The Run Time Length Thread

[Deaths Head II]

HAHA the workprint was 106 minutes including credits and this is 109...HAHAHAHAHA. 20 extra minutes my ***. People will believe anything.

I agree. Fox knows this, so that's why they feed us these lines.

[chaseter]

Except I learned from it last time.

[TheVileOne]

It's funny because a few weeks ago, McCabe was up and down exclaiming how 90 minutes was the perfect length for this movie because of Mad Max.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

the funny thing is, vile, how you condemn this film for being under 2 hours when it really doesnt need to be longer. the story doesnt warrant an over 2 hour film. just because the comics fill up 100 issues with uncomprehensible garbage doesnt mean the movies have to.

[Nathan]

the funny thing is, vile, how you condemn this film for being under 2 hours when it really doesnt need to be longer. the story doesnt warrant an over 2 hour film. just because the comics fill up 100 issues with uncomprehensible garbage doesnt mean the movies have to.

Funny, that actually describes the ending perfectly.

[Deaths Head II]

I definitely disagree. The beginning needed more development to make the later events have more impact. You may disagree, but I definitely think this film could have been better with 2 hours. I strongly believe more time developing Team X, Wolverine and Sabretooth's early relationship, Silverfox and Wolverine, Stryker's relationship with Wolverine, and Wolverine in general would have made a huge difference for me in rating this film.

[FaT_tONle]

HAHA the workprint was 106 minutes including credits and this is 109...HAHAHAHAHA. 20 extra minutes my ***. People will believe anything.


Are you serious??? I mean no one is suprised don't get me wrong... but some of you guys need to start eating crow... take the crow and shove it down your throats because if this report is true... it's nothing less then what you guys deserve... not mentioning any names of course.

[lordofthenerds]

http://www.bbfc.org/website/Classified.nsf/0/0F19F01390BAC413802575920053B0C9?OpenDocument

BBFC lists this as 107m 15s... looks like Fox didn't add anything to the movie other than maybe some nifty effects.

[Peter McCabe]

It's funny because a few weeks ago, McCabe was up and down exclaiming how 90 minutes was the perfect length for this movie because of Mad Max.

I still stand by that.

Why? Because I haven't seen the movie.

And neither have you.

[danoyse]

Are you serious??? I mean no one is suprised don't get me wrong... but some of you guys need to start eating crow... take the crow and shove it down your throats because if this report is true... it's nothing less then what you guys deserve... not mentioning any names of course.

There is no need for anyone to start doing that, so let's not start.

[TNC9852002]

The movie has a running time of 109 minutes according to the dutch classification board and been given a 12+ rating (like PG-13).
http://www.kijkwijzer.nl/classificaties2.php?id=35911

Strangely the site says the movie is been distributed here by Warner Bros. Something to do with Watchmen?:huh:
:o

-TNC

[FaT_tONle]

http://www.bbfc.org/website/Classified.nsf/0/0F19F01390BAC413802575920053B0C9?OpenDocument

BBFC lists this as 107m 15s... looks like Fox didn't add anything to the movie other than maybe some nifty effects.

Just can't make it up... can not make this **** up.... just never ceases to amaze me.

And if you people are paying for this to see the completed effects... why??? If you were not satisfied with the work print as a film in its own right... why would you pay for a few CGI shots? The main lure of going to a theatre... or even sneaking in for that matter, was to catch the extra 10-15 minutes of bonus footage. Is a minute or two more really worth it? And it's one thing if you feel guilty about downloading it and want to pay for the real version... but do all of you guys go back and pay for every single thing you pirate? Be honest here... I just can not fathom why fanboys who were not satisfied with the leaked version would go back and watch this thing if this is indeed true.

[TNC9852002]

http://www.bbfc.org/website/Classified.nsf/0/0F19F01390BAC413802575920053B0C9?OpenDocument

BBFC lists this as 107m 15s... looks like Fox didn't add anything to the movie other than maybe some nifty effects.
Sure.......Where's your lack of evidence? :p

I swear, people never take info straight-up anymore and just leave things how they are until something solid is actually presented. This creates a huge amount of assumptions and this is how terrible rumors get started.

As far I knew, most of what was done were RESHOOTS and not additional footage, so, the running time wouldn't be changed by a large amount.

[danoyse]

Just can't make it up... can not make this **** up.... just never ceases to amaze me.

And if you people are paying for this to see the completed effects... why??? If you were not satisfied with the work print as a film in its own right... why would you pay for a few CGI shots? The main lure of going to a theatre... or even sneaking in for that matter, was to catch the extra 10-15 minutes of bonus footage. Is a minute or two more really worth it? And it's one thing if you feel guilty about downloading it and want to pay for the real version... but do all of you guys go back and pay for every single thing you pirate? Be honest here... I just can not fathom why fanboys who were not satisfied with the leaked version would go back and watch this thing if this is indeed true.

Maybe they're not as obsessed with the run time as some people are here.

People will see it for any reason they choose to. There's no need to go jumping down people's throats if they do.

[Figs]

this is my theory.

FOX had a 2 week window before ordering prints for the various theatres, to hear fans complain about the flaws in the leak.

They may have resorted to alternate conclusions to specific storylines, specifically with characters NOBODY will ever feel satisfied with.

*I'm expecting to see Storm in the film along with a completely different title sequence.

Sorry McCabe...I as well as others heard almost this exact 'wishing' or 'hoping' for X-3. Hell! We even heard it for the DVD for X-3 as well.

I can't say how the theatrical version is going to be until I see it when it's released, but I wouldn't get your hopes up about Fox listening to complaints from the leak and try to fix the film before release.

If they did that,(you know...by actually giving a damn) they could have done that with X-3(on DVD if anything) since there were so many different edits/scenes in the trailers and TV spots that weren't in the final film. Ratner himself said he had multiple edits which all altered the film's tone pretty drastically.

Not saying Hood did the same with Wolverine, I just don't see Fox listening to the fans.

[FaT_tONle]

Not saying Hood did the same with Wolverine, I just don't see Fox listening to the fans.

All I can say is... what goes around comes around... and it would be nothing more than sweet justice if this thing flops in Fox's face. Drinks will be on me should that happen... :woot:

[Deaths Head II]

So the extra time people were parading around as the savior of this film is probably bunk...the only justification anyone can keep giving for the final cut being better is the editing, sfx, and music (which will personally not raise my score much I don't think...those things would be icing on the cake but this cake has some broken glass in it).

[Peter McCabe]

I just don't see Fox listening to the fans.

They shouldn't.

the majority of [source material] fans don't deserve to be listened to.

Its a noble thing to go see a movie in the theatre and then deem it crap. Its just cheap to download a raw cut of that movie and then crap all over it.

The reactions to Deadpool alone are just ridiculous around here.

"That wasn't Deadpool."

:cmad:

[danoyse]

I thought the Deadpool anger was pretty justified, actually...

[Figs]

They shouldn't.

the majority of [source material] fans don't deserve to be listened to.

Its a noble thing to go see a movie in the theatre and then deem it crap. Its just cheap to download a raw cut of that movie and then crap all over it.

The reactions to Deadpool alone are just ridiculous around here.

"That wasn't Deadpool."

:cmad:

I agree with you that a ton of 'source material' fanboys shouldn't be listened to mainly because a lot of them complain about some of the smallest diversions...which is a bit obsessive.

What I meant by my comment was in regards to the complaints that the film is too short and how a number of characters get little to no development, so they're essentially wasted and only serve to move the character to the next scene. You know, actual 'Film' complaints not 'comic book' movie complaints in regards to accuracy.

[def28]

The reactions to Deadpool alone are just ridiculous around here.

"That wasn't Deadpool."

:cmad:

Hugh Jackman even stated everyone would be pissed. Its expected, and unless they show something to prove thats not the last we will see of Deadpool I think everyone will continue to b****.

Us Deadpool fans have good reason to be upset.

What if they gave Sabertooth Optic blasts instead?

[TheVileOne]

You aren't standing by it McCabe because you are supporting false rumors that there's some longer 2 hour plus cut of the movie out there.

[Peter McCabe]

I thought the Deadpool anger was pretty justified, actually...

Don't encourage them, please.

they've been naggin about every little detail regarding that character.

I'm kinda happy it blew up in their faces.

[Peter McCabe]

Hugh Jackman even stated everyone would be pissed. Its expected, and unless they show something to prove thats not the last we will see of Deadpool I think everyone will continue to b****.

Us Deadpool fans have good reason to be upset.

What if they gave Sabertooth Optic blasts instead?

Hugh Jackman only said that to get the annoying fanboys off his back, well at least he thought it would.

Honesty is the last thing you wanna try with insane fanboys. I prefer the Gavin Hood approach ---> DEAL WITH IT.

*Everyone that's seen the leak who's opinion I value is telling me Deadpool's final "form" is both fierce and horrific.

That alone sounds more appealing to me than the wacky ninja guy who looks like Spider Man and NOBODY except comic fans know about.

[Peter McCabe]

You aren't standing by it McCabe because you are supporting false rumors that there's some longer 2 hour plus cut of the movie out there.

No, I'm standing by it because whether its 90 minutes or 107 - I still haven't seen it.

And neither have you.

[Deaths Head II]

*Everyone that's seen the leak who's opinion I value is telling me Deadpool's final "form" is both fierce and horrific.

Well he is horrific, though not in the way you imagine.... :hehe:

To be honest though, I thought Deadpool looked goofy. Reynolds does not look good in a bald cap. And those blades are way too big for his arms to be able to bend.

Not to mention there is a VERY hilarious aspect of him that I can't mention because its spoilers.

[lordofthenerds]

*Everyone that's seen the leak who's opinion I value is telling me Deadpool's final "form" is both fierce and horrific.

Sorta, except it doesn't in the slightist bit resemble the character of Deadpool; in character, powers, or appearence. Maybe that's why the fans are pissed off....

[JaD]

No, I'm standing by it because whether its 90 minutes or 107 - I still haven't seen it.

And neither have you.Trufax methinks.

[protocida]

It's a 5/10 movie that could easily be a 10/5.

And that's terrible.

[def28]

That alone sounds more appealing to me than the wacky ninja guy who looks like Spider Man and NOBODY except comic fans know about.

I hear the opposite. That the opening scene with Wade works much better and is much more true to his comic version. But I will judge it fair when its released.

Deadpool is very popular with movie and video game fans as well. I know plenty of people who are aware of the character, they just dont know the background or details on him. Which is the case with all the characters in this franchise.

[Peter McCabe]

Well he is horrific, though not in the way you imagine.... :hehe:

To be honest though, I thought Deadpool looked goofy. Reynolds does not look good in a bald cap. And those blades are way too big for his arms to be able to bend.

Not to mention there is a VERY hilarious aspect of him that I can't mention because its spoilers.

It wasn't Reynolds. It was Scott Adkins.

They both look very similar though http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[Peter McCabe]

Sorta, except it doesn't in the slightist bit resemble the character of Deadpool; in character, powers, or appearence. Maybe that's why the fans are pissed off....

Who cares?

I'll tell you who - Not me, and not the majority of people that will pay to see this movie.

*I saw screencaps from the leak of Weapon XI Deadpool and that man/thing looks 10 times more interesting to me than the foot soldier in red from the comics.

[def28]

It wasn't Reynolds. It was Scott Adkins.


It both of them.

[Peter McCabe]

It both of them.

All I know is that Adkins played the Weapon XI part of Deadpool. Reynolds was only on set for 3 days and those are the scenes of him as Wade Wilson.

[protocida]

There's someone defending Weapon XI? :csad:

[Deaths Head II]

It wasn't Reynolds. It was Scott Adkins.

They both look very similar though http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

It's Reynolds in the close up shots.

I am not wrong about this either, when you will see the film you will see it's unmistakably Reynolds whenever he's staring down Wolverine or whatever. Weapon XI actually looks better in the action sequences because Adkins DOES look good in a bald cap.

[lordofthenerds]

Who cares?

I'll tell you who - Not me, and not the majority of people that will pay to see this movie.

*I saw screencaps from the leak of Weapon XI Deadpool and that man/thing looks 10 times more interesting to me than the foot soldier in red from the comics.
True and good for you, but you were complaining earlier that the fans were pissed with Deadpool's portrayal in the movie, and their anger seemed fairly reasonable to me.

And I honestly didn't find the character that interesting/frightening, mainly because he was just another very unfrightening character's pawn.

[def28]

All I know is that Adkins played the Weapon XI part of Deadpool. Reynolds was only on set for 3 days and those are the scenes of him as Wade Wilson.

Reynolds confirmed thats him in an interview. But your right, he was only there for three days. So as for how many shots hes actually in who knows?

[danoyse]

Don't encourage them, please.

they've been naggin about every little detail regarding that character.

I'm kinda happy it blew up in their faces.

Well, they have every right to be upset about if they didn't like it. You have no right to tell them they can't be.

[Peter McCabe]

Well, they have every right to be upset about if they didn't like it. You have no right to tell them they can't be.

never told them they couldn't be upset.

*I personally feel they deserve to be upset. And I mean that in the vindictive way.

They complained, complained and complained and the character ends up...

:woot:

[JaD]

It wasn't Reynolds. It was Scott Adkins.

They both look very similar though http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

It both of them.Yeah it's both, I have a great screencap/comparison to show that too, but then again it's incredibly sloppy how they flip from Adkins to Reynolds during the fight. Eh. I hope it's polished up because it's so blatantly obvious who is who in the end.

[chaseter]

No, I'm standing by it because whether its 90 minutes or 107 - I still haven't seen it.

And neither have you.
I have and the reason you told us not to judge this film is that it isn't in its final form but that has been proven false. The leak was the final film, the ferrari without its paint...but no one buys a ferrari because of the paint job and I am not paying to see a film that I thought was mediocre.

[chaseter]

It wasn't Reynolds. It was Scott Adkins.

They both look very similar though http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif
No...it was Scott in the action parts and Reynolds in the slow parts and his head looks big in a bald cap. That is why so many people thought he looked weird because he has that thick layer of hair underneath the bald cap so he sort of looks like he has a huge brain.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

never told them they couldn't be upset.

*I personally feel they deserve to be upset. And I mean that in the vindictive way.

They complained, complained and complained and the character ends up...

:woot:

Personally, I've given up on fanboys.

I've been here for 2 X-films now (X-Men: The Last Stand, and this one), and I've seen their reactions to nearly every comic film that's come out.

I find the fanboy perspective to be rather arrogant and self absorbed.

There's a few that maintain a level of logic and level headedness, but unfortunately they are outnumbered.

And no, it has nothing to do with liking or disliking certain films. Rather, it has everything to do with the lack of reasoning behind it. They think inside a box, and anything that goes outside of that box is all of a sudden corrupt, horrible, and evil.

*waits for thewheepeople to use this post against me in an unrelated argument in a year*

[JaD]

I have and the reason you told us not to judge this film is that it isn't in its final form but that has been proven false. The leak was the final film, the ferrari without its paint...but no one buys a ferrari because of the paint job and I am not paying to see a film that I thought was mediocre.Ohh I can't wait 'til April 30th, I'm watching the print, no wait. I'll put it on my PSP and watch it when I wait across the street for the movie to start at Borders, then I'll come online and come find you. Pointing out all the differences there are :oldrazz:

[chaseter]

There isn't 14 or 20 extra minutes worth so your list will be short and sweet:cwink: A lot of the fx were done in the leak so there isn't much more in that film that will put my butt in the seat. Fox could have done so by actually putting in 20 extra minutes but it was a promise from a group of liars so no one should be shocked that it isn't so.

[danoyse]

never told them they couldn't be upset.

*I personally feel they deserve to be upset. And I mean that in the vindictive way.

They complained, complained and complained and the character ends up...

:woot:

I'm going to warn you one last time not to be so obnoxious to all of the other fans here.

[TheVileOne]

More and more do I believe McCabe somehow worked on this movie or is associated with it.

[Peter McCabe]

I'm going to warn you one last time not to be so obnoxious to all of the other fans here.

to call me obnoxious in this forum is like handing out a speeding ticket at the Indy 500 :cwink:

*I don't see the people celebrating the leak's "failure" getting warnings, Danoyse.

[Figs]

never told them they couldn't be upset.

*I personally feel they deserve to be upset. And I mean that in the vindictive way.

They complained, complained and complained and the character ends up...

:woot:

McCabe, at first I thought you were a bit more reasonable in your opinions but after this post...your a typical Fox stooge. You'll take whatever they give you. While some of us want a good 'film', your in the group of people who think "It's another comic film, it must be good!".

Honestly, I got over the Deadpool thing before the leak happened. I realized, it is what it is and the movie is supposed to be about Wolverine after all. Just to make things clear, I'm not one of those super fanboys that complains about the littlest of changes either. I like the first two X-men films a lot, despite all their flaws and changes from the comics.

I just think it's a chump move to say that the fans that are still pissed about Deadpool deserve it. Let alone fans like myself that wanted a better quality film that would do the Wolverine comics justice...even with some changes here and there which happen in all comic films.

[danoyse]

More and more do I believe McCabe somehow worked on this movie or is associated with it.

Oh, you think everyone works for Fox.

[Theweepeople]

Personally, I've given up on fanboys.

I've been here for 2 X-films now (X-Men: The Last Stand, and this one), and I've seen their reactions to nearly every comic film that's come out.

I find the fanboy perspective to be rather arrogant and self absorbed.

There's a few that maintain a level of logic and level headedness, but unfortunately they are outnumbered.

And no, it has nothing to do with liking or disliking certain films. Rather, it has everything to do with the lack of reasoning behind it. They think inside a box, and anything that goes outside of that box is all of a sudden corrupt, horrible, and evil.

*waits for thewheepeople to use this post against me in an unrelated argument in a year*

Why are you purposely trying to create tension between us? I'm not bashing this film right now so there's really no reason to bring me into this conversation unless you're trying to act like a dick towards me again.

It's obvious that you've always considered me to be one of the fanboys with no perspective. That's okay. No offence taken. Hopefully, you won't be offended if I consider you to be an elitist snob who lacks the emotional capacity to accept the opinions of those who dislike X-Men movies and other Fox films you enjoy.

[Peter McCabe]

McCabe, at first I thought you were a bit more reasonable in your opinions but after this post...your a typical Fox stooge. You'll take whatever they give you. While some of us want a good 'film', your in the group of people who think "It's another comic film, it must be good!".

Honestly, I got over the Deadpool thing before the leak happened. I realized, it is what it is and the movie is supposed to be about Wolverine after all. Just to make things clear, I'm not one of those super fanboys that complains about the littlest of changes either. I like the first two X-men films a lot, despite all their flaws and changes from the comics.

I just think it's a chump move to say that the fans that are still pissed about Deadpool deserve it. Let alone fans like myself that wanted a better quality film that would do the Wolverine comics justice...even with some changes here and there which happen in all comic films.

I too want a quality film, but I won't allow pre-determined notions fueled by irrelevant agendas to the overall concept of what this film should be to in any way compromise my excitement.

If the movie sucks, then I will say it sucks. I will describe my dissatisfaction in a full review dated sometime AFTER May 1st.

If it is good though, and I further confirm my theories that people here are only bashing it out of spite for FOX and hate for the changes made to Deadpool, then I will review it positively and emphacize most of my love for the film in the characters/story arc that should matter to those watching it.

Right now I smell a huge number of FOX haters using the leak as a tool to say "Look! FOX did it again."

On May 1st, we'll know if my sense of smell was off.

[TNC9852002]

There isn't 14 or 20 extra minutes worth so your list will be short and sweet:cwink: A lot of the fx were done in the leak so there isn't much more in that film that will put my butt in the seat. Fox could have done so by actually putting in 20 extra minutes but it was a promise from a group of liars so no one should be shocked that it isn't so.

Oh, you think everyone works for Fox.
:D

Chaseter seems to act that he's working for FOX too sometimes. ;)

Me, I sympathize moreso with guys like McCabe and Nell, but I'm slightly different. Just in case anyone was wondering, I don't TRY to stay "on the level". I just have a tendency to go where the facts and the proven evidence or what I feel is logical leads me. Sure, my opinion has been swayed through optimism, despite knowing that there's a bigger risk in doing so. I'm just that kind of person in real-life.

I also find humor whenever someone believes so much into their assumptions that they take them as cold hard facts. Even if their assumptions are proven right afterward, they don't have any more power than they did before when other people thought otherwise.

With that said, this forum is becoming pretty depressing for me. :p :(

[sniktsnakt]

Oh, you think everyone works for Fox.

It's the new ultimate insult:

"Oh yeah? Well, you work for Fox!"

[chaseter]

I work for Fox...AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I feel bad for some people on here because I was doing what they are doing 3 years ago and I was let down.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Why are you purposely trying to create tension between us? I'm not bashing this film right now so there's really no reason to bring me into this conversation unless you're trying to act like a dick towards me again.

It's obvious that you've always considered me to be one of the fanboys with no perspective. That's okay. No offence taken. Hopefully, you won't be offended if I consider you to be an elitist snob who lacks the emotional capacity to accept the opinions of those who dislike X-Men movies and other Fox films you enjoy.

I was wondering the same thing about you a few days back when you made a comment about your "prediction of me" coming true, after I voiced my opinion of the leaked film (when we were able to still talk about it)

I really couldn't care less what you think of me. If you think I can't accept people that dislike the X-Men films, you're more than welcome to your incorrect opinion. But I'm not going to justify myself to you.

[JP]

HAHA the workprint was 106 minutes including credits and this is 109...HAHAHAHAHA. 20 extra minutes my ***. People will believe anything.

The work print also contains a lot of footage that won't be in the film. As well as X3's credits, which were ridiculously long. I doubt this films credits will be as long as X3's.

[chaseter]

The work print also contains a lot of footage that won't be in the film. As well as X3's credits, which were ridiculously long. I doubt this films credits will be as long as X3's.
You know footage won't be in the final film how:huh: This movie is still not the extra 14 or 20 minutes promised that some people believed. It is still a 90 something minute movie. Yeah I know it had X3's credits and it was used to provide an estimate and so that estimate won't be too far off.

[Peter McCabe]

You know footage won't be in the final film how:huh: This movie is still not the extra 14 or 20 minutes promised that some people believed. It is still a 90 something minute movie.

Its actually 107 minutes.

[chaseter]

Its actually 107 minutes.
With credits:huh:

[danoyse]

OK, this thread is getting way too nasty, so here are the new rules if you want it to stay open:

1- STAY ON TOPIC. This is not the place to complain about Deadpool, or for anyone to decide who is the the better fan.

2 - Nell and theweepeople: knock it off. There's no reason to start picking silly arguments with each other, and none of us want to hear it.

3 - If this thread turns into a continuous stream of 'I told you so's', it's closed. The topic is over, go gloat somewhere else.

So let's play nice, don't play at all. Thank you.

[Figs]

I too want a quality film, but I won't allow pre-determined notions fueled by irrelevant agendas to the overall concept of what this film should be to in any way compromise my excitement.

If the movie sucks, then I will say it sucks. I will describe my dissatisfaction in a full review dated sometime AFTER May 1st.

I highly doubt this. You as well as I may not have watched the leaked version but I knew before the spoilers were banned you had heard enough about it from the people who saw it. I truly think you already have your mind made up, just from the simple notion that you have seeminly been positive about most if not all of the details about the movie...even the ones that had a lot of people pissed(NO, not just Deadpool).

I've seen you defend a number of these things even though a lot of the faults people are complaining about are typical things that are just bad for a film...the kind of things critics will trash on, not just fanboy purist problems.

If it is good though, and I further confirm my theories that people here are only bashing it out of spite for FOX and hate for the changes made to Deadpool, then I will review it positively and emphacize most of my love for the film in the characters/story arc that should matter to those watching it.

Right now I smell a huge number of FOX haters using the leak as a tool to say "Look! FOX did it again."

As for the last comment regarding 'Fox haters'. You say that as if the fact that it leaked was something the Fox haters jumped on and not the fact that they watched what leaked and saw with their own eyes what appears to be another Fox film that is of low quality. Sorry, you and the supporters can dream that the rumoured 11-14 minutes could drastically alter the film and get some of the haters to enjoy it more...but it's doubtful with all the complaints I've heard.



I also find humor whenever someone believes so much into their assumptions that they take them as cold hard facts. Even if their assumptions are proven right afterward, they don't have any more power than they did before when other people thought otherwise.

The hilarious thing is when you talk trash about people believing their own assumptions when people have seen a 99% finished version of the film and a lot of them agreed it had the same low quality problems typical of Fox. That a lot of what they complained about was what they didn't like with their other films (excluding X1 and 2 for the most part).

[Peter McCabe]

With credits:huh:

Credits won't go longer than 3 - 4 minutes.

that leaves the movie at 104 minutes.

that's not bad I think, I was expecting 90 - 100.

[JaD]

The work print also contains a lot of footage that won't be in the film. As well as X3's credits, which were ridiculously long. I doubt this films credits will be as long as X3's.Yeah, I'm not giving up hope on this movie yet. I'm still excited to see this movie, and the worst I see happening is me giving this movie a 7 when I already gave the print a 6... :hehe: If the critics tear this movie apart, then I'm confident that Fox won't let one of it's biggest (and best quality) superhero franchises go down the toilet in quality.

[Theweepeople]

I was wondering the same thing about you a few days back when you made a comment about your "prediction of me" coming true, after I voiced my opinion of the leaked film (when we were able to still talk about it)

Damn you're hypersensitive. How was making that prediction an example of me trying to create tension? I thought you would enjoy this movie more than TDK, Spider-man 1, and Spider-man 2 because X-Men is your favorite comic. I don't have a problem this and I'm not sure why you're trying to turn this into another silly fight.



I really couldn't care less what you think of me. If you think I can't accept people that dislike the X-Men films, you're more than welcome to your incorrect opinion. But I'm not going to justify myself to you.

That's fine.

[JP]

You know footage won't be in the final film how:huh: This movie is still not the extra 14 or 20 minutes promised that some people believed. It is still a 90 something minute movie. Yeah I know it had X3's credits and it was used to provide an estimate and so that estimate won't be too far off.

I assume the point of re-shoots is to.. well, re-shoot. You know, meaning there will be new scenes that will likely replace old scenes. Not that hard a concept to understand.

And 90 minutes? Are you saying the credits will roll for 18 minutes? :wow:

Honestly, I'm perfectly satisfied with the film as is, so it doesn't matter to me if the film is 4 extra minutes, or 10.

[chaseter]

I assume the point of re-shoots is to.. well, re-shoot. You know, meaning there will be new scenes that will likely replace old scenes. Not that hard a concept to understand.

And 90 minutes? Are you saying the credits will roll for 18 minutes? :wow:

Honestly, I'm perfectly satisfied with the film as is, so it doesn't matter to me if the film is 4 extra minutes, or 10.
I said 90 something minutes:huh: I can't say 97 minutes because I don't know how long the credits will be but they will be along the lines of X3 hence why they used them to estimate. They were pickups and who is to say that wasn't in the leak?

This movie is 90 something minutes long and the run time hurt the pacing and didn't allow for a lot of character development and that hurt the film and that is what critics will pound on the most.

[chaseter]

Credits won't go longer than 3 - 4 minutes.

that leaves the movie at 104 minutes.

that's not bad I think, I was expecting 90 - 100.
Credits will be longer than 5 minutes.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Honestly, I'm perfectly satisfied with the film as is, so it doesn't matter to me if the film is 4 extra minutes, or 10.

This.

I won't lie - as is, the film doesn't quite meet my expectations on what I'd hope for. I do find faults with it.

But overall, I am satisfied with it.

I never bought into the hype that there is an additional 14 - 20 minutes of footage in the film. I look at it as a bonus, if it is there.

But, I did get burned with X-Men: The Last Stand. I bought into the hype that certain things would be different, I even wrote a huge post about how I thought for sure that Cyclops would survive. When none of that stuff happened, I let it ruin the film for me. Just like I think many did.

In actuality, there's more to the film than Cyclops dying, and Rogue taking the cure. It's actually a good movie, if not a bit under developed.

I feel the same about this movie. Yes, some certain aspects of the film suck, and they all come at the end. But there's a whole lot more to the movie than that. Like X-Men 3, it's a good movie, if not a bit under developed.

If the 14 extra minutes is indeed true, then this movie is going to be pretty amazing.

[TheVileOne]

I'm sure the Watchmen fans are happy.

Karma has come back to roost at 20th Century Fox now.

And Fox has a lot of bad karma to go answer to.

[JP]

I'm sure the Watchmen fans are happy.

Karma has come back to roost at 20th Century Fox now.

And Fox has a lot of bad karma to go answer to.
How so? I have seen absolutely no indication that the leaked print will hurt the box office numbers at all. Quite the opposite, actually.

[TheVileOne]

Its not about box office per se. But you can't deny that Fox isn't happy about this.

Also, Fox legally claimed that the leak of the workprint might affect the box office, so they are publically stating as such.

[JaD]

You can look at it in several different ways, if the movie is huge and successful, then you can say the leak provided some extra publicity and press for their film. If it bombs horribly, then they can use the leak as causing some damage. Maybe turning certain people away from going to see the film.

[chaseter]

Everything I feared for this movie came true...the run time being the biggest. So, the leak happened and created a lot of bad wom and Fox is on spin control so I do think it will hurt the box office due to it not having good legs. It will probably still do good opening weekend but I think it will have a huge drop off and it won't make near as much as Tranformers, Harry Potter, Terminator, and maybe Star Trek.

[JP]

I don't understand your run time fear? It's not like the film is 90 minutes. It's not even 100 minutes (which I consider a decent time allotment).

[chaseter]

My fear is that in short movie, you have little time to tell a story and allow it to develop good enough and allow the characters in that story to develop. The leak was badly paced and lacked a lot of character development and that made the movie mediocre to me. These movies were once deeper films than just eye candy and cutting edge SFX, that is what Transformers is; a mindless SFX and explosion fest and it does it well. People say that some in here gripe over changes but with all of its changes, X2 was easily the best of this franchise because of the story it told and the depth the characters in it were taken to.

[Ace of Knaves]

But it isn't just eye candy. The very opening sequence has some pretty horrific stuff in there, particularly the part in Vietnam. It isn't too cerebral, but it has some thought provoking stuff in there about the fine line between love-hate relationships and what not. Would Logan come to his brothers aid in that bit in Vietnam if he knew what he was about to do? Would Logan end up the same as his brother if he just embraced his animalistic, murderous instincts? See the argument that there is absolutely no thought provoking material in this film just doesn't hold any ground what so ever. It's just sour grapes, people ignoring them parts because they are too busy actually looking for problems, looking for things to slate, instead of just watching the film for what it is. I 100% guarantee A LOT of people are doing that, and it's bollox, sort yourselves out.

The cameo characters got enough development for their cameo roles. I don't particularly give a toss about what Bradley, Blob and Wraith get up to in their past lives or what they are all about. If you use your imagination you can figure all that out for yourself. And anyway, we know why they left Weapon X and how it has effected them, they have all turned to vices in some form or the other. They are there to keep the plot moving along, and they do get sufficient development for their roles.

It's funny, about a week ago people were moaning that these cameo characters were gonna take away from Logan and Creeds stories. Well they haven't. Now you have people moaning that the cameo characters don't get enough development. Sort it out.

[dark_b]

Does that run time include credits? If not then that isn't a bad run time, pretty close to 2 hours.i think runtimes are always with credits.

[X-Maniac]

My fear is that in short movie, you have little time to tell a story and allow it to develop good enough and allow the characters in that story to develop. The leak was badly paced and lacked a lot of character development and that made the movie mediocre to me. These movies were once deeper films than just eye candy and cutting edge SFX, that is what Transformers is; a mindless SFX and explosion fest and it does it well. People say that some in here gripe over changes but with all of its changes, X2 was easily the best of this franchise because of the story it told and the depth the characters in it were taken to.

Oh yes, such depth in X2 for the virtually absent Cyclops and mute henchwoman Deathstrike. Not to mention a Mastermind illusionist who in no way resembled the comicbook version.

Your bitter bias towards the Wolverine movie is so palpable you could slice it with a knife and serve it with coffee.

[Ace of Knaves]

^ :hehe:

[danoyse]

I don't understand your run time fear? It's not like the film is 90 minutes. It's not even 100 minutes (which I consider a decent time allotment).

Welcome to the daily run-time obsession thread. :up:

Honestly, 90 minutes would have been awful. 106, that ain't terrible.

[Downhere]

Welcome to the daily run-time obsession thread. :up:

Honestly, 90 minutes would have been awful. 106, that ain't terrible.

What happened to the 10 extra minutes that were supposed to be in the final cut? Judging by the work print, it was extremely choppy and needed some more transitional scenes between certain takes. If that ends up being the final, final version, then good grief.

[FaT_tONle]

Some scenes sort of skipped around and jumped for a couple of seconds or two in the workprint. But if you factor all those editing flaws... it probably only adds up to a minute or so. So ALL the scenes are in tact and in place. Nothing will be added unless they replace a scene all together, and there is no flexibility to do that based on the pacing. Rothman flat out LIED to all the fans... again.

[danoyse]

What happened to the 10 extra minutes that were supposed to be in the final cut? Judging by the work print, it was extremely choppy and needed some more transitional scenes between certain takes. If that ends up being the final, final version, then good grief.

But we know if that was 10 additional minutes, or scenes were cut and replaced with additional footage? I have no idea.

I never really bought the 'extra 20 minutes' rumor, I just assumed the stuff they did in February hadn't been added into the film yet, or if it was replacing previous footage. But who knows? I haven't seen the workprint, so I really have no idea.

AICN has really been pushing the extra 20-minutes thing, they're going to catch a lot of hell too if that winds up being BS.

I'm just not going to be climbing out on a ledge because the movie is 106 minutes.

[Nivek]

It's the new ultimate insult:

"Oh yeah? Well, you work for Fox!"

I was hired as a storyboard artist for Fox in 2001, but they closed the department the day before I was supposed to start. Can I still be a stooge? :cwink:

[danoyse]

I worked for Fox's tv affliate in NY in 1996. It was my first job after college and I left in early 1998. I hated it there. The statute of limitations on me being a Fox stooge ran out years ago.

[Rac]

If it is good though, and I further confirm my theories that people here are only bashing it out of spite for FOX and hate for the changes made to Deadpool, then I will review it positively and emphacize most of my love for the film in the characters/story arc that should matter to those watching it.

Right now I smell a huge number of FOX haters using the leak as a tool to say "Look! FOX did it again."

On May 1st, we'll know if my sense of smell was off.
Eh, no. I don't know are there people bashing this (or any other Fox) movie just because it's Fox movie, but I ain't one*. It's no secret that I don't like how they handle their genre films. Majority of them are not good films, I don't understand why people always overlook that. Saying (not you, but you know...) that we bash Fox just because they killed of Cyclops in X3 is ****ing retarted. Maybe 9-year old kids could do so, but not us adults or, eh, "young adults". (Though sometimes people act here like they're still in elementary school...)

I did not like X-Men Origins: Wolverine simply because it's not a good film. I don't like the plot at all. Plus they wronged so many characters (including Logan). Only one I think they managed to pull off was Sabretooth (aside from making him the brother of Logan). The personality was Sabretooth.

But that's about that for now. If Dutch and British classification boards have seen the film already, VET, the Finnish one is soon to follow. I'll the post the runtime then. It won't differ from their 106/107 minutes, but they always include the seconds and the metres of the film. :up:

MPAA should be checking the film soon too, I'd guess.

*I do have a tendency to say "Meh, won't probably be any good" if Fox announces a new genre film, because of their track record. But if the film turns out the be good, I will say it was good. Happened with Jumper. I only watched it because of Jamie Bell, I'm a fan of him. I was expecting the same ol' crap, but it ended being somewhat okay. Not a very good film, but not a complete **** either. Mostly because of Bell's badass character.

[Downhere]

But we know if that was 10 additional minutes, or scenes were cut and replaced with additional footage? I have no idea.

I never really bought the 'extra 20 minutes' rumor, I just assumed the stuff they did in February hadn't been added into the film yet, or if it was replacing previous footage. But who knows? I haven't seen the workprint, so I really have no idea.

AICN has really been pushing the extra 20-minutes thing, they're going to catch a lot of hell too if that winds up being BS.

I'm just not going to be climbing out on a ledge because the movie is 106 minutes.

Yeah, I don't know, I was only hoping there was a bit more that needed to be added to the film. I saw the first 15 minutes of the work print and the transitions were horrible. It was all jumbled and moved way too fast. Not sure if that is how it is throughout the movie, but it definitely needs some padding in the first part that I saw. But, I'm going to probably assume that was the final cut that just needed some work done to the FX and all. Meh, it will probably end up being decent like X3, but nothing great...just another Fox blunder really.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

the funny thing is, vile, how you condemn this film for being under 2 hours when it really doesnt need to be longer. the story doesnt warrant an over 2 hour film. just because the comics fill up 100 issues with uncomprehensible garbage doesnt mean the movies have to.

I'm sorry, Nell, but I just dont know how you can say this story doesnt warrant a 2 hour movie. This is 150 years worth of history for TWO characters, spanning 4 wars, a government conspiracy and another man's quest to turn mutants into his own personal weapons. IF anything, 2 hours is barely enough.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I'm sorry, Nell, but I just dont know how you can say this story doesnt warrant a 2 hour movie. This is 150 years worth of history for TWO characters, spanning 4 wars, a government conspiracy and another man's quest to turn mutants into his own personal weapons. IF anything, 2 hours is barely enough.

Because we don't need to see every detail of the 150 years and 4 wars, that's why it doesn't warrant a long movie.

I mean, a 2 / 2 1/4 hour movie is fine, and I would not be against that, but it doesn't need to be a LONG movie.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Because we don't need to see every detail of the 150 years and 4 wars, that's why it doesn't warrant a long movie.

I mean, a 2 / 2 1/4 hour movie is fine, and I would not be against that, but it doesn't need to be a LONG movie.


I would say 2 hours at a minimum, and i'm not suggesting we need to see every little detail of those 150 years, but it is a lot of history that needs to be covered, especially throwing in a government conspiracy, a love story, an experiment, how these 2 close brothers grew so far apart, not to mention Logan fighting against what he is. Throw the main antagonist's story, not to mention all of the cameo's, and 90-100 mins doesnt seem nearly enough, IMO at least.

And do you honestly blame people for having an agenda against Fox? If they made their movies with the care and love other studio's mostly give to their comic book property's, there wouldnt be any need for an agenda. There is a reason the likes of WB, Universal, Paramount, etc, DONT have agenda's against them.

[Nivek]

I would say 2 hours at a minimum, and i'm not suggesting we need to see every little detail of those 150 years, but it is a lot of history that needs to be covered, especially throwing in a government conspiracy, a love story, an experiment, how these 2 close brothers grew so far apart, not to mention Logan fighting against what he is. Throw the main antagonist's story, not to mention all of the cameo's, and 90-100 mins doesnt seem nearly enough, IMO at least.


I agree with what your saying. It seem's like there is a whole other movie that they skipped over to do this one.

[chaseter]

Oh yes, such depth in X2 for the virtually absent Cyclops and mute henchwoman Deathstrike. Not to mention a Mastermind illusionist who in no way resembled the comicbook version.

Your bitter bias towards the Wolverine movie is so palpable you could slice it with a knife and serve it with coffee.
Such depth? What does that make this movie:huh: Deathstrike was a tool for a fight...like Deadpool. Cyclops had development in the first film unlike most of the characters in this movie. The mastermind illusionist that in no way resembled the comic version...he is in this movie too!!!

Fans and critics agree that X2 was the best of the series and critics and fans will find this mediocre because of the issues I addressed: pacing and lack of development. It makes no sense to cram in so many characters and purposely make a short movie...it is stupid.

Your unbridled love for Fox and all things with X-Men in the title is sad. If you want to empty your pockets for Fox so that we can keep getting medicore movies then by all means do it.

I was right about the run time after a lot of you were hoping for the opposite. It is a 106 minute movie with credits...congratulations on your success. For that, I do have bias and why should I care otherwise? What makes you think I should be objective when I can sit here and see their track record and make an educated guess as to what will happen down the road?

Do you think Uwe Boll's next film will be a masterpiece? Or, can you look at his track record and make a guess:huh:

[Sam Fisher]

Oh boo hoo. It's 106 minutes. Fox sucks balls. wa wa. BIG F'ING DEAL.


And why are you comparing this to Uwe Boll's movies? This and those movies aren't even in the same league.

[danoyse]

Your unbridled love for Fox and all things with X-Men in the title is sad. If you want to empty your pockets for Fox so that we can keep getting medicore movies then by all means do it.

That's not true. X-Maniac is a fan of the films, but he's often been critical about them and the studio.

You need to stop jumping at everyone who likes these films without resorting to baseless accusations.

[Spider-Fan]

Everyone also needs to stop jumping on chase for his. He's judging these films on merit too, so if you're going to defend X-Maniac on one hand, let's also remember people are accusing chase of blind hate, which is false.

[Nivek]

And why are you comparing this to Uwe Boll's movies? This and those movies aren't even in the same league.

It's all about opinion... to some, it's that off mark.

[Spider-Fan]

Oh boo hoo. It's 106 minutes. Fox sucks balls. wa wa. BIG F'ING DEAL.


And why are you comparing this to Uwe Boll's movies? This and those movies aren't even in the same league.

He didn't say it was Uwe Boll bad. Everyone loves misrepresentation to make their point :up:

What he wasy saying was all major FOX films have similar problems of rushing and cramming, so why would he expect different from this film. He compared this to saying do you think Uwe Boll's next movie will be good. This was not saying they're in the same league. This was a metaphor saying track record shows tendencies that are often predictable.

[chaseter]

That's not true. X-Maniac is a fan of the films, but he's often been critical about them and the studio.

You need to stop jumping at everyone who likes these films without resorting to baseless accusations.
Did you not see what he said about my opinion:huh: That last bit was a snarky retort at his snarky comment about my opinion. It is my opinion and those that thought this movie was fantastic keep poking at my ribs.

Your bitter bias towards the Wolverine movie is so palpable you could slice it with a knife and serve it with coffee.
Yeah...he is not jumping on anyone here:o

[chaseter]

Oh boo hoo. It's 106 minutes. Fox sucks balls. wa wa. BIG F'ING DEAL.


And why are you comparing this to Uwe Boll's movies? This and those movies aren't even in the same league.
When did I say they were in the same league:huh: Oh, that is right...I didn't. I love how you read posts and pick out what you want to respond to.

[chaseter]

He didn't say it was Uwe Boll bad. Everyone loves misrepresentation to make their point :up:

What he wasy saying was all major FOX films have similar problems of rushing and cramming, so why would he expect different from this film. He compared this to saying do you think Uwe Boll's next movie will be good. This was not saying they're in the same league. This was a metaphor saying track record shows tendencies that are often predictable.
Oh if common sense were more prevalent:csad:

[Spider-Fan]

Oh if common sense were more prevalent:csad:

I can only spread the word :csad:

[X-Maniac]

Such depth? What does that make this movie:huh: Deathstrike was a tool for a fight...like Deadpool. Cyclops had development in the first film unlike most of the characters in this movie. The mastermind illusionist that in no way resembled the comic version...he is in this movie too!!!

But my point was that henchmen/henchwomen exist and that, despite the treatment of Deathstrike, it hasn't affected critics' or fans' overall view of X2.


This movie is intended to revolve around Wolverine and his backstory. Other characters will be secondary or even less (tertiary) or maybe just a mere glimpse. Wolverine is the protagonist. I don't really care about backstory on Blob, Wraith, etc. They are simply secondary or tertiary characters who are there within the narrative.

I've not seen the leaked film so I can't judge it at all. But I would expect several characters to be in the background, simply to flesh out the mutant movie-verse and add texture to the story. It's impossible to have a film with 15 main characters.

As for what happens, allegedly, to Deadpool, it sounds controversial for hardcore fanboys. But Fox talked about a solo spin-off, so they might be wanting to develop him further in future.


Fans and critics agree that X2 was the best of the series and critics and fans will find this mediocre because of the issues I addressed: pacing and lack of development. It makes no sense to cram in so many characters and purposely make a short movie...it is stupid.

I can't comment on pacing or development until I see the film. But I don't expect characterisation to be fleshed out on any more than three or four characters maximum.


Your unbridled love for Fox and all things with X-Men in the title is sad. If you want to empty your pockets for Fox so that we can keep getting medicore movies then by all means do it.

You're being hysterical. And inaccurate regarding my 'unbridled' love for Fox. I'll judge it on opening weekend and let it stand or fall by its reception and box office.


I was right about the run time after a lot of you were hoping for the opposite. It is a 106 minute movie with credits...congratulations on your success. For that, I do have bias and why should I care otherwise? What makes you think I should be objective when I can sit here and see their track record and make an educated guess as to what will happen down the road?

Have we had an official running time yet?

Do you think Uwe Boll's next film will be a masterpiece? Or, can you look at his track record and make a guess:huh:

Is Gavin Hood as bad as Uwe Boll?

[danoyse]

Did you not see what he said about my opinion:huh: That last bit was a snarky retort at his snarky comment about my opinion. It is my opinion and those that thought this movie was fantastic keep poking at my ribs.


Yeah...he is not jumping on anyone here:o


Fair enough.


EVERYONE stop jumping down each other's throats just because they disagree.

[chaseter]

Take us out for ice cream then.

[chaseter]

But my point was that henchmen/henchwomen exist and that, despite the treatment of Deathstrike, it hasn't affected critics' or fans' overall view of X2.
I agree that not all characters will shine and that some serve a lower purpose but Deadpool is quite a comic star and I was shocked to see his treatment. Wade was great and Reynolds was great so the logic of what they did to him baffles me. Kelly Hu...not so great in the acting department and nobody was screaming Kelly Hu for Deathstrike for 10 years:cwink:


This movie is intended to revolve around Wolverine and his backstory. Other characters will be secondary or even less (tertiary) or maybe just a mere glimpse. Wolverine is the protagonist. I don't really care about backstory on Blob, Wraith, etc. They are simply secondary or tertiary characters who are there within the narrative.
I agree and Sabes is handled wonderfully and Wolverine is handled ok but Stryker is pivotal to Wolvie's plight and I didn't much like Danny Huston and the plot was iffy to me surrounding Stryker. My biggest complaint for side characters is of course Wade/Deadpool and I have listed many times why. I thought the supposed added 10-14-20 minutes would remedy that issue but it appears not true. Gambit was also a pivotal character in this film and although I loved Taylor as Gambit...parts seem forced that I think could have been handled by more development.

I've not seen the leaked film so I can't judge it at all. But I would expect several characters to be in the background, simply to flesh out the mutant movie-verse and add texture to the story. It's impossible to have a film with 15 main characters.
I agree and people like Cyclops, Emma, and all the other captured muties are there to be in the background. However, I think the team should have been given a lot more screen time than they got since they are pivotal to the plot.

As for what happens, allegedly, to Deadpool, it sounds controversial for hardcore fanboys. But Fox talked about a solo spin-off, so they might be wanting to develop him further in future.
I just don't see why they did what they did to Deadpool and how they utilized Reynolds...I said it baffles me. Weapon XI could have been a no name goon, a throw away villian, but they decided to hint at how awesome Reynolds is for 3 minutes and then toss away that entire character.



You're being hysterical. And inaccurate regarding my 'unbridled' love for Fox. I'll judge it on opening weekend and let it stand or fall by its reception and box office.
Just because I have beefs with the film and the previous films doesn't mean I am on a bandwagon or will blindly hate this movie and my comment to you was to show you how unfair it is to say such things. I liked parts of this movie and I didn't like parts and all in all it could have been way better which seems to be the theme for these films as of late.




Have we had an official running time yet?
We won't.



Is Gavin Hood as bad as Uwe Boll?
Did I say that?

[Sam Fisher]

When did I say they were in the same league:huh: Oh, that is right...I didn't. I love how you read posts and pick out what you want to respond to.Just like you clearly did not read my post.

[chaseter]

Not much to get out of: Oh boo hoo. It's 106 minutes. Fox sucks balls. wa wa. BIG F'ING DEAL.

And why are you comparing this to Uwe Boll's movies? This and those movies aren't even in the same league.

Never said they were in the same league so what is left out of that post that I am supposed to get?

[Sam Fisher]

Meaning just because it's 106 minutes, doesn't automatically mean the movie sucks. 106 minutes is better than 90.

[chaseter]

Now is that harder to say than "Oh boo hoo, wa wa, and BIG F'ING DEAL"?

This movie is 106 minutes with credits. Take away the credits and you have 90 something minutes...which is to be expected.

[Sam Fisher]

And it could be 90 minutes in total with credits. So 106 minutes is better than nothing.

[chaseter]

90 minutes is better than nothing, 80 minutes is better than nothing. We will always get X-Men movies so nothing isn't an option...it just depends on who makes them.

[Ace of Knaves]

The credits wouldn't be longer than 6 minutes would they? I think the actual film will run at about 1 hour 40 minutes. That's not too bad really, X-1 was about that and I thought it handled introducing us to new characters quite well.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The credits wouldn't be longer than 6 minutes would they? I think the actual film will run at about 1 hour 40 minutes. That's not too bad really, X-1 was about that and I thought it handled introducing us to new characters quite well.

It is also the same run-time as X3 which was ridiculously rushed and didnt cover half the things it needed to. X-Men 1's story wasnt neat as extensive as this movies.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

And do you honestly blame people for having an agenda against Fox? If they made their movies with the care and love other studio's mostly give to their comic book property's, there wouldnt be any need for an agenda. There is a reason the likes of WB, Universal, Paramount, etc, DONT have agenda's against them.

Yes, I do.

I really don't see the BAD films that Fox has put out.

The movies that people do refer to as bad? I think that's just having some pretty pretentious standards really.

The only reason I even notice the movie studio behind these films anymore is because of everyone crying about Fox. And even then, when I put it together, I still don't see the string of "horrible" films that Fox has put out.

[Rac]

Have we had an official running time yet?
Yes (http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classified.nsf/e8ea0df3a881175480256d58003cb570/0f19f01390bac413802575920053b0c9?OpenDocument).

Classification boards don't make up the running times. But I'm sure you know this.

[Rac]

Yes, I do.

I really don't see the BAD films that Fox has put out.

The movies that people do refer to as bad? I think that's just having some pretty pretentious standards really.

The only reason I even notice the movie studio behind these films anymore is because of everyone crying about Fox. And even then, when I put it together, I still don't see the string of "horrible" films that Fox has put out.

How many good ones can you spot: http://akas.imdb.com/company/co0000756/#productionX20company

From the first glimpse I already spotted these ****fests: AVPR, Babylon A.D., Meet Dave, The Happening, The Seeker: The Dark is Rising, Hitman, Epic Movie and the list goes on...

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Yes, I do.

I really don't see the BAD films that Fox has put out.

The movies that people do refer to as bad? I think that's just having some pretty pretentious standards really.

The only reason I even notice the movie studio behind these films anymore is because of everyone crying about Fox. And even then, when I put it together, I still don't see the string of "horrible" films that Fox has put out.

Come on Nell, you cant deny that X3, both AvP movies, both FF movies, Eragon, Max Payne, Jumper, The Dark Is Rising, Dragonball Evolution, Street Fighter: The Legend Of Chun Li, I could go on forever. BOTH critics and fans realise these as poor movies (X3 got the best critical reception out of them all), its nothing to do with having pretentious standards, its simply about having standards :woot:.

But in all seriousness Nell, you blame people for being dissapointed with the above movies, this isnt even mentioning the likes of Babylon A.D, which the movies OWN DIRECTOR slated. These have been Fox's tentpole movies for the last 4/5 years. Compare them to other studio's tentpoles and how much they have satisfied critics and fans alike and surely you see were people are coming from. Fox did this to themselves. As I said, you dont see anyone slating other studio's for the same reasons do you?

EDIT: Thanks RAC for posting more examples, I had happily forgot the others.

[Peter McCabe]

Come on Nell, you cant deny that X3, both AvP movies, both FF movies, Eragon, Max Payne, Jumper, The Dark Is Rising, Dragonball Evolution, Street Fighter: The Legend Of Chun Li, I could go on forever. BOTH critics and fans realise these as poor movies (X3 got the best critical reception out of them all), its nothing to do with having pretentious standards, its simply about having standards :woot:.

But in all seriousness Nell, you blame people for being dissapointed with the above movies, this isnt even mentioning the likes of Babylon A.D, which the movies OWN DIRECTOR slated. These have been Fox's tentpole movies for the last 4/5 years. Compare them to other studio's tentpoles and how much they have satisfied critics and fans alike and surely you see were people are coming from. Fox did this to themselves. As I said, you dont see anyone slating other studio's for the same reasons do you?

EDIT: Thanks RAC for posting more examples, I had happily forgot the others.

I don't see you badmouthing LGF for the ENORMOUS crap that was Punisher Warzone, or The Spirit or Banghok Dangerous.

*Every studio has its share of bad products and its share of good ones.

Your hate for FOX is IMO pretty absurd. You've gotten way too caught up in this agenda and it makes you sound pretty obsessed when you speak of them.

Unless you're some guy that the studio fired, leaving you and your family out in the street - take it easy with the FOX bashing.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I don't see you badmouthing LGF for the ENORMOUS crap that was Punisher Warzone, or The Spirit or Banghok Dangerous.

*Every studio has its share of bad products and its share of good ones.

Your hate for FOX is IMO pretty absurd. You've gotten way too caught up in this agenda and it makes you sound pretty obsessed when you speak of them.

Unless you're some guy that the studio fired, leaving you and your family out in the street - take it easy with the FOX bashing.

Bit hard to work for Fox when I live in the UK isnt it :whatever:.

I havent ONCE said that every studio doesnt have its duds, but look at the list above and tell me how many of those are recognised as good movies. Funny thing is, I enjoyed Punisher and The Spirit much more than X3, and they were poor movies.

Your love for Fox is IMO pretty absurd, at the end of the day, its people like you who defend them that are getting ****ed over the most with their mediocre at best output. As I have said a THOUSAND times, people dont hate Fox for no reason McCabe.

[Rac]

I don't see you badmouthing LGF for the ENORMOUS crap that was Punisher Warzone, or The Spirit or Banghok Dangerous.
Dude, when was Lionsgate a good studio? I think it's always been a meh-studio. They do good stuff, but it's always been a minority for them. Fox in the other hand was once an excellent studio.

And hey, everyone makes **** films (Batman 3&4, Catwoman, I Am Legend. Hello WB, what the hell?), but Fox is going strong with their half-assed films for almost a decade now. They just don't care about the quality anymore. Which is very sad.

[dark_b]

the problem with FOX is that they are way to obvious cheap. they never put time and money in their movies.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Dude, when was Lionsgate a good studio? I think it's always been a meh-studio. They do good stuff, but it's always been a minority for them. Fox in the other hand was once an excellent studio.

And hey, everyone makes **** films (Batman 3&4, Catwoman, I Am Legend. Hello WB, what the hell?), but Fox is going strong with their half-assed films for almost a decade now. They just don't care about the quality anymore. Which is very sad.

Exactly, the difference with other Studio's though is that they LEARN from their bad movies. At least BF and B&R ended with us getting BB and TDK, Fox has been pulling the same **** for nigh on ten years.

LGF just dont compare either, they dont have the money or resources to pour into movies that Fox does.

[Peter McCabe]

I enjoyed Punisher and The Spirit much more than X3, and they were poor movies.

That right there is evidence that your taste in movies is VERY trivial.

Either that or your hate for FOX got in the way of your common sense when deeming X3 a lesser film than Punisher Warzone (crime of a film) or The Spirit (evidence that Frank Miller should never direct again).

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I haven't seen a lot of those movies - I haven't been to a lot of movies lately (only movies I've seen in theaters in the past year have been The Dark Knight, Quantam Of Solace, and Watchmen), and I haven't had time to watch a lot of movies at home, since for the past year I've been working close to 7 days a week, and have little time at home to sit down and watch movies.

There are a couple movies on there - mainly Dragonball Evolution - that were bound to suck regardless of the studio.

Are you honestly trying to tell me that Dragonball is a promising property with loads of potential for high quality?

If you do, then we just need to end this conversation now because we're obviously on different levels.

As far as those other movies that are always brought up - X3, Daredevil, Fantastic 4, Hitman... I don't think those movies are as bad as people make them out to be. For Daredevil and Fantastic 4, I don't think they are bad movies at all. I enjoy Hitman, though as a fan of the games I know it's faults.

The other big thing is the fact that these are just movies. No matter how beloved the source materials are, they are just movies and not really that serious. I just find it a waste of time to get so worked up over a movie studio.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

That right there is evidence that your taste in movies is VERY trivial.

Either that or your hate for FOX got in the way of your common sense when deeming X3 a lesser film than Punisher Warzone (crime of a film) or The Spirit (evidence that Frank Miller should never direct again).

That right there is only evidence that I have a different opinion than you, a concept that seems lost on you seeing as you try and insult anyone who shows a differing opinion to you. FOX didnt make me hate X3, X3 made me hate X3, I dont outright hate every Fox movie so sorry to burst your little bubble. Die Hard 4 I enjoyed quite a bit, though the harder cut was much better and much more Die Hard. And Avatar I am immensely looking forward to.

To me, X3 was not only a bad adaptation, but a bad movie also, THATS why I hate it, when you realise other people have differing opinions to you you may be able to get this.

I dont want to turn this into an insulting argument, and I am not trying to be insulting with the comments above, its just that the way you come accross is that you think your opinion for these movies is rule, when its just your opinion. X3 to me, is a dreadful film.

I haven't seen a lot of those movies - I haven't been to a lot of movies lately (only movies I've seen in theaters in the past year have been The Dark Knight, Quantam Of Solace, and Watchmen), and I haven't had time to watch a lot of movies at home, since for the past year I've been working close to 7 days a week, and have little time at home to sit down and watch movies.

There are a couple movies on there - mainly Dragonball Evolution - that were bound to suck regardless of the studio.

Are you honestly trying to tell me that Dragonball is a promising property with loads of potential for high quality?

If you do, then we just need to end this conversation now because we're obviously on different levels.

As far as those other movies that are always brought up - X3, Daredevil, Fantastic 4, Hitman... I don't think those movies are as bad as people make them out to be. For Daredevil and Fantastic 4, I don't think they are bad movies at all. I enjoy Hitman, though as a fan of the games I know it's faults.

The other big thing is the fact that these are just movies. No matter how beloved the source materials are, they are just movies and not really that serious. I just find it a waste of time to get so worked up over a movie studio.

I dont know enough about Dragonball to know whether it has potential or not, BUT, I do know that the hardcore DB fans hate the movie because it is not only poor but pays no homage to the source material. Those other movies get pretty much the same reaction. Not to mention out of all of the ones listed, you only managed to pick 4 that "werent that bad."

I dont get angry Nell, I used to, now I just simply vote with my pocket. I will pay to see a Fox movie if I believe they have put the effort to make a good movie. As with any product, if I am not satisfied with it I wont pay for it.

[Theweepeople]

If adaptations based on an amusement park ride and a toyline can be turned into 300million dollar blockbusters films I don't see why another popular comic can't be adapted into a successful film. Could any of us really predict that Transformers and Pirates1 would be blockbuster hits a decade ago?

Of course if you're a studio named Fox with a control freak CEO, successfully adapting any property right with quality source material is typically a miracle.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

aveit, i mention those films because those are the ones that everyone uses as examples to how bad fox is. the fact is i dont have a favorite studio. the only reason i am even aware of what studio has what films is because of all the crying ive seen on these forums for 4 years that ive been to. id argue that save for elektra, the worst comic book films are non fox - hulk, blade 2 and 3, catwoman, the pre nolan batmans, the hellboy movies... dd, f4, those movies arent close to bad. another of the fanboys most hated, ghost rider is by the same studio that did spiderman. none of the punisher movies were fox and people hate those (i loved the tom jane one but havent seen wz). then with everyones crying over fox and how bad they were, i looked through my dvd collection and noticed a good bulk of my favorite movies were fox. xmen, star wars, titanic, simpsons, id4, thats what? 13 films off the bat? i like a lot of their comedies (thats my other beef with fox haters, comedies and family films are ok. not everything has to be lotr or tdk) i like the first avp, hitman. theres probably tons others, but like i said i dont regularly keep tabs on what movie studios produce what. if a movie looks good, i will see it, period. i dont care about studios, reviews, or any of that crap. i judge movies based on their stories and how well i think they are executed. i think that dragonball is a piece of **** property and it would suck anywhere. so i dont knock fox for that. i knock whatever fool thought up dbz in the first place and thought it was a good idea. all of that is why i dont get the hatred for a movie studio. and like u said, if u dont like their products, u as a consumer have a right to not pay for it. although that doesnt give justification to download it, just because u dont like the studio. not saying u specifically aveit, just in general. ps sorry about the formatting, i am posting this from my phone.

[neemer5]

After reading all these posts about run time, how the movie felt rushed (like X3), and how Fox is totally cheap, I realized something quite ironic:

The scenes most needed, and most likely to make this film both successful and profitable, are the scenes which probably would cost the least to make by a wide margin.

And since Hood likely at least directed those scenes (or even mere shots), I believe that the editing team was likely pressured to trim the film down to a tidy length for the sole purpose of screening the film a certain amount of times in a day.

I hate this trend of taking all these respectable indie or up-and-coming directors, handing them blockbuster films, and then essentially draining them of any creative control. Hood is not the first casualty of this, but hopefully he'll be the last. I'm hoping this doesn't happen to Gondry and Green Hornet, I think he's next on the chopping block.

[icelemt38]

It has been said that Hood got 90% the final film that he wanted, so I wouldn't be surprised if that 10% was runtime stuff, or things he wanted in the film that the editors trimmed out. I personally really liked the movie but do feel that it needs some transitions and pacing things. I don't consider myself a fangirl at all, just merely a fan of Hugh and X1 & X2, and not knowing much about Wolvie outside of the cartoons in the 90s, I thought the movie was great, for me on par with X1. But if the pacing was leveled out more and not as rushed, then I would put it above X1 for me, X2 however seems to be untouchable in this series.

[Ace of Knaves]

If adaptations based on an amusement park ride and a toyline can be turned into 300million dollar blockbusters films I don't see why another popular comic can't be adapted into a successful film. Could any of us really predict that Transformers and Pirates1 would be blockbuster hits a decade ago?

Of course if you're a studio named Fox with a control freak CEO, successfully adapting any property right with quality source material is typically a miracle.

Those films success were NOTHING to do with the actual source material.

Think about it. Films featuring giant alien robots that turn into vehincles smashing the crap out of each other is going to be popular.

A series of films about Pirates featuring Jonny Depp as a drunk pirate were gonna be popular regardless. Most people probably never even heard of the ride, I know i didn't.

But personally, I hated Transformers and the POTC films.

[TNC9852002]

Me, I don't really look at films studio-to-studio. It's only when I come here that people like to throw the FOX card around in gauging their films.

I mean, most movies in the past 3-4 years, the GOOD ones, people never can really remember each and every studio(s) that distributed them, but they'll remember the director. Whenever it comes down to an online debate discussing 20th Century FOX distributed movies, good or bad, there never seems to be an issue with the director or the writer, but just this arbitrary "FOX" or Rothman moniker and I really don't like this double standard. A good director with good writers and a script will make a good movie. Period. It shouldn't significantly matter what studio distributes the film. If a studio gives you parameters and rules, its up the talent of the writers and directors to take those guidelines and make the best movie possible.

Like others have mentioned, it's not just a comic book thing. Several studios have hit and miss with their comic book properties, so we can throw that whole argument out. FOX has been in a slump for just a couple of years here, but they're far from being down and out. We can't just set aside all of those great properties that they've delivered us just because we had a beef over one or two comic book movies that may have missed their mark...and now people have been using these gripes to take over their opinion of the entire studio in general. That's pretty petty if you ask me. It might seem fair depending on your perspective, but to me, personally, I wish I could take it all so seriously.

Not really. :p

[chaseter]

Guess who hires the writers and the directors:o If Fox own the rights to something, they hire a writer and use what script they like. They then hire a director.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

aveit, i mention those films because those are the ones that everyone uses as examples to how bad fox is. the fact is i dont have a favorite studio. the only reason i am even aware of what studio has what films is because of all the crying ive seen on these forums for 4 years that ive been to. id argue that save for elektra, the worst comic book films are non fox - hulk, blade 2 and 3, catwoman, the pre nolan batmans, the hellboy movies... dd, f4, those movies arent close to bad. another of the fanboys most hated, ghost rider is by the same studio that did spiderman. none of the punisher movies were fox and people hate those (i loved the tom jane one but havent seen wz). then with everyones crying over fox and how bad they were, i looked through my dvd collection and noticed a good bulk of my favorite movies were fox. xmen, star wars, titanic, simpsons, id4, thats what? 13 films off the bat? i like a lot of their comedies (thats my other beef with fox haters, comedies and family films are ok. not everything has to be lotr or tdk) i like the first avp, hitman. theres probably tons others, but like i said i dont regularly keep tabs on what movie studios produce what. if a movie looks good, i will see it, period. i dont care about studios, reviews, or any of that crap. i judge movies based on their stories and how well i think they are executed. i think that dragonball is a piece of **** property and it would suck anywhere. so i dont knock fox for that. i knock whatever fool thought up dbz in the first place and thought it was a good idea. all of that is why i dont get the hatred for a movie studio. and like u said, if u dont like their products, u as a consumer have a right to not pay for it. although that doesnt give justification to download it, just because u dont like the studio. not saying u specifically aveit, just in general. ps sorry about the formatting, i am posting this from my phone.

The majority of those movies you liked from Fox were before 10 years ago though Nell, I love a lot of Fox movies as well, but very few of them are from the last 10 years, which is when most of their poor output has been produced.

How you can prefer the FF movies to the likes of pre-Nolan Batman's (specifically Burtons's one's) Blade II and the Hellboy movies is simply beyond me. Those movies got better critical and fan receptions than both FF movies got anywere near, X3 itself never got near the critical or fan reception the Hellboy movies did. If you like these movies Nell, fair enough, its your opinion. But the movies you are comparing them to are actually recognised by critics and fans as significantly better movies.

[Theweepeople]

Those films success were NOTHING to do with the actual source material.

The point I was making is the source material for both of those movies is incredibly weak. Pirates barely even has source material since it's a ride. As for transformers the source material was never strong nor did it have consistent continuity. There are many transformers cartoon and comic incarnations that have no relation so of course the film would have deviations from the source material.


Think about it. Films featuring giant alien robots that turn into vehincles smashing the crap out of each other is going to be popular.

There was no guarantee the movie would be successful simply because of this concept. I thought a film featuring space marines fighting Giant Insects on another planet could be popular but, that film(Starship Troopers) bombed at the boxoffice.

Both films had quite a few things in common. They are both sci-fi films with no A-list actors/actresses. They had great action and special effects. The storylines were pretty straightforward with very few plot twists. Inspite of having all these things in common one movie failed while the other was a colossal hit.

A series of films about Pirates featuring Jonny Depp as a drunk pirate were gonna be popular regardless. Most people probably never even heard of the ride, I know i didn't.


First of all Johnny Depp was not a big box office draw before Pirates1 came out. Sleepy Hollow was a boxoffice disappointment and Edward Scissorhands was the last financial hit that Johnny starred in. Furthermore, the last Pirate movie made before Pirates1 was Cutthroat Island. That movie is one of the biggest bombs of all time. There was no guarantee any movie about Pirates would ever be successful.

But personally, I hated Transformers and the POTC films.

I guess some who read this would think that you had ridiculously high expectations for these films. Others would suggest that you should have switched off your brain and be entertained. I'm merely using some of the reasoning you used in another thread to justify your enjoyment of Wolverine.

[night0205]

Fox's philosphy in the last 10 years on how to make movies, is not what I would say is a good philosophy. They think about money, and for some reason think quality does not equal money. I think Fox has not been very smart in the head lately, which is why there are so many Fox haters out there. I really can't blame anyone...the studio, I believe, has a wrong view of what the people want...but then again...they have the right view. No matter how much you and I hate 90 min, paper thin plotted movies...the people still go and see it, and Fox still makes plenty of money for them. Why make the movie longer to lose time spots, which costs more money, if they still make a profit. Blame the people, only recently with Iron Man and TDK does Fox actually realize a good, normal lengthed movie will make money...however Wolverine is only 106...so...? I would never do business with Fox if I was in the business.

[Theweepeople]

The majority of those movies you liked from Fox were before 10 years ago though Nell, I love a lot of Fox movies as well, but very few of them are from the last 10 years, which is when most of their poor output has been produced..


Same here. There's plenty of sci-fi/action Fox movies I've enjoyed in the past:

Star Wars 4, Alien, Aliens, The Abyss, Die Hard 1,2,3, The Fly, Predator, Speed, Fight Club.

In the past 10 years they've only made a few movies of these genres that I've enjoyed:

X1, X2, I-Robot, and Minority Report(No studio can control Steven Speilberg).

I didn't dislike Alien 3, Alien4, Speed 2, Independence Day, Planet of the Apes, Daredevil, Elektra, Predator 2, The Fly 2, Fantastic Four, Behind Enemy Lines, LXG, AVP1, and The Thin Red Line simply because they were made by Fox. I thought all of these movies were bad before my agenda started against Fox during the summer of 2006.

[Theweepeople]

Fox's philosphy in the last 10 years on how to make movies, is not what I would say is a good philosophy. They think about money, and for some reason think quality does not equal money. I think Fox has not been very smart in the head lately, which is why there are so many Fox haters out there. I really can't blame anyone...the studio, I believe, has a wrong view of what the people want...but then again...they have the right view. No matter how much you and I hate 90 min, paper thin plotted movies...the people still go and see it, and Fox still makes plenty of money for them. Why make the movie longer to lose time spots, which costs more money, if they still make a profit. Blame the people, only recently with Iron Man and TDK does Fox actually realize a good, normal lengthed movie will make money...however Wolverine is only 106...so...? I would never do business with Fox if I was in the business.

Fox's boxoffice profit percentages from last year suggests their methods of making any movies may not work anymore. 2008 was the worst year they've had in a decade and only two of their movies grossed over 100million domestically. They aren't off to a good start in 2009 either. They lossed somewhere in the range of 50 to 55million on Street Fighter. Dragonball made only 2million yesterday with an estimated budget range of 45 to 120million. Whatever the budget is that movie won't come close to making it's money back.

[chaseter]

Well Ace is once again knocking other movies to defend this one............................................... ..........................................:dry:

[xwolverine2]

how long is this movie?

[FaT_tONle]

At least ten minutes under two hours with credit.

[Ace of Knaves]

I guess some who read this would think that you had ridiculously high expectations for these films. Others would suggest that you should have switched off your brain and be entertained. I'm merely using some of the reasoning you used in another thread to justify your enjoyment of Wolverine.

Na not "ridiculously high expectations". I just don't like crap films. Transformers was crap. The ONLY thing good about that film was the actual robots. **** acting, appalling script, appalling story. Seriously, Transformers was a good enjoyable brain dead action film. But the performances from the actual actors REALLY put me off it.

Nearly every single ****ing performance from actual actors in that film was beyond crap. Optimus Prime was the better actor in that load of garbage.

Wolverine doesn't suffer that. Nearly every single performance in Wolverine is great. Apart from the obvious exceptions. That's why I rate it pretty highly. Sure it's a action fest, but it has some things to think about(well I think it does and I have explained those things before, but I can't now because I'll get banned :D ) and it has some brilliant performances.

So basically, I don't understand how anyone can rate films like Transformers above this.

And Pirates of the Caribbean? To be fair I liked the first one, but from then on they just got too long and too long winded and convoluted. IMO the main reason the second and third films did well was solely because of Jonny Depp. And maybe Bill Nighey.

[night0205]

Ace I agree with you about Transformers...it was just...not that great, beyond seeing some cool robots go at each other...
I have learned to love Pirates, even though i agree with you, the first one is great, but Pirates 2 & 3 are like the Sistene Chapel compared to Matrix 2 & 3. I agree Pirates 2 & 3 lost it's wind, but it's still entertaining :). Who doesn't like pirates goin around doin stupid stuff? Am I right? HA HA...anyways Wolverine is better then Transformers....

[Ace of Knaves]

Well Ace is once again knocking other movies to defend this one............................................... ..........................................:dry:

What do you mean once again? That's the first time I've mentioned other movies. Apart from when I say this movie is better than the FFs, Elektra and co.

[TNC9852002]

Transformers is a high profile movie, so, in perspective, the movie wasn't great, but that still doesn't make it nearly as bad as what people think. It gave you what you wanted in the end and that's all. When people say it's "crap" and the next guy goes to see Street Fighter and says that was "crap", how can you tell the difference in quality in just words? You really can't.

TF has such high production value and entertaining action pieces that you can't knock it down too much for being an otherwise silly movie (what else could you do with such a story?). It's exactly the same with POTC and Matrix. High profile movies are placed at such high pedestals where their few faults are outshining the rest of what's a remarkable achievement in many other areas suchs sound, effects, editing, costume, cinematography...etc. [/rant]

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I thought that Transformers was amazing. One of my favorite films. I can't tell you how many times I geeked out at that movie.

[Ace of Knaves]

Well I'm not really saying Transformers is crap. I have sat down many times and enjoyed watching it, for what it is. A over the top action romp. That.is.it. Seriously, the acting in it is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooo poor. Words can't even begin to explain how poor i think the acting from every single person in that film is. Even Jon Voight who i am a fan of was crap. Too many cliches, stupid story. Wolverine pisses all over Transformers IMO, and I haven't even seen the finished cut yet.

That's what sets this film apart from the likes of Transformers for me. Sure it is a action fest, but it has some truly terrific performances in it. Even some of the smaller roles like Wade, Wraith and Blob were great performances. Never thought i'd say that about Will.i.am.

And I don't care what anyone says, there was some thought provoking stuff in Wolverine. Not a lot, but there was enough to set it apart from other brainless action fests.

[night0205]

I hate Titanic...why? Because it has made more domestically then any other movie, and it won 11 academy awards. If Titanic was just seen as a good movie...I wouldn't hate Titanic. I actually might like it. I don't believe it is as "AMAZING" as it gets credit for. I have nothing against the production of Transformers...it has some amazing CGI, which is what I think Michael Bay was focusing on :) The story is where me personally thinks it lacks quality. Which is what a lot of people are thinking about Wolverine, which is perfectly fine, but I would suggest you see the finished version before you crucify it.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Well I'm not really saying Transformers is crap. I have sat down many times and enjoyed watching it, for what it is. A over the top action romp. That.is.it.

You're right. That is it.

It's a bunch of robots based on a line of action figures in the 80's duking it out for 2 hours.

It's not deep, thought provoking stuff here.

It's just full of all sorts of win.

[Ace of Knaves]

You're right. That is it.

It's a bunch of robots based on a line of action figures in the 80's duking it out for 2 hours.

It's not deep, thought provoking stuff here.

It's just full of all sorts of win.

Well yea there is nothing wrong with that I suppose. But I'm just backing up my opinion on how I think Wolverine is a much better all round film compared to it's recent-ish rivals.

[night0205]

It's hard with Transformers, I'm glad it did well in the box office, I'll see the sequel. It's hard because it's about robots...fighting each other...I think they are doin the best they can...I mean look how Dragonball seemingly turned out? 0_o

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea I am looking forward to the sequel actually. It does look pretty insane.

[TNC9852002]

I never went into Transformers hoping for Josh Duhamel would finally get his Best supporting Actor nom.. :p

TF is just giant robots and explosions. What else do you want?

-TNC

[Ace of Knaves]

Nothing more really. Apart from some actual good acting. It doesn't matter if it's just a explosive action fest, it should still have some quality from the actual real people involved. As I said, the best actual acting performance in that film was from Optimus IMO. Every single other real human being actor in that film was just terrible.

Actually wait!!! I forgot, John Tutturo was the best thing about that film. But he is usally the best thing about any film he is in! :D

I'm just saying what sets Wolverine apart from that film. Transformers is mostly praised. Wolverine is mostly dissed. Even though as a all round film, Wolverine is much, much better IMO.

[night0205]

We will see after the release if it's dissed...

[FaT_tONle]

I never went into Transformers hoping for Josh Duhamel would finally get his Best supporting Actor nom.. :p

TF is just giant robots and explosions. What else do you want?

-TNC

Some people who loved the cartoons and the comics that I am sure had an actual story to them are offended by what has become of it... I mean I could care less but that's the attitude people like you an me have and that's why we don't have a problem with it. With X-Men, it's not as senseless as Bay films but what has become of certain characters in this series is a disgrace and fans care about X-Men a lot more so the negativity is more than warranted.

[Rac]

how long is this movie?
107m 15s

[neemer5]

I never went into Transformers hoping for Josh Duhamel would finally get his Best supporting Actor nom.. :p

TF is just giant robots and explosions. What else do you want?

-TNC

It delivered in that regard, and it was completely satisfying. What would someone expect from a movie about a toy line and cartoon?

Wolverine, however, is based on a pretty important comic book that drew to an adult crowd since its inception.

[neemer5]

107m 15s

Wait, is that now official? Does that include credits?

[chaseter]

Well yea there is nothing wrong with that I suppose. But I'm just backing up my opinion on how I think Wolverine is a much better all round film compared to it's recent-ish rivals.
Have to disagree. Wolverine as you said is just a popcorn flick and for us to enjoy it we have to shut off our minds and the fx and stunts are what makes this movie a lot better. However, Transformers beats Wolverine to a pulp in the fx and stunts/fights department so I would have to say that TF2 will be better than this. I haven't seen TF2 but I am going to say it will be a better all around film and so will HP6, Terminator, and Star Trek....it's rivals:o

[Peter McCabe]

Have to disagree. Wolverine as you said is just a popcorn flick and for us to enjoy it we have to shut off our minds and the fx and stunts are what makes this movie a lot better. However, Transformers beats Wolverine to a pulp in the fx and stunts/fights department so I would have to say that TF2 will be better than this. I haven't seen TF2 but I am going to say it will be a better all around film and so will HP6, Terminator, and Star Trek....it's rivals:o

you just threw all your common sense out the window just to spite this film once again.

Applause.

[chaseter]

you just threw all your common sense out the window just to spite this film once again.

Applause.
You haven't seen the leaked version yet rated it and are talking about how good it is:huh::huh::huh::huh::huh::huh::huh::huh:

TF1 was better than this movie and so it is common sense to think this one will be even better.

[Peter McCabe]

TF1 was better than this movie and so it is common sense to think this one will be even better.

You haven't seen X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

You saw a raw cut of what was to eventually become X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

The problem with you is that you feel you have the right to judge the film in its unfinished form. You don't.

You didn't like the leak? Fine. But don't expect the rest of us that have some kind of respect for the film's crew to take the shortcut you took and pass judgment on something far from done.

You act like watching the leak made you wiser.

All it did was give you more ammo against a film you've been hating on since Day 1.

Why you take the time to post on a message board about how much you hate a movie is beyond me.

*I've never even set foot in the Spirit or Punisher Warzone forums.

Why would I wanna talk about how bad those movies were???

I got better things to do.

[Ace of Knaves]

Have to disagree. Wolverine as you said is just a popcorn flick and for us to enjoy it we have to shut off our minds and the fx and stunts are what makes this movie a lot better. However, Transformers beats Wolverine to a pulp in the fx and stunts/fights department so I would have to say that TF2 will be better than this. I haven't seen TF2 but I am going to say it will be a better all around film and so will HP6, Terminator, and Star Trek....it's rivals:o

I didn't say Wolverine is just a pop corn flick. I said the opposite actually. There is some thought provoking stuff in there, not a lot, but it is definitely there. There is also some really great performances, especially Liev's.

Transformers had neither of those things. It wasn't thought provoking ATALL. Every single performance by an actual human being was absolute crap.

You haven't seen the leaked version yet rated it and are talking about how good it is:huh::huh::huh::huh::huh::huh::huh::huh:

TF1 was better than this movie and so it is common sense to think this one will be even better.

In your opinion Transformers 1 is better than this movie, and I think you are wrong, for the reason I just explained.

[CyclopsSummers]

This version is 107 min
the true version add 10 min according to Rothman

[Peter McCabe]

This version is 107 min
the true version add 10 min according to Rothman

No, apparently the REAL movie is still in the 106 - 109 minute range.

The leak was 106, but the material inside the REAL film might be different from the leak's.

The leaked workprint was dated pre-January 2009.

In these last 4 months alot may have been done to that workprint, not only from a visual standpoint (recent TV spots) but regarding the outcome of certain characters.

[EnDz0n3]

Just playing devil's advocate here but are we sure that that workprint is still from before the "reshoots" in Vancouver or has anyone brought up the possibility that this is another one of the studio's damage control?

I wouldn't put it pass this studio. Or any studio for that matter.

[protocida]

X-men Origins: Wolverine is not a bad movie. It's solid and has cool parts, but I believe Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen will be WAY better.

[Ace of Knaves]

Just playing devil's advocate here but are we sure that that workprint is still from before the "reshoots" in Vancouver or has anyone brought up the possibility that this is another one of the studio's damage control?

I wouldn't put it pass this studio. Or any studio for that matter.


No one will know for sure until we see it.

But this workprint is definitely older than the latest batch of trailers and tv spots.

It's the one that was "reviewed" about 2 months ago, so it is definitely at least 2 months old.

[Peter McCabe]

No one will know for sure until we see it.

But this workprint is definitely older than the latest batch of trailers and tv spots.

It's the one that was "reviewed" about 2 months ago, so it is definitely at least 2 months old.

Jackman said the workprint is pre-January/pre-reshoots.

I don't think the guy's lying.

[Ace of Knaves]

Well I believe Jackman more than I do Rothman.

[EnDz0n3]

No one will know for sure until we see it.

But this workprint is definitely older than the latest batch of trailers and tv spots.

It's the one that was "reviewed" about 2 months ago, so it is definitely at least 2 months old.

My question really was that if people have actually entertained the idea that this is all just studio bs. That aside from the finished cgi and score, that the end product won't be drastically different from what we have in the workprint.

[icelemt38]

Well I believe Jackman more than I do Rothman.

Which is why I found it interesting that Hugh only used the Farrarri reference when talking about the leak and didn't mention anything about runtime. Hugh I don't think would lie about the movie at all, and if the finished version were 20 minutes longer or whatever, I'm sure he would have said it. I'm sure some elements will be different but in terms of run time, I don't think its going to be anything substantial so that 107M from the reliable source is probably right.

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea, I don't think it will be much longer than the workprint. But I could imagine there will be some chopping and changing. Some scenes taken out, other scenes added in.

The most important thing they need to do IMO is have another scene with Wade. Explain how and why he ended up a lab rat. Reynolds himself said he has cancer in this film. So either Reynolds was flat out lying or there is some more to see.

[Peter McCabe]

My question really was that if people have actually entertained the idea that this is all just studio bs. That aside from the finished cgi and score, that the end product won't be drastically different from what we have in the workprint.

If Jackman isn't lying, then this workprint is 4 months old.

There's ALOT the studio could have done to it in 4 months.

-Change scenes

-Replace scenes with reshoots footage

-Change pacing

[Peter McCabe]

Yea, I don't think it will be much longer than the workprint. But I could imagine there will be some chopping and changing. Some scenes taken out, other scenes added in.

The most important thing they need to do IMO is have another scene with Wade. Explain how and why he ended up a lab rat. Reynolds himself said he has cancer in this film. So either Reynolds was flat out lying or there is some more to see.

Reynolds only shot 3 days during Principal Photography.

He got 6 days during the reshoots.

*The real outcome of Deadpool is most definitely in the REAL film.

[icelemt38]

Reynolds only shot 3 days during Principal Photography.

He got 6 days during the reshoots.

*The real outcome of Deadpool is most definitely in the REAL film.

All the stuff that Spaced and Confused said was after the reshoots were done, and I'm guessing the work print was prior to the reshoots according to what Hugh said and a few other people. So it could be really interesting to see if the stuff Spaced and Confused said is actually true and in the final cut.

[Ace of Knaves]

I'm not talking about the outcome, I don't think anything will be changed there unfortunately. I hoping for a scene right at the end or during/after the credits similar to that at the end of Hulk vs, but I doubt it.

But there has to be some explanation for why he went under the procedure. If they isn't, then Reynolds was lying when he said Wade had cancer in this. And he seems like a classy guy, not your typical hollywood pretty boy prick, so i hope he wasn't lying.

[StarkTheProdigy]

peter mccabe,
you rock
seriously, i have faith in this movie
and i hate when people are like, "i saw the leaked, it sucked"
i hope they see the finished version in theatres and are blown away,
and they probly will, but won't admit it
just my opinion

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

The most important thing they need to do IMO is have another scene with Wade. Explain how and why he ended up a lab rat. Reynolds himself said he has cancer in this film. So either Reynolds was flat out lying or there is some more to see.

Unfortunately, Reynolds may have been lying.

Ben Foster in interviews for X-Men 3 was talking about how cool it was to be kicking bad guys' asses in the movie - and well we all know how that turned out.

I believe I recall Mei Melancon (Psylocke) talking about scenes involving her psi-blades, and again we know how well that one turned out.

And there was also an interview with James Marsden who was talking about his response to getting back into the X-Men suit. Well, we know how that one turned out.

[Daredevil_2003]

EDIT: **** it.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Some people who loved the cartoons and the comics that I am sure had an actual story to them are offended by what has become of it... I mean I could care less but that's the attitude people like you an me have and that's why we don't have a problem with it. With X-Men, it's not as senseless as Bay films but what has become of certain characters in this series is a disgrace and fans care about X-Men a lot more so the negativity is more than warranted.


Exactly, I am a Transformers fan and there really isnt much more they could have done with the story of the first movie. X-Men has so much more scope to say something about society and be more emotional, yet Fox is just letting thaty potential slide in favour of what they think are awesome action scene's.

Transformers was miles better than X3, and given the response Wolverine has got so far, I doubt Wolverine will come close to it either. Despite the fact it has more scope and range to explore than the likes of Transformers has.

[chaseter]

You haven't seen X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

You saw a raw cut of what was to eventually become X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

The problem with you is that you feel you have the right to judge the film in its unfinished form. You don't.

You didn't like the leak? Fine. But don't expect the rest of us that have some kind of respect for the film's crew to take the shortcut you took and pass judgment on something far from done.

You act like watching the leak made you wiser.

All it did was give you more ammo against a film you've been hating on since Day 1.

Why you take the time to post on a message board about how much you hate a movie is beyond me.

*I've never even set foot in the Spirit or Punisher Warzone forums.

Why would I wanna talk about how bad those movies were???

I got better things to do.
Coming from the person that said the Avengers movie will be trash:whatever: You haven't seen it but already formed an opinion on it:o

You haven't seen the leak so I have a better view of this film than you do so please quit telling me what I should or shouldn't think. A lot of the people here that saw the leak that it was mediocre and more so thought it was bad or average. Yet, you rated the film a 10/10 for some odd reason:huh: Why did you do that? I didn't have respect for Fox Studios before this so they didn't lose anything. I did lose some faith in Jackman though.

Watching the leak made me wiser and it seems you not watching the leak somehow made you wiser than myself on MY OPINION.

HAHA...didn't hate on this since day 1. I had a set of priorities that if this film didn't meet then I was not going to pay for this film. The run time was the biggest factor. I predicted that it would be short and it is. For that, the movie lacks in development and is paced and edited very badly. They will never learn. I hated Fox before this film and I still hate them...doesn't concern you.

I post in here because a) I can and b) I am an X-Men fan.

Why do you think Spirit and Punisher was bad? What gives you the right to say so? You do know there are people that loved those movies and I am sure are doing the same exact thing on those boards just like you are doing now. You amaze me:o

[Peter McCabe]

Coming from the person that said the Avengers movie will be trash:whatever: You haven't seen it but already formed an opinion on it:o

Never said it would be trash, just that I'm not diggin the idea is all.

You haven't seen the leak so I have a better view of this film than you do so please quit telling me what I should or shouldn't think.

No, you have a biased, disgruntled, completely tarnished view of this film on the count of your hate for FOX. You actually confirm this below - completely exonorating the leak from your complaints.

Watching the leak made me wiser and it seems you not watching the leak somehow made you wiser than myself on MY OPINION.

No, not watching it is just gonna give me a chance to do something you can never do - watch this movie without an agenda of hate.

HAHA...didn't hate on this since day 1. I had a set of priorities that if this film didn't meet then I was not going to pay for this film. The run time was the biggest factor. I predicted that it would be short and it is. For that, the movie lacks in development and is paced and edited very badly. They will never learn. I hated Fox before this film and I still hate them...doesn't concern you.

Agenda of hate, agenda of hate.

I post in here because a) I can and b) I am an X-Men fan.

Applause.

Why do you think Spirit and Punisher was bad? What gives you the right to say so? You do know there are people that loved those movies and I am sure are doing the same exact thing on those boards just like you are doing now. You amaze me:o

I didn't like those movies hence I am not on those forums everyday spreading recycled vitriol - which is what you have been doing since the leak hit.

*Before the leak, you had some very legitimate concerns that I actually felt made alotta sense. Now you're just bashing it blindly and even admitting your predetermination to do so.

You saw the leak Chaseter, which to you is the film, and you DESPISED it.

We know that now, we know how you feel - but there's no need to keep telling us over and over and over.

[chaseter]

HAHA agenda of hate, agenda of hate!

You rated the leak and you didn't see it. Answer my question. My concerns came to fruition as I stated. What was your concern with this film? Oh right, you had none because you have an agenda of love AGENDA OF LOVE!

I didn't despise this film...I gave it a 6/10 in my review and rated it mediocre which is why I chose that option in the poll??? You are one good baseless accuser Peter McCabe.

Why do you post in here? What do you contribute? I know you will eat up anything in this movie so why do I need to read that? You have fun riding around in a painted up Pinto while I ride around in my unpainted Ferrari.

[Peter McCabe]

HAHA agenda of hate, agenda of hate!

My concerns came to fruition as I stated. What was your concern with this film? Oh right, you had none because you have an agenda of love AGENDA OF LOVE!

You can't judge an unfinished film.

I will pass judgment on this movie in two weeks. I'll deem it good or bad as anyone else with common sense would.

You passed jugment on it 3 years ago, Chaseter.

That's the problem.

[chaseter]

You can't judge an unfinished film.

I will pass judgment on this movie in two weeks. I'll deem it good or bad as anyone else with common sense would.

You passed jugment on it 3 years ago, Chaseter.

That's the problem.
I already know what you will say about this film...can't wait to read that review.:up:

I also love how you answer none of my questions because you know you are 100% wrong...good debate Peter.

[Peter McCabe]

I didn't despise this film...I gave it a 6/10 in my review and rated it mediocre which is why I chose that option in the poll??? You are one good baseless accuser Peter McCabe.

*Go re-read your own posts, from the stuff you've been writing about the leak I'd say you gave it a 1.

Why do you post in here? What do you contribute? I know you will eat up anything in this movie so why do I need to read that? You have fun riding around in a painted up Pinto while I ride around in my unpainted Ferrari.

I'm here to discuss anything that relates to the UPCOMING movie.

I'm not here to bash it nor am I here to ruin anyone else's excitement of seeing it.

I like good arguments against the film, I myself have a few complaints - but nothing that comes from an agenda against FOX that has been building up for years [apparently].

You went into that leak to do exactly what you said - to find all those things you wanted to hate.

I'm going into this to have a good time. That's what a movie is supposed to do for you - entertain you. Whether its with drama, or action, or comedy.

I don't watch movies to tear them apart.

[chaseter]

Why did you rate the leaked film a 10/10?

I found the things I knew I would hate and I found some things that surprised me....all in my review that you only read the negative parts of so you could defend this movie without knowing anything about it. You haven't seen this so quit trying to debate the negative points brought forward because you have not seen this movie yet.

I don't watch movies to tear them apart and I don't shut off my brain and drool so that I can enjoy a film. Good point:up:

[Peter McCabe]

Why did you rate the leaked film a 10/10?

I found the things I knew I would hate and I found some things that surprised me....all in my review that you only read the negative parts of so you could defend this movie without knowing anything about it. You haven't seen this so quit trying to debate the negative points brought forward because you have not seen this movie yet.

I don't watch movies to tear them apart and I don't shut off my brain and drool so that I can enjoy a film. Good point:up:

Have you even stopped and taken the time to realize that you saw a WORKPRINT?

Don't you understand that you're not supposed to judge unfinished movies? Does Easy Rider ring a bell???

You have a truly polluted way of looking at movies, man :csad:

The worst part about all this is that your opinion on the leak isn't even valid at this point. You've blatantly confessed your hate for FOX regarding this film and its conception.

You wanted to hate this film, Chaseter.

Before the leak I thought you were just extremely guarded, not wanting to be handed a bad deal - but now its all in the open.

That leak, whether the story was great or terrible - NEVER had a chance with you.

[chaseter]

Why did you rate the leak?

[BMM]

And there was also an interview with James Marsden who was talking about his response to getting back into the X-Men suit. Well, we know how that one turned out.

I remember one of the most awkward/funny interviews during promotion for The Last Stand featured James Marsden trying to describe how Cyclops reacts to the presence of the cure.

[chaseter]

Why do you refute posts of posters that have legitimate complaints about a movie that you have not seen yet? What is the point?

[Chewy]

I remember one of the most awkward/funny interviews during promotion for The Last Stand featured James Marsden trying to describe how Cyclops reacts to the presence of the cure.
:funny:

[Deaths Head II]

I remember one of the most awkward/funny interviews during promotion for The Last Stand featured James Marsden trying to describe how Cyclops reacts to the presence of the cure.

May I ask what he said?

"Uh...Cyclops kind of has bigger problems right now." :hehe:

[chaseter]

"Jean gives him the 'cure'."!

[Spidey 2007]

"Jean gives him the 'cure'."!

The cure to the disease of starring in an atrocious movie....


thats wolverines job

[Downhere]

"Jean gives him the 'cure'."!

Well, I guess she gave him the ultimate cure. :hehe:

[Peter McCabe]

The cure to the disease of starring in an atrocious movie....


thats wolverines job

Why is your avatar a picture of Hugh Jackman as Wolverine then?

X3 was far from atrocious, it just wasn't made to please the fans of the source material (you).

It was aimed at general audiences who don't even know who Chris Claremont is or what The Phoenix Saga was.

General audiences pay the bills (TDK), source material fans don't (Watchmen).

[chaseter]

OMG............................................... .................................................. .................................................. ..........................:facepalm:

[hero79]

Why is your avatar a picture of Hugh Jackman as Wolverine then?

X3 was far from atrocious, it just wasn't made to please the fans of the source material (you).

It was aimed at general audiences who don't even know who Chris Claremont is or what The Phoenix Saga was.

General audiences pay the bills (TDK), source material fans don't (Watchmen).

So what if he has a avatar of Wolverine and doesn't like the movie. He has a right to his opinion, yes?

[Chewy]

Why is your avatar a picture of Hugh Jackman as Wolverine then?

X3 was far from atrocious, it just wasn't made to please the fans of the source material (you).

It was aimed at general audiences who don't even know who Chris Claremont is or what The Phoenix Saga was.

General audiences pay the bills (TDK), source material fans don't (Watchmen).
Staying true to the source material was the least of X3's problems.... the first two X-Men films didn't stay true to it either. It's about respecting the source material, not necessarily staying true to it, and making a coherent movie.

There's a reason Iron Man made almost $100M more than X3 despite have a slightly smaller opening weekend

[EnDz0n3]

Why did you rate the leak?

Why do you refute posts of posters that have legitimate complaints about a movie that you have not seen yet? What is the point?

Hahaha I'm sorry but this just cracked me up.

I really don't think you're gonna get an answer out of McCabe, man.

[hero79]

Staying true to the source material was the least of X3's problems.... the first two X-Men films didn't stay true to it either. It's about respecting the source material, not necessarily staying true to it, and making a coherent movie.

There's a reason Iron Man made almost $100M more than X3 despite have a slightly smaller opening weekend

I couldn't agree more.

[Peter McCabe]

Staying true to the source material was the least of X3's problems.... the first two X-Men films didn't stay true to it either. It's about respecting the source material, not necessarily staying true to it, and making a coherent movie.

X3 was coherent. It didn't need to "respect" anything. Its an adaptation of a comic book, not a Watchmen approach to The Phoenix Saga.

It wasn't TDK, but it was a great action movie.

$234 Million Americans went to see it. That's $20 Million more than X2.

$111 Million went to see it after opening weekend. Weak legs or not, that's still alot of money.

There's a reason Iron Man made almost $100M more than X3 despite have a slightly smaller opening weekend

You can say IRON MAN was a better movie, but you can't say that its $318 Million gross had to do with quality over hype.

IRON MAN had a great marketing campaign, and it was light enough to cater to kids as well as adults and comic book fans. It was a package deal.

X3 was dark and really only appealed to teenagers.

I'm pretty sure a large percentage of IRON MAN's money came from kids under 10 - there's your reason.

[Chewy]

X3 was dark
:funny:

"Don't you know who I am? I'm the Juggernaut, *****!"
"Storm, don't get your panties in a bunch"
*kicks guy in balls* "Grow those back"

yeah, real "dark"

[chaseter]

It as night time in that one scene!

[chaseter]

Hahaha I'm sorry but this just cracked me up.

I really don't think you're gonna get an answer out of McCabe, man.
Nope:o

[EnDz0n3]

Nope

LOL. I don't think he likes to admit when he's wrong. Wouldn't blame him tho. It just looks very hypocritical, IMO

X3 was coherent. It didn't need to "respect" anything.

Actually it needed to respect the movie that came before it. In the movie that came before it, namely X2, Jean Grey "made a choice" she chose Scott. Rogue became more comfortable in her own skin, doing the superhero thing. From the first movie, if there was one X-man that would be the second in line to Xavier, it would have been Scott.

Its an adaptation of a comic book, not a Watchmen approach to The Phoenix Saga.

It wasn't TDK, but it was a great action movie.

$234 Million Americans went to see it.That's a lot of Americans! :hehe:

That's $20 Million more than X2.One could argue that that $20 Million came from that first weekend $85 Mil. vs. $102 Mil.) where those looking forward to the follow-up for X2 were anticipating the movie would be atleast on par with it in quality.

But really when one factors in the budget between the 2 movies, there's really no arguing which movie made more money :o

[Peter McCabe]

:funny:

"Don't you know who I am? I'm the Juggernaut, *****!"
"Storm, don't get your panties in a bunch"
*kicks guy in balls* "Grow those back"

yeah, real "dark"

Yeah, real funny.

-The movie opens with a young boy scraping off the feathers growing out of his back with a bloodied piece of metal.

-After 30 minutes, Jean Grey comes back from the dead in a very eerie way to make out with her estranged boyfriend who she kills immediately after.

-Jean makes out with Logan shortly after she kills Scott, removes his belt and then smashes him into a wall when he rejects her.

-Jean atomizes Xavier to death slowly (most powerful moment of the film).

-Wolverine goes into the woods and kills 7 mutants.

-Jean atomizes an entire Battalion of soldiers in Alcatraz and then attempts to atomize Wolverine before he stabs her in the torso.

*So yeah, 2 major characters dead, soldiers atomized, people making out in a horizontal position, Schizophrenic behavior...

I'm sure alot of 10-year-olds just LOVE stuff like that :whatever:

[Deaths Head II]

X3 had some dark scenes, but the whole film had a very immature feel to it. At least from my perspective. Stuff like them inserting an internet meme in a scene for no reason and Wolverine kicking the guy in the nuts only highlighted that.

Stuff like that just make me realize how much I really disliked that film.

[Rac]

Wait, is that now official? Does that include credits?
Yup (http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classified.nsf/0/0F19F01390BAC413802575920053B0C9?OpenDocument)

[Chewy]

I'm sure alot of 10-year-olds just LOVE stuff like that :whatever:
As opposed to terrorists kidnapping a man and threatening to stick a heated iron rod in his friend's mouth, which is 10-year-old's cup o' tea

A few "darK" scenes doesn't make a movie dark. If it did, Iron Man would have to be considered dark. Wolverine may have killed 7 mutants in the woods, but Iron Man killed a **** load of terrorists. Wolverine may have "made out in a horizontal position" (what shocking, dark, behavior!) but Iron Man banged that reporter. And Wolverine may have stabbed Jean in the torso, but the bad guy in Iron Man exploded.

In no way is Iron Man more geared towards kids than X3.

[Peter McCabe]

LOL. I don't think he likes to admit when he's wrong. Wouldn't blame him tho. It just looks very hypocritical, IMO

Thanks alot.

Actually it needed to respect the movie that came before it. In the movie that came before it, namely X2, Jean Grey "made a choice" she chose Scott.

So what? How does that change anything about her behavior in the film at all?

It doesn't.

Scott was gonna die one way or another. Jean wasn't gonna allow the man who claimed to love her yet kept her "under control" to live.

Rogue became more comfortable in her own skin, doing the superhero thing.

No, not at all. She was tired of not being able to touch anyone. She didn't act heroic at all in X2, she just shut down Pyro because he was getting out of hand. That didn't mean she was now suddenly going to embrace the one thing she hated about herself.

From the first movie, if there was one X-man that would be the second in line to Xavier, it would have been Scott.

Oh brother.

"Second in line."

GET OVER the source material.

X1 and X2 were WOLVERINE movies. Wolverine was the main man, not Scott.

Scott was only there to get mocked by Wolverine. That's the Bryan Singer way of handling Cyclops.

But really when one factors in the budget between the 2 movies, there's really no arguing which movie made more money :o

OMG.

Wishfult thinking is not a fact in the books :cwink:

X3 made more money.

That's a fact.

[Rac]

X3 made more money.

That's a fact.
Only because people liked the first two movies.

[Nathan]

Only because people liked the first two movies.

X1 was good, X2 even better, went to see X3 on opening day, left theater complaining.

Yes, X3 made money, but he always seems to ignore the fact that it had two films before it that helped to build a solid movie fanbase.

[EnDz0n3]

Thanks alot.

And yet again you still haven't told us how you could have rated the leaked film a 10 when by your accounts, you've only seen 5 mins or so.

So what? How does that change anything about her behavior in the film at all?

It doesn't.

So what you say? So it means it did not respect the events of the previous film is what im saying.

Scott was gonna die one way or another. Jean wasn't gonna allow the man who claimed to love her yet kept her "under control" to live.



You only came to that conclusion because the story told you so. I'm willing to bet that had Jean not said so, it never would have crossed your mind that "Scott was gonna die one way or another"

No, not at all. She was tired of not being able to touch anyone. She didn't act heroic at all in X2, she just shut down Pyro because he was getting out of hand. That didn't mean she was now suddenly going to embrace the one thing she hated about herself.

She stood with the rest of the X-men at the end of X2 looking ready to take up the responsibility of being a hero. Apparently her first act of heroism would be to act as a coward and get "cured".

Oh brother.

"Second in line."

GET OVER the source material.

X1 and X2 were WOLVERINE movies. Wolverine was the main man, not Scott.

Scott was only there to get mocked by Wolverine. That's the Bryan Singer way of handling Cyclops.

pssssttt...i was talking about Storm taking the reigns of the mansion over Scott.

OMG.

Wishfult thinking is not a fact in the books :cwink:

X3 made more money.

That's a fact.

The budget for X3, according to boxofficemojo (http://boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?id=vs-xmen.htm) is $210 mil. X2's was $110. With X3's domestic haul being $234 and X2's 214, im not really sure where you're pulling the supposed fact that "X3 made more money" from.

That or this is one of your opinions that you're telling everyone is fact. That seems to be your schtick.

[EnDz0n3]

Double post.

[Deaths Head II]

Scott was gonna die one way or another. Jean wasn't gonna allow the man who claimed to love her yet kept her "under control" to live.

Am I missing something? Nothing in the story suggested Scott knew about what Professor X did to Jean.

[Spidey 2007]

Why is your avatar a picture of Hugh Jackman as Wolverine then?

X3 was far from atrocious, it just wasn't made to please the fans of the source material (you).

It was aimed at general audiences who don't even know who Chris Claremont is or what The Phoenix Saga was.

General audiences pay the bills (TDK), source material fans don't (Watchmen).

LOL, no no.. i know i know mate. I generally LIKE X3.. but its a very heavy love hate relationship... But im smart enough to look at it from a general point of view and still enjoy it.

But yea I only find it atrocious because of how much potential it completely wasted haha... Its genuinly dissapointing... I really dont mind deviation from the comic roots, or complete alterations of characters to screen... Just wish it was actually done well ha...

But anyway, back to wolvie, lol. Which in fact, will be better than X3 at least. :up:

[Ace of Knaves]

I know it's off topic but I just wanna point this out about X3.

I reckon Scott's death was necessary to the story. Scott appealed to Jean, the Phoenix side of her personality didn't like that. She didn't wanna end up caged in the weaklings mind again. So she killed the man that could possibly bring Jean back.

As for Logan? Well obviously he appealed to the Phoenix side of her personality.

[Spidey 2007]

I know it's off topic but I just wanna point this out about X3.

I reckon Scott's death was necessary to the story. Scott appealed to Jean, the Phoenix side of her personality didn't like that. She didn't wanna end up caged in the weaklings mind again. So she killed the man that could possibly bring Jean back.

As for Logan? Well obviously he appealed to the Phoenix side of her personality.

And thats cool.... Just wish there wer'nt so many other things wrong with this movie hah. The effects of wolverine coming thru the smoke when thrown by colossus still makes me cringe till my teeth fall out lol

anyshway

[Peter McCabe]

I know it's off topic but I just wanna point this out about X3.

I reckon Scott's death was necessary to the story. Scott appealed to Jean, the Phoenix side of her personality didn't like that. She didn't wanna end up caged in the weaklings mind again. So she killed the man that could possibly bring Jean back.

As for Logan? Well obviously he appealed to the Phoenix side of her personality.

Exactly http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

X1 and X2 actually have a ton of clues as to why The Phoenix would resent Scott more than anyone, the guy was even finishing her sentences in X1 :whatever:

Xavier was the cager, but Scott was the tamer.

They both had to go.

Wolverine represented passion and freedom, but once she saw he'd been tamed, he was now just another disposable human being.

*She didn't count on the adamantium though :cwink:

[Nathan]

Screw the adamantium, she should have vaporized all of his flesh. But of course his healing factor kicked into overdrive in the last scene.

[Rac]

I know it's off topic but I just wanna point this out about X3.

I reckon Scott's death was necessary to the story. Scott appealed to Jean, the Phoenix side of her personality didn't like that. She didn't wanna end up caged in the weaklings mind again. So she killed the man that could possibly bring Jean back.

As for Logan? Well obviously he appealed to the Phoenix side of her personality.
Though in the Singer/Dougherty/Harris version Scott was going to kill Phoenix...

[Peter McCabe]

Though in the Singer/Dougherty/Harris version Scott was going to kill Phoenix...

General audiences don't wanna see James Marsden save the day.

Comic book fans maybe, but not general audiences.

*I personally don't see the logic in Scott being left alive or in Scott having the physical ability to kill Jean.

She woulda vaporized him the moment he began to think about killing her.

With Logan there was adamantium, with Scott there would be only bone.

I can already picture the Singer/X2 writing team version of X3:

-Jean kills nobody

-Wolverine is STILL the star

-Scott kills Jean and nobody cares because she never did any harm to anybody

[epc11223]

Thanks alot.



So what? How does that change anything about her behavior in the film at all?

It doesn't.

Scott was gonna die one way or another. Jean wasn't gonna allow the man who claimed to love her yet kept her "under control" to live.



No, not at all. She was tired of not being able to touch anyone. She didn't act heroic at all in X2, she just shut down Pyro because he was getting out of hand. That didn't mean she was now suddenly going to embrace the one thing she hated about herself.



Oh brother.

"Second in line."

GET OVER the source material.

X1 and X2 were WOLVERINE movies. Wolverine was the main man, not Scott.

Scott was only there to get mocked by Wolverine. That's the Bryan Singer way of handling Cyclops.



OMG.

Wishfult thinking is not a fact in the books :cwink:

X3 made more money.

That's a fact.

scott played a pretty big role in x1, especially in the end. him and wolverine used teamwork to stop magneto. cyclops also saved wolverine in the beginning of the movie. so i would argue the point that it was a wolverine movie. wolverine played a big part in the first one, but i would also say that bryan singer did a good job portraying cyclops. the second movie, i would say was a wolverine movie. especially since they delved more into his backstory.

but to bold out the fact that x3 made more money, again, i would beg to differ. the consensus from critics and fans alike find that x3 was the worst one of the three. we can only speculate that the third one made so much money because people liked the first two so much. more specifically the second one. if you liked the third one, that is fine, but the majority of people did not care for the third one.

The first two movies set up for a phoenix movie that was closer to the comics. Even at the end of the second one you see a faint phoenix bird which we never once saw in the third movie. Jean went all veiny when she was phoenix instead of a fiery bird. You could say that even the opening was completely different from the first two movies. In the beginning you had charles with a monologue, whereas the third movie had an actual scene. So to say that the third movie flowed with the first two, i would totally disagree with you. Again, your entitled to your opinion, but I, along with most others would disagree with you. Even with your point about Rogue not being more accepting of her powers. AT the end of hte second one, she is fully with the rest of the xmen and she has on her suit on. She was officially a member of the x team. She is also the one that flew the plane to save the xmen from the damn breaking.

Sorry for the long post, but i just cant really believe anyone at this point in time is still defending x3. If you enjoyed it, great, but i dont think many people would agree with you on this.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

General audiences don't wanna see James Marsden save the day.

Comic book fans maybe, but not general audiences.

*I personally don't see the logic in Scott being left alive or in Scott having the physical ability to kill Jean.

She woulda vaporized him the moment he began to think about killing her.

With Logan there was adamantium, with Scott there would be only bone.

I can already picture the Singer/X2 writing team version of X3:

-Jean kills nobody

-Wolverine is STILL the star

-Scott kills Jean and nobody cares because she never did any harm to anybody

How exactly do you know what the GA want to see Peter? The success of TDK proved to me that they want to see GOOD movies, its doesnt matter who does what in them as long as they are good. Jean was going to go dark in Singer's version, and Scott wouldnt have killed Jean, what the ending was going to be was Jean controlling Scott's powers to kill herself. This would have been a thousand times more emotional than Wolverine suddenly healing 100 times faster than he ever has in the previous movies.

scott played a pretty big role in x1, especially in the end. him and wolverine used teamwork to stop magneto. cyclops also saved wolverine in the beginning of the movie. so i would argue the point that it was a wolverine movie. wolverine played a big part in the first one, but i would also say that bryan singer did a good job portraying cyclops. the second movie, i would say was a wolverine movie. especially since they delved more into his backstory.

but to bold out the fact that x3 made more money, again, i would beg to differ. the consensus from critics and fans alike find that x3 was the worst one of the three. we can only speculate that the third one made so much money because people liked the first two so much. more specifically the second one. if you liked the third one, that is fine, but the majority of people did not care for the third one.

The first two movies set up for a phoenix movie that was closer to the comics. Even at the end of the second one you see a faint phoenix bird which we never once saw in the third movie. Jean went all veiny when she was phoenix instead of a fiery bird. You could say that even the opening was completely different from the first two movies. In the beginning you had charles with a monologue, whereas the third movie had an actual scene. So to say that the third movie flowed with the first two, i would totally disagree with you. Again, your entitled to your opinion, but I, along with most others would disagree with you. Even with your point about Rogue not being more accepting of her powers. AT the end of hte second one, she is fully with the rest of the xmen and she has on her suit on. She was officially a member of the x team. She is also the one that flew the plane to save the xmen from the damn breaking.

Sorry for the long post, but i just cant really believe anyone at this point in time is still defending x3. If you enjoyed it, great, but i dont think many people would agree with you on this.

Exactly, X3 made money because the 1st 2 were so highly regarded, even then, the movie didnt make much over its budget domestically.

[flavio_lebeau]

scott played a pretty big role in x1, especially in the end. him and wolverine used teamwork to stop magneto. cyclops also saved wolverine in the beginning of the movie. so i would argue the point that it was a wolverine movie. wolverine played a big part in the first one, but i would also say that bryan singer did a good job portraying cyclops. the second movie, i would say was a wolverine movie. especially since they delved more into his backstory.

but to bold out the fact that x3 made more money, again, i would beg to differ. the consensus from critics and fans alike find that x3 was the worst one of the three. we can only speculate that the third one made so much money because people liked the first two so much. more specifically the second one. if you liked the third one, that is fine, but the majority of people did not care for the third one.

The first two movies set up for a phoenix movie that was closer to the comics. Even at the end of the second one you see a faint phoenix bird which we never once saw in the third movie. Jean went all veiny when she was phoenix instead of a fiery bird. You could say that even the opening was completely different from the first two movies. In the beginning you had charles with a monologue, whereas the third movie had an actual scene. So to say that the third movie flowed with the first two, i would totally disagree with you. Again, your entitled to your opinion, but I, along with most others would disagree with you. Even with your point about Rogue not being more accepting of her powers. AT the end of hte second one, she is fully with the rest of the xmen and she has on her suit on. She was officially a member of the x team. She is also the one that flew the plane to save the xmen from the damn breaking.

Sorry for the long post, but i just cant really believe anyone at this point in time is still defending x3. If you enjoyed it, great, but i dont think many people would agree with you on this.

and add to that the fact X3 had a huge opening weekend, and then fell miserably.

The main consensus is that X3 is easily the worst of the trilogy.

And I entirely agree with the Rogue point. She had fully accepted herself by the end of X2. And then X3 comes and destroys the character completely. Any development she had in 2 films is gone in 2 or 3 lame scenes.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

and add to that the fact X3 had a huge opening weekend, and then fell miserably.

The main consensus is that X3 is easily the worst of the trilogy.

And I entirely agree with the Rogue point. She had fully accepted herself by the end of X2. And then X3 comes and destroys the character completely. Any development she had in 2 films is gone in 2 or 3 lame scenes.

Agreed, sums up my feelings perfectly, sounds like it has a new rival in Wolverine though.

[Downhere]

and add to that the fact X3 had a huge opening weekend, and then fell miserably.

The main consensus is that X3 is easily the worst of the trilogy.

And I entirely agree with the Rogue point. She had fully accepted herself by the end of X2. And then X3 comes and destroys the character completely. Any development she had in 2 films is gone in 2 or 3 lame scenes.

Take it in context now. The X-Men franchise has always been frontloaded, so this is nothing new. Also take into consideration that it did make more money than the previous installments both domestically and internationally and DVD sales exceeded 6 million units. So, while most here would put it last among the trilogy, the general public did find some enjoyment out of it.

[danoyse]

For the umpteenth time, this is not the X3 thread. Take the discussion to the X-Men trilogy forum if you want to continue it there.

Let's get back on topic, or I'm closing this thread.

[TNC9852002]

Don't use one day's worth of OT to close up 62 pages of win. :(

-TNC

[Sam Fisher]

Don't use one day's worth of OT to close up 62 pages of win. :(

-TNC62 pages pages of win? hahahaha. And he has given warnings many times already so if you want this thread to stay open, I suggest you don't push him.

[chaseter]

Who is him?

[danoyse]

62 pages pages of win? hahahaha. And he has given warnings many times already so if you want this thread to stay open, I suggest you don't push him.

You mean her. :cwink:

[TheVileOne]

James Marsden's success outside of X-men = audiences would like to see more of him.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

James Marsden's success outside of X-men = audiences would like to see more of him.

I think people just want to see a good story, no one in TDK was an outright star, yet it blew the box-office away. The ending Singer had in mind was 1000 times more emotional just reading it than what I saw at the end of X3.

[Deaths Head II]

I agree that the general audiences wouldn't care about who saves the day as long as the story is good.

Wolverine didn't really save the day in X2 all by himself, yet I didn't see anyone in the general audience whine about the fact it was Storm and Nightcrawler that rescued the Professor or that it was Jean that helped the team escape or whatever.

[Deaths Head II]

Double Post.

[TheVileOne]

I think people just want to see a good story, no one in TDK was an outright star, yet it blew the box-office away. The ending Singer had in mind was 1000 times more emotional just reading it than what I saw at the end of X3.
Good points.

But I mean, women like James Marsden. He's become quite the star coming out of X-men. His movies generally have a better sucess ratio than Hugh Jackman's.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Good points.

But I mean, women like James Marsden. He's become quite the star coming out of X-men. His movies generally have a better sucess ratio than Hugh Jackman's.

Marsden is never the headliner, either, so it's hard to call them "his" movies.

[Peter McCabe]

Marsden is never the headliner, either, so it's hard to call them "his" movies.

Its amazing to hear people actually say that "Marsden's movies" are in any way superior to Jackman's :hehe:

If only ANYBODY knew who James Marsden is.

[Sam Fisher]

You mean her. :cwink:
I knew I'd get that wrong:hehe:

[danoyse]

Its amazing to hear people actually say that "Marsden's movies" are in any way superior to Jackman's :hehe:

If only ANYBODY knew who James Marsden is.

Pete, I'm a huge Hugh Jackman fan and James Marsden is incredibly popular and has tons of fans too - he's definitely had much more box office success in films past X-Men and has even more with musical films (Hairspray, Enchanted).

And he deserves it, he's wonderfully talented and certainly just as good looking. :cwink:

[Ace of Knaves]

I think people just want to see a good story, no one in TDK was an outright star, yet it blew the box-office away. The ending Singer had in mind was 1000 times more emotional just reading it than what I saw at the end of X3.

Apart from a certain maniacal clown...

[X-Maniac]

Pete, I'm a huge Hugh Jackman fan and James Marsden is incredibly popular and has tons of fans too - he's definitely had much more box office success in films past X-Men and has even more with musical films (Hairspray, Enchanted).

And he deserves it, he's wonderfully talented and certainly just as good looking. :cwink:

Yes, James Marsden is great... though he doesn't quite have the screen presence of Hugh Jackman.

He's done okay outside the X-Men franchise. I'm sure he got tired of playing second fiddle to Jackman's Wolverine.... except he then went into a movie (Superman) where he was second fiddle to Superman.

[danoyse]

Not to mention playing the eternally dumped boyfriend - Enchanted, The Notebook, X-Men, even Superman Returns to an extent.

I think 27 Dresses was the first time he ended up with the girl at the end.

[Peter McCabe]

Apart from a certain maniacal clown...

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif