MovieChat Forums > NotASpeckOfCereal > Replies
NotASpeckOfCereal's Replies
Wow. Brie Larson is pretty hot.
What would you prefer, we go back to a dumb blonde Ann Darrow with big tits?
This is an absolutely terrible reason to judge an actor for her work in a film. She didn't write the damned thing. Blame the director, the writers, any kind of photography continuity person they may have hired (if any).
But judge Brie Larson on her acting job. It was very well done.
The general audience isn't going to know what kind of moves a 1970s-era war photographer should be making.
This one is 100% troll. The best way to deal with him is to ignore him.
I find it quite astonishing that anyone would say that. It's really anything BUT "same old".
Yeah, I don't think there was supposed to be a super duper "better than ever" villain. In fact, why even try to En Sabah Nur?
As Dan sez, it was pretty much about Logan and Charles, and time. Also, without the mention of everyone else (most conspicuously Magneto), I think this film was supposed to stand more or less apart from the general X-men timelines.
I haven't EVEN been out to the wikis yet to see how badly this film horks up their various timelines, where it fits in the re-imagings,canon, etc. It's really all quite a mess in that regard.
So to me, it was really not just apart AND alone, but pretty much only related to the X-Men universe at large in the respect that it helped if you knew just a wee bit about the mutant history, the school that the old man use to run, what the heck was going on with the blades those two had coming out of their knuckles ... but you could still probably enjoy the film with only a rudimentary impression of all of that.
A huge villain probably would have detracted from the story they wanted to tell.
I don't know if it's overhyped because I don't pay much attention to marketing efforts.
Sure, I heard it was different, violent, thanks to Deadpool for R rating success, yada yada. I also noticed there were no "stinker" reviews.
So I decided to think for myself. Imagine that.
Should you spend the money to see it while it's in the theater rather than wait for a rental: yes. It's good, it's tight, you will be entertained. I haven't heard a single person say they were disappointed, or that they wish they hadn't gone to see it on the big screen. So go.
That said, it's probably my favorite X-Men film (I own all of them, including Apocalypse, which IS pretty much a yawner IMO), certainly my favorite Wolverine solo.
Chris
Apparently you aren't around kids much AND you forget that when you were a kid, because snot happens with crying kids. Or when you were a kid, you didn't cry.
If anything, snot added to the realism.
"Nobody wants to ..."
Speak for yourself.
Or is it simply the case that you really didn't want to embarrass yourself by reaching up to wipe that tear from your eye in front of your buddies? Because, you know, it was a pretty moving scene.
This article subsection covers a lot of the history and complexities of his adamantium poisoning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolverine_(character)#Powers_and_abilities
As the text starts, "His primary mutant power is an accelerated healing process". The skeletal structure enhancements were more than just genetic mutation, so it seems to me that he stands apart from the rest of the X-Men in that regard.
This installment (the film) in his history adds pus coming from his claw exit points and wounds that are no longer healing / regenerating as quickly as before, helping to define what is 'end of life' normalcy for him.
Though nobody can expect future owners of the X-Men franchise to stick to the story, given how many times it's changed already.
I don't believe the explained it. My take is that it was there for the traditional reasons of bringing a bird into a questionable space, which is to test the air for things that kill you.
The film also used the bird to enhance excitement, showing it jumping around more excited when things in the film were getting more tense. So in that respect, the bird was just a device.