# Saw the new Wolverine film today



## vampiregenocide (May 2, 2009)

Gotta say, pretty damn epic. Better than the X-Men films (well maybe one of two of em). Has a lot of action, many cameos (some kinda pointless) and goes into Wolverines backstory nicely.

Admittidly, the story is an amalgamation of several storylines, a pick abd choose if you will. It would've been cooler to see more of Logan's time during the wars etc, and none of his time in Japan was featured at all.

But the one thing that bothered me, despite the epicness, was Deadpool. His incarnation in this film was nothing like the comics. I'm not going to go into in it in great detail, but he was essentially Deadpool in name only. He should've just been called Weapon XI as he was. It kinda raped a good character just for their name. Oh well.

I'd still se it if you haven't it is a good film. Wish I could say I was as optimistic about Dragonball (still haven't seen that).


----------



## MFB (May 2, 2009)

Really? I found it to be awful and really not worth even seeing. Dragonball is the worst piece of shit to hit theaters since Gigli. Don't even bother bootlegging it.


----------



## Triple-J (May 2, 2009)

vampiregenocide said:


> It kinda raped a good character just for their name. Oh well.



That's my problem with Marvel movies in general as that's all they seem to have done with most of the X-men (and other Marvel) characters.

For example I'm a big fan of Nightcrawler and I just don't get how they gave him what is arguably the best fight scene in the X-men series at the start of X2 then made him seem like an idiot for the rest of the movie, and don't even get me started on "Galactus" in Fantastic Four 2 and the stupid Re-boot thing they have with Hulk and the Punisher! 

I've really lost faith in Marvel movies recently and feel their best is in the past (X1 + X2) plus I feel the rate they are knocking them out at could possibly create a comic book movie backlash, ultimately I'm not expecting much except an average action movie with Wolverine in but you know what?.............I'll go and see it anyway


----------



## MFB (May 2, 2009)

Weapon XI was more like WolverDeadClops 

Not to mention the serious plothole of :



Spoiler



If Logan rescues all of them as kids like Cyclops and what have you, then why in X1 does he not recognize the voice or any likeness of Wolverine? The man SAVED YOUR LIFE


----------



## soliloquy (May 3, 2009)

one thing i was turned off from was the graphics. this is the year 2009, yet it seemed the graphics are from the 1980s. some of the things, like when logan is bouncing over the water, or when he pulls out his metal claws the lighting just doesn't belong in that area. like, some of the added graphics seemed too bright, or not bright enough, and they moved rather awkwardly.

i'm glad they brought out gambits characater FINALLY!!! but i'm sad that they never mentioned him in part one or any of the X-MEN movies. and i'm sad that they didnt make him as cool






ALSO, apparently each movie print has a different secret ending. as in, say you're in a theatre that has 20 theatres, and out of which, 10 are showing wolverine. all 10 or was it 8? will have a different secret ending after the credits. i HATE x-men for doing this! part 3's secret ending was a disgusting cliff hanger that STILL has me waiting to find out what happens next. 

anyways, if you saw the secret ending, write it here:

highlight the box


Spoiler



i got the ending that showed the sword of deadpool retrading back into his arm. then his arm twiches about, and finds his head. shortly after, the beheaded deadpool opens his eyes, and whispers 'shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!' odd ending


----------



## MFB (May 3, 2009)

Weren't they doing a Deadpool movie seperate?



Spoiler



But if so this totally fucks up _everything_ for the possibility of that cause everyone seems him die...for the most part


----------



## Spinedriver (May 3, 2009)

MFB said:


> Weren't they doing a Deadpool movie seperate?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I believe that Ryan Reynolds wants to make a Deadpool movie but I don't believe that anything's 'official' as of yet. Not only that, apparently Marvel is more or less using each movie to launch another. For example, in the next couple of years, they're releasing Thor and Captain America movies as a build up to the Avengers movie set for 2012. My guess is that they put Deadpool and Gambit in the Wolverine movie to see how they 'test' with the audience and based on whatever 'feedback' the studio gets off of message board sites and the like, they can decide whether or not to make spinoff movies with those characters.


----------



## vampiregenocide (May 3, 2009)

If they do make a Deadpool film, they've still fucked up the character. Even with the alternate ending, they'd still be hard pressed to make it the recognisable Deadpool we know.

The effects weren't as good as I expected either, I think they went a bit over board with that.

I think the thing is, Marvel know we're going to go and see these films, because as pessimistic as we might be, we want to. And because of that, they want to stretch things out as much as they can. It might involve destorying plotlines and characters, but they know they'll make money anyway.


Heres an interesting question, name one Marvel film that was faithful and you really enjoyed?


----------



## soliloquy (May 3, 2009)

they are making a thor movie? as nice as that sounds, i think they will ruin it. why? thors world isnt earth. unless they make the movie similar to 300, the movie will not fly. and even if they do make it like 300, chances are, it still wont look good. a good example being the watchmen, and the spirit. they both were horrible...


----------



## Scar Symmetry (May 3, 2009)

I thought it was cool, but there was something missing that I couldn't put my finger on...

still cool though


----------



## TomAwesome (May 3, 2009)

MFB said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> If Logan rescues all of them as kids like Cyclops and what have you, then why in X1 does he not recognize the voice or any likeness of Wolverine? The man SAVED YOUR LIFE



Well,


Spoiler



Cyclops had that pad over his eyes or whatever that was, so he wouldn't have seen him, and they were only following him very briefly, so it's unlikely that he heard Wolverine talking much.





soliloquy said:


> anyways, if you saw the secret ending, write it here





Spoiler



The one I saw was Logan sitting at a bar in what appeared to be Japan. His exchange with the girl behind the bar was something like:

"Are you American?"
"Canadian... I think."
"Are you drinking to forget?"
"No. I'm drinking to remember."


----------



## MFB (May 3, 2009)

Yeah I guess you're right but still it also seems like someone thought the same thing and then said 



Spoiler



"What if we make him lose his memory?! He can be called James in the beginning and then he'll be called...Logan afterwards!" I mean c'mon, what the fuck was up with that. Not to mention if he did really forget then why was the ending to that "I'm drinking to remember" when clearly you can't!



Also, I think it was Soliloguy (I fucked up the name I know) who said that Thor's world wasn't Earth? The plotline of the comics is that Thor is to be taught humility and he's placed in the body of a disabled medical student named Donald Blake. Much of the comic took place on Earth.



> Being the son of the Elder Goddess Gaea, Thor has a natural affinity for Earth and feels obliged to protect the mortals that occupy it. Thor's time on Earth is marked by battles against supervillains, monsters, cosmic beings, and even other gods.


----------



## TomAwesome (May 3, 2009)

MFB said:


> Yeah I guess you're right but still it also seems like someone thought the same thing and then said
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



Yeah, I thought the name thing was weird, too. It confused me in the opening scene. As far as the "drinking to remember" part, I don't think he remembers being shot in the head and having his memories physically destroyed.


----------



## sakeido (May 3, 2009)

I saw Wolverine on Friday and thought it was fucking horrible. It was even worse than X3. Could not in any way be compared to the first two X-Men movies.. it had bad effects, horrible plot, most of the fight scenes were pretty lackluster, and it was unintentionally funny for much of its running time. I am choked I paid to see it because I just gave money to the studio for making such a steaming pile of shit movie. 

I really feel bad for Hugh Jackman and Liev Schreiber, since I thought they were both great, but the rest of the movie was just so horrible they couldn't save it. Also, completely inexplicably, the effects sucked. I've seen five year old movies with more convincing CGI graphics than what you see in this movie.


----------



## TemjinStrife (May 3, 2009)

sakeido said:


> I saw Wolverine on Friday and thought it was fucking horrible. It was even worse than X3. Could not in any way be compared to the first two X-Men movies.. it had bad effects, horrible plot, most of the fight scenes were pretty lackluster, and it was unintentionally funny for much of its running time. I am choked I paid to see it because I just gave money to the studio for making such a steaming pile of shit movie.
> 
> I really feel bad for Hugh Jackman and Liev Schreiber, since I thought they were both great, but the rest of the movie was just so horrible they couldn't save it. Also, completely inexplicably, the effects sucked. I've seen five year old movies with more convincing CGI graphics than what you see in this movie.



Agreed on all counts.


----------



## CentaurPorn (May 3, 2009)

Thought the movie was better than any of the others. *shrug* I too thought the effects were a little lackluster. Other than that I do not have too many complaints.


----------



## GH0STrider (May 4, 2009)

I'm surprised they spent so much money on getting a big name like Ryan Reynolds to play dealpool only to have him in the movie for a whopping 15 minutes. lame... 

I agree the effects were pretty lame too. Could have been much better.


----------



## Xaios (May 5, 2009)

Saw it on opening night. Yes, the plot was a continuity and logic black hole, but it was still fun to watch.


----------



## synrgy (May 5, 2009)

Well, it was better than I expected it to be!!

A little campy? Maybe, but then again we are talking about a Marvel superhero/storyline here. I think people forget how cheesy most of the comics are -- especially the plots and dialog. I mean, let's be honest -- they made a relatively entertaining hour and a half out of a character who hasn't said much more than 'bub' or some halfway decent one liners in his 20-30 some odd years of existence.

Dragonball doesn't completely suck ass either, if you really do enjoy the story. They took some liberties (as Hollywood always does) but for the most part it wasn't the lube-less ass-raping of the franchise that I was expecting.


----------



## vampiregenocide (May 5, 2009)

synrgy said:


> Dragonball doesn't completely suck ass either, if you really do enjoy the story. They took some liberties (as Hollywood always does) but for the most part it wasn't the lube-less ass-raping of the franchise that I was expecting.



Wow really? You're the first person I've heard say smething positive about it.

From the trailers, I was half expecting them to get Zac Efron as Vegeta and bring an album out with the sequel. But you fill me with hope kind sir


----------



## synrgy (May 5, 2009)

vampiregenocide said:


> Wow really? You're the first person I've heard say smething positive about it.
> 
> From the trailers, I was half expecting them to get Zac Efron as Vegeta and bring an album out with the sequel. But you fill me with hope kind sir



Eek! Don't let me fill you with hope!!

It's not great. It just isn't _vomit inducing awful_, which is what I was expecting. I mean, it's rated PG, so there's only so much you can expect in terms of a 'mature' story-arc, and let's face it -- the dragonball plot is just a carbon copy of practically every other action/epic plot, where you have a 'chosen one' type of character who has to rise from nothing to be the greatest and save the world, blah blah blah.

Anyway, there were enough redeemable qualities that *I* enjoyed it, but I wouldn't expect too many other people to.


----------



## vampiregenocide (May 5, 2009)

synrgy said:


> Eek! Don't let me fill you with hope!!
> 
> It's not great. It just isn't _vomit inducing awful_, which is what I was expecting. I mean, it's rated PG, so there's only so much you can expect in terms of a 'mature' story-arc, and let's face it -- the dragonball plot is just a carbon copy of practically every other action/epic plot, where you have a 'chosen one' type of character who has to rise from nothing to be the greatest and save the world, blah blah blah.
> 
> Anyway, there were enough redeemable qualities that *I* enjoyed it, but I wouldn't expect too many other people to.



Awww it was nice to be hopeful  Though brief it was


----------



## synrgy (May 5, 2009)

vampiregenocide said:


> Awww it was nice to be hopeful  Though brief it was



If you really enjoyed the cartoon, you should find enough in the movie to enjoy. (I particularly liked Chow Yun Fat as Master Roshi..)

If you only casually enjoyed the cartoon, there's probably not enough to keep you interested.


----------



## silentrage (May 5, 2009)

Lawl, Dragon Ball Z - "Better than lubeless assraping."


----------



## AVWIII (May 7, 2009)

Oh Wolverine...
Loved the beginning. 
But other than that it felt like a tacked-on XxX sequel. Why get a bunch of cool actors when you use them for five minutes a piece when you can just cast Vin Diesel as everybody? 
It had the formula. Tiny amount of character development and then wham! Explosion! Motorcycle jump!
I'm not asking the Coen brothers to hop on board or anything. I just reallllly liked the way they were going with the first two X-Men movies. Wolverine was like a Schumacher batman in comparison.


Spoiler



And I swear to god if they keep the eye blasts and the lame retractable katanas in the deadpool movie...


----------



## bostjan (May 7, 2009)

I saw it. Evidently I look like Sabertooth Victor.

It was a pretty decent comic flick IMO. 

Although it didn't jive with the comics.


----------



## AK DRAGON (May 8, 2009)

If you have no knowledge of the Marvel universe it was an OK film

Plot line... there was a plot? heh wouldn't even call it a story
action... some action 
artistic license? stretched that MOFO way out in left field


----------



## Pauly (May 8, 2009)

Being a geek I hated it, especially with the way they raped Deadpool's character since he's one of my fave characters!

Also, fucking LOL at CGI Patrick Stewart at the end, wtf?!?


----------



## vampiregenocide (May 8, 2009)

Pauly said:


> Being a geek I hated it, especially with the way they raped Deadpool's character since he's one of my fave characters!
> 
> Also, fucking LOL at CGI Patrick Stewart at the end, wtf?!?



I dno, I thought it was a great film aside from Deadpool (which to be fair, was only the end of the film) and the sub-par CGI.


----------



## playstopause (May 8, 2009)

Every critic I read about this film is baaad. Ok, they're to be taken with a grain of salt but it's pretty unanimous : it sucks.


----------



## Rick (May 11, 2009)

Badass movie. Can't wait for the sequel, can't wait for Deadpool, and I hope they make a Gambit movie.


----------



## OrsusMetal (May 11, 2009)

I've seen it twice now, the 2nd time being tonight. You really notice how shitty the special effects are the 2nd time. I mean it's very apparent the first time, but they just pop out even more the 2nd.

Really the best part of the movie was the beginning when the team was together. Wade is awesome. I too was very disappointed that Deadpool was in so little of the film. When I saw who was playing him on Imdb when the film was being shot, I was stoked the chose Ryan because I thought he would play him perfectly. So I'm definately looking forward to the Deadpool movie.

Anyone else find it a little weird that Weapon XI (Wade) was played by a different actor?


----------



## kazzie (May 11, 2009)

I haven't seen it yet simply because I'm scared...I mean, look what they did with the third movie, or the timeline in general...



Is emma frost in this? because they better have picked the hottest babe out there...!


----------



## Scar Symmetry (May 11, 2009)

kazzie said:


> I haven't seen it yet simply because I'm scared...I mean, look what they did with the third movie, or the timeline in general...
> 
> 
> 
> Is emma frost in this? because they better have picked the hottest babe out there...!



it ain't great, but it ain't bad either 

it doesn't have Emma Frost in this, but as far as hot babes go, it has Lynn Collins in, who is tres tasty


----------



## MFB (May 12, 2009)

Um, Emma Frost is in it?  She's even mentioned in the trailer

...and she's _not hot_


----------



## Scar Symmetry (May 12, 2009)

so she is


----------



## DDDorian (May 12, 2009)

They really, really fucked up Deadpool, to the point where I'm not gonna bother with the standalone movie. Hopefully the Magneto movie is as cool as it sounds (if it's even still in production).

On a vaguely related note, the new Wolverine game based on the movie is really damn good. Shameless rip-off of God Of War, but it does it really well, and the Sabretooth fights kick buttock. The story also manages to be way better than the one in the movie, despite ostensibly being the same. Get it.


----------



## 777timesgod (May 12, 2009)

Hanev't seen the film but from what i heard it is better than the X-men flicks. Not that this comment makes it good...


----------



## synrgy (May 12, 2009)

Okay okay okay..

WHAT are you guys all being so whiny about when it comes to Deadpool?

I'm honestly curious. I'm only familiar with the Deadpool character as he related to X-Force back when Rob Leifield was drawing it. In his 5-10 some odd minutes of screen time in this movie, Deadpool had more depth than he EVER had in those comics.

GRANTED, I never read any Deadpool comics (assuming they exist? I never saw one on the shelves, ever..) but come on... What the fuck did they do that was so awful? In the X-Force comics I used to read, he was just a dude in a red suit who didn't do anything but stand there, not speak a single word, and look cool. I think he might have fired a gun _once_.........

I could understand if it were a better known/more developed character, but you guys are all pissing and moaning about this movie 'screwing up' a character that never had any character in the first place!!


----------



## vampiregenocide (May 12, 2009)

Deadpool is more then just a random character. Sometimes he's used as just a filler in some other comics, and they don't bother to flesh out his character much.

But in his own comics, he is one of the few comic book characters to break the fourth wall (he knows he is in a comic book) and engages with the audience. He has some really great lines, and Reynolds character n the film reflects what he is like in the comics (up to a point).

We're 'pissy and moany' because Deadpool had the potential to be a great character and that was kinda ruined. You can't really say that kinda stuff when you've only read a few comics with him man lol Deadpool is an underrated character, he's worth checking out more


----------



## synrgy (May 12, 2009)

vampiregenocide said:


> We're 'pissy and moany' because Deadpool had the potential to be a great character and that was kinda ruined. You can't really say that kinda stuff when you've only read a few comics with him man lol Deadpool is an underrated character, he's worth checking out more



But this wasn't the Deadpool movie -- It was the Wolverine movie. So basically, you're saying you're mad because what they did with his character in this movie is exactly what they did with him in all the comics except the ones that were based solely on his character, right? You even said that the parts where Reynolds was playing him were pretty close to being spot on, so again -- where is the problem?

If this movie screwed up the Wolverine character and that was your complaint, that would make more sense to me.

It's like people complaining that the Star Trek movie didn't feature enough of the Romulan villain. The movie wasn't called "Nero" -- it was called "Star Trek". You've basically got 90 minutes to tell a story. You can't spend 30-40 of those minutes focusing on a character that the audience isn't really supposed to identify with.


----------



## DDDorian (May 12, 2009)

I couldn't care less about Wolverine at this point, to be honest. This is movie number four for him, there's not a lot else to be said. The whole reason I watched it was because they announced there'd be a Deadpool spin-off if it did well and I wanted to see their take. I saw their take, and it was a totally different character with Deadpool's name slapped on. I didn't expect them to dedicate the movie to him or anything, just... yknow, not fuck him up. I understand there probably wasn't a place in this or any other movie for a character that is essentially Deathstroke: 4chan Edition, but if that's the case, why include him at all? Weapon XI already existed, they just slapped Deadpool's name on there for no real reason.


----------



## Uber Mega (May 12, 2009)

Saw this the other day, after reading recent reviews I went in with fairly low expectations...and it still somehow managed to be disappointing. Just a bad movie IMO.

The split-second cameo by Daniel Negreanu at the poker table was the highlight for me


----------



## synrgy (May 12, 2009)

DDDorian said:


> I couldn't care less about Wolverine at this point, to be honest.



Then you shouldn't have gone to see a movie about him.


----------



## DDDorian (May 12, 2009)

Who says I did? 

Anyway, I didn't say the movie as a whole wasn't worth watching; people have been bashing it for the hackneyed story and for being little more than a bunch of action scenes. So what? It's a comic book movie, for christ's sake. Anything more than a bunch of superpowered dorks duking it out and the occasional one-liner should be considered a bonus. The CGI sucked (it was Jackman's production company's first big film, and it shows) but the set pieces were fun. Dumb, forgettable fun. 

I keep harping on about Deadpool because it was made clear months ago that they'd be testing the waters for a Deadpool spin-off with the Wolverine movie (which was always guaranteed to print money so it was a mere formality, really) so I went in expecting to see the deranged cancer-striken mercenery with the indescribably strange voice and instead got


Spoiler



a goddamn puppet Megaman thing with retractable katanas in his arms


. I expect different things from a Deadpool movie than I would from a Wolverine film and this sets a bad precedent.


----------



## synrgy (May 12, 2009)

My best guess is that if they do a Deadpool movie, it's going to be different, possibly avoiding the angle portrayed in the Wolverine movie alltogether. Marvel's been doing stuff like that since forever, usually citing "it's a different timeline" as the excuse. 

I mean seriously -- the bits Ryan Reynolds played could make a movie. The bits after (_all the stuff I don't want to spoil_) happened could not. That'd be like "*Nell*: the Action Movie" or something. There's no way they could market the Deadpool from the end of the Wolverine movie, and they know that, I think.

I have another key point about this film's portrayal of the character, as soon as somebody tells me how to do the highlighted green text that people have to scroll over to read.


----------



## MFB (May 12, 2009)

Ryan Reynolds did a good job as Wade, _not_ Deadpool because his part wasn't _cast_ as Deadpool; he was before the shit hit the fan. But what they did to what was _supposed_ to be Deadpool is what people were upset about. We were told we would have a good, honest depicition of Deadpool and they barely made good on half their promise considering how little time Reynolds really got  Once you see the ending fight you realize that they decided to go back on it and really fucked up their credibility with a lot of the comic fans for that call because he became Weapon XI instead of Deadpool (this is also further emphasized in the after the credit parts*)

*


Spoiler



With Weapon XI they decided to make him this huge clusterfuck of other mutants that seems invinceable which by today's standards is pretty/very cliche because then you know what happens? They obviously bring in another character from earlier movie and they reunite to take down the "true" villain. Deadpool is known as the "Merc with a mouth" - he's witty, breaks the fourth wall, and still is completely kickass despite being a total ripoff of another character (Deathstroke aka Slade from Teen Titans). What many thought was Deadpool had no speaking ability, retractable katanas (srsly, what the fuck?) and was just lame for a final fight.


----------



## vampiregenocide (May 12, 2009)

synrgy said:


> But this wasn't the Deadpool movie -- It was the Wolverine movie. So basically, you're saying you're mad because what they did with his character in this movie is exactly what they did with him in all the comics except the ones that were based solely on his character, right? You even said that the parts where Reynolds was playing him were pretty close to being spot on, so again -- where is the problem?
> 
> If this movie screwed up the Wolverine character and that was your complaint, that would make more sense to me.


 
At least in the comics, Deadpool was always Deadpool. In the film, it was basically Deadpool in name only. It was a names drop for the sake of it. Sure, it may be a Wolverine film, but that doesn't mean you should screw with all the other characters man. The title character isn't the only one you shoudl worry about. Everyone else in teh film I thougth was awesome, just Deadpool bothered me because I saw so much potential in Reynolds first action scene, it was a bit of a minfuck when I saw what they did to him.



synrgy said:


> My best guess is that if they do a Deadpool movie, it's going to be different, possibly avoiding the angle portrayed in the Wolverine movie alltogether. Marvel's been doing stuff like that since forever, usually citing "it's a different timeline" as the excuse.
> 
> I mean seriously -- the bits Ryan Reynolds played could make a movie. The bits after (_all the stuff I don't want to spoil_) happened could not. That'd be like "*Nell*: the Action Movie" or something. There's no way they could market the Deadpool from the end of the Wolverine movie, and they know that, I think.
> 
> I have another key point about this film's portrayal of the character, as soon as somebody tells me how to do the highlighted green text that people have to scroll over to read.



I agree with all you just said there though. Reynolds said the character he played was not Deadpool, but what would become Deadpool. They gotta fix the retractable katanas and cyclops beams though lol


----------



## Marv Attaxx (May 12, 2009)

I just came back from the cinema...it think it was quite boring 
The story didn't exist, the effects were bad and the characters pretty weak...
If you want to see a good movie, go watch star trek instead!!


----------



## SargeantVomit (May 12, 2009)

Did they even call him Deadpool in the movie? All the other forums I'm on have been repeating "Weapon 11 and Deadpool are completely different characters, don't mix them up". 

I saw the movie, and although I don't read the comics I always watched the cartoons and thought some stuff sucked. 

1)What the fuck was up with them being born mutants? I always thought Wolverine was a normal human until he was experimented on against his will. 

2)Gambit was definitely not mysterious or as cool as he was in the cartoons. 

3)Sabertooth could have looked.......more like sabertooth.


----------



## DDDorian (May 12, 2009)

^^Yeah, they call him "Deadpool" because he "pools" the powers of dead mutants, has nothing to do with the death pool from the comics at all.

I do agree about points 2 and 3. There's a Gambit movie coming too I think, so maybe that'll be neat. I don't think I'll have the patience for another comic movie by then though



synrgy said:


> My best guess is that if they do a Deadpool movie, it's going to be different, possibly avoiding the angle portrayed in the Wolverine movie alltogether. Marvel's been doing stuff like that since forever, usually citing "it's a different timeline" as the excuse.



Nope, they've already put out a press release green-lighting the Deadpool movie that makes it clear that ol' Weapon XI is the inspiration. It's what prompted me to post in the first place.

Oh, and the spoiler bars are done with [.spoiler.] [/.spoiler.] around the relevant text, minus the dots.


----------



## silentrage (May 12, 2009)

Isn't wolverine born with mutant healing? His adamantium skeleton and claws are not so much a power as a tool. 
He could just shove some Uranium in his butt and kill everyone within 10 miles that way too, but what's the fun in that.


----------



## Volsung (May 12, 2009)

As a die-hard fan of all things X-Men for 15/16ths of my life (thus making me a bit of a nerd), the movies storyline was one of the most frustraiting things. 

I mean come on...


Spoiler



having Wolverine and Sabretooth as BROTHERS!? Are you kidding me? The writers must have tried really hard to NOT be creative.  

Not to mention having Wolverine's memory blanked out by a bullet. The whole build up with the gun with 'special bullets' was grade school average at best.



The action bits and overall plot were pretty un-inspired. Which is a shame seeing as how the first two flicks kept a pretty good pase of both (oh...they've got their moments/plot lines that were just pathetic, but I don't think anyone wants to listen to a load of geek-talk).

That said, I did get _a bit_ joy out of the film. Jackman, Schreiber, and Reynolds (in all of his 5 minutes) did do a good job. Everyone else was either average or horrible (like those children in the begining )

I'd watch it again, but I'd wait till it came out on cable before doing so. 

OK. I think that's all of my complaining.


----------



## GH0STrider (May 14, 2009)

but they are brothers... they were in the comics and in the cartoon


----------



## vampiregenocide (May 14, 2009)

GH0STrider said:


> but they are brothers... they were in the comics and in the cartoon



In some comics Sabretooth was his son, and in some it was the other way around 

Marvel have always had some continuity issues.


----------



## Triple-J (May 14, 2009)

Chris Claremont originally intended for Sabretooth to be Wolverine's father but he never got around to telling the story. 
The 2001/2002 "Wolverine:Origin" graphic novel has them as brothers with a year or two between them in age as they are friends in the book but unaware they are related, Sabretooth doesn't have a proper name and is called Dog(don't ask!) Wolverine is called James it's the father of them both who is known as Logan.

It's a pretty good story that clears a lot up about their relationship and is quite sad in places (similar to the flashback scenes in Batman Begins) imo it would make a great standalone movie but they've already butchered quite a bit of it for the Wolverine movie.


----------



## technomancer (May 15, 2009)

Haven't seen this yet, but Wolverine was always a mutant, his ability was his healing factor and IIRC he had claws, they were just bone instead of adamantium. The Weapon X project just laced his skeleton with adamantium.


----------



## vampiregenocide (May 15, 2009)

technomancer said:


> Haven't seen this yet, but Wolverine was always a mutant, his ability was his healing factor and IIRC he had claws, they were just bone instead of adamantium. The Weapon X project just laced his skeleton with adamantium.



Yeah, the healing factor was necessary for the operation to be a success. He is the only person who could survive it.


----------



## silentrage (May 15, 2009)

I always wondered how his claws work, are they spring or gas operated? Or does he have some tentons and muscles specifically for them?


----------

