The Wolverine

Off Topic
41

[quote]sardines12 wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]Cimmerian wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
First off, wolverine is a short, hairy, 300 lbs man of agression. Hugh Jackman’s portrayal is very “pop”.
He doesn’t have anywhere close to the build or look. Hugh Jackman is like the anime skinny jeans teenager version of wolverine. Where are the massive legs,thick forearms, wide back and so forth? At the very least, he should look like this: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0P9ZTV_V4eE/TQBBYNCrTgI/AAAAAAAAAAM/WvXxhZmP_cI/s1600/1410872951_27bc2c3002.jpg

A guy that looks like this would be great (scroll down):
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?32901-Wolverine/page7

Then there’s the fact that the way they make him fight is fucking dumb. The guy is supposed to be a master martial artist. The fuck is he doing with those wild retarded swings and lack of fighting form?

The way wolverine is portrayed is just terrible. This movie will be just as terrible as all the other ones.[/quote]

So which short, hairy, 300lbs-of-muscle actor would you like to head this A-list movie?
[/quote]

Most guys are hairy, and not all actors are 6 feet tall. I’m sure you can find an actor, not necessarily a known actor, who is sub 5’5, doesn’t wax his body hairy, take a year or two to build him up in to a muscular behemoth and then make him act. Look what they did with 300, with bane, etc. It’s doable.[/quote]

You are going to complain about Jackman not fitting the bill physically yet find Tom Hardy acceptable as bane? Makes no sense.

Both actors succeed(ed) in over coming the geek expectations of their characters by actually being decent actors.[/quote]

In Nolan’s realistic batman-verse, Bane was fine.
Actually, Bane was pretty much perfect. He was fairly large and his physique was imposing, just not juiced to the gills imposing.

Regardless, I’m just not impressed by Wolverine’s portrayal.[/quote]
I like how they focused on big traps, shoulders and his back[/quote]

For me, both their portrayals work.

Hugh Jackman looks like enough of an animal since he is fairly thin and tall but muscular/vascular. It does annoy me that he is technically the Wolverine which is obviously a small ferocious animal, it makes the name completely invalid…

42

Roy can probably help me out here, but I once read that Glenn Danzig was approached to play Wolverine before the first X-Men, but turned it down. Any truth to that?

43

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Roy can probably help me out here, but I once read that Glenn Danzig was approached to play Wolverine before the first X-Men, but turned it down. Any truth to that?[/quote]

I like the band Danzig, but Glen is such a douche.

44

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]sardines12 wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]Cimmerian wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
First off, wolverine is a short, hairy, 300 lbs man of agression. Hugh Jackman’s portrayal is very “pop”.
He doesn’t have anywhere close to the build or look. Hugh Jackman is like the anime skinny jeans teenager version of wolverine. Where are the massive legs,thick forearms, wide back and so forth? At the very least, he should look like this: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0P9ZTV_V4eE/TQBBYNCrTgI/AAAAAAAAAAM/WvXxhZmP_cI/s1600/1410872951_27bc2c3002.jpg

A guy that looks like this would be great (scroll down):
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?32901-Wolverine/page7

Then there’s the fact that the way they make him fight is fucking dumb. The guy is supposed to be a master martial artist. The fuck is he doing with those wild retarded swings and lack of fighting form?

The way wolverine is portrayed is just terrible. This movie will be just as terrible as all the other ones.[/quote]

So which short, hairy, 300lbs-of-muscle actor would you like to head this A-list movie?
[/quote]

Most guys are hairy, and not all actors are 6 feet tall. I’m sure you can find an actor, not necessarily a known actor, who is sub 5’5, doesn’t wax his body hairy, take a year or two to build him up in to a muscular behemoth and then make him act. Look what they did with 300, with bane, etc. It’s doable.[/quote]

You are going to complain about Jackman not fitting the bill physically yet find Tom Hardy acceptable as bane? Makes no sense.

Both actors succeed(ed) in over coming the geek expectations of their characters by actually being decent actors.[/quote]

In Nolan’s realistic batman-verse, Bane was fine.
Actually, Bane was pretty much perfect. He was fairly large and his physique was imposing, just not juiced to the gills imposing.

Regardless, I’m just not impressed by Wolverine’s portrayal.[/quote]
I like how they focused on big traps, shoulders and his back[/quote]

For me, both their portrayals work.

Hugh Jackman looks like enough of an animal since he is fairly thin and tall but muscular/vascular. It does annoy me that he is technically the Wolverine which is obviously a small ferocious animal, it makes the name completely invalid…[/quote]

The wolverine is short, stocky and full of muscle. Most animals are not really vascular, but they are super muscly. Look at any pics of short haired animals (horse, lions, etc) and you see it’s the case.

His teenage vascular look is bullshit, especially considering how little muscle he has. Vascularity and abs on a skinny dude is like big tits on a fat chick: no one cares.

45
46

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

now that you mention it Hugh Jackman looks nothing like a wolverine.

47

[quote]Hell-Billy wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Roy can probably help me out here, but I once read that Glenn Danzig was approached to play Wolverine before the first X-Men, but turned it down. Any truth to that?[/quote]

I like the band Danzig, but Glen is such a douche.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/GraphicCity/news/?a=60436[/quote]

I like both Danzig and the Misfits, but agreed he’s a jackass. Ever seen that clip of him backstage at a concert where he starts shit with a roadie then gets laid out? Good times.

48

[quote]Hell-Billy wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

now that you mention it Hugh Jackman looks nothing like a wolverine. [/quote]

The size thing does bother me when it comes to his fights with sabretooth in the last movie, made no sense as to why he would actually call himself wolverine too.

They did a not too bad job in making him appear shorter though in the first x men, filmed dialogue scenes with the actors on raised platforms for some scenes supposedly.

49

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Roy can probably help me out here, but I once read that Glenn Danzig was approached to play Wolverine before the first X-Men, but turned it down. Any truth to that?[/quote]

Yeah, that’s true. It was back in the mid-nineties before Singer got involved. Around that time they were pursuing Bob Hoskins to play Logan. Not sure if that’s ridiculous or inspired.

50

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I remember after seeing the remake of Cape Fear back in the 90’s(?), thinking about how Deniro would probably be a great Logan. Get him in his best shape, obviously a bit older and weathered, looks like he’s lived through his share of ‘sh-t’, and definitely able to go from 0 to 60 in under a second.

S[/quote]
[/quote]

Ok, that pic is just awesome :slight_smile:

S

51

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Roy can probably help me out here, but I once read that Glenn Danzig was approached to play Wolverine before the first X-Men, but turned it down. Any truth to that?[/quote]

Yeah, that’s true. It was back in the mid-nineties before Singer got involved. Around that time they were pursuing Bob Hoskins to play Logan. Not sure if that’s ridiculous or inspired. [/quote]

Bob Hoskins, as in “Eddie Valiant” Bob Hoskins? There’s no way…

52

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Roy can probably help me out here, but I once read that Glenn Danzig was approached to play Wolverine before the first X-Men, but turned it down. Any truth to that?[/quote]

Yeah, that’s true. It was back in the mid-nineties before Singer got involved. Around that time they were pursuing Bob Hoskins to play Logan. Not sure if that’s ridiculous or inspired. [/quote]

Bob Hoskins, as in “Eddie Valiant” Bob Hoskins? There’s no way…[/quote]

I kind of see where they were going with that, but they probably hadn’t seen him in anything later than The Long Good Friday. It would have taken a lot of work to get him into even passable shape.

53

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
First off, wolverine is a short, hairy, 300 lbs man of agression. Hugh Jackman’s portrayal is very “pop”.
He doesn’t have anywhere close to the build or look. Hugh Jackman is like the anime skinny jeans teenager version of wolverine. Where are the massive legs,thick forearms, wide back and so forth? At the very least, he should look like this: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0P9ZTV_V4eE/TQBBYNCrTgI/AAAAAAAAAAM/WvXxhZmP_cI/s1600/1410872951_27bc2c3002.jpg

A guy that looks like this would be great (scroll down):

Then there’s the fact that the way they make him fight is fucking dumb. The guy is supposed to be a master martial artist. The fuck is he doing with those wild retarded swings and lack of fighting form?

The way wolverine is portrayed is just terrible. This movie will be just as terrible as all the other ones.[/quote]

I agree and disagree. Rememeber in the first couple of years in the comics when Wolverine was a skinny, short guy? He was muscular but not huge.

54

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
I’m not too bothered over hugh jackmans build not being in line with the comic book cause it just gives me something to look forward to for when they inevitably reboot the series.

I couldn’t agree more on the fighting part, he just flails about like crazy.[/quote]

Yeah but look at it this way, he has razor sharp unbreakable claws. He doesn’t need to do ANYTHING other than slash and stab. I mean, why even bother to kick anyone?

55

[quote]sandos wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
I’m not too bothered over hugh jackmans build not being in line with the comic book cause it just gives me something to look forward to for when they inevitably reboot the series.

I couldn’t agree more on the fighting part, he just flails about like crazy.[/quote]

Yeah but look at it this way, he has razor sharp unbreakable claws. He doesn’t need to do ANYTHING other than slash and stab. I mean, why even bother to kick anyone?[/quote]

I agree but I think my annoyance comes from X Men 2 when he was basically completely useless compared to DeathStrikes over the top powers.

56

[quote]sandos wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
First off, wolverine is a short, hairy, 300 lbs man of agression. Hugh Jackman’s portrayal is very “pop”.
He doesn’t have anywhere close to the build or look. Hugh Jackman is like the anime skinny jeans teenager version of wolverine. Where are the massive legs,thick forearms, wide back and so forth? At the very least, he should look like this: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0P9ZTV_V4eE/TQBBYNCrTgI/AAAAAAAAAAM/WvXxhZmP_cI/s1600/1410872951_27bc2c3002.jpg

A guy that looks like this would be great (scroll down):

Then there’s the fact that the way they make him fight is fucking dumb. The guy is supposed to be a master martial artist. The fuck is he doing with those wild retarded swings and lack of fighting form?

The way wolverine is portrayed is just terrible. This movie will be just as terrible as all the other ones.[/quote]

I agree and disagree. Rememeber in the first couple of years in the comics when Wolverine was a skinny, short guy? He was muscular but not huge.[/quote]

No, I don’t. Also, it’s irrelevent. Wolverine is CURRENTLY short, muscular and an able fighter…he has been for the past few DECADES.

57

[quote]Steel Nation wrote:

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:

[quote]optheta wrote:

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
I like the 1st Wolverine movie [/quote]

Thats a good joke.[/quote]

meh, it enterainted me. I liked them all cept for X3[/quote]

I even liked X3 because I don’t give a fuck about the X Men and thought it was entertaining.[/quote]

I didn’t mind it either, but the way internet talk goes X2 was above reproach and X3 was a disaster.
The same thing with Spider-Man 2 and 3. While I didn’t think Spider-Man 3 was great, it didn’t stand out to me as incredibly bad…and didn’t seem much different from the first two.

58

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]Cimmerian wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
First off, wolverine is a short, hairy, 300 lbs man of agression. Hugh Jackman’s portrayal is very “pop”.
He doesn’t have anywhere close to the build or look. Hugh Jackman is like the anime skinny jeans teenager version of wolverine. Where are the massive legs,thick forearms, wide back and so forth? At the very least, he should look like this: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0P9ZTV_V4eE/TQBBYNCrTgI/AAAAAAAAAAM/WvXxhZmP_cI/s1600/1410872951_27bc2c3002.jpg

A guy that looks like this would be great (scroll down):
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?32901-Wolverine/page7

Then there’s the fact that the way they make him fight is fucking dumb. The guy is supposed to be a master martial artist. The fuck is he doing with those wild retarded swings and lack of fighting form?

The way wolverine is portrayed is just terrible. This movie will be just as terrible as all the other ones.[/quote]

So which short, hairy, 300lbs-of-muscle actor would you like to head this A-list movie?
[/quote]

Most guys are hairy, and not all actors are 6 feet tall. I’m sure you can find an actor, not necessarily a known actor, who is sub 5’5, doesn’t wax his body hairy, take a year or two to build him up in to a muscular behemoth and then make him act. Look what they did with 300, with bane, etc. It’s doable.[/quote]

You are going to complain about Jackman not fitting the bill physically yet find Tom Hardy acceptable as bane? Makes no sense.

Both actors succeed(ed) in over coming the geek expectations of their characters by actually being decent actors.[/quote]

In Nolan’s realistic batman-verse, Bane was fine.
Actually, Bane was pretty much perfect. He was fairly large and his physique was imposing, just not juiced to the gills imposing.

Regardless, I’m just not impressed by Wolverine’s portrayal.[/quote]

Just to be clear, I highly doubt that was Tom Hardy when Bane climbed down the chain. it was most likely a stunt double…the arms were huge.

59

[quote]Nards wrote:

[quote]Steel Nation wrote:

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:

[quote]optheta wrote:

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
I like the 1st Wolverine movie [/quote]

Thats a good joke.[/quote]

meh, it enterainted me. I liked them all cept for X3[/quote]

I even liked X3 because I don’t give a fuck about the X Men and thought it was entertaining.[/quote]

I didn’t mind it either, but the way internet talk goes X2 was above reproach and X3 was a disaster.
The same thing with Spider-Man 2 and 3. While I didn’t think Spider-Man 3 was great, it didn’t stand out to me as incredibly bad…and didn’t seem much different from the first two.[/quote]

Are you kidding me Nards? That “bad Peter” crap was absolutely terrible.

60

Of course that part was terrible, but I didn’t see a very big difference in the basic feel of 3 as compared to 2 or the first one. Lots of swinging in a bad CG way with Mary Jane tied up somewhere high.

The silliest thing for me with number 3 was the coincidences.

The idea that a black goo from space would happen to find the one guy who has these strange spider-like powers and that the one guy who falls into some science experiment and becomes melded with sand is the guy who killed that Spider-Man’s uncle and later when Spider-Man rids himself off the black goo in a church tower the black goo falls onto the only guy who wants Peter Parker dead. Ugh.