Quantcast
subscriber help

artisanal film reviews | by maryann johanson

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (review)

Snikt!

Remember how when you were a kid and you were having a birthday party and you begged your mom not to buy the cheap generic potato chips but please please please get the Ruffles with Ridges because they really were better? Wolverine is like that. It’s Frosted Flakes on a Saturday morning even though you’re now grown up enough to worry about carbs. It’s a carton of Ben & Jerry’s Phish Food for dinner. It’s not good for you — not at all — and it’s maybe a little embarrassing to admit if you’re mature and politically aware and anticorporate and all that, but sometimes a big bowl of processed cheese dip not even made from real milk, never mind BHG-free organically herded heritage cows, is all you want.

Sometimes junk food is soul food, and sometimes junk movies are yummy and satisfying (and never mind the bellyache later).
It starts right away, the quality of dubious but delicious quality. Remember how we were all raving over the opening credits of Watchmen, how you could just watch them over and over again and never get tired of them? The opening credits of X-Men Origins: Wolverine are almost as tasty, as we see James Logan — woo-hoo! Wolverine! — and Victor Creed — woo-hoo! Sabretooth! — go from being boys together in the Northwest Territories of Canada in 1845 to rampaging across the battlefields of the 19th and 20th centuries. “Do you seek out war if you’re indestructible?” may be the question director Gavin Hood (Rendition, Tsotsi) and screenwriters David Benioff (The Kite Runner, Stay) and Skip Woods (Swordfish) are asking here. It’s all fun and games through the Civil War, WWI, and WWII — Wolverine and Sabretooth stormed the beach at Normandy! take that, Nazi bastards! — until Vietnam, when Victor finally goes crazy, actually starts enjoying the raping and killing, and Jimmy finally gets disgusted with it all.

And the field is set for a massive battle to the death between these two brothers.

Oh, didn’t I say? These two supermutant dudes… they’re brothers! I know some about the deep history of the X-Men comic-book universe, but not enough to say whether this is a revelation on the scale of “Luke, I am your father” or not. But it’s not a spoiler for the film. This is how we start out, not a question of surprise or suspense for the movie. (Maybe it was the way the history of these characters has been told over the years in book form, but not here.) And it’s so perfectly, wonderfully melodramatic! If you thought, perhaps, from those sincere and grim opening credits, that we were in for another solemn superhero flick that prisms our cultural crises through the monsters we make — did we all go crazy after Vietnam, just like Sabretooth? or did we finally come to our senses then, just like Wolverine? — well, this is not what you’re in store for.

Woo-hoo, it’s all just cheese dip galore. What the demented army guy Stryker (Danny Huston: How to Lose Friends and Alienate People, 30 Days of Night) does to James Logan to turn him into “Wolverine” — Logan’s original factory equipment was bone claws, not adamantium ones, of course. (And just what is adamantium, anyway? Answers are forthcoming… sort of.) Huston, always underappreciated as an actor, is a deadpan riot saying things to Logan like “You will suffer more pain than any other man could endure, but you will have your revenge” and “We’re gonna make you indestructible, but first we’ll have to destroy you.” Fun!

Melodrama! How Logan has nightmares about “the wars… all of them”! The woman (Lynn Collins: The Number 23, Bug) Logan loved and lost! How Wolverine got his name — so sad! His relationship with the Ma and Pa Kent of Canada!

This is some spectacular cinematic cheese, and I honestly do mean that in the best possible way. Because no matter how preposterous it all gets — even as it follows its own internal logic — Hugh Jackman (Australia, Happy Feet) as Logan is authentic and honest in his rage and pain and even his vulnerabilities. Liev Schreiber (Defiance, Love in the Time of Cholera) is more cartoonish as Sabretooh, but that’s just the nature of the character, not any fault of the actor (though you can practically see him thinking, Hey, I finally made it to a comic-book movie!) — and if all their fisticuffs involve long running starts to launch into each other… well, you try being the irresistible force meeting the immovable object sometime.

Credit to the flick, but in what should have been a completely predictable story — this is all backfill, after all — there are some shocking moments. Some of those moments are cheesy, too, but who’s looking for Citizen Kane here?


MPAA: rated PG-13 for intense sequences of action and violence, and some partial nudity

viewed at a private screening with an audience of critics

official site | IMDb | trailer
more reviews: Movie Review Query Engine
  • WESKERVSJILL

    PLEASE TO ALL PEOPLE WHO ARE BROKE OR DON’T HAVE A RICH GIRLFRIEND, DDDDDDDDOOOOOOOOO NNNNNNNOOOOOTTTTT SEE THIS MOVIE, AVOID IT AT ALL COST. I SAW IT AND CAN’T GET THE STUFF I SAW OUT OF MY HEAD.(SPOILERS) WARNING: A. NO BERSERKER RAGE B. MAGIC BULLET TO THE HEAD C.SILVERFOX? D.BARAKA AS DEADPOOL FTW! NUFF SAID GETTING A HEADACHE AND THE NUMBER ONE THING THAT PISSED ME OFF I WAS REALLY WANTING TO SEE WOLVERINE BREAKING OUT OF THE WEAPON X FACILITY KICKING AND FIGHTING INSTEAD OF RUNNING OUT LIKE A LITTLE GIRL.
    COME ON. MESSED UP WOLVERINE BIG TIME FOR ME. DOULBLE FRICK!!!!! :(

  • PaulW

    Adamantium, actually. It’s a fictional hardest metal known to man in the Marvel universe, supposedly indestructible but only for heroes with life-saving coupons they cash in every summer blockbuster (villains get the cheap third-rate knockoff metal known as Quesadantium).

  • MaryAnn

    Oh, PaulW, I know it’s fictional. :->

    Fixed my spelling error. Thanks for pointing it out.

    WESKERVSJILL: See that Caps Lock key? Hit it, once. And why do you assume that everyone who might want to see this movie is a hetero guy or a lesbian woman? Or do you just assume that gay guys and straight women just naturally won’t have rich girlfriends anyway?

  • JoshDM

    Adamantium can’t cut through the tough-to-duplicate Adamantium-Vibranium alloy used to create Captain America’s signature circular shield.

  • Riley

    I feel like you went into this one with different expectations and requirements than you generally do with movies. You keep apologizing for it and acting like its flaws don’t matter. Now, I have no problem with that. I have a shelf full of bad movies. I love to watch ridiculousness, it’s great. However, it doesn’t mesh with what you usually do, and it doesn’t seem fair. Why does this one get a pass? Because it’s X-Men? Because you’re into Hugh Jackman as Wolverine? I dunno, it just strikes me as odd. Maybe after you’ve seen it a second time and you take a week to think about it you could revisit it, see if you’re still riding this Wolverine ride you’re on.

    And yes, I did see it. I thought Jackman was the only thing good in it. He gave it his best, but everything else felt lacking. I’m advising my friends to wait for DVD or premium cable. Maybe a Sunday matinee if it’s raining outside.

  • Arco

    I’m amazed at how this movie is getting slaughtered at Rottentomatoes. I understand this is the year after Iron Man and Dark Knight, and even Watchmen (on which the critics were kind of split) was very out-of-the-box so to critics this probably feels run-of-the-mill, but…

    As you say MaryAnn, this is pure entertainment. Action, drama, action, Hugh Jackman being Wolverine…it doesn’t seem to claim to be more than that either in the trailers. What are people expecting? I think the trailers for Wolverine are more fitting than the ones for Watchmen, which sold that as ‘cool action’ more than anything else and left people surprised and disappointed.

    I hope it does good business. The buzz has been so deliberately bad due to so many naysayers I’m rooting for it. (If only because the X-franchise kinda hangs in the balance here, and I would like to see more in spite of some disappointments)

  • Doa766

    “The opening credits of X-Men Origins: Wolverine are almost as tasty”

    really??

    because I thought that the shot of Sabretooth charging on four legs through the Normandie was one of the most stupid things that I’ve ever seen in a movie

    also why the hell are the fighting on the civil war and wearing american uniforms on the other wars if they’re canadians? Logan even goes back to live in Canada with his girlfriend so it’s not like he just spend a few years of his childhood there, he clearly think if it as home

    anyway, the good looking guys seemed to have blinded you of how mediocre this movie is, it’s not boring but it’s on the same quality level as Daredevil or Fantastic Four and you shouldn’t recommend people to “see it”

  • Ben

    I agree with Riley in terms of being surprised you seem to have given this one a free pass from your usual standards (standards that I enjoy). I too like films that are bad and cheesey, but not films that are awful, and I have to put Wolverine in that category.

    I mean for one thing the writing is just horrible. You quote some lines as cheese, and perhaps that would be acceptable if it was just a few lines, but not when the vast majority of the dialogue is melodramatic and over the top. I mean what about the “decent” line he gets at the dinner table… groan. Or the Wolverine story he is told by his love interest, sooooo baaddd…

    The writing also fails at the characterisation aspect. It’s attempt to add character to the film tends to be disjointed and out of place. I mean Wolverine doesn’t start saying “Bub” until he fights the Blob (who mishears it). Why did he suddenly start saying Bub right now? (apart from the writers needing it as a clumsy bit of fan Perhaps if he had said it as a line throughout the film as turn of speech (which it is for Wolverine) it would be ok.. but no, its just suddenly used then.

    All and all I am warning all my friends to avoid seeing this one. Although there is one thing that is good about this film, and that is the brilliant portrayal of Deadpool/Wade at the start of the film. This particular character stands out like a glowing gem amongst the pile of other flat personalities on screen. I would pay to see a whole movie based on him for sure, purely based on his sort appearance in the film.

    Oh and then finally there are the plot holes – Spolier alert needed I guess (or delete these parts of the comments if you don’t allow spoilers in this section, sorry if that is the case)











    – They send Zero after Wolverine, a crack shot assassin, and then only after he is dead go “oh yeah, this gun we have lying around, that would have been good to give him” (a gun which moves from “the only thing that can kill him” to “it will sure give him memory loss” over the course of the disjointed film)
    – Gambit, someone who apparently hates the whole weapon X-program see’s Wolverine basically ready to kill Sabertooth, and what does he do? Come in and attack both characters… I mean sure Wolverine did knock him out a few minutes before.. but still are the film makers really saying he is that stupid?
    – The guys running the weapon X intend to maker Wolverine a super solider and then erase his memory… personally I would have done that the other way around, erase and then supersolider.
    – A final example would be the mutli-million dollar secret base on 3 Mile Island which seems to be guarded by 3 guys with machine guns and sabertooth. To look after around 20 mutants… ummm what? Similarly the weapon X facility seemed a little low on grunt power (oh and what about the hugely foreshadowing lingering shot of the waterfall as they are heading there – Look, Look, he is going to jump off this later, you will see… groan…)

  • Ben

    Oops… “clumsy bit of fan service” – haha.. always when complaining about bad writing ;)

  • Doa766

    if you call the Victor from this movie Sabretooth, then you should refer to Weapon X by his proper name as well: Deadpool

  • JSW

    Isn’t Wolverine’s pre-amnesia last name supposed to be Howlett?

  • Chris

    Wow talk about taking a pretty decent comic series and just raping it. It feels more like Fox decided that they needed to cram every mutant in this movie to make up for the ones that were left out of the X-Men trilogy. Jackman is good actor, but like Australia, a good actor is only as good as the script given and the actors around him. Bullets apparently cause a self healer to lose memory. Oh and the last thing I want is a “cartoonish” Sabertooth. Sabertooth is villain that kills with no rhyme or reason. He does it because his instincts tell him too. If you want to make someone cartoonish, let it be Deadpool. Have your week Hugh and Mary Ann, cause next week the real summer blockbusters begin.

  • SaintAndy

    I’m actually disappointed in your review …because, from what I’ve read on this site (and I have read most of the reviews) you’ve always managed to maintain objectivity. I like Jackman too, and Schreiber, and I buy into the whole X-men/Wolverine universe/phenomenon, and I really wanted this film to be good ..but it’s not ..and it didn’t deserve more than a yellow stamp of approval.

    Also, I am not the one to blindly follow the crowd, but the fact that’s down all the way to 37% on RottenTomatoes stands for something …

  • Mathias

    Question from a Canadian, can Logan and his brother be considered Canadians if they grew up in the Northwest Territories 1845, when Canada wasn’t even a country until 1867?

    Is this the type of idiocy i can expect from this film?

  • Mathias

    Yeah, MaryAnn. We were all expecting you to rip this film up to shreds and a bit puzzled that you recommended we see it. You compare this film to fattening chips and dip, but they are very tasty snacks and we ignore their unhealthy-ness because of it.

    Can massive plot holes, embarrassing cliches, poorly staged fight scenes, obvious and intrusive CGI and cringe-inducing dialogue be considered tasty?

  • Eh, it looks like fun to me. But then MaryAnn and I both liked Crank, which is nothing but a plot hole. I will be seeing this one at some point, no matter how much it diverges from the comic and how many plot holes it has.

    Oh, and I know it’s not my blog, but can we not refer to “rape” if we’re not talking about, you know, rape? Unless this movie has forcibly, nonconsensually penetrated a sentient comic book I think the word might be inappropriate.

  • Alli

    JoshDM, Harry Knowles also recommended we see Twilight, so he really shouldn’t be blasting MaryAnn for supporting a cheesy movie. He’s just pissed that one of his favorite comic book franchises didn’t meet his standards.

    As for MaryAnn’s review, she makes it pretty clear that this isn’t good cinema. So if you are a Wolverine fan and you were expecting Dark Knight, I think MaryAnn made it clear that you will hate this.

  • Man, the dudes who comment on some of these reviews always get really pissed off and butthurt when MaryAnn has an opinion that is in opposition to theirs.

  • MaryAnn

    Harry Knowles can say whatever he likes about me: I just wish he’d linked to my review. I can always use the traffic.

    also why the hell are the fighting on the civil war and wearing american uniforms on the other wars if they’re canadians?

    For the same reason that Americans volunteered to fight with the British before the U.S. entered WWI: for the fun, or the glory, or the honor, or whatever. Hell, more than one woman disguised herself as a boy so she could fight in the Civil War — and probably more than we even know of. Hence my supposition about the two mutants being drawn to war.

    Can massive plot holes, embarrassing cliches, poorly staged fight scenes, obvious and intrusive CGI and cringe-inducing dialogue be considered tasty?

    That’s not the tasty stuff. That’s the bad-for-you stuff that gives you the stomachache later.

    I’m not particularly proud of enjoying this movie. But I DID enjoy it, in spite of its many flaws, and I don’t see any point in pretending that I didn’t enjoy it.

  • Tim1974

    It has become quite disturbing and very disappointing that yet another film decides to feature male nudity only. Whether it is non sexual or not it has become quite a double standard of exposing only males.

  • Doa766

    “For the same reason that Americans volunteered to fight with the British before the U.S. entered WWI: for the fun, or the glory, or the honor, or whatever. Hell, more than one woman disguised herself as a boy so she could fight in the Civil War — and probably more than we even know of. Hence my supposition about the two mutants being drawn to war.”

    an american woman disguised herself to fight on the civil war because the outcome had effects on her, therefore she wanted to help, this is not the case with canadians, also they’re clearly not the hero-volunteer type

    regarding WW2, if we’re seeing the narmandie charge then it takes placed after America entered the conflict, Canada participated on WW2 and they could’ve fought with their own country and their own national uniforms

    I know what you’re saying it’s posible but it’s highly unlikely, the montage of them fighting in american wars was meant for the audience to see them as part of US history (it’s also a rip-off from Cap. Dan’s flashback story on Forrest Gump) and it probably was the idea of one of the screenwriters and then another decided to set most of the movie in Canada and they never bother to make it cohesive

  • Pedro

    You know what the saddest part of this experience was? Before the movie, they showed five trailers. Among those, THREE were sequels (Terminator, Transformers and Night at The Museum), the other starred friggin’ JOHN CENA, and only ONE of them was remotely close to being a good movie…and oh yeah, that was foreign. It’s called Rudo Y Cursi, and it stars the ever-excellent Gael García Bernal.

    Still want to bad-mouth Wolverine? Thought so.

    Seriously, what does this tell about the state of the industry, when some of the most interesting movies I saw never even made it to theaters (I had to watch them on DVD or – gasp! – online) and instead we get tripe like this as our “upcoming attractions”?

    MaryAnn? Care to comment?

  • Victor Plenty

    So, let me see if I understand this. These characters are apparently over 150 years old, but they look like they’re maybe in their mid-twenties, tops. Nobody questions how realistic that might be.

    But show some guys who were born in Canada fighting in American wars, wearing American uniforms, and that’s what brings out the hardcore sticklers for realism?

    Really? Seriously?

  • So, let me see if I understand this. These characters are apparently over 150 years old, but they look like they’re maybe in their mid-twenties, tops. Nobody questions how realistic that might be.

    But show some guys who were born in Canada fighting in American wars, wearing American uniforms, and that’s what brings out the hardcore sticklers for realism?

    Really? Seriously?

    It’s the same reason I can accept Hiro stopping time with his brain but wonder why DNA manipulation lets Sylar change his clothes. People will more easily fall victim to big lie than a small one.

    (…Godwin’s Law now fulfilled.) ;)

  • Mathias

    So MaryAnn, all that stuff i mentioned is the stuff you didn’t like so what was it about this film that counter-balanced all that and made you give it the green light?

    The awesome 3 minute credit sequence, Hugh Jackman and Liev Schreiber’s acting and some pulpy dialogue from Danny Huston?

    Somehow i don’t think that’ll be enough.

  • MaryAnn

    an american woman disguised herself to fight on the civil war because the outcome had effects on her,

    Or maybe she just wanted adventure and escape, like some men do who join the army.

    regarding WW2, if we’re seeing the narmandie charge then it takes placed after America entered the conflict, Canada participated on WW2 and they could’ve fought with their own country and their own national uniforms

    I didn’t pay attention to the insignia on their uniforms in the WWI and WWII sequences — maybe they are fighting in the Canadian armies.

    I know what you’re saying it’s posible but it’s highly unlikely, the montage of them fighting in american wars was meant for the audience to see them as part of US history

    Possibly. Or it’s meant as I suggested: as an indication that these guys went to war not out of any noble intentions but because they’re freakin’ immortal, bored, and looking for excitement.

  • MaryAnn

    Seriously, what does this tell about the state of the industry, when some of the most interesting movies I saw never even made it to theaters (I had to watch them on DVD or – gasp! – online) and instead we get tripe like this as our “upcoming attractions”?

    MaryAnn? Care to comment?

    Don’t I comment on this kind of thing all the time?

    We know what the state of the movie industry is. And it’s not going to get any better — it’s going to get worse. See this piece I wrote this week for Film.com.

  • MaSch

    So, let me see if I understand this. These characters are apparently over 150 years old, but they look like they’re maybe in their mid-twenties, tops. Nobody questions how realistic that might be.

    Assuming you’re talking about Wolverine and Sabertooth here: Mid-twenties, TOPS? I don’t know what the people in their mid-twenties or younger you hang out with do to make them look that not-young, and I don’t think I want to know, it must be scary.

    Nerdycellist: While I agree with your point, now I would like to see a self-made video showing a comic-book movie nonconsensually penetrating a sentient comic book.

    Just for the record, I also want to point out that it isn’t relevant to rape whether or not the perpetrator penetrated forcibly, consent is all that matters. And I want to point out that a woman can rape too without being the penetrating one, see “40 days and 40 nights” or “thursday”.

  • MaryAnn

    So MaryAnn, all that stuff i mentioned is the stuff you didn’t like so what was it about this film that counter-balanced all that and made you give it the green light?

    I recognized the flaws of the film, but the overall impact — for me, maybe not for other people — was one of popcorn enjoyment. It’s not the bits and pieces you picked out — “The awesome 3 minute credit sequence, Hugh Jackman and Liev Schreiber’s acting and some pulpy dialogue from Danny Huston?” — but how they all fit into a cohesive whole. Not narratively cohesive, perhaps. But Jackman holds it together… as an actor, not as beefcake. He believes in Wolverine, so I did, too.

  • MaryAnn

    Assuming you’re talking about Wolverine and Sabertooth here: Mid-twenties, TOPS? I don’t know what the people in their mid-twenties or younger you hang out with do to make them look that not-young, and I don’t think I want to know, it must be scary.

    Um, yeah. Jackman and Schreiber look every bit the early-40s that they are.

    Just for the record, I also want to point out that it isn’t relevant to rape whether or not the perpetrator penetrated forcibly, consent is all that matters.

    And no one can say that this movie constitutes rape of any kind, because Marvel consented to allow this movie to be made.

  • Arco

    Okay I’m going to see it tomorrow, I have lowered my expectations, but I suspect my reactions will be like MaryAnn’s: fun cheesy entertainment.

    Would I have preferred a masterpiece? Sure, but I’ll take the ‘fun ride’ if that’s what it will be.

    I just get the impression many people decided to hate this movie’s guts way before they saw it. Some of the complaints I’ve seen smell like complete dung. (‘Why would they be in the US Civil War?’ because they were clearly looking up wars to fight in, establishing their nature as fighters and mayhem junkies I imagine.) It just sounds like digging for reasons to bitch at it. Very odd.

    Oh and Harry Knowles decided not to review because he didn’t get invited to a screening and because ‘other people say it’s bad’. And then, never having seen it, tells readers not to go. MaryAnn, I know this is probably pointless to say but…please, please confirm you would never ever do something like that? I already can count the reviewers I truly value on one hand and while I was never a fan of AICN this was still rather shocking.

  • Drew Ryce

    Roughly 50,000 Canadians fought in the US Civil War.
    Here is a list of 29 that received the Medal of Honor: http://www.geocities.com/cancivwar/CanMOH.html

  • Just Wondering

    I’m not really a comic book geek, but my understanding from previous movies was that Wolverine (at least) didn’t appear to age because of his mutant healing ability. Did I get that wrong?

  • Thanks, MaSCH – you’re totally right about what constitutes rape, which is a big part of what kept me out of those two movies you listed. Grody!

    I don’t think MaryAnn’s ever condemned a movie because she didn’t get to review it/didn’t get a freebie ticket. She’s groused about studios that can’t get their crap together and invite her to screenings, only to suddenly disinvite her. And I believe she has made oblique references to “not screened for critics – you know what that means”, but I don’t know that she’s ever let the availability of a screening affect what she thinks about the movie once she’s seen and reviewed.

  • MaryAnn

    It has become quite disturbing and very disappointing that yet another film decides to feature male nudity only. Whether it is non sexual or not it has become quite a double standard of exposing only males.

    Hey, Tim1974, here’s a thought: Maybe if there were more movies actually *about* women doing interesting and exciting things, we could get more vulvas onscreen for you. I mean, much as I like this movie, it’s all *about* men: Logan, Victor, Stryker, etc. The only female character of even passing substance is Logan’s girlfriend, and she’s only there as a pawn in the men’s game.

    Maybe if there were more movies about women, there could be more female nudity in contexts that actually make sense, instead of as merely bouncing tits as eye candy for men.

    I mean, the *only* way to get a vulva onscreen for you in this movie would be in the *one* scene in which Logan and the chick are in bed together (and they’re just sleeping, not even having sex). There’s a *reason* for Logan to be naked in the bit where he’s naked that has nothing to do with sex. There is NO reason for ANY woman to be naked here, because women are hardly in the movie at all.

    Just some food for thought for you, Tim1974. Maybe you need to start complaining that there aren’t enough women in movies, not enough vulvas. Unless that’s all women are to you.

  • MaryAnn

    my understanding from previous movies was that Wolverine (at least) didn’t appear to age because of his mutant healing ability. Did I get that wrong?

    Clearly Logan and Victor *are* aging: they start out as children in this one. So maybe they’re just aging much more slowly (because of they’re regenerative abilities). Perhaps in 500 years they’ll look 75.

    Oh and Harry Knowles decided not to review because he didn’t get invited to a screening and because ‘other people say it’s bad’. And then, never having seen it, tells readers not to go. MaryAnn, I know this is probably pointless to say but…please, please confirm you would never ever do something like that?

    I’ve never done anything like that, and I won’t ever do anything like that. Sometimes I don’t get invited to press screenings, and sometimes movies aren’t screened at all. In those cases, sometimes I then buy a ticket and see a movie anyway. Sometimes I might express opinions about a movie I haven’t yet seen (as I often do when I feature trailers), but I can’t imagine how I could flat-out recommend that my readers NOT see a film based on my own suppositions about what I think a movie MIGHT be based on incomplete evidence.

    And certainly I have more than once gone into a movie with low expectations and then found I liked it a lot, and vice versa. Harry should at least give the movie a try: he might like it. And as annoying as I’m sure he found it to not be invited to prescreen the movie, he shouldn’t hold that against *the movie* itself.

  • Tim1974

    I think you jumped the gun on this one Mary Ann. I never said a thing about seeing a vulva here. Since there wasn’t any male genitals then there shouldn’t be any female genitals. My post is just to mention that yet again there is only male nudity and once again there is no female nudity. Unfortunately it appears that films intended for males has male nudity and those more intended for females also has more male nudity. My point being, where is the female nudity ?

  • MaryAnn

    And my point, Tim1974, is “where are the women”? You can’t have female nudity without women, and you can’t have female nudity that isn’t entirely gratutitous without a contextual reason for women to be nude.

    Perhaps you want only gratuitous nudity?

  • Arco

    MaryAnn: Thanks. I pretty much knew it already but…well, like I said, even of Harry this surprised me.

    To Tim 1974: where is it written that a movie ‘should’ have equal amounts of male and female nudity? Is it some kind of law? I’d say it differs per movie, what charactes there are and what the story calls for.

    And even then, looking back at movie history I’d say female nudity FAR outnumbers male nudity, so the ladies still have some catching up to do. (As I’m sure my wife will do tomorrow, when she soaks up some shiny naked Hugh Jackman;)

  • Tim1974

    The problem is Arca, the bombardment of male nudity. As far as having more female nudity, you don’t make up what for might have been wrong by then discriminating against another group. In this case males. No, it is not written anywhere that there should be equal nudity. However, in our world today where equality has become an important issue, then why isn’t it being followed in films ? It is a present day double standard against males. Maybe it is time for writers/directors/producers to use better judgement and realize that there is a male population that is also interested in seeing as much female nudity as male nudity.

  • Chris

    Male nudity is code for “funny,” in a lot of films. For some reason.

  • lunarangel01

    Maybe it is time for writers/directors/producers to use better judgement and realize that there is a male population that is also interested in seeing as much female nudity as male nudity.

    SERIOUSLY? Have you not watched movies, especially horror movies and action flicks, for the last 3 decades (if not LONGER)? There are boobs and ass showing in the vast majority of them.

    If you want equal nudity, go watch some porn. That’s what it’s for.

  • Tim1974

    I am not talking about the last three decades. Have you not watched movies within the past five years ?????? I can only assume that having the double standard of showing a majority of male nudity is just fine with you. If you are comfortable with injustice to males in reference to nudity, then there is nothing that is going to change your mind. For me, I will continue to seek equality for males in this regards. (BTW, why is it that many females seem to always use the “go see porn” comment when they do not want to address issues that deal with males in reference to nudity ?) I personally find it extremely interesting that many females have no interest in equality.

  • Tim1974

    Oh, and Mary Ann I will state that if they include male nudity then they can also include female nudity. The male nudity was not necessary. It could have been shown without it. But since they did, then let’s see some female nudity too. It isn’t any more difficult to also female nudity than it is to include male nudity. They choose not to do it and therefore it is a double standard. I also find it interesting that you feel the male nudity was necessary but even the thought of including female nudity and you mention it would be gratuitous.

  • Paul

    For those of you who think MaryAnn is giving this movie too much of a free pass as opposed to other movies, she also warns of her lack of objectivity about the Star Wars and Doctor Who series. Everybody has certain things they just like regardless of what their objective side tells them about it. In my case, that would be Star Trek and Joss Whedon’s shows, two cases of series with variable quality but hey, I like seeing them anyway.

  • Accounting Ninja

    Good lord, not this again. MAJ really hit the nail on the head as to WHY your assertions bother me: Men have far more varied roles in movies, hands down. Movies are far more often written from their points of view, more authentically capture their experiences (and not just, like a woman’s role, filter them through what male writers THINK is your experience, ie. Chick Flicks) and show them in action far more often. It ties into the point I had made on the other thread to you, Tim, that you failed to acknowledge: Even mens’ NUDITY ITSELF is more varied in tone and theme. As MAJ said, Wolverine’s nudity was not of a sexual nature.
    And please don’t take that American attitude of “If they are nude it must equal sex” BS. Sex is all in HOW a scene is presented. Wolverine was not sexualized, though he was nude. Tim doesn’t think it was “necessary”, but obviously the story writers for this movie did.

    When women are allowed as deep and varying roles as men-and yes! that includes more nudity that ISN’T all “hey, look at me, men, I’m an ogling object, tee hee!”- you will see more female nudity of a casual nature.

    I’ll say it again: you maintain that sexism against men is what’s at work here, but it’s just the opposite: men are considered more human and not simply here for the sexual pleasure of women. They have more widely representative roles.

  • Tim1974

    And Ninja I will say again that if they thought it was necessary for the male character then they can find a way to make it necessary for a female character too. And if these films are written by males for males then why isn’t there female nudity ? Why have they forgotten about the population of males who want to see female nudity also ? It is because they choose not to. And that choosing not to is a double standard. And, I had no intention of caring on a discussion this time. I came on only to express my displeasure of yet another film featuring only male nudity. It has become extremely tiresome and redundant.

  • Victor Plenty

    MaSch, I’ve seen only glimpses of previews for this, so the age I listed for the characters’ appearance was a rough guess, and there’s no need to insult my acquaintances on that basis.

    My point remains the same in either case. Whether they look 20 or 40, it seems they are in fact portrayed as being at least 100 years older than their apparent age. Which is not a big issue for me, but would seem a bigger issue for trivia buffs than scrutinizing the insignia on their uniforms.

    Just wanted to clarify that. Now we can all go back to grieving for the poor oppressed male actors who have been forced to appear nude in so many recent Hollywood films, and only been paid millions of dollars for it.

  • Doa766

    in any case, inmortal Canadians fighting in all america’s mayor wars is just one of the many examples that could be pointed out to show how mediocre this movie is, let me give you another example: adamantium bullets? despite what some screenwriter with no what the xmen are about might think Wolverine is not a warewolf, also how could stryker posibly know about the memory lost? it’s stupid beyond belief

    regarding the nudity don’t forget that the previous three xmen movie had a naked top model painted blue

    some guy a few comments ago said something that really pisses me off, he said something about how can people complain about canadians fighting american wars if the movie has people with superpowers and fanatsy all the way through

    let me explain something to you in case you haven’t noticed: superheroes are our mithology, the fact that people on other times really believed in Zeus, Rah, Ares, Apolo, Jesus, Mahoma or whoever and no one believes this ones are real is besides the point, they serve the same purpose

    and they should be trated with the proper respect, nothing solemne or overly serious but rearrenging facts to suit the purposes of a crap movie like this is just wrong

  • Victor Plenty

    Doa766, you’re not making much sense in most of your points.

    First, Canadians who wanted to fight in a lot of wars over the past 150+ years would not have all that many chances to fight in Canadian wars. They’d have far more opportunities to fight, in a far wider variety of places, if they were willing to wear American uniforms.

    Next: Adamantium bullets don’t necessarily imply anybody is being thought of as a WEREWOLF. Think about it. If we discovered a new metal, harder than almost anything else previously known, trying to use it for bullets of it would be right near the top of the list for any military force to get their hands on it.

    As for the nudity being no cause for alarm, that’s one point where I can agree with you.

    Now on to the mythology point. Free people have the freedom to make negative images of their mythological figures. Ancient Greek myths gave their gods a wide range of human frailties, and were full of contradictions as well.

    If you’re going to get offended enough to call it “wrong” when someone isn’t as reverent as you are toward your comic book heroes, you are missing the whole point of a free society.

  • Accounting Ninja

    If it’s so tiresome, why do you feel the need to comment on it? After all, you are the one who started the conversation. If you’re going to start a crusade, you need to be prepared for dissent.

    Oh, I see. You want your opinion to go unchallenged on the internet………good luck with that!

    On the topic, I didn’t see the movie yet. I don’t know why Wolvie was naked, but it was implied that it was not during his one sex scene (or, post-sex-sleep scene.) Perhaps any nakedness at all in this movie would strike me as unnecessary. I don’t know. MAJ, is it possible to tell why he was naked without spoilers?

    Let’s take another example, the most famous recently all-naked-all-the-time guy: Dr. Manhattan. There are character related reasons he walks around nude. It isn’t merely to titillate or shock. But, by your logic, since they have a man, they need to have a woman walk around naked…for the sake of fairness. Never mind that she (maybe SS2) has no character reason whatsoever to be naked. It’s…just cuz. That would just be bizarre. It would be equally as bizarre if Doc Manhattan were a woman and they had a guy walk around naked just cuz. (But something tells me there’s be NO fanboy clamor for Penis Equality in that situation! And, any fangirl who said so would promptly be laughed at.)

  • JoshB

    Tim1974, are you gonna hijack the comments every time a guy shows some skin? Cause I actually think that would be kinda funny…

    You’re either tooney-loones or the most dedicated and skillful troll I’ve ever seen.

  • Arco

    I think I got him figured out. Tim1974’s like Stephen Colbert. He’s really being satirical and opposite and we’re all falling for it.

    It’s the only explanation.

    Right?

  • Tim1974

    I didn’t say I was tired. I said it is tiresome to see only male nudity all the time. I continue to find it interesting how hyprocritical of you to mention how male nudity is always “necesssary” to the plot but suggest having female nudity and you just can’t even think about it being important. You always want to state how it is either sexual or gratutitous. Where are all your examples of female nudity where there is no male nudity included ??? It is obvious you have no concern for males and thus go against your own policy of crusading for equality. No matter how much you twist and turn the excuses to prove to you and other feminists that male nudity is all part of everything and it is ok, while at the same time complaining all about how females being the ones degraded, the continual dispalying of male nudity only is redundant and a huge double standard bias. So go ahead and spin your excuses and show your true hypocrisy. It has become obvious that is all you know how to do.

  • MaryAnn

    MAJ, is it possible to tell why he was naked without spoilers?

    Yes. Logan is escaping from the secret facility where Stryker’s been doing to adamantium thing to him. He’s been in a tank, underwater, naked. However, it makes no sense except for the modesty of the actor that Logan is strategically covered up while he’s in the tank, completely naked, and the camera is close up. However, later, after he’s actually outside the facility, he takes a leap off a cliff into a waterfall. It’s clearly a CGI Logan, he’s at a great distance, and while it’s obvious that he is nude, there’s no flopping or anything even the least bit graphic.

    Tim1974, you are completely misunderstand just about everything everyone else is saying here. No one is saying that male nudity is “necessary.” But just because nudity isn’t “necessary” doesn’t mean it’s gratuitous, either. And if you aren’t going to acknowledge that naked female breasts constitute “female nudity,” you’re never going to be happy in this discussion.

    Oh, and when you say things like:

    And if these films are written by males for males then why isn’t there female nudity ? Why have they forgotten about the population of males who want to see female nudity also ?

    you only underscore the fact that you’re simply asking for your own personal fetishes to be catered to by movies. This is why you’re hearing the recommendation to just go rent some porn. You are clearly completely uninterested in story or character or context: you just want to see naked female bodies.

    Now let’s get back to actually talking about the movie itself.

  • Accounting Ninja

    Oh, you are too funny. You’re starting to get all angry and calling me a hypocrit, but yet again, you’ve failed to address my interesting points of conversation, as well as others’. Insult responder, restate your original point. That’s your MO, and you don’t seem to be able to gasp finer points like context and cultural attitudes toward nudity of both sexes. Sigh, this “debate” is becoming so shallow, and my words are wasted. But because I am a shameless ENTP, I will forge on.

    I never said female nudity was always sexual no matter how it’s presented. Because for me, presentation is key. I’m trying to think of examples where a female’s nudity was purely non-sexual. She wasn’t in any sexually suggestive poses; the camera didn’t linger on her body; etc. I’m thinking of a French film I saw, where the camera never fetishized her, as well as her male lover, and they were having sex. So, it isn’t just about sex itself, it is possible to not pornify a sex scene and just portray it as normal people expressing love. I can’t think of anything else, but I tend to stay in the Sci-Fi and Indie genre, and far away from Horror, where I’d more likely see women fetishized. Any other movies buffs here wanna help out?
    Also, I never said all male nudity wasn’t sexualized and was “necessary”. I specifically stated that I wasn’t sure why Wolvie was naked and whether it was necessary. I was taking MAJ’s word for it when she said it wasn’t sexualized, though, because I know she likes Jackman and she’d tell us if it was “sexy” (wouldn’t you, MAJ? Pleeeease? ;), and I trust her judgement. So, did you see it, Tim? Care to refute her claims? With actual arguments, not just “Cuz he’s nekkid! Rabble rabble.”
    And I’ll easy your mind by stating that I did think the cock in Observe and Report WAS unnecessary. It was enough that it showed him opening his coat from behind, we get it, he’s flashing. There’s only one reason to show the cock: shock value and laughs. And many found it funny. But IMO it was indeed unnecessary. i’m not a completely unreasonable feminist. ;)

  • Accounting Ninja

    Sorry for the double post, but thanks MAJ for the explanation. To me, that seems entirely reasonable and not at all gratuitous. There were no closeups, no sexual grunts, no “female gaze” camera shots. In fact, it would have been weird if he were naked in the tank except like a pair of tighty-whities (which I’ve seen, more on cartoons and tv shows, so as not to anger the censors!). Why not just be clothed, then, lol? Or when someone de-transforms from a monster and they’re conveniently wearing bra and panties/boxer shorts when the monster itself was wearing nothing. This is an instance where nudity IMO would be “necessary”. Necessary=makes sense in story context. It would make sense that they were naked, as it makes sense that Wolvie was, too.

  • MaSch

    Victor: Sorry for the insult to your acquaintances. You’re right, your point is valid, but the snarkier part of me took over control, mostly because of the “tops”.

    nerdycellist: I think the depiction of sex without consent of the man in “40 days” was vile because it was going for funny or cool, while the depiction in “thursday” treated it as rape, which is a good thing (if done right, I haven’t seen either of the movies).

    But that’s a bit OT.

  • Victor Plenty

    MaSch: Yes, in hindsight, the word “tops” was not the best way to communicate that I was making an uninformed guess as to the characters’ apparent age.

  • JoshB

    but I tend to stay in the Sci-Fi and Indie genre…Any other movies buffs here wanna help out?

    Last scene of Resident Evil. Milla Jovovich wakes up naked in a lab after having been experimented upon and proceeds to make her escape. Popped in my head immediately because it so resembles the one MaryAnn described in Wolverine.

    But because I am a shameless ENTP, I will forge on.

    INTJs pwn joo.

  • Ok how about we pull the conversation back to the movie and forget about the male/female nudity. I’m a longtime Wolverine and Punisher fan from the comics, and I can say they tried but did fall a bit flat on the movie re-imagining of the imaginary tale of Wolverine. I have been let down several times by The Punisher franchises, and have finally come to my senses that in order for screenwriters to get a cut or something, movies must be made different from the comics – or else the movie producer gets sued or something like what I heard happened with Sin City, where they simply lifed the comic page-for-page onto the movie. I just wish other comic movies could do that.

    So here’s how the comics told it that actually made more sense. Logan was captured against his will in Canada after coming out of a bar one night. He was subdued with gas or something and quickly placed into “the tank” before he could fully recover via his mutant healing factor. The Weapon X project was a super-soldier program and they had found their perfect human to bond adamantium to and etc. etc., but the part about him losing his memories came from the DAYS, if not Weeks, of the metal-to-bone bonding process, the constant torture of that process drove him mad. They put some kind of mind control helmet thingy on him and sent him out, pretty much naked, into the wilderness (which was during the winter so full of snow), to do things like kill bears and such to test out their control on him. Well his healing factor kicked into overdrive and he finally broke free of the mind control, slaughtered almost everyone in the facility – and there were lots of those soldier dudes, and went out to living as a wild animal. The Canadian gov’t later found him as he retuned more “human” and gave him the costume and had him fight off rampaging monsters like the Hulk (wolverine’s first appearance!) and the Wendigo (an abomidable snowman of sorts). SilverFox was actually an Indian from the late 1800’s and was killed by Sabretooth and all that long before the weapon X thing – but for different reasons. And Silver Fox wasn’t a mutant with an agenda – just an indian chick. As an aside, the movie Silver Fox was absolutely beautiful. Don’t know too many blue eyed native americans, But apparently she was one. It would have been nice to see her in the nude.

    I just wish the writers could copy the real backstory, like The Punisher comic, it was much more intriguing and “logical” than the stupid bullet through the adamantium skull story (wouldn’t adamantium bounce off of adamantium? The bullet would have to be vibranium, the only stronger substance than adamantium, to penetrate seeing as how Deadpool’s adamantium swords didn’t scratch wolverines claws and vice versa), which by the way should have permanently left two holes in his skull, even if skin healed over it. Long post but this gives some background to the comic book Wolverine. I still liked it a little, but much like the first Hulk movie my wife hated it. The Blob scene was useless and absolutely kiddie-stupid. And why did they show no blood whatsover on the claws? Wasn’t this PG-13? oh well…

  • acmike

    Oh and my wife did like that Hugh Jackman was super hot. I have to give the guy props for getting into shape like that at – what is he, 40? Damn. Maybe that’s why MJ gave it a passing green grade instead of the much-deserved Yellow Light at best. But I have to admit that I’ve liked some terrible movies because of the boob-factor (Jennifer Connelly in The Hot Spot before she got all “actress thin”, and Scarlett Johansson in A Love Song for Bobby Long – poor movies that get a Green Light from me).

  • Accounting Ninja

    INTJs pwn joo.

    From personalitypage.com: INTJ weaknesses.

    Tendency to believe that they’re always right

    :P

    My husband’s an ISTJ. He’s so…literal. I’m sure you can imagine how much we drive each other nuts. :)

    Ok how about we pull the conversation back to the movie and forget about the male/female nudity.
    (stuff)
    Oh and my wife did like that Hugh Jackman was super hot.

    HA! You couldn’t resist.

  • JoshB

    Tendency to believe that they’re always right

    It’s not a weakness because it’s not a belief, but an immutable law of the universe.

    God Himself is one of us!

  • Vera Cobb

    Just chiming in to say – saw it last night and really enjoyed it. Sometimes I just want a comic book movie to be fun. I’m not an X-Men comic book devotee and perhaps that works to my benefit in regard to this one. I didn’t have any expectations beyond thinking that they got a great cast in Hugh Jackman and Liev Schreiber and that I would enjoy watching them chew the scenery. And that I did.

    As much as I think Batman is a superior film, I get tired of the constant Sturm und Drang that seems to characterize comic book movies recently. Sometimes I just like an entertaining movie with some nice eye candy on a Saturday night. So, I got what I wanted from X-Men Origins.

  • Drew Ryce

    Thank you acmike for the description of the comic book origin story. It makes more sense than the film version.
    re the film version: why does Wolverine still hate Victor at the end? His motive, the death of the girlfriend, has been revealed as a sham. The bro has just saved his life and, least we forget, was Logans brother and closest friend for a couple of centuries. Why are they enemies? Logan can decline to live the mercenary violent life without going on a violent jihad against his brother.
    re the “Canadian” discussion: I don’t see how the fact that the NWT weren’t “Canada” the day he was born matters at all. Logan says that he is canadian during a modern era when canada exists and he lives there. Like everyone else born in the NWT before the establishment of the country he was a canadian the minute the country was “created”. Ditto, Washington and Adams are Americans and US citizens despite their birth as british subjects in a crown colony. Hell, I think that Hamilton was born in jamaica.

  • Paul

    What to call one’s birthplace confuses some people. Rushdie wrote about how he was born in what was part of India but is now Pakistan (or maybe part of Pakistan that is now part of India) so he isn’t sure how to self-identify. And some of the first Americans (and I use that phrase with apologies to Native American readers) self-identified by state first.

  • Mo

    Ok, I haven’t seen the movie yet, but this Canadian/Not Canadian thing is ticking me off.

    Large parts of Canada were actually called Canada long before confederation- usually Quebec and Ontario. The name came into use by the mid 1500s. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1jG58nghRo In fact from what I very fuzzily remember of Canadian History class, most second generation settlers would call themselves Canadian even if they weren’t specifically born in Upper or Lower Canada just as a way of saying that they weren’t born in Europe either.

    And to back up what Drew Ryce said, Newfoundland didn’t become a part of Canada until 1949, but people who were born before then would still refer to themselves as Canadian now. It would have been the same for say a Nova Scotian at Confederation or later an Albertan when they joined.

    (I do have to say I’m kind of surprised the writers set his early life in the NWT unless they had been watching waaaay too much Due South. It’s always been sparsely populated that far north and would have been an insanely rough life for European settlers in that era. Most of the population of Canada is huddled along the southern border where it’s warmer.)

    As for fighting in American wars, it makes sense to me. The Canadian border is like a one way mirror. You may not hear much about us, but we see everything up here and feel involved in what happens even when we aren’t. News may have traveled slower back then, but it still traveled and wars don’t happen next door without anyone noticing. In the mid 1800s any war in America would probably have brought back still-fresh memories of the war of 1812 when the Americans invaded Canada. If things went bad a civil war could have spilled over again. Plus loyalists’ descendants might still have had an interest in what happened in their parents’ or grandparents’ old home. And then there were the all the slaves who had ended up in Canada and would have had an interest in what happened.

    Bored kids living in a harsh place would easily have wanted to go fight in that war they had been hearing all about, whether for personal convictions or the hope of fame and fortune or at least a bit of adventure, even if it wasn’t their country. (Being English didn’t stop Byron from fighting for Greece not long before.) It would have been the same sort of reasons an American kid would sign up when he didn’t have to.

    Sorry for the big history lecture, but all these criticisms based on bad and downright ignorant history knowledge (and it’s not just here – I’m looking at you Ebert) make me want to throw my old Canadian history textbook at someone.

  • Drave

    One of these days, I will go through my list of every single movie I’ve seen in the past five years, and do a comparative chart for Tim1974, showing that female nudity still outweighs male nudity at the movies by a factor of at least 15 to 1. Or rather, I would do that if I believed for a second that Tim1974 is actually being serious, and not involved in some extended trollish performance art piece.

  • MaSch

    Drave: Forget about Tim1974, do it for me, I’d really like to see that list.

  • Tim1974

    Drave, my statement is in reference to frontal nudity (genital exposure) only. And yes, let’s see that list. The only time limit that I have ever stated was those American mainstream films within the last year and a half. And that I said in refernce to frontal nudity only. If you can show it is not accurate let’s see it. I have the films listed that contain male and female frontal nudity from that time period and it is much more male than female. I have also stated that you don’t fix a wrong by discriminating against another group, which is males. The past is gone and is history. So to correct the problem then you need to have equal amounts of nudity not expose males more.

  • Tim1974

    I apologize that I did see that I stated the last five years. I assume I was tired and I don’t have any evidence to prove that point. However, I am curious to see how close it is. And please list those films to see that they are American mainstream movies.

  • Erik Goodwyn

    Well, MJ I have to hand it to you. You are the queen of “I know I’m not supposed to like this stuff, but gosh darn it I do anyway!”-reviews. Anyone who doubts, check out her reviews of the Phantom Menace, the 13th Warrior, Pathfinder, just to name a few. I appreciate your childlike honesty and recognition that there are more reasons to go to the movies than to look for a deep social commentary or “rich characterization”…dammit sometimes you just want to go see Wolverine kick some butt!

    Ahem. Anyway, I’m a big fan of Kurosawa and Citizen Kane and all that, too, but I actually enjoyed the hell out of this movie. I don’t care if the dialogue is corny, the plot full of holes, or any of that, because comic book movies exist on a different plane, with different rules. They are modern mythology and have to be understood as that–symbolic expressions of emotional experiences. And wolverine is just such a popular character, because he personifies the archetypal rage and bestial nature of man, as he tries to combat the more ‘civilized nature’ we have. If this is done well, the story does it’s job. And it was–the rest of the stuff, like “realism”, “plot consistency”, “characterization”, and witty dialogue, etc, don’t matter any more than they matter in Norse mythology or the legend of Hades and Persephone.

    It’s not the details, its the emotionality that matters. Wolverine and Sabretooth are brothers (here, not in the comics) because it better suits the symbolic conflict–each just this side of the border between civilized and demonic. One is the reflection of the other. Comic movies like Fantastic Four and Daredevil do this poorly, and are more about looking “cool” in the modern sense–this is why they lack mythic weight and fall flat as just lame.

    I’m not saying Wolverine is some great cinematic masterpiece or anything, just that as a comic movie, with all the irrational logic, plot contrivances and inane character motivations that entails, *works*–on that level. Tales about comic heroes are tales about the gods. They’re just as irrational, eccentric and “unrealistic”. As any other kind of movie it’s an abysmal failure. But it isn’t. Like myth it is an exercise in symbolic, visual story telling. It’s more right brained and irrational. But when it works, it’s a lot of fun to get lost in, and with such capable leads in Jackman and Shreiber, how could it not?

    Way to stick to your guns, MJ.

  • Mathias

    74 comments. Wow.

    Clearly the fanboys are not pleased with you MaryAnn. ;)

  • candace

    I’m with you on this one MaryAnn. I really enjoyed the movie and I think what saved it for me, other than Victor himself, was the relationship between Victor and James. Because even if Victor is jealous, sadistic and crazy he does love James, I believe (not that this excuses the horrible things he’s done. I don’t approve of any of that). And I think that’s what I loved about this movie. I came in looking forward to Gambit and came out loving Schreiber’s Victor.

    Does Schreiber seem underrated to anyone as an actor? What a sexy, sexy man.

    I had fun.

  • Loco

    Wow, I finally found someplace online that also liked the movie. Like MA said, it was just cheap fun. Most of the flaws rolled off my back, until they showed Deadpool. I did a facepalm and asked to myself “wwwhhhyyyy?”

  • Drew Ryce

    Perhaps someone can clear this up for me?
    1. If Logans girlfriend can make people do what she wants even when she is no longer touching them (walk until your feet bleed) and she is on-board with the whole get Logan to undergo the treatment thing, then:

    why doesn’t she just have him do it and cut out the need for all the dead not dead nonsense?

    2. If Sabretooth can beat the pre-Adamwhatever Logan unconscious, and he is on-board with the program, then:

    why doesn’t Sabrebro beat Logan unconscious then chain him up and dump him into the pool?

    I guess the bottem line is why go with the weird overly complicated plot?

  • Saladinho

    Or hey, Drew, how about this?

    1. How in the hell is Stryker still an army col. in X2 after murdering a general in this film?

    2. If Wolverine is going by his father’s last name of Logan, who in the hell is Victor Creed taking his name from?

    3. How can Stryker possibly know that adamantium bullets will cause amnesia in Wolvie? If you somehow know it won’t kill the guy, how does amnesia become option no. 2?

    4. This movie is a piece of crap. It doesn’t love you. It only wants your money.

  • Drew Ryce

    Dear Saladinho,

    1) he didn’t get caught
    2) I am guessing but Logan is probably the name of the guy that W thought was his father and Creed was the name of the big bugger that W killed at the beginning of the film (and the acknowledged father of ST). Logan keeps the name of the man he loved not the bruto that he killed. (I could be way off base),
    3) Yep, total crap
    4) LOL I know that you love the movies but really, have the movies ever loved you back? (Speaking for myself, I have had to settle for some really great one night stands that lasted for around 2 hours but always ended with my being thrown back into the street with popcorn on my breath and a jones for pie and a good conversation)

  • Saladinho

    Lol! Funny, but I’d prefer to think of them as brief encounters, the memories of which will last forever. Heh.

    Uh, but actually, Howlett was the name of his not real dad.

    And, Stryker was picked up at the end, after Silver Fox ordered him to take a walk and see the sights–FOREVER!

  • D

    “2. If Sabretooth can beat the pre-Adamwhatever Logan unconscious, and he is on-board with the program, then:

    why doesn’t Sabrebro beat Logan unconscious then chain him up and dump him into the pool?”
    Drew Ryce, they made it clear that Logan had to be a voluntary subject, otherwise he wouldnt be able to cope with the insane level of pain that he had to subject himself to. Same thing with silvefox. Logan, like Sabertooth, apeared to have some kind of resistance to her powers. And hypnosis only takes you so far when your feeling an excruciating pain.

  • Drew Ryce

    D – so Logan dies if he isn’t a volunteer? I’m not saying that they don’t make that point (although I didn’t see them do so), I’m having trouble understanding why that would be.
    Unbearable pain makes one pass out. that I get. If they need Logan to ‘want to live’ as a means of dealing with the pain, and, revenge is the strongest motivation (which i don’t believe but okay “if”) then kick is ass-stick him in the tank- then have good laugh at him as you start the process. That should get him into primo revenge mood in a hurry.

  • Shadowen

    I was able to enjoy the film at any one point, but the moment I stopped enjoying the movie at that instant and looked back or looked ahead, I immediately saw:

    It was shitballs stupid. Gyuh.

    Layers upon layers of stupid. Destroying everything that was cool about the source material and replacing it with Foxy bullshit. O, the fuckers, the fuckers…

    I enjoyed the film at the time, but afterward I couldn’t understand why and found myself hating even the bits that I had outright loved, because they had no right to be in such a bad film.

  • Pollas

    I for one thoroughly enjoyed this movie for what it was, fun entertainment. And I don’t feel the need to make any apologies for doing so. Don’t look for Shakespeare in pulp fiction.

Pin It on Pinterest