X-Men: Days of Future Past

[Silrian]

I wouldn't be able to take it seriously, him with his stupid pillow lips. Jackman is irreplaceable, just like Reeve.

Oh boy, the "I can't let go of the version I know." syndrome. Of course no one can replace them. That's also not the point of it. Neither of them represent the CB character entirely, whether you like it or not, they were one (in your eyes good) version, other versions have validation based on the source material. And they'll need other actors for it.

If you just can't let go of Jackman, that has little to do with who Hardy or any other actor is.

 

[Silrian]

I honestly think an actor just needs the potential, it's the director who decides what actually comes out.

Currently I can't think of anyone with more potential than Hardy judging by his filmography. But I'm very interested in any other actors for it.

 

[pturtle]

I honestly think an actor just needs the potential, it's the director who decides what actually comes out.

Currently I can't think of anyone with more potential than Hardy judging by his filmography. But I'm very interested in any other actors for it.

Right now, I think he's almost perfect, I really would love to see what he can do in the role.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Irvy]

Please no babyface Hardy wolverine.

 

[a-dev]

Seems like Hardy has quickly become the dream-casting for some. Sorta like Timothy Olyphant is my ideal to play Kyle Reese in a future war Terminator movie. And it'll never happen.

 

[Silrian]

I mean ffs some people want C-tates for Wolverine. **** that man. If he can truly do a natural cajun accent I will gladly welcome him as Gambit, he's a suave mofo and if he's confident in nailing the role, I'm fine with that, he's quite a solid actor for a supporting character like that.

But if Wolverine is recast I want a smaller guy, in the suit, with a proper canadian background.

I honestly can't believe it's 2014 and we have this:

But we've never seen this:

 

[The Josh]

People can whine about the height issue. But there will not a better actor to play the role than Jackman.

Agreed! When they cast Jackman I thought he was spot on in how he looks.

 

[karamazov80]

I think 36 will be a turnoff for the studios looking for a replacement for Jackman. You don't want to have to revisit this problem in another 5-10 years, assuming the new person cast is liked by the fans.

 

[a-dev]

After they're done with the Singerverse the only thing to do with X-men will be to De-ground it. Make it look much more like the comics, costumes and all.

 

[Kibagami]

After they're done with the Singerverse the only thing to do with X-men will be to De-ground it. Make it look much more like the comics, costumes and all.

Wasn't that their goal with first class?

 

[a-dev]

Wasn't that their goal with first class?

Other than putting colour into the costumes it very much felt exactly like the rest of the films to me so I dunno.

 

[Silrian]

First Class had a massive "YOU ****ERS BETTER KEEP THE POSSIBILITY FOR TIE INS!" Studio note printed on every script page.

You're right though Karamazov, age is definitely a factor that might rule a lot of actors out. But if Fox is anything to go by a reboot might become a teen-clusterfail like I expect FF to be. Dear lord am I glad I don't give a twat about that property. You show me a 24 year old that's a greasy lived-through bastard like Wolverine, maybe a reboot would've been even worse than whatever we get now.

It's just horrendous how Fox, and Sony for that matter, operate. They're seaaaaaaau 2005. *gay hand gesture* Just desperately trying to have a piece of the pie.

 

[Silrian]

The Mystique after credits scene can be viewed here:
https://collider.com/amazing-spider-man-2-post-credits-scene-x-men/

Also, dafaq, pretty damn sure that soundtrack is Oil Rig from Man of Steel.

 

[Solidus]

People can whine about the height issue. But there will not a better actor to play the role than Jackman.

Agreed! When they cast Jackman I thought he was spot on in how he looks.

It was the same for me when I saw the first X-Men movie at the theater. I thought Jackman did a remarkable job as Wolverine, and his height was a very minor issue.

I was never into the comics very much, but I think a lot of the folks who are, need to suspend their disbelief a little. Movies and comics are two completely different genres, that attract different audiences.

 

[karamazov80]

It was the same for me when I saw the first X-Men movie at the theater. I thought Jackman did a remarkable job as Wolverine, and his height was a very minor issue.

I was never into the comics very much, but I think a lot of the folks who are, need to suspend their disbelief a little. Movies and comics are two completely different genres, that attract different audiences.

I think almost all comic movie fans understand that liberties will be taken with comic films--and they should, for the purpose of making the material more suitable for the medium. But all other things being held equal, if something from the comic can be brought to the screen to make the character more accurate to the source, then it should usually be done IMO.

Ask yourself this--what is it that makes Wolverine distinctive? For comic fans, the size is part of it. His aggression, his crazy hair, the metallic skeleton, the claws, the healing factor, his name, his association with the X-Men, hell, his classic costumes, these are all also components of this character. Some of them may be more important than others, but ideally, they will all be part of Wolvie in any medium.

If the creators of films don't think these things matter, then they can pull a Chris Nolan and just keep the superficial parts of characters, and films can still be good or even great as a result. But many comic fans won't be totally satisfied, and that's understandable.

Getting a good actor to represent the spirit of the character is more important than anything else, but size of Wolvie does matter, and it would be better if he were short rather than tall.

 

[pturtle]

I don't think anyone here is saying they want Jackman replaced, we're saying when he eventually leaves the roll that we'd like a more comic accurate Wolverine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Solidus]

I think almost all comic movie fans understand that liberties will be taken with comic films--and they should, for the purpose of making the material more suitable for the medium. But all other things being held equal, if something from the comic can be brought to the screen to make the character more accurate to the source, then it should usually be done IMO.

Ask yourself this--what is it that makes Wolverine distinctive? For comic fans, the size is part of it. His aggression, his crazy hair, the metallic skeleton, the claws, the healing factor, his name, his association with the X-Men, hell, his classic costumes, these are all also components of this character. Some of them may be more important than others, but ideally, they will all be part of Wolvie in any medium.

If the creators of films don't think these things matter, then they can pull a Chris Nolan and just keep the superficial parts of characters, and films can still be good or even great as a result. But many comic fans won't be totally satisfied, and that's understandable.

Getting a good actor to represent the spirit of the character is more important than anything else, but size of Wolvie does matter, and it would be better if he were short rather than tall.

I can understand your sentiments towards desiring a Wolverine on the big screen that stay true to the source material, and there's nothing wrong with that. But, for all intents and purposes, Jackman's portrayal of of the character just "worked" - in terms of his popular appeal, which translated to the amount of money that he brought into the box office.

And yeah, Nolan's movies portrayed a cardboard cut-out of Batman. But, the X-Men movies and even Jackman were never on that level of p oop.

 

[pturtle]

Nolan's Batman is an abomination?

This is my favorite franchise, but let's not forget X-Men Origins: Wolverine. That movie is an abomination any way you want to look at it. That's one of the few superhero movies of recent times that can actually be considered Batman and Robin bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Silrian]

It was the same for me when I saw the first X-Men movie at the theater. I thought Jackman did a remarkable job as Wolverine, and his height was a very minor issue.

I was never into the comics very much, but I think a lot of the folks who are, need to suspend their disbelief a little. Movies and comics are two completely different genres, that attract different audiences.

I think you just need to accept that Jackman factually is not the perfect Wolverine, whether you like him or not. He's one adaptation of a character that existed long before him and an adaptation that strays from the original in ways that are absolutely NOT necessary and have nothing to do with suspension of belief. Just completely nothing. PLENTY of actors out there who fit Wolverine's physique better than Jackman. He didn't make Wolverine, he made a Wolverine.

Also concerning different audiences, we've never seen the Wolverine from the comics on screen, we've rarely seen any comic book character truly portrayed like in the comics on screen, for almost no characters. So you can't back that statement up with any proof.

If anything Marvel Studios' success proves you wrong, because although those aren't perfect copies brought to life either, most of them are closer to their original counterparts than Jackman is to Wolverine. Same for Spidey now, regardless of whether that new film is any good.

I think it's exactly the opposite, I think we'll learn as time progresses that much more people would like the actual proper versions of these characters than is often presumed. If you look at CB filmography and it's success versus it's progression, that certainly seems to be the case I'd say. The more films have directly taken the CB versions, the overall more success they started having. One can often mention Nolan to disprove that theory, but Batman Begins was quite an accurate CB year one Batman. It's TDK and TDKR that started watering that down, instead of increasing it.

Also, I never had much access to the comics as a kid, but the more I learn about the comics, the more I see why these characters were designed the way they were, or why writers took them in certain directions. Those reasons often heavily outweigh the reasons filmmakers make their versions the way they do, which often don't have much to do with the character itself at all.

And the current Wolverine is a good example of that.

 

[karamazov80]

I agree that Jackman did a good job, just trying to explain the argument from the POV of one of those making it.

And I personally thought Bale Batman was a pretty good representation of the classic comic Bats that I love, ignoring TDKR version, of course. But the villains are another story. Apart from Ra's, they only shared a pretty superficial connection to the source IMO.