X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)
X-Men Origins: Wolverine contains one of this year’s best lines of dialogue. In trying to convince Logan (Hugh Jackman) to join the Weapon X program, Colonel Stryker pleads, “Your country needs you.” Logan scoffs, “I’m Canadian.”
Let’s start off with what I liked about the movie. I thought the opening montage was really excellent, tracing the history of the mutant brothers since 1845, as they are compelled to fight in every war that comes along. It was reminiscent of the Watchmen (2009) opening, but with less emotional weight. Still, it was very cool.
The story was much better than I was expecting. I actually thought the first half was well on its way to redeeming the franchise after the abysmal X-Men: The Last Stand (2006). Unfortunately, things fell apart in the second half, complete with unacceptably-large plot-holes, and pieces missing that were needed to link one action to the next. It still had some cool moments, and was entertaining overall, it just was not as interesting as the first half.
Hugh Jackman and Liev Schreiber (as Victor Creed) own this movie. Their performances are really solid, and I really have to respect Schreiber for bulking up so considerably for the role. Jackman is a 6’2” tank, and even so, Schreiber towers over him. Dominic Monaghan as Bolt was a highlight, but he is criminally underused. Danny Huston is dependable-as-always, as a younger William Stryker, before the character appears again as Brian Cox in X2 (2003). Everyone else is hit-and-miss. Taylor Kitsch as Gambit is particularly abhorrent. He tries to fake a southern accent, but it's lame. The story also greatly and needlessly exaggerates the abilities of his character, making him rather silly. It’s too bad: Gambit is my favorite X-Man.
The dialogue is certainly not Fantastic Four cringe-worthy. It has its moments, but overall I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of the dialogue, especially because I had, after all, seen the movie’s trailer. Many characters are underwritten and underdeveloped, however, including Wolverine himself. I don’t feel that the writers gave Hugh enough to work with – don’t get me wrong, Hugh was great, and nobody else on the planet can play Wolverine like him – but his development was fairly dull. I understand that Wolverine is a difficult character to work with: much like Superman, Wolverine is almost entirely invulnerable. This inherently leads to the tedious dilemma of having a character who is never actually under any threat; the trick is to put him under emotional threat and exploit his sensitivity. The film did attempt this here and there, but it was all very cliché and predictable. I wanted more.
Now the fanboy in me has something to say.
When Ryan Reynolds was first introduced as Wade Wilson, the soon-to-be Deadpool, I was initially pleased. I strongly feel that Reynolds is perfect for the merc-with-the-mouth, as they are both obnoxious pricks, but I was wary that the filmmakers were going to butcher this wonderful character anyway. His few pieces of dialogue were pitch-perfect; no problems so far. So they went a little overboard with Wade’s abilities, having him spin his swords around so fast that he deflects a storm of incoming bullets, which is a significant stretch for a character that, at least in the comic books, has no super powers until he volunteers for the Weapon X program to save his life from cancer, and even then I’m pretty sure helicoptering his swords is not one of his talents. But I was still okay. The use of Deadpool at the end brutally destroyed any prospects for satisfaction. I won’t give it away, and I admit that it was fun to watch, but as someone who loves the character, it hurt.
In translating a comic book story to the big screen, I realize that some liberties must be taken with these characters. Some of these liberties are both acceptable and expected. Spider-Man (2002) is a great example. Filmmakers decided it would be simpler for Peter Parker to develop the web-shooters as a part of the biological metamorphosis resulting from the spider bite, instead of using the comic book explanation that Peter, a gifted science student, built the web-shooters mechanically and concocted web-fluid based on a formula bestowed on him by the spider bite. Even last year’s Iron Man (2007) took major liberties with Tony Stark’s creation of the Iron Man armor. These alterations are effective, though, because they often make more logical sense than a half-century-old idea, and they serve the film’s plot in a constructive way. The problem with X-Men Origins: Wolverine is that it ignores this mandate. Filmmakers took great liberties for the sole purpose of staging a ridiculously over-the-top fight scene. Instead of building a story around their characters, filmmakers choreographed the action the way they wanted, and then altered their characters to fit within the desired action. This is not a good reason to take these totally unnecessary and illogical liberties.
A Wolverine movie needs to be more. It’s a sad day when the videogame tie-in possesses more balls than the movie. I haven’t played it, but I am told the videogame Wolverine actually cuts people up, complete with beheadings and tearing people in half. That’s the Wolverine movie I want to see. Give me that or at least give me something to care about.
The final verdict: While it’s not the Wolverine movie we all wanted, and while it may seriously offend X-Men purists, X-Men Origins: Wolverine is still a fun, entertaining start to this year’s summer popcorn-flick season. It’s at least a better choice than Ghosts of Girlfriends Past (2009).
Professor P
No comments:
Post a Comment