Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

Updates:

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)

Director: Gavin Hood

Time Out rating

Average user rating

97 reviews

Movie review

From Time Out London

The first in a planned series of ‘X-Men’ prequels, ‘Wolverine’ arrives dogged by a lengthy production process (including a series of extensive and very public reshoots) and by the fact that an early version was leaked online some weeks before the official release. That version – dubbed a ‘workprint’ by the studio, but reportedly similar to the completed cut, barring a few effects shots – has already received a drubbing from those brave enough to admit to having watched it. So how does the finished film stand up?

The plot is thin and largely culled from an established backstory that anyone who's seen 'X2' will be familiar with. After unwittingly murdering his father, young Logan runs away to a life of war and turmoil: deathless and indestructible, Wolverine and his brother Victor, aka Sabretooth (Liev Schreiber), are eventually recruited by Danny Huston’s black-ops expert General Stryker for a series of covert missions. But surveillance quickly turns to slaughter, and Logan turns his back on the military. Unfortunately – and predictably – it turns out the military isn’t close to finished with him.

On the plus side, Hugh Jackman is hugely likeable in a role he was born to play, slicing and dicing his way through a series of competent action sequences devised by ‘Rendition’ and ‘Tsotsi’ director Gavin Hood. The opening mapping Wolverine’s journey through a century of warfare, is epic, breathless and brilliant.

But the script is simply disastrous. Overloaded with murky, forgettable characters familiar only to fans of the comics, it’s shot through with both narrative inconsistencies and laughably functional dialogue.

A host of talented supporting players, including Liev Schreiber and Ryan Reynolds, are unforgivably wasted, while crude visual references to both ‘Watchmen’ and ‘The Lord of the Rings’ only highlight the film’s failed ambitions. With some dire blue-screen effects, dizzying tonal instability and a total absence of suspense or originality, ‘Wolverine’ is something of a disaster.

Author: Tom Huddleston 2009-04-27 18:58:54

Time Out London Issue 2019, May 1-7 2009

Bookmark

User reviews of this film

stacy said...

Posted on May 05 2009 20:18 x men 3 was bad. this is the same maybe the worst of all the x men movies. its like they dont even care about this movie when it was made, no story line what so ever,

Report as inappropriate
ScotishLass said...

Posted on May 05 2009 05:45 I get so sick of the whiney dunderheads..."it's not like the comic." Go read the comics then and stay out of the theater. THIS WAS GREAT ENTERTAINMENT! My attention was riveted the whole time, and I came away with a deeper appreciation for the Wolverine character. We didn't all grow up reading the comics, so chill out and be glad that a whole new population is coming to love these guys. I'm going to see this again, and can't wait for the next one!

Report as inappropriate
Mr know said...

Posted on May 04 2009 16:49 All i have to say is that nobody can spell

Report as inappropriate
daniel said...

Posted on May 04 2009 11:17 i have to choose between this film and "fast and the furious", which film is better?? waiting for answer...

Report as inappropriate
Andy said...

Posted on May 04 2009 09:44 The main problem I had with this film started about 10 seconds in - if a superhero is immortal and indestructible, where's the tension? We know he can't die or even be hurt for long, so what's the point? And by making him over 100 years old, the idea that it took him a century to fall in love just makes him look a bit dim.

Report as inappropriate
Jeeezy said...

Posted on May 04 2009 03:59 you spelt adamantium wrong.... and you think you know what you're talking about

Report as inappropriate
Djole said...

Posted on May 04 2009 00:40 After the mess that was X-Men 3 this is a welcome return to form for the franchise. I loved the movie, and I speak as a comic aficiniado who has the original X-Men comics written by Chris Claremont and illustrated by John Byrne.

Report as inappropriate
Matt said...

Posted on May 04 2009 00:17 Wow Nemo, jay, and jack.... I really hope english is your fourth language. If that is a taste of your understanding of the english language; no wonder you hated the movie, you probably couldn't understand it.

Report as inappropriate
Ano said...

Posted on May 04 2009 00:16 I personally have not seen it, but my dad being a Wolverine fan went to go see it on the day it came out to theatres. Since he was actually around when Wolverine comics came out, he told me that it reminded him of the comics. So obviously all those bashing on people saying that they know nothing of the original origins, shut up. Statistically you might not even know the full origin story, or your a young sucker who thinks he knows all until some older fellow who grew up in that time comes along and proves you wrong. You have no idea what people know, plus even if they do not follow the comics, doesn't mean that it is a bad movie. Besides my ranking is based upon what my dad would mark, not me, maybe my view point of a good movie is different than his but I will have to see to find out. So from what my dad says, you want to see a Great Action flick, and watch a classic comic figure kick butt than go see the movie.

Report as inappropriate
D3 said...

Posted on May 03 2009 19:43 One word kept flashing though my mind as I watched this movie - LAME. How Marvel allows this to happen to such a popular and longstanding character as Wolverine is beyond me. This character, who John Byrne and Chris Clairemont and then countless other talented writers have turned slowly into one of the best comic book characters of all times is completely sold out inside of 3 minutes in this film. Nothing against Hugh Jackman, but the only thing that resembles Wolverine on that guy is his face - and since when was he the same size as Sabertooth? And what about his covert asian background? The adamantimum transformation was one of the most physically traumatic experiences of the character's life, and yet the movie treats it like he got a filling at the dentist. And WTF was Deadpool about? Why even go there? Did the film need it? Why didn't we at least get the Sabertooth we saw in the X-Men movies? And why use Cyclops in that way? And what was with the totally forgettable girlfriend? I thought what Spidey 3 did to the Gwen Stacey character was a travesty, but this takes the cake. As a lifelong Wolverine fan this movie was deeply disappointing if not downright insulting to the franchise, had little if anything to do with the character as written, and should be swept under the mythos carpet ASAP. Boo, people! Just boo. Sad follow up to Iron Man - why reconstruct characters that have already stood the test of time across such a huge fanbase? This was obviously more about the money than about any commitment to the Wolverine character. This movie just sucked bigtime!!! PLEASE MARVEL - MORE IRON MAN QUALITY AND LESS OF THIS INSULTING CRAP!! WHY DO YOU THINK THESE CHARACTERS ARE POPULAR?!? I want my money back. I only put one star because that was the minumum - personally I'd give this one a -3.

Report as inappropriate
Michael Laing said...

Posted on May 03 2009 01:27 This film is not good. The script is awful, I wrote better stories when I was 4, Apart from one or two one liners the dialogue is sub par, the story rediculous, charactor building is pretty much forgotten, the story clunks along form one fight scene to the next (more about the fight stuff later. The diecting and cinematography is uninspired and pretty amateurish. The ation scenes are about as exciting as watching socks dry. I have seen it all done before and better in count;ess other film. I hate fast cutting anyway especially in action scene (it can work in some films Bourne being a good example) but here it is done badly and combined with the ropey wire work and below standard special effects.
Due to the script most of the actors are given very little to work with. I can only think of one good one liner and that comes from Liev Schreiber Creed charactor. Hugh Jackman may look good but isn't given anyfthing decent to say and isn't given a chance to develop the characterr. Ryan Reynolds is given nothing to do with Deadpool and the he just isn't funny. I must admit to being a big deadpool fan and really hated that they did to him (why do movies have to change successful charactors so much and turn them into dog droppings). Taylor Kitsch is ok as Gambit but it feels as if he has just been added in for the sake of getting another popular character on screen
The music for the film was ok but kept getting over melodramatic, which isn't helped by the complete disinterest in the charactrrs, which means the score is wasted and became annoying after a while
This film is a huge mess. I don't think a film should be made badly just because it is a action or comic book film, I like good action films but this film fails in almost every respect. If you want a good x men film go and watch X2 which is much better. If you want a good Marvel film watch Blade 2 or Iron man. If you want to see a good superhero film go and watch the matrix or last 2 batman films which is superior in every way.

Report as inappropriate
Belle said...

Posted on May 02 2009 21:56 Are you guys out of your mind!?! You know X Men Origins: Wolverine was intensively illusive and action based all the way throughout the film. Note - My critique will be featured on The New Yorker and I want to see these ratings climb to the top.

Report as inappropriate
nick said...

Posted on May 02 2009 20:17 I particularly enjoy when a movie deviates from its original material at times. Especially a movie based on fictitious material to begin with. You've read the comic book. And if you enjoyed the comic books then good for you! Here's a different take. A different style. True it may be different from the actual story but I like seeing something new. Why would I read the story, then go watch a movie that will just tell me the same story. What's the point in that?

Report as inappropriate
Ed said...

Posted on May 02 2009 17:09 The movie was no "Forrest Gump" or "On Golden Pond", that's for sure, but it was enjoyable. Fair enough, the characters were not as deep as some would like, but they were identifiable and easily distinguished from one another.
The special effects at times left something to be desired, and as a fan, I'm a bit disgusted with the portrayal of Gambit. In this writer's opinion, that was the largest let down. Yes, I'm familiar with the actual print media this film was ~loosely~ based upon, and appreciate the care the writers and director took to address the needs of both the die-hard fans and also the "film fans".
Clearly, not a film for everyone, it did entertain. As a side note, I'd ask that any adult writing a review here take a few moments to recall a little device we were introduced to in school called a dictionary. While my own diction fails at moments, for the majority I double check the words I can't spell. I felt inclined to write a more positive review here for others to see just to prove that not everyone that watches this film is a bloody knuckle dragging porkskin eating neanderthal. I'm an educated, working adult who enjoys taking his son to see films that are energy driven and partially mindless. And alas, escapist at the core. I was able to feel immersed in this world with probable suspension of reality and disbelief long enough to enjoy the material presented, minus a few quirks that actually made me feel more for the characters that in my opinion were done "right".
While correctly billed as "not JUST for the Xmen/Wolverine" fanboys, this film was worth taking the time out of your day to just sit back and enjoy a fantastic story. Anal retentives need not reply.
Cheers.

Report as inappropriate
xXLottieXx said...

Posted on May 02 2009 14:02 There's been a load of reviews saying this movie sucks, and loads of reviews saying it was amazing, but I'd justy like to say that if your not a huge fan and follow the comics avidly, then you should enjoy it. Those of you who believe the comics as scripture will probably hate it as they have changed the story around to make it fit in with Xmen 1, and I guess to make it fit into a 2hr slot. That being said, if you just want to see a good film (granted there are some special effects issues that look a bit 90s) then this is for you, as there are some good one liners in a pretty funny at times script, and the action and fight scenes are really good. If you liked the other Xmen films (which also completely changed true comic events and histories) then you will like this.

Report as inappropriate