If you recall, my husband and I have very different expectations and requirements for what constitutes an enjoyable movie. He needs intellectual stimulation in his films, which usually includes decent acting and a cohesive, well-written plot. I require none of these things, and in fact most of the movies I watch can hardly be categorized as “films”, a word that suggests a certain level of quality. I watch “flicks”, yo. There’s no quality in sight, which is the way I like it.
I had been looking forward to X-Men Origins: Wolverine for a while, and a few weeks ago it turned up in my Netflix queue. It’s one of those rare action things that I can get N to watch with me. He doesn’t expect them to be epic or anything, but apparently there’s a certain sub-genre of bad action movies he will agree to watch without complaint. (But if you ask him why that is, he can’t explain – as you’ll see in a moment.)
I actually was not expecting to like it as much as I did. Here’s the thing: I felt that X-Men would have been far better as a stand-alone movie. Much like The Matrix, one was enough, you know? Okay, let’s be fair: X2 was enjoyable enough. But the third one in the series (much like the third Matrix movie) was just painful. So you can see my (momentary) hesitation to watch yet another sequel. But, technically, this is a prequel, so there’s my justification for adding it to my queue in the first place. Hee.
Hugh Jackman was a great casting choice as Wolverine. I’ve thought that since the very first X-Men, at which point I believe he was still relatively unknown. Anyway, I’m glad he accepted the role again – it seems like a lot of times for prequel-type movies they end up re-casting some of the roles – although please don’t ask me for examples, I can’t come up with any at the moment.
There was plenty of action, and I felt like overall it did a nice job of filling in some of Wolverine/Logan’s backstory – since he can’t remember his past in the original three movies, there was quite a bit of storyline to be worked with and I think the writers did a nice job. I would definitely watch it again and will probably pick up a copy of the DVD if I find it on sale. Even N seemed to enjoy (or at least he wasn’t making disparaging remarks the entire time), so I think we can give Wolverine two thumbs up.
Which is far, far more than can be said for Crank 2: High Voltage.  Ahem. It was…terrible, for lack of a better word. Except that doesn’t begin to cover it, so maybe I can come up with something else: atrocious, horrific, intelligence-insultingly awful, an abusive assault on the senses…it was worse than the original, and folks, that one was total crap. I’m not put off by the comic-book style approach to film-making, sometimes it works (see: Kill Bill), but Crank 2 is proof that sometimes it does NOT.
The language was enough to make a sailor blush – which I can handle, but is it really necessary to use the c-word at all, say nothing of MULTIPLE TIMES during a movie that is only 96 minutes long? Not to mention the plot was completely and utterly ridiculous – which again, I can handle, but come on. This was so far out of the realm of believability that it was hard to watch. Mostly because I spent most of the time with my eyes rolled as far back into my head as they could go.
But that begs the question I asked N: Why is it that he (and surprisingly, I) found Crank 2 to be SO bad that it was virtually intolerable? For the love. The two of us cheerfully sat through Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus (starring 80s pop star Debbie Gibson). AND Silent Venom, something which may or may not have been the pinnacle of Luke Perry’s career (hint: NO). Oh, and we’ve also seen Mosquito, which is exactly as good as you would assume.
So why do we find both Crank movies so terrible? What’s the limit? We both like Jason Statham (although presumably for very different reasons) and we both appreciate the comedy inherent in bad movies, whether intentional or not. N couldn’t answer those questions when I asked him last night, and honestly neither can I. Are they trying too hard? Just too full of implausible violence/cringe-worthy language/gratuitous sex? My high tolerance for bad movies of all kinds is well documented on this blog but Crank 2 isn’t just bad, it’s abysmal. I’d add it to the sequel hall of shame, but since I also hated the original I don’t think it qualifies.
Full disclosure: Will this stop me from watching the inevitable Crank 3? Probably not. (Will I be able to sweet-talk N into watching that one with me too? Absolutely not. In fact, I probably won’t be able to talk him into watching anything of my choosing for quite a while. Or possibly ever again.)
