It wasn't quite my cup of tea but the girl I was staying with sat me down and made me watch it because it was her favourite film - some people really love it, I wouldn't say it was woeful, just a bit self-consciously quirky.

Film's like that have been handled so much better in the past, and without the quirkiness you mentioned (that was my take on the narration too).

Someone has brought up a potential plot hole for The Wolverine. Hoping it can be resolved.

In X-men: Wolverine has no memory of his past other than the last few years.
In X2: Wolverine goes back to the base where he was created and remembers bits'n'bobs. Does he regain all of his memory at this point?
In XO: We find that James/Logan was born 1845; in 1985, he undergoes the transformation and becomes Wolverine. He loses his memory at the end of the film.

So in The Wolverine, why does he remember 1945 when Nagasaki was bombed? Should he not have had this wiped?

I gave up trying to figure out when XO was even set! Mind you, it was still a better film than The Wolverine

Can we not just enjoy the movie for what it is?

An overblown piece of crap?

The timeline thing actually occurred to me too as I was watching it in the cinema, and as a Terminator fan that sorta thing doesn't usually enter my head

Chronicles of the Underworld: City of Bones (Mortal Instruments?)
* * *

Not bad, but a bit 'young' for me. Youngest daughter is a total fan of the book series. She says that JC isn't really as he was in the book, much nicer and there are the usual inconsistencies. But it was a fun afternoon out with the family.

Yeah, the trailer did give that 'young' vibe, but I wasn't expecting anything else. I've actually got the books on my Kindle to give them a go...

Riddick.


I believe there are 2 types of people in the world.
Those that enjoyed Chronicles of Riddick, and everyone else.
Now, if you're not one of those people, you're not going to go and see Riddick. So this needn't concern you, it's everyone else I'm talking to.

Ok.
Right. Well, if you're still here, brace yourself.
This film feels like a pit stop on the way to somewhere else.
I was curious as to where they'd take it given the ending of Chronicles.
And it's a little disappointing to be honest, in that respect.
Riddick is all about a man who'll literally do anything to survive, someone more animal than human.
This film softens him a touch, and the big bad isn't as scary as the Pitch Black monsters.

So, violence, some cute on liners and a man fighting monsters is pretty much the bones of the film, and let's face it, it's enjoyable enough.
Part of me hopes there's going to be a sequel, but part of me isn't bothered if they don't.
But hell, it's Riddick. You know what you're in for and it doesn't really fail that badly to deliver. But don't watch Pitch Black before you see this.

Interesting.
I saw an interview with Vin Diesel where he explained that Chronicles was supposed to be the start of a three-part film, but that Riddick is a side-step and if it does the right business the other two of the trilogy would get made.

Mark

That would explain the 'pit stop' feel of this then.
If they're hoping the bank on this is going to fund the next one... Hmm. Wouldn't hold my breath. Who knows? Might do well on the sell through.

I find that... odd. Shouldn't they have decided whether or not to make the 2nd and 3rd parts depending on how the 1st part did?

Of course, but I guess the time distance between Chronicles and now (9 years according to IMDB) was too great?
I know that Vin Diesel loves this character and I also know that he had a lot of trouble getting this film made, so if it breaks a profit I guess the financiers will bank-roll the other two.

Mark

I think Riddick is more like Pitch Black than Chronicles. I enjoyed Chronicles and it had the added bonus of Thandie Newton.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

It is, yes, but it's a shadow of the first film in some ways.