Critics' Reviews: Discussion

[craigdbfan]

Ebert's review:

''There is little dialogue, except for the snarling of threats, vows and laments, and the recitation of essential plot points. Nothing here about human nature. No personalities beyond those hauled in via typecasting. No lessons to learn. No joy to be experienced. Just mayhem, noise and pretty pictures. I have been powerfully impressed by film versions of Batman, Spider-Man, Superman, Iron Man and the Iron Giant. I wouldn't even walk across the street to meet Wolverine.

But wait! -- you say. Doesn't "X-Men Origins" at least provide a learning experience for Logan about the origins of Wolverine? Hollow laugh. Because we know that the modern Wolverine has a form of amnesia, it cannot be a spoiler for me to reveal that at the end of "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," he forgets everything that has happened in the film. Lucky man''

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090429/REVIEWS/904299978

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Ebert's review:

''There is little dialogue, except for the snarling of threats, vows and laments, and the recitation of essential plot points. Nothing here about human nature. No personalities beyond those hauled in via typecasting. No lessons to learn. No joy to be experienced. Just mayhem, noise and pretty pictures. I have been powerfully impressed by film versions of Batman, Spider-Man, Superman, Iron Man and the Iron Giant. I wouldn't even walk across the street to meet Wolverine.

But wait! -- you say. Doesn't "X-Men Origins" at least provide a learning experience for Logan about the origins of Wolverine? Hollow laugh. Because we know that the modern Wolverine has a form of amnesia, it cannot be a spoiler for me to reveal that at the end of "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," he forgets everything that has happened in the film. Lucky man''

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090429/REVIEWS/904299978

 

[Anita18]

Hey, even if Ebert is crazy sometimes, he's so deliciously snarky and upbeat for a guy who has no lower jaw, it's impossible not to love him. t:

 

[Illuminata]

Ebert's review:

''There is little dialogue, except for the snarling of threats, vows and laments, and the recitation of essential plot points. Nothing here about human nature. No personalities beyond those hauled in via typecasting. No lessons to learn. No joy to be experienced. Just mayhem, noise and pretty pictures. I have been powerfully impressed by film versions of Batman, Spider-Man, Superman, Iron Man and the Iron Giant. I wouldn't even walk across the street to meet Wolverine.

But wait! -- you say. Doesn't "X-Men Origins" at least provide a learning experience for Logan about the origins of Wolverine? Hollow laugh. Because we know that the modern Wolverine has a form of amnesia, it cannot be a spoiler for me to reveal that at the end of "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," he forgets everything that has happened in the film. Lucky man''

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090429/REVIEWS/904299978

Well said Roger... well said.

 

[dark_b]

in the workprint when wolverine gives Victor hes hand the music that was playing was from transformers. it was from the final battle(TF).

how was the original music in that scene? was it epic?

 

[danoyse]

I thought that the Fountian was a disaster and I had high hopes for it. I knew exactly what kind of movie I was walking into and wanted so bad to like but ended up hating it.

Some (alot) people do have stupid taste in movies but I don't consider myself one of them. I knew exactly what I was getting myself into when I watched the film and still hated it, whats your defense against that?

Oh wait a second... I don't give a s**t!

The Fountain wasn't some misunderstood masterpeice it was a terrible movie that smart and dumb alike hated. Even dumb people could smell that turd.

:facepalm

 

[Illuminata]

I thought that the Fountian was a disaster and I had high hopes for it. I knew exactly what kind of movie I was walking into and wanted so bad to like but ended up hating it.

Some (alot) people do have stupid taste in movies but I don't consider myself one of them. I knew exactly what I was getting myself into when I watched the film and still hated it, whats your defense against that?

Oh wait a second... I don't give a s**t!

The Fountain wasn't some misunderstood masterpeice it was a terrible movie that smart and dumb alike hated. Even dumb people could smell that turd.

My niece and I were laughing throughout most of that movie.

Especially the lapping milk from the tree scene. There were some serious guffaws going on in the threatre at the LA Grove when we were watching it.

People were walking out and the ones that stayed were only there for the Lolz factor.

 

[Theweepeople]

You go Roger Ebert...

I couldn't care less about what Ebert thinks on this issue. He is arguably the most overated mainstream critic. I stopped taking his reviews seriously 15 years ago. The only time he and I are on the same page review wise is when he reviews movies that are universally loved or hated.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I'm disappointed with that Ebert review. Not because I disagree with his score, but because it is just a really poor review. I don't know where he gets "little dialogue" and "No personalities beyond those handed in via typecasting" what is he even talking about there?

 

[magus]

"Such films are assemblies of events" is my favorite line from the Ebert review. It seems he went especially tough on this one, but that line describes how I feel about all the X movies. There are a bunch of individually cool parts (and terrible ones) that come together to make something that doesn't seem nearly as cool as a whole.

In other news, I saw Crank: High Voltage and enjoyed it immensely. It had no pretense; it efficiently told the story and it did so with globs of style and originality in the way it used genre conventions. It just goes to show that even stupid movies that commit to a purpose can work. Wolverine was too much of a mess that couldn't decide what it wanted to do, so it ended up being wholly mediocre on most fronts.

 

[bunk]

I kinda thought there would be more reviews on RT at this point. Anyway, it's going to be sad if it isn't able to at least score better than X3 by the end.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea I honestly believe it is better than X3, and I've still only seen the workprint. Going tomorrow. So unless somehow the workprint is better than the final cut, then this film will get no less than a 7/10 from me.

 

[J.Howlett]

Seeing it tonight...but I just don't think my opinion will change. As a matter of fact, the details still play in my head and the film slips further and further, in terms of rating. I'm even flirting with the idea that The Last Stand is better than this....seriously!

 

[Ace of Knaves]

That's your opinion man.

But I just think the acting and the story(although plot-holey) is better than X-3. I also like the action sequences much more, especially the Lagos one.

I mean X-3 tried to do two massive X-Men stories in one film. If they chose one or the other it wouldn't of been half as bad. But you just can't fit The Cure and Dark Phoenix storylines into one film, unless it's like 3 hours long or something. And the action was pretty crap apart from the moving of the bridge and Logan in the woods. The very final battle was just a jumbled mess IMO.

 

[Goliath]

Jaded critics are the worst and no one is more jaded then Roger Ebert. God Bless him, he was great in his day but he's seen one too many films. Fresh publications like USA Today all love Wolverine because they employee people that are in touch with 21st century sensibilities.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/reviews/2009-04-29-wolverine_N.htm

Screw the critics either way.

 

[J.Howlett]

Ace,

I can agree on some of the acting in Wolverine, not all of it(Huston comes to mind). Storywise, it's only better than The Last Stand because of its simplicity. But with that comes the issues I have with it in term of continuity to X-Men and X2...and that's where my major gripes are at.

And its been further fueled after reading a full script review of Benioff's original draft of this film and some of the knuckleheadedness in this film was not in that script. Hell, according to the review, they even explained the situation with Victor and how he ends up how he does in X-Men. Now, how does that not make it into the film...considering the marketing of this film has him being called Sabretooth, yet the film doesn't.

Again, just crap like that irks me.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

and that is understandable.

 

[J.Howlett]

My question is this: If this film doesn't do the numbers Fox really needs, does Marvel get the rights back?

Because as much as I hold a serious torch for what Singer did with X-Men and X2, I think, with this film, X-Men needs to be rebooted. I hate thinking that way because Jackman, for me, is Logan...but if Fox continues with this, they'll keep making crap films in this franchise and that's got to stop. In a way, it'll hurt the perception of Singer's films.

 

[Microchip]

Probably not.... it's been such a profitable franchise that I think Fox would need more than one failure to actually want to give up on it. They'd probably rather reboot it themselves first and see if that works.

Plus, Marvel's got their plates full for the next few years anyways. They're a small studio, and furthermore I don't WANT to see them crank out 6-7 comic book movies every summer. Lets see what Fox can do with a Wolverine-less X-Men First Class, and if that doesn't get big numbers, I can see them quitting ahead and giving up on the franchise.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea Marvel has got the whole Avengers thing going on. And if that doesn't prove successful then Marvel will go down the pan just as it got going.

But I think all the Avenger movies including IM 2 and Thor will do well.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Yea Marvel has got the whole Avengers thing going on. And if that doesn't prove successful then Marvel will go down the pan just as it got going.

But I think all the Avenger movies including IM 2 and Thor will do well.

IM2 will do very well but Thor has "flop" potential IMHO.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

That's your opinion man.

But I just think the acting and the story(although plot-holey) is better than X-3. I also like the action sequences much more, especially the Lagos one.

I mean X-3 tried to do two massive X-Men stories in one film. If they chose one or the other it wouldn't of been half as bad. But you just can't fit The Cure and Dark Phoenix storylines into one film, unless it's like 3 hours long or something. And the action was pretty crap apart from the moving of the bridge and Logan in the woods. The very final battle was just a jumbled mess IMO.

I disagree with the bolded.

One of the reasons why I love X-Men 3 so much is because I think it's the best story arc of the bunch. Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that it's the only movie that is based on a classic X-Men storyline (X-Men wasn't based on one at all, and God Loves, Man Kills isn't in the same league as X-Men stories like Phoenix Saga, Dark Phoenix Saga, Days of Future Past, Age of Apocalypse, Mutant Massacre, etc...), but whatever it is, it's the best story.

I also don't believe that it needed 3 hours, even with the cure story thrown in. 2 hours, 2:15 tops. It wasn't that far off the mark. It did everything it needed to do in terms of explanation, it just didn't sit long enough for many of the things to sink in and have an effect. It only needed a little bit more to get that.

And the acting I don't think there's any question. X-Men 3 had better performances all across the board.

Jackman and Schrieber were great. Huston was off and on. Reynolds and Will.I.Am were good. I also liked Kitsch as Gambit. Mohnagan was good in his limited material.

But Lynn Collins was pretty bad. As I said earlier, Huston was off and on, meaning he had some not so great moments. Henney wasn't amazing as Agent Zero.

I really don't think that Lynn Collins is as good as Famke Jansenn, Huston is no Ian McKellen, and even Henney is no Aaron Stanford.

Not only that, but X-Men 3 still has Jackman, cancelling that out, on top of Patrick Stewart, Kelsey Grammar, Anna Paquin.

 

[J.Howlett]

Anna Paquin did nothing in The Last Stand. Her character is, to me, the great example why The Last Stand is what it is.

How could you not use Rogue's character to push and do some real examination of the cure storyline? It's tailor made for her and they just rushed the hell out of it. Ten seconds in the danger room...an argument with Bobby...hears about the cure...decides to take it...shows up at the end and totally negates the true meaning of what it means to be an X-Men.

If they had developed Rogue thoroughly in The Last Stand and yet she still took the cure, I wouldn't have been upset.

I mean, they could've shown her as part of the team in a real action sequence instead of the Danger Room. They could've developed her powers. They could've developed her as a mentor and teacher to younger students and how they think of her because she's waying the pros and cons of taking the cure...examined her relationship with Bobby more...could've explored the idea of if she would even be welcomed back to the school because she took the cure.

I mean, crap, that's meaty material there and there's absolutely nothing in the Last Stand for her. And she's just a example of other examples as to why that film fails.

 

[Kanon]

"It is Hugh Jackman's misfortune that when they were handing out superheroes, he got Wolverine, who is for my money low on the charisma list"

That's a stupid statement... I actually feel sorry for Ebert's review. I can only think he is somehow biased, complainig about stuff like "neither he, nor we, find out how he developed such an interesting mutation"... What the **** was this guy watching?

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea, Ebert surprised me. I usually like his reviews, but this one was crap. And not just because I disagree with it.

He just didn't seem to get it, and it isn't that hard to get.

His comment about the "type-casting" is probably mainly aimed at Wade Wilson/Ryan Reynolds. That isn't type-casting, that's the character being nailed.