Pretty much every single one of the XMCU films that are perceived to be bad are better than people say they are.
The X-Men Cinematic Universe (General Discussion)
- Thread starter DigificWriter
- Start date
I'm trying to think of the positives of Wolverine: Origin to support your claim, but... it seriously was awful. It's not perceived to be bad, it IS bad. Even the effects were done half heartedly. It deserves to be ranked with Catwoman, Steel, and Elektra, deservedly so. To claim otherwise is a lie to us AND oneself.
The battles montage was a pretty good movie squeezed into 60 seconds.
I have a soft spot for Wolverine: Origins because the storming the beach scene was filmed at the beach just down the street from my sister's place so I went and watched them filming it. But other than that, and the fact that Hugh Jackman was in it, it really doesn't have a lot going for it.
Last edited:
Is there any definite confirmation that the MCU will be completely rebooting the X-Men? I'd have thought that opening up the multiverse in Spiderman: Far From Home would enable them to keep whatever aspects they like of the existing franchise and retrofit other aspects as they please. Although if Dark Phoenix performs badly enough, they may just decide it's not worth the effort and start from scratch.
Well there we go.
Actually, yes, good call on Shreiber, he was perfectly cast in that role and sold the character. I tend to overlook that because the story itself is just so messy and bad, it's basically a (bad) video game where the hero wanders from almost unrelated over the top action sequence boss fight to another, meeting these new characters that are poorly acted and adapted for the big screen (it's sad when the thought of Channing Tatum actually felt like a step forward with Gambit!).
There's a reason that even fans of the franchise rightfully skip this one on the rewatches. It and Apocalypse are the only X-movies I didn't purchase on bluray. I have no desire to see them ever again.
Actually, yes, good call on Shreiber, he was perfectly cast in that role and sold the character. I tend to overlook that because the story itself is just so messy and bad, it's basically a (bad) video game where the hero wanders from almost unrelated over the top action sequence boss fight to another, meeting these new characters that are poorly acted and adapted for the big screen (it's sad when the thought of Channing Tatum actually felt like a step forward with Gambit!).
There's a reason that even fans of the franchise rightfully skip this one on the rewatches. It and Apocalypse are the only X-movies I didn't purchase on bluray. I have no desire to see them ever again.
That's your choice to make, but the franchise's overall tapestry is incomplete without them.
Last edited:
I can't speak for anyone else, but personally I am not going to buy a boring movie that I will never, ever re-watch just because "the franchise's overall tapestry is incomplete without them." (I'm looking at you here, Mission: Impossible 2). That just feels like wasting money.
Agreed. I skipped Thor 2 and IM3 for the same reason.
Same. XMO and Apocalypse are my least favorite films in the XCU as well. There's just no real reason to revisit them. X3 isn't perfect but it's not like there's nothing there to appreciate. Plus, it gets us The Wolverine and DOFP. So, you need it. Apocalypse dropped the ball by giving too much empathize on JLaw and not enough shine on the new generation of X-Men.
Mission Impossible 2 is good example. I would submit Fast and Furious Tokyo Drift as another one. It's not terrible, but with how the franchise launched and relaunched itself with it's 4th and 5th movies. The third (Tokyo) is like a curious memento.
Same.
I actually haven't seen Apocalypse since it was in theaters, but I'll give it another go with the other two as a lead-in to Dark Phoenix. I don't expect my opinion to change much, unfortunately, but stranger things have happened.
I never, ever bother with the Origins: Wolverine with any of my rewatches anymore. It's simply not worth it. I know The Wolverine has it's own detractors but I will always defend it, especially the director's cut. Far and above much better than its predecessor.
I never, ever bother with the Origins: Wolverine with any of my rewatches anymore. It's simply not worth it. I know The Wolverine has it's own detractors but I will always defend it, especially the director's cut. Far and above much better than its predecessor.
The Wolverine is a hard one to judge. There are parts of it I absolutely adore. And then there are parts that are just... eh, what? I never saw the dc, though. What does it change?
Extended and uncut fight scenes, foul language and character moment scenes. The Wolverine Uncut is closer to Logan, than it is to XMO.
http://www.movieviral.com/2013/11/2...tion-is-the-best-x-men-film-of-the-franchise/
I don't think you understand where Tokyo Drift falls in the Fast and the Furious narrative because it's anything but a "throwaway".
Tokyo Drift may have been the third film released, but it's the sixth narratively, taking place between The Fast and the Furious 6 and Furious 7 and leading directly into the latter.
Having only ever watched Origins: Wolverine once (and falling asleep while doing so...) but having rewatched all the others at various times, I've never felt like I was missing crucial details by skipping it. As such, I'd have to disagree with the other poster's assertion on "tapestry" considerations even above your absolutely on-the-money comment about it not being worth your time.
Gonna have to disagree here. Tokyo Drift is essential as the conclusion to Han's story, which in turn sets up Furious 7.
It's certainly possible to get by with, let's say, "the gist" of what's explained in F7 as to Han's experiences, but from my perspective it's more impactful actually seeing his last adventure before going into the next piece of the narrative.
I doubt very much that we will "need" Apocalypse as a building block towards Dark Phoenix.
As far as The Wolverine goes - the thetrical cut is a flawed yet still enjoyable film, whereas the director's cut definitely elevates it. I was very pleased by how much the DC improved that film. It's still not at, say, the "top tier" of X-Men films, but I'd place it right outside with those changes.
---
Edited to fix typo that EMH teases me about below.
Last edited:
grendelsbayne, I would highly recommend checking out the director's cut, especially if you loved certain parts of the theatrical version. While it's not on the level of Kingdom of Heaven improvement (where I went from hating the film to loving it upon seeing the director's cut), it is a strong improvement and I rank The Wolverine (director's cut) as my third favorite X-Men film after Days of Future Past and Logan and just above First Class and X2.
Ooooo...Dark Future sounds fascinating. Tell me more!
I don't expect Apocalypse will be needed (other than as introduction for the younger X-Men including Jean), but I am curious to see how I feel about it on a second viewing after several years.
Last edited:
Destroys half the cities on Earth. Improves mutant/human relations anyway.
Apocalypse works in mysterious ways.
The FoX-Men movies don't care about Humans as actual characters, so they just ignored that.
Just like how it's supposed to be a good thing when the X-Men broke into the White House to bully the President like a bunch of terrorists.
Similar threads
