Critics' Reviews: Discussion

[magus]

The movie is down to 39%. The critics are in a bad mood and it's hilarious. That's even harsher than I would have given it and I didn't like the film much at all. Even though it will probably have a successful opening weekend, word-of-mouth might not be too great on it. There seems to be a pretty substantial "meh" reaction to the film.

 

[dark_b]

whats sad to me is that there are 3 fights between Victor and Logan and they are very similar. it makes me sad that sabertooh was not better used. Liev with a better script could be ''the'' villain that everyone talks about in 2009 .

 

[Dark Knight]

This review below falls in line on how I felt about the film after viewing it last night. Let me guess was Tom Rothman involved in this mediocre film?

Disappointing beyond belief and unbalanced. The action sequences were just not good.

Gavin Hood did a bad job and those ill advised butt shots of Jackman were odd especially since the core demographic of Wolverine and X-Men fans are MALES....not FEMALES! Sheesh....


http://www.insidebayarea.com/movies/ci_12257064

 

[magus]

"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?

Or as fans of the comic book we are potentially more biased because we are able to imply things about the characters that aren't otherwise perceptible to casual viewers.

It isn't like he hates the genre: he's given very fair reviews to many other comic-book movies, including the X-Men ones.

 

[dark_b]

This review below falls in line on how I felt about the film after viewing it last night. Let me guess was Tom Rothman involved in this mediocre film?

Disappointing beyond belief and unbalanced. The action sequences were just not good.

Gavin Hood did a bad job and those ill advised butt shots of Jackman were odd especially since the core demographic of Wolverine and X-Men fans are MALES....not FEMALES! Sheesh....


http://www.insidebayarea.com/movies/ci_12257064

hahahahhahaaha

 

[magus]

whats sad to me is that there are 3 fights between Victor and Logan and they are very similar. it makes me sad that sabertooh was not better used. Liev with a better script could be ''the'' villain that everyone talks about in 2009 .

Stare at each other in quick draw pose. Wolverine runs, Sabretooth does feral thing where he doesn't actually touch the ground. Stab each other in non-lethal ways (such as shoulders). Stop fighting because the movie would be over already if one of them died.

 

[CelticPredator]

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?

He's a 100% right.

Wade- Annoying jokester, who wise cracks all the time, but can still get the job done. (Any 90's action movie)

Logan- The loner. (Too many to count!)

Creed - The crazed brother of the Loner.....

Agent X- The gun shooting badass.

Wraith - The only black guy on the team.

Stryker - The shady military dude with plans of his own.

Kayla - The love interest who dies.



Every character in this movie is a type cast. Since they have little time to develop, they cant be anything but that.

 

[Deaths Head II]

I liked the Ebert review. It's not his best, but it was amusing.

 

[magus]

I liked the Ebert review. It's not his best, but it was amusing.

I haven't seen him so angry in a while. It was most definitely amusing.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

He's a 100% right.

Wade- Annoying jokester, who wise cracks all the time, but can still get the job done. (Any 90's action movie)

Logan- The loner. (Too many to count!)

Creed - The crazed brother of the Loner.....

Agent X- The gun shooting badass.

Wraith - The only black guy on the team.

Stryker - The shady military dude with plans of his own.

Kayla - The love interest who dies.



Every character in this movie is a type cast. Since they have little time to develop, they cant be anything but that.

Well Reynolds nailed the character, it's not type-casting if you get the character right is it?

And I think the cameo characters get enough characterization. Just because they don't get a lot of screen time doesn't automatically mean they have no characterization at all.

When people say Bradley, Wraith and Blob get no characterization at all I laugh, because they are wrong. They might not of got much characterization or development, but they got enough for their roles. We learn what they are about, what made them leave Weapon X, how they deal with what happened. I can't remember what review said it but someone mentioned Bradley had a "charming sadness" about him. I completely agree with that. He sorta reminded me of J.F Sebastian from Blade Runner. So yea, he didn't get a lot of screen time but I could pick up on little character traits there.

And Gambit although not a lot of screen time you get what happened to him and that there is something more to him.

But again if people wanna complain about all these cameo characters then you gotta realize that it was the fault for all the fans clamouring to see these characters in the film. Fox threw them in to try and please the fans, obviously it seems to have backfired. So the lesson is; Don't listen to the fans.

One minute people are moaning saying the cameos take away from Logan and Creed. Then the next minute they didn't get enough development. You can't have things both ways.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

Must be an X-Men fanboy... roams these boards as.... THE ORIGINAL BAMFER!!!
Yes... the mod...

 

[sniktsnakt]

Somehow I may be getting more out of these reviews than I may get from the movie.

 

[magus]

Well Reynolds nailed the character, it's not type-casting if you get the character right is it?

And I think the cameo characters get enough characterization. Just because they don't get a lot of screen time doesn't automatically mean they have no characterization at all.

When people say Bradley, Wraith and Blob get no characterization at all I laugh, because they are wrong. They might not of got much characterization or development, but they got enough for their roles. We learn what they are about, what made them leave Weapon X, how they deal with what happened. I can't remember what review said it but someone mentioned Bradley had a "charming sadness" about him. I completely agree with that. He sorta reminded me of J.F Sebastian from Blade Runner. So yea, he didn't get a lot of screen time but I could pick up on little character traits there.

Did you honestly just make a comparison between this movie and Blade Runner? That saddens me to no end.

Maverick was the worst character in the entire movie; there was no "charming sadness". Unless you are referring to the 1 sec where he got yelled at as him being "sad".

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Did you honestly just make a comparison between this movie and Blade Runner? That saddens me to no end.

Maverick was the worst character in the entire movie; there was no "charming sadness". Unless you are referring to the 1 sec where he got yelled at as him being "sad".

Who was talking about Maverick?

I'm talking about Bradley. The scene at the carnival. There was a sadness about him. Now working as a mere fun fair entertainer, he seems a bit sad and angry that his gift is thought of just as a cheap parlour trick by that guy. Then he goes back to his caravan alone and comforts himself with all his toys and a glass of booze. Yea, no characterization what so ever there...

Even when he is with Team X I can tell what sort of person he is. He seems the odd one out, he ain't a killer like these other guys.

Honestly, it seems some people can't tell the different between screen time and characterization.

And I'm not comparing it to Blade Runner, nice hyper-bole there

I said I got a J.F Sebastian vibe about Bradley. As in being all alone apart from his toys and all that.

 

[magus]

Who was talking about Maverick?

I'm talking about Bradley. The scene at the carnival. There was a sadness about him. Now working as a mere fun fair entertainer, he seems a bit sad and angry that his gift is thought of just as a trick by that guy. Then he goes back to his caravan alone and comforts himself with all his toys and a glass of booze. Yea, no characterization what so ever there...

And I'm not comparing it to Blade Runner, nice hyper-bole there

I said I got a J.F Sebastian vibe about Bradley.

Sorry got the names mixed up. In the comics Bradley took over Maverick for a while. Bolt was a bit more of a sympathetic character, but there was no reason for him to be so important. I appreciate that the one piece of artistic integrity in the movie was his scene, but the character was irrelevant in the end.

And saying that you were comparing it to Blade Runner when you were comparing two characters from the two films is not hyperbole; also, hyperbole is one word.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

I agree with Ace....
He had limited power and no other skills he could cash in on. He was special yet relegated to a really low position in society. When the couple leaves him after he shows his trick there was a certain sense of grief in his eyes....
He goes to his little hovel and amuses himself until Creed comes in to ruin his day...

Also, is it me or does the scene with BLOB and Logan boxing remind anyone of a bad Bollywood film...

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Sorry got the names mixed up. In the comics Bradley took over Maverick for a while. Bolt was a bit more of a sympathetic character, but there was no reason for him to be so important. I appreciate that the one piece of artistic integrity in the movie was his scene, but the character was irrelevant in the end.

And saying that you were comparing it to Blade Runner when you were comparing two characters from the two films is not hyperbole; also, hyperbole is one word.

So, there was some characterization for his tiny role. Screen time doesn't equal characterization. And I thought he was characterized nicely.

And I feel my comparison to J.F Sebastian is valid.

I agree with Ace....
He had limited power and no other skills he could cash in on. He was special yet relegated to a really low position in society. When the couple leaves him after he shows his trick there was a certain sense of grief in his eyes....
He goes to his little hovel and amuses himself until Creed comes in to ruin his day...

Also, is it me or does the scene with BLOB and Logan boxing remind anyone of a bad Bollywood film...

Exactly. I thought that was a nice touch.

So yea, no characterization what-so-ever

The boxing match was pretty silly. But it was thrown in there for the kids and I thought Blob in the movie has more depth than Blob from the comics.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

Since we now have two threads devoted to reviews, I am renaming this one for clarification. Thanks.

--Caliph

 

[AnorexicBatman]

Agreed... comic and animated series Blob disgusts me...
Here... like Logan... he was a teddy bear... an angry teddy bear...

Infact... Wade Wilson and Creed were the only hardcore ones...
The others were the kind of guys, good mothers want their daughters to meet...

 

[magus]

So, there was some characterization for his tiny role. Screen time doesn't equal characterization. And I thought he was characterized nicely.

And I feel my comparison to J.F Sebastian is valid.
.

I never said there was no characterization nor did I say that more time = characterization; you must be confusing me with someone else.

Bolt's scene is the most touching in the film. So much so that it is completely out of place. It is a great scene in and of itself but it makes no sense for such an unimportant character to get that screen time in lieu of others. I am not going to commend them for doing one thing right when it juts points out how much they actually did wrong. I would have preferred the scene didn't exist so that I could just call the writers/director incompetent instead of them showing me they had potential that went unused due to apathy or lack of time/resources.

Wolverine himself never had a moment even close to as revealing as Bolt's. What should have been the biggest scene in the movie—Wolverine's escape from the facility—was something like 20 seconds long. Every animated version of the X-Men and even the flashbacks in X2 had better versions of that scene.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Not arguing the point about the escape, that was crap.

And I will commend them on the Bradley scene. It was in the movie, it is commendable.

And they actually made Blob a deeper character than he is in the comics. But people like to ignore that as well.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

I can't believe how badly it is being trashed by the critics. I just came from Rottentomatoes. I was like...

 

[AnorexicBatman]

^ That's another problem....
All the side characters get more development than Logan and Creed...

 

[Kanon]

Or as fans of the comic book we are potentially more biased because we are able to imply things about the characters that aren't otherwise perceptible to casual viewers.

It isn't like he hates the genre: he's given very fair reviews to many other comic-book movies, including the X-Men ones.

So the movie should have explained that mutants ar born with powers?

 

[TheVileOne]

I can't believe how badly it is being trashed by the critics. I just came from Rottentomatoes. I was like...

Its not surprising. Bryan Singer didn't direct this movie.

Most of Fox movies get awful reviews, especially the comic book movies. X3, FF, FF2, and now Wolverine were all poorly reviewed films.