Critics' Reviews: Discussion

[narrows101]

Two positve reviews from Urban Cinefile:

http://www.urbancinefile.com.au/home/view.asp?a=15678&s=Reviews

 

[def28]

All reviews so far are positive which is good, the Sci Fi page one and Ign seem to give a more detailed review.

I think this will maybe land around 70% on RT.

Those who have seen the WP, is it better or worst than Spider-Man 3?

 

[Nathan]

Wow, Nathan hit it on the head for me. For me, in everything I've read, the lack of Wolverine really getting his hands dirty and being dark, animalistically brutal and quite morally ambiguous has been a serious downer and negative point. I thought that was where we were going; X2 hinted at his past ferocity and when I saw the first trailers I was also led to believe that. So am I right in saying he never has a full blown berserker rampage or massacre in this? X2 was like a tease for me, I turned to my sister and said "Holy crap, look at this scene in the trailer! Logan is so gonna kill the invading guards in berserker style! Just like the comics" but it wasn't a big drawn out sequence, and I was fine with that. I was hoping to see something of the sort on a larger scale come May 1st, but it sounds like such a scene wont be in there?

Just a short espace from Weapon X. And I mean short.

 

[J.Howlett]

Nathan,

Wouldn't you agree that his escape from the Weapon X project is more ferocious in the flashback in X2 than the actual film?

 

[stardust]

These reviews tell nothing new and the praising paragraphs at the end sound like someone has paid them to write them. :P

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I knew that if the reviews dared to be positive people would claim that they were paid off or whatever.

Wow you people need to sort it out.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Like I said, watch it again. First, he doesn't know what went down, only that Creed and the Soldiers are suddenly trying to kill each other. Secondly, it doesn't matter what happened in the Comic Con Footage, in the Movie he is just shoving people around.



Ok, I just read war montage and didn't see that you're just talking about the last scene in particular. But anyway, look for my answer above.

At the very end of the war montage he is popping his bone claws and standing in a fighting stance. It's is OBVIOUS what goes down next. They don't show him killing the soldiers because they don't need to.

And the fact that he is defending his brother even though his brother did something terrible makes you question. Would he of helped his brother out if he knew what he was doing? Or would he of just let the soldiers kill him or whatever?

It doesn't need to be spelled out for you, use your brain.

 

[JP]

First three reviews up on RT are positive, but I guess we all know that already?

 

[Nathan]

At the very end of the war montage he is popping his bone claws and standing in a fighting stance. It's is OBVIOUS what goes down next. They don't show him killing the soldiers because they don't need to.

It isn't obvious. If they would've killed those Soldiers off, I doubt they would've ended up getting executed, because they would've gotten the hell out of there. Do you think they'd kill those soldiers and then wait around for a trial? They were surrounded, one wrong move and the soldiers would've opened fire, and seeing a guy suddenly pop claws out of his knuckles I doubt they would've hesitated.

And the fact that he is defending his brother even though his brother did something terrible makes you question. Would he of helped his brother out if he knew what he was doing? Or would he of just let the soldiers kill him or whatever?

It doesn't need to be spelled out for you, use your brain.

... In an origin I don't want to just use guess work and have lines allude to whether he's bad or not. That what we got in the X-Men Movies. This is a Origin, this is supposed to deal with his dark past, this is supposed to outright show us the sins he has committed. All the good stuff shouldn't be just left to one's own imagination.

 

[Nevaratoiel]

Well, there will be good and bad reviews, though I expect the last ones to have upperhand. I'm going to see it tomorrow and be entertained. **** those reviews. I never read them. I really don't care about them. Screw the inconsistancies! I want a Gambit spinoff!!!!!!!!!

 

[danoyse]

First three reviews up on RT are positive, but I guess we all know that already?

Now there's 5 positive reviews.

It could all change in a minute, but I'll take it so far.

 

[Drz]

Indeed, i remember when Watchmen had 95% on rotten tomaetoes. ^^

 

[JP]

17 again was at 100% for a good two days before it finally came down to 58.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I reckon when all is said and done this will be in the 70s on RT. Maybe 60s, but no lower than that.

 

[CelticPredator]

I'd say high 50's.


And the reason people think those are studio reviews, is because they're written so....forced.


Also, funny, but semi related story. When UltraViolet came out, there was this review that said "Sleek, sexy, and utter crap."

And then I see a TV spot...."Sleek and sexy..."

I laughed so hard.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Sleek, sexy and utter crap? That sounds about right!

 

[Celestial]

Four out of five of those reviews are australian and maybe they are well-disposed towards it because it was filmed in Aus/NZ and stars a well-loved, australian actor. I think Jackman's likeability is going to help the reviews elsewhere, too.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Na I don't think so. If they really thought the movie was crap they would say so. I mean, what do they achieve by lying? Apart from discrediting themselves?

 

[CelticPredator]

They get money. Simple as that.

Hell...if someone gave me a thousand bucks, i'd tell ya how "amazing" this movie is.

 

[X-Maniac]

I'd say high 50's.


And the reason people think those are studio reviews, is because they're written so....forced.


Also, funny, but semi related story. When UltraViolet came out, there was this review that said "Sleek, sexy, and utter crap."

And then I see a TV spot...."Sleek and sexy..."

I laughed so hard.

You do realise that anyone accusing favourable reviews of being from the studio is just exposing their own bitter bias. It looks like you are sitting there wishing for negativity in order to validate your own negativity. Which is a fairly insecure way of existing.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea but then your whole reputation would be ruined really. People would be like "Hmm, he is either a complete idiot or he has been paid off, I'm not going to pay attention to him ever again"

As well as their peers and fellow critics thinking less of them. It just wouldn't seem worth it, to me anyway.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

double

 

[_BB_]

I read a review in a british newspaper yesterday and have just gone onto their website now to see if i can post a link but no can do - apparently there is still an embargo on uk websites putting up reviews until 8pm tonight I dont get it, its ok to print it for national distribution but its criminal to post it online?

 

[X-Maniac]

And by the way, I've seen the movie. But I realise my opinions matter very little in the...ahem...deadpool of pre-biased negativity on here.

But I will add that - after the film - I mentioned the fanboy complaints on here to the group of people I was with. They've never laughed or rolled their eyes so much.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

You do realise that anyone accusing favourable reviews of being from the studio is just exposing their own bitter bias. It looks like you are sitting there wishing for negativity in order to validate your own negativity. Which is a fairly insecure way of existing.

True. I just had a row with some prick on IMDB about it. He was saying every single positive review must be a Fox shill. The guy was completely insane. Talk about paranoid delusions.

But I don't think any one over here is that ****ed up in the head, well I hope not because I'll end up getting banned for abusing them.