View Single Post
Old 07-08-2011, 04:01 PM   #116
Alexei Belyakov
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,494
Default Re: James Mangold will direct The Wolverine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
Eh, I don't see how it wasn't character driven. Everything leading up to Weapon X, and even a chunk of it after Weapon X, was all about Logan, the relationships he built with people, and then those relationships being taken from him. But it's also a comic book, and as Thebumwhowalks seemed to imply, I think that some people are overestimating the deepness of a comic book story.
That's a poor mentality to have towards the genre. It basically implies that because these films are based on comic books that they shouldn't be serious/intelligent pictures with any depth.

Bryan Singer went into the genre with the complete opposite set of ideals, which Christopher Nolan drove home with TDK.

This genre is very capable of quality material.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
It's still Weapon X, it's still Wolverine v. Sabretooth, it's about scientists experimenting on him, and them him raging on them afterwords. Now, I know a lot of people had a problem with Logan's lack of berserker rage in the movie, but I really didn't take issue with it. There were certainly some aspects of the movie I didn't like, but overall, I really never understood why people hate it so much.
Nell, you defend Origins and X3 alot on these forums despite the very general consensus of them by others here, and while I can agree that X3 isn't the horrific film its made out to be by most in the comics community, I really can't say the same about Origins.

Let me clarify that I don't dislike Origins because I'm a comic book fan or because it didn't satisfy my thirst for blood and gore. As a movie, not just as a comic book movie, but as a movie in general, its a really bad movie.

I hate to have to use RT for reference, but 37% says it all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
One of the things that I love so much about the movie is that I feel it focuses on Logan, and his relationships with both Kayla and the Hudsons so much, and gives those relationships time to build and breathe.
While the movie does indeed focus on Logan, it gives us no reason to care about Logan [besides our prior encounters with him in the trilogy].

All the moments prior to Weapon X that could have made for great emotional drama are wasted on an opening sequence that turns the Origin comic into a 3 minute scene and 150 years of war into a credits montage.

*Gavin Hood spoke of how they had a sequence during the Civil War where the brothers find themselves to be the only survivors of that particular battle shaping them as men now that they know they're impervious to damage.

Obviously that scene wasn't explosive enough to have in the movie.

*In another sequence that never saw the light of day, [Captain] Creed tells the men on his U-Boat in Normandy right before they hit the beach "That they're all gonna die" with a tasty grin on his face.

All those important beats that would have actually developed the brothers were excised in favor of an "epic" montage which does nothing more than suggest one man embraces his animal nature and the other doesn't. Maybe if the rest of the film wasn't an absolute departure from common sense, that would have worked a little better.

His relationship with Kayla was okay, really didn't need more work, but again is completely thrown in the trash can once she reveals her ridiculous intentions for betraying Logan (I literally almost left the theatre when she started saying "They have my Sister!!!!!" over and over again ).

As for The Hudsons. Nell, have you ever seen this movie?



They ripped out that ENTIRE concept from Superman: The Movie and I'm almost 100% it was because Donner himself became involved with the film. It is the absolute worst homage to a movie ever made, not to mention Jackman's dialogue and acting take a massive collapse during those scenes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
We get 45 minutes of that before we get into our first big action sequence, which is the helicopter chase. After that, sure I'll admit the movie loses a bit of focus and kinda ends up all over the place, but the first half of that movie alone give it a lot of heart. And while the 2nd half bounces around a bit, I don't think that it ever loses focus of what his motives are.
The character's motives were pretty simple and they still somehow managed to mess them up massively.

-Man lives for war.
-Man gets tired of war.
-Man's brother won't accept his change of heart.
-Man leaves war, pursues quiet life.
-Man's brother destroys man's quiet life.
-Man tries to exact vengeance on man's brother, fails.
-Man turns to monster for tool to defeat brother.
-Man finds out quiet life was never real and brother didn't really do anything worth being killed for.
-We no longer care about man or movie.
-Movie continues anyway and man decides to help woman who........

There were too many ways to get the above before the bold right. They failed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
Sure, it's not a character piece the likes of The Godfather or Citizen Kane or something, but it's a comic book movie, it's not supposed to be.
Again, you should demand more from your movies and expect the best when it comes to characters you loved long before they were adapted into film properties.

Wolverine got quality treatment from Bryan Singer in an X-Men film. He deserved quality treatment in his own film.

The comic book genre hasn't been a "B" genre for over a decade. Unfortunately some producers in Hollywood still think it is and we get crap like Ghost Rider, Green Lantern, Punisher War Zone and X-Men Origins.

Ironically those same producers make so much less than those that approach the genre with respect and creativity

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
I pride my favorite movies on having a certain level of character focus as well, except for certain circumstances, I'm not really impressed by non-character driven action films (although oddly enough, with the whole Aronofsky conversation, I get turned off by movies that become -too- artsy as well, I have a particular medium that I look for). That's why I love X-Men in general, because there is a good focus on character, and what I consider to be a great foundation for the world these characters live in, and I thought that X-Men Origins: Wolverine matched that. To this day, I still don't get why people are so upset with the film.
Nell, you're entitled to enjoy Origins as is everyone else who did, but I gotta ask, are you really gonna say Origins matched the level of its precursors?


Last edited by Alexei Belyakov; 07-08-2011 at 04:09 PM.
Alexei Belyakov is offline   Reply With Quote