Singer made some statements that should finally put to bed all this talk from certain fans about X3 being retconned, or First Class being a reboot, or all their other pet theories to make whichever movie they dislike the most go away
I wish it was taking place under the direction of someone else.
-- things you rarely hear X-Men movie fans say!
Wow. Half my excitement for this movie is that Singer is helming the ship.
M
I get it. I mean look at the movies Singer has made since X2. Superman, Valkerie, Jack the Giant Killer Slayer... Not an inspiring record. And when you look at how overloaded the movie is with characters its worrisome.
I'm fine with Singer. But I don't think he's the end all and be all.
Other than the costumes I'm not sure what most people hate about X3.
I think they tried cramming too much into the script. It seemed like the 'last ride' where they tried to cram everything into it. And the costumes have been an issue since the first X-Men.
I'm fine with Singer. But I don't think he's the end all and be all.
Other than the costumes I'm not sure what most people hate about X3.
I think they tried cramming too much into the script. It seemed like the 'last ride' where they tried to cram everything into it. And the costumes have been an issue since the first X-Men.
M
I agree, the costumes have always been an issue. And maybe you're right that they tried to do too much, but that could have happened anyway, even if Singer returned.
Not saying people have to like it, I just don't understand the vitriol that is launched at it.
I'm fine with Singer. But I don't think he's the end all and be all.
Other than the costumes I'm not sure what most people hate about X3.
I think they tried cramming too much into the script. It seemed like the 'last ride' where they tried to cram everything into it. And the costumes have been an issue since the first X-Men.
M
I agree, the costumes have always been an issue. And maybe you're right that they tried to do too much, but that could have happened anyway, even if Singer returned.
Not saying people have to like it, I just don't understand the vitriol that is launched at it.
You're correct, it could've happened under Singer's watch too. I feel more confident when he's in control because I think he has more weight. A lot of the story issues & character deaths stem from studio input rather then the writers & director. I don't put it at the bottom of the list, but I might pop X-Men in before X3.
Granted Singer had control over Superman Returns, but I give him the benefit of the doubt with X-Men. He's proven himself with these characters before.
I'm fine with Singer. But I don't think he's the end all and be all.
Other than the costumes I'm not sure what most people hate about X3.
I think they tried cramming too much into the script. It seemed like the 'last ride' where they tried to cram everything into it. And the costumes have been an issue since the first X-Men.
M
I agree, the costumes have always been an issue. And maybe you're right that they tried to do too much, but that could have happened anyway, even if Singer returned.
Not saying people have to like it, I just don't understand the vitriol that is launched at it.
There's a good podcast interview with the writers (can't remember the name of the podcast, but it was Screenwriting something), and it sounds like the studio meddling is why we get a Dark Phoenix who pretty much disappears for much of the story, and has no dialogue. And why we basically got two scripts smashed into one. And why characters like Angel and Kitty Pryde are introduced but don't get to do much of anything.
As much as I dislike Brett Ratner's work, I doubt he had enough time to have much of an impact at all on the film. He was basically just there to point the camera and shoot. Maybe Singer could have fought the studio on some of those changes, but who knows.
As much as I dislike Brett Ratner's work, I doubt he had enough time to have much of an impact at all on the film. He was basically just there to point the camera and shoot. Maybe Singer could have fought the studio on some of those changes, but who knows.
Yeah, everyone blames Ratner but thy always forget that the movie had already gone through pre-production with another director before he stepped in.
I'm fine with Singer. But I don't think he's the end all and be all.
Other than the costumes I'm not sure what most people hate about X3.
I think they tried cramming too much into the script. It seemed like the 'last ride' where they tried to cram everything into it. And the costumes have been an issue since the first X-Men.
M
I agree, the costumes have always been an issue. And maybe you're right that they tried to do too much, but that could have happened anyway, even if Singer returned.
Not saying people have to like it, I just don't understand the vitriol that is launched at it.
There's a good podcast interview with the writers (can't remember the name of the podcast, but it was Screenwriting something), and it sounds like the studio meddling is why we get a Dark Phoenix who pretty much disappears for much of the story, and has no dialogue. And why we basically got two scripts smashed into one. And why characters like Angel and Kitty Pryde are introduced but don't get to do much of anything.
As much as I dislike Brett Ratner's work, I doubt he had enough time to have much of an impact at all on the film. He was basically just there to point the camera and shoot. Maybe Singer could have fought the studio on some of those changes, but who knows.
I think Angel and Kitty got plenty to do, for brand new characters. They got more to do than Cyclops did in 2 Singer movies.
I'm fine with Singer. But I don't think he's the end all and be all.
Other than the costumes I'm not sure what most people hate about X3.
I think they tried cramming too much into the script. It seemed like the 'last ride' where they tried to cram everything into it. And the costumes have been an issue since the first X-Men.
M
I agree, the costumes have always been an issue. And maybe you're right that they tried to do too much, but that could have happened anyway, even if Singer returned.
Not saying people have to like it, I just don't understand the vitriol that is launched at it.
There's a good podcast interview with the writers (can't remember the name of the podcast, but it was Screenwriting something), and it sounds like the studio meddling is why we get a Dark Phoenix who pretty much disappears for much of the story, and has no dialogue. And why we basically got two scripts smashed into one. And why characters like Angel and Kitty Pryde are introduced but don't get to do much of anything.
As much as I dislike Brett Ratner's work, I doubt he had enough time to have much of an impact at all on the film. He was basically just there to point the camera and shoot. Maybe Singer could have fought the studio on some of those changes, but who knows.
I think Angel and Kitty got plenty to do, for brand new characters. They got more to do than Cyclops did in 2 Singer movies.
They did have stuff to do, but I didn't think either of them was fleshed out enough to make me care about them. They were available for action sequences, and they each served a plot purpose - Kitty made Rogue jealous, and... I'm blanking on what Angel did, but I know he was tied into the whole cure plot. I didn't walk away from that film thinking I'd been introduced to two new regular characters. Nightcrawler made a more lasting impression in X2 than either of those two did for me.
Even though I like him a lot, I'm somewhat hoping this is Jackmans last time as Wolverine. Just for his own health. 45 year olds getting jacked through the roof on steroids can't be good.
Even though I like him a lot, I'm somewhat hoping this is Jackmans last time as Wolverine. Just for his own health. 45 year olds getting jacked through the roof on steroids can't be good.
This is the first I've heard about him doing steroids. In fact, everything I have read until your post involved him consulting with others on how to build body through exercise and food intake.
I also disagree with you about this being his last outing. He IS Wolverine. We complain too many times about actors not wanting to continue with defining roles because they don't want to be typecasted. We get an actor who has fully embraced a defining role and I want it to stay that way until he can no longer do it.
Even though I like him a lot, I'm somewhat hoping this is Jackmans last time as Wolverine. Just for his own health. 45 year olds getting jacked through the roof on steroids can't be good.
This is the first I've heard about him doing steroids. In fact, everything I have read until your post involved him consulting with others on how to build body through exercise and food intake.
I also disagree with you about this being his last outing. He IS Wolverine. We complain too many times about actors not wanting to continue with defining roles because they don't want to be typecasted. We get an actor who has fully embraced a defining role and I want it to stay that way until he can no longer do it.
M
I'm not complaining. I love him. But there does come a time where someone doesn't fit anymore. Connery had to stop being Bond. Moore had to stop.
I'm also not denying that he consults with experts. But the guy ain't a professional athlete. Do I have proof? Of course not. But I don't think any of us needed proof to know Sly Stallone, Arnold, and The Rock use steroids either. They all did and still do.
Is that proof? No. Of course not. There's no drug testing for actors. But, I do have eyes and I did watch a 31 year old Jackman last night as Wolverine. While strong, he looked pretty normal. Cut to a 44 year old Jackman who is (literally) jacked through the roof.
Maybe he doesn't. But either way, he is still doing crazy things to his body. Like eating 5,000 calories a day and lifting for 3 hours a day.
After DOFP is done he will be pushing 50. Steroids or no, it might be time to move on. Like I said, I love him. But at some point, he's gonna have to stop. The time travel, timey whims aspect of DOFP could make it a good time.
In a world of rebooted 20somethings playing superheroes I am totally game for a 50 year old playing Wolverine. Chops and commitment and more interesting to me than a fresh face.
Even though I like him a lot, I'm somewhat hoping this is Jackmans last time as Wolverine. Just for his own health. 45 year olds getting jacked through the roof on steroids can't be good.
This is the first I've heard about him doing steroids. In fact, everything I have read until your post involved him consulting with others on how to build body through exercise and food intake.
I also disagree with you about this being his last outing. He IS Wolverine. We complain too many times about actors not wanting to continue with defining roles because they don't want to be typecasted. We get an actor who has fully embraced a defining role and I want it to stay that way until he can no longer do it.
M
I'm not complaining. I love him. But there does come a time where someone doesn't fit anymore. Connery had to stop being Bond. Moore had to stop.
I'm also not denying that he consults with experts. But the guy ain't a professional athlete. Do I have proof? Of course not. But I don't think any of us needed proof to know Sly Stallone, Arnold, and The Rock use steroids either. They all did and still do.
Is that proof? No. Of course not. There's no drug testing for actors. But, I do have eyes and I did watch a 31 year old Jackman last night as Wolverine. While strong, he looked pretty normal. Cut to a 44 year old Jackman who is (literally) jacked through the roof.
Maybe he doesn't. But either way, he is still doing crazy things to his body. Like eating 5,000 calories a day and lifting for 3 hours a day.
After DOFP is done he will be pushing 50. Steroids or no, it might be time to move on. Like I said, I love him. But at some point, he's gonna have to stop. The time travel, timey whims aspect of DOFP could make it a good time.
We should add Christian Bale & countless other actors as steroid users! I think the difference between actors like Jackman and the Stallone/Rock group is that the latter are known for their bulk. Jackman could do movies where he's in shape & not ripped (Swordfish) and it wouldn't cause a bugaboo. Now imagine if Stallone did a movie where he was in shape & not ripped. THAT would be talked about.
I'm not saying Jackman couldn't be using something extra, but he's got the career that allows him to workout as long & as much as he wants for a role.
Connery jumped ship because he tired of the Bond role & didn't want the typecast. Moore hung in a few movies too long, but wanted out after movie FYEO (the opening teaser for Octopussy was written to usher in the next Bond. With NSNA released in 1983, the studio wanted an established actor to go up against Connery.) Jackman, however has fully embraced the Wolverine role.
As for his longevity in the role, I'd say its part of the appeal to the character. He might be in his mid40s, but he doesn't look it. People want to see Jackman as Wolverine. Just like Stark/RDJ. He's pushing 50, but 1/2 the appeal to the character is that RDJ is playing him. Once he is no longer playing the part, the character's popularity will greatly reduce. The Studio knows that. Its why, despite his $50-70+ million he got for Avengers, they resigned him instead of recasting.
Even though I like him a lot, I'm somewhat hoping this is Jackmans last time as Wolverine. Just for his own health. 45 year olds getting jacked through the roof on steroids can't be good.
This is the first I've heard about him doing steroids. In fact, everything I have read until your post involved him consulting with others on how to build body through exercise and food intake.
I also disagree with you about this being his last outing. He IS Wolverine. We complain too many times about actors not wanting to continue with defining roles because they don't want to be typecasted. We get an actor who has fully embraced a defining role and I want it to stay that way until he can no longer do it.
M
I'm not complaining. I love him. But there does come a time where someone doesn't fit anymore. Connery had to stop being Bond. Moore had to stop.
I'm also not denying that he consults with experts. But the guy ain't a professional athlete. Do I have proof? Of course not. But I don't think any of us needed proof to know Sly Stallone, Arnold, and The Rock use steroids either. They all did and still do.
Is that proof? No. Of course not. There's no drug testing for actors. But, I do have eyes and I did watch a 31 year old Jackman last night as Wolverine. While strong, he looked pretty normal. Cut to a 44 year old Jackman who is (literally) jacked through the roof.
Maybe he doesn't. But either way, he is still doing crazy things to his body. Like eating 5,000 calories a day and lifting for 3 hours a day.
After DOFP is done he will be pushing 50. Steroids or no, it might be time to move on. Like I said, I love him. But at some point, he's gonna have to stop. The time travel, timey whims aspect of DOFP could make it a good time.
We should add Christian Bale & countless other actors as steroid users! M
I would absolutely put Bale in the suspect category. However, not to get bogged down in that.
The point is this. If they changed the way Wolverine is portrayed, ie: allowed him to age some, put some grey in his hair, made it so Jackman doesn't have to be sliced and diced like a 23 year old Olympic athlete, I might be more on board with it. But that doesn't seem like that's what they plan, and it doesn't seem like Jackman plans on doing that.
Either way, at some point there will be a time to move on. I would rather it be one movie too early than one movie too late. For instance, Days of Future Past comes out in 2014. To me, it would be kind of a shame if he stayed on till 2016 or 2017 when the next one came out and we all saw it and went "whew... wow, he shoulda quit while he's ahead." Because that's sad. Like an athlete who stays two seasons too long, or Roger Moore looking tired in A View to a Kill.
You brought up RDJ. Yes, he is of a similar age, but the Tony Stark role doesn't depend on him being in crazy shape. RDJ is in good athletic shape now, but if he wasn't in that shape in Avengers 2, it wouldn't hurt his character because he's a super smart guy who flies around in armor. Jackman is playing someone whose not only super strong, but also essentially ageless. But Jackman ain't ageless.
Like I said, if they change the way he's portrayed, that could make a difference. But if they keep trying for 2 or 3 more movies for him to be this crazy strong killing machine with Jackman behind the wheel, I fear there's gonna come a time when we all go "oh no... this was a bad decision."
I'm fine with Singer. But I don't think he's the end all and be all.
Other than the costumes I'm not sure what most people hate about X3.
I think they tried cramming too much into the script. It seemed like the 'last ride' where they tried to cram everything into it. And the costumes have been an issue since the first X-Men.
M
I agree, the costumes have always been an issue. And maybe you're right that they tried to do too much, but that could have happened anyway, even if Singer returned.
Not saying people have to like it, I just don't understand the vitriol that is launched at it.
There's a good podcast interview with the writers (can't remember the name of the podcast, but it was Screenwriting something), and it sounds like the studio meddling is why we get a Dark Phoenix who pretty much disappears for much of the story, and has no dialogue. And why we basically got two scripts smashed into one. And why characters like Angel and Kitty Pryde are introduced but don't get to do much of anything.
As much as I dislike Brett Ratner's work, I doubt he had enough time to have much of an impact at all on the film. He was basically just there to point the camera and shoot. Maybe Singer could have fought the studio on some of those changes, but who knows.
I think Angel and Kitty got plenty to do, for brand new characters. They got more to do than Cyclops did in 2 Singer movies.
They did have stuff to do, but I didn't think either of them was fleshed out enough to make me care about them. They were available for action sequences, and they each served a plot purpose - Kitty made Rogue jealous, and... I'm blanking on what Angel did, but I know he was tied into the whole cure plot. I didn't walk away from that film thinking I'd been introduced to two new regular characters. Nightcrawler made a more lasting impression in X2 than either of those two did for me.
Kitty and Angel to me both had plenty to do. Kitty did much more than just make Roque jealous. Plus, Kitty already had one useless cameo in X2 and so did Collosas (or however his name was spelled). I think an argument could be made that Kitty and Angel both did more in X3 than Cyclops did in the entire trilogy. In the first movie, he's just kinda there and then plays a role in the end raid on lady Liberty. But in X2 he's basically gone for the entire movie and totally useless. He says hi to Logan, takes Prof X to see Magneto, and then is gone for the rest of the movie. Ostensibly the leader of the X-Men may have had less lines and less to do in X2 then either Kitty or Angel in X3.
Anyway, my point is, sure you could look at X3 and see a lot of characters that aren't fleshed out. The same could be said for pretty much all the movies because they have such large casts and characters. Throughout the first trilogy, all we know about Mystique is that she can change shape and kicks ass. We learn nothing about her character. In First Class there are many characters that are only there for the action and serve no other purpose than that.
Even though I like him a lot, I'm somewhat hoping this is Jackmans last time as Wolverine. Just for his own health. 45 year olds getting jacked through the roof on steroids can't be good.
This is the first I've heard about him doing steroids. In fact, everything I have read until your post involved him consulting with others on how to build body through exercise and food intake.
I also disagree with you about this being his last outing. He IS Wolverine. We complain too many times about actors not wanting to continue with defining roles because they don't want to be typecasted. We get an actor who has fully embraced a defining role and I want it to stay that way until he can no longer do it.
M
I'm not complaining. I love him. But there does come a time where someone doesn't fit anymore. Connery had to stop being Bond. Moore had to stop.
I'm also not denying that he consults with experts. But the guy ain't a professional athlete. Do I have proof? Of course not. But I don't think any of us needed proof to know Sly Stallone, Arnold, and The Rock use steroids either. They all did and still do.
Is that proof? No. Of course not. There's no drug testing for actors. But, I do have eyes and I did watch a 31 year old Jackman last night as Wolverine. While strong, he looked pretty normal. Cut to a 44 year old Jackman who is (literally) jacked through the roof.
Maybe he doesn't. But either way, he is still doing crazy things to his body. Like eating 5,000 calories a day and lifting for 3 hours a day.
After DOFP is done he will be pushing 50. Steroids or no, it might be time to move on. Like I said, I love him. But at some point, he's gonna have to stop. The time travel, timey whims aspect of DOFP could make it a good time.
We should add Christian Bale & countless other actors as steroid users! I think the difference between actors like Jackman and the Stallone/Rock group is that the latter are known for their bulk. Jackman could do movies where he's in shape & not ripped (Swordfish) and it wouldn't cause a bugaboo. Now imagine if Stallone did a movie where he was in shape & not ripped. THAT would be talked about.
I'm not saying Jackman couldn't be using something extra, but he's got the career that allows him to workout as long & as much as he wants for a role.
Connery jumped ship because he tired of the Bond role & didn't want the typecast. Moore hung in a few movies too long, but wanted out after movie FYEO (the opening teaser for Octopussy was written to usher in the next Bond. With NSNA released in 1983, the studio wanted an established actor to go up against Connery.) Jackman, however has fully embraced the Wolverine role.
As for his longevity in the role, I'd say its part of the appeal to the character. He might be in his mid40s, but he doesn't look it. People want to see Jackman as Wolverine. Just like Stark/RDJ. He's pushing 50, but 1/2 the appeal to the character is that RDJ is playing him. Once he is no longer playing the part, the character's popularity will greatly reduce. The Studio knows that. Its why, despite his $50-70+ million he got for Avengers, they resigned him instead of recasting.
M
Stallone did do a movie where he wasn't ripped. Copland in 1997. He really let himself go, and funnily enough, gave one of his most affecting performances, even along side such acting heavyweights as Robert De Niro, Harvey Keitel, and Ray Liotta.
Steroids or not, I think Hugh Jackman looked tremendous in the new film, very weathered and sinewy. I think the added years help with a character like Wolverine. I hope he continues with the character.
Even though I like him a lot, I'm somewhat hoping this is Jackmans last time as Wolverine. Just for his own health. 45 year olds getting jacked through the roof on steroids can't be good.
This is the first I've heard about him doing steroids. In fact, everything I have read until your post involved him consulting with others on how to build body through exercise and food intake.
I also disagree with you about this being his last outing. He IS Wolverine. We complain too many times about actors not wanting to continue with defining roles because they don't want to be typecasted. We get an actor who has fully embraced a defining role and I want it to stay that way until he can no longer do it.
M
I'm not complaining. I love him. But there does come a time where someone doesn't fit anymore. Connery had to stop being Bond. Moore had to stop.
I'm also not denying that he consults with experts. But the guy ain't a professional athlete. Do I have proof? Of course not. But I don't think any of us needed proof to know Sly Stallone, Arnold, and The Rock use steroids either. They all did and still do.
Is that proof? No. Of course not. There's no drug testing for actors. But, I do have eyes and I did watch a 31 year old Jackman last night as Wolverine. While strong, he looked pretty normal. Cut to a 44 year old Jackman who is (literally) jacked through the roof.
Maybe he doesn't. But either way, he is still doing crazy things to his body. Like eating 5,000 calories a day and lifting for 3 hours a day.
After DOFP is done he will be pushing 50. Steroids or no, it might be time to move on. Like I said, I love him. But at some point, he's gonna have to stop. The time travel, timey whims aspect of DOFP could make it a good time.
We should add Christian Bale & countless other actors as steroid users! M
I would absolutely put Bale in the suspect category. However, not to get bogged down in that.
The point is this. If they changed the way Wolverine is portrayed, ie: allowed him to age some, put some grey in his hair, made it so Jackman doesn't have to be sliced and diced like a 23 year old Olympic athlete, I might be more on board with it. But that doesn't seem like that's what they plan, and it doesn't seem like Jackman plans on doing that.
Either way, at some point there will be a time to move on. I would rather it be one movie too early than one movie too late. For instance, Days of Future Past comes out in 2014. To me, it would be kind of a shame if he stayed on till 2016 or 2017 when the next one came out and we all saw it and went "whew... wow, he shoulda quit while he's ahead." Because that's sad. Like an athlete who stays two seasons too long, or Roger Moore looking tired in A View to a Kill.
You brought up RDJ. Yes, he is of a similar age, but the Tony Stark role doesn't depend on him being in crazy shape. RDJ is in good athletic shape now, but if he wasn't in that shape in Avengers 2, it wouldn't hurt his character because he's a super smart guy who flies around in armor. Jackman is playing someone whose not only super strong, but also essentially ageless. But Jackman ain't ageless.
Like I said, if they change the way he's portrayed, that could make a difference. But if they keep trying for 2 or 3 more movies for him to be this crazy strong killing machine with Jackman behind the wheel, I fear there's gonna come a time when we all go "oh no... this was a bad decision."
Good, replace Jackman so I can stop watching Wolverine movies. It'll save me time & money...much like Amazing Spider-man.
Also, I think an out of shape RDJ in Avengers 2 would raise a lot of eyebrows. IM3 was to show he's more then the armor. He used hand-to-hand combat, as well as his mind.
Arguing about an actor aging gracefully while playing a character that could be potentially 100 years old.
Whackos. :)
Jackman for life, bitches!!!
Hear, Hear!!! If any character in comic films could be played by the same actor over two or more decades it is Jackman's Wolverine. I want to see an aged, haunted Wolverine. Jackman owns this version of Wolverine as securely as RJD owns Tony Stark. No more re-boots please!
I know, he's dead. But I was hoping one of the first things we'd see in the movie would be Cyclops, running through the dystopian future. No explanation of how he's alive, just he's alive. I don't need a whole movie to explain how he's back.
A sentinel comes around the corner and he blasts its big head off with his beam. Then the story could continue with the time traveling of wolverine and such.
I know, he's supposed to be dead in DOFP anyway. But still. Wolverine isn't supposed to be the one going back through time, but some things are allowed to change. Would have loved to see a living Cyclops blowing stuff up in the future.
Arguing about an actor aging gracefully while playing a character that could be potentially 100 years old.
Whackos. :)
Jackman for life, bitches!!!
Hear, Hear!!! If any character in comic films could be played by the same actor over two or more decades it is Jackman's Wolverine. I want to see an aged, haunted Wolverine. Jackman owns this version of Wolverine as securely as RJD owns Tony Stark. No more re-boots please!
The real contention isn't whether or not Jackman would be too old to play Wolverine, but whether or not he'd still be fit to do so in the future. That's a rather grueling physical role. Still, so long as he is fit, I'm all for more. I agree that he's made the role his.
I know, he's dead. But I was hoping one of the first things we'd see in the movie would be Cyclops, running through the dystopian future. No explanation of how he's alive, just he's alive. I don't need a whole movie to explain how he's back.
A sentinel comes around the corner and he blasts its big head off with his beam. Then the story could continue with the time traveling of wolverine and such.
I know, he's supposed to be dead in DOFP anyway. But still. Wolverine isn't supposed to be the one going back through time, but some things are allowed to change. Would have loved to see a living Cyclops blowing stuff up in the future.
I haven't ruled out ANY cameos of prior X-Men until I see the movie. I'm sure there's some surprises Singer has for us. Plus, I've had this theory the DOFP will alter things in the future to make First Class & original trilogy more coherent as the same timeline. A side effect could be Cyke survived.
Comments
Sentinel full scale and comments by Singer
"It takes place about ten years, give or take, after X-Men 3; and in the past it takes place about ten years after First Class..."
Wow. Half my excitement for this movie is that Singer is helming the ship.
M
KillerSlayer... Not an inspiring record. And when you look at how overloaded the movie is with characters its worrisome.I know it's just me, but Singer's movies rub me the wrong way. They're aloof and painfully "cool".
Including Singer being back.
Other than the costumes I'm not sure what most people hate about X3.
M
M
Not saying people have to like it, I just don't understand the vitriol that is launched at it.
Granted Singer had control over Superman Returns, but I give him the benefit of the doubt with X-Men. He's proven himself with these characters before.
M
As much as I dislike Brett Ratner's work, I doubt he had enough time to have much of an impact at all on the film. He was basically just there to point the camera and shoot. Maybe Singer could have fought the studio on some of those changes, but who knows.
I also disagree with you about this being his last outing. He IS Wolverine. We complain too many times about actors not wanting to continue with defining roles because they don't want to be typecasted. We get an actor who has fully embraced a defining role and I want it to stay that way until he can no longer do it.
M
I'm also not denying that he consults with experts. But the guy ain't a professional athlete. Do I have proof? Of course not. But I don't think any of us needed proof to know Sly Stallone, Arnold, and The Rock use steroids either. They all did and still do.
Jackman and steroids
Actors and steroids
Is that proof? No. Of course not. There's no drug testing for actors. But, I do have eyes and I did watch a 31 year old Jackman last night as Wolverine. While strong, he looked pretty normal. Cut to a 44 year old Jackman who is (literally) jacked through the roof.
Maybe he doesn't. But either way, he is still doing crazy things to his body. Like eating 5,000 calories a day and lifting for 3 hours a day.
After DOFP is done he will be pushing 50. Steroids or no, it might be time to move on. Like I said, I love him. But at some point, he's gonna have to stop. The time travel, timey whims aspect of DOFP could make it a good time.
I'm not saying Jackman couldn't be using something extra, but he's got the career that allows him to workout as long & as much as he wants for a role.
Connery jumped ship because he tired of the Bond role & didn't want the typecast. Moore hung in a few movies too long, but wanted out after movie FYEO (the opening teaser for Octopussy was written to usher in the next Bond. With NSNA released in 1983, the studio wanted an established actor to go up against Connery.) Jackman, however has fully embraced the Wolverine role.
As for his longevity in the role, I'd say its part of the appeal to the character. He might be in his mid40s, but he doesn't look it. People want to see Jackman as Wolverine. Just like Stark/RDJ. He's pushing 50, but 1/2 the appeal to the character is that RDJ is playing him. Once he is no longer playing the part, the character's popularity will greatly reduce. The Studio knows that. Its why, despite his $50-70+ million he got for Avengers, they resigned him instead of recasting.
M
The point is this. If they changed the way Wolverine is portrayed, ie: allowed him to age some, put some grey in his hair, made it so Jackman doesn't have to be sliced and diced like a 23 year old Olympic athlete, I might be more on board with it. But that doesn't seem like that's what they plan, and it doesn't seem like Jackman plans on doing that.
Either way, at some point there will be a time to move on. I would rather it be one movie too early than one movie too late. For instance, Days of Future Past comes out in 2014. To me, it would be kind of a shame if he stayed on till 2016 or 2017 when the next one came out and we all saw it and went "whew... wow, he shoulda quit while he's ahead." Because that's sad. Like an athlete who stays two seasons too long, or Roger Moore looking tired in A View to a Kill.
You brought up RDJ. Yes, he is of a similar age, but the Tony Stark role doesn't depend on him being in crazy shape. RDJ is in good athletic shape now, but if he wasn't in that shape in Avengers 2, it wouldn't hurt his character because he's a super smart guy who flies around in armor. Jackman is playing someone whose not only super strong, but also essentially ageless. But Jackman ain't ageless.
Like I said, if they change the way he's portrayed, that could make a difference. But if they keep trying for 2 or 3 more movies for him to be this crazy strong killing machine with Jackman behind the wheel, I fear there's gonna come a time when we all go "oh no... this was a bad decision."
Kitty and Angel to me both had plenty to do. Kitty did much more than just make Roque jealous. Plus, Kitty already had one useless cameo in X2 and so did Collosas (or however his name was spelled). I think an argument could be made that Kitty and Angel both did more in X3 than Cyclops did in the entire trilogy. In the first movie, he's just kinda there and then plays a role in the end raid on lady Liberty. But in X2 he's basically gone for the entire movie and totally useless. He says hi to Logan, takes Prof X to see Magneto, and then is gone for the rest of the movie. Ostensibly the leader of the X-Men may have had less lines and less to do in X2 then either Kitty or Angel in X3.
Anyway, my point is, sure you could look at X3 and see a lot of characters that aren't fleshed out. The same could be said for pretty much all the movies because they have such large casts and characters. Throughout the first trilogy, all we know about Mystique is that she can change shape and kicks ass. We learn nothing about her character. In First Class there are many characters that are only there for the action and serve no other purpose than that.
Steroids or not, I think Hugh Jackman looked tremendous in the new film, very weathered and sinewy. I think the added years help with a character like Wolverine. I hope he continues with the character.
Whackos. :)
Jackman for life, bitches!!!
Also, I think an out of shape RDJ in Avengers 2 would raise a lot of eyebrows. IM3 was to show he's more then the armor. He used hand-to-hand combat, as well as his mind.
M
No Cyclops in DOFP
I know, he's dead. But I was hoping one of the first things we'd see in the movie would be Cyclops, running through the dystopian future. No explanation of how he's alive, just he's alive. I don't need a whole movie to explain how he's back.
A sentinel comes around the corner and he blasts its big head off with his beam. Then the story could continue with the time traveling of wolverine and such.
I know, he's supposed to be dead in DOFP anyway. But still. Wolverine isn't supposed to be the one going back through time, but some things are allowed to change. Would have loved to see a living Cyclops blowing stuff up in the future.
M