Juonikuvaukset(1)

Marvel Comicsin suosittuun sarjakuvaan perustuvassa toimintafantasiassa palataan ahmamies Wolverinen (Hugh Jackman) juurille, aikaan ennen mutanttiryhmä X:n syntyä. Logan ja hänen pahantahtoisempi isoveljensä Victor syöksyvät yhdessä taistosta taistoon, kunnes nuorempi veli väsyy tappamiseen. Logan valitsee hiljaiselon vuorilla tukkijätkänä - kohtaloaan hän ei kuitenkaan voi välttää. (MTV3)

(lisää)

Videot (11)

Traileri 3

Arvostelut (16)

Marigold 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti Disappointment that is on a level higher than the final part of the trilogy. Even Jackman's unquestionable charisma cannot hold together a story which, after a fairly promising start, burst into disjointed fights, silly dialogues and terribly predictable twists. The unique magic of the X-Men series has somehow disappeared, and I'm really wondering what puts Wolverine above all other soulless comic book fight films. Instead of the neglected question of the mutants vs. people relationship, Hood's film was supposed to feature a troubled hero, but only those shiny claws and an angry expression really remain of Logan. Paradoxically, the biographical film contributes the least to the image of the Wolverine of all the films, and while it does benefit from the charisma of previous films, the new knowledge about the hero's past is very weak, contrived, exaggerated and sometimes almost embarrassingly calculated. The image concept has nothing with which to captivate, the music is ok, the actors ok, but the added value that the viewer is used to with Singer is simply missing here. Unfortunately, what I suspected with regard to X-Men: The Last Stand has been confirmed. Without Singer, this universe lacks any distinctive charm. [50%] ()

Isherwood 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti 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. ()

Mainos

POMO 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti The first half an hour of Wolverine is very promising, with its spectacular action, very nice work with mountain locations, a likable Hugh Jackman, a believable relationship with a hot girl, cool catchphrases (“I’m Canadian”) and Liev Schreiber’s badass super villain (he’ll have to fight off offers to play more villains with a stick). Wolverine starts off as a tastefully balanced mix of dynamic action and pleasant family adventure with some romance thrown in for a good measure... That’s why it’s a pity that the talented Gavin Hood must gradually submit to more and more stupid screenplay twists, which want to astonish the action-craving audience at any cost. The movie thus ends up being something between Doom and X-Men: The Last Stand. I’m neither angry nor disappointed, as this was to be expected already from the trailer. I’m just saying it’s a pity. These characters and the hard-working actors playing them deserve something more clever. Something like Bryan Singer. ()

Malarkey 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti 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. ()

J*A*S*M 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti 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. ()

Kuvagalleria (117)