Wolverine - a spin-off too far?

Apr 30, 2009 11:11

I try not to judge a film until I've seen it myself, but this review pretty much confirms my expectations ( Read more... )

films, superheroes, film reviews, comics

Leave a comment

Comments 20

lindas_hell April 30 2009, 10:55:02 UTC
When the unfinished print got leaked a month ago, and the studio had a fit, I wondered if it was because they knew the film was crap and didn't want the fans to know until after they spent money to go see it.
We'll be seeing it Saturday and we'll let you know what we think. As you know, I'm a big Hugh Jackman fan, particularly when he's shirtless.

Reply

pmoodie April 30 2009, 12:12:28 UTC
Yeah, if the studio is unhappy about a film getting leaked early, it's usually a sign that they dont have much faith in it. Even so, that doesn't necessarily mean the film's crap, only that the execs think it's crap. And what do they know?

I look forweard to hearing what you think of the film, and of Hugh's throbbing muscles! ;)

Reply

lindas_hell May 1 2009, 11:15:38 UTC
what do studio execs know indeed! I posted a video on my facebook about Kevin Smith talking about his brief experience writing for the Superman movie. Makes the studio execs look monumentally stupid.
Also, you can't count on reviewers. How many of them hated Star Wars when it came out?!
I have to take each movie as it comes. It's all about personal preference. Lots of people hated the slow-motion in Watchmen. I didn't mind it at all.

Reply

pmoodie May 1 2009, 11:42:15 UTC
Thing is though, I read about Kevin Smith's treatment for the Superman film in The Greatest Sci-Fi Movies Never Made, and his ideas sounded pretty horrendous to me! So maybe the execs had the right idea on that one.

But yeah, execs are usually lawyers and acccountants, not creative types. So their instincts are not to be trusted!

I generally don't pay much attention to reviewers, but when I have bad vibes about a film and then bad reviews start to appear, it tends to make me think my bad vibes are justified. But still, I will see it one day and make up my own mind. :)

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

pmoodie April 30 2009, 12:27:40 UTC
Yes, Van Helsing is pretty much the worst Hollywood bluckbuster I've seen in decades. It showed that constant action can be just as boring as no action at all. Most of all, it upset me because I love the old Universal horror films, and to see some twatty new Hollywood film piss all over them was a painful experience.

Favourite superhero movie, eh? I think I'd still go with Superman the Movie. It's big and epic and it has fun with the material, without poking fun at it. It's serious when it needs to be, but it doesn't pretend that it's the most important film ever made. Most of all, it does what a superhero film should do - it entertains me and makes me want to throw on a spandex suit and save the world. :D

Of the more recent wave, I'd go for the first two Spider-Man films, Iron Man and Hulk. Oooh, and The Incredibles too. It might be a spoof, but it's better than a lot of straight superhero films. And Watchmen was excellent too, I thought.

What's yours?

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

pmoodie April 30 2009, 13:14:59 UTC
I remember liking Batman Forever quite a lot when I first saw it. I think I was pleasantly surprised that Robin wasn't a total embarrassment! But I prefer the first two Tim Burton Batmans. Catwoman is rather yummy...

Actually, I think I still prefer those to the new Christian Bale jobs. And you say your choices are uncool! LOL

Reply


guerabella April 30 2009, 14:43:38 UTC
I saw it last night at an employee screening and liked it quite a bit, but maybe I'm just easy to please. LOL

Reply

pmoodie April 30 2009, 18:09:26 UTC
Well no, I'm quite prepared to accept that the Empire reviewer could be a tasteless froob! LOL

Reply

guerabella April 30 2009, 21:18:30 UTC
I'll be curious to see what you think after you've seen it, but I think it's worth it. Of course, I rather liked seeing Hugh Jackman's backside. LOL

Reply

pmoodie May 1 2009, 08:46:03 UTC
Hee! Yes, I'm sensing that a major part of the appeal is seeing Hugh Jackman with his clothes off. That's fine for ladies and gay men, but it's not something that's going to enhance my enjoyment! LOL

Reply


angelout2killme April 30 2009, 22:43:15 UTC
1) X-men, back in the Bryne/Claremont days, was my gateway comic, along with Frank Miller's run on Daredevil. I liked Wolverine before he was solo against the Hellfire Club, but then again I tend to like the bad boy/asshole/troublemaker in any story. I have always loved Hodges from day one on CSI.
2) I like Van Helsing. The cheese factor makes me happy. Oh, sure, the ueslessness of Kate Beckinsale's drives me a bit nuts, but I'm not a huge fan of Kate Beckinsale as an actor either.
3) And I will go see any move that uses Hugh Jackman in a wife beater. It's worth the $8. He could stand there and breathe for 90 minutes. Just think of it as socially acceptable sexual stimulation for some women. :-)

Reply

pmoodie May 1 2009, 08:43:46 UTC
Clearly Wolverine is tailor made for you, and I'm sure you'll love it. Maybe I will too when I eventually see it. I just don't have any enthusiasm for it.

As for Van Helsing - I loved the black & white opening sequence. I thought, "Yes, they've nailed it! This going to be fun." But it all fell apart very quickly for me after that. I spent the final hour or so looking at my watch, waiting for it to end.

I think I liked it less because I should have loved it, you know? I love the old Universal monster cycle. But it forgot to be a homage to those old films and turned into some half-assed comic-book adventure film instead. Dracula, Frankenstein's monster and the Wolf Man, together in a film again after all those years? How could they screw THAT up? By hiring Stephen Sommers to write and direct, that's how! LOL

Reply

angelout2killme May 1 2009, 12:45:26 UTC
First of all, I LOVE Frankenstein's monster in that story; not only the look, but the moral complexity he offers. Is he a man? Does he have a soul? He wasn't a strick monster in that movie.

And I love Dracula in that movie too. He was gay as s may pool and twice as outlandish as any vampire, but it worked in the setting.

I'm secretly hoping the Wolverine movie is taylor made for me. :-) Because after he says to Gambit, "I know what you are," the line should be, "my first homosexual experience!"

YAY! Everyone wins.

Reply

pmoodie May 1 2009, 14:18:28 UTC
First of all, I LOVE Frankenstein's monster in that story; not only the look, but the moral complexity he offers. Is he a man? Does he have a soul? He wasn't a strick monster in that movie.

I thought he was OK, but his reason for being there was so stupid. Dracula needs him to conduct electricity so he can animate his army of bat-babies? That's really the best they could come up with?

Oh, the incredible lameness of Dracula's bat-babies. I thought vampires propegated themselves by biting other people on the neck and turning them into vampires? Since when do they have flying bat-babies? I think the reason for this is that bat-babies sell more toys and happy-meals ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up