A Pull Quote?

MCN’s David Poland‘s has not only called Wolverine “a low-rent masterpiece,” but says it makes you “ready to sit through the next Origins.” But will Fox marketers feel too skittish about hyping “low rent,” which obviously suggests a cheesy quality?

Here‘s the portion of Poland’s review that it came from: “Is Wolverine the comic book equivalent of Hal Ashby and Waldo Salt‘s Coming Home with mutant powers? No. But versus last year’s second tier parade of high grossing action – Indy 4, Hulk Incredible, Mummy 3 and Jules Verne’s Center of the 3D – it looks like a low-rent masterpiece.

“It’s a B movie with 1000 effects shots, pure and simple. Gavin Hood made some good acting choices, moved the pieces around the board effectively, Don McAlpine lit the shit out of it, Harry Gregson-Williams hype scored it (not memorably, but loudly, as this material demands), and after 107 minutes, you are ready to sit through the next Origins, not expecting the world, but not unhappy to be there for the ride.

“What else, exactly, were you expecting?”

Big Hollywood’s Steve Mason, by the way, is predicting that Wolverine will pull down $92 million by Sunday night.

39 thoughts on “A Pull Quote?

  1. Who doesn’t like low rent?

    Fox should pull the quote as is. They seem to embrace the working class with their television line-up. That is, until a sitcom gets all uppity and develops a cult following. Then they bury it.

  2. Why use “a low-rent masterpiece” as the pull quote when marketers would have no shame is using just “a . . . masterpiece”?

  3. Wolverine looks VERY hit-and-miss. I’ll see it, but I’m in no rush. And it will definitely do at least $80 million this weekend.

    Bring on Star Trek; that film looks pretty awesome.

    And I can’t believe I’m saying this, as I think McG is an ULTRA-HACK, but why does Terminator: Salvation look completely bad-ass? I am a bit turned off by the PG-13′ing of the franchise, but the film looks huge in scale and Bale looks commanding as ever.

    Still, in terms of the big summer movies, nothing matters until June 24th…

  4. “Is Wolverine the comic book equivalent of Hal Ashby and Waldo Salt’s Coming Home with mutant powers?”

    Delete “Is Wolverine” and the “?” and you have your pull quote to publish in the NY Times.

  5. actionman – you really think The Hurt Locker is going to be a big summer movie? Bold call, sir.

    Looks like Paramount is again going to have back to back $300M releases. Would be amusing if just like Iron Man last year, Star Trek becomes their top release over the presumed champ with the talking cars…

  6. No, Deathtongue. I am expecting The Hurt Locker, based on all of the orgasmic reviews, to be one of the BEST movies of the summer. However, its chances for box office success are slim to none. No big stars and the Iraq-war stigma won’t help it.

    The movie that drops on 6/24 that I expect to be the BIGGEST movie of the summer is Michael Bay’s Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.

  7. I don’t think McG has directed enough movies to be considered an ULTRA HACK, with all cap + hyphen. 3 movies, only one of which had a script. he’s got a couple more projects to prove that he’s in Rob Cohen’s league of hackdom.

  8. Fine, Mark. The dude is a “simple hack.” I’ll remove the “ultra” and the caps-lock for the time being and use that for when I’m discussing Ratner.

    I just think that the Charlie’s Angels movies were beyond horrendous, and We Are Marshall was extremely stale. The guy tried cribbing off of Bay in the Angels movies, and then tried to go all soft with his football flick. He’s a tool.

    I hope I am singing a different tune about ole McG after I walk out of T4.

  9. I’m sure that Transformers will be a huge hit, but that new trailer they linked to on AICN, with Shia doing the “it’s not you, it’s me” breakup speech with Bumblebee? Holy mackerel that’s awful.

  10. I do not get the fanboy hate for McG; the Charlie’s Angels movies are goofy fun, and even if you’re not down with them, how can you hate on a $100 million summer movie with Crispin Glover and Justin Theoreoux? I think T4 will surprise people.

  11. I agree with you, Rich. It’s beyond silly.

    But that scene, and the few others that will be just like it, aren’t the reasons why I will see TF2 in the theaters. I am thinking more about the ridiculously large action sequences that will be on display in a manner that only a visual master like Bay could ever create. He sucks with his actors, but not with his toys. And that’s what the TF films are: massive toy movies.

  12. Deathtongue – you should have went with My Sister’s Keeper, since this site has been circle jerking over Hurt Locker since before the war started.

    Can’t be too dramatic w/ sarcasm. John McCain learned this when he suggested that the Middle Class ended at $5million in income. This sarcastic number wasn’t too high, it was too low. He should have suggested $30 million.

  13. Mark – that is exactly why I went with it. The obvious joke seemed to be My Sister’s Keeper. I should have known subtly would be lost on anyone creaming their pants over the giant robots thing….

  14. Anyone who compliments the acting in Wolverine has something wrong with them.

    A low rent masterpiece would be Transformers. Wolverine is utter garbage. Poorly acted, terrible script, completely unfaithful to the source material…

    I could go on.

  15. I don’t even think Poland meant his review to be as positive as it was. It’s amazing how little control he has as a writer.

  16. As for David Poland, i’m pretty sure that the opening title sequence of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is better than all of Wolverine.

  17. As for David Poland, i’m pretty sure that the opening title sequence of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is better than all of Wolverine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>