X-MEN ORIGINS – WOLVERINE: Snikt, snikt, fizz, fizz, oh what a relief it is.

X-MEN ORIGINS – WOLVERINE
Starring Hugh Jackman, Liev Schreiber, Danny Huston
Directed by Gavin Hood
20th Century Fox
Review by Louis Fowler

OK. So here we go again.

So I finally got around to watching WOLVERINE yesterday. Usually I am first in line for comic book adaptations, but I've been so out of it lately that I almost missed it, like I did with PUNISHER: WAR ZONE—I'm still kicking myself over that, because that was a movie that the phrase “fucking awesome” was created for.

Look: WOLVERINE is a great, fun movie. It's definitely the best of the X-MEN movies; it wonderfully avoids Bryan Singer's heavy-handedness and Brett Ratner's ham-handedness, creating an extremely exciting movie that, as far as Marvel adaptations go, is right up there at the top for me. What is there to hate here?

I know you disagree with me, fine. I've read the other reviews—it was hard not to miss the bad (mostly) Internet reviews from nerds who were miffed about one thing or another. This is the same problem I had with FANTASTIC FOUR: RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER. I've noticed, from the websites I write for to the forums I frequent to the sly little Twitter quips, that more and more, as the Internet transforms into a bigger, louder community, they are starting to form a Borg-like Hive mentality that eschews any type of differing opinions.

I didn't like WATCHMEN. OK—I thought it was, you know, “alright”, but it sure as hell wasn't the end-all, be-all of comic book adaptations. The graphic novel is overrated enough, but the movie's fandom felt forced. You were made to feel like you had to like it or you just didn't get the illustrated storytelling medium. You were an imbecile who still reads—P'SHAW—lame heroes like SUPERMAN. No matter how you slice it, WATCHMEN was too long, too boring, too overwrought and too cold. But, then again, I love the previous PUNISHER adaptations and GHOST RIDER and the FANTASTIC FOUR flicks and even DAREDEVIL, so I'm wrong, right? My opinion is wrong. My likes are wrong. What I find entertaining is wrong.

Recently, I've caught hell for liking ROB ZOMBIE'S HALLOWEEN (I like it better than the original) and not wanting to see MARTYRS or ALL THE BOYS LOVE MANDY LANE or BASEMENT GEEK CIRCLE JERK #12. (And why is everyone supposed to hate Rob Zombie, for some reason? And, if you don't, it's like you don't know the “secret knock” and sorry, you're not allowed.) It's this collective mentality that is ruining film criticism. Not only is it yahoos with an Internet connection who can never fully explain why they hate something beyond the superficial, but it's a cult that is trying desperately to kill off any individuality, with hiding-behind-a-computer-force, if applicable.

It seems like this type of violent nerdery is only really present in genre film. No one ever calls another person a “stupid faggot” for liking A ROOM WITH A VIEW over REMAINS OF THE DAY. But, say that you liked BATMAN AND ROBIN over BATMAN BEGINS, like I did, and you might as well be filling every hole on you body with multiple man-roots while wearing a BATMAN shirt with the nipples cut out. Yes, you are that much of a pariah.

But you are right. That's all you want to hear. Type in all caps to let me make sure. Call me an “idiot”. Make a fat joke. Do whatever is necessary to let me know that I am wrong for loving WOLVERINE, even more so than WATCHMEN or, gasp, THE DARK KNIGHT.

I, on the other hand, couldn't give a damn whether or not you agree with me. I am free in that respect, not having to worry if the nerd-trend slave-masters are gonna whip me. You will always be afraid of what is thought of you, and your opinion, so you cannot be trusted as a film critic. You're no better than, say, a professional film critic you gets a paid-ticket junket to write a puff-piece on why Megan Fox is “the hotness” (that's the popular jack-off idol right now, right?).

One thing that I can promise: I will never, ever lie to you about what I like. No matter how embarrassing the general public may want it to be, if I like it, I will honestly tell you. If I hate it, I will honestly tell you. And you can believe it won't be because I'm trying to get some advertising or please a studio.

You need some proof: the Sci-Fi Channel's MEGASNAKE was one of my favorite films of last year. Does that lose me cool points? Fine, just take it down to zero. I'll deal somehow.

So, WOLVERINE.

WOLVERINE delivers. It is every single thing I want in a comic book movie: a clear-cut hero who knows the difference between good and evil, over-the-top fight scenes that have zero basis in reality, multiple cameos by characters from the books, questionable special effects that only heighten the “comic bookiness” of the proceedings...even the opening sequence was cooler than WATCHMEN. The whole time I was watching it, I was sitting up straight in my seat: I care about Wolverine, I care about his origin, I care about his mission...I care. I care about everything this movie put in front of my eyes.

What is it that you didn't like about WOLVERINE? You can pick apart nit-picky things to impress your pals on your podcast, where upon each of you can get into an acidic little pissing contest as to who can hate it more? Oh, Deadpool's origin wasn't what you were used to? They cast a Black-Eyed Pea? Professor X looked a bit too CGI'ed?

All excruciatingly minor, purely needless quibbles. They, in no way once, took you out of a film about a 150+ year old mutant with bone claws who has metal grafted onto them while his psychotic, animalistic brother hunts and steals the powers of other mutants so a crazed army general can create a super-mutant to use as a living weapon. Not. Once. Look, WOLVERINE was extremely entertaining. How can you counter that? Were you not, at any point, entertained fully by WOLVERINE? Was there any moment that you can honestly say that you were bored?

I bet you can't say that about WATCHMEN...