Why the hate for Wolverine?

[gambitfire]

Wolverine being at Cyclops`place is more exctiting to me than Cyclops being there because it`s "been there, done that". I don`t want to see the same thing as the freakin comics! But more importantly if you knew the X-Men, knew Wolvie, you would know that it`s fantastic what happened because Jean is the love of Logan`s life! Even in the comics I like would this angle better and the reason is? Because I like the Cyclops character so much and i`m tired of him being defined by his relation with Jean, being in the shadow of any other ladies for that matter.

I`m just tired that Scott is defined what happened to Jean. He`s a better character than that. Sure the character in the movie died but the actor playing Cyclops was unfit to be playing him anyway. Better get rid of him than having this boring actor crapping on Cyclops further. I have never seen any traces of Cyclops in those movies.

I still don't get why people like too preach their bad opinions like they'r facts.

It's an adaptation genius therefore it's not "been there, done that" because it hasn't been done on the Silver Screen .

Oh and if you knew a thing or two about Wolverine you would know of a little someone named Mariko or even Yuriko before you start stating that Jean is the love of his life. Cyclops isn't defined by his relationship with Jean, she was gone for long periods of time in which he was defined by his leadership and commitment to the X-men so stop talking about what you don't know.

As for the actor being unfit, that's YOUR opinion.
Marsden is a great actor IMO.

Here is Cyclops for you enjoy-

 

[ntcrawler]

Oh and if you knew a thing or two about Wolverine you would know of a little someone named Mariko or even Yuriko before you start stating that Jean is the love of his life.

Yes, precisely. There were and are other women in Wolverine's life besides Jean. Certainly women much better suited to Logan with whom he had well developed, serious, mutual relationships.

Cyclops isn't defined by his relationship with Jean, she was gone for long periods of time in which he was defined by his leadership and commitment to the X-men so stop talking about what you don't know.

That is true. But, it's also his relationship with Jean, her friendship and compassion that allowed him to change from a broken orphan-boy into a confident, positive man. And he certainly had a positive influence on her. They served as each other's stabilizing force and that's one of the reasons why they were able to get to where they are. Without Jean, he didn't have something very precious in life to look forward to, but Cyclops managed to carry on, and his leadership and committment to the things he believed in were still there. He doesn't NEED Jean. But having her in his life does make it better, and the opposite is true as well. But he's certainly not clingy!

As for the actor being unfit, that's YOUR opinion.
Marsden is a great actor IMO.

In fact he's really been coming to his own over the years and the great enthusiasm with which fans embrace the guy and the publicity he's now getting confirms this. You or other people may not like him, but enough people do that he's not the unfit actor you feel he is.

 

[Jan Irisi]

Well i don't think Hugh has the "it" otherwise we would see more blockbuster movies coming from him. I already said what the problem with Cyke was im not repeating myself but it all still validates against or towards what your saying .

Your not blaming Marsden but your saying he lacked "it"; so what, therefore his character loss was insignificent?

Sorry Jan i can't help it feel like your placing a blame here . I Apologize maybe im blowing it slightly out of proportion.

As for Depp that's a whole other story, the characters are completely different. James played Cyclops with what he had. It wasn't his fault he wasn't give much.

Think about how many Celebrities "it" comes from sexual appeal and not actual talent. Something else i've noticed. In which case Hugh has got the "it".



Exactly what ive been saying, the visor made it more difficult.

as for the other thing
lol that is so very true my friend thought the movie was brilliant but i can't help it notice her obssesion with hugh jackman.

*sigh*

Certainly, the "it" thing could well be traced to a sexual appeal, but then, how does one explain such actors as Ernest Borgnine, Maggie Smith, or even Ian McKellen having it too? These actors are hardly known for being sex symbols now are they?

Again, Hollywood is loaded with good, competent, wonderful actors, but only a handful have that elusive "it". And once again, as I stated, not all of them have it all the time. As I stated in my post before, I said Hugh as Wolverine had "it". And too many, this is true.

Once more I state that it is not the actors fault that this "it" is present or not, it just happens. Whether it is pure unadulterated sex appeal, as in the case of Marilyn Monroe, or sheer screen presence as in the case of John Wayne, or even a case of whimsey as in the case of the late Marty Feldman, or a combination of many factors, it is not something that can dragged out of mothballs at will or turned on with the flip of a switch. It just happens. That's it.

Some actors have the inate ability to still make an impact even with no lines whatsoever. A raise of an eyebrow, the set of a jaw, the glimmer in the eyes, the tone and timber of their voice, or just the way they stand. And I fully believe that (as I said before) Marsden just didn't have the "it" it took to grab an audience's attention as Cyclops. Nowhere did I say that I blame him, nowhere did I say he was a poor actor.

 

[L3G3NDK1LLER]

im sure this has all been said before, but Fox needs to get off the Wolverine sauce and try other stuff. They used him wayyyy to much. i always call them X-men movies Wolverine 1,2,and 3 because thats what they are, and honestly, i dont think they can tell us much more than what we have been shown in the first three. i liked hugh jackman as wolverine,they probably couldnt have done a better job. but when they start using him as a leader,and shouting out orders...no no no. and when they didnt use cykes for the phoinex storyline...i about walked out. but, then since they didnt show him die, im thinking that maybe they left it open for a glimmer of a chance for cykes to come back. i dont know, its not the same. and if it werent for beast in x3...i would have walked out. but, im thinking maybe since the x-men movies were about wolverine....fox will shock us and make a wolverine movie about the x-men...that would be great...

 

[ntcrawler]

im thinking maybe since the x-men movies were about wolverine....fox will shock us and make a wolverine movie about the x-men...that would be great...

Yeah, and the cover art will feature Cyke's visor.

 

[La_She-Beast]

^^ Yeah unfortunately all depends on the companies... take Disney for example. They're no. 1 in artists' creativity and even so they're exploiting every single movie made: "The little mermaid 2", "The Lion King 2 & 3", "Bambi 2" and soooooo on (what's worse, they're not good movies). And all because of the silly ol' money...

 

[gambitfire]

*sigh*

Certainly, the "it" thing could well be traced to a sexual appeal, but then, how does one explain such actors as Ernest Borgnine, Maggie Smith, or even Ian McKellen having it too? These actors are hardly known for being sex symbols now are they?

Again, Hollywood is loaded with good, competent, wonderful actors, but only a handful have that elusive "it". And once again, as I stated, not all of them have it all the time. As I stated in my post before, I said Hugh as Wolverine had "it". And too many, this is true.

Once more I state that it is not the actors fault that this "it" is present or not, it just happens. Whether it is pure unadulterated sex appeal, as in the case of Marilyn Monroe, or sheer screen presence as in the case of John Wayne, or even a case of whimsey as in the case of the late Marty Feldman, or a combination of many factors, it is not something that can dragged out of mothballs at will or turned on with the flip of a switch. It just happens. That's it.

Some actors have the inate ability to still make an impact even with no lines whatsoever. A raise of an eyebrow, the set of a jaw, the glimmer in the eyes, the tone and timber of their voice, or just the way they stand. And I fully believe that (as I said before) Marsden just didn't have the "it" it took to grab an audience's attention as Cyclops. Nowhere did I say that I blame him, nowhere did I say he was a poor actor.

Ok i get it. It doesn't have too be sex appeal. Although in Hugh's case i can't help it think it is. He isn't that great of an actor ive seen him in movies not theatre but as far as movies go he's ok not great IMO. His accent is always coming through. He appealed as Wolverine well simply because.................it's wolverine! he was the main focus so all eyes where on him. Your opinion is that he had an "it". In the end that's an opinion. I just don't like how your preaching it like "it" is a fact. He appealed to you and some others not everyone.

Notice that his fanbase consists mostly of girls....and Wolverine fans.

Come 2008 when Wolverine comes out we'll see truly how powerful "it" is.

According to Van Helsing or even Kate & Leopold or Someone like you. The "it" wasn't strong enough. Yes the last 2 where chick flix but they arn't really stand out like other chick flix are.

Swordfish on the other hand i must say was ok, but i give Travolta credit for that one.

 

[ntcrawler]

Some actors have the inate ability to still make an impact even with no lines whatsoever. A raise of an eyebrow, the set of a jaw, the glimmer in the eyes, the tone and timber of their voice, or just the way they stand. And I fully believe that (as I said before) Marsden just didn't have the "it" it took to grab an audience's attention as Cyclops. Nowhere did I say that I blame him, nowhere did I say he was a poor actor.

I agree, but do have exceptions. Whether an actor or character has "it" also depends on the director and cinematographer. With the right camera angles, mood, and lighting a simple gesture like raising an eyebrow or narrowing eyes can be powerful and beautiful. They certainly know how to exploit that with Famke. Cyclops on the other hand? Go rewatch the scene of him standing over Xavier while he's in a Coma and pondering the future and making that promise to continue to carry on Xavier's vision should something happen. I think Marsden and Cyclops definitely had "it" in that scene. Same thing with Cyclops at the end of X2 during their encounter with the President of the US. You couldn't see his eyes but had no problem understanding how he felt and what he was going through. "It" was there as well. And finally in X3, when he reaches out, and embraces the resurrected Jean and realizes she's not a ghost but real and tangible. Holding back those sobs and the tears that he can't cry because of his optic beams... he definitely had "it" there too.

 

[flavio_lebeau]

Mystique is the most biggest largest widest "it" ever.
She needs no words at all. Actually when she speaks, the mystery kinda goes down

 

[ntcrawler]

Mystique is the most biggest largest widest "it" ever.
She needs no words at all. Actually when she speaks, the mystery kinda goes down

Haha, so true. That's actually part of the character. That's one of the reasons why she wears no cloths: because she knows the reactions seeing her provokes, and she likes keeping people on edge like that.

 

[flavio_lebeau]

Haha, so true. That's actually part of the character. That's one of the reasons why she wears no cloths: because she knows the reactions seeing her provokes, and she likes keeping people on edge like that.

true. Pity that in X1, she has 1, but one of the best and more meaningful lines of the movie...in X3, she has "funny" lines :\ (though i still love her in X3)

 

[Loganbabe]

Yes, precisely. There were and are other women in Wolverine's life besides Jean. Certainly women much better suited to Logan with whom he had well developed, serious, mutual relationships.

But I thought we were discussing the movies here, not the comics...or have I missed something?

 

[AznBABYBANDIT]

I don't answer to my slave name...
*Slides under the thing and waving*
It is people like you, i was afraid to go to scholl

Mystique gets the BEST lines

its meant to be movies

 

[Loganbabe]

I started to answer it in another thread http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=244628&page=2 , but it belongs here, I guess...

It was more of a crush, lust and wishful thinking. Knowing that it's like to be her and about caging the beast are little things, he didn't have the chance to get to know her or learn those little things you need to make love blossom and a relationship last. Scott's been doing it for 15 years so obviously he has an advantage. As for how much time Logan spent with Jean? It's actually shorter than you think.

No, it started as a crush and lust, but turned out to be love. How many relationships start that way? Even Jean and Scott´s, I guess.
Of course Logan didn´t have time to develop anything more serious and stable with her, and maybe it wouldn´t even happen. Who cares. Sometimes romantic love has nothing to do with long relationships, or the fact that you´ve known the person for 15 or 50 years. Otherwise Romeo and Juliet wouldn´t be one of the most famous romantic stories of all time, and they stayed together for what...one night? But the love was there, and we don´t doubt it, even if it came totally out of the blue.
In Jean and Logan´s case, I believe they started to connect when Jean read Logan´s mind. They formed some kind of bond, and by the end of X1 it wasn´t only Logan who had a thing for Jean, SHE had a thing for him, too. And it wasn´t only lust.

Well all know Logan didn't have pure, sincere thoughts for her. Just watch X3. What's the first thing she says him him? "Oh Logan, you're making me blush".

Well, if Scott didn´t have some impure thoughts about Jean every now and then, I would say it was their relationship that had problems.

She didn't blush by realizing how much he missed her and was worried about her. To think otherwise, you're only fooling yourselves ond trying to add an angle into the films that wasn't meant to be there in the first place, until the X3 people went totally overboard with the concept, especially at the ending. "I Love you" he says? I don't think so.

Yeah, she blushed because she noticed how much he desired her. What´s wrong with that? Love is about many things, it´s about physical desire, too. All this "oh, he was only lusting after her" comes from this disgusting notion that Logan is a mere animal, therefore incapable of loving someone. But Jean knew better, otherwise a woman like her would never accept a mere sexy-driven horny animal kissing her the way they did in X2. That´s why Logan was shocked when the Phoenix wanted only the animal in him - because he knew the real Jean knew he was much more than that.

 

[My Red Sight]

I can't say that I'm too suprised that Logan was featured much more the Scott in this movie. The other two movies have building up their relationship. Maybe if the first two focused on the Jean/Scott side of the romance triangle Scott would have had a bigger role.

 

[AznBABYBANDIT]

na, singer didnt wanna give him giant sized role

 

[ntcrawler]

It's well known by now that Singer had bigger intentions for Cyclops but the studio managers vetoed his idea. Again, no matter what the movie, it's never a good thing when managers put their fingers on the script like that and influence the plot to their own liking or for business purposes. You may boost short-term profit but the effects on the story upset fans, like it did here

 

[danoyse]

I only did that because you and danoyse are invading this thread. This thread is about "Why the hate for Wolverine" and nothing else but you two come here and defend him. If you want to do that then make a "Why the hate for Cyclops" thread.

"Invading your thread?" No one is invading your thread. It's not even our thread to invade. It's a discussion board, isn't it? It's not "This is why we hate Wolverine." This why fans and non-fans can discuss their differences with the character.

Why haven't we made a "Why the hate Cyclops" thread? Because we don't hate Cyclops? Honestly, I just don't have it in myself to spew hatred about a fictional character. Unlike our buddy Kurosawa, who makes Wolverine fans look saner and better every time he posts.

Who's doing the name calling here? Who's telling people they can't accept reality? It's not the Wolverine fans.

LS was right when he responded early in the thread...why the hate for Wolverine? Jealousy. Certain fans can't stand that another character is more popular, and will rip to shreds everything from the character itself to the people who like him, to wild conspiracy theories about studio vendettas.

Isn't it entirely possible that people can just like a certain character more, or think the actor who played that character just had more appeal? To accept the fact that there's an entire chunk of the moviegoing audience that has not and will not check out a comic book and let them enjoy the movie for their own merit?

It doesn't mean you can't like your favorite anymore. It doesn't mean you can't be frustrated that the character doesn't get more attention. But if you don't like getting picked on for it, don't expect roses back when you pick on the other guy.

 

[Celestial]

It's well known by now that Singer had bigger intentions for Cyclops but the studio managers vetoed his idea.

I think I must have missed this. Can you give me a link? I've seen a lot of speculation that Singer might have given Cyclops a bigger role but nothing to back it up.

 

[The Original Bamfer]

(Yeah, I didn't care to read anything that went on in this thread... so, I'm just going to continue to answer the title's question, "Why the hate for Wolverine?")

1. He's a walking cliche. He's a "Bad guy" with a good heart... all the girls want em'. So very original. Not to mention his slight amnesia and bitterness toward his past. He was a failed samurai? For some reason, this just doesn't cut it for me.
2. There are only so many things you can do with metal claws. (I've never been a big fan of physical abilities such as claws or super-strength, it's just, well, not as interesting as telekinesis or optic beams... the healing factor is semi-cool at least)
3. In most every incarnation of the X-Men, besides the actual comics, he is the center of the story. It's annoying, really. 'Wolverine & The X-Men' just proves how much less of a ensemble the X-men have become. Let them be a team, damn it.

 

[Cosmic Mind]

I dont hate Wolverine, I just hate the people that overused him, making him more important than the others, and that makes me angry

 

[The Original Bamfer]

And, in X3, they stripped Wolverine of what made him such an appeal to everyone (save for myself)... they tried to say he "loved" Jean... and he didn't.

 

[Cosmic Mind]

by the way, what is that issue??? is that from the Uncanny Omnibus??? is looks great..

 

[undomiel]

And, in X3, they stripped Wolverine of what made him such an appeal to everyone (save for myself)... they tried to say he "loved" Jean... and he didn't.

I have to respectfully disagree with you there. Wolverine most definitely loves Jean Grey -- truly, madly, and deeply. I do not read comic books myself, but those who do have even confirmed this -- that Jean is always listed among Wolverine's true loves.

I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say they stripped Wolverine of what made him such an appeal to everyone. Do you mean everyone liked him until they said he loved Jean? But he professes his love for Jean even in the first film, when he says his heart belongs to her. So I don't understand what you mean.

 

[undomiel]

(Yeah, I didn't care to read anything that went on in this thread... so, I'm just going to continue to answer the title's question, "Why the hate for Wolverine?")

1. He's a walking cliche. He's a "Bad guy" with a good heart... all the girls want em'. So very original. Not to mention his slight amnesia and bitterness toward his past. He was a failed samurai? For some reason, this just doesn't cut it for me.
2. There are only so many things you can do with metal claws. (I've never been a big fan of physical abilities such as claws or super-strength, it's just, well, not as interesting as telekinesis or optic beams... the healing factor is semi-cool at least)
3. In most every incarnation of the X-Men, besides the actual comics, he is the center of the story. It's annoying, really. 'Wolverine & The X-Men' just proves how much less of a ensemble the X-men have become. Let them be a team, damn it.
Today 01:47 PM

To your second point: One of the things I like best about Wolverine is his lack of exotic powers. He is one of the lesser angels of the superhero realm, and is not dependent upon phenomenal, cosmic powers to make him interesting. His more ordinary powers enable him to come across in a more real way, in a way that more ordinary people can relate to. His lesser powers therefore drive his story inward, to become more about his personal conflicts and choices than about exotic displays. This, to me, is the most compelling stuff of heroic stories and characters.

To your third point: Doesn't it seem logical to conclude that Wolverine is the most interesting character to most people, and that is why he is so often placed at the center of a story? Also, every team has stand-out players. Think about it in terms of sports: there are always star players on a team, those who excel and win the hearts of the general public. This doesn't mean that the team ceases to be a team. And especially in the case of movies, there must be a main character. The X films were still about a team, they just used Wolverine as the main character.