It's customary behaviour in the 21st century to shout and bawl about all those movies that you want to see that aren't getting made, but sometimes we don't stop to consider that, hey, what if they're not being made for a reason? What if there's, like, an actual reason? You may have noticed recently that superhero movies are pretty big right now, and by "pretty big," I mean they're threatening to take over the cinematic medium in general. Which brings us to the Hulk. You know him: big green guy, prone to violent outbursts. One of the most popular comic book creations, no doubt, and yet - perhaps more than any other Marvel superhero with a matching popularity - this character lacks a genuinely great cinematic adaptation. The last decade played home to a few admirable attempts, but did they work as fully-fledged Hulk movies? Were they the flicks we dreamed of? Uh-uh. This got me thinking about why adapting the Hulk to the big screen has proven itself to be such a difficult task. I'm not sure, in all honestly, that the filmmakers involved are totally at fault, though. Ang Lee went all existential because, hey, that was one way of trying to approach the material, and for that Edward Norton version... well, they played it safe and a bit (ahem) dull, because they didn't want to repeat Lee's "mistake." With Mark Ruffalo now cast as Bruce Banner in Marvel's Cinematic Universe, the outcry for a standalone Hulk movie has never been stronger - everybody seems to agree that the actor perfectly embodied the character for the first time in a long time. But here's 8 reasons why, ultimately - despite the fact that it would be amazing if they could - it's going to be near-on impossible to make a genuinely brilliant standalone Hulk movie... Note: I'm using the mythology established in the Marvel Cinematic Universe for the basis of this article, so I'm only discussing the character in terms of what has happened/been established in that particular canon.