Special effects

I think you got that backwards. Lees Hulk looked especially cartoonish in upright scenes like the desert fight. He was way too bright green. Also, the movie was just bad.

Definitely agree with the OP. The 08 version was also just a terrible film.

Hulk looked amazing in darker scenes, but in scenes with better lighting he was too lime-green.

Despite the awful coloring they gave him, his fluidity and movement is surprisingly very realistic for the time. The desert scene looks like a real green giant moving about. The 2008 version got the shading correct, but they look like PS3 characters fighting.

La religion est fausse, mais vous êtes réel. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bpq26sPbC_4

I know, people need to get their eyes checked if they think the CGI looked more realistic in the 2008 film. The water dripping down the Hulk's skin looks like real flesh.

The 08 design is better.

But the render and the animation/physics of the movement of the 03 version is superior.

And aesthetically, the motion and the texturing and overall design between the 03 version and the 2012 version have a bit more in common than the 2012 version and the 08 version.

That is because ILM handled Hulk in the 03 film and in The Avengers. Not the 2008 incarnation.

Star Wars, Marvel, DC, Game of Thrones

Did you mean Ang Lee's Shrulk

Anyone with more than two brain cells agrees that the Hulk 2003 is more fake than Shrek.

In 2003 we already had LOTR, this looks way worse but the budget was lower

This signature is hilarious and original.
NAAAT!