X-Men Origins: Wolverine

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)

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)

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)

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)