Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

The Wolverine

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> The Wolverine Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
The Wolverine - 17/7/2013 11:29:37 PM   
Empire Admin

 

Posts: 30250
Joined: 29/6/2005
Post your comments on this article
Post #: 1
GUTTED!! - 17/7/2013 11:29:37 PM   
sjdoug

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 4/10/2009
had high hopes for this, james mangold done a good job with 3;10 to yuma and walk the line, but the same can be said for gavin hood with tsotsi :(

i cannot rate this movie as i have not seen it, but to comment on this i have to 3 stars is a shame!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 2
- 18/7/2013 10:54:29 AM   
Oroborous

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 30/6/2013
I find it hard to comprehend that anyone had any interest in this film anyway, to be honest I'm surprised it got so high a score, certainly one not to spend any money on.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 3
RE: - 18/7/2013 11:30:10 AM   
kickpuncher

 

Posts: 26
Joined: 28/4/2011
Really? You find it hard to comprehend that anyone would be interested in seeing a film about one of the most popular characters in fiction, realising one of the characters most beloved storylines, played by one of the world's most adored film stars?

Yeah. That sounds like something very few people would be interested in.

I liked it - totally agree on the ending, which got kinda silly, but otherwise I thought it pretty much nailed the tone, kept the focus right on Wolverine, and generally worked. Not perfect, but it got me interested in the franchise again after I had long jumped ship to the Marvel Universe (I know X-Men is Marvel, but not really in the filmic sense).

(in reply to Oroborous)
Post #: 4
RE: - 18/7/2013 11:35:46 AM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1375
Joined: 7/1/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous

I find it hard to comprehend that anyone had any interest in this film anyway, to be honest I'm surprised it got so high a score, certainly one not to spend any money on.

anyone paying to see this at the cinema needs a juggernaut sized headbutt in the balls!

_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to Oroborous)
Post #: 5
RE: RE: - 18/7/2013 1:42:32 PM   
waltham1979


Posts: 1255
Joined: 18/3/2008
From: San-Diago, which is German for 'Whales virgina'...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous

I find it hard to comprehend that anyone had any interest in this film anyway, to be honest I'm surprised it got so high a score, certainly one not to spend any money on.

anyone paying to see this at the cinema needs a juggernaut sized headbutt in the balls!


Why?

_____________________________

I just wish stuff like, I don't know, the slow & systemic CRATERING of this country could inspire the same call-to-arms as Batman casting

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 6
RE: RE: - 18/7/2013 1:50:12 PM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1375
Joined: 7/1/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltham1979


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous

I find it hard to comprehend that anyone had any interest in this film anyway, to be honest I'm surprised it got so high a score, certainly one not to spend any money on.

anyone paying to see this at the cinema needs a juggernaut sized headbutt in the balls!


Why?

because they should have learned their lesson with the last Wolverine movie!

_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to waltham1979)
Post #: 7
RE: RE: - 18/7/2013 2:32:53 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
The last one, you mean the one with a totally different story, writers and director?

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 8
RE: RE: - 18/7/2013 2:53:56 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2362
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: waltham1979


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous

I find it hard to comprehend that anyone had any interest in this film anyway, to be honest I'm surprised it got so high a score, certainly one not to spend any money on.

anyone paying to see this at the cinema needs a juggernaut sized headbutt in the balls!


Why?

because they should have learned their lesson with the last Wolverine movie!


Yeah that would be like someone going to see every new Chris Nolan film, hating them, but still going to see them and complaining about them each and every day on this forum.

Not as stupid as paying to see the new Star Trek film despite hating the entire franchise though right Danny?

< Message edited by Cool Breeze -- 18/7/2013 2:54:25 PM >


_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 9
RE: RE: - 19/7/2013 9:32:35 AM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15400
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: waltham1979


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous

I find it hard to comprehend that anyone had any interest in this film anyway, to be honest I'm surprised it got so high a score, certainly one not to spend any money on.

anyone paying to see this at the cinema needs a juggernaut sized headbutt in the balls!


Why?

because they should have learned their lesson with the last Wolverine movie!


Well, not really. I could see your point if this film had the same writers and director as the other one but it doesn't. It is also a different period of Wolverine's life, it is not a direct sequel to Origins. The Wolverine in this films has suffered loss and been through the events of the three X-Men films so he should be a rougher tougher guy this time round.


_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 10
RE: RE: - 19/7/2013 10:09:08 AM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1375
Joined: 7/1/2009
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: waltham1979


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous

I find it hard to comprehend that anyone had any interest in this film anyway, to be honest I'm surprised it got so high a score, certainly one not to spend any money on.

anyone paying to see this at the cinema needs a juggernaut sized headbutt in the balls!


Why?

because they should have learned their lesson with the last Wolverine movie!


Well, not really. I could see your point if this film had the same writers and director as the other one but it doesn't. It is also a different period of Wolverine's life, it is not a direct sequel to Origins. The Wolverine in this films has suffered loss and been through the events of the three X-Men films so he should be a rougher tougher guy this time round.



dont get me wrong! I lurved Jackmans Wolverine! however I am bored of it now! time to retire Hugh! hand the claws over...

to....Joe manganiello (I am not his agent, but he should be given the lead in Assassins Creed Movie and Should have been the next Superman)

< Message edited by Dannybohy -- 19/7/2013 10:11:46 AM >


_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 11
RE: RE: - 19/7/2013 10:10:06 AM   
Oroborous

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 30/6/2013
No, I find it hard to comprehend why anyone would be interested in seeing the next installment in a franchise which has almost entirely been uninspired and unengaging, this time focusing on a character who has shared those qualities on screen, with no remarkable talent involved in directing or writing it, and for which all trailers and marketing has been mind-numbingly underwhelming.
The only reason there was value in this film was when Aranofsky was involved, because he could have done something genuinely special with the material. This franchise needs some serious reinvigorating to lift it out of stagnancy and make it something interesting. As it is, The Wolverine appears to be about as interesting as a TV episode of ‘How it’s Made’ about the construction processes behind household cutlery. The difference is that I wouldn’t have to pay nearly £10 to watch the latter.

(in reply to kickpuncher)
Post #: 12
RE: RE: - 20/7/2013 11:11:27 AM   
sanchia


Posts: 18337
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous

No, I find it hard to comprehend why anyone would be interested in seeing the next installment in a franchise which has almost entirely been uninspired and unengaging, this time focusing on a character who has shared those qualities on screen, with no remarkable talent involved in directing or writing it, and for which all trailers and marketing has been mind-numbingly underwhelming.




Christopher McQuarrie has The Usual Suspects in his back catalogue and also X-men which was not a bad film at all. Scott Frank has Get Shorty (which was a decent film) and Minority Report in his back catalogue. James Mangold has Walk The line and 3.10 To Yuma in his back catalogue both of which were good. To say there is not potential is false.

It has the potential to be awful but at the same time it has the potential to be very good. Time will tell. That is why people are interested in seeing it because there is that potential.

< Message edited by sanchia -- 20/7/2013 11:12:18 AM >


_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Oroborous)
Post #: 13
RE: RE: - 21/7/2013 11:41:34 AM   
Oroborous

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 30/6/2013

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

Christopher McQuarrie has The Usual Suspects in his back catalogue and also X-men which was not a bad film at all. Scott Frank has Get Shorty (which was a decent film) and Minority Report in his back catalogue. James Mangold has Walk The line and 3.10 To Yuma in his back catalogue both of which were good. To say there is not potential is false.

It has the potential to be awful but at the same time it has the potential to be very good. Time will tell. That is why people are interested in seeing it because there is that potential.


Yes, like I said, no remarkable talent. I didn't say there was no talent, but the talent there is isn't anything exciting. None of the examples you've given strike me as particularly remarkable. X-Men, like its sequels, was not terrible but was a completely forgettable and unengaging superhero film. I also didn't say it had no potential, everything has potential, it just isn't the slightest bit interesting.

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 14
RE: RE: - 21/7/2013 12:10:07 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
Dude, Mangold also has Girl, Interrupted and Copland in his CV, the crew for this film is about as remarkable as that of the previous X-Men films.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to Oroborous)
Post #: 15
RE: RE: - 21/7/2013 6:35:11 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18337
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

Christopher McQuarrie has The Usual Suspects in his back catalogue and also X-men which was not a bad film at all. Scott Frank has Get Shorty (which was a decent film) and Minority Report in his back catalogue. James Mangold has Walk The line and 3.10 To Yuma in his back catalogue both of which were good. To say there is not potential is false.

It has the potential to be awful but at the same time it has the potential to be very good. Time will tell. That is why people are interested in seeing it because there is that potential.


Yes, like I said, no remarkable talent. I didn't say there was no talent, but the talent there is isn't anything exciting. None of the examples you've given strike me as particularly remarkable. X-Men, like its sequels, was not terrible but was a completely forgettable and unengaging superhero film. I also didn't say it had no potential, everything has potential, it just isn't the slightest bit interesting.



Most films which end up being highly enjoyable and very good have no "remarkable" talent attached to them. Also so called "remarkable" talents have created absolute dogs of films and having someone deemed as such is no guarantee of anything. It is a falsehood to say it is not in the least bit interesting as as you admit there is talent attached (even if it is uninteresting to you). If you only watch films with remarkable talent and find no other film of interest you must watch about one film every three or four years.

< Message edited by sanchia -- 21/7/2013 6:56:50 PM >


_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Oroborous)
Post #: 16
RE: RE: - 21/7/2013 6:38:47 PM   
Ref


Posts: 7461
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Leicester

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

Christopher McQuarrie has The Usual Suspects in his back catalogue and also X-men which was not a bad film at all. Scott Frank has Get Shorty (which was a decent film) and Minority Report in his back catalogue. James Mangold has Walk The line and 3.10 To Yuma in his back catalogue both of which were good. To say there is not potential is false.

It has the potential to be awful but at the same time it has the potential to be very good. Time will tell. That is why people are interested in seeing it because there is that potential.


Yes, like I said, no remarkable talent. I didn't say there was no talent, but the talent there is isn't anything exciting. None of the examples you've given strike me as particularly remarkable. X-Men, like its sequels, was not terrible but was a completely forgettable and unengaging superhero film. I also didn't say it had no potential, everything has potential, it just isn't the slightest bit interesting.





Whoa, whoa, whoa - The Usual Suspects is the best sodding film ever made. A great film where everything works: there is not one weak link in the entire movie.


_____________________________

Viewers of a nervous disposition may be interested to know that your television is off and I am speaking to you from inside your head...

Hugh Dennis, Mock the Week

Icon created by the talented JaD

(in reply to Oroborous)
Post #: 17
RE: RE: - 21/7/2013 6:57:27 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18337
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ref


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

Christopher McQuarrie has The Usual Suspects in his back catalogue and also X-men which was not a bad film at all. Scott Frank has Get Shorty (which was a decent film) and Minority Report in his back catalogue. James Mangold has Walk The line and 3.10 To Yuma in his back catalogue both of which were good. To say there is not potential is false.

It has the potential to be awful but at the same time it has the potential to be very good. Time will tell. That is why people are interested in seeing it because there is that potential.


Yes, like I said, no remarkable talent. I didn't say there was no talent, but the talent there is isn't anything exciting. None of the examples you've given strike me as particularly remarkable. X-Men, like its sequels, was not terrible but was a completely forgettable and unengaging superhero film. I also didn't say it had no potential, everything has potential, it just isn't the slightest bit interesting.





Whoa, whoa, whoa - The Usual Suspects is the best sodding film ever made. A great film where everything works: there is not one weak link in the entire movie.



It is a remarkable film.


_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Ref)
Post #: 18
RE: RE: - 21/7/2013 7:31:02 PM   
Oroborous

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 30/6/2013

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

Dude, Mangold also has Girl, Interrupted and Copland in his CV, the crew for this film is about as remarkable as that of the previous X-Men films.


A crew which can't have been remarkable if they created said X-Men films.

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 19
RE: RE: - 21/7/2013 7:32:57 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18337
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
So you don't like the X-Men films so of course you would not have any interest in a character from the aforesaid films even if a "remarkable" talent was attached.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Oroborous)
Post #: 20
RE: RE: - 21/7/2013 8:05:34 PM   
Oroborous

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 30/6/2013

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia


Most films which end up being highly enjoyable and very good have no "remarkable" talent attached to them. Also so called "remarkable" talents have created absolute dogs of films and having someone deemed as such is no guarantee of anything. It is a falsehood to say it is not in the least bit interesting as as you admit there is talent attached (even if it is uninteresting to you). If you only watch films with remarkable talent and find no other film of interest you must watch about one film every three or four years.


The lack of remarkable talent is not what makes me disinterested anyway, I realise and agree that remarkable talent is not necessary for a film to be potentially worthwhile. It is a combination of this with the lack of worth in almost all the previous X-Men films, and the impression I have gotten from the marketing (in which everything I've seen from the trailers/clips etc. looks incredibly dull and generic). If this were a new franchise, and it had come across well in it's trailers etc, but the talent was still unremarkable, then I would possibly be interested.

As it is, I will use a metaphor to explain the situation. Let's say I purchase a series of cakes from a bakers shop, and find that upon eating them they are bland, dry and fairly tasteless, with the exception of one (which is slightly above average but nothing incredible). The bakers who work in this bakery come from a number of backgrounds, and while working in other shops have actually created some really nice cakes, but here in this one they haven't been very successful. Then I discover that the bakers shop has produced a new cake, made by a baker who had a hand in the previous recipes, and has used similar techniques for this one. On top of this, the advertisement for this new cake is unappealing and unimaginative, and gives me the impression that the new cake is similar to the others in terms of it's blandness. Now, I cannot imagine why i should be interested in this new cake, in fact I wouldn't be at all, and I certainly could not justify spending money on it. Is there the possibility that this new cake has a different enough recipe that it's worth eating? Yes, I cannot deny this. But is that chance great enough that I am going to pay nearly £10 to find out? No.

There are a number of issues that contribute to my lack of interest in this new cake that is called The Wolverine, I would never judge a cake, or a film, purely based on the talent behind it. In the end, money is valuable, and if I'm going to spend it, it won't be at this bakery.
Also, if I eat too many cakes I'll get fat.

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 21
RE: RE: - 22/7/2013 9:35:24 AM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19053
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
Ah darkness my old friend. I will embrace you once again.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to Oroborous)
Post #: 22
X men disappointment. - 22/7/2013 10:59:51 AM   
ericcoyle

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 9/10/2009
Personaly I don't get all this positive defence of the X Men films. They are very much a disappointment from the start (bar perhaps First Class, which is actually the only really worthwhile film of the bunch)). First we get X men. In this film we have a happy couple which is broken apart because the woman (Jean ) fancies this bloke that turns up. How shallow is she? There is nothing in the script, no cinematic chemistry to justify this. We are just supposed to take it as read that she would fall for this character with no real build up between the two. We have superheroes who don't really use their powers too much (that would stretch the budget and thats how it feels throughout the film). When they have a fight it is filmed without much dynamism in one-on-one contrived sequences (this also keeps the budget down and thats what it feels like). having big ,full on superheroics is just beyond this film. There is little to no humour and the characters are unengaging. They may be popular (although at the time anyone who did not read comics would have had little awareness of them) but that does not excuse such dull script writing. The sound track, a vital part of any film, is dull and unimaginative and, worst of all, totally forgettable. Did any one really leave the cinema and be humming the tune several days later? AS a comic book reader I found the whole thing a disappointment. It was ok overall but has the feel of a TV movie with a slightly bigger budget.
Then we get X2. Once again the whole three way romance thing is fumbled terribly. The budget is perhaps a little bigger and the effects are impressive in places ( Night Crawler's attack on the White House is the standout sequence in the film). Some neat cameos by characters lift interest ( Collosus is very underused. Budget not enough again?). Overall there is once again little chemistry between characters, little or no humour to create some light and shade.

< Message edited by ericcoyle -- 22/7/2013 11:04:06 AM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 23
Disappointment continued - 22/7/2013 11:11:29 AM   
ericcoyle

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 9/10/2009
Any way, I have run out of space already so just decided to add this bit....
You get the idea. Dull characterisation, uninvolving plot development, a lack of screen chemistry etc. It just goes on. There is no justification for any X Men film (other than First Class) to get more than three stars and the disappointment factor could justify a drop to two stars if you were being mean. Other than people saying they are masterpieces, I have not actually heard any justification for this opinion that makes sense. Which bits are particularly well directed, where is there some genuine emotional engagement that justifies Cyclops getting the heave ho? Why should the new film be any different. Wolverine just isn't that interesting a screen character.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 24
RE: Disappointment continued - 23/7/2013 12:05:08 PM   
Ballschin

 

Posts: 26
Joined: 5/3/2008
I was most excited for this film when Aranofsky was involved and promised that it would be an entirely standalone picture. As soon as he departed I assumed we would get another typical studio blockbuster, and the trailers seem to have confirmed my thoughts. Quite why they would want to tie the film to "The Last Stand" anyway is unfathomable as nobody likes that film and it is widely regarded as a disaster. Then we have to have the inclusion of other pointless mutants just so the audience don't forget this is part of the X-men franchise and a huge CGI robot as the end battle for what reason I don't know, action figures?

I don't agree that Wolverine isn't an interesting character and a 15 rated Wolverine 'Japan Saga' or any other story for that matter could be amazing, but we'll never get that from Fox, especially after what happened with Dredd last year. At this point I just feel sorry for Hugh Jackman because I think he genuinely wants to make a good Wolverine movie but while he's still employed by that studio, it's never going to happen. I'll stick with the MCU.

(in reply to ericcoyle)
Post #: 25
RE: RE: - 23/7/2013 12:46:21 PM   
waltham1979


Posts: 1255
Joined: 18/3/2008
From: San-Diago, which is German for 'Whales virgina'...
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oroborous


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia


Most films which end up being highly enjoyable and very good have no "remarkable" talent attached to them. Also so called "remarkable" talents have created absolute dogs of films and having someone deemed as such is no guarantee of anything. It is a falsehood to say it is not in the least bit interesting as as you admit there is talent attached (even if it is uninteresting to you). If you only watch films with remarkable talent and find no other film of interest you must watch about one film every three or four years.


The lack of remarkable talent is not what makes me disinterested anyway, I realise and agree that remarkable talent is not necessary for a film to be potentially worthwhile. It is a combination of this with the lack of worth in almost all the previous X-Men films, and the impression I have gotten from the marketing (in which everything I've seen from the trailers/clips etc. looks incredibly dull and generic). If this were a new franchise, and it had come across well in it's trailers etc, but the talent was still unremarkable, then I would possibly be interested.

As it is, I will use a metaphor to explain the situation. Let's say I purchase a series of cakes from a bakers shop, and find that upon eating them they are bland, dry and fairly tasteless, with the exception of one (which is slightly above average but nothing incredible). The bakers who work in this bakery come from a number of backgrounds, and while working in other shops have actually created some really nice cakes, but here in this one they haven't been very successful. Then I discover that the bakers shop has produced a new cake, made by a baker who had a hand in the previous recipes, and has used similar techniques for this one. On top of this, the advertisement for this new cake is unappealing and unimaginative, and gives me the impression that the new cake is similar to the others in terms of it's blandness. Now, I cannot imagine why i should be interested in this new cake, in fact I wouldn't be at all, and I certainly could not justify spending money on it. Is there the possibility that this new cake has a different enough recipe that it's worth eating? Yes, I cannot deny this. But is that chance great enough that I am going to pay nearly £10 to find out? No.

There are a number of issues that contribute to my lack of interest in this new cake that is called The Wolverine, I would never judge a cake, or a film, purely based on the talent behind it. In the end, money is valuable, and if I'm going to spend it, it won't be at this bakery.
Also, if I eat too many cakes I'll get fat.


I like cake...one time when I had the munchies after a night out I decided to make an entire cake from scratch and bake it; then spent the next hour with a fork eating the entire thing on my sofa...in my pants...it was not one of my prouder moments as I fell asleep with the remains of a Cadbury ready mix cake spilling out over my sweaty snoring body. I was woken up by my dog eating the cake off my belly...dogs can't eat chocolate.

Anyway; back on topic. What about if the cake shop was run by completely different chefs? What if it burned down and was then re-opened by new owners who promised that the cakes would be better, would look like Hugh Jackman and have their top off a lot? What if they did Muffins? Do you know the Muffin man?

I also like pie...

Personally I would probably be interested in the batch of new cakes but wait till they come out on DVD and eat/watch it then; then if it was excellent I would be pissed off with myself for not paying to watch it at the cinema...then make a cake...or a pie.

< Message edited by waltham1979 -- 23/7/2013 12:48:19 PM >


_____________________________

I just wish stuff like, I don't know, the slow & systemic CRATERING of this country could inspire the same call-to-arms as Batman casting

(in reply to Oroborous)
Post #: 26
RE: RE: - 23/7/2013 1:13:31 PM   
Oroborous

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 30/6/2013

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltham1979

I like cake...one time when I had the munchies after a night out I decided to make an entire cake from scratch and bake it; then spent the next hour with a fork eating the entire thing on my sofa...in my pants...it was not one of my prouder moments as I fell asleep with the remains of a Cadbury ready mix cake spilling out over my sweaty snoring body. I was woken up by my dog eating the cake off my belly...dogs can't eat chocolate.

Anyway; back on topic. What about if the cake shop was run by completely different chefs? What if it burned down and was then re-opened by new owners who promised that the cakes would be better, would look like Hugh Jackman and have their top off a lot? What if they did Muffins? Do you know the Muffin man?

I also like pie...

Personally I would probably be interested in the batch of new cakes but wait till they come out on DVD and eat/watch it then; then if it was excellent I would be pissed off with myself for not paying to watch it at the cinema...then make a cake...or a pie.


Sometimes a cake is worth it though, sometimes a cake is worth sacrificying all dignity for. Is it so much to ask that one's faith in the potential of cake is rewarded?
Yes, the shop would need to be sold to new owners with a greater vision, bakers who weren't held back by the usual baking conventions, who crafted their own recipes rather than simply reading them out of a book, or relying on the unsuccessful and stale recipes of the past. These bakers would need to convince me they were really going to make something special, something both immediately enjoyable, but that would stay within my memory for years to come, so that I would, in future, look upon that cake shop with wonder and hopeful joy, and would be happy to give those chefs my money. If that happened I would be very interested in a new cake. Yes, throw some muffins in there too and then we're laughing.
The problem is, cake has the potential to be so delicious, that if it's ever underwhelming, it makes the dissapointment so much worse, and that leads to anger.
Then again, why not make a pie for a change?

(in reply to waltham1979)
Post #: 27
RE: Disappointment continued - 23/7/2013 1:18:05 PM   
Oroborous

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 30/6/2013

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ballschin

I was most excited for this film when Aranofsky was involved and promised that it would be an entirely standalone picture. As soon as he departed I assumed we would get another typical studio blockbuster, and the trailers seem to have confirmed my thoughts. Quite why they would want to tie the film to "The Last Stand" anyway is unfathomable as nobody likes that film and it is widely regarded as a disaster. Then we have to have the inclusion of other pointless mutants just so the audience don't forget this is part of the X-men franchise and a huge CGI robot as the end battle for what reason I don't know, action figures?

I don't agree that Wolverine isn't an interesting character and a 15 rated Wolverine 'Japan Saga' or any other story for that matter could be amazing, but we'll never get that from Fox, especially after what happened with Dredd last year. At this point I just feel sorry for Hugh Jackman because I think he genuinely wants to make a good Wolverine movie but while he's still employed by that studio, it's never going to happen. I'll stick with the MCU.


I agree about Aranofsky, I was actually genuinely excited about this film when he was directing because I could see the potential in the character if handled by someone like him. I really hoped Wolverine would have a chance of stepping free from the previous X-Men films and achieving greater heights, that's why it's such a shame about the film as it is.

(in reply to Ballschin)
Post #: 28
RE: X men disappointment. - 24/7/2013 2:55:11 AM   
Nimrods Son

 

Posts: 294
Joined: 2/6/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericcoyle

Then we get X2. Once again the whole three way romance thing is fumbled terribly. The budget is perhaps a little bigger and the effects are impressive in places ( Night Crawler's attack on the White House is the standout sequence in the film). Some neat cameos by characters lift interest ( Collosus is very underused. Budget not enough again?). Overall there is once again little chemistry between characters, little or no humour to create some light and shade.


Won't bother defending the love triangle but in fairness it's barely present in a jam packed film. Don't get the smack talk about the budget, there's loads of great setpieces and maybe Colossus is barely in it because there's already loads of characters in it (and one of X2's greatest assets is the way it balances so many characters so well bar Cyclops and one or two others). And no humour? For god's sake man what about the great twenty minute stretch where Wolverine's with the X-kids and they visit Iceman's folks? I'm not sure how you can say the movie has no "light"




_____________________________

It only ends once. Anything that happens before that is just progress.
-Jacob (Lost)

(in reply to ericcoyle)
Post #: 29
RE: X men disappointment. - 24/7/2013 7:35:15 AM   
superdan


Posts: 8326
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericcoyle

Personaly I don't get all this positive defence of the X Men films. They are very much a disappointment from the start (bar perhaps First Class, which is actually the only really worthwhile film of the bunch)). First we get X men. In this film we have a happy couple which is broken apart because the woman (Jean ) fancies this bloke that turns up. How shallow is she? There is nothing in the script, no cinematic chemistry to justify this. We are just supposed to take it as read that she would fall for this character with no real build up between the two. We have superheroes who don't really use their powers too much (that would stretch the budget and thats how it feels throughout the film). When they have a fight it is filmed without much dynamism in one-on-one contrived sequences (this also keeps the budget down and thats what it feels like). having big ,full on superheroics is just beyond this film. There is little to no humour and the characters are unengaging. They may be popular (although at the time anyone who did not read comics would have had little awareness of them) but that does not excuse such dull script writing. The sound track, a vital part of any film, is dull and unimaginative and, worst of all, totally forgettable. Did any one really leave the cinema and be humming the tune several days later? AS a comic book reader I found the whole thing a disappointment. It was ok overall but has the feel of a TV movie with a slightly bigger budget.


I'd put First Class way down in the list of X-Men films. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that only Origins: Wolverine is worse.

quote:

Then we get X2. Once again the whole three way romance thing is fumbled terribly. The budget is perhaps a little bigger and the effects are impressive in places ( Night Crawler's attack on the White House is the standout sequence in the film). Some neat cameos by characters lift interest ( Collosus is very underused. Budget not enough again?). Overall there is once again little chemistry between characters, little or no humour to create some light and shade.


X2's budget was $110m and it was filmed over a decade ago. I don't think the budget was a problem. If Colossus was underused it's probably mainly because there were other characters who'd been used in the first film that Singer decided to maintain the focus on (which is fair enough).

(in reply to ericcoyle)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> The Wolverine Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.188