'The Grey' Takes Home Green at the Bo...

'The Grey' Takes Home Green at the Box Office, Jan. 27-29, 2012

There are 32 comments on the Huliq.com story from Jan 29, 2012, titled 'The Grey' Takes Home Green at the Box Office, Jan. 27-29, 2012. In it, Huliq.com reports that:

"The Grey" starring Liam Neeson in a survival story battling both the weather and grey wolves led the box office "pack" with a better-than-expected $20 million take for the weekend of Jan.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Huliq.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“9.99% of what happens...”

Since: Aug 11

...is not on the news

#1 Jan 29, 2012
I don't like the fact that the cast members ate wolf meat.. and two wolf corpses were used as props in the movie, that is more than a little disturbing.

“Rawr”

Since: Jun 11

The Jungle

#2 Jan 29, 2012
Their portrayal of wolves is disgustingly inaccurate, but then again, when has Hollywood ever been accurate about anything?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#3 Jan 30, 2012
Crazy Like FoxNews wrote:
I don't like the fact that the cast members ate wolf meat.. and two wolf corpses were used as props in the movie, that is more than a little disturbing.
It's even more disturbing that you find reality disturbing. It's a pretty safe bet that no animals were harmed during the making of the film but it does depict the reality of being stranded in wolf territory and trying to survive.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#4 Jan 30, 2012
A Voice 4 The Animals wrote:
Their portrayal of wolves is disgustingly inaccurate, but then again, when has Hollywood ever been accurate about anything?
I'm sure the story was dramatized for entertainment purposes but the portrayal of wolves as stalkers of human prey is very accurate. Wolves are alpha predators and anything they can bring down, kill, and eat is fair game. I have only seen the trailers so far but the story is set in the frozen north in mid winter where food for large predators is at a premium and then in drops a group of unarmed, inexperienced humans. You do the math.

“9.99% of what happens...”

Since: Aug 11

...is not on the news

#5 Jan 31, 2012
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>It's even more disturbing that you find reality disturbing. It's a pretty safe bet that no animals were harmed during the making of the film but it does depict the reality of being stranded in wolf territory and trying to survive.
The movie wasn't even based on real events, and since when were movies considered reality? In your own mind perhaps? Have you seen Harry Potter, or Lord of the Rings? How well do those two films depict reality for you? Have you even seen The Grey? and have you ever encountered a pack of wild wolves while being stranded in the wilderness? If not, how would you know if the movie did a good job at depicting the "reality" of being stranded in wolf territory? Who said anything about animals being harmed during the making of the movie? The cast members purchased three wolf corpses, one they ate out of curiosity, the other two were used as props. Oh and btw, the director mentioned in a recent interview that he knows wolves aren't as aggressive as he made them out to be in the film, but that it made for good entertainment.

“9.99% of what happens...”

Since: Aug 11

...is not on the news

#6 Jan 31, 2012
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>I'm sure the story was dramatized for entertainment purposes but the portrayal of wolves as stalkers of human prey is very accurate. Wolves are alpha predators and anything they can bring down, kill, and eat is fair game. I have only seen the trailers so far but the story is set in the frozen north in mid winter where food for large predators is at a premium and then in drops a group of unarmed, inexperienced humans. You do the math.
You're pretty funny. So, when's the last time you opened the morning paper and read about a wolf attacking a human being? Please do share, thank you.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#7 Jan 31, 2012
Crazy Like FoxNews wrote:
<quoted text>
The movie wasn't even based on real events, and since when were movies considered reality? In your own mind perhaps? Have you seen Harry Potter, or Lord of the Rings? How well do those two films depict reality for you? Have you even seen The Grey? and have you ever encountered a pack of wild wolves while being stranded in the wilderness? If not, how would you know if the movie did a good job at depicting the "reality" of being stranded in wolf territory? Who said anything about animals being harmed during the making of the movie? The cast members purchased three wolf corpses, one they ate out of curiosity, the other two were used as props. Oh and btw, the director mentioned in a recent interview that he knows wolves aren't as aggressive as he made them out to be in the film, but that it made for good entertainment.
Excuse me? I told you that I haven't seen the movie. I was simply commenting on the fact that animal rights advocates try to sell the idea that wolves aren't dangerous and that they don't kill and eat humans livestock, pets, etc. I'm sure that the movie was dramatized in many respects but the fact remains that wolves ARE dangerous and they DO kill and eat humans. Wolves are magnificent creatures and they are alpha predators. Like I said, I haven't seen the movie but yes I have been in the wilderness in wolf country and I have been stalked by wolves. I've watched them hunt and I've watched them nearly vanish. They nearly vanished because man went too far in protecting himself and his livestock from the wolf. Now the move to protect and reintroduce the wolf goes too far in the opposite direction and it's proponents would have people believe that they're friendly little puppies. The reality I spoke of is the fact that wolves are alpha predators and will take as prey anything they are capable of bringing down and eating. The movie Jaws was way over-dramatized but that doesn't take away from the reality that sharks will eat people. Wolves are as aggressive as they need to be. If it is a hard winter in the high country and their usual prey is scarce they will adjust. If humans are available.......they will eat humans. I don't want to see the myth that wolves are cuddly woodland creatures spread any more than I want to see the myth that they are monsters spread. Either way, the wolf looses.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#8 Jan 31, 2012
Crazy Like FoxNews wrote:
<quoted text>
You're pretty funny. So, when's the last time you opened the morning paper and read about a wolf attacking a human being? Please do share, thank you.
Well gee, seeing as how we nearly wiped them off the face of the planet it's not surprising that there aren't any recent wolf attacks. However, if the reintroduction of the wolf isn't better managed and they keep expanding their territory outside the wilderness areas set aside for them the instance of wolf attack and wolves taking livestock and pets WILL increase and we'll be right back to square one. There are many accounts of wolf attacks from around the world and they are the reason that the wolf was nearly exterminated. Don't believe it? Well keep an eye on the reintroduction process, if it keeps going as is you'll get a chance to read those accounts of wolf attack. Then the pendulum will swing back to the opposite side and the wolf will be a monster again.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#9 Jan 31, 2012
Crazy Like FoxNews wrote:
I don't like the fact that the cast members ate wolf meat.. and two wolf corpses were used as props in the movie, that is more than a little disturbing.
I know what you mean. I was watcing "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" and I was equally disturbed by the fact that the cast members purchased tomatoes (and likely ate them too) and some of them were used as props. These people are disgusting. Wouldn't a fuzzy/knitted tomato suffice just as well?

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#10 Jan 31, 2012
A Voice 4 The Animals wrote:
Their portrayal of wolves is disgustingly inaccurate, but then again, when has Hollywood ever been accurate about anything?
Yeah. Fiction should be outlawed.

“9.99% of what happens...”

Since: Aug 11

...is not on the news

#11 Feb 4, 2012
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Excuse me? I told you that I haven't seen the movie. I was simply commenting on the fact that animal rights advocates try to sell the idea that wolves aren't dangerous and that they don't kill and eat humans livestock, pets, etc. I'm sure that the movie was dramatized in many respects but the fact remains that wolves ARE dangerous and they DO kill and eat humans. Wolves are magnificent creatures and they are alpha predators. Like I said, I haven't seen the movie but yes I have been in the wilderness in wolf country and I have been stalked by wolves. I've watched them hunt and I've watched them nearly vanish. They nearly vanished because man went too far in protecting himself and his livestock from the wolf. Now the move to protect and reintroduce the wolf goes too far in the opposite direction and it's proponents would have people believe that they're friendly little puppies. The reality I spoke of is the fact that wolves are alpha predators and will take as prey anything they are capable of bringing down and eating. The movie Jaws was way over-dramatized but that doesn't take away from the reality that sharks will eat people. Wolves are as aggressive as they need to be. If it is a hard winter in the high country and their usual prey is scarce they will adjust. If humans are available.......they will eat humans. I don't want to see the myth that wolves are cuddly woodland creatures spread any more than I want to see the myth that they are monsters spread. Either way, the wolf looses.
Like I said, where is your proof that wolves eat human beings?

“9.99% of what happens...”

Since: Aug 11

...is not on the news

#12 Feb 4, 2012
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Well gee, seeing as how we nearly wiped them off the face of the planet it's not surprising that there aren't any recent wolf attacks. However, if the reintroduction of the wolf isn't better managed and they keep expanding their territory outside the wilderness areas set aside for them the instance of wolf attack and wolves taking livestock and pets WILL increase and we'll be right back to square one. There are many accounts of wolf attacks from around the world and they are the reason that the wolf was nearly exterminated. Don't believe it? Well keep an eye on the reintroduction process, if it keeps going as is you'll get a chance to read those accounts of wolf attack. Then the pendulum will swing back to the opposite side and the wolf will be a monster again.
People started killing wolves when we started breeding livestock, what does that tell anyone who has a brain? Please try and keep your next response short and sweet, some of us don't have time to read long and boring drawn out responses from idiots who don't know what they're talking about. Thanks.

“9.99% of what happens...”

Since: Aug 11

...is not on the news

#13 Feb 4, 2012
USA R0CKS wrote:
<quoted text>
I know what you mean. I was watcing "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" and I was equally disturbed by the fact that the cast members purchased tomatoes (and likely ate them too) and some of them were used as props. These people are disgusting. Wouldn't a fuzzy/knitted tomato suffice just as well?
So what you're basically saying, is that you equate a living animal to a bag of produce? They're pretty much the same thing according to you. Humm, interesting, shows a lot about how low your IQ is.

“9.99% of what happens...”

Since: Aug 11

...is not on the news

#14 Feb 4, 2012
USA R0CKS wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah. Fiction should be outlawed.
People like you who cannot differentiate between fiction and reality should be outlawed from watching, or reading it.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#15 Feb 4, 2012
Crazy Like FoxNews wrote:
<quoted text>
People started killing wolves when we started breeding livestock, what does that tell anyone who has a brain? Please try and keep your next response short and sweet, some of us don't have time to read long and boring drawn out responses from idiots who don't know what they're talking about. Thanks.
History my friend. We started killing wolves when we learned that we were capable. Before that wolves were killing us. Why is it so hard for you to understand the natural order? We didn't start "exterminating" the wolf until we started breeding livestock. Please try to keep your next response factual, some of us don't have time to teach remedial history to pompous idiots who deny the facts.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#16 Feb 5, 2012
Crazy Like FoxNews wrote:
<quoted text>
Like I said, where is your proof that wolves eat human beings?
Try hanging out with a pack of wolves in the dead of winter.

hiss of death

“Bowhunting Is Euphoric”

Since: Jan 09

Double Lung em

#17 Feb 5, 2012
Crazy Like FoxNews wrote:
<quoted text>
So, when's the last time you opened the morning paper and read about a wolf attacking a human being? Please do share, thank you.
Not just attacking... but killing a human...

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/13/natio...

hiss of death

“Bowhunting Is Euphoric”

Since: Jan 09

Double Lung em

#18 Feb 5, 2012
Crazy Like FoxNews wrote:
<quoted text>
People started killing wolves when we started breeding livestock, what does that tell anyone who has a brain?
That if one wants to protect their livestock, killing wolves might be necessary.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#19 Feb 5, 2012
Crazy Like FoxNews wrote:
<quoted text>
People like you who cannot differentiate between fiction and reality should be outlawed from watching, or reading it.
I apologize if it was a different stupid person who was complaining that a fiction story was not like reality. I really could have swore that you were the stupid one complaining about it.

“9.99% of what happens...”

Since: Aug 11

...is not on the news

#20 Apr 18, 2012
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>History my friend. We started killing wolves when we learned that we were capable. Before that wolves were killing us. Why is it so hard for you to understand the natural order? We didn't start "exterminating" the wolf until we started breeding livestock. Please try to keep your next response factual, some of us don't have time to teach remedial history to pompous idiots who deny the facts.
History is a good thing, you should study up sometime. The killing of wolves actually coincided with the expansion of agriculture, coincidence? You just eat up propaganda like a fly eats sh*t, don't you?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Underworld: Awakening Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Common Law Set Visit: Michael Ealy and Warren C... (May '12) May '12 Jessica Fieseher 2
More from around the web