WARNING: This entry contains spoilers.
NOTE: Originally posted here. I edited this entry and updated some info. I also took out screencaps that are NSFW to avoid any shit. But if you wanna see them (especially the screencaps of Hugh Jackman's ass) do check out the original review in my blog.
Like most people I was REALLY looking forward to seeing it. I didn't read any literature about the story so I won't be prejudiced when I see the movie. But STILL, it failed to WOW me.
The only things I loved about it are:
1. The few glimpses of Hugh Jackman's ass. (photo posted @ Nuninuninu)
2. Several shots of Hugh Jackman's HOTT HOTT HOTT bod
3. Several shots of Hugh Jackman half-naked (photo posted @ Nuninuninu)
4. Hugh Jackman wearing tight tank tops roaring like a sexy, sweaty, and totally hunkalicious mad man.
5. There's also the treat of seeing Ryan Reynolds half-naked (hairless this time!), and staring at Daniel Henney's lovely smile.
6. Oh, and have I mentioned that Hugh Jackman has got a HOTT HOTT ass? (even when he's wearing denim pants!) (photo posted @ Nuninuninu)
What I think about the movie:
1. I've seen better story lines from Pixar
Actually Pixar DOES have GREAT stories and they are always well told: simple but well thought of.
X-Men has a very compelling story that has transcended the years and have made it relevant no mater what decade it's being told. Their themes on social discrimination has always been relatable to underdogs of varying milieu.
Wolverine has one of the most touching stories as well: a diamond in the rough, a man who is at conflict with his nature. He's a brute with a very humane soul. And his story chronicles how he has become a victim of his times.
But watching it from the movie, I was barely able to feel the pain!
It's all "AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH" TUSOK! "RRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAARRRGGGHHHHH" patay!
They were laid out as if to tell the viewers that: "Okay, this happened first. Okay, that's done, then the next scene is this, and then this, and then this..."
There was no flavor; no elaborations on themes like the growing moral conflict within Wolverine when he joined Striker's team, no color in how significant his relationship was with Kayla, or how difficult it was for him to live a normal life seeing the many complications of his condition, the anger, the sorrow, the heartbreaking discovery of finding your loved one killed...
The snippets of Logan's life were laid off as if you were just looking at album photos... It's just so bland, there's no build up to it. What a way to massacre a good material.
2. I've seen better action direction and action scenes from Die Hard.
I never felt that Die Hard was a "story movie". People watched it because of the testosterone/adrenaline-inducing action scenes. And in fairness to the producers, the last installment was like their last and most glorious hurrah in creating over-the-top, hard-to-believe, pakshet-angas action scenes.
Wolverine did some ambitious scenes and tried to achieve some bigness in the action scenes (like Wolverine taking down a helicopter - yuck! so Van Dame - or the battle scene on top of the nuclear reactor thingy). I really saw the effort, but I feel that something was lost in the execution. They were potentially great scenes but they were just so bland. In fact, they were so bland, they made the scenes corny.
The most disgustingly corny scene was when Wolverine ignites the gas trail leading to the helicopter; they go to long shot: Wolverine walking cooly away from the helicopter as the helicopter EXPLODES as if several bombs were planted in the vehicle! ARGH so Antonio Banderas in Desperado
3. "The Never-ending Story" had better Visual effects.
Okay, that's an exaggeration. HOWEVER for it's time, Never-ending Story had great visuals! X-Men Origins' effects, on the other hand, were poorly executed!
The quality takes us back 10/15 years ago in the era when chroma backgrounds were SOOOOO noticeable you'd think they were doing back projections.
And the CLAWS! Man, don't get me started with the claws! How could they miss that one out!?!? They were the very iconic weapons for the character! And yet there's a scene were Wolverine kind of plays with his claws in front of the bathroom mirror and they look so ROUGHLY hewn; as if hindi na dumaan sa finishing touches.
And what's with turning Patrick Stewart into mad Botox face? Really! I think he looked more bloated than young...
It's REALLY disappointing
4. The direction was really poor.
Just compare it to the past X-men films: Bryan Singer did a fairly good job with the first 2 installments. The first one was a bit blah but the 2nd one was more exciting.
Bret Rattner did a bang up job for The Last Stand (probably because he has better material?). The story-telling was heartfelt, he was able to direct the actors so well that you see them embodying the characters. I especially loved the ending where Wolverine kills Jean - ugh so heartbreaking.
Gavin Hood's work compared to the last one was sloppy.
Gavin Hood's directorial resume includes (from imdb):
He apparently has some awards under his belt (no Oscars or Cannes or MTV movie awards - haha - though). I don't feel like I'm in a good position to judge his work as I've never seen any of his films.
Point of the matter is, whatever artistic value he earned through those awards, he's definitely not for the big blockbuster. He's probably a decent director of certain types of films... but I think this one was a bit too big for him.
His take of the potentially million-dollar property of X-Men Origins was just so sloppy!
There were scenes that's so "tableau-ish" I can imagine him giving directions to Hugh Jackman like: "Okay, Hugh, concentrate on moving all your facial features towards your nose, spread those arms like a vulture and growl like you're an animal"
I felt that the acting was really "pose-y", the editing did not have the flavor appropriate for the genre, the writing was at a plateau, and the visuals are just NOT glossy.
I'm not sure how much budget the producers invested in tis movie, but it sure looks like tinipid siya.
That being said, I just want to say the I loved the cast (with the exception of Taylor Kitsch as Gambit and Lynn Collins - who the hell is she? - as Kayla. Kitsch is a bit too weak when put side by side the other cast members and Kayla was just oh so fug for Hugh Jackman. Hugh Jackman looks so much prettier! haha)
Oh, and have I mentioned that I totally loved Hugh Jackman? (hehehe)
I'm not saying that it's TOTALLY horrendous. It's just, over-all, below average. It's an OK movie if you wanna unwind and NOT think, something to watch with a bunch of friends to pass the time. But it's not worth watching again, and again, and again.
But that's just me. How about you? How did you find it?
NOTE: Originally posted here. I edited this entry and updated some info. I also took out screencaps that are NSFW to avoid any shit. But if you wanna see them (especially the screencaps of Hugh Jackman's ass) do check out the original review in my blog.
It's really gearing up to be the season's blockbuster what with malls allocating multiple cinemas to its screening. And since it came out there's been a lot of feedback pouring in about it; most of them are raves.
I do hope the editorial board don't mind my re-post coz I wanna share an alternative view on the movie of the season.
Personally, I felt like it was a big pppffffffffffffffffttttttttttttttt.
I do hope the editorial board don't mind my re-post coz I wanna share an alternative view on the movie of the season.
Personally, I felt like it was a big pppffffffffffffffffttttttttttttttt.
Like most people I was REALLY looking forward to seeing it. I didn't read any literature about the story so I won't be prejudiced when I see the movie. But STILL, it failed to WOW me.
The only things I loved about it are:
1. The few glimpses of Hugh Jackman's ass. (photo posted @ Nuninuninu)
2. Several shots of Hugh Jackman's HOTT HOTT HOTT bod
4. Hugh Jackman wearing tight tank tops roaring like a sexy, sweaty, and totally hunkalicious mad man.
6. Oh, and have I mentioned that Hugh Jackman has got a HOTT HOTT ass? (even when he's wearing denim pants!) (photo posted @ Nuninuninu)
What I think about the movie:
1. I've seen better story lines from Pixar
Actually Pixar DOES have GREAT stories and they are always well told: simple but well thought of.
X-Men has a very compelling story that has transcended the years and have made it relevant no mater what decade it's being told. Their themes on social discrimination has always been relatable to underdogs of varying milieu.
Wolverine has one of the most touching stories as well: a diamond in the rough, a man who is at conflict with his nature. He's a brute with a very humane soul. And his story chronicles how he has become a victim of his times.
But watching it from the movie, I was barely able to feel the pain!
It's all "AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH" TUSOK! "RRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAARRRGGGHHHHH" patay!
There was no flavor; no elaborations on themes like the growing moral conflict within Wolverine when he joined Striker's team, no color in how significant his relationship was with Kayla, or how difficult it was for him to live a normal life seeing the many complications of his condition, the anger, the sorrow, the heartbreaking discovery of finding your loved one killed...
The snippets of Logan's life were laid off as if you were just looking at album photos... It's just so bland, there's no build up to it. What a way to massacre a good material.
2. I've seen better action direction and action scenes from Die Hard.
I never felt that Die Hard was a "story movie". People watched it because of the testosterone/adrenaline-inducing action scenes. And in fairness to the producers, the last installment was like their last and most glorious hurrah in creating over-the-top, hard-to-believe, pakshet-angas action scenes.
Wolverine did some ambitious scenes and tried to achieve some bigness in the action scenes (like Wolverine taking down a helicopter - yuck! so Van Dame - or the battle scene on top of the nuclear reactor thingy). I really saw the effort, but I feel that something was lost in the execution. They were potentially great scenes but they were just so bland. In fact, they were so bland, they made the scenes corny.
The most disgustingly corny scene was when Wolverine ignites the gas trail leading to the helicopter; they go to long shot: Wolverine walking cooly away from the helicopter as the helicopter EXPLODES as if several bombs were planted in the vehicle! ARGH so Antonio Banderas in Desperado
3. "The Never-ending Story" had better Visual effects.
Okay, that's an exaggeration. HOWEVER for it's time, Never-ending Story had great visuals! X-Men Origins' effects, on the other hand, were poorly executed!
The quality takes us back 10/15 years ago in the era when chroma backgrounds were SOOOOO noticeable you'd think they were doing back projections.
And the CLAWS! Man, don't get me started with the claws! How could they miss that one out!?!? They were the very iconic weapons for the character! And yet there's a scene were Wolverine kind of plays with his claws in front of the bathroom mirror and they look so ROUGHLY hewn; as if hindi na dumaan sa finishing touches.
And what's with turning Patrick Stewart into mad Botox face? Really! I think he looked more bloated than young...
It's REALLY disappointing
4. The direction was really poor.
Just compare it to the past X-men films: Bryan Singer did a fairly good job with the first 2 installments. The first one was a bit blah but the 2nd one was more exciting.
Bret Rattner did a bang up job for The Last Stand (probably because he has better material?). The story-telling was heartfelt, he was able to direct the actors so well that you see them embodying the characters. I especially loved the ending where Wolverine kills Jean - ugh so heartbreaking.
Gavin Hood's work compared to the last one was sloppy.
Gavin Hood's directorial resume includes (from imdb):
- Rendition (2007)
- Tsotsi (2005)
... aka Thug (International: English title: literal English title) - "W pustyni i w puszczy" (2002) TV mini-series
- W pustyni i w puszczy (2001)
... aka In Desert and Wilderness (International: English title)
... aka Stas and Nel Adventures (USA: informal English title) - A Reasonable Man (1999)
- The Storekeeper (1998)
He apparently has some awards under his belt (no Oscars or Cannes or MTV movie awards - haha - though). I don't feel like I'm in a good position to judge his work as I've never seen any of his films.
Point of the matter is, whatever artistic value he earned through those awards, he's definitely not for the big blockbuster. He's probably a decent director of certain types of films... but I think this one was a bit too big for him.
His take of the potentially million-dollar property of X-Men Origins was just so sloppy!
There were scenes that's so "tableau-ish" I can imagine him giving directions to Hugh Jackman like: "Okay, Hugh, concentrate on moving all your facial features towards your nose, spread those arms like a vulture and growl like you're an animal"
I felt that the acting was really "pose-y", the editing did not have the flavor appropriate for the genre, the writing was at a plateau, and the visuals are just NOT glossy.
I'm not sure how much budget the producers invested in tis movie, but it sure looks like tinipid siya.
That being said, I just want to say the I loved the cast (with the exception of Taylor Kitsch as Gambit and Lynn Collins - who the hell is she? - as Kayla. Kitsch is a bit too weak when put side by side the other cast members and Kayla was just oh so fug for Hugh Jackman. Hugh Jackman looks so much prettier! haha)
Oh, and have I mentioned that I totally loved Hugh Jackman? (hehehe)
I'm not saying that it's TOTALLY horrendous. It's just, over-all, below average. It's an OK movie if you wanna unwind and NOT think, something to watch with a bunch of friends to pass the time. But it's not worth watching again, and again, and again.
But that's just me. How about you? How did you find it?
Comments
I've been a Gambit fan for 12 years now, and I was absolutely satisfied with Kitsch's portrayal, he truly became Gambit and didn't disappointed me. But oh well, if you're judging that Collins girl because she's too 'fug' I can see what kind of review this is.
on the collins girl:
she's better lookin' as a redhead. i got a pic of her in my blog and she looked pretty cute. though i agree, she's not a good match for hugh. i didn't feel the chemistry.
on ryan reynolds:
yes, seeing him in anything is always a treat. he's one of my few mancrushies. :D
on the story line:
i think that's always the risk when you have a character as old as wolverine. it's hard to put everything into an hour and a half. though that's not an excuse. on the other hand, i didn't feel like they butchered his history either. it's easy for non comic readers to digest and it showed why he has that kind of relationship with sabertooth and how he got his adamantium. they did change a lot of things but so did the other xmen movies. as for it being arrghh tusok patay :D, it is a comic book based story. and it is wolverine :D
i loved the latest batman movie but it can get pretty heavy. i do exactly the opposite when watching a movie. i watch the brainless ones over and over and watch the heavier ones less. personally, i don't like to process too much drama when i'm supposed to be RELAXING. :D
on the effects:
i did find the exploding helicopter scene way too cheesy. as a whole, i didn't expect much because it's "origins". the characters are still supposed to be developing their powers. i'm hoping the next movie will be better. but i loooved everything they did with victor creed. i loved the fangs, the retractable nails and the way he ran on all fours.
on matching the actors with their characters:
no one else can play wolverine.
loved, loved, loved, loved Liev Schreiber. i have to disagree with anon :S i'm also a huge gambit fan and i hated kitsch. mababaw, but i wanted him to be a lot more good looking and suave. and i hated, hated the accent. loved ryan, and will.i.am.
cant wait to see magneto movie hooo--hooo!