View Single Post
Old 02-21-2013, 11:40 AM   #105
The Guard
The Guard's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 32,068
Default Re: "Romeo & Juliet Return?": The Official Jean Grey/Cyclops Debate

I don't think anyone here wanted Cyke to be the lead for three films, at least not in this discussion. To assume that would be to miss the point of people's problems with how Fox has set up their X-Men franchise.

There's a reason why the Avengers approach has and will continue to be brought up in comparison to X-Men it was the first time a superhero ensemble film treated most of their characters with a level of respect and focus. They could've easily made Iron Man the Wolverine of that film, but they didn't. And even though Iron Man got a lot of screentime and memorable lines, Joss Whedon smartly set up Hulk as a crowd pleasing character as well
I don’t think THE AVENGERS “balanced” things quite as well as people think in comparison to the X-Men movies. AVENGERS just showed more action in general. Marvel absolutely used Iron Man as their “Wolverine”, in several respects. I think THE AVENGERS was far less subtle about how they portrayed their iconic characters, so it seems like they’re putting more of their characters in the film, but in reality, there’s not that much depth to what’s onscreen, or that much development of the characters compared to what’s found in X-Men. It’s actually fairly comparable to what we see in X-MEN, with the exception of a few nods to the characters solo film adventures in THE AVENGERS.

Anything that was satisfying about Scott in X3 is down to James Marsden. Even though he was clearly cast because he's supporting cast actor and nothing more, Marsden did play the part admirably.
Frankly, I think Cyclops limited screentime in X3 is satisfying because of Marsden, the writing of the character, the effects team, and pretty much anyone involved.

Marsden was originally cast because Jim Caveziel and several other good up and coming actors essentially passed on the role. They were looking for people who could nail their parts and grow into them, who were good actors, not just “supporting cast actors”.

Heck, Hugh Jackman was a relative nobody when he was cast as Wolverine, not a “film leading man”.

But that still dosen't change the fact that they crapped on Cyclops in X3.
And nothing ever will.

But the fact that they crapped on Cyclops in X3 doesn’t mean they crapped on him in two or three other films. There seems to be this attitude that because he was crapped on in X3 that he magically retroactively got crapped on in every movie. That’s just not true.

Not only did Logan take his role as Jean's lover, they had Storm take his role as Xavier's successor. And then, his death is pretty much undermined for the rest of the film.
In the comics, when Cyclops has quit, is dead or is missing, guess what has happened?

Logan and Jean have occasionally had a romance/intrigue between them.

And Storm takes more responsibility as a leader. This has been repeated through various versions of the X-Men mythology for decades.

Of the remaining X-Men in THE LAST STAND, if Scott was unable to do so, then Storm was the most logical choice to take on Xavier’s role, along with Logan, based on what the franchise had showed in two previous films. They didn’t just “give them Cyclops’ role”, they showed the logical progression of those characters based on the source material.

If Marvel Studios handled the X-Films, Cyclops wouldn't be THE lead character...but then again, none of them would be, because if Marvel Studios had the X-Men, it would actually be an ENSEMBLE movie.
The X-Men films ARE ensemble movies. Wolverine has a slightly larger role than the others, but that’s partially because he’s been the audience identification character from Day One. The same can be said of Rogue.

For me personally, I don't need for Scott to dominate all three movies, just respect his role in the X-Men mythology.
And for the most part, they did. They did not in X3, though his role was acknowledged. It was an enormous weakness of that film/adaption. It does not invalidate the entire portrayal of Cyclops up to that point.

He is the Field Leader of the X-Men, a tactical genius, and the successor to Charles Xavier who wields ungodly power and tries his best to contain it.
And that’s pretty much what he had been up until X3.

Respect that, develop that as much as you can in an ensemble film. You can do profound and impressive things with a character in minutes or a single scene.
And they did. Until X3, and even during his limited time in X3.

Don't undermine Scott's role and basically portray him as nothing more than Logan's foil, or the guy that Jean dates because he provides security, but dosen't actually seem to love. Now, you may say all those aspects are in the original trilogy, but if they are, then they're developed poorly.
The only reason people insist on seeing Scott as just Logan’s foil is because people insist on only seeing him that way.

That’s not the reality of whats onscreen.

I never saw Scott as “just Logan’s foil”. Any more than I saw Xavier as “just Logan’s mentor” or Storm as “Just the girl who kicks Logan in the pants now and then”. The nature of Scott’s character was very clear on film.

Where on Earth do you get the idea that Jean doesn’t actually love Scott?

"Perception is the enemy of reason."

The Guard is offline