WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

"The Wolverine" is a Mild Box Office Hit

Posted: July 28th, 2013 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
"The Wolverine" is a Mild Box Office HitSubmit Comment
20th Century Fox was hoping for "The Wolverine" to gross at least $70 million during its opening weekend. The results are now in, and "The Wolverine" only managed to gross $55 million.

That was still good enough for first place at the domestic box office and more than enough to make the film a success. Internationally, the comic book movie took in another $86.1 million for a worldwide total of $141.1 million. Since "The Wolverine" cost only $120 million to make, it's already considered a hit.

Four years ago, the studio released "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," which was leaked online early and potentially hurt the film's box office results. But the movie still opened to $85 million, much higher than "The Wolverine."

Meanwhile, "The Conjuring" was pushed to second place. The horror film, which cost only $20 million to make, grossed another $22.1 million to bring its worldwide total to $96 million.

On the specialty side, Woody Allen's "Blue Jasmine," which has an 85% fresh rating on RottenTomatoes, was released in six theaters in New York and Los Angeles. It grossed $612,767 for an amazing per-screen average of $102,128, one of the best openings of all time.

Click here to read our "The Wolverine" review.

Check out the rest of the box office results

Source: THR


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 52 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
The5thBeatle5 writes:
on July 28th, 2013 at 9:42:34 PM

It was definitely worth the scratch to see it in theaters, been waiting a while for it to come out Looking forward to Days of Futures Past, hopefully another stand alone Wolverine, and the R-rated Blu Ray version
minkowski writes:
on July 28th, 2013 at 9:56:36 PM

Zzzzzzzzz......
cress writes:
on July 28th, 2013 at 9:59:24 PM

PACIFIC RIM was last seen falling through the interdimensional portal at the bottom of the ocean. It got stuck halfway down, though, as it became clogged with all that cheese.
minkowski writes:
on July 28th, 2013 at 10:03:39 PM

2013: The Summer of Cinematic Garbage.
Rambo writes:
on July 28th, 2013 at 10:29:42 PM

I'm glad Pacific Rim bombed,the non action scenes were on the level of grown ups 2 with worst acting then that movie.
Rambo writes:
on July 28th, 2013 at 10:45:23 PM

and yes - summer 2013 was horrible.There were only 2 movies that didn't suck but none of them were great - Fast six and World War Z.
minkowski writes:
on July 28th, 2013 at 11:01:35 PM

Not a single instant classic for me this year, or last either. Seems to be it's getting harder and harder to find one of those "eternally enjoyable" films.
Rambo writes:
on July 28th, 2013 at 11:19:50 PM

so what was the last instant classic you liked?
minkowski writes:
on July 28th, 2013 at 11:27:38 PM

Pfffft. let me get back to you.
Deaft0ne writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 12:30:34 AM

Pacific Rim is better than The Wolverine Rambo, don't be a willful c*nt.
pornfly writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 12:33:22 AM

I liked Flight until Denzel wised up in the end
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 12:46:48 AM

Is JB and Deaftone the same person?
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 12:47:33 AM

Are.
telur writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 1:11:48 AM

the best part of the wolverine is when ian mckellen and patrick stewart appear in the ending
vincere01 writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 1:56:48 AM

Saw wolverine last night. Heres some quick thoughts.

let me start by saying in general I tend to not like films/video games/tv shows that venture too much into Japanese areas because I find them either harder to relate to, woefully outdated thematic material or just plain stupid.

There are very few instances where something out of the land of the rising sun or something heavily influenced by it interests me. The last last samurai, enter the dragon and the like are obvious givens.

this movie still interested me as well. Im glad I went to it as well. I found the story to be a breath of fresh air as far as superhero films go, mostly due to its lack of overcomplicated juggling of plot and characters.

it focused soley on wolverine the entire film and it was very welcome. They took the character then ever before, whether it was the more graphic violence and blood, the deeper emotional aspects of what makes logan tick and the repercussions of his life choices, or just the multiple f bombs he enjoys throughout.

Jackman turned in his best performence to date as logan and you can tell he was absolutely loving every minute of it. I believe its obvious now that he is content to continue playing this part for as long as they will let him/his does not look to old to play it. And I dont believe he is the type to make outlandish demands of payment either.

he stays very busy in theater, and other films and I think he genuinely just enjoys playing as logan and its not about the money for him anymore. And after seeing him in this film im quite alright to see him play logan until its natural ending.

the story was well paced, a few bogdowns here and there but it still kept my interest. There were also a few obvious 0lot points there as well but nothing that distracted from my enjoyment.

I thought the opening was fantastic, especially seeing the recreation of the nagasaki atomic explosion on the screen, top notch effects. Overall the movie meshed cgi and practical effects quite well. Cinemetography was also beautiful at times and serviceable at worst which was not often.

acting overall was quite good, especially all the main cast. One glaring fault for me was the psuedo vilaness lizzard chemist chick whatever her name was(viper maybe?). I found her to be annoying and cliche, almost a direct copy of xenia onnatop from goldeneye, she was by far the movies weakest link.

speaking of onnatopp, the actress who played her, famke jannsen was great with the few scenes she did have. ---spoiler ahead skip if you have not seen movie-----her last scene featured her character making some vague but also interesting remarks about how logan "put her there". Maybe its just me...but by her look and tine which visibly and audibly changed in that scene, I took it to a reference about her being stuck in some sort ofnpurgatory place impsrisoned. Could this be a plot device put there to allow singer to fix her death as he mentioned he might just do??? Curious..

also would like to note that this movie had a bit of a james bond feel to it which I really liked, the chases, the espionage bits and exotic locales.

---spoiler over----

in closing I would highly suggest giving this movie a go. If you have enjoyed any of the previous xmen movies you will enjoy this one, and its a welcome step by in the right direction after x3 killed the modern day set.movies. I look forward to any sequels from this point if the quality stays like this and ratner is kept as far away as possible.

the good
- great perfomences all around for the main cast, especially jackman which is his best interpretation of logan on screen to date
- great blending of old effects and cgi
- rights the ship for modern day xmen films

the bad
- some bogdown points
- horrible caricature vilan viper character

OVERALL 8 OUT OF 10
Avirex writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 2:03:37 AM

Saw both Wolverine and Pacific Rim tonight. Glad I checked them out before their theater run ends. I missed both Iron Man 3 and Man of Steel.

Wolverine was obviously better than the last outing. But I have the same complaint everyone else did about the third act. It became B movie sci-fi cliches. I hear one of the dudes who wrote 'Live Free or Die Hard' wrote part of the flick so I can only assume that sh*t at the end was him. Anyway, basically it was great in comparison to other X-flicks but still a far cry from it's maximum potential. Better than expected, mostly. Hugh should end this on a high note though and let someone else take over.

Pacific was visually engaging, especially as a Del Toro fan. All his trademarks were there in copius amounts. Slimy monsters, creatures in tanks, his obsession with machines, the elevator type thing, Ron Perlman, etc. However, its not a great film by any means. If you're not a Del Toro fan there won't be much for you to enjoy.
JB_ENFORCER writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 2:37:18 AM

I am going to See Wolverine Tomorrow. So will give opinion then.

Blue Jasmine has Andrew Dice Clay !!!!
Tanman32123 writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 2:41:34 AM

I'm gonna wait until Days of future past Comes out. Right before it does, I'll watch Origins, Wolverine, First class, 1,2 and 3. THEN go watch Dofp.

Until then, I really don't care lol
Taco writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 3:20:48 AM

At Tanman,
The Wolverine comes after X3. May want to switch your order.
Patrick Bateman writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 3:28:00 AM

and here I was thinking it was a spicy hit
Rambo writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 4:04:52 AM

@mink

regarding JB and deaftone - maybe,I have a feeling there are a few users here that play around with multiple accounts.
GreenLensman writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 4:05:29 AM

They pick the dumbest villains for these movies. There are so many things they can do but they choose the cheapest way to make money.

I wish I could say I'm going to stop watching until they bring in better characters, but there is really nothing else to watch...
Cannon writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 4:26:22 AM


I walked out of the theater Friday having enjoyed The Wolverine. But now, after giving it some thought, Iíll contend that itís a far more underrated film than most people realize. A number of clichťs and the largely predictable plotline still stand, yet, thematically, it has done something far more poignant (and more daring) than a plethora of previous comic book/summer blockbusters. Where those films piggybacked on post-9/11 as a mere cheap gimmick for endless CG destruction and spectacle, this film only features one explosion...just one...that more sincerely shapes the story and its two principle characters, and not by evoking a real life tragedy that happened to America, but one that America inflicted on someone else.

Also, itís a better staged and more sharply edited action film, with better choreographed fight scenes, than most of the bullsh*t Iíve seen over the past few summers. So, frankly, I donít give a sh*t if it doesnít break box office record or if it isnít deemed some "instant classic". f*ck classics. I just want a good movie. And The Wolverine is a good movie.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 4:35:49 AM

An instant classic is a film you'll still be watching twenty years from now.

Do you seriously think you'll be watching Wolverine twenty years from now?

I doubt it.

More like some disposable summer fare. Something to kill time. Something better, but only slightly, than all the other disposable summer fare.

But hey, if your view on cinema is that it's just a personal time waster, fair enough, but don't get upset some of us take film far more seriously.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 4:36:41 AM

@Rambo: yep.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 4:44:51 AM

"Where those films piggybacked on post-9/11 as a mere cheap gimmick for endless CG destruction and spectacle, this film only features one explosion...just one...that more sincerely shapes the story and its two principle characters, and not by evoking a real life tragedy that happened to America, but one that America inflicted on someone else."

Really, Cannon. Really.

You really think all the explosions in films these days has to do with 9-11 and not the fact the master of cinematic destruction Michael Bay has made Hollywood billions of dollars, and his cheaper imitations many billions more?

And then you think that because Wolverine features only one boom-boom, it somehow rises above numerous other more explosion-laden films in the same genre? Extremely low bar, don't you think?

Really. Like I said. Really. You seem to think there's some connection to Nagasaki from 9-11, and perhaps Wolverine mentions such a connection explicitly, but otherwise it's a huge stretch to connect what happens to Logan in Wolverine to what you think has shaped cinema over the last twelve years. An enormous and incredulous stretch.

Really.
Rambo writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 4:52:37 AM

Boom, boom, boom, boom, I want you in my room
Let's spend the night together from now until forever
Boom, boom, boom, boom, I wanna double boom
Let's spend the night together, together in my room
Rambo writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 4:55:14 AM

those were some poetic words from vengaboys...

As for what Cannon said,it's interesting and I do agree the first half of the movie was better then any other comic book adaptation this summer but the second half really went nowhere,very generic and I'm sure that if the budget of the movie was bigger then what it was we would have seen more explosions.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 5:00:39 AM

He may or may not be right about Wolverine (haven't seen it yet) but his posited connection of 9-11 to modern movie pyrotechnics is a specious argument at best, and one would only need to review summer films pre-9-11 to give lie to that assertion.

Hell, even Burton's first Batman movie featured gratuitous and obligatory explosions. Seems that's Hollywood's standard set piece and has been for the better part of twenty-five years.

Die Hard, anyone?
Rambo writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 5:10:40 AM

I think conspiracy people will claim that Hollywood is controlled by the elite class (5 or 6 families which rule the world's money) and they dictate movies with explosions since explosions and panic give a subliminal message of fear to anyone who watches them and fear means need for security which means the simple man/woman understand how important it is to have a strong government and it's important to pay taxes which actually go to the people who rule the country to make them richer and richer and give them more control.
something like that.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 5:13:30 AM

So Michael Bay is our shadow king?
Rambo writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 5:16:57 AM

yes,and we are his car washing bitches
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 5:17:39 AM

Heh. Nice analogy.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 5:18:29 AM

Alex and Dustin respond: When do we get to "audition" on Bay's couch?
Rambo writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 5:22:47 AM

there goes my lunch
M. Bullitt writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 5:42:46 AM

- This is The End: Utter Crap!

- The Purge: Mega Crap!

- The Croods: Very Funny and nicely done.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 6:06:59 AM

Where ever, she'd still be f*cking black guys for their money.
Sev writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 6:33:23 AM

"The Wolverine" cost only $120 million to make"

.....only $120million? Jesus h! >_<
pornfly writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 6:37:05 AM

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_luqervDDQk1r5qrimo1_400.gif
pornfly writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 6:40:43 AM

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_me23gbg3ad1rlvqlao1_400.gif
M. Bullitt writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 6:46:08 AM

Lol!
Cannon writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 7:01:55 AM

@Mink

"An instant classic is a film you'll still be watching twenty years from now.

Do you seriously think you'll be watching Wolverine twenty years from now?

I doubt it."

Such logic implies that I would likewise never bother watching any film from twenty years ago or longer that isnít a "classic", which is, of course, ridiculous.

"But hey, if your view on cinema is that it's just a personal time waster, fair enough, but don't get upset some of us take film far more seriously."

Thatís extremely binary. Having a passion for cinema at its finest dose not by default exclude one from embracing films that, while not extraordinary, are still thoughtful and solidly crafted entertainment.

"You really think all the explosions in films these days has to do with 9-11 and not the fact the master of cinematic destruction Michael Bay has made Hollywood billions of dollars, and his cheaper imitations many billions more?"

Actually, thatís precisely my point. Just this past summer alone weíve seen Star Trek Into Darkness and Man of Steel incorporate storied acts of terrorism -- bombings, toppling skyscrapers, starships crashing into innocent bystanders, entire city blocks decimated by alien death rays -- that were clearly intended as metaphors for 9/11 and the war on terror or to evoke wholesale imagery from the WTC attacks so as to resonate with a post-9/11 audience ...and yet it all just came off as an exploitive, superficial gimmick cheaply employed to justify Bay-scaled explosions and wanton CGI spectacle, to say nothing of the nonsensical nature of how much of it was worked into the narratives.

The same goes for the latter two Nolan Batman films and, to a lesser degree, The Avengers (which lazily threw in TV footage of post alien invasion memorials) and Iron Man 3, though to its own credit, played more satirically with Al-Qaeda/media culture than anything else.

Now, Iím not suggesting that The Wolverine reaches All Quiet on the Western Front levels of profoundness. No, itís not The Deer Hunter. Itís not even the original Gojira, which infused the atomic bombings far deeper and more meaningfully into its subtext.

What I am saying is that, compared to the aforementioned superhero/blockbuster movies, particularly those that exemplify such gimmickry at its worst, this is the first of such kind to evoke -- or, in this case, directly reference -- real tragic history without it feeling like a lame excuse to just blow sh*t up real good, over and over and over again. It was more singular, more focused. The way the scene is handled, along with two later related scenes in the film, treats the event seriously and in a way that genuinely serves some thematic purpose, albeit broad, regarding the main characters.

So, in short: yeah ...Really.

pornfly writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 7:04:11 AM

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/2661/c74d97b01eae257e44aa9d5.gif
pornfly writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 7:07:45 AM

http://24.media.tumblr.com/fd61a67a5ebd4addcc5671c4c2dea844/tumblr_mnbf05sKzD1qzbyqeo1_500.gif
JB_ENFORCER writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 7:22:06 AM

I am me only, Deaftone seems like a decent guy but I only use one account now.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 7:40:45 AM

"Such logic implies that I would likewise never bother watching any film from twenty years ago or longer that isnít a "classic", which is, of course, ridiculous."

I meant classic to YOU, to ME, not classic according to IMDb or Leonard Maltin.

And there was no such "logic", merely a question, one you still have not honestly answered.


"Thatís extremely binary"

There's nothing extreme about something being binary. It either is binary or it is not, just like binary itself.


"Having a passion for cinema at its finest dose not by default exclude one from embracing films that, while not extraordinary, are still thoughtful and solidly crafted entertainment."

Blah blah blah. Translation: A person can like high-art films and still enjoy trash low-brow summer tentpole flair like Wolverine. We get it. That's all you had to say.

Regardless, that's not what *I* said.

You took issue because I apoke about the fact there hasn't been any recent films I would consider "instant classics", going so far as to quote me without actually using quotation marks, and then you went on to talk about how great Wolverine is as a film. That wasn't my point.

Let me restate everything again: I have not seen one single film in more than few years I can say I will be watching twenty years from now, what I could call a personal "instant classic", and I highly doubt you'll be watching Wolverine, or Man of Steel, or Oblivion, or...twenty years hence, whereas I'll still be enjoying Indian Jones and Back to the Future and Die Hard. That's what I meant and you still have not addressed that query honestly.



Wolverine is likely not an instant classic to you, nor will it be an instant classic to me (when I see it), and thus no matter how "good" it is at the moment, in lieu of anything better, two decades hence you likely won't even remember it was ever made.

So, whatever it is you think you and I were saying, we weren't.





As for 9-11...you tried to make some weird connection to city explosions in films and the fact Logan recollects the bombing of Nagasaki in Wolverine. How you made that connection, I've no clue, but ignoring the thought process involved, I addressed the other part of your comment, the part wherein you seemed to say that 9-11 has had some unprecedented impact on movie films, and again, I say they haven't, because before 9-11, buildings and cities were still be destroying by the virtual square mile.

The ONLY thing 9-11 brought to film was, is a cheaply cinematic inspirational acquisition of film footage from that day, such as: aping the smoke clouds and dust plumes, the frantically running people and the expanding debris. That's it. Footage of 9-11 has done nothing more than served to provide cinematographers first-hand realistic experience, before unseen, of what it looks like when buildings fall on people.

Yes, yes, Star Trek Into Darkness had some guy blowing up buildings, and some of the shots look like they were lifted from CNN. So what? That Hollywood learned what REAL demolitions looked like from CNN's historical coverage?

We can all now see Hollywood has liberally borrowed from footage of that day. It's nothing new, not for STID, and not you or me or anyone else. But some guy blowing up sh*t, city buildings even, predates 9-11 by a few decades.

Again, all that's been added since September 11, 2001 is the so-called realism of such destruction, which is more like art imitating life (although many commentators actually said 9-11 greatly resembled Armageddon, which would then thus be life imitating art), and the rise of the "urban terrorist" in films, a circ*mstance once again unprecedented since there was a bevy of IRA movies made in the 80s.

Apart from that, nothing more. There's certainly been no uptick in the amount of explosions per film, per year, since 9-11, which seemed to be what you were implying.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 7:56:39 AM

spoke.
minkowski writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 8:06:56 AM

a...a...some others.
Cannon writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 12:07:43 PM


@Mink

"Blah blah blah. Translation: A person can like high-art films and still enjoy trash low-brow summer tentpole flair like Wolverine. We get it. That's all you had to say. "

So, basically, your argument here is to mock me for articulating? Okay. I'll tell you what: I'm gonna give you a free pass here by pretending that this pointless, obnoxious retort never happened. Moving on.

"Regardless, that's not what *I* said."

From previous post: "But hey, if your view on cinema is that it's just a personal time waster, fair enough..."

That's EXACTLY what you said.

Continued: ..."but don't get upset some of us take film far more seriously."

I wasn't *upset* with you or any else at all. My only point is that I don't care about box office records or popular consensus; that is, whether or not a film is deemed "classic". And the latter is why I loosely quoted you -- for context -- not because I took issue with your personal opinion of the film in question or the summer output of films from recent years. Quoting you doesn't necessarily mean I was addressing you personally. Had that been the case, I would have @ted your name.

"Wolverine is likely not an instant classic to you, nor will it be an instant classic to me (when I see it), and thus no matter how "good" it is at the moment, in lieu of anything better, two decades hence you likely won't even remember it was ever made."

That ranked about an 8.6 on the 'Presumptuous Richter Scale. I'm not preoccupied with this fix on "instant classics". Of course there are films that I consider the best of the best--my personal favorites. But the next tier down is not films that I watch only once and never watch again, even if I found them well made and entertaining.

Look, Mink, this really isn't that complicated. If I enjoy a movie...then I'm likely to watch it more than once, to revisit that movie from time to time, even years later. WarGames, for example, is a movie I enjoy. It's not a classic for me--not among my favorites. It wouldnít even make my top 30. I don't consider it the best of the best. But I watched it again just last week. I enjoyed The Wolverine: wash, rinse and repeat.

"As for 9-11...you tried to make some weird connection to city explosions in films and the fact Logan recollects the bombing of Nagasaki in Wolverine."

I wasn't making a connection, only a comparison. And I'm not sure why the notion of Hollywood capitalizing on the cultural psyche of a post-911 audience (thus making it pop-cultural) is so far-fetched to you. Itís quite reasonable. Metaphors and evocations are not overly complex, mystical rarities that require only the most sophisticated, art-house filmmakers to employ.

It doesn't take a Room 237-magnitude doc*mentary to realize that the plot and villain for Star Trek Into Darkness was scripted with a kind of 'hot topic' relevance. You accurately detailed how current blockbusters dealing in disaster have updated their visuals to better simulate the realisms of 9-11 footage (I think we can add modern war footage in general as well), only to then turn around and dismiss it all as insignificant.

Imagery is incredibly powerful. It makes an impression. Filmmakers know this; it influences them, as they then influence other filmmakers. I hardly think it voodoo or some crackpot theory to suggest that the summer movies I referenced earlier are fashioned, at least to some notable degree, with disaster spectacle that harkens real life events as a way to illicit a stronger dramatic response. And I never said nor implied that this was unprecedented, or that mainstream cinema never dealt in destruction mayhem before 2001.

I also donít have any fundamental problem with entertainment films that channel real life, be it visually or thematically, for a bigger impact. My beef with films like Into Darkness and Man of Steel, first-and-foremost, even regardless of how they fashioned their spectacle, is the mere fact that they blew said wads with little to no finesse or any real sense of volume control and showmanship; that much of it was laced with story elements and/or imagery evoking real life tragedy just made it feel that much cheaper and more gimmicky.

This goes back to the comparison I was making with The Wolverine, how it went about its content more selectively and with greater poise. It was simply a classier affair.
cress writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 12:41:15 PM

"My beef with films like Into Darkness and Man of Steel, first-and-foremost, even regardless of how they fashioned their spectacle, is the mere fact that they blew said wads with little to no finesse or any real sense of volume control and showmanship.."

Definitely agree with that about MAN OF STEEL. It was just WAY too much destruction, and the third act was a clusterf*ck of non-stop, over-the-top loud noises. The further I get away from that film, the less I like it. But it was a good franchise starter, albeit with a flawed script and some shoddy direction.

I enjoyed reading both Cannon and Minks comments, so says the clown. :)
Tanman32123 writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 2:48:05 PM

Thanks Taco lol
mustardayonnaise writes:
on July 29th, 2013 at 4:45:27 PM

Del Toro had written an alternative version of the Kaijus, called 'Kaijews'. They came through the undersea portal and took over Goldman Sachs. The studio was completely put off, saying the fact that the monsters attacked banks but seemingly paid no attention to talent agencies was 'totally unrealistic'.

But I digress.

I passed on Wolverine this weekend, and instead caught a Bollywood film on Netflix called 'Kahaani'. No singing, no dance numbers, just a simple thriller. And, I must say, aside from some cartoonish acting (typical for Bollywood fare, I suppose), it was one of the best surprise endings I've seen in YEARS. Holy crap, did not see it coming. It's such a rare treat to watch a film with absolutely zero expectations and be so pleasantly surprised. Y'all should check it out, it's worth it.


There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved