# Wolverine looks awesome!!!



## Treebore (Dec 16, 2008)

Rate-a-Trailer: Does Wolverine Look Razor Sharp? - E! Online


----------



## Relique du Madde (Dec 16, 2008)

Treebore said:


> Rate-a-Trailer: Does Wolverine Look Razor Sharp? - E! Online




Wow...  Lets see...  how many X-men characters are in this...

By the looks of it there's going to be alot of cameos.. I just pray that young Scott Summers no shows this film.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Dec 16, 2008)

Treebore said:


> Rate-a-Trailer: Does Wolverine Look Razor Sharp? - E! Online




I dunno. I mean, it _does_ look cool, absolutely. And if it had come on the heels of X-Men 1 and 2, I'd have no doubts.

But after the trainwreck that was X-Men 3? I'm still feeling a little gunshy.


----------



## Treebore (Dec 16, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:


> I dunno. I mean, it _does_ look cool, absolutely. And if it had come on the heels of X-Men 1 and 2, I'd have no doubts.
> 
> But after the trainwreck that was X-Men 3? I'm still feeling a little gunshy.





Well, MArvel has taken control of their movie franchise since then and the Hulk and Iron Man movies were enjoyable to AWESOME! I haven't seen the Punisher yet, so don't know about that one. Looks promising.

Anyways, I am hopeful they have learned their lessons and will kick butt from now on.


----------



## Relique du Madde (Dec 16, 2008)

Treebore said:


> Well, MArvel has taken control of their movie franchise since then and the Hulk and Iron Man movies were enjoyable to AWESOME! I haven't seen the Punisher yet, so don't know about that one. Looks promising.
> 
> Anyways, I am hopeful they have learned their lessons and will kick butt from now on.




Yeah.... but Wolverine: Origins is still Fox Production.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Dec 16, 2008)

Treebore said:


> Well, MArvel has taken control of their movie franchise since then and the Hulk and Iron Man movies were enjoyable to AWESOME! I haven't seen the Punisher yet, so don't know about that one. Looks promising.




Not exactly. Marvel's learned not to sell the rights, and they're making their own movies. But they haven't _regained_ any rights they'd already sold. Sony still has Spider-Man, and Fox (alas) still has X-Men.

The Wolverine movie--for good or ill--is the product of the same studio and executives who gave us X3, not the studio that gave us Iron Man or Hulk.


----------



## Taelorn76 (Dec 16, 2008)

I think that it looks promising


----------



## Treebore (Dec 16, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:


> Not exactly. Marvel's learned not to sell the rights, and they're making their own movies. But they haven't _regained_ any rights they'd already sold. Sony still has Spider-Man, and Fox (alas) still has X-Men.
> 
> The Wolverine movie--for good or ill--is the product of the same studio and executives who gave us X3, not the studio that gave us Iron Man or Hulk.




Hmmm. Well, lets hope that Fox has learned some lessons.


----------



## fba827 (Dec 16, 2008)

I know I am in a minority, but I have never been a fan of Wolverine, as a character.

Having said that, the trailer looks great -- but, of course, it does what a trailer is supposed to do -- clip for us several action highlights.

Despite not being a Wolverine fan, I'll still watch it, and you know, I'll probably sill enjoy it on some level.

Several xmen shown there, I wonder how many have a cameo and how many have some focus as sideline characters....
Gambit (he had several clips in the preview, so guessing he's more than a single cameo scene).
Deadpool (guess based on  physical appearance)
Blob (guess based on physical appearance)
Sabertooth (guess based on physical appearance and tie to wolverine's comic background)
Silver Fox ? (or whatever that girl's name is, in the comics, that wolverine liked from his candian group that was killed by sabertooth -- am guessing soley based on that scene where Wolverine is holding a dead girl in his arms and mourning her loss)

And some woman that appeared to turn white/silver? Or maybe that was silver fox again -- i never knew what her power was.

And there was a brief flash of a young black girl with white hair.. the fact that they even had a clip of her in the preview makes me think she's important...  a young storm?  i think there is some comicbook story where wolverine does meet a young storm (but i could be mixing something up).

who else did you guys/gals notice?


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Dec 16, 2008)

I have to admit while it looks cool I am peeved a bit that it is no longer the Canadian Government that is involved in Weapon X. That was always the coolest Canadian-involvement in comic books.​


----------



## Mark (Dec 16, 2008)

Looks pretty cool.  We'll see as we get closer.


----------



## Felon (Dec 16, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:


> Not exactly. Marvel's learned not to sell the rights, and they're making their own movies. But they haven't _regained_ any rights they'd already sold. Sony still has Spider-Man, and Fox (alas) still has X-Men.



Goes even farther than that. Fantastic Four, Daredevil, Ghost Rider, and some others that haven't even got movies are still optioned. 

For Marvel Studios, it's Avengers characters or bust....for now. There's even been talk of Hawkeye and Ant-Man movies.



> The Wolverine movie--for good or ill--is the product of the same studio and executives who gave us X3, not the studio that gave us Iron Man or Hulk.



Did someone other than Fox make X1 and X2, or are you just focusing on the negative?


----------



## Felon (Dec 16, 2008)

fba827 said:


> I know I am in a minority, but I have never been a fan of Wolverine, as a character.
> 
> Having said that, the trailer looks great -- but, of course, it does what a trailer is supposed to do -- clip for us several action highlights.
> 
> ...



The girl turning to crystal is probably a young Emma Frost. Don't ask me why, but for some reason some writer thought telepathy would be well-complemented by the ability to turn her body into organic diamond. The little black girl with white hair is undoubtedly Storm. For the rest, our observations sync up. 

Is that guy he's fighting at the end supposed to be Sabretooth? If so...what a letdown. They got him right in X1. They guy there looks like some lame Dracula wannabe.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Dec 16, 2008)

Felon said:


> Did someone other than Fox make X1 and X2, or are you just focusing on the negative?




I'd say the difference in quality has far more to do with Bryan Singer (_The Usual Suspects_) directing X1 and X2 and Brett Ratner (_Rush Hour_ 1-3) directing X3.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Dec 16, 2008)

Felon said:


> The girl turning to crystal is probably a young Emma Frost. Don't ask me why, but for some reason some writer thought telepathy would be well-complemented by the ability to turn her body into organic diamond.




I believe that writer was Grant Morrison. I'm not sure why he decided to do that either.

EDIT: an interesting tidbit from Wikipedia on this:



			
				Emma Frost - Wikipedia said:
			
		

> Using Frost as a character was suggested to writer Grant Morrison on his website by a fan. While writer Grant Morrison initially had no plans to use her, the death of the character Colossus left Morrison with an opening.<sup id="cite_ref-5" class="reference">[6]</sup> He created Emma's secondary mutation--a super strong diamond form--as a replacement for Colossus' powers and added her to the cast.<sup id="cite_ref-6" class="reference">[7]</sup>






Felon said:


> Is that guy he's fighting at the end supposed to be Sabretooth? If so...what a letdown. They got him right in X1. They guy there looks like some lame Dracula wannabe.




Yeah. On the one hand, the guy they've got now (Liev Schreiber) is a pretty decent actor, but on the other hand he's way too small. While I was watching the trailer, I was wondering how Sabretooth was going to grow 10 inches taller by X1.


----------



## Relique du Madde (Dec 16, 2008)

Darth Shoju said:


> I believe that writer was Grant Morrison. I'm not sure why he decided to do that either.
> .




That and it was the only way he could make her survive Genosha being blown up.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Dec 16, 2008)

Relique du Madde said:


> By the looks of it there's going to be alot of cameos.. I just pray that young Scott Summers no shows this film.




Cyclops is my favorite character, so I also hope Scott Summers is not in this film...for entirely different reasons than you do.



fba827 said:


> I know I am in a minority, but I have never been a fan of Wolverine, as a character.



Hello, friend.



Felon said:


> Did someone other than Fox make X1 and X2, or are you just focusing on the negative?




What in that list isn't the negative?



Darth Shoju said:


> I'd say the difference in quality has far more to do with Bryan Singer (_The Usual Suspects_) directing X1 and X2 and Brett Ratner (_Rush Hour_ 1-3) directing X3.




Yeah, that's probably why X3 was even worse than the first two.

*Sigh*  Guess I'll stop hating on Wolverine's big feature movie.  It's only the fourth this decade to focus on him, after all.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Dec 16, 2008)

Felon said:


> Did someone other than Fox make X1 and X2, or are you just focusing on the negative?




Sure it was Fox, but they had different studio heads, and yes, it was interference from the studio execs that caused a lot of the crap that was X3.

So for all practical purposes related to the issues in question, they might as well have been different studios.


----------



## Felon (Dec 16, 2008)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> What in that list isn't the negative?



Looking at how much both critics and audiences enjoyed all three of them, the answer is none of them should be looked at as negative. They collectively took the franchise and the genre a long way, and without them there's no Wolverine movie.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Dec 16, 2008)

See, if it was the Wolverine I knew, it would be rated "R".  Figure it will be a good movie, action and FX driven, but he will not be the hardcore berserker.


----------



## Blackrat (Dec 16, 2008)

Hand of Evil said:


> See, if it was the Wolverine I knew, it would be rated "R".  Figure it will be a good movie, action and FX driven, but he will not be the hardcore berserker.




If it were the Wolverine I knew, he'd be wearing Yellow Spandex and flip out every few minutes... Yeah, it's been a while since I've read X-men...


----------



## Felon (Dec 16, 2008)

Hand of Evil said:


> See, if it was the Wolverine I knew, it would be rated "R".  Figure it will be a good movie, action and FX driven, but he will not be the hardcore berserker.



Frank Miller is too busy screwing up the Spirit to give us his spin on Wolvie


----------



## Mark (Dec 16, 2008)

Felon said:


> Frank Miller is too busy screwing up the Spirit to give us his spin on Wolvie





I'll bet it would have had a splash of color.


----------



## Relique du Madde (Dec 16, 2008)

Blackrat said:


> Yeah, it's been a while since I've read X-men...




He still does that... but now he seems to be against others following his path and is dead set on preventing people from doing that.  That and telling Cyclops off when ever Cyclops orders him to do something "un X-man-like."


----------



## DonTadow (Dec 16, 2008)

Hand of Evil said:


> See, if it was the Wolverine I knew, it would be rated "R".  Figure it will be a good movie, action and FX driven, but he will not be the hardcore berserker.




That  was part of the reason ia hated the last movie.  I don't think u can do wolverine pg. He's a mutant with 3 sharper than anything knives on each hand.  He has a serious temper.  That begs high body count.


----------



## Wombat (Dec 18, 2008)

I watched it and went, "Wait a minute, what is Wolverine doing at D-Day?" 

Then I realized that I know next to nothing about the X-Men...

I know a few characters, far fewer villains, and little of the storyline outside of Dark Phoenix and a bit of build up to that.

That was why the first X-Men film was bad for me -- it was made entirely for people who already knew the characters.  The second X-Men film was brilliant, however, as you got to know the characters much better (and even got all their names).  

So when I was done watching this trailer my feeling was, "Which way?"

If it is made with only fans in mind, I probably won't enjoy it; if it is made with people who have only heard of the X-Men, then I may well enjoy it, much like Iron Man, Dark Knight, and other superb superhero movies.


----------



## Arnwyn (Dec 18, 2008)

Fallen Seraph said:


> I have to admit while it looks cool I am peeved a bit that it is no longer the Canadian Government that is involved in Weapon X.



So that is a definite change?

SUCK. (And a rude gesture towards Americans.)


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Dec 19, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> So that is a definite change?
> 
> SUCK. (And a rude gesture towards Americans.)



I am guessing in the comics it is still Canadian. But the uniforms and weaponry involved in the trailer are distinctly American.


----------



## Hammerhead (Dec 19, 2008)

A definite change? Striker, the guy from X2 involved in the whole Weapon X thing, was an American military officer. And you're surprised that they've kept that consistent with the new Wolverine movie?


----------



## D.Shaffer (Dec 19, 2008)

Any idea who the young individual with different eye colors was?
It rings a bell but I just cant place it.


----------



## fba827 (Dec 19, 2008)

D.Shaffer said:


> Any idea who the young individual with different eye colors was?
> It rings a bell but I just cant place it.




I didn't catch that image in the preview so I am not sure who you're talking about.  However, the one x-men character i can think of off the top of my head with different eyes is Mastermind.  He was also in X2 as Stryker's grown-up son (Jason Stryker - he was lobotomized and spinal fluid taken out and used as a tool by his father for the purpose of tricking Xavier and others).  So it could very easily be a younger version of him (Jason/Mastermind) since Stryker will be there.

(This is presuming that I am remembering correctly in the fact that Mastermind has different colored eyes)


----------



## RangerWickett (Dec 19, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> So that is a definite change?
> 
> SUCK. (And a rude gesture towards Americans.)




I thought we're supposed to punch you, and you're supposed to say, "Sorry."


----------



## Staffan (Dec 19, 2008)

Wombat said:


> I watched it and went, "Wait a minute, what is Wolverine doing at D-Day?"
> 
> Then I realized that I know next to nothing about the X-Men...



Wolverine has long been established as being _old_ (there was a comic in 1990 that showed him in flashbacks with Captain America during WW2, looking pretty much the same as he does now). His healing factor keeps him from aging. Since his mind has been messed with so many times in his life, he didn't know his early history himself. In 2001-2002, Marvel published a limited series called Origin, in which it was established that he was born in the late 19th century as James Howlett.

He got all his memories back in the aftermath of the House of M event three years ago, and since then he's had a separate comic dealng with tracking down people from his past.


----------



## Arnwyn (Dec 19, 2008)

Hammerhead said:


> A definite change? Striker, the guy from X2 involved in the whole Weapon X thing, was an American military officer. And you're surprised that they've kept that consistent with the new Wolverine movie?



Surprised? Not one little bit. Though at the time of X2 I was just going with an assumption that he worked alongside the Canadian gov't way back when the Weapon X program was active.

Don't know why they even bothered with Wolverine being in "Alberta, Canada" at the beginning of X1. Makes that kind of silly.


----------



## BadMojo (Dec 20, 2008)

Darth Shoju said:


> Yeah. On the one hand, the guy they've got now (Liev Schreiber) is a pretty decent actor, but on the other hand he's way too small. While I was watching the trailer, I was wondering how Sabretooth was going to grow 10 inches taller by X1.




Liev Schreiber is a fairly tall guy.  I don't think Sabretooth is supposed to be exceptionally tall.  He's supposed to be big guy and it does seem like Schreiber really bulked up for the role.  I didn't even recognize him in the first few seconds of his appearance in that trailer.

For what it's worth, Hugh Jackman is bout 8 inches too tall to play Wolverine.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Dec 20, 2008)

Fallen Seraph said:


> I am guessing in the comics it is still Canadian. But the uniforms and weaponry involved in the trailer are distinctly American.




It is entirely possible that the writers weren't sure what WW2 Canadian uniforms would look like (I sure don't), and/or were more worried that American audiences would wonder what this made-up pseudo D-day landing was, because that was just the US, dammit*.

And, it isn't out of the question that the Canadians use American equipment; the Poles and Free French sure did, and the British used a lot of American tanks.  That's probably enough of a fig leaf for them.

Nifty looking trailer, though, and I'll probably go see it.  But I really did think Tyler Mane looked more like Sabertooth should.

Gambit can go hang himself, though.

* - Yes, I know the Canadians had a beach.  And enough people probably do, too.  But still.

Brad


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Dec 20, 2008)

I am talking more about the modern stuff, like the Humvee and the uniform of the trying to sign Logan up for Weapon-X.

Though now that you mention it, it be great to have Wolverine at Juno Beach with the Canadians since we were the only ones to reach their final objective on D-Day. Sooo... Wolverine could have played a role in that


----------



## Darth Shoju (Dec 21, 2008)

BadMojo said:


> Liev Schreiber is a fairly tall guy.  I don't think Sabretooth is supposed to be exceptionally tall.  He's supposed to be big guy and it does seem like Schreiber really bulked up for the role.  I didn't even recognize him in the first few seconds of his appearance in that trailer.




I don't think he's that tall in the comics, but they made sure he was in the first movie (I believe they put lifts in Tyler Mane's boots to make him 7' instead of his usual measly 6'10  ).



BadMojo said:


> For what it's worth, Hugh Jackman is bout 8 inches too tall to play Wolverine.




LOL I agree. It was a minor peeve of mine with the movie. At least they had James Marsden stand on a box so Cyclops wouldn't be shorter than little old " 5'3 " Wolverine.


----------



## Staffan (Dec 21, 2008)

Darth Shoju said:


> I don't think he's that tall in the comics,



6'6" according to Sabretooth


----------



## frankthedm (Apr 30, 2009)

So anybody seen prescreenings? Ones WITH the special effects added in .


----------



## Relique du Madde (Apr 30, 2009)

frankthedm said:


> So anybody seen prescreenings? Ones WITH the special effects added in .




I heard somewhere that there was like 4 different cuts with alternate endings existence (including the leaked one), so who knows which is the final one that was released.


----------



## CAFRedblade (Apr 30, 2009)

Based on this article from last week on aintitcoolnews.com someone has seen a finished 
copy of the movie.
UPDATED!! The Finished/Theatrical Version Of WOLVERINE Has Been Seen!! Just How Different Is It From That Workprint?? -- Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.
and it looks like the leaked version was the final cut minus the final cgi effects and probably some finalized audio (music/foley)  
I'll wait for some full reviews and determine if it's worth a $6 dollar (canadian) matinee,
certainly won't be worth $12 apparently from comments I've read about the leaked version.


----------



## Arnwyn (Apr 30, 2009)

From my local paper (and attributed to The Associated Press):

"Director Gavin Hood says the theatrical version of _X-Men Origins: Wolverine_ features two different "Easter egg" endings. The short bits of footage play after the credits and reveal important information about key characters. Hood says the two endings play on separate prints, so different theatres may show different footage."

And a link for the wankers who don't believe something is real unless it can be "linked" to:
Theatrical `Wolverine' promises secret endings


My editorial comment: That is ing stupid.


----------



## Zaukrie (Apr 30, 2009)

That's just stupid.


----------



## DonTadow (May 1, 2009)

Really didn't like it. The pacing seemed off and the story reached greater convuluted moments than the marvel material its loosely based on.  Characters just seemed to disappear at times and everyone seemed miscast.  

this movie kinda reminded me of mortal kombat 2.  Where they just wanted to introduce a lot of different fights without any story.


----------



## frankthedm (May 1, 2009)

I liked it up until the silly End Boss.


----------



## dravot (May 2, 2009)

It was ok, not great.  It started off slow and ponderous, which is an easy trap for any superhero film which does an origin.

Action scenes were fun, and well done.


----------



## RangerWickett (May 2, 2009)

Posted also in the other thread: 

I enjoyed 1/3 of this movie, but the parts with the love story, or anything involving the actual Weapon-X program (or mini-mutant island) was painful to watch. I walked out 15 minutes from the end.

It's like there were two directors. One knew how to tell a story, and one just tossed stuff onto the screen with no regard to establishing a consistent tone or narrative arc for the movie.

I feel the movie would have been much better if the Wolverine vs. Sabertooth storyline had taken place in the modern time (after the previous X-Men movies), with flashbacks to the earlier stuff. That way you could, y'know, resolve the storyline. 

If you thought X-3 was bad, don't go see this one either. It's a little better, but it's not good. Please help me atone for the fact that I gave Fox money for this piece of 1/3 toffee, 2/3 crap.


----------



## Richards (May 2, 2009)

But RangerWickett, how can you be sure about your percentages if you didn't even watch the last 15 minutes of the movie?  What if those 15 minutes were "super-toffee" -- wouldn't that throw off your ratio?  And now, _you'll never know for certain_.

Silly Ewok.  

Johnathan


----------



## Mark (May 2, 2009)

`Wolverine' has box-office bite with $35M debut


----------



## TheNovaLord (May 3, 2009)

It was about 7/10

pacing was indeed horrid

Gambit was thankfully 'pretty kewl'

there is a bit just after the credits start and another bit right at the end.


----------



## catsclaw227 (May 3, 2009)

Meh.... it was OK. 6/10.  Typical summer fare, but it didn't grab me.

The bit I saw just after the credit start was with Stryker getting jacked.  Was there something else too?

Heck, I can't even remember parts of the film, it was that forgettable.


----------



## stonegod (May 4, 2009)

catsclaw227 said:


> Meh.... it was OK. 6/10.  Typical summer fare, but it didn't grab me.
> 
> The bit I saw just after the credit start was with Stryker getting jacked.  Was there something else too?



That part was common to all prints.

There are two bonuses that could come after all the credits:[sblock]Deadpool grabs his head and it shushes the camera (breaking the 4th wall) *or* Wolverine in Japan drinking to remember.[/sblock]


----------



## Bullgrit (May 4, 2009)

> Deadpool grabs his head and it shushes the camera (breaking the 4th wall)



See, now *that* would have been worth sitting and waiting for.



> or Wolverine in Japan drinking to remember.



But this is what I got, and it wasn't worth waiting for.

Bullgrit


----------



## Hand of Evil (May 5, 2009)

Hated the ending clip, as I said, should of had Wolverine running into Bruce Banner in an out of the way bar/dinner in Canada.


----------



## campbellr14 (May 8, 2009)

I would give it 6/10. It was fun to watch but they really ruined Deadpool. I think Liev Schreiber as Sabretooth was my favorite part of the whole movie.


----------



## shilsen (May 9, 2009)

I just saw the movie yesterday and it's right up (down?) there as one of the worst superhero movies I've ever seen.


----------



## Mallus (May 9, 2009)

shilsen said:


> I just saw the movie yesterday and it's right up (down?) there as one of the worst superhero movies I've ever seen.



That was God's way of punishing you for not seeing Star Trek, shil. Now go see Star Trek!


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (May 10, 2009)

Bullgrit said:


> See, now *that* would have been worth sitting and waiting for.




It wasn't.

I expected the movie to be an abomination that would have me both clawing my eyes out and wishing for death.  At least, that's what the geek reviews said.  Instead, I was pleasantly surprised.

Not to say that it was good by any stretch of the imagination.  But Hugh Jackman and Liev Schrieber really, really tried, and it showed.  If they'd had a good plot and writing to work with, it'd've probably kicked ass, even though Schrieber doesn't look like the comic book Sabertooth at all.

Brad


----------



## shilsen (May 10, 2009)

Mallus said:


> That was God's way of punishing you for not seeing Star Trek, shil. Now go see Star Trek!



Thank you. I see my error now, and it shall speedily be rectified.


----------



## Mallus (May 10, 2009)

shilsen said:


> I see my error now, and it shall speedily be rectified.



Good. 

Now get thee to Starfleet Academy.


----------

