X-Men Geneza: Wolverine

The first half an hour of Wolverine is very promising, with its spectacular action, very nice work with mountain locations, a likable Hugh Jackman, a believable relationship with a hot girl, cool catchphrases (“I’m Canadian”) and Liev Schreiber’s badass super villain (he’ll have to fight off offers to play more villains with a stick). Wolverine starts off as a tastefully balanced mix of dynamic action and pleasant family adventure with some romance thrown in for a good measure... That’s why it’s a pity that the talented Gavin Hood must gradually submit to more and more stupid screenplay twists, which want to astonish the action-craving audience at any cost. The movie thus ends up being something between Doom and X-Men: The Last Stand. I’m neither angry nor disappointed, as this was to be expected already from the trailer. I’m just saying it’s a pity. These characters and the hard-working actors playing them deserve something more clever. Something like Bryan Singer. (27.04.2009)

Crap that cost a lot of money always piss me off the most, and with Wolverine's origin my anger is clear. It’s an incredibly unoriginal comic book movie that fails in everything. Really, one cliché after another, already during the first fifteen minutes or so there are two shots of a screaming kneeling figure with a camera flying upwards. At least it makes you retroactively appreciate Ratner’s third part. (14.07.2011)

Mourning for Singer went out of fashion long ago after Ratner's collapse, so why not enjoy mutants in the brisk action guise dictated by the increasingly popular 1980s model? Hood grasped the point of the subject matter on offer and presents us with a very decent piece of work that relies on the fact that if something moves, shoots, and explodes on the screen (preferably ten times in a span of a few seconds), it is impossible to be mad at it. However, Skip Woods is still writing like he’s had a lobotomy, so the dialogue is solidly rough, and the twists and turns were surely foreseen by the group of twelve-year-old snots sitting a few seats away. My fondness for Reynolds, the fact that Schreiber is a crackerjack and Jackman a major crackerjack, who simply is Wolverine, saved a lot of this film for me. I’ll probably forget it in a few days, but the fact that I wasn't bored for two hours, and the over-the-top finale on the cooling tower gives it just enough bonus points. Edit: Even after the second viewing it still has some energy, but the stupidity is also quite visible. I give it a better three stars. (30.04.2009)

Wolverine alone has earned two films over a period of four years purely about him. I didn’t understand why they did it, and overall I don’t even understand the meaning of the whole X-Men movies, where they return from the present to the past only to gradually jump into the future. I don’t understand the narrative line of all the movies, and I’ll probably never understand it. But what I admit is that this movie, unlike the Wolverine film itself, is perhaps even better. This is mainly due to the atmosphere of the 1970s, which seems absurd to me whenever I’m reminded of it. However, so be it. Three stars for not being completely bad at filmmaking. But everything else in this series is meaningless, and I think I will never find any meaning in other films from this series. (26.10.2015)

Disappointment that is on a level higher than the final part of the trilogy. Even Jackman's unquestionable charisma cannot hold together a story which, after a fairly promising start, burst into disjointed fights, silly dialogues and terribly predictable twists. The unique magic of the X-Men series has somehow disappeared, and I'm really wondering what puts Wolverine above all other soulless comic book fight films. Instead of the neglected question of the mutants vs. people relationship, Hood's film was supposed to feature a troubled hero, but only those shiny claws and an angry expression really remain of Logan. Paradoxically, the biographical film contributes the least to the image of the Wolverine of all the films, and while it does benefit from the charisma of previous films, the new knowledge about the hero's past is very weak, contrived, exaggerated and sometimes almost embarrassingly calculated. The image concept has nothing with which to captivate, the music is ok, the actors ok, but the added value that the viewer is used to with Singer is simply missing here. Unfortunately, what I suspected with regard to X-Men: The Last Stand has been confirmed. Without Singer, this universe lacks any distinctive charm. [50%] (27.04.2009)

The real superheroes here aren’t Wolverine and Sabretooth, but Jackman and Schreiber. Both of their performances, overcoming the clichéd action scenes and almost making you forget about the stupidity of the screen-writing, are nothing short of superhuman. Other than that it’s just a full feature Tide Pod infomercial (Logan’s whitest than white shirt would put John McClane to shame) mixed with 80s B movie classics resulting in an imbalanced cocktail, and even having seen the whole the movie I still can’t tell whether it was taking itself seriously or not. (03.05.2009)

Adrenaline, excitement, fascinating action, and Jackman. Although Gavin Hood doesn't go through complicated storylines or delve into deep psychological exploration, it's beyond me how the creator of the desperately average Rendition could create such an amazing tribute to Logan. I simply rejoiced in everything, from the warrior Wolverine, to the lone Wolverine, to the expectedly raging Wolverine. Nevertheless, I acknowledge that this five-star review is probably highly personal. (24.05.2009)

I have only seen the first two films of the X-Men series so far and they made a very solid impression on me. Wolverine takes a completely different direction and is not what I am looking for. It is more action-packed and visually impressive, but somehow immature in a teenage way. Even Liev Schreiber, one of my favorite actors, in the role of the main antagonist, did not improve my feelings. It is likely a generational matter because as a teenager I would give it at least one more star. Overall impression: 45%. (16.12.2009)

Wolverine had a lot of potential but unfortunately it remained almost untapped. As I feared, most of Wolvie's fascinating life was shown in the opening titles (World War I and II, Vietnam), and then we go straight back to when he served under Stryker. Which means those who wanted to know more about Wolverine's past are out of luck. But when you accept the game started by the screenplay, you'll have fun. Hugh Jackman was born for this role, and he certainly doesn't have to be ashamed of what he's doing here. The charming killer will hopefully win the heart of every viewer. The story is otherwise devoted to the creation of the X and XI programs, so there will be eye-pleasing showdowns, wisecracks, and also fateful moments when we will find out what actually happened. It could have been done better but I still had fun. Thanks to Ryan Reynolds, I'm really looking forward to Deadpool's solo. Oh yes, I almost forgot, Victor Creed is Schreiber's role of a lifetime. (27.06.2009)

It's hard to say how I would have reacted to X-Men Origins: Wolverine when it was a novelty, but today I can appreciate the cross-section of Logan's history, the war montage, and the quiet scenes from Canada. Everything else is unfortunately strange and superfluous. (05.08.2015)

A boring mix of romance and breathtaking mountain scenery (more interesting first part) with a disjointed action adventure (boring second part) and a typically grandiose climax. As a prequel to a famous franchise, it's decent, but as a standalone action piece, it's very mishandled. Hugh Jackman has charisma, but his character is not sufficiently well-written, the action is confusing, computer-generated, and dull. The antagonists are solid, but the final over-the-top action set-piece follows a beaten path that no longer entertains me. (30.08.2009)

After X-Men III, which I'm not dismissing mainly because it somehow wraps up the saga (but otherwise it's kind of a mutant Beverly Hills), Wolverine is definitely a turn for the better. Jackman has the charisma of three normal guys, Schreiber's villain is also a unique character in his own way, the film is brisk, it moves along thanks to a reasonable runtime, the action scenes are handled well (the final battle with Deadpool had me staring in the movie theater), and the soundtrack is also good. I liked Gambit the most among the supporting characters, I hope he is somehow included in the next installment. Sure, script-wise, Wolverine isn't Oscar-worthy, but whoever was expecting something like that was wrong. Wolverine is exactly what it's supposed to be and is not trying to be something it’s not. (09.05.2009)

The only thing this movie has in common with its great predecessors is the character of Wolverine, played by the likeable Jackman, whose shiny claws are on display even more often and with greater intensity. Everything else felt very cold, completely lacking the charm and insight of Singer and Ratner. The characters fight with each other, but with hardly any chemistry or psychology between them. I didn't even like the story, which was a bit boring in many places, nor the main villain Stryker, who’s not even close to Ian McKellen. I was looking forward to another bombastic adventure, but its mediocrity was quite surprising. Yet, I wouldn’t call X-Men Origins a waste of time 60% (17.02.2012)

Wolverine is a moronic B movie that someone shoved a lot of money into. In other words, just like the main character. Contrary to the complaints of many about the lack of Singerian overtones, the satire, and the emotional nitpicking of the first two X-Men movies (pfffffff), I'd like to defend myself by saying that I watch mutant movies for the reason that their protagonists can actually punch a helicopter in the face. Check. Plus, when the imbecilically digital Picard appeared at the end of the film, a completely unique strangled sound came from my throat, the first time I've heard it, and whose motivations and origins I intend to continue to investigate. So I can't complain that the film wasn't at least thought-provoking for me. (21.11.2014)

Many characters are introduced here, but actually completely unnecessarily, because we will not meet them again. The new "Wolverine" is like starting everything over and is actually a restart. And let's face it, better. On the other hand, we learn a lot here about how Wolverine was actually created, which is quite important at least from the perspective of world knowledge and various connections. Of course, only for those who are in love with comics and their adaptations. (23.12.2013)

I’d say this was a decent action movie, but all that effort to make it epic and the wasted potential of the script turn this into a disappointment, considering the gem of a movie this could have been. The only positives are the standard good music and, as always, fantastic Jackman (and a couple of good lines here and there), otherwise an average movie in all respects. (30.07.2013)