X-Men Origins: Wolverine - Twentieth Century Fox

I finally got a chance to go see the new X-Men movie last week. We actually did a double feature where we went to see it, and the new Star Trek movie. But I'll get in to that more later. I have to say, when I saw the trailers for this movie, I thought they looked pretty good. However, I was concerned about the casting of Liev Schreiber as Sabretooth. I just didn't know for sure that he'd be able to pull it off. However, after watching the movie, and just immersing myself into it . . I think he did a pretty decent job. Of course the special affects and CGI helped a lot, but . . you know. Anyways, I went with my wife who liked the first 3 movies, but still doesn't read the comics. To me that's the hard thing about the X-Men books, I'm not sure where to have her start. So, she knows the characters, mostly, but not all of the stories. Kind of the opposite of me. Which I thought was cool because she'd have a different approach to the movie than I would. Afterwards she said the background stories, how they all came together, and Wolverine's origin, was the most interesting to her. Although, for a Wolverine movie, I have to say I thought there was an awful lot left out. I know . . they're on a time limit, but . . I thought there was some important stuff we didn't get to see. Sure the first 15 or 20 minutes are mostly about Logan, but after that . . it could've been called X-Men Origins: Weapon X. And I know that's a big part of Logan's past, but . . it almost presented Sabretooth and Deadpool as more interesting characters. I also didn't like the way, at the end of the movie, that they explain Logan's years of memory loss . . an Adamantium bullet to the forehead by Stryker. I just didn't like that whole explanation. But, having said all that, I have to admit that I'm a person who watches a movie and really gets into it. I just tune out everything around me, and all of life's problems, and just really immerse myself into the story. I don't think about whether a special effect, or stunt is believable, or even realistic. And, in the case of comic-book movies, I try hard not to compare what I'm seeing to what I've read over the years. I want to be completely unbiased when I watch a movie for the first time. So, to that point while my wife said that she enjoyed the whole movie, I have to admit that I got a little bored with it. Like I said, I don't want to compare the movie to what I've read, but . . I've still read it, so I knew most of the story. Yes there was artistic license taken here and there, but . . to me the movie just spent to much time explaining things. I can appreciate how that's necessary, as my wife didn't know this story, but to the informed viewer . . it all dragged on a little to long. Which to me, is why I always consider the sequel to a movie better than the original. Originals always spend so much time explaining things, and giving you the background stories that you don't get a lot of new material or action. However, in the sequels, they generally assume that the viewer saw the first so they're aware of what happened. It doesn't need to be re-explained. Sometimes they do, but . . it's brief. Therefore we get a lot more original story and action. Anyways, overall I have to say, I did like the movie, however, I thought it dragged in spots. I still think Hugh Jackman is fantastic as Logan, and while I was skeptical about Ryan Reynolds . . I really thought the guy pulled off Deadpool. I would enjoy a sequel. And if they're taking votes . . I would definitely vote for a Deadpool movie. Can you imagine it? Fan-frikkin-tastic!