X-Men: Days of Future Past

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I would definitely prefer a smaller Wolverine if possible, because it is more accurate to the comics, and part of what made him distinctive was that he was this little guy who was such a fierce bad-ass. In fact, I always felt he had a chip on his shoulder because of his size, that probably got him into lots of fights, and pushed him to become the fighter and bad-ass that he eventually became.
 
They're doing a good job restraining what they show in the trailers, unlike ASM2.

Seems like many movies are doing so now, looks like the trend of showing the entire movie in the trailers is slowly fading away.

I don't want to watch the entire film in the trailers, I have no problems with how that is being handled. The few more recent have too much cheesiness for my liking. I love Jackman / Wolverine but the Beast scene in the mansion looks awful and the Quicksilver not much better. Hopefully in the spectrum of the film they play out better...
 
I don't want to watch the entire film in the trailers, I have no problems with how that is being handled. The few more recent have too much cheesiness for my liking. I love Jackman / Wolverine but the Beast scene in the mansion looks awful and the Quicksilver not much better. Hopefully in the spectrum of the film they play out better...

That's what I'm saying, it's good that they're not showing too much.

They're showing a couple scenes sure, but at this point I still have no idea how the movie will develop, unlike ASM2 I practically walked in knowing what was going to happen.
 
Supposedly it was part of an agreement between Sony and Fox so that Webb wouldn't have to fulfill a contractual requirement to direct another movie for Fox, and could instead focus on Spider-Man films. Was definitely awkward and out of place, and not even a very good commercial.
 
When I watch movies, I try not to bring any baggage with me, and view the film based on it's own merits. If I hear the movie is great, I'm definitely going to check it out, but I have no interest in this X-Men interpretation otherwise. I haven't liked any of the X-Men movies, I've seen, and being these aren't the characters I know, it's just an aesthetic. Obviously tons of people are loving this X-men incarnation, so I'm happy for them. I hated the character of Superman in "Superman II", but really liked the "Man of Steel" interpretation, so I'm thankful for different interpretations. Hopefully they bring the characters I love to the screen one day, but if not, I still have my preferred versions.

I think Hugh Jackman is a great actor, but he never felt like Wolverine to me. I've heard from a lot of people that think he is the perfect Wolverine. We all may love a character, but there may be different aspects that are more appealing than others, and without that part played up, it might not feel like the same character. I liked the short and grungy guy that worked in the background, away from his team-mates' eyes. It takes away from Wolverine to have him in a leader position off that bat, and thrown in the spotlight. I loved when he was the underdog, and disliked by the team, except for Nightcrawler. The "Wolverine and the X-Men" TV series did a good job giving a reason for him to be in the leader position that was true to his character.

127-wolverine-freaked-out.jpg

UX142_vsBrotherhood3.jpg

140-wolverine-and-nightcrawler-debate.jpg

Wolverine talking down Storm (X-Men leader at the time) from killing-(Couldn't find panel-dialogue from my comic)

Storm: Stand aside wolverine
Wolverine: and watch you destroy yourself? Not Flamin' Likely! Anyone can kill, princess. It's easy, I know. What takes courage an' strength--what separates humans from the animals--is NOT killin'.

UX220_vsWolverine2.jpg
 
Supposedly it was part of an agreement between Sony and Fox so that Webb wouldn't have to fulfill a contractual requirement to direct another movie for Fox, and could instead focus on Spider-Man films. Was definitely awkward and out of place, and not even a very good commercial.

Ok thanks for the info; yeah, it was 'weird'
 
There were definitely some components of Jackman Logan that I was never totally happy with. He was never quite as brutal and short-tempered as the comic version, he often seemed wiser and more sensible in the movies than in the comics where he could sometimes be reckless and impulsive, and he often did hang out in the background of the comics, whereas he is always front and center in the movies. But I think Jackman did a really good job, all things considered--including the fact that a movie Wolverine is almost guaranteed to take center stage in whatever movie he is in.
 
When I watch movies, I try not to bring any baggage with me, and view the film based on it's own merits. If I hear the movie is great, I'm definitely going to check it out, but I have no interest in this X-Men interpretation otherwise. I haven't liked any of the X-Men movies, I've seen, and being these aren't the characters I know, it's just an aesthetic. Obviously tons of people are loving this X-men incarnation, so I'm happy for them. I hated the character of Superman in "Superman II", but really liked the "Man of Steel" interpretation, so I'm thankful for different interpretations. Hopefully they bring the characters I love to the screen one day, but if not, I still have my preferred versions.

I think Hugh Jackman is a great actor, but he never felt like Wolverine to me. I've heard from a lot of people that think he is the perfect Wolverine. We all may love a character, but there may be different aspects that are more appealing than others, and without that part played up, it might not feel like the same character. I liked the short and grungy guy that worked in the background, away from his team-mates' eyes. It takes away from Wolverine to have him in a leader position off that bat, and thrown in the spotlight. I loved when he was the underdog, and disliked by the team, except for Nightcrawler. The "Wolverine and the X-Men" TV series did a good job giving a reason for him to be in the leader position that was true to his character.

View attachment 107739

View attachment 107735

View attachment 107737

Wolverine talking down Storm (X-Men leader at the time) from killing-(Couldn't find panel-dialogue from my comic)

Storm: Stand aside wolverine
Wolverine: and watch you destroy yourself? Not Flamin' Likely! Anyone can kill, princess. It's easy, I know. What takes courage an' strength--what separates humans from the animals--is NOT killin'.

View attachment 107748

I wish I could rep people, posts like these deserve it.
 
There were definitely some components of Jackman Logan that I was never totally happy with. He was never quite as brutal and short-tempered as the comic version, he often seemed wiser and more sensible in the movies than in the comics where he could sometimes be reckless and impulsive, and he often did hang out in the background of the comics, whereas he is always front and center in the movies. But I think Jackman did a really good job, all things considered--including the fact that a movie Wolverine is almost guaranteed to take center stage in whatever movie he is in.

More than reckless and impulsive, I'd say that he isn't afraid to piss people off, sure he is short tempered but he isn't dumb, unless he is utterly enraged and in berserk mode you don't often see him attacking willy nilly.

The part of being a smart ass and a bit of a cynic talker is something Jackman did perfectly in the 1st 2 movies, haven't seen much of it since, he was even more Wolverine in the 3 seconds he was in First Class than the entirety of X3, Origins and The Wolverine :lol
 
His character changed over the years, and he was domesticated a bit in the interim, but there were several times in the Claremont/Cockrum/Byrne period when Wolvie would go off to do something that wasn't very strategically smart, and would have to get reigned in by Cyclops (assuming Cyclops could get to him in time), or in the case of the picture shown above, Storm, because he was so aggressive and acted on instinct and impulse. It was part of his charm, though. I like Wolverine as a flawed character who doesn't always do the smart or right thing.
 
I always found it funny how the Wolverine Origins video game was actually better than the movie in every aspect.
 
Wolverine ideally ought to call to mind his namesake which is low to the ground and pound for pound one of the most ferocious animals out there.

If they can get someone with a nasty snarl, 5'7-5'10 and built like a brick ****house, that would be a good start. Hugh's Wolvie is a tad bit restrained but he's a great actor even though he's not lifted off the page. Maybe he had to be a little more of a male model to grab the general public's attention, but I'm ready for a darker take after Hugh is well and done.

View attachment 107698
Just gonna say only once more, this guy is 5'9, a beast AND a brilliant actor.
Tom-Hardy-Warrior-tom-hardy-22946523-450-699.jpg


I would definitely prefer a smaller Wolverine if possible, because it is more accurate to the comics, and part of what made him distinctive was that he was this little guy who was such a fierce bad-ass. In fact, I always felt he had a chip on his shoulder because of his size, that probably got him into lots of fights, and pushed him to become the fighter and bad-ass that he eventually became.
EXACTLY!
When I watch movies, I try not to bring any baggage with me, and view the film based on it's own merits.
Hey mate, nice to see you here! Also, excellent post!
I wish I could rep people, posts like these deserve it.
Same here.
 
Back
Top