I'm glad SOMEONE agrees. Seeing it as a 7.7 on imdb made me question humanity a little bit.Nami nom noms said:I never really know what to think of a film when moviebob says it's as good as watchmen... one of his favourites.
That film was f***ing awful on every level.
so... not sure about this.
I agree, and the only reason the second one is looked down upon is because it is an obvious cash in. If they made another hangover (in 5 or so years) that did some new things, i would be on board. I think that's what made the first hangover so good... it had fresh ideas and tone.daxterx2005 said:I get you disliked Hangover part II bob, but your little quip at the end "forget the first two movies" thats implying the first one was bad which it wasn't at all.
He is talking in terms of continuity and how it ignores established continuity for example Wolverine ended with a Bald but still able ot walk Charles, but in this film that isn't the order in which events transpireDead_Lee said:Care to explain which scenes undermine the previous two x-men films?
They screwed up so badly on the lore of the movie. The actual story of Weapon X is fascinating, and the sole reason why Wolverine is so fun to watch and learn about. The movie did exactly what every comic lover is afraid a movie will do... make a good movie, but not about the fiction we love. We would rather have an ok movie that follows the story to the T (ie Watchmen, Sin City).AvauntVanguard said:I actually liked Wolverine's Origins. But as always, I also lack lore knowledge and general nostalgia so I have nothing to compare to.