I won't cast my vote until I see the final product but, going off the workprint, I'd rate it 2.5/5, and that's being generous.
devilshalo
04-27-09, 06:22 PM
I don't think there should be any reviews from the work print. Only the final product. I'm not going to d/l it and will reserve judgement when I see it in a theater.
scott1598
04-27-09, 06:32 PM
I don't think there should be any reviews from the work print. Only the final product. I'm not going to d/l it and will reserve judgement when I see it in a theater.
isn't the wp the same cut as final? i agree that the theater will be the most honest format to make an informed decision.
Shannon Nutt
04-27-09, 06:35 PM
isn't the wp the same cut as final? i agree that the theater will be the most honest format to make an informed decision.
Yeah, apparantly some who have eyed the final cut have leaked that the only difference between the workprint and the final cut were the uncompleted effects. So the whole line we got about the workprint being a very rough cut would appear to have just been damage control by the studio.
Suprmallet
04-27-09, 07:59 PM
I can safely say this movie is better than X3. But then again, almost any film would be better than X3.
KillerCannibal
04-27-09, 08:13 PM
I can safely say this movie is better than X3. But then again, almost any film would be better than X3.
I can think of at least half a dozen superhero films off the top of my head that are worse than X3.
- Daredevil
- Elektra
- Fantastic Four (all 3)
- Wolverine
- Superman IV
Kicker_of_Elves
04-27-09, 08:29 PM
I can think of at least half a dozen superhero films off the top of my head that are worse than X3.
- Fantastic Four (all 3)
Whoa whoa whoa, they made a 3rd one?
CharlieK
04-27-09, 08:33 PM
Maybe 3 is counting the Roger Corman version?
Kicker_of_Elves
04-27-09, 08:51 PM
But it wasn't officially released which makes me think we all need to check it out and start a review thread for it. -biggrin-
superdeluxe
04-27-09, 09:15 PM
isn't the wp the same cut as final? i agree that the theater will be the most honest format to make an informed decision.
No (Unless Fox is lying)
superdeluxe
04-27-09, 09:16 PM
Yeah, apparantly some who have eyed the final cut have leaked that the only difference between the workprint and the final cut were the uncompleted effects. So the whole line we got about the workprint being a very rough cut would appear to have just been damage control by the studio.
Fox studio head says there are 10 additional minutes that were shot earlier in the year, that are not in the wp.
Whether he is lying, we will find out.
Artman
04-27-09, 09:50 PM
Fox studio head says there are 10 additional minutes that were shot earlier in the year, that are not in the wp.
Shot yes... edited into the final movie? That's the big question....
scott1598
04-27-09, 10:05 PM
well, the wp is 107 minutes, right? that is the same listing time at Fandango, imDb...
fumanstan
04-27-09, 10:37 PM
Shouldn't discussion about the workprint be stopped, given it's essentially an illegal download?
superdeluxe
04-28-09, 01:08 AM
I did not think discussion about illegal downloads are not allowed,i just thought discussion on obtaining them were.?
scott1598
04-28-09, 06:05 AM
Shouldn't discussion about the workprint be stopped, given it's essentially an illegal download?
I did not think discussion about illegal downloads are not allowed,i just thought discussion on obtaining them were.?
fu is right. i think the other thread is still good for that discussion. i noted the first post to try and just talk about preview or advanced screenings until friday.
The Bus
04-28-09, 06:19 PM
Did the workprint have the two scenes after the credits with
Striker
Wolverine?
I've heard good buzz from people that have seen the final cut. Can't wait until Thursday.
cranberries fan
04-28-09, 06:24 PM
Did the workprint have the two scenes after the credits with
Striker
Wolverine?
I've heard good buzz from people that have seen the final cut. Can't wait until Thursday.
No Wolverine is in Japan in after credits.?
The Bus
04-28-09, 06:30 PM
Does the "workprint" not have the scene with
Striker walking down a road
Solid Snake PAC
04-28-09, 06:49 PM
that spoiler really seems like a worthless clip..is he JUST doing that, The Bus?
Artman
04-28-09, 06:56 PM
5 for 5 positive so far on RT...lol! I would love it if this stayed fresh, just to stick it to those who claim this is the worst movie ever.
The Cow
04-28-09, 07:02 PM
I thought Liev did really good in this one. The character Kevin Durand did was horrible.
Movie was decent enough for me, 3/5
scott1598
04-28-09, 07:14 PM
5 for 5 positive so far on RT...lol! I would love it if this stayed fresh, just to stick to those who claim this is the worst movie ever.
actually 6 for 6.
cranberries fan
04-28-09, 09:48 PM
Hey Bus that scene is in the "Working-Print".
Shannon Nutt
04-30-09, 04:09 PM
There are reviewers who have seen BOTH the workprint and theatrical cut who have confrimed they are the SAME (again, minus the finished effects of the workprint):
But there were TWO Easter Egg endings on the workprint too, so whether these are actually "new" or just another FOX falsehood (it's obvious now the theatrical is NOT 10 minutes longer - perhaps not even 10 seconds!) is yet to be seen.
Matty-O
04-30-09, 04:19 PM
Already dipped to 41% on RT. I'll still be taking my son to see it this weekend.
Hokeyboy
04-30-09, 04:31 PM
41% at RT and dropping. Yikes. Huge opening weekend, big dropoffs, are in Wolverine's future. I *still* think this movie will hit $200m domestically, but it might make half that amount in its first 3 days.
Shannon Nutt
04-30-09, 06:12 PM
Ebert's less than enthusiastic (but humorous) review:
Just got back from seeing this. I did see a bit of the WP but left it at that since I wanted my first experience of this movie to be in the theater.
I thought the movie was lazily written, with several scenes of over-the-top clichéd dialogue, and a few instances of questionable FX that bordered on Golden Compass levels. There were (to me, at least) a lot of changes to the characters which did not seem canonical, but then again I didn't follow any of the X books past the 1990s. The action sequences didn't compare with the best of the original trilogy and at times it paled to X3.
But, overall... I was still very entertained. Very much entertained. Don't expect something on the level of Iron Man or Dark Knight. Do expect something along the lines of Incredible Hulk with much less setup and about half of the boring dialogue scenes excised.
The movie then, falls solidly into the "decent" camp of super-hero movies, along with the first X-Men, the second Fantastic Four, the aforementioned Hulk film, and the Hellboy movies (although with much less charm). It's not a classic, but IMHO it is worth your time and money.
Dean Kousoulas
05-01-09, 03:24 AM
I just came back form the midnight showing. Overall I was entertained. I'm only a casual X-Men fan so maybe i'm not the best person to give an opinion, but what can I say, I liked it.
Lara Means
05-01-09, 04:39 AM
and a few instances of questionable FX that bordered on Golden Compass levels.
Sooo what youre saying is that the FX in Wolverine is Academy Award worthy?
stingermck
05-01-09, 08:29 AM
I saw it last night, and was overall entertained. There are changes that will freak out the geeks (and I was hearing it last night) but it fits in well with the story that was presented in X1-3. I would have preferred more screen time for Deadpool and Gambit, but what there was, was solid.
I did have one peeve though: Cyclops optic blast was actually heat vision like Superman, rather than energy blast, as shown in X1-3. Not sure why they made the change.
Also it was good to see Professor X. I didn't know he was in the movie.
As far as the multiple endings, we had the Japan ending, which received a lot of boo's in the audience.
So lets say this is a hit, do you think there will be an Origins 2, maybe taking place in Japan, or a film showing Logan after X3?
"But first a lot of his former mutant comrades wind up dead, a development that unhappily, if coincidentally, echoes the recent, by now almost forgotten, “Watchmen” movie."
rotfl
Solid Snake PAC
05-01-09, 10:55 AM
C+, loved Deadpool for what he was, hated the change to his character afterwards.
scott1598
05-01-09, 12:22 PM
reviews are going through the bottom.
GCS
05-01-09, 02:16 PM
Just got back.
Not bad, not great either.
Worthy of a viewing ... yes
Worthy of repeat viewings ... doubtful
It is not IM or DK but I did not expect that at all. I appreciated the more serious approach they took to the character but also feel like something was just "missing". I can tell you what it was but it was missing something to move it off of the decent level to good level.
Hugh Jackman - makes a great Wolverine IMHO they just need to do more with the story. The action was ok, nothing superb.
Liev Schriber - not a big fan of his but I thought he did a damn fine job of Sabretooth and I was easily able to go along with it even w/o the long blonde hair you would expect to see on this character.
Gambit - not jumping up and down about Taylor Kitsch playing the character (and yes I like FNL) but I did enjoy what little they did with him and I thought the FX for him were very cool. I can see this getting a PG-13 spin off to get the "girls" in the theater.
Wade - Digging RR as this character I think he is dead on perfect for it and would love to see this go to the next level.
Deadpool - WTF was that? I am not sure if this follows comic book lore or not but I thought this bit was a little dumb.
Patrick Stewart - there was no way that was him. It was someone else with a shitty CGI face of Stewart. This really annoyed me. It was appropriate for this bit in the movie but damn would it have cost that much to have him show up for that 30 seconds? I mean gimme a break. It looked pretty bad to me (as did some of the other SFX - just sloppy)
Everything else was kind of a mess. Still happy to see it and hope that it makes enough bank for them to make a "deeper/better" Wolverine movie in a few years. This could be it for Wolvie though, we'll have to see.
Greg
**EDIT -- it will do at least 100m this weekend but as you guys have said drop dramatically after that. Of course my guess is that ST will obliterate that next weekend and then when Transformers 2 hits in July a new BO record will be established I am sure of it.
This will either peter out at say 160mil or slightly crack the 200 barrier and finish at say 212mil or so.
It's gonna be a long summer with Wolverine, Star Trek, Terminator Salvation, Transformers 2, and GI Joe. This may be the most summer movies I have seen in a long time.
stingermck
05-01-09, 02:31 PM
Estimates put the midnight showings at 4.4 million, not bad.
scott1598
05-01-09, 03:38 PM
with the negative buzz, i am no longer going to see this in the theater. i'll just look forward to "Star Trek".
RyoHazuki
05-01-09, 03:44 PM
with the negative buzz, i am no longer going to see this in the theater. i'll just look forward to "Star Trek".
Good thing you made the review thread for a movie you won't be seeing. Maybe these threads should be started by someone who has seen the film?
scott1598
05-01-09, 03:48 PM
Good thing you made the review thread for a movie you won't be seeing. Maybe these threads should be started by someone who has seen the film?
i had always intended on seeing it and only reason i started th. and still will, just not in the theater.
stingermck
05-01-09, 03:53 PM
I would have missed a lot of movies I consider favorites, if I listened to reviews or WOM.
scott1598
05-01-09, 03:57 PM
I would have missed a lot of movies I consider favorites, if I listened to reviews or WOM.
just to expensive nowadays to not consider previous viewers.
superdeluxe
05-01-09, 04:13 PM
Is this better than X3?
awil1026
05-01-09, 04:25 PM
Good thing you made the review thread for a movie you won't be seeing. Maybe these threads should be started by someone who has seen the film?
I fail to see how it matters... at all.
RyoHazuki
05-01-09, 04:28 PM
**maybe we'll wait and review when seen in theaters and not talk about the workprint. the other thread is still good for that**
i had always intended on seeing it and only reason i started th. and still will, just not in the theater.
Good advice.
jjcool
05-01-09, 04:31 PM
This thing was terrible, in my opinion. The only positives I saw were Ryan Reynolds character, Liev Schreiber and Gambit. Other than that, it just felt forced, with shitty dialogue most of the time. It was just bad, not Watchmen bad, but worthy iof 1 star, since there was no "1/2 star" option inthe poll.
cranberries fan
05-01-09, 04:54 PM
Is this better than X3?
No I enjoyed X3 (Better actors-Ian McKellen,Patrick Stewart) alot more than this half-cooked flim!
On side-not I am guessing that "Magneto solo-film" is now dead-in-the-water and that to bad I love to see more Ian McKellen.
BJacks
05-01-09, 04:57 PM
This has the worst use of CGI I've seen in a movie in a very long time. The claws look totally fake in every scene, and the green screening is really noticeable. It's like at some point their gfx dept just gave up.
BJacks
05-01-09, 04:58 PM
On side-not I am guessing that "Magneto solo-film" is now dead-in-the-water and that to bad I love to see more Ian McKellen.I wouldn't say that. Wolverine will probably open huge.
Philzilla
05-01-09, 05:04 PM
I saw it last night, and was overall entertained. There are changes that will freak out the geeks (and I was hearing it last night) but it fits in well with the story that was presented in X1-3. I would have preferred more screen time for Deadpool and Gambit, but what there was, was solid.
I did have one peeve though: Cyclops optic blast was actually heat vision like Superman, rather than energy blast, as shown in X1-3. Not sure why they made the change.
really, interesting change then, but in line with the rest of the film apparently
http://www.100megspop3.com/scottororo/fiction/ScienceOfScott.htm
Suprmallet
05-01-09, 05:40 PM
Good thing you made the review thread for a movie you won't be seeing. Maybe these threads should be started by someone who has seen the film?
Who cares? These threads are for discussing reviews that come out before the release, then for members to put their own reviews in after release. It's not a requirement that the OP see the film before starting one of these threads.
chris_sc77
05-01-09, 05:43 PM
I think I'll predict this does $75 million this weekend. 28 Million on Friday, 30 million Saturday and $17 million on Sunday.
Indy Jones Fan
05-01-09, 05:43 PM
Two bonus scenes. One right after the credits start and the other at the end of the credits. The first shows Stryker being arrested. The second has Deadpool still alive.
mdc3000
05-01-09, 07:49 PM
Patrick Stewart - there was no way that was him. It was someone else with a shitty CGI face of Stewart. This really annoyed me.
In the workprint, it was old Patrick Stewart and looked 10X better than the finished product... Man, I was expecting this to play BETTER on the big screen with finished FX etc. but it actually played WORSE. The finale while being more comprehensible, played WAY TOO cartoony and there were never any real stakes (I thought this was just a flaw with the non-FX version in the wp, but no) and the claws never looked great - ESPECIALLY THE SCENE IN THE FARMHOUSE BATHROOM - bar none the worst CG in the movie.
I actually thought the movie was fairly entertaining when I watched the leak, but upon a second (first 'real') viewing, the tedious plot holes, cheap gimmicks etc. just made the movie feel about 30 minutes longer than it actually was... Not horrendous but not great. I definitely won't be going again to the theatre (save the $ for Star Trek!!!!).
Quick question: WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO GAMBIT'S FACIAL HAIR? He has it while playing cards, he knocks Wolvie out of the casino and when he comes outside, he no longer has it for the rest of the movie - did he blow his own hair off of his face?
(I won't dwell on Deadpool but having the Merc with a mouth have NO MOUTH really just pisses me off to no end - I wish they'd have the bonus scene at the end of some prints have him slicing open the mouth and cracking wise...that would be decent....the version I saw still just had the Japan tag at the end, not the deadpool scene.) 2.5/5
Iron_Giant
05-01-09, 08:57 PM
I was entertained by the movie, but it was not the wow of Iron_Man and TDK. But, it was an "Origin" movie and that is what we got - we now know how Wolverine came to be. For that I really enjoy the move. Lots of good humor, Wolverine and action - that is all I was looking for.
Mr. Cinema
05-01-09, 10:08 PM
Before today, I didn't think anyone could make a worse X-men film than Brett Ratner. It has now happened. While some parts are pretty good, this was pretty much total crap with some absolutely horrendous dialogue. Jackman coasted through this one big time. I did like the 10 seconds of screen time given to Gambit and some of action was fairly entertaining. I kept wondering if Wolverine and Sabertooth were going to fight 5 more times. I didn't think the 3 rounds we already got were going to be enough.
Mr. Cinema
05-01-09, 10:08 PM
I think I'll predict this does $75 million this weekend. 28 Million on Friday, 30 million Saturday and $17 million on Sunday.
I'll be surprised if this increases tomorrow.
Solid Snake PAC
05-01-09, 10:37 PM
I'd give it a C+ at the most. It was ok. 1/3 of the film was good until Logan quits the team. After that it just gets bad. And again..wtf would be wrong with using actual locations and sets instead of green screen. Again...I'm pissed about Deadpool...and his "ending" didn't help out.
DJariya
05-01-09, 10:46 PM
Just saw it and liked it alot. I'm not some know it all comic fanboy of the X-Men series and won't go into some diatribe nitpicking it. I thought Jackman was solid, but I really liked Liev Schreiber as Sabertooth. I thought he was very mennacing. It was worth every penny of the $8.75 I paid to see it.
The extended scene I got was:
Logan having a drink at the Japanese bar
Pretty much 95% of the audience had already left when that scene popped it.
Regarding the cameo:
I have to agree that Patrick Stewart's face looked really weird. I kept staring at it and wondering if that was really him or not.
DJariya
05-01-09, 10:50 PM
Patrick Stewart - there was no way that was him. It was someone else with a shitty CGI face of Stewart. This really annoyed me. It was appropriate for this bit in the movie but damn would it have cost that much to have him show up for that 30 seconds? I mean gimme a break. It looked pretty bad to me (as did some of the other SFX - just sloppy)
Shouldn't you spolerize this since it's an uncredited cameo?
Solid Snake PAC
05-01-09, 10:54 PM
agreed.
jarofclay73
05-01-09, 11:08 PM
Not horrendous but not great. I definitely won't be going again to the theatre (save the $ for Star Trek!!!!)
Exactly how I felt. I gave it a generous ***1/2 out of *****. I liked that they kept the runtime short, even though it did feel slow in some parts.
Giantrobo
05-01-09, 11:30 PM
Shouldn't you spolerize this since it's an uncredited cameo?
TOO LATE! :lol: Sometimes even glancing past posts to get to a spoiler free review post can aim your eye right smack on "The spoilage". :lol:
But I know people will start with the "What do you expect in a "Reviews thread?!" nonsense so we'll chalk it up to "oh well".
Giantrobo
05-01-09, 11:31 PM
So far not too many positive reviews.
So will this drop off like Watchmen next weekend?
Hokeyboy
05-01-09, 11:33 PM
TOO LATE! :lol: Sometimes even glancing past posts to get to a spoiler free review post can aim your eye right smack on "The spoilage". :lol:
But I know people will start with the "What do you expect in a "Reviews thread?!" nonsense so we'll chalk it up to "oh well".
I like Marvin Gaye. I mean, not really, but still, "Got To Give It Up" has got THE kickin bassline of the 70s. But that won't stop the complainers from getting their panties in a twitch. Not Marvin Gaye, but Wolverine/Patrick Stewart spoilers.
rw2516
05-01-09, 11:36 PM
Regarding the cameo:
I have to agree that Patrick Stewart's face looked really weird. I kept staring at it and wondering if that was really him or not.
The first thing I thought was "man, he looks old" and just figured he really looks like that now since haven't seen him at all in a few years.
B5Erik
05-02-09, 12:25 AM
The San Diego Union-Tribune critic gave Wolverine a very positive review:
Here's part of the review -
“X-Men Origins: Wolverine” leaps off the screen, talons shiny and sharpened, fomenting a blast of excitement to the summer movie season.
This is a picture to be seen on the big screen. What the creative stew came up with is a fast-moving adventure that opens with Jackman and Schreiber as line soldiers in the Civil War, in the trenches of World War I, landing in Normandy during World War II, and trudging through the jungles of Vietnam. They get hit by bullets, pummeled and stabbed. Nothing stops them. It's jaw-dropping.
Both are recruited by the underhanded Col. William Stryker (Danny Huston – his late, famous cinematic dad, John Huston, would've been proud of the nasty portrayal), gathering up his ragtag battalion of mutants to take on the globe.
“I know how special you are,” he tells Jackman and Schreiber. “I'm putting together a special team with special privileges.”
Schreiber's Sabretooth turns into a killing machine, despite brother Jackman's attempts to guide him another way.
Meanwhile, six years earlier, in the Canadian Rockies, Jackman was living contented as a lumberjack with Kayla Silverfox (Lynn Collins), the love of his life, in an isolated, mountaintop house when Stryker showed up.
“Someone is hunting down our old team,” he says. “Your country needs you.” Snaps Jackman's Wolverine, “I'm Canadian.”
Kayla wonders why they want him back. Says he, “I'm the best at what I do, and what I do isn't very nice.”
The movie glides with deft dialogue and extraordinary special effects, including one set piece in which a helicopter hovers over Jackman speeding on a motorcycle. The clash, the crash, the calamity is mighty.
Jackman is a huge screen presence. He has a way with a line and a grace that served him well hosting this year's Oscars. Here, he plays a man with “berserker rage” who's afraid of flying.
Son of Odin
05-02-09, 02:33 AM
I was entertained by the movie, but it was not the wow of Iron_Man and TDK. But, it was an "Origin" movie and that is what we got - we now know how Wolverine came to be. For that I really enjoy the move. Lots of good humor, Wolverine and action - that is all I was looking for.
it's not suppose to have humor in it. we never get to see the feral, animal version of wolverine in this movie and that's what this movie was supposed to show us. this movie fails on all fronts. this was the lifetime channel version of wolverine. he never let loose and totally went into his berserker rages. his was a raging animal inside before xavier helped him subdue it a little. he showed more rage in the mansion attack scenes in X2 than this entire film. i give this a lower rating than x-men 3. because 20th century Fox had more time with this movie and it had far fewer characters than x-men 3. plus it had an easy origin storyline from the comics to follow. yet they still blew it.
Mike86
05-02-09, 02:34 AM
Went to this last night. Liked it quite a bit more than I was expecting to probably give it a 3 or 3.5 out of 5. Not the best of the X-Men films but better at least than The Last Stand. I'd rank the movies X2, X-Men, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, and The Last Stand.
Hokeyboy
05-02-09, 10:17 AM
this was the lifetime channel version of wolverine.
You nailed it right on the head there.
Michael Corvin
05-02-09, 10:58 AM
Let me get this out of the way, I know zero about X-men outside of the films.
I really enjoyed the flick. I thought it was leagues better than X3 despite some shoddy CG work. Logan's mountaintop cabin scenes were laughable, as was the CG cameo at the end. Jackman was great as usual. Liev was equally awesome. Ryan Reynolds surprised me. Gambit was pretty cool and deserves more screen time in a future X-men film. In fact I hope to see all four again.
I loved the opening credit sequence showing Logan & Sabretooth in every war, which extended into the kick ass opening action sequence.
It was interesting seeing so many TV actors pop up (Keamy & Charlie/Lost, Dubaku/24, Riggins/FNL).
Mr. Cinema
05-02-09, 10:58 AM
Is this better than X3?
Absolutely not.
Goldberg74
05-02-09, 11:57 AM
Two bonus scenes. One right after the credits start and the other at the end of the credits. The first shows Stryker being arrested. The second has Deadpool still alive.
Saw the first scene... but not the second one.
The only real that bothered me (and no it wasn't will-i-am's acting) was...
why did Wolverine have a Mortal Kombat-esque fight with Baraka on the top of the tower?
I went into this expecting it to be pretty awful based on the buzz and actually enjoyed it quite a bit. It certainly had its flaws, but wasn't that far off from being a tremendous movie. The dialogue definitely needed another round of polish in places and the CGI was pretty rough in some spots, but neither of those were horrible, just kind of 'meh'. I would've really liked another 15-30 minutes with the team working together at the beginning. The movie that followed made out like these guys were really close and had been through some shit together, but the scenes at the beginning really seemed to contradict that. I guess I'll spoilerize the details on that criticism: I mean, we see the guys in the plane, flying to Nigeria and the dialogue gives the sense that it's the first time some of them are working together. They assault the compound, head to village, and then Logan quits the team. I felt like that was the only mission they'd done as a full team. Quite a few scenes later in the film might have resonated a bit more if we'd felt the guys were really close and then kind of fell apart.
That and we could've done with a couple less top-down pull-back shots of Logan screaming into the sky.
The Bus
05-02-09, 01:06 PM
Is this better than X3?
In some ways, yes. In other ways, no.
Shannon Nutt
05-02-09, 01:15 PM
I think it's about on the same level as X3. It kept my attention, but it's not something I have any desire to see again. In fact, I pretty much have no desire to see the Wolverine character on screen again - the last two films have pretty much negated how interesting the character of the first two films was.
I see it made $35 million on Friday, which means it's probably going to wind up with a huge number for the weekend. One wonders if we'll see a huge drop next weekend, or if it will actually cut into Star Trek's numbers (I've seen both now, and Star Trek is leaps and bounds better than Wolverine).
RagingBull80
05-02-09, 01:25 PM
I'm not a big X-Men fan but I know a little.
I thought this movie was bad. I didn't have high expectations going in to see this at all either.
The story, acting, effects and the dialogue were all pretty terrible.
All they tried to do was cram in as many characters as they could to trick people into thinking it's good. Gambit was thrown in there for no other reason than he hadn't been in the others and they knew people would pay admission price to see him.
They royally screwed up Deadpool. Reynolds was perfectly cast as Wade/Deadpool and all the scenes with him at the very beginning are great. He nailed the character. Then he drops out of the movie completely until the last 10 minutes and "Deadpool" is not Deadpool at all.
I liked Jackman in the other movies, particularly X2, but something seemed very off with him this time around.
This is an action movie with some of the worst action I've seen in a while.
Goldberg74
05-02-09, 02:23 PM
I think that I might go see it again.
I enjoyed the characters (even though there were alot of them) and now that I can forget about the story and just pay attention to them.
... and was I the only person that thought that Mike Meyers should have played Fred Duke? ;)
If they bring Gambit back for another film, please make it someone other than Taylor Kitsch.
riley_dude
05-02-09, 04:01 PM
It will start strong and then Word of mouth will destroy it.
edstein
05-02-09, 06:41 PM
I thought it was pretty good. I haven't been around the X-Men comics since the late 80's. I had heard about Deadpool but didn't really know about his origin. In this movie he looked alot more like Baraka from Mortal Kombat than the pics I remember from the comic. Would have liked to see more of him. I thought this was just as good as X1. X3 is so bad it would be really hard to make a worst X-Men movie. I'd put the X-Men movies in this order.
1) X2
2) X1
2) Wolverine
3) X3
chris_sc77
05-02-09, 06:52 PM
^I concur. I thought it was a pretty decent action movie. It had problems but overall I was entertained and appreciated it for what it was. I gave it 3.5 out of 5 stars.
Weapon XI wasnt necessary. It should have just been Deadpool. Dont understand why that wouldn't have been enough.
The film also needed more breathing room. There were times when it felt like what should have been 2 or 3 or 4 scenes were compacted into one scene to make things flow faster. This was almost never a good choice and a shame this film didnt have a more appropriate pace.
mdc3000
05-02-09, 09:22 PM
If they bring Gambit back for another film, please make it someone other than Taylor Kitsch.
I think Taylor Kitsch rocks but had nothing to do here - he's a hell of an actor on FNL and I think he could do a pretty decent job in his own flick...
I nearly did a spittake today when a friend told me he thought this was THE BEST X-MEN MOVIE YET... He then told me that he ranked them 1. Wolverine 2. X-Men 3/4. X2 tied with Last Stand - then did a rant about how overrated X2 was... I sat there slackjawed... We aren't friends anymore ;)
TonyDP
05-02-09, 10:44 PM
As someone who was never much of an X-Men/mutants fan, I was able to watch the movie without the baggage of how it would measure up to the comics. On that basis, I had a very good time. It isn't a perfect film as there are some pretty big plot holes to contend with. In spite of that, I thought the action sequences were very well done and the characters were for the most part interesting.
Hugh Jackman and Liev Schrieber really sink their teeth into their respective roles. The remaining cast of mutants each have their moment in the spotlight and though they may not look much like their 4 color counterparts, I thought they all did a serviceable job, especially Ryan Reynolds as Slade/Deadpool. Yes, their roles are small, but the title of the movie is "Wolverine", not "A Bunch of Mutants". Many critics have also harped on how the film ends, but since it is a prequel to the prior X-Men films, they really didn't have much of a choice if they wanted to maintain continuity.
I for one prefer the emphasis on action and pacing as opposed to the moral ambiguities, social commentary, and adolescent angst of the first couple of films. I don't think there's anything wrong with a movie that simply tries to entertain without banging some message over your head. Viewed in that spirit, X-Men Origins: Wolverine gets the job done.
fumanstan
05-02-09, 10:49 PM
I think Taylor Kitsch rocks but had nothing to do here - he's a hell of an actor on FNL and I think he could do a pretty decent job in his own flick...
I nearly did a spittake today when a friend told me he thought this was THE BEST X-MEN MOVIE YET... He then told me that he ranked them 1. Wolverine 2. X-Men 3/4. X2 tied with Last Stand - then did a rant about how overrated X2 was... I sat there slackjawed... We aren't friends anymore ;)
Which echoes what I was saying in the box office thread. As much as comic book fans and internet movie junkies like to complain about X3, the general audience doesn't think it was nearly as bad as the internet likes to think.
That said, watching X2 again on Blu-ray I was reminded how the movie runs out of steam by the time they reach Alkali Lake, although the first 90 minutes or so is absolutely stellar.
Boba Fett
05-02-09, 11:00 PM
I'd give the film a 2.5/5.0 or a B-/C+ rating.
It has a solid opening, very mediocre convoluted second act, and a rushed but tidy conclusion. Jackman, Huston, and Schrieber all deserved a much better script and honestly did the best with what they had.
It will make a great RiffTrax film, especially with all the potential for Canada jokes. For my money the random shot of Logan, cigar in mouth, clad in a flannel shirt, sawing some lumber, was so funny it was worth the price of admission.
I'd rank the series as follows:
X-2: A+ (4.5/5)
X-Men: B+ (3.5/5)
Wolverine: B-/C+ (2.5/5) [time will tell to which grade it will fall to)
The Last Stand: C (2/5) [only some brilliant casting of Grammar as Beast and the reliable Stewart/McKellan combo save it from doom)
dogmatica
05-02-09, 11:46 PM
I was not impressed. I saw it with two of the high school boys I work with and neither were impressed. We were all tired from an event earlier that day, so there's that, but we each found ourselves dozing off.
I thought they kept Deadpool sans mask because they wanted to give a big actor like Ryan Reynolds some face time. And yet... he was barely in it! Why skip the classic costume and mask to let a good actor barely be in a film and then get replaced by a stunt actor doing his best rendition of a ridiculous amalgamation of a poor character? Makes no sense to me.
The film never felt like it officially started or ended. It just kinda started, there was some stuff, then it kinda ended. It also relies on its audience knowing A LOT of Wolverine's history (and how mutants work, etc.) before they see this movie.
Meh.
Boba Fett
05-03-09, 12:07 AM
The film never felt like it officially started or ended. It just kinda started, there was some stuff, then it kinda ended. It also relies on its audience knowing A LOT of Wolverine's history (and how mutants work, etc.) before they see this movie.
I noticed this too. It assumed you knew what mutants were (which obviously the audience should at this point, but still...); I guess Logan and Victor found out what they were from Striker though.
RocShemp
05-03-09, 12:15 AM
That said, watching X2 again on Blu-ray I was reminded how the movie runs out of steam by the time they reach Alkali Lake, although the first 90 minutes or so is absolutely stellar.
That's always been my problem with X2. It all pretty much girnds to a halt at a point that's meant to be the climax of the film.
Shilex
05-03-09, 12:20 AM
Boy, am I glad I didn't download the leaked workprint of Wolverine! It would have ruined a completely average movie for me. I'm not even going to review it. I'll just give you hints on whether you will like it or not:
-If you like lines of dialogue that are thrown in randomly just to try to make the movie tie into the previous movies, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like multiple showdowns with people screaming and running straight at each other, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like interesting characters that get no screentime or reason to exist, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like pointless fights that begin and end for no good reason and with no resolution, you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like seeing Wolverine not hurting anyone with his claws or posing any real threat, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you think adamantium katana's are much cooler than adamantium claws, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you don't believe in physics or chemistry, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like Hugh Jackman's ass, then you'll like Wolverine.
musick
05-03-09, 12:23 AM
I don't like any of the above
.... and I liked Wolverine
so much for your theory
TwineTime
05-03-09, 01:14 AM
And I like Hugh Jackman's ass but I absolutely HATED Wolverine.
superdeluxe
05-03-09, 03:32 AM
It will start strong and then Word of mouth will destroy it.
Eh, not too sure about that..everyone is talking about how bad the word of mouth is going to be, but it was not terrible. I mean it was no Iron Man/Dark Knight, but it wasn't elektra/catwoman either. It was decent. What is going to destroy it is Star Trek.
Suprmallet
05-03-09, 06:00 AM
Boy, am I glad I didn't download the leaked workprint of Wolverine! It would have ruined a completely average movie for me. I'm not even going to review it. I'll just give you hints on whether you will like it or not:
-If you like lines of dialogue that are thrown in randomly just to try to make the movie tie into the previous movies, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like multiple showdowns with people screaming and running straight at each other, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like interesting characters that get no screentime or reason to exist, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like pointless fights that begin and end for no good reason and with no resolution, you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like seeing Wolverine not hurting anyone with his claws or posing any real threat, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you think adamantium katana's are much cooler than adamantium claws, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you don't believe in physics or chemistry, then you'll like Wolverine.
-If you like Hugh Jackman's ass, then you'll like Wolverine.
This is the post of the thread. The scene in X2 where Wolverine dispatches the SWAT team is still the most effective and thrilling use of his fighting skills and claws in any of the movies. And while the helicopter attack was fun, there is nothing here that matches that.
Patman
05-03-09, 10:47 AM
I thought story-wise, it was average in that it was a little too comic booky in plot development and not a good cinamatic treatment of the vast source material.
Overall, it starts out okay with some decent humor bits, but the sparse character introductions deprives the film of any substantial character hooks and solely relies on comic book famliarity of the new characters to go from one plot point to the next without too much narrative propulsion.
The 3rd act has some cool scenes but its conclusion is lackluster.
Be sure to stay to the very end of the credits for an extra scene (there is also a short scene about 30 seconds once the credits start). It is weird that I've heard there are now different ending scenes tacked on to the very end of the credits. Ah well.
I give it 2.5 stars or a grade of C+.
Daytripper
05-03-09, 12:58 PM
Went into this with rock bottom expectations after all the rotten user reviews (and some professional one's too), and came out enjoying it more that I thought I would. First, it's not a great film. Not even close. But it's also not a terrible one either. Like someone mentioned above, or in the other "Wolverine" thread, it gets the job done. And I was entertained. That said, I'd give it a 7/10. The first "X-Men" for me was the best. Just perfect (10/10). The second, 9/10. Also as someone mentioned, the last half hour brought it to a screaching hault. "The Last Stand" I'd give a 6/10.
superdeluxe
05-03-09, 01:59 PM
Even if Wolverine only makes 35-40 million next weekend, by that time it will still have cleared most likely 120-125 million.
Daytripper
05-03-09, 02:41 PM
Even if Wolverine only makes 35-40 million next weekend, by that time it will still have cleared most likely 120-125 million.
Aren't you forgetting the money it will make during the week? Even if it grosses slightly less than the 88M projected this weekend, it'll probably gross another 20M Monday-Thursday.
Patman
05-03-09, 03:07 PM
Don't forget all those kids from Texas who don't have school this coming week due to Swine Flu. They ain't all going to stay at home. LOL.
bunnydojo
05-03-09, 03:14 PM
the vast source material.This is what kills the movie for me. To make such a mediocre film out of such a wealth of action-movie-ready material is just ridiculous. If you were to tell my 8-year-old self that a movie was coming out with Wolverine, Gambit, Deadpool, and Cyclops, I would've been ecstatic. Those were my four favorite Marvel characters, just from a coolness perspective (this is before Cyclops was 'ruined' by the first 3 movies).
If they were going to go this dumb with the movie, they should've brought Bishop in and had all five of them traveling through time killing Nazis and aliens and making bad puns.
JimRochester
05-03-09, 03:57 PM
I gave this movie a solid 3 stars. It doesn't have the complexity of the first 2 but for pure entertainment value, it was an enjoyable couple hours. I wish my wife would have gone, with Jackman and Reynolds ripped to perfection maybe she would have wanted some later. Nah, who am I kidding? But it did have plenty o' action.
Giantrobo
05-03-09, 04:03 PM
Wow, I'm going later today with a friend of mine; but at this point I'm actually looking forward to the Trailers and crazy fun tie-in video game more than the Film. :lol:
Suprmallet
05-03-09, 04:15 PM
I for one prefer the emphasis on action and pacing as opposed to the moral ambiguities, social commentary, and adolescent angst of the first couple of films. I don't think there's anything wrong with a movie that simply tries to entertain without banging some message over your head. Viewed in that spirit, X-Men Origins: Wolverine gets the job done.
The social commentary and ambiguity is what makes X-Men unique. There are plenty of mindless action films out there, let's keep X-Men more nuanced.
superdeluxe
05-03-09, 05:44 PM
Aren't you forgetting the money it will make during the week? Even if it grosses slightly less than the 88M projected this weekend, it'll probably gross another 20M Monday-Thursday.
You are right, It will clear what..140? by the end of next weekend? and then you figure another 55-60% drop...and its still looking at 170-175 by the end of the 3rd weekend.
Rob V
05-03-09, 08:08 PM
I was never a comic book fan nor do I have any knowledge of the history of X-men, Wolverine, etc... so I found this movie pretty fun and well worth the $12 my wife and I spent. It was a perfect popcorn flick.
PS - is the intent of the "Origins" movies to focus only on Wolverine or are they supposed to branch out to all the main characters? I can't imagine anyone would want to see any character other than Wolverine as the main source.
Groucho
05-03-09, 08:26 PM
It wasn't terrible, but there's nothing about this movie that's noteworthy or will stay with me now that I'm out of the theater.
I will say this: it was extraordinarily well-cast (with the exception of that CGI...thing...they got to represent Professor X).
vvebsta
05-03-09, 09:31 PM
I really liked it! Wolverine is such a great comic character. I thought the cast was all decent. I felt like it could have been bigger. I think it started off low budget but hollywood added to the pot and jazzed it up, cause some of the CG was pretty noticeable, but some was amazing.
LickTheABCs
05-03-09, 09:43 PM
PS - is the intent of the "Origins" movies to focus only on Wolverine or are they supposed to branch out to all the main characters? I can't imagine anyone would want to see any character other than Wolverine as the main source.
I'd sit through this mediocre film 4 more times if it meant the slightest chance at a Deadpool movie. I mean, an actual Deadpool movie, not the abomination in this film.
musick
05-03-09, 09:46 PM
yeah and then you can bitch to FOX when they give you a Dazzler movie instead
Matthew Chmiel
05-03-09, 10:43 PM
I saw it.
With a talented director, a more talented writer, and a less middling studio; this could've been something great.
Instead, I got to see a bigger abortion than what was X-Men: The Last Stand.
How this film cost nearly as much money and had as much terrible CGI is beyond me.
Is there any possible way we can get Singer back to the franchise and erase the past two films? Please?
Daytripper
05-03-09, 10:56 PM
I saw it.
With a talented director, a more talented writer, and a less middling studio; this could've been something great.
Instead, I got to see a bigger abortion than what was X-Men: The Last Stand.
How this film cost nearly as much money and had as much terrible CGI is beyond me.
Is there any possible way we can get Singer back to the franchise and erase the past two films? Please?
OK, I must agree here. What an odd choice for a director of this very successful franchise. Gavin Hood. Who!? He did the AMAZING "Tsotsi". Such a great film. And critically acclaimed. But a drama. And "Rendition". A not so great film. Mixed reviews (more negative than positive). And a bomb. So why this guy??? That said, with someone who's done something more edgy and flashy, and a better writer, this film could have really kicked ass. Someone at Fox needs to be fired for hiring Hood. It's just not his genre.
chris_sc77
05-03-09, 11:04 PM
Well Fox apparently has trouble hiring directors with talent because not many established talented directors will work with them. At least that has been what reports have said.
They care very, very little about crating the best film possible but instead about things like appealing to the broadest audience possible, fitting as many showings as possible per day per print, and sacrificing art for profit even if it means getting in the bad graces of the original fans who helped make their properties popular in the first place.
Groucho
05-03-09, 11:05 PM
I actually think it was Jackman who pushed for Hood.
project86
05-03-09, 11:12 PM
I was pumped the whole time Gambit was on the screen. Other than that, the whole time I was thinking "Haven't they kind of explained this already in X-Men and X2?". The whole origin story of Wolverine is very cool, but they butchered it too much. But, like someone said above me, I'd watch many mediocre movies if it meant there would be a chance for a Deadpool movie.
tanman
05-03-09, 11:12 PM
I thought it was quite good. I came into it thinking it would be terrible especially after the dreadful X3. But it was a great popcorn flick with some really cool action scenes. I loved seeing Patrick Stewart in it. Didn't expect that.
It would be really cool if they went a totally different route with magneto and did a real drama with the holocaust and his early adult years as a background.
X2>X1>>Wolvie>>>>>>>>>>X3
gmanca
05-03-09, 11:31 PM
yeah and then you can bitch to FOX when they give you a Dazzler movie instead
Made in the Xanadu mold and set in the early 1980's? Get Kristin Bell to be Dazzler, Michael Keaton to portray Sebastian Shaw in 19th century British dandy-wear, and Laura Linney for the role of the White Queen and I'm there!
musick
05-04-09, 12:01 AM
I loved seeing Patrick Stewart in it. Didn't expect that.
Nothing special, nothing bad, just..."Ok". There was some cool stuff in it but there was nothing in it that blew me away and I walked out with that, "meh" feeling. The person who went with me saw the WP and she was kind enough not to spoil anything for me but she said neither version did anything for her.
Suprmallet
05-04-09, 02:48 AM
I actually think it was Jackman who pushed for Hood.
He absolutely did. And I don't think Hood did a bad job, he just couldn't move the film beyond the atrocious script.
fausti
05-04-09, 04:07 AM
I loved Jackman and Schreiber, but what a lousy script!! I thought X-Men: Last Stand was merely mediocre, but this was truly friggin' awful! I'm rather glad I saw this for free (from the free ticket deal with the X-Men BDs) 'cause I would've raised all hell if I had paid real money to see this.
nickdawgy
05-04-09, 05:46 AM
I thought it was great. A definite Blu-Ray purchase for me. It makes me laugh to read all the posts about how it wasn't true to the story or whatever.
nickdawgy
05-04-09, 05:57 AM
Is this better than X3?
By far.
DJariya
05-04-09, 06:21 AM
I thought it was great. A definite Blu-Ray purchase for me. It makes me laugh to read all the posts about how it wasn't true to the story or whatever.
I guess some people think they are a New York Times movie critic or an expert on Marvel Comics or something.
I agree I enjoyed it for what it was.
OutRun2
05-04-09, 07:45 AM
I haven't seen it yet but why was it so bad? Was Halle Berry in it?
Gunde
05-04-09, 08:03 AM
Horrible CGI. That's just not good enough in 2009.
The scene where he checks out his new steel claws in the mirror, they looked damn hand drawn. Like something out of Roger Rabbit. Pissed me off.
TallGuyMe
05-04-09, 08:45 AM
is there any rationale given as to why Sabretooth looks totally different than he did in X-Men 1?
Groucho
05-04-09, 09:29 AM
is there any rationale given as to why Sabretooth looks totally different than he did in X-Men 1?He was played by a different actor.
danicus007
05-04-09, 09:31 AM
is there any rationale given as to why Sabretooth looks totally different than he did in X-Men 1?
No. There's not much rationale to this film at all really. I guess we have FOX to blame for screwing this one up.
musick
05-04-09, 02:25 PM
is there any rationale given as to why Sabretooth looks totally different than he did in X-Men 1?
I'd be all for doing an end of ROTJ Anakin on Mane in X1 and replaceing him with Schreiber :)
karoomba
05-04-09, 03:04 PM
Was it ever explained anywhere why he called himself "Logan" in the film. In fact I don't recall if they ever mentioned his last name as 'Howlett' in the beginning... makes me wonder if the writers just changed his name to James Logan instead.
As for the film I gave it 3 stars. .but as a wolvie origin film it fails.. barely any feralness .. glosses over his war history.. no mention of Department H.. or explanation of why the US General is having a hidden base I'm assuming in the Canadian Rockies.
Thought the kid that played cyclops did an actual real good job.. and loved that he was receiving 'directions' during the escape from prof X.. that was a good surprise, unfortunately ruined by the lowly CGI, when you actually get to see him.
nickdawgy
05-04-09, 03:41 PM
Horrible CGI. That's just not good enough in 2009.
The scene where he checks out his new steel claws in the mirror, they looked damn hand drawn. Like something out of Roger Rabbit. Pissed me off.
I can agree there. They did look drawn. I was pissed as well. I damn near demanded my money back.
Then I calmed down when I realized it was a movie, and it was all fake anyway. I actually enjoyed myself after that.
Snowmaker
05-04-09, 03:44 PM
I'm going right after work today. Nobody try and stop me.
RichC2
05-04-09, 03:55 PM
You're making a huge mistake by seeing this instead of Gooby.
Doughboy
05-04-09, 04:31 PM
This was a bad movie, but I wasn't expecting much. I just tagged along with some friends who wanted to see it. I never thought X-Men III was as horrendous as others made it out to be(although it was a major missed opportunity as a followup to X2).
I think my issue with a Wolverine origin film from the very beginning was how superfluous the whole thing is. We know he can't remember any of it at the end, so it ends up feeling like one of those "it was all just a dream" endings. Plus with Stryker and Sabertooth showing up in X2 and X-Men respectively, we know they can't die.
Michael Corvin
05-04-09, 04:37 PM
I think my issue with a Wolverine origin film from the very beginning was how superfluous the whole thing is. We know he can't remember any of it at the end, so it ends up feeling like one of those "it was all just a dream" endings. Plus with Stryker and Sabertooth showing up in X2 and X-Men respectively, we know they can't die.
I did like the film, but the things you mention do kinda detract from the overall 'feel' of the movie.
d2cheer
05-04-09, 04:56 PM
It was OK my son liked it more than I did. I would give it 2.5 out of 5.
Do they ever reference that Sabertooth and Wolverine are brothers in the first X-Men movie? I don't remember...
I too thought the effects were rather poor...
Suprmallet
05-04-09, 05:36 PM
I thought it was great. A definite Blu-Ray purchase for me. It makes me laugh to read all the posts about how it wasn't true to the story or whatever.
Forget being true to the source material. It wasn't true to good storytelling, period.
Deftones
05-04-09, 08:21 PM
Saw it. Liked it. Was it spectacular? Of course not. Was it faithful to the source material? Was I entertained? Yeah. Personally, I thought Liev Schriber stole the show as Victor Creed. The CGI was pretty bad in spots but nothing that was so overwhelmingly distracting. I think the worst part of the film was the dialogue. There were some really, really bad parts in there. "I'm so cold."
Blu Man
05-04-09, 08:57 PM
I liked it. Good action. Now to see how good Terminator and Transformers will be compared to this.
Daytripper
05-04-09, 09:15 PM
Saw it. Liked it. Was it spectacular? Of course not. Was it faithful to the source material? Was I entertained? Yeah. Personally, I thought Liev Schriber stole the show as Victor Creed. The CGI was pretty bad in spots but nothing that was so overwhelmingly distracting. I think the worst part of the film was the dialogue. There were some really, really bad parts in there. "I'm so cold."
Yeah, I don't get all the "horrible CGI" comments. Aside for the claws which were, yeah, not great. The rest was fine. And miles better than "Hancock" and that last Mummy film.
Groucho
05-04-09, 09:23 PM
The CGI Patrick Stewart was not "fine". It looked like one of the wax figures in this thread (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk/554337-worst-wax-museum-best-wax-museum.html).
Daytripper
05-04-09, 09:48 PM
The CGI Patrick Stewart was not "fine". It looked like one of the wax figures in this thread (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk/554337-worst-wax-museum-best-wax-museum.html).
Has it been confirmed that Patrick Stewart was 100% CGI? Or just had his face CGI'd to look younger?? If it's the former, then I'm sorry, that was fantastic. Just look at all the creepy "humans" in "The Polar Express" and "Beowulf".
Oh, and thanks for that link. And I thought Madam Tussauds was bad.
Suprmallet
05-04-09, 09:52 PM
AFAIK, that was Patrick Stewart in the shot. His face was de-aged, as was done in the intro to X-Men 3. It's just that they went too far in this one.
Boba Fett
05-04-09, 10:22 PM
It was normal Patrick Stewart in the workprint. The biggest problem with the CGI is he was smiling way too wide.
toddly6666
05-05-09, 10:11 AM
I thought Wolverine was highly entertaining and it fits perfectly with the other three. The direction, especially the Canadian scenes, reminded me of Bryan Singer's X-Mens, so this film definitely feels like a prequel that one can comfortably watch before watching X-Men 1 and 2. (an example of bad prequels that don't blend smoothly with original films are the Star Wars prequels).
After watching the old X-Men flicks after this new one, things have changed. X-Men 2 is great, but not as great as it was pre-Dark Knight or Watchmen. I would grade the X-men movies as all slightly equally good as:
1. X-Men 2 / X-Men 1 / Wolverine
2. X-Men 3
First off, I want to address all the bitching about Deadpool:
1. DEADPOOL: I'm a huge comic book fan and Deadpool was not messed up one bit for the sake of "movie adaptation". I have no understanding what people are complaining about?
a. Costume: Who has a costume like in the comics? Not in these X-Men movies! It was basically just Magneto, Juggernaught and wrestler dude Sabertooth who had costumes that look like their comic counterparts. So for anyone who has seen the previous three X-Men movies, why would you even expect Deadpool to have a mask? Be happy that he had his red colored costume at the beginning at least.
b. Dying and Powers: Just look at wikipedia if you forgot what he's capable of:
-Regenerative healing factor
-Superhuman strength, stamina, agility, and reflexes
-Expert marksman, swordsman, and martial artist
-Teleportation
-Telepathic immunity
-"Cursed with life" (inability to die) by Thanos
Deadpool's been decapitated before in the comics and came back to life just fine.
The movie is a decent enough origin for Deadpool, especially in which he is not the focus. He was the coolest thing at the beginning of the movie and at the end of the movie. Why would he be the focus throughout the whole movie? It could have been Deadpool replacing Victor Creed, but that would change the whole story. The heart of the story is between Logan and Victor Creed. There's no room for Deadpool. It's a Wolverine movie with tons of mutants. Why would Deadpool be the focus? And for "movie adaptation", it doesn't matter that his mouth was sewn shut (he'll rip it open eventually) or if he can shoot laser beams out of his eyes or has blades that shoot out of his arms. He is known as having tons of powers. For movie adaptation reasons, it's not a big deal or insulting the character...I thought the Wolverine movie was a perfect set-up for a Deadpool solo film if they ever do one.
But other than that, I was happy with Deadpool and the rest of the characters. Liev Shrieber was an awesome Sabertooth, definitely better character than his comic book or cartoon versions. Gambit was cool. Emma Frost had big breasts which was good. The Blob was awesome - although the make-up was a bit wierd. I wasn't bugged by the poor CGI because CGI is all equally the same to me. I prefer to have none that have it. Is the CGI in those Star Wars prequels considered good CGI? To me the CGI in those films looked bad, so it doesn't bug me, because the CGI in Wolverine wasn't the focus. The focus was on the characters, story, and action.
The oiling up of Hugh Jackman was pretty funny and overboard. Someone needs to fire the make-up artists. There is no need to oil him up to make Hugh Jackman look good or "extra good." The make-up artists did the same in Australia.
The CGI Patrick Stewart was a bit wierd, but didn't bug me.
Overall, Wolverine was better than I expected.
Bring on the Magneto Origins movie!
Artman
05-05-09, 11:53 AM
It was normal Patrick Stewart in the workprint.
I was wondering about that....he looked fine to me there..lol! Haven't seen the final version...
Suprmallet
05-05-09, 01:22 PM
I really wish the Magneto film would be a hardcore Holocaust drama and not an action movie at all.
Gunde
05-05-09, 02:31 PM
Has it been confirmed that Patrick Stewart was 100% CGI? Or just had his face CGI'd to look younger?? If it's the former, then I'm sorry, that was fantastic. Just look at all the creepy "humans" in "The Polar Express" and "Beowulf".
Oh, and thanks for that link. And I thought Madam Tussauds was bad.
He looked just as creepy. He looked completely CG to me - bad CG.
Also the compositing was horrible. Especially in the motocycle scene and Fake Stewarts grounded helicopter.
For the record I did like the movie. Thought it had some great action scenes. It's just too bad when the CG is such a distraction
jjcool
05-05-09, 03:16 PM
Was it ever explained anywhere why he called himself "Logan" in the film. In fact I don't recall if they ever mentioned his last name as 'Howlett' in the beginning... makes me wonder if the writers just changed his name to James Logan instead.
As for the film I gave it 3 stars. .but as a wolvie origin film it fails.. barely any feralness .. glosses over his war history.. no mention of Department H.. or explanation of why the US General is having a hidden base I'm assuming in the Canadian Rockies.
Thought the kid that played cyclops did an actual real good job.. and loved that he was receiving 'directions' during the escape from prof X.. that was a good surprise, unfortunately ruined by the lowly CGI, when you actually get to see him.
That was one of my big gripes with the movie. We go from when he is a kid and people calling him Jimmy, to the girl calling him Logan, and liev still calling him jimmy. Didnt make sense to me. What was his name?
Groucho
05-05-09, 03:26 PM
HIS NAME WAS ROBERT PAULSON!lc
Michael Corvin
05-05-09, 04:24 PM
That was one of my big gripes with the movie. We go from when he is a kid and people calling him Jimmy, to the girl calling him Logan, and liev still calling him jimmy. Didnt make sense to me. What was his name?
That's alright, what's common knowledge to some has had me googling to keep up with this thread. A gripe which someone else posted, the filmmakers take for granted that people seeing the movie know these characters. I had to wiki Deadpool, Silverfox and Emma Frost so I could follow the conversation. :lol: I don't think any of those names were actually used in the movie.
karoomba
05-05-09, 05:50 PM
Where was Emma Frost??? ..was she
Stryker's assistant who says the adamantium bullets are useless. Or is she Silverfox's sister who has the diamond skin?
drk_knight01
05-05-09, 05:59 PM
Where was Emma Frost??? ..was she
Stryker's assistant who says the adamantium bullets are useless. Or is she Silverfox's sister who has the diamond skin?
Silverfox's sister
Giantrobo
05-05-09, 06:06 PM
Where was Emma Frost??? ..was she
Stryker's assistant who says the adamantium bullets are useless. Or is she Silverfox's sister who has the diamond skin?
The Diamond Chick. She was nowhere near as slutty and femme fatale as Marvel portrays her in the comics and cartoons these days. :lol:
karoomba
05-05-09, 07:36 PM
^ Thanks Guys.
I always thought Emma Frost was a Psychic, from the Inner Circle or something. Didn't know she had that other power too. Then again, all my knowledge of her is from the 90's X-Men cartoon... so they may have dropped that.
Solid Snake PAC
05-05-09, 08:17 PM
Well here powers were an afterward thing. It was a further mutation for her recently. She's still psychic in the comics plus she can get that diamond skin.
Sierra Disc
05-05-09, 10:02 PM
I thought it was better than all the online bitching led me to believe -- I actually thought it didn't really get going till after the adamantium bits though. Not terrible, not wonderful, but at least the equal of X-Men 1 in my book (which I think was good for the first half, terrible climax).Anyway Wolverine was a solid "B" for me, I was entertained.
My thought on Victor Creed -- did they ever CALL him Sabretooth in this movie? Or did they ever call Sabretooth Victor Creed in X-Men? I'd like to just pretend Tyler Mane in X-Men was just an entirely different character, makes more sense that way.
fumanstan
05-06-09, 11:54 AM
I just caught this last night, and like others, I enjoyed it more then I thought I would after reading all the bitching online. I have some complaints, and don't like the changes to some characters, but all in all I enjoyed this about as equally (maybe even slightly more) then the first X-Men movie.
The cons I had for the movie are the same as others, but they didn't really distract me from enjoying the movie as a whole.
-Poor CGI - The only poor CGI that really stuck out to me were the claws in the bathroom, the helicopter explosion, and Professor X at the end. The rest were fine to me, although not particularly spectacular.
-Rushed origin - Having just read the Wolverine: Origin comic, I was disappointed how quickly the intro with him as a child went by. I thought they could have taken an extra 5 minutes to show his father and their relationship with Creed's dad (not a bad change from the comic)
-Silverfox - Predictable, and cheesy dialogue from her.
-Character Changes - these annoy me, but are forgivable given that characters have been changed a bit throughout all the X-Men movies. The Deadpool changes sounded a lot worse then they really were.
-End Credit shot of Stryker. I thought they should have set that up better for his appearence in X2.
On the flip side, there was a lot I did enjoy.
-The intro with Wolverine and Creed going through all the different wars. I thought that was amazingly well done.
-Jackman and Liev were fantastic in both their roles. I wish they spend a little more time about Sabretooth turning into the way he looks in X1 and losing his memory as well (could have been easily explained by Stryker doing some experiment on him and making him more of an animal)
-Gambit looked pretty cool, although I wish they had him throwing more cards aside from his intro
-Ties to the other movies - I know people complained about how they had to rush to explain things for how Wolverine gets to where he is in X-Men, but I thought they did a good job with it. I liked Prof X meeting Cyclops, Wolverine losing his memory, and things make sense now like Gambit's name showing up in Stryker's computer in X2 as well as Stryker in X2 saying that he hasn't aged well while Wolvie looked the same. Kinda neat.
So overall, it wasn't the greatest comic book movie but I enjoyed it. I think the action in this rivaled X2, and maybe even surpassed it in some parts which is exactly what I hoped from a Wolverine movie. Given the action in X-Men, this was miles ahead of it (seriously, watch that Mystique fight and it looks ridiculous). Of course, I'm also someone that didn't think X3 was terrible. I also got the Deadpool end credit, which it seems most people didn't get which was kind of cool.
My ranks -
X2 - 9/10
X1 - 7/10
Wolverine - 7/10
X3 - 6/10
superdeluxe
05-06-09, 12:16 PM
Where was Emma Frost??? ..was she
Stryker's assistant who says the adamantium bullets are useless. Or is she Silverfox's sister who has the diamond skin?
diamond skin girl
superdeluxe
05-06-09, 12:17 PM
^ Thanks Guys.
I always thought Emma Frost was a Psychic, from the Inner Circle or something. Didn't know she had that other power too. Then again, all my knowledge of her is from the 90's X-Men cartoon... so they may have dropped that.
Emma frost is one of the more powerful mutants around. She was the leader of the hellfire club when she was evil, then she became good.
Michael Corvin
05-06-09, 02:17 PM
Where was Emma Frost???
A pic to go with all the responses:
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a76/MCorvin/Emma_Frost_1_Tahyna_Tozzi.png
Re: Elisha Cuthbert....she sure doesn't look that anymore. Well, her body doesn't at least. She's put on a few pounds. Still cute though. She was on Jimmy Kimmel last week.
NiCK Crush
05-07-09, 12:43 AM
Someone care to explain to me how this and the first X-Men film are in the same universe? Sabretooth is in both, yet in the X-Men film there is practically no connection between him and Wolverine... not to mention the appearance is COMPLETELY different.
Now I'm not a huge X-Men fan... but come on, for continuity's sake...
fumanstan
05-07-09, 12:49 AM
Someone care to explain to me how this and the first X-Men film are in the same universe? Sabretooth is in both, yet in the X-Men film there is practically no connection between him and Wolverine... not to mention the appearance is COMPLETELY different.
Now I'm not a huge X-Men fan... but come on, for continuity's sake...
Well you see why Wolverine forgets about Sabretooth... I wish they would have done a quick explanation for Sabretooth like I mentioned earlier. Something could have been easily done in 5 minutes to have Stryker follow through with their deal and rather then give Creed adamantium, mutate him further into an animal and make him lose his memory, this explaining things for X-Men 1. There is some recognition in X-Men though, with Sabretooth taking Wolverine's dog tags.
musick
05-07-09, 12:53 AM
Someone care to explain to me how this and the first X-Men film are in the same universe? Sabretooth is in both, yet in the X-Men film there is practically no connection between him and Wolverine... not to mention the appearance is COMPLETELY different.
Now I'm not a huge X-Men fan... but come on, for continuity's sake...
simple ....they are different actors
if it bothers you so much think of it as advanced mutation in X1
NiCK Crush
05-07-09, 01:49 AM
Well you see why Wolverine forgets about Sabretooth... I wish they would have done a quick explanation for Sabretooth like I mentioned earlier. Something could have been easily done in 5 minutes to have Stryker follow through with their deal and rather then give Creed adamantium, mutate him further into an animal and make him lose his memory, this explaining things for X-Men 1. There is some recognition in X-Men though, with Sabretooth taking Wolverine's dog tags.
True, forgot about the memory wipe.
simple ....they are different actors
if it bothers you so much think of it as advanced mutation in X1
Different actors is not a good explanation at all. The mutation thing, maybe, but not the actors.
NiCK Crush
05-07-09, 01:51 AM
Also, i thought Wolverine's pre-adamantium claws looked silly.
Michael Corvin
05-07-09, 08:54 AM
Different actors is not a good explanation at all. The mutation thing, maybe, but not the actors.
:shrug: I don't care about continuity (appearance-wise) if it means we get an amazing actor (Liev) to replace a wrestler with zero acting skill (Mane). Dude grew long hair after Origins and before X1. What else is there to tell?
B.A.
05-22-09, 09:01 PM
I'll be kind and give this ** out of five.
I went into it w/ low expectations, but damn...what a mediocre film.
I liked some of the casting (Sabretooth, Kayla Silverfox).
A good majority of the supporting mutants were blah.
And the FX sucked.
hdtv00
05-24-09, 09:21 PM
Wow now I see why this had a HUGE drop off at box office week two. It sucked, I'm shocked it was this bad really. Terminator a turd, ,this a huge pile and trek the summer masterpiece, who would've predicted that one.
mikehunt
06-06-09, 11:12 PM
and the claws never looked great - ESPECIALLY THE SCENE IN THE FARMHOUSE BATHROOM - bar none the worst CG in the movie.
just saw it and agree
the claws looked much better in xmen 1-3
mikehunt
06-06-09, 11:19 PM
I think my issue with a Wolverine origin film from the very beginning was how superfluous the whole thing is. We know he can't remember any of it at the end, so it ends up feeling like one of those "it was all just a dream" endings. Plus with Stryker and Sabertooth showing up in X2 and X-Men respectively, we know they can't die.
none of that bothered me
but how they got rid of his memory kind of did
they never mention bullet holes in his skull in X1. can his body somehow create adamentium too?
Scott in X1-3 never says "hey, I remember you, thanks for making my escape possible"
fumanstan
06-06-09, 11:26 PM
Scott in X1-3 never says "hey, I remember you, thanks for making my escape possible"
Because Scott never sees Wolverine during the escape.
mikehunt
06-06-09, 11:28 PM
-The intro with Wolverine and Creed going through all the different wars. I thought that was amazingly well done.
I want a dedicated movie of wolverine in each of those wars
mikehunt
06-06-09, 11:37 PM
Because Scott never sees Wolverine during the escape.
doh
now I feel stupid
ok, but no one told him about a guy with metal claws cutting their cages open?
jeffkjoe
06-07-09, 01:56 AM
Bryan Singer wants to return
jeffkjoe
06-07-09, 03:41 AM
Gavin hood dropped the ball
John_Shil
06-07-09, 04:11 AM
As far as the difference in appearance between Sabreteeth, and I'm sure this wasn't intended, but in the comics when Wolverine and Sabretooth let go and get all feral in the woods, they get bulkier, more animalistic, less talky, more bitey, much like Sabretooth in the first movie.
I mean, this is Wolverine after Magneto ripped all the adamantium off his skeleton, leading Logan to flee into the woods and go all lupine.
...You sure? Wasn't that from when Genesis (aka Cable's son) attempted to make a Horseman out of Logan in Wolverine #100 by trying to do the adamantium process again? Didn't he get more feral like around that time?
ChineseCheckers
08-03-09, 01:23 PM
I just watched this last night and enjoyed it for what it was. One question though...was there any explanation on how either Wolverine and Sabertooth were able to live for over 100 years? If not, was there an explanation in the other X-Men movies? I know that Wolverine could self heal and what not but wasn't aware that he was immortal as well.
Hokeyboy
08-03-09, 02:17 PM
I just watched this last night and enjoyed it for what it was. One question though...was there any explanation on how either Wolverine and Sabertooth were able to live for over 100 years? If not, was there an explanation in the other X-Men movies? I know that Wolverine could self heal and what not but wasn't aware that he was immortal as well.
A constantly self-healing, regenerating organism wouldn't necessarily age; or if they could, it'd be REAL slow.
And the movie was terrible. Ugh. :(
mikehunt
08-05-09, 07:27 PM
I just watched this last night and enjoyed it for what it was. One question though...was there any explanation on how either Wolverine and Sabertooth were able to live for over 100 years? If not, was there an explanation in the other X-Men movies? I know that Wolverine could self heal and what not but wasn't aware that he was immortal as well.
in X1 Jean comments that they can't tell how old he is and that he could easily be older than Xavier
Buy: