You are insane, man... That'd be a waste of ammo.
You are insane, man... That'd be a waste of ammo.
Here's what you deserve instead:
We're in agreement that Aranofsky is a great filmmaker. And it's very likely any Wolvie film he would have done would be miles better than what we got. But again, you take that same plot, and let a mediocre or uninspired filmmaker take it on, or if the writing itself isn't good, or if the acting and drama aren't well done, and then you've got crap. It takes a lot of moving parts working together the right way for a film to really succeed, to my eyes. And that's why many of them don't. I think this applies to movies that have good and bad, like X-Men Apocalypse, which I really enjoyed, but acknowledge has some serious flaws, primarily related to pacing, structure, and a WTF coda involving Magneto. And Suicide Squad, which was a good idea in principle and had great actors and a pretty good director, but had similar, albeit much more glaring flaws, compounded by a studio sanitizing things for a PG-13 rating and mass audience appeal. I'm hoping the stars align the right way for the next Wolvie movie. He has really been my favorite comic book superhero since I was 6 or 7, with Batman and Spidey probably a tie for close second. So it pains me that we haven't seen him really utilized better. No equivalent of Nolan Dark Knight treatment thus far.
You said "a good film" which is incorrect, that's all.
Ah, well, compared to the other Nolan films I don't think it's particularly good. But if you can remove it from that context, I think it is good. I enjoyed it, but thought it was pretty flawed. Though I have no evidence at all to support this, I'm convinced Nolan got roped into a 3 film deal and only did it to fulfill his contract. I figure he did the best he could, but had long lost interest at that point (in part due to the death of Ledger), so he just went through the motions. But a great director like him going through the motions is significantly better than a Brett Ratner, Michael Bay, or Zach Snyder at their very best.
Ah, well, compared to the other Nolan films I don't think it's particularly good. But if you can remove it from that context, I think it is good. I enjoyed it, but thought it was pretty flawed. Though I have no evidence at all to support this, I'm convinced Nolan got roped into a 3 film deal and only did it to fulfill his contract. I figure he did the best he could, but had long lost interest at that point (in part due to the death of Ledger), so he just went through the motions. But a great director like him going through the motions is significantly better than a Brett Ratner, Michael Bay, or Zach Snyder at their very best.
)For a one-shot comic book.
Which is impossible.
