The Wolverine


MaxPower

Recommended Posts

"Not a sequel" could mean anything. It could mean that it's a prequel that takes place during the time in-between the prologue of X-Men Origins and the main meat of the story. Or it could be "not a sequel" in that it chronologically takes place after the first movie, but doesn't directly continue any character or plotlines.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

"Not a sequel" could mean anything. It could mean that it's a prequel that takes place during the time in-between the prologue of X-Men Origins and the main meat of the story. Or it could be "not a sequel" in that it chronologically takes place after the first movie, but doesn't directly continue any character or plotlines.

Or it could mean he saw the first movie, said "Fuck that noise" and decided he'd rather do his own Wolverine film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that'd work if he were in complete control of the entire X-men franchise. I don't think Fox would let him do that.

What I mean is, he would do his own movie, with its own story, and then just try to put as little reference to the first movie as possible.

Technically this would be the 5th movie with this character played by the same actor. People are going to assume it's part of the continuity.

Yeah, most people don't really care about reading stuff online, they'll just go see the film when it comes out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it seems sort of obvious now, but couldn't most comic/superhero movies work like that? The comics always have well defined story arcs that finish. Each movie could be their own stand alone story, not a sequel, not a prequel, just shit that happens to that hero?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it matter if it’s a sequel or not? If the events that take place in the movie don’t contradict what’s already been laid out, then you can take it either way. And I don’t think they will. Nobody has to be confused by this.

If he's specifically saying it's not a sequel then it might contradict past movies. He didn't need to say anything unless it does.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like you're reading too much into it.

Wolverine's in Japan. They'd have to out of their way to contradict what's already been set up, and I don't know why they would since it's not necessary this time around. And I'd like to believe Aronofsky and McQuarrie know what they’re doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, here's a thought:

They're trying to do with Aronofsky to Wolverine what Nolan did to Batman. And it's not going to work. At all. I mean christ, we saw that Batman pitch he did.

Mind you, I love Aronofsky's stuff. But I just don't see this turning out well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not denying that Aronofsky can bring the right things to the table. But if how he handled his Batman pitch is how he's going to handle Wolverine, in terms of how he's gonna handle the comic properties, I think we have some things to be worried about.

Here's what it comes down to, for me. They're bringing in Aronofsky to try and get someone critically acclaimed and artistic on the Wolverine series, in order to get positive popular attention. IE, what the Batman films now have with Nolan.

EDIT: Okay, here we are:

And the problem with that is, Aronofsky has nothing going for him but critical acclaim, and in terms of the popular audience, that means exactly jacksquat. Almost no one knows who he is, unless he's a film buff (like half of us on here).

Just look at the two: both had critically acclaimed movies released in the last year, and Nolan's the one people are talking about more, and the one the more popular audience is interested in, which is the audience the Wolverine movie is gonna be aimed at.

There is overlap between comic movie fans and film buffs, but it's not a big one. And I don't think it's gonna be enough to pull this off for Aronofsky.

Mind you, I like the guy's work. Black Swan was awesome, and Fountain was solid, if a bit too up his own ass for me at times. I just don't think he's going to be able to appeal to a mainstream audience on name basis alone, like Nolan. And if Fox is gonna keep the license, they need that mainstream appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

It's a reason, but a shitty one. He would have known the shoot was OS when he signed on and now he's bitching about it. I doubt it's the real reason. Would have loved to see his take on it, Fox will probably panic and get Peter Berg or someone like that. I'd love Paul Verhoeven to have a go at an iconic character.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He said away from his family though, not I don't want to become radio active. This all begs the question, why isn't Fox either halting production (losing the rights to the franchise I would guess) or moving production somewhere else. It all seems really weird.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.