The Finished/Theatrical Version Of WOLVERINE Has Been Seen!!

[Papa Burgundy]

I thought it would end up in the 50's but if it ends up in the 40's then wow I do hope Fox execs and the producers see that they can make a way better movie.

they know they can. that movie was called x-men 2. hell i wasnt the biggest fan of x1 but ill take that over x3 and wolverine.

guess the first 2 were lucky flukes.

 

[sniktsnakt]

What're we at now? Still at 44? <too lazy to move from this forum and check>

 

[Deaths Head II]

they know they can. that movie was called x-men 2. hell i wasnt the biggest fan of x1 but ill take that over x3 and wolverine.

guess the first 2 were lucky flukes.

It's because the X-Films were Singer's babies. Its like when they got rid of Donner in the Superman films.

 

[Krozee]

FOX is getting so cheap. when was the last time that FOX made a big budget movie with groundbreaking effects?

Avatar. December 18th, 2009. Be there. Or be square.

 

[CelticPredator]

They're axing the 3D apparently....

 

[Kanon]

Hey guys, I just watched the movie, and timed the runtime

FOX logo at 8:44pm

The Japan scene ended at 10:31pm

That is 107, but the clock used (my cellphone) doesn't show seconds, so there is one minute of margin of error.

BTW, those times are GMT-3 (right now is 10:50pm here)

 

[bullets]

so if the CGI on patrick looks bad i know why it does. because FOX didnt want to spend money.
i am asking myself why have a scene like that if you dont want to spend money on teh effect. why not really show him form behind.

FOX is getting so cheap. when was the last time that FOX made a big budget movie with groundbreaking effects?

They could of just showed the back of his head and we hear his voice . That would of been alot cheaper.

 

[Deaths Head II]

They could have not de-aged him at all (he looked fine in the leak), or done it to a lesser degree then X3. Years had to have passed since they got Jean.

 

[Electrix]

They're axing the 3D apparently....

Not true. They will be released it in 3D and 2D, as not all screens will be 3D ready. It was originally going to be released this summer but they delayed it so they could work on it some more and to allow more time for more 3D screens to be fitted.

Plus Avatar is costing $200 million+ so FOX aren't cheap.

 

[Papa Burgundy]

41 percent

 

[night0205]

Does Patrick look worse then X3...cause he looked fine there...i mean you knew something was wrong he he but it wasn't a big deal...

 

[dark_b]

Not true. They will be released it in 3D and 2D, as not all screens will be 3D ready. It was originally going to be released this summer but they delayed it so they could work on it some more and to allow more time for more 3D screens to be fitted.

Plus Avatar is costing $200 million+ so FOX aren't cheap.

dont use avatar that FOX is not cheap.
this is completely different. this is James F.... Cameron . TITANIC was a FOX movie. thats why they are spending so much money. not even FOX is so dumb to not give Cameron a huge budget.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

dont use avatar that FOX is not cheap.

How is Fox cheap? This movie I believe cost over $100 million, X-Men 3 cost over $200 million if I recall. That's cheap?

 

[dark_b]

How is Fox cheap? This movie I believe cost over $100 million, X-Men 3 cost over $200 million if I recall. That's cheap?

go on the interent and search why the budget was so high.

and if people are complaining that the claws in this movie look more fake then in 2003 then this means that they are cheap. technology is better.

 

[drmick]

Good point. The claws did look a lot more fake in this film than all the previous films.

 

[Anita18]

X-Men 3 cost over $200 million if I recall. That's cheap?

Because they valued beating SR to the theaters even more than they valued their money. It must have been some serious hatred!

 

[craigdbfan]

How is Fox cheap? This movie I believe cost over $100 million, X-Men 3 cost over $200 million if I recall. That's cheap?

Actually the budget has been reported to be $75 million. They decided to go cheaper but gain the same type of earnings as their previous big budget X-Men films.

/film has a good article on it: Article

 

[dark_b]

actually the budget has been reported to be $75 million. they decided to go cheaper but gain the same type of earnings as their previous big budget x-men films.

/film has a good article on it: article on fox earning "plan" for cheaper price

whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat??????

 

[craigdbfan]

I'm referring to X-Men Origins: Wolverine not X-Men 3.

It’s pretty clear that, with no cost-containment on budget (especially the big cast), the X-Men franchise had reached the point of diminishing returns. So, X-Men Origins: Wolverine (Fox), debuting Friday, is a sequel, but, technically, a spin-off, without costing as much as a true sequel would.

I’m guessing that Hugh Jackman is working for a great price, also serving as a producer with a healthy backend participation. The rest of the name cast is essentially limited to Liev Schrieber (The Manchurian Candidate, The Omen), Dominic Monaghan (The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, NBC’s Lost) and Ryan Reynolds (Blade: Trinity, The Amityville Horror), and there is no Bryan Singer (X-Men, X-2) or Brett Ratner (X-Men 3) to direct. Instead, Fox and Jackman settled on the much less expensive, but still Academy Award-winning director Gavin Hood (Tsotsi). Now with a scaled-back story and cast, the movie comes in at a much more studio-friendly price while, hopefully, still packing an X-Men-style box office punch.

 

[Bill]

I thought it would end up in the 50's but if it ends up in the 40's then wow I do hope Fox execs and the producers see that they can make a way better movie.

They won't care one bit if it makes a lot of money. Speak with your wallets if you want a better movie.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I'm referring to X-Men Origins: Wolverine not X-Men 3.

There is so much wrong with that article that you quoted:

1. No, it's not a sequel, and no, it's not a spin off. It's a prequel. Do these journalists not understand what a prequel is?! That is exactly what this is. Deadpool would be a spinoff. I'd even consider a Wolverine movie based in Japan as a spin-off. But X-Men Origins: Wolverine is a prequel, telling a story that was hinted at in X-Men and X-Men 2, showing the story of how many key elements of the X-Men film universe came to be. PREQUELPREQUELPREQUELPREQUELPREQUELPREQUELPREQUELPREQUEL

2. The cast being *limited* to Liev Shrieber, Dominic Monahgan, and Ryan Reynolds? Those are some pretty decent names there. Limited? No, I don't think so. This isn't an ensemble film like the others were, therefore it doesn't require the same number of actors. While he has no prior acting experience, Will.I.Am is still a pretty big name due to his career with the Black Eyed Peas, and they still ended up getting

Spoiler

Patrick Stewart[/i] in the film also.

3. "Settling" on an Academy-Award winning director? What the hell? How is that settling? I'd say getting an Academy-Award winning director is, on paper, getting one of the most qualified people director for the job. Academy Award winning = accomplished.

People obviously just want to complain about anything, that's all that article says to me.

Given the events of X-Men and X-Men 2, this movie is actually the next logical step to take the franchise. X-Men 3 pretty much brickwalled any advancement in the story line, but there were still loose ends regarding a MAJOR element of a MAJOR character, which is a MAJOR storyline in the X-Men universe.

Maybe you like how it was done, or maybe you don't, but this article just proves to me that people will complain about anything, whether it's true or not, or even makes sense or not.

 

[Deaths Head II]

I'm guessing this budget is setting a precedent for future X-Films. No wonder I didn't find the effects in the trailers and tv spots to be that good.

 

[magus]

I'm guessing this budget is setting a precedent for future X-Films. No wonder I didn't find the effects in the trailers and tv spots to be that good.

I honestly don't care what the budget is as long as they spend it on some decent writers. They could tape aluminum foil covered popsicle sticks to Hugh Jackman's hands like he was a 3rd grader and I wouldn't mind as long as they fixed the massive plot holes and ******ed last act.

 

[TheVileOne]

As I recall, EW reported Wolverine being budgeted at $130 million.

X-men 3 was mainly $200 million to rush its less than a year production schedule to meet a Memorial Day of 06 release date.

 

[BMM]

Actually, in its current issue, Entertainment Weekly reports that X-Men Origins is the most expensive installment of the franchise yet, even more than The Last Stand. I don't know if I believe that, but that is what Alex Young claims.