Topic: X-Men Origins: Wolverine Redux (Read 23028 times)

MrBridge · « **Reply #50 on:** 02 Apr 2009, 09:21 »

Apparently there is a leaked, "high quality" working print out there. No idea where one could find it..really mr fbiman I don't.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7977265.stm

0bsessions · « **Reply #51 on:** 02 Apr 2009, 10:22 »

Yeah, I kind of mentioned that already, like all of four posts ago.

Anyways, Darryl, having slept on it, I still think the movie was pretty bleh, and the more time goes on, the lower my opinion of it gets.

MrBridge · « **Reply #52 on:** 02 Apr 2009, 13:43 »

Yeah but I provided content! context! cursory allusions be damned!

Dimmukane · « **Reply #53 on:** 02 Apr 2009, 16:22 »

It's not exactly high-quality. They have pretty much zero effects put in and half the music missing.

0bsessions · « **Reply #54 on:** 02 Apr 2009, 18:39 »

Yeah, that was pretty glaringly obvious at certain points and honestly makes it so that it might be really funny drunk. That said, the problem with the movie isn't the special effects, as some of it looks good now even without completion. The problem's the generic plot, substandard acting from the majority of the cast and the overall lack of any characterization.

Dimmukane · « **Reply #55 on:** 02 Apr 2009, 20:47 »

I know, I'm just saying using 'high quality' as a choice of words is fatally inaccurate.

0bsessions · « **Reply #56 on:** 03 Apr 2009, 10:03 »

That's a relative conclusion. By standards of something leaked around release, much less before release, it's very high quality. The lack of CG and music isn't even readily apparent, for the most part, until close to halfway through.

Lines · « **Reply #57 on:** 01 May 2009, 21:22 »

So, uh, Gambit isn't cajun and Sabertooth is Wolverine's brother.

Lol, wut.

Blue Kitty · « **Reply #58 on:** 01 May 2009, 21:28 »

I hear there are 4 different secret endings

Alex C · « **Reply #59 on:** 01 May 2009, 22:36 »

Obsession's review isn't really catching me off guard here. I mean, I don't know what else you could do with a Wolverine movie but make it into a pretty cliched action fest. Wolverine, when it comes right down to it, is either an all-star second banana and dopey fun or else he's a conflicted man who realizes that he has the potential to be a murderous sociopath of the highest order. Which one comes out is basically dependent on the writer and whether he needs to be massaged into a group dynamic or not. I don't see how you could build an entire movie around the second banana version and I'm unconvinced many people really want to watch a movie about the sociopath, or that the studios would know how to handle such a movie even if they did.

Joseph · « **Reply #60 on:** 01 May 2009, 22:44 »

Silence Of The Lambs

Joseph · « **Reply #61 on:** 01 May 2009, 22:45 »

American Psycho

Jimmy the Squid · « **Reply #62 on:** 01 May 2009, 22:45 »

I went and saw this the other day and man I was really disappointed. I mean I don't even have a high standard for these kind of things, I enjoyed the Fantastic Four films, and Daredevil for fuck's sake. I kept waiting for it to be good and it was constantly just short of being any good. The acting wasn't even bad!! The story was just awful and for some reason (and this is what I cannot get my head around) the CGI was dogshit. I don't know what the hell happened because in the other X-Men films the CGI was more than acceptable so what the hell went wrong here? It's not as if the budgets for the films were that different either!

Fuck me that movie was just a big disappointment. I'll probably see it again to find out if it has any kitsch value but I kind of doubt it.

Joseph · « **Reply #63 on:** 01 May 2009, 22:48 »

No Country For Old Men

Alex C · « **Reply #64 on:** 01 May 2009, 22:57 »

Yes, because after the first three X-Men movies people are totally expecting the Wolverine movie to be along the lines of Silence of the Lambs or No Country For Old Men. It's a comic book movie and Wolverine solo shots have all been about as bright and cheery as Punisher runs. And we all know how well the Punisher movie went over.

Nodaisho · « **Reply #65 on:** 01 May 2009, 23:18 »

Which one? There have been three.

KvP · « **Reply #66 on:** 01 May 2009, 23:41 »

He's talking about the good one!

Alex C · « **Reply #67 on:** 01 May 2009, 23:42 »

Take your pick. None of 'em went over all that well. The 2004 one made a profit, at least, which is more than the most recent one can say, last I heard.

lolwut · « **Reply #68 on:** 02 May 2009, 00:16 »

It should have been a musical.

Nodaisho · « **Reply #69 on:** 02 May 2009, 01:18 »

I would pay to see that.

It's funny, Roger Ebert's only complaint about the recent one was that it was too gross. You would think that a "mature" comic book movie would have much more to complain about than that, wouldn't you?

Joseph · « **Reply #70 on:** 02 May 2009, 08:11 »

Did you actually read Roger Ebert's review? The word gross doesn't figure in there at all, and he seemed to find a lot of things the matter with the movie.

Cartilage Head · « **Reply #71 on:** 02 May 2009, 11:03 »

I was pissed that they killed off Deadpool like a bitch. However, I heard there was a secret ending in some theatres where he grabs his head and breaks the fourth wall by shushing the audience. Awesome. I wish I got that one.

Alex C · « **Reply #72 on:** 02 May 2009, 14:05 »

Quote from: Joseph on 02 May 2009, 08:11

Did you actually read Roger Ebert's review? The word gross doesn't figure in there at all, and he seemed to find a lot of things the matter with the movie.

I believe he's actually referring to Ebert's review of the latest Punisher movie, in which he says it's well-acted, well-made, and disgusting. Really, I don't think Ebert had a problem with the disgusting part so much as he has a problem with the fact that there is absolutely nothing in the film whatsoever for anyone who didn't go just to see icky things. It's the sort of movie you have to rather heavily qualify before recommending, hence the two stars as opposed to three. It reminds me of the AV club's review of Babylon A.D., another classic case in which some people did a very good job on costume and set design in the service of a rather dire film.

For the record, I think I liked the 2004 Punisher about as much as I could possibly like a Punisher movie, which is really just another way of saying not very much. The Punisher is a sad, dingy anti-hero and it's very hard to really tell stories about him that most people will wish they have heard.

Tom · « **Reply #73 on:** 02 May 2009, 15:29 »

Even Moon Knight's more interesting than the Punisher.

Surgoshan · « **Reply #74 on:** 02 May 2009, 17:43 »

Saw it this evening (Wolverine, not Punisher); I quite enjoyed it. I agree, though, that some of the special effects were painfully obvious.

Nodaisho · « **Reply #75 on:** 02 May 2009, 19:07 »

Quote from: Alex C on 02 May 2009, 14:05

I believe he's actually referring to Ebert's review of the latest Punisher movie, in which he says it's well-acted, well-made, and disgusting. Really, I don't think Ebert had a problem with the disgusting part so much as he has a problem with the fact that there is absolutely nothing in the film whatsoever for anyone who didn't go just to see icky things. It's the sort of movie you have to rather heavily qualify before recommending, hence the two stars as opposed to three. It reminds me of the AV club's review of Babylon A.D., another classic case in which some people did a very good job on costume and set design in the service of a rather dire film.

Yep, I was talking about his review of War Zone. I just wanted to see an action flick, I wasn't really going in hope of seeing someone's head graphically blown apart with a shotgun, or skull caved in by a chair leg. Nice to see body armor actually reliably work in a film, though. Babylon AD seemed like it was trying to cram another movie's worth of stuff in the last 20 or 30 minutes, so they dropped almost all of it. Has anyone read the book (Babylon Babies) or an earlier script?

Lines · « **Reply #76 on:** 02 May 2009, 19:53 »

Man, at least in the X-Men movies, Jackman looked like he actually had claws on his hands sometimes. The ones in this movie looked fake the entire time. Also, there were oddly placed slow motion scenes that were rather bad. Also Deadpool's head being cut off should have stopped the laser eye thing.

Surgoshan · « **Reply #77 on:** 02 May 2009, 20:06 »

Sometimes I have serious trouble suspending disbelief.

At one point, Wolverine and the black teleporter are driving down the road on choppers and the black guy is wearing a cowboy hat. Why didn't his hat blow off? Totally ruined the movie for me. I mean, what, did he have a second mutant power that kept his hat on? BULLSHIT! NERD RAGE!!!!!!

Blue Kitty · « **Reply #78 on:** 02 May 2009, 20:57 »

Quote from: Cartilage Head on 02 May 2009, 11:03

I was pissed that they killed off Deadpool like a bitch. However, I heard there was a secret ending in some theatres where he grabs his head and breaks the fourth wall by shushing the audience. Awesome. I wish I got that one.

It was awesome. But god damn, everything I didn't want to happen to Wade Wilson happened. I walked into this knowing it would not be good and I was right. I got what I expected.

Wait, your suspended disbelief is troubled by a cowboy hat not blowing in the wind. That's all?

Surgoshan · « **Reply #79 on:** 02 May 2009, 21:46 »

I'm sorry, I should have included this tag.

[/tongue in cheek]

Scandanavian War Machine · « **Reply #80 on:** 04 May 2009, 17:18 »

that's the kind of thing that always bothers me in movies too.

it's like, i can accept teleportation and super powers and aliens and "curve the bullet" and all kinds of other nonsense, but as soon as something stupid like that happens i start shouting "shenanigans!"

JD · « **Reply #81 on:** 04 May 2009, 17:52 »

The cowboy must have Jamie Hynemen powers.

Felrender · « **Reply #82 on:** 05 May 2009, 02:10 »

Quote from: Blue Kitty on 02 May 2009, 20:57

Quote from: Cartilage Head on 02 May 2009, 11:03
I was pissed that they killed off Deadpool like a bitch. However, I heard there was a secret ending in some theatres where he grabs his head and breaks the fourth wall by shushing the audience. Awesome. I wish I got that one.

It was awesome. But god damn, everything I didn't want to happen to Wade Wilson happened. I walked into this knowing it would not be good and I was right. I got what I expected.

That wasn't Wade. That was a clone of Wade. Real Wade was in one of those ice things.

(but seriously what the hell was with the ice things)

lprkn · « **Reply #83 on:** 05 May 2009, 07:21 »

Well, at least we will have our bloody video game.

Dude's head + helicopter blades = better than the movie

Blue Kitty · « **Reply #84 on:** 05 May 2009, 22:39 »

Deadpool movie

WriterofAllWrongs · « **Reply #85 on:** 06 May 2009, 10:14 »

Man, they are just scrambling to make money aren't they?

0bsessions · « **Reply #86 on:** 06 May 2009, 10:25 »

I saw that earlier and I'm not sure how to feel. On the one hand, I love Deadpool. On the other hand, Fox have wasted what faith I had in them to do a good comic book movie without Bryan Singer involved.

Blue Kitty · « **Reply #87 on:** 06 May 2009, 21:45 »

Quote from: Felrender on 05 May 2009, 02:10

That wasn't Wade. That was a clone of Wade. Real Wade was in one of those ice things.

(but seriously what the hell was with the ice things)

Having seen it again, I didn't see Wade in any of the freezers. My friend, that was Wade on the table.

Also, the kid being held in place in his cell makes me think he's Pietro.

EDIT: I guess a sequel to this movie has already been announced

Ozymandias · « **Reply #88 on:** 07 May 2009, 09:03 »

Also a second spinoff in the form of X-Men Origins: First Class

0bsessions · « **Reply #89 on:** 07 May 2009, 10:28 »

Yeah, but that was announced at least six months ago.

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: X-Men Origins: Wolverine Redux (Read 23028 times)

lolwut