Wolverine won't be the highest grossing film of the year, let alone "TDK-successful."
Why? A couple of reasons: 1) It'll most likely suck. 2) The hype around it isn't even that great. Especially because people have already downloaded the film/don't like it. 3) Advertising hasn't been that great; the trailers aren't that good imo.
Really, for me, this movie just isn't looking good.
Originally posted by FistOfThe North
what's "wild things"?to lazy to look it up.
Spike Jonzes' Where the Wild things are.
I'm sure Wolverine will be successful but look at the X-men movie's. The best Wolverine can hope for is to do a little better than X-3. With this years movie schedule, X-3 numbers isn't going to be enough to be the highest grossing. Personally, i think the movie is going to suck and will struggle to reach 200 million. The buzz around the movie has already dropped off a great deal, thanks to the leak. That is really bad when the movie is about to release.
Although, anything is possible. I mean, i'm still astounded that Watchmen didn't do nearly as well as it should have. That movie is a masterpiece.
I see all the x-men movies as a comic series in it's own right, playing in it's own universe (pretty much like the ultimate universe), so i don't mind at all if they show differences from 616. For me to be fun, the movie has to be directed well, the changes have to make sense and the characters have to be true to their personalities.
Spoiler:
Victor being half brother to Logan does work for me quite well. It believably supports the whole love/hate/rivalry thing between them and adds a classic ... no, an antique ... no, actually even an antediluvian note to their relationship.Gambit being able to levitate cards and transfer kinetic energy fron the tip of his staff to the ground or whatever ... well ... it's an absolutely minor change to his powers that simply adds a little show ... and in the good way, i may add.
Cyclops going to highscool - who cares?! It neither adds to or takes away from the character anything important.
I could go on like this with changes i didn't mind or even liked, but i will come to those i didn't appreciated, cause it's a shorter list.
Emma? Was that diamond girl, being sister to Silverfox (the girls couldn't be more different) really supposed to be Emma? She was completely irrelevant for the storyline and could have been replaced by any other noname mutant easyly. She was just one example of what the movie really suffered from imo, a problem not unknown from X3 - Using major characters of the 616 and then giving them nothing to do but being there, having too much screentime for a nice little cameo and not enough significance for the story so that the audience might relate to them.
Boosting Deadpool up to beeing escentially Mimic wasn't such a great idea either. Fighting the major boss adversary at the end of the game ... uhm sorry ... movie, is a not very creative and using as such an artifically muted character whose major signature is not his powerset but his anticlimactic talking and comedy is as unwise and idiotic as it can get.
I had my moments of joy and my moments of anger watching this movie. I would like to see it again, but wouldn't spend money for the cinema. All in all it was ok, but completely failed to excite me like X1 and X2
Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
Wolverine will most likely be successful, but NOT TDK successful..
I said "event wise", not box office-wise. meaning that it's the most anticipated movie of the year in the way T..D.K. and spiderman 1 was.
event-wise.
box-office-wise i know it's not gonna make half a billion like TDK did but i believe that it can be the highest grossing hit of the year..
Everyone wants to watch it.. Wolverine is the most popular comic book bad-ass most people generally know, like common men, women, and children. some whom don't even read the comics. He's a good guy but different than the wholesome batman, spiderman, and superman characters. And people love him for that. He always stole the show in all the xmen movies, he was the bravest, the funniest, the most emotional, a ladies man, a guys guy, the kids loved him, it's crazy, he's the one people are always waiting to come on screen, and on top of that, this is an origin story. Those are some pretty damned good formulas for success. The popular 4 Wolverine Spiderman Superman and Batman (5 (maybe Hulk) have all had their origins stories save for W. until now, and it's gonna be what people want and wanna see. what people have been waiting to see.
Imho, I see it going past $200m domestically. The only thing that may very well out-do it is "harry 'pooter'".
we'll just have to see.
My friends saw Wolverine earlier this month online and they said they wanna watch it in theatres. I didn't watch it but decided to watch it in theatres cause wolverines my favorite xmen character since i was a kid, i love his comics (some of 'em) and that's where you watch a movie like that: On a huge screen with mega surround sound in the dark. And I also believe this movie will do good cause it's also leak-proof meaning even the leak won't hurt the movie's gross too much. It'll practically be unnoticeable.
But like i wrote we'll just have to see.
Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Nah..We're talking about a beloved and popular iconic comic book character the just about the likes of superman, batman, and spiderman that goes way back further than any of those titles you've mentioned. (I dunno about Star Trek, though, i think they both came out in the 60's, i think.)
Wolverine came out in 74. Star Trek in 66.
Regardless, I actually liked the unfinished version of Wolverine. Not as bad as I thought. Not good, by any means, of course.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Wolverine came out in 74. Star Trek in 66.Regardless, I actually liked the unfinished version of Wolverine. Not as bad as I thought. Not good, by any means, of course.
Yup, it was '74. Just double-checked Marvel.com after seeing your post. I thought he came out in 60's, o well..
Yea, my friends saw that version online, as well, i think. They were telling about some gun or guns that were flipping up in the air in slo-mo, and how it was just blatant bare bone unfinished CGI. Like something you'd see in early preproduction in a cutting room.
By the way I just read that on wiki that "In May 2008, Wolverine was ranked #1 out of "Wizard Magazine's Top 200 Comic Book Characters of All Time."
That's saying alot. Wizard's like the ultimate comic book magazine. I loved reading Wizard in the early half of the 2000's especially the vS section.
It'd be cool if this W. movie includes S.H.I.E.L.D. some how, in some cool way. Or vise versa. Meaning Have W. cameo in at least one of the new upcoming avengers related movie projects.
Originally posted by Dr Will Hatch
No more so than the first two. Face it, Singer got lucky once. He's no better then the "Rush Hour" guy.
No, man. I have to highly disagree with you there. Singer is a very fine Director. Every movie he has made has been filmed well. The guy is a versatile Director. the subject content and writing in the movie's he Directs may be lacking at times but that is hardly his fault. Go back and watch his movies, Usual Suspects, Xmen X2, Superman Returns and Valkyrie. The first 3 and last movie in that list are all very well made movies. Even Superman Returns was well made. It had it's problem but none of it's problems were because of poor directing.
I can't even blame Ratner for the end result of X-3. X-3 was actually filmed very well. X-3 suffered because of writing and cast members (i'm lookin at you Halle Berry 😠 )
I liked the work print better than the last stand but that's not saying much. I also think the movies make an interesting story once you tie them in with the game and the prequel comics. I also have an idea for a better intro to the wolverine flick then the one in the work print if anyone would like to read it.
Originally posted by Dr Will Hatch
He got lucky. Superman Returns was AWFUL.
Superman Returns was not awful. Perhaps it wasn't what many people hoped for in a superhero film, but it was far from awful. It was a a hell of a lot better than most superhero films, too.
Even you can't deny that The Usual Suspects was a damn good film and the majority would probably say the same for X-Men 2. As for his other stuff, X-Men was far from bad (it was a reasonably good film, and significantly better than the mess that was The Last Stand) and I haven't yet seen Apt Pupil or Valkyrie. Meanwhile, what's Ratner achieved? A horrific mess of a film in X-Men 3 and the pretty dire Rush Hour films. Red Dragon was OK, I'll give him that, but that was largely down to the quality of Thomas Harris' book and some decent acting, certainly not to his lacklustre direction.