X-Men Origins: Wolverine: What Were You Expecting, Doctor Zhivago?

I'm not really sure why movie critics complain about superhero movies being loud and stupid. I am an avowed lover of comic books -- superhero books in particular -- and I will be the first to admit that superhero comics are mostly pretty stupid. Even the really smart ones (Watchmen, Sandman) are based on stupid principles, i.e., that people who can fly, pop claws, shoot laser beams, etc. will put on tights and fight crime. So why do critics -- particularly the ones I've heard called "comic book tourists" -- continue to look for depth, meaning and artistry? Were they spoiled by last year's summer of high-quality superhero flicks, and they want Wolverine to shoulder the full responsibility this year, since it's the only superhero movie coming out? Talk about putting all of your eggs in one basket.

When I go into a superhero movie, I look for three things: a fair amount of accuracy, a certain degree of originality, and an appropriate dose of comedy. Dark Knight, Iron Man and Incredible Hulk had these things last year, and so does X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Is Origins as well-made as the other three? Well, no. But is it as entertainingly good? Hell, yes. How could it not be? It's Hugh Jackman, consummate showman, playing the role he would have been born to play if he was about two feet shorter. And the role is Wolverine, America's (and probably Canada's) most popular comic book character for the past 30 years. These factors alone give Origins a leg up, putting Wolverine on equal footing with Batman and Iron Man -- after all, Wolverine doesn't need to put on a suit to be a bad-ass. The man was born a bad-ass.

Yes, Wolverine is a man's man. He's fought in four wars. He can heal from any wound. He doesn't really age. When he needs to get to an island, they drop him out of a plane. He threatens to take three different people's heads off in the movie, and he means it each time. He even works as a lumberjack at one point! And the movie surrounds him with other born-to-be-badasses, including a man who can shoot and kill anything, a man who can punch a tank shell and not get hurt, a man who can blow up anything he touches, a man who can control electrical devices with his mind and a man who can do anything with a sword, including deflect and slice bullets (see our guide to them all here). And the king badass of them all is Wolvie's own brother, Sabretooth, played by Liev Schreiber. Everything Wolvie can do, 'Tooth can do better. This is all accurate, and therefore a thumbs-up for me.

The story is where the originality comes in to play. While most of the details of Wolverine's life are straight out of the comics, characters are shifted around and used in new ways. A couple of members of Wolverine's government kill-team were never involved with the Weapon X program. The creation of Deadpool at the end is interesting -- not how it really happened, but interesting nonetheless. But this is all nit-picking. If the movie told the story exactly how it played in the comic books, I would be pretty damn bored. This way, the events not only come to a sad, downbeat resolution at the end, they perfectly segue into the first X-Men movie (or another Wolverine prequel?). Maybe it's not the best stand-alone story, setting up the X-trilogy as it does, but neither was Dark Knight, with its "stop imitating me" opening and "just blame me" ending.

And if the comedy stylings of the Joker in Dark Knight were to your liking, then you should like the comedy in Origins. Jackman does double duty as tortured soul and as a comic genius, mocking Agent-on-a-leash Zero and eating-disorder-having Blob, streaking across a field and accidentally slicing up a bathroom sink. Will.i.am actually does a commendable job as the sly, jokey Wraith, and Ryan Reynolds is morbidly hysterical, of course, in his short time as Wade Wilson, which makes me sad, because I have no idea how they could spin off Reynolds' character into his own movie. Taylor Kitsch's Gambit has potential, I guess -- I've never been the biggest Gambit fan, but considering how few characters are left alive at the end, he may be our only hope... aside from Wolverine himself, of course. Jackman has already talked to the writers about a sequel set in Japan, and I, for one, would be first in line to see it.

What did you think of the movie? Or Hugh Jackman's derriere? Either/or?

17 Comments

May 4, 2009 11:53 AM
Michelle
Reply

I, for one, loved it. I thought Taylor's Gambit could use a tiny bit of work on the accent, but he was pretty damn great. (Although I'm slightly biased, I'm a HUGE Gambit fan.) Wolverine was Wolverine, all wisecracking and claws. And things blew up. Color me happy!

May 4, 2009 12:29 PM
josh
Reply

When I first walked out of the theater I was fairly sure I hated the movie but, after giving it a few days i realized it wasn't THAT bad. What turned me off? The way they get Logan to forget his memory, Ma & Pa Logan and Dead Pool. Mostly Dead Pool.I don't mind the idea of the altered mutant with all the others powers but why waste the potential that is Dead Pool (and the comedic brilliance that is Ryan Reynolds)?

But again, after re-thinking things I really liked the military montage and the Weapon X team as a whole (with major props going to Liev Schreiber who was Awesome as Creed) and the "hunt for the truth"/ tracking of Creed.

One question I have, and Zach I hope you know the answer, was Patrick Stewart actually "there" or was he CGI because he looked odd.

May 4, 2009 12:31 PM
josh
Reply

When I first walked out of the theater I was fairly sure I hated the movie but, after giving it a few days i realized it wasn't THAT bad. What turned me off? The way they get Logan to forget his memory, Ma & Pa Logan and Dead Pool. Mostly Dead Pool.I don't mind the idea of the altered mutant with all the others powers but why waste the potential that is Dead Pool (and the comedic brilliance that is Ryan Reynolds)?

But again, after re-thinking things I really liked the military montage and the Weapon X team as a whole (with major props going to Liev Schreiber who was Awesome as Creed) and the "hunt for the truth"/ tracking of Creed.

One question I have, and Zach I hope you know the answer, was Patrick Stewart actually "there" or was he CGI because he looked odd.

May 4, 2009 12:37 PM
Kathleen
Reply

I also loved it. Yes, Taylor could have worked on the accent a bit more but he was awesome as Gambit. Loved Ryan Reynolds and hope they can and do spin him off as Deadpool.

I also am very glad that I stayed till after the credits. Yay!

May 4, 2009 12:43 PM
Faye Bond
Reply

:) The movie critics who go to a superhero movie for art are the same ones who go to art movies for action. When I go to a comic-book-turned-movie (and I don't read comic books in general), I look for loud, funny, and good basic story resolution. Two out of three is pretty good for a blockbuster with so many potential sequals! Great reveiw!

May 4, 2009 2:11 PM
Brendan
Reply

The "what were you expecting" line of defense is a cop out. Just because a movie is a comic movie, or a summer tentpole or a remake or a sequal, doesn't mean it should get a pass for it's failures. I'm not asking for Citizen Kane, but I do, at the very least, expect a well story with characters I can care about. The best of this genre (Superman, SpiderMan 2, Dark Knight, Iron Man) have that. This didn't. Jackman gave it a good try, but his natrual charsima can only make up for so much. I really wanted to like this movie because I'm a fan of Wolverine and of Jackman, but sitting through it was a depressing experience. Not because it was terrible (there have been far worse comic movies), but because of how soullessly average it was. It was sleep inducing in it's mediocraty.

May 4, 2009 2:13 PM
Chris
Reply

I'm so with you Zach. I don't know, maybe I liked it because it's being crapped on so much and it wasn't that bad. I was ready to be disappointed because I love Wolvie so much... but it wasn't that bad.
Even when I was sitting there watching the pointless bits (The Blob fight...), I was amused. I knew it was unnecessary. But I didn't mind.

OK, there were still too many mutants running around, and if you try and link up too much of the film with the X men trilogy you could go mental. Striker giving the adamantium to Logan then trying to erase he's memory and the bullet thing... were stupid, lazy and random. Some of the scenes were too bloody cliched and cheesey...

But still... I liked it overall. Maybe Hugh's muscles hypnotised me. Maybe it was his hair.

Actually, I know what it was. It was that helicopter rescuer. I loved that!!! LOVED IT!

Anyway...

If, if! they do another one they need to sort it out. Focus people! But I hope it does enough business to get another shot.

May 4, 2009 3:06 PM
slashbunny
Reply

I'm sorry, but as a (comicbook) movie, I thought it was bad...I suppose a "Spider-man 2" is rare but this one completely and utterly lacked inspiration, imagination, and, in fact, originality.

May 4, 2009 3:22 PM
random00b
Reply

I was not looking forward to the movie, but a good friend of mine insisted on seeing it even after reading the reviews. But, two or three days out, I'm finding myself thinking it was okay.

It could've been longer. Some back story on some of the other mutants would've been appreciated (so I wasn't bonding with Wiki at 11pm on a Friday night trying to figure out who was who). But it was funnier than an action movie has any right to be: Victor Creed stole the movie when he, upon viewing Logan's upgraded weaponry, smirks "shiny."

May 4, 2009 8:18 PM
Kitten
Reply

Eh. I love comic book movies, a lot, and I thought it was merely okay. It was all action, no plot, no humor to me. The "what were you expecting" line kind of sucks because it basically tells people who didn't like it that it's not fair not to like it because it was cheesy and plot-less even though many many other comic movies have been far better.

May 4, 2009 11:09 PM
Day
Reply

I've been a Gambit fan for 12 years and Kitsch didn't disappointed! the portrayal was one of the best in a Xmen movie.

May 5, 2009 12:03 AM
daleonsouth
Reply

I enjoyed the movie... but I felt it was basically "X-Men II" repeated. As a movie goer, a little more originality would have been nice. I did enjoy the "Deadpool" character. I know nothing of the character's actual origin. But it would be nice to see more.

May 5, 2009 5:08 PM
Gloria
Reply
replied to comment from Day

I don't understand. Have there been any other portrayals of Gambit in a movie?

May 5, 2009 10:16 PM
PJ
Reply

Don't forget Bradley. He was a great character and one of the few I wanted to know more about.

May 9, 2009 1:41 PM
Stefan-
Reply

So, I know of two endings after the credits. One has Logan in Japan drinking to remember. The other is of Deadpool decapitated, his sword arm popping in and out and "shhh"ing with a new mouth. Has anybody seen any others?

May 13, 2009 10:28 PM
KB
Reply

I love comic book movies (even though I've never read a comic book), but this one was just okay, if a little less than okay. Maybe my perception is skewed because I saw it immediately after Star Trek, and nothing could have stood up to that, but it was way too haphazard--too many characters and not enough development. As I told my sister, it felt like a really long trailer. Hugh Jackman tried, as did Liev Schreiber. Ryan Reynolds was great but, of course, way underused. And what was Agent Zero's story? Being able to shoot with accuracy isn't a mutation, is it? It really just didn't live up to the hype or to the standard set by the other X-Men movies. I hope they do better with the rest of the Origins series.

July 2, 2011 4:06 PM
ptfm xxx 12z7
Reply

X men origins wolverine what w.. Not so bad :)

Loading...

Add a comment

TWoP Toolbar

BLOG ARCHIVES

The Moviefile

January 2012

2 Entries

December 2011

27 Entries

November 2011

22 Entries

October 2011

22 Entries

September 2011

29 Entries

August 2011

27 Entries

July 2011

30 Entries

June 2011

25 Entries

May 2011

13 Entries

April 2011

23 Entries

March 2011

22 Entries

February 2011

33 Entries

January 2011

39 Entries

December 2010

21 Entries

November 2010

29 Entries

October 2010

23 Entries

September 2010

25 Entries

August 2010

26 Entries

July 2010

29 Entries

June 2010

36 Entries

May 2010

22 Entries

April 2010

26 Entries

March 2010

30 Entries

February 2010

19 Entries

January 2010

19 Entries

December 2009

15 Entries

November 2009

21 Entries

October 2009

27 Entries

September 2009

30 Entries

August 2009

28 Entries

July 2009

34 Entries

June 2009

27 Entries

May 2009

24 Entries

April 2009

23 Entries

March 2009

18 Entries

February 2009

30 Entries

January 2009

56 Entries

December 2008

51 Entries

November 2008

61 Entries

October 2008

102 Entries

September 2008

86 Entries

August 2008

99 Entries

July 2008

116 Entries

June 2008

95 Entries

May 2008

86 Entries

April 2008

67 Entries

March 2008

14 Entries