Wolverine movie poll. Did you like it?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,383
912
126
Originally posted by: middlehead
It's a little tricky, but they never actually refer to Wade or Weapon XI as "Deadpool." Stryker says "... the pool. The dead pool." I saw it more as them setting up the creation of the name rather than using the name.

The part that did it for me is how he says, "So he finally shut you up", which alluded to him referring to Deadpool (which I'm pretty sure Stryker calls Ryan Renolds's character "Deadpool" when they're in Nigeria) as there were comments in the beginning about him being a great soldier if he could shut his mouth.

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
I still enjoyed the movie more than X-Men 3, but I think my expectations were a lot lower (having been thoroughly disappointed by X-Men 3).

Why does everyone hate X-Men 3 so much anyway? I don't read the comics, so it doesn't usually mean as much to me, but :heart: Ellen Page.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: middlehead
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
...a complete destruction of the Marvel universe
:confused:

maybe not the full marvel universe.. but a good portion of it. the condensed wolverines past. not to mention creed/logan are not brothers etc. they really screwed it up
 

middlehead

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
4,573
2
81
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: middlehead
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
...a complete destruction of the Marvel universe
:confused:
maybe not the full marvel universe.. but a good portion of it. the condensed wolverines past. not to mention creed/logan are not brothers etc. they really screwed it up
They didn't screw up Wolverine's history, they altered it to better fit the chemistry of a movie. They don't have 30 years to stretch out the stories with hints and misdirections, they needed to explain why these guys were so connected and why they'd get so brutal when that connection was broken.

I didn't like some of the changes they made, but saying they brutalized the Marvel universe or any portion of it is just ridiculous.
 

d4mo

Senior member
Jun 24, 2005
588
0
0
I saw it in theaters and liked it.

Also I saw the Bar ending.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: middlehead
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: middlehead
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
...a complete destruction of the Marvel universe
:confused:
maybe not the full marvel universe.. but a good portion of it. the condensed wolverines past. not to mention creed/logan are not brothers etc. they really screwed it up
They didn't screw up Wolverine's history, they altered it to better fit the chemistry of a movie. They don't have 30 years to stretch out the stories with hints and misdirections, they needed to explain why these guys were so connected and why they'd get so brutal when that connection was broken.

I didn't like some of the changes they made, but saying they brutalized the Marvel universe or any portion of it is just ridiculous.

sure they did screw it up (kinda) logan/creed are nto related, stryker did not start teh weapon X program, the reason he can't remember anything is diffrent etc.

yeah they changed it to fit the movie (wich i understand) but it still screwed up his history.

thats getting past that wolverine is nto a 6'3 guy to begin with heh
 

gorcorps

aka Brandon
Jul 18, 2004
30,741
456
126
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
It was an entertaining popcorn flick with some decent action bits, a stupid plot, a complete destruction of the Marvel universe, and some cheesy acting. Oh, and even for a film about mutants with superpowers, some shit just shouldn't happen... like, say, a motorcycle taking several direct hits from a .50 caliber machine gun and not showing any visible damage. I'm not expecting realism from a film where people can teleport or spontaneously heal and live forever, but come on, that's just fucking absurd. My willing suspension of disbelief was severely tested. I still enjoyed the movie more than X-Men 3, but I think my expectations were a lot lower (having been thoroughly disappointed by X-Men 3).

This is about how I feel. Even for a 'mutant movie' there was a lot of bullshit that made things way too ridiculous. Action movies are supposed to be this way, but usually not this obvious.

Now I don't know the x-men comics worth shit outside of what I gathered from x-men legends and marvel: ultimate alliance, but they still seemed to change more than they needed to about the whole thing. If I knew my comics I'd probably be more disappointed but w/e.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: jonks
Good to know that shooting someone in the head at close range guarantees amnesia.

I don't know if this has happened before but the videogame is much higher rated than the movie it's based on.

That would probably be because the videogame was in development before the movie. It's also much more violent and bloody.

As an aside, they actually took lines from the videogame and put it in the movie.

Were you impressed with the quality of the writing in the videogame script?

Yeah, absolutely, and in fact I was able to bring some of the lines of dialogue from the game script into the movie, because I liked how well it was written ? the game production overlapped with the film, so it was possible to make those changes.
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
14
81
I enjoyed it, I agree that it was a popcorn flick, but I'm biased because I enjoy most action flicks in a movie theater setting. But I will say this, if they expect to make more of these X-Men origins, and this is what they have to offer for their most popular character, well then they're fooling themselves if they think the next movies are going to succeed.
 

middlehead

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
4,573
2
81
Originally posted by: IsLNdbOi
Are they going to make an "Origins" movie for all of the main X-Men characters?
Magneto is the only one that's planned at this point, but I'm sure they'd like to do a few more.
 

Titan

Golden Member
Oct 15, 1999
1,819
0
0
Originally posted by: jonks
Good to know that shooting someone in the head at close range guarantees amnesia.

I like how his healing factor was able to heal the adamantium holes bored through his skull by the bullets.

Missed that on the x-ray in X1, didn't ya jean grey? Wolvie's eggs were scrambled!

Prequels = plot holes.
 

Goosemaster

Lifer
Apr 10, 2001
48,775
3
81
I was actually surprised at how watchable it was. I went with kids so I had to turn off the cynicism but even in retrospect it was very entertaining.
 

imported_Imp

Diamond Member
Dec 20, 2005
9,148
0
0
Loved it. Very entertaining movie. Not deep or anything though.

What the hell? Stuff after the credits? Missed that.
 

middlehead

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
4,573
2
81
Originally posted by: jonks
Good to know that shooting someone in the head at close range guarantees amnesia.
I do prefer the idea that the government purposely wiped his brain, but this was a perfectly acceptable movie-style way of explaining the amnesia. "His brain will grow back, his memories won't." That also helps explain why Xavier wouldn't unlock Wolverine's head in X1 - it's not physically possible, the shit's gone.
 

lokiju

Lifer
May 29, 2003
18,526
5
0
Originally posted by: Titan
Originally posted by: jonks
Good to know that shooting someone in the head at close range guarantees amnesia.

I like how his healing factor was able to heal the adamantium holes bored through his skull by the bullets.

Missed that on the x-ray in X1, didn't ya jean grey? Wolvie's eggs were scrambled!

Prequels = plot holes.

That is always true. But I just have to ignore stuff like that and enjoy it for what it is.

Like gambit doing side spinning jumps up 40 feet into the air :laugh:
 

Palvaran

Member
Apr 13, 2002
86
0
66
Ryan Reynolds is definitely Deadpool.

Want definitive proof, check out the comics, Cable & Deadpool, I believe the 1st issue Deadpool tells Cable that his face looks like Ryan Reynolds met a meat grinder.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: middlehead
Originally posted by: jonks
Good to know that shooting someone in the head at close range guarantees amnesia.
this was a perfectly acceptable movie-style way of explaining the amnesia

disagree. You can't cause selective amnesia by shooting people in the head. it's dumb. off the top of my head, more plausible ways to accomplish this in movieland:

1. use a psychic mutant to brainwash him
2. use advanced computer technology to brainwipe him
3. super high voltage electrocution
4. massive head trauma (which unintentionally causes memory loss). Falling off that nuclear reactor and landing on his head would have been more plausible an explanation.

How did stryker know an adamantium bullet to wolvie's head would cause amnesia when humans get shot in the head and survive without amnesia? It's not a scientific or even likely result.
 

Babbles

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2001
8,253
14
81
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: middlehead
Originally posted by: jonks
Good to know that shooting someone in the head at close range guarantees amnesia.
this was a perfectly acceptable movie-style way of explaining the amnesia

disagree. You can't cause selective amnesia by shooting people in the head. it's dumb. off the top of my head, more plausible ways to accomplish this in movieland:

1. use a psychic mutant to brainwash him
2. use advanced computer technology to brainwipe him
3. super high voltage electrocution
4. massive head trauma (which unintentionally causes memory loss). Falling off that nuclear reactor and landing on his head would have been more plausible an explanation.

How did stryker know an adamantium bullet to wolvie's head would cause amnesia when humans get shot in the head and survive without amnesia? It's not a scientific or even likely result.

You are way over-analyzing shit here. The way it was explained in the movie makes perfect sense in context of the movie. And, of all things, to bring "scientific" into the equation when discussing a superhero movie is just flat out absurd.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: Babbles
You are way over-analyzing shit here. The way it was explained in the movie makes perfect sense in context of the movie. And, of all things, to bring "scientific" into the equation when discussing a superhero movie is just flat out absurd.

No, you're under-analyzing shit here. A screenwriter had to sit down and write the equivalent of this:

"He needs to forget all about this. I know, I'm going to give him amnesia! Hm, how to accomplish this....I know, I'll shoot him in the head, that's a foolproof way to cause memory loss!"

Given the options I thought up with little or no time spent, this is piss poor lazyass writing.

And don't start with the "it's a superhero movie so anything goes" crap argument. They have rules set up that they have to work within. If Frodo pulled out a gun and shot Gollum ya think it would be acceptable because "it's just a fantasy movie" or do you think some semblance of order is required in order to maintain suspension of disbelief?
 

middlehead

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
4,573
2
81
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: middlehead
Originally posted by: jonks
Good to know that shooting someone in the head at close range guarantees amnesia.
this was a perfectly acceptable movie-style way of explaining the amnesia
disagree. You can't cause selective amnesia by shooting people in the head. it's dumb. off the top of my head, more plausible ways to accomplish this in movieland:
He doesn't have selective amnesia, he has amnesia. He doesn't remember shit about shit.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: middlehead
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: middlehead
Originally posted by: jonks
Good to know that shooting someone in the head at close range guarantees amnesia.
this was a perfectly acceptable movie-style way of explaining the amnesia
disagree. You can't cause selective amnesia by shooting people in the head. it's dumb. off the top of my head, more plausible ways to accomplish this in movieland:
He doesn't have selective amnesia, he has amnesia. He doesn't remember shit about shit.

Pardon my choice of words. I'll rephrase.

I forgot bullets to the head are a certain way to cause total amnesia.

Better?
 

Raiden256

Platinum Member
Feb 11, 2001
2,144
0
0
Anybody else think the makeup/cgi/whatever they did to Patrick Stewart / Professor X looked REALLY WEIRD? He didn't look younger... he looked like he was dunked into a vat of botox!
 

hdeck

Lifer
Sep 26, 2002
14,530
1
0
i enjoyed it. good popcorn flick for sure.

i want to see a movie devoted to dead pool. ryan reynolds is great at being a smart ass. and his part of the mission in africa was just great to watch.

side note, what happens in the "bar scene" secret ending? i saw the deadpool one.