The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > X-Men > X-Men 1, 2 & 3

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-12-2007, 03:57 PM   #51
LastSunrise1981
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

There's no definitive proof as to how Vaughn would've made X-Men 3 better.

Am I curious? Yes. I still wonder at times how his X3 would've looked on the big screen and wonder what concepts he would've used, changed, or whatever. It's not like someone like James Cameron, Peter Jackson, Ridley Scott, or Sam Raimi took over this project and made a crappy film.

Fox chose two directors, who in my opinion, were clearly wrong for the film and can't handle material that is as epic, deep, and intelligent as X-Men. I wish Bryan stayed, but at the same time, Fox wasn't professional with him in the beginning and kept on screwing with him. There are a lot of things that Bryan did that I didn't like. I didn't like the way the X-Men didn't interact with one another, I didn't like the way the writers made Cyclops out to be somewhat of a weak pussy in the first, and so forth.

Bryan did quite a few things I didn't care for, but in hindsight, what he did do was make a great quality film that was emotional and reflected the themes of the X-Men perfectly.

All we can hope for is a restart of a sequel that fixes the mistakes. I'd rather have a restart that wipes the slate clean, hires a director and writers who know the material, and will film it in a fashion where all the X-Men get a depiction that is both faithful to the material and faithful to the fans.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 05:27 PM   #52
X-Maniac
High Evolutionary
 
X-Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Genosha
Posts: 12,889
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

I don't think finding a director and writers who 'know' the material will be easy. And some would argue it's not even necessary. Singer didn't know the material, but he had an inner empathy with the X-Men's themes of alienation, isolation, discrimination and inner turmoils, the search for acceptance and a place in the world. That's why his X-Men films work.

Brett didn't know the material either but he pulled from the comicbook pages the excitement, drama, energy and action...and those things work well too. More so because the first two movies laid careful groundwork and had the gradual character development. Ratner was less in tune with Singer's themes, maybe they don't affect him personally - he's allegedly a party animal, not a neurotic loner... When I first read the X-Men comics as a kid, I wasn't fascinated by the social relevance but by the colourful characters and their fantastic powers based on real-world scientific phenomena, so that interpretation is still relevant.

Remember, X-Men writer Chris Claremont (who created the original Phoenix Saga among other things) was on the set of X3 and wrote the novelisation so knowing the material isn't a guarantee that the movie will follow that material to the letter.

I'm very curious about how a Singer X3 or a Vaughn X3 would have turned out...but we'll never really know. Vaughn had his chance (and a lot more time than Ratner at that point) yet he walked out.

__________________
Noah 3/10, Godzilla 6/10, CA:TWS 7/10, GoTG 7.5/10, X-Men: Days of Future Past 9/10
X-Maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 12:41 AM   #53
Drago
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 542
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Maniac View Post
Yes, it's possible..and quite likely he would have added more 'heart'... but he screwed up his chance to make X3... and, as it happens, his own actions of walking out at such a late stage were a contributory factor to the X3 we did get. He caused the loss of a lot of time, money and preparation.

I'd still like to see what he could do with an X-movie. But it's no use boasting now about what he could have done.

He had more time than Ratner when he walked out. What a shame he didn't have this brash confidence at that moment.
Vaughn walked out because after FOX told him he could make a serious X3 they wouldn't let him do it. They insisted it be a crappy popcorn flick so he dropped out. Ratner, even if hired earlier in Vaughn's place, probably would've made the same piece of crap he did. Ratner is partially to blame, but not as much as the studio. Same reason Spidey 3 turned out to be crap too.

Drago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 09:48 AM   #54
Scarlet Spider
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,464
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Maniac View Post
I'm very curious about how a Singer X3 or a Vaughn X3 would have turned out...but we'll never really know. Vaughn had his chance (and a lot more time than Ratner at that point) yet he walked out.
Vaughn's X3 would have just been a variation (at least story wise) of the movie that was actually made. I mean wasn't Ratner hired at the last minute and was handed the script that Vaughn had developed with Kinberg and Penn to shoot?

Singer's X3 is the real enigma. He had a completely different story in mind and once he left the franchise, he took his treatment (that he had been developing with Dougherty and Harris) with him.

I would love to read it. I'll always wonder how they were going to follow-up X2 and what direction the series was originally heading in.

Scarlet Spider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 11:45 AM   #55
LastSunrise1981
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenReilly19 View Post
Vaughn's X3 would have just been a variation (at least story wise) of the movie that was actually made. I mean wasn't Ratner hired at the last minute and was handed the script that Vaughn had developed with Kinberg and Penn to shoot?

Singer's X3 is the real enigma. He had a completely different story in mind and once he left the franchise, he took his treatment (that he had been developing with Dougherty and Harris) with him.

I would love to read it. I'll always wonder how they were going to follow-up X2 and what direction the series was originally heading in.
Well Singer said that his X3 would introduce the good Phoenix and would concentrate on her revival, whereas X4 would be the Dark Phoenix and would introduce the Hellfire Club.

He admitted that he didn't have much except for a few notes here and there, so it's not like he had a script already in effect.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2007, 01:44 PM   #56
X-Maniac
High Evolutionary
 
X-Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Genosha
Posts: 12,889
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drago View Post
Vaughn walked out because after FOX told him he could make a serious X3 they wouldn't let him do it. They insisted it be a crappy popcorn flick so he dropped out. Ratner, even if hired earlier in Vaughn's place, probably would've made the same piece of crap he did. Ratner is partially to blame, but not as much as the studio. Same reason Spidey 3 turned out to be crap too.
Where is the source for this information? Where did it say that Fox wanted a 'crappy popcorn flick' (I can't imagine Fox saying: 'Excuse me, Mr Vaughn, but we want a crappy popcorn flick.').

Vaughn merely says he couldn't make a movie of the quality of X2 in the time available ---- and yet Ratner filmed for 125 days, longer than it took to film X2, so that argument doesn't make sense either.

__________________
Noah 3/10, Godzilla 6/10, CA:TWS 7/10, GoTG 7.5/10, X-Men: Days of Future Past 9/10
X-Maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2007, 04:32 PM   #57
BMM
Side-Kick
 
BMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 7,388
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Maniac View Post
Vaughn merely says he couldn't make a movie of the quality of X2 in the time available ---- and yet Ratner filmed for 125 days, longer than it took to film X2, so that argument doesn't make sense either.
Sure it does. It's not as though one day of filming is equal to one unit of quality, as though those few extra days of filming automatically allow for that much more quality.


Last edited by BMM; 10-14-2007 at 04:40 PM.
BMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2007, 05:13 PM   #58
X-Maniac
High Evolutionary
 
X-Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Genosha
Posts: 12,889
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMM View Post
Sure it does. It's not as though one day of filming is equal to one unit of quality, as though those few extra days of filming automatically allow for that much more quality.
That still makes no sense. My point is that the extra filming means that the shooting of the movie wasn't as desperately rushed as some people are leading us to believe.

The fact of the matter is that the filming of X3 took place over a longer timeframe than the filming of X2. The impression given that it was all thrown together in moments is therefore wrong.

I would imagine the pressure came in pre-production and post-production. Ratner joined with just eight weeks before filming started. Ian McKellen himself remarked that it should have been more like eight months.

__________________
Noah 3/10, Godzilla 6/10, CA:TWS 7/10, GoTG 7.5/10, X-Men: Days of Future Past 9/10
X-Maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2007, 05:36 PM   #59
La_She-Beast
Side-Kick
 
La_She-Beast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Spain
Posts: 1,835
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Maniac View Post
(I can't imagine Fox saying: 'Excuse me, Mr Vaughn, but we want a crappy popcorn flick.').
Something very similar to that, though.

__________________
~Not a fan of Beast, but an admirer :P~
"You know, Maggie? The sooner kids talk, the sooner they talk back. I hope that you never say a word"

"Daddy"
La_She-Beast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2007, 06:28 PM   #60
X-Maniac
High Evolutionary
 
X-Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Genosha
Posts: 12,889
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by La_She-Beast View Post
Something very similar to that, though.
That was a very poor attempt at irony. You deserve an eye-roll for that. Let me squeeze one out for you.....

__________________
Noah 3/10, Godzilla 6/10, CA:TWS 7/10, GoTG 7.5/10, X-Men: Days of Future Past 9/10
X-Maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2007, 07:20 PM   #61
BMM
Side-Kick
 
BMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 7,388
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Maniac View Post
That still makes no sense. My point is that the extra filming means that the shooting of the movie wasn't as desperately rushed as some people are leading us to believe.

The fact of the matter is that the filming of X3 took place over a longer timeframe than the filming of X2. The impression given that it was all thrown together in moments is therefore wrong.

I would imagine the pressure came in pre-production and post-production. Ratner joined with just eight weeks before filming started. Ian McKellen himself remarked that it should have been more like eight months.
You act as though Vaughn’s claim is invalid and lacking sense… and to support your argument you merely use Ratner’s 125 day shoot as evidence, as though Ratner and Vaughn maintain the same directorial skills. Perhaps Vaughn didn’t feel he had the resources to shoot the movie he wanted. You don’t know otherwise. We’ve seen some of Vaughn’s storyboards, and they are altogether different than what is displayed in The Last Stand, so who’s to say that he could or couldn’t shoot the movie he wanted in the amount of time he had. No one on this board is qualified to say so because none of us were there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Maniac
That was a very poor attempt at irony. You deserve an eye-roll for that. Let me squeeze one out for you.....

BMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2007, 10:00 PM   #62
Theweepeople
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,498
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

The fact that it took Ratner so long to finish this movie does not surprise me. Movie critics and cast members who've been in his films have claimed that he typically uses an average of 30 takes to get each scene right. What does surprise me is that inspite of those takes we got some of the worst and most bland acting performances from some cast members for the entire series.

__________________
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results. No one bothered to give Tom Rothman the memo.

CBM hack list:

Mark Steven Johnson, Paul WS Anderson, Brett Ratner, Joel Schumacher, Kenneth Johnson, Rob Bowman, Zak Penn, Simon Kinberg, Avi Arad, Pitoff, John Rogers, and Tim Story.
Theweepeople is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2007, 02:08 AM   #63
psyonic
X-Man
 
psyonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,387
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Bottom line : X3 was a terrible movie when compared to X1 and X2. I believe Vaughan would have made a better movie.

psyonic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2007, 03:19 AM   #64
La_She-Beast
Side-Kick
 
La_She-Beast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Spain
Posts: 1,835
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Maniac View Post
That was a very poor attempt at irony. You deserve an eye-roll for that. Let me squeeze one out for you.....
Erm, who was trying to be ironic? Calm down. All companies (Fox, Warner Brothers, Dreamworks, etc) are always scared the money they're "contributing" will be flushed down the toilet. The creativity is taken away replaced by what it sells. "Let's walk through the secure track" .You should know that.

__________________
~Not a fan of Beast, but an admirer :P~
"You know, Maggie? The sooner kids talk, the sooner they talk back. I hope that you never say a word"

"Daddy"
La_She-Beast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2007, 04:40 AM   #65
Rac
Deadite
 
Rac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Apocalyptic Wasteland
Posts: 6,371
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

From Empire October 2007:



Well I understand that he didn't want to stay at Fox and do something he didn't want to do. That happens a lot in Hollywood, studio controls the directors. Yet, Fox did the same for Singer but he stayed on board for two movies. But eventually he got tired of it too and didn't do X3.

I believe if Vaughn would have have his own freedom on doing X3 he could have made it 100x times better than the one we got. But under the Fox radar the he was, I doubt it. I think it would have been a little better than the one we got, but still a lot more like Mimic etc. studio screw ups.

Sidenote: I thought Stardust was wonderful. One of the best movies of this year. I really much liked Layer Cake too.

EDIT: Sorry, just noticed I had the scan twice in my post.

__________________
"But I did stay very true not only to the first two movies but to the comic books." -Brett Ratner on X3
"I'm ready to go to war against them, but I can't because they don't give a s--t." -Mathieu Kassovitz on 20th Century Fox

Last edited by Rac; 10-16-2007 at 03:22 AM.
Rac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2007, 05:42 AM   #66
X-Maniac
High Evolutionary
 
X-Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Genosha
Posts: 12,889
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMM View Post
You act as though Vaughn’s claim is invalid and lacking sense… and to support your argument you merely use Ratner’s 125 day shoot as evidence, as though Ratner and Vaughn maintain the same directorial skills. Perhaps Vaughn didn’t feel he had the resources to shoot the movie he wanted. You don’t know otherwise. We’ve seen some of Vaughn’s storyboards, and they are altogether different than what is displayed in The Last Stand, so who’s to say that he could or couldn’t shoot the movie he wanted in the amount of time he had. No one on this board is qualified to say so because none of us were there.
At one point, Vaughn was hiring actors, working on the script, creating storyboards, things were moving along. I'm interested in what changes/demands were being forced on him.

__________________
Noah 3/10, Godzilla 6/10, CA:TWS 7/10, GoTG 7.5/10, X-Men: Days of Future Past 9/10
X-Maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2007, 09:59 AM   #67
Angamb
Banned User
 
Angamb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 13,348
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rac View Post
From Empire October 2007:

If that quote is true, I respect him 100%, and about Fox..... it's a real shame.

Angamb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2007, 02:26 PM   #68
WorthyStevens
Green Man
 
WorthyStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Gobias Industries
Posts: 14,348
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rac View Post
From Empire October 2007:



Well I understand that he didn't want to stay at Fox and do something he didn't want to do. That happens a lot in Hollywood, studio controls the directors. Yet, Fox did the same for Singer but he stayed on board for two movies. But eventually he got tired of it too and didn't do X3.

I believe if Vaughn would have have his own freedom on doing X3 he could have made it 100x times better than the one we got. But under the Fox radar the he was, I doubt it. I think it would have been a little better than the one we got, but still a lot more like Mimic etc. studio screw ups.

Sidenote: I thought Stardust was wonderful. One of the best movies of this year. I really much liked Layer Cake too.
I wholeheartedly agree. Even though I wish he still would have made the movie, I have alot more respect for Vaughn now for making such a decision.

__________________
FROM THE DESK OF: TOBIAS FUNKE

"OFF TO WORK"

- T (TOBIAS)
WorthyStevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2007, 04:10 AM   #69
Rac
Deadite
 
Rac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Apocalyptic Wasteland
Posts: 6,371
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Btw, if someone didn't get it; the movie he refers in the "I'm going to go off and just write a film and do it my own way" -sentence was Stardust.

__________________
"But I did stay very true not only to the first two movies but to the comic books." -Brett Ratner on X3
"I'm ready to go to war against them, but I can't because they don't give a s--t." -Mathieu Kassovitz on 20th Century Fox
Rac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2007, 02:56 AM   #70
Nell2ThaIzzay
Banned User
 
Nell2ThaIzzay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 16,635
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by LastSunrise1981 View Post
While he wasn't my first choice, I'm very curious to see what he would've done with it. Just because there were storyboards of different concepts doesn't mean they would've came to fruition.

There's no way to tell or know if Vaughn would've made a trainwreck. It's all speculation and opinion. We'll never know what his X3 would've been like, so I think you're just bashing to be bashing.

Ratner made the film, so he's going to receive criticism and anger from fans, critics, and so forth.
i am not bashing "just to bash".

i am "bashing" because i don't like a single thing that i heard about vaughn's version of x-men 3.

i don't like the idea of wolverine putting leech in a backpack during the final battle, and running around with him. granted, that idea never came directly out of vaughn's mouth, zak penn mentioned that as one of vaughn's ideas that was ultimately scrapped. and even though he didn't go into further detail, he also did mention about other ideas that vaughn had that would make the fans want his head on a stick.

i don't like the concept of the danger room sequence that was story boarded under vaughn. the idea of physical wounds (fatal wounds, in this instance, as the skin was burned off of both iceman and kitty pryde) disappearing just because a hologram room is shut off is completely ridiculous in my opinion. i understand that it's a hologram room, but the fact is that it is capable of inflicting physical wounds, and physical wounds don't just un-happen because you turn off a switch. i thought that idea was absolutely horrendous. and that idea IS documented, because that storyboard has made it's way to this board before.

also, the script that ratner used was the infamous "6 day script" that was written under vaughn's supervision. many of the plot details that people have such problems with - cyclops dying, xavier dying, mystique being cured - those all came under the watch of not ratner, but vaughn. ratner did make changes, yes... and the changes that he did make i believe were for the better (at least the ones i am aware of). but many of the problems of the film (at least plot-wise) all go way back to vaughn, whom the script was written under (and the backbone of that script remained for the film we got). with so little time, there was only so much ratner could do.

also, vaughn's attitude towards singer's films showed me that he did not respect them, and had no intention of following them. he made plenty of remarks about the problems with singer's films, but except for lip service remarks like "i like singer's films" he never said anything good about them. he also said that he wanted the cast to forget everything they did on the previous film. i understand, new director, new direction, but for a sense of consistancy with the characters, you CAN'T forget everything you've done with the characters.

vaughn also cast vinnie jones as juggernaut, and while i personally don't have a problem with juggernaut in the movie, many people do.

nothing that came out of vaughn's short time on this film was positive in my eyes. i was never comfortable with him in charge, and when he walked, a part of me was relieved.

i don't claim that ratner was the perfect choice. x-men 3 is a plenty flawed movie, that could have, and should have, been done better. but i do believe that he delievered a better film than vaughn would have. he was working with essentially the same material, but not being so snobbish, i believe, allowed him to see beyond his own ego, and make a film that better connected and fit with singer's films, instead of trying to make his OWN movie that strayed from what had been established. while i don't believe kinberg and penn to believe champions of x-men mythos, i also do believe them when they say that they are fans, and without the ego that vaughn had, ratner was probably better able to take their advice and knowledge and use that to his advantage. unfortunately, kinberg and penn didn't have much of a voice against studio execs, and many plot points couldn't be changed.

as far as singer's films vs. ratner's / vaughn's version... well, i think it's simple. ratner's film lacked the emotion, depth, and development that singer's films had (although i don't believe the film was -void- of these elements, and when done, it's done rather well. it's just not done as much as it should be), but made up for it by giving us the action, spectacle, and graduer that singer missed. as much as i love x-men and x2 because of the emotion, depth, and development, these are still comic book characters, and i want to have a bit of fun with it too. ratner got that. unfortunately, he didn't nail the heart of the movie. and when you have 2 movies previous that have focused on character and emotion, it is noticeably missing in the 3rd.

singer's version would have given us the heart and character the movie needed. but i don't think we would have had the spectacle that ratner's film had.

in the end, i think that singer would have developed the better film. but under ratner, seeing what singer lacked, it does make me feel a bit like we as x-men fans could have had more. ratner's film lacks the heart of singer's films, and for that, i see it as a more flawed movie. but if i want an x-men movie that will awe me and wow me, and give me that epic feeling, x-men 3 is the film for that.

unfortunately, the balance was never found. x2 came -close-, because it has some very HUGE moments of spectacle - nightcrawler's white house invasion, magneto's majestic escape from prison, jean's sacrifice at alkali lake. unfortunately, i also believe that movie suffers from a rather boring climax, that consists of a bald guy sitting in a chair thinking real hard, and a poorly choreographed fight between wolverine and lady deathstrike.

despite me stating that singer's films lacked in the action and spectacle department, the only film that i feel any "regret" over is x-men 3. that is the only film that i feel could have been better. x-men is probably my least favorite of the 3 (but still a good movie - i love all 3), and x2 is missing out on the spectacle of x-men 3, but i believe as a whole, those movies were done absolutely right, and didn't really need anything. x-men 3 DID need something in my opinion. it needed a deeper political conflict (sentinels, and trask's push to get the president to unleash them on the mutant community, but the president is hesitant because he doesn't want to walk down a "slippery slope" and destroy human/mutant relations), it needed a much more emotional -struggle- with jean (star wars 3 and anakin's turn to the darkside is pretty much exactly how i feel jean should have been dealt with), it needed gambit (rogue's turmoil with iceman left a perfect oppourtunity for him, and i have ideas that i believe would have fit rather well for him in this movie. and let's face it, the fans were clamoring for gambit, not kitty pryde, quill, and arclight), and it needed to not kill cyclops, not kill xavier, and not cure rogue.

with that said, my opinion pretty much remains the same as it always has: i think x-men 3 was still a great movie, and a great addition to the x-men trilogy. it definately has it's flaws, and in my opinion, is the most disappointing movie of the trilogy. not neccesarily because of what it was, but rather what it could have been. to me, x-men 3 remains in some ways the BEST of the trilogy, and in other ways the WORST of the trilogy, all at once. on the whole, i am very happy with the x-men trilogy as a fan of x-men, and think they were handled properly, but there are things that i would have liked to have seen that now we will never get.

i am not a fan of reboots, so i am not particularly fond of the idea of rebooting the franchise. a reboot will only get different things wrong, and a different group of fans will be complaining. batman is a different beast, because it's freaking batman, an icon, and batman will always be done, and done some more. same goes for superman. i am not particularly fond of the idea of a hulk reboot. and i'm not really looking for an x-men reboot to pop up either. we have our trilogy, and while it didn't go down the way we all wanted it to 100%, i believe the trilogy was a success.

Nell2ThaIzzay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2007, 12:12 AM   #71
Theweepeople
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,498
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
i am not bashing "just to bash".
I don't believe you. Your bias against Vaughn is completely unfair and irrational. You even admitted to me during our last pleasant encounter that it was hypocritical to bash Vaughn for his script when Ratner used basically the same script with the exception of a few changes that were made.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
i don't like the idea of wolverine putting leech in a backpack during the final battle, and running around with him. granted, that idea never came directly out of vaughn's mouth, zak penn mentioned that as one of vaughn's ideas that was ultimately scrapped. and even though he didn't go into further detail, he also did mention about other ideas that vaughn had that would make the fans want his head on a stick.

i don't like the concept of the danger room sequence that was story boarded under vaughn. the idea of physical wounds (fatal wounds, in this instance, as the skin was burned off of both iceman and kitty pryde) disappearing just because a hologram room is shut off is completely ridiculous in my opinion. i understand that it's a hologram room, but the fact is that it is capable of inflicting physical wounds, and physical wounds don't just un-happen because you turn off a switch. i thought that idea was absolutely horrendous. and that idea IS documented, because that storyboard has made it's way to this board before.
As I've said multiple times on this subject before these are just storyboard ideas. Over half of these types of ideas don't even get used for other movies. Considering the pressure Vaughn was under and how little time he had to put these ideas together before filming none of us should be surprised at the flaws that were inevitable as the result of an absurd production schedule.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
also, the script that ratner used was the infamous "6 day script" that was written under vaughn's supervision. many of the plot details that people have such problems with - cyclops dying, xavier dying, mystique being cured - those all came under the watch of not ratner, but vaughn. ratner did make changes, yes... and the changes that he did make i believe were for the better (at least the ones i am aware of). but many of the problems of the film (at least plot-wise) all go way back to vaughn, whom the script was written under (and the backbone of that script remained for the film we got). with so little time, there was only so much ratner could do.
I'm glad you brought this point up. First of all, what had Zak Penn and Simon Kinberg been doing during the 5 months before Vaughn was hired to direct? They were hired by Fox to write a script so why wasn't one prepared when Vaughn was hired. Most studios have a script prepared at least a year in advance before filming starts for a film. It appears as though all Simon and Zak had after 5 months were some brain storming ideas that Vaughn had to hastily put together so the movie would have a script with only a few months before filming was to commence. Vaughn should be given a lot of credit for at least making an attempt to try and clean up this mess on such short notice.

Furthermore, you are being intellectually dishonest if you think all those bad ideas(Cyclops, Xavier, Jean dying, and Mystique being cured.) were the result of Vaughn's decisions. Simon admitted on thexverse that most of those bad ideas were dictated to him and Zak from the Fox executives. I find it quite baffling that you are so convinced that someone who had basically no creative control and was involved with a film for only 2 months is more responsible for all the flaws in X3 then the one who ended up directing the film.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
also, vaughn's attitude towards singer's films showed me that he did not respect them, and had no intention of following them. he made plenty of remarks about the problems with singer's films, but except for lip service remarks like "i like singer's films" he never said anything good about them. he also said that he wanted the cast to forget everything they did on the previous film. i understand, new director, new direction, but for a sense of consistancy with the characters, you CAN'T forget everything you've done with the characters.
No arguments here. Vaughn is an arrogant jerk. Unfortunately, Vaughn's replacement was an arrogant jerk who also turned out to be a complete hack.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
i don't claim that ratner was the perfect choice. x-men 3 is a plenty flawed movie, that could have, and should have, been done better. but i do believe that he delievered a better film than vaughn would have. he was working with essentially the same material, but not being so snobbish, i believe, allowed him to see beyond his own ego, and make a film that better connected and fit with singer's films, instead of trying to make his OWN movie that strayed from what had been established.
I guess that's one perspective one can take. I thought Ratner showed his ego by not fighting at all for the fates of multiple characters who were unnecessarily written out of the script. He also made some public statements about his film that turned out to be his 100% false after it was released. I don't know if Vaughn's movie would have correlated better with X2 than Ratner's. What I do know is Ratner's movie did not correlate well enough for me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
while i don't believe kinberg and penn to believe champions of x-men mythos, i also do believe them when they say that they are fans, and without the ego that vaughn had, ratner was probably better able to take their advice and knowledge and use that to his advantage..
Do you really believe that Kinberg and Penn are X-Men fans? If they are what prevented them from getting a one page of the script written after 5 months of involvement with this project?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
unfortunately, kinberg and penn didn't have much of a voice against studio execs, and many plot points couldn't be changed...
I guess the same could be said about Vaughn because he may have left for the same reasons. What's bizzare is you still seem to believe that all the bad plot points in X3 are the result of Vaughn while all the good ones are the result of Ratner.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
singer's version would have given us the heart and character the movie needed. but i don't think we would have had the spectacle that ratner's film had.".
I will take a film that has heart and character development with some action over one which is filled with mindless action any day.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
unfortunately, i also believe that movie suffers from a rather boring climax, that consists of a bald guy sitting in a chair thinking real hard, and a poorly choreographed fight between wolverine and lady deathstrike.
You could say the same thing about Jean and Professor X's mental battle in X3. At least we got somewhat of a perspective of what the Professor was doing with his mind.

I also, thought many of the fight scenes in X3 were poorly choregraphed. Juggernaut's fight with Wolverine wasn't much of a fight. Storm's second fight with Callisto was lackluster. Beast's fight scenes were all short and some looked totally ridiculous. The scene where he jumps in the air away from the camera, does a back flip, and moves toward the camera was B movie special effects material.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
i am not a fan of reboots, so i am not particularly fond of the idea of rebooting the franchise. a reboot will only get different things wrong, and a different group of fans will be complaining. batman is a different beast, because it's freaking batman, an icon, and batman will always be done, and done some more. same goes for superman. i am not particularly fond of the idea of a hulk reboot. and i'm not really looking for an x-men reboot to pop up either. we have our trilogy, and while it didn't go down the way we all wanted it to 100%, i believe the trilogy was a success.
Well, I've actually moved on from this franchise. I still liked Singer's films for what they were considering all of his restrictions but, all 3 movies should have been better. I don't have much of a desire to watch any of these films anymore. When a reboot does come hopefully, it will be treated with more respect.

__________________
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results. No one bothered to give Tom Rothman the memo.

CBM hack list:

Mark Steven Johnson, Paul WS Anderson, Brett Ratner, Joel Schumacher, Kenneth Johnson, Rob Bowman, Zak Penn, Simon Kinberg, Avi Arad, Pitoff, John Rogers, and Tim Story.
Theweepeople is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2007, 08:14 AM   #72
Phoenix_Flare
Side-Kick
 
Phoenix_Flare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: milwaukee, wi
Posts: 650
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

some of you ppl don't know what you want!!! Singer v.s Vaughn vs. Ratner!?!?! c'mon jus be glad we got the franchise period...I mean I have problems with X3, but we need to thank Singer for setting up X3 with Phoenix...do you honestly think Vaughn or whoever would've pulled off a good X3 if it wasn't for the X2 cliffhanger!?!?!

The X-Men are not just a fighting force their are stories to be told and then comes the action. the samething goes or the comics/cartoon...would u want a cartoon/comic just full with action??

Singer brought these characters to life and gave them a story whether you agree with some of the charatcers being minor they still were their...

Phoenix_Flare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2007, 09:03 PM   #73
Kahran Ramsus
Side-Kick
 
Kahran Ramsus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Sunshine State
Posts: 4,637
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

I somewhat believe him. I do like the story in X3. Certainly it is much stronger than the cliche 'Doomsday Device' plot of the first film, and there are some nice scenes and characters here. It is just that it is too short and seems really sloppily put together. It isn't as well made as the previous two films. Now if that was Ratner's inability as a director, then Vaughn would certainly have helped things. If it was the studio doing a hatchet job in the cutting room, then the problems would have been the same regardless of who was directing.

Kahran Ramsus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 04:52 AM   #74
Nell2ThaIzzay
Banned User
 
Nell2ThaIzzay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 16,635
Default Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
I don't believe you. Your bias against Vaughn is completely unfair and irrational. You even admitted to me during our last pleasant encounter that it was hypocritical to bash Vaughn for his script when Ratner used basically the same script with the exception of a few changes that were made.
i don't care if you don't believe me or not. the fact of the matter is, i never felt comfortable with vaughn on board. i never liked his attitude towards the movie, and the director before him. and the ideas that i have heard that have come from him, i didn't like.

why should i say good things about the guy when i have liked exactly 0% of what i know about his contribution to the film?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
As I've said multiple times on this subject before these are just storyboard ideas. Over half of these types of ideas don't even get used for other movies. Considering the pressure Vaughn was under and how little time he had to put these ideas together before filming none of us should be surprised at the flaws that were inevitable as the result of an absurd production schedule.
okay, but whether they were ever going to be used or not, those storyboards are just as much of evidence as anything that we never did get towards what he would have done with the movie. and i didn't like it. plain and simple.

it is evidence towards a direction i did not like. and i am not going to not use that as evidence, just because it might not have been used.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
I'm glad you brought this point up. First of all, what had Zak Penn and Simon Kinberg been doing during the 5 months before Vaughn was hired to direct? They were hired by Fox to write a script so why wasn't one prepared when Vaughn was hired. Most studios have a script prepared at least a year in advance before filming starts for a film. It appears as though all Simon and Zak had after 5 months were some brain storming ideas that Vaughn had to hastily put together so the movie would have a script with only a few months before filming was to commence. Vaughn should be given a lot of credit for at least making an attempt to try and clean up this mess on such short notice.
so, using your logic, shouldn't ratner be given even MORE credit for walking into an even bigger mess on an even shorter notice?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
Furthermore, you are being intellectually dishonest if you think all those bad ideas(Cyclops, Xavier, Jean dying, and Mystique being cured.) were the result of Vaughn's decisions. Simon admitted on thexverse that most of those bad ideas were dictated to him and Zak from the Fox executives. I find it quite baffling that you are so convinced that someone who had basically no creative control and was involved with a film for only 2 months is more responsible for all the flaws in X3 then the one who ended up directing the film.
well, i don't think that jean dying, and mystique being cured are "bad" ideas. and yes, some of it was the result of vaughn's decisions. the script was written under his supervision. and his input was definately put into the script. vaughn even stated he wanted the film to be more gritty, and also have moments to drive people to tears. many of the things that he said he wanted to do were, at the time, heavily believed to be the death of cyclops, as well as xavier. was there studio input to kill off cyclops? i don't doubt that there was. but there was also a creative decision from the team, under supervision of vaughn, to do it as well. such as kinberg's statement that "we" (meaning, the creative team, supervised under vaughn) have found a great way to deal with marsden's limited availability.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
No arguments here. Vaughn is an arrogant jerk. Unfortunately, Vaughn's replacement was an arrogant jerk who also turned out to be a complete hack.
okay, but you state that opinion as though it is fact. it is not. i do not think that ratner is a "hack" in the least bit. i for one have yet to see a brett ratner movie that i didn't enjoy. i haven't seen rush hour 3 yet, but the first 2 were rather well made action / comedy flicks. i rather enjoyed money talks, the one time i saw it. and i thought that x-men 3 had many elements that have been sorely lacking from the first 2.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
I guess that's one perspective one can take. I thought Ratner showed his ego by not fighting at all for the fates of multiple characters who were unnecessarily written out of the script. He also made some public statements about his film that turned out to be his 100% false after it was released. I don't know if Vaughn's movie would have correlated better with X2 than Ratner's. What I do know is Ratner's movie did not correlate well enough for me.
didn't correlate well enough for you. that is acceptable. i don't agree, but i respect your opinion.

it DID correlate well enough for me. i would have liked a better movie overall, as i believe there was TONS more that could have happened with the movie, but i think x-men 3 suffers more from what it could have been, more so than what it was. what it was was a film that i felt did conclude the trilogy rather well, and tie things together. what it wasn't was in depth enough. more characters, and a much deeper conflict could have easily been presented to make it an even more exciting, and epic, and emotional film. unfortunately, many "shortcuts" were taken. as it was, it was a good film that followed the first 2 films rather well. it just didn't follow up and capitolize off of the potential.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
Do you really believe that Kinberg and Penn are X-Men fans? If they are what prevented them from getting a one page of the script written after 5 months of involvement with this project?
fans? sure, i believe they are fans.

competant writers? well, that's debateable. i believe they gave us a DAMNED good plot. and for that, i believe these 2 guys are very creative, and very imaginative. i just don't believe they are very thourough. they gave us an amazing, epic, emotional plot. what they didn't give us was the depth that could truly maximize the epic and emotional scope of the plot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
I guess the same could be said about Vaughn because he may have left for the same reasons. What's bizzare is you still seem to believe that all the bad plot points in X3 are the result of Vaughn while all the good ones are the result of Ratner.
well, considering that the backbone of the script remains the same, i suppose some credit needs to be given where it is due. but given the evidence, in my opinion, YES, the bad decisions were the result of vaughn while the good decisions were the result of ratner. from all i have seen, vaughn had many ideas that were much worse than what we did get in the film. and according to zak penn, there were many more horrible ideas on the way had vaughn not been canned. now i do not know what these other ideas were, as penn did not expand on that. but given that's all the evidence i have, that's all i can judge off of. there is nothing out there that refutes penn's claim. except for vaughn saying he would have made x-men 3 100 times better. but given the ideas that i have heard from his treatment -> no, he wouldn't have made it 100x better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
I will take a film that has heart and character development with some action over one which is filled with mindless action any day.
i will too, and i like how you conveniently decided NOT to quote the parts of my post which i said pretty much the exact same thing.

what i am saying is that yes, while i love x-men because it's deeper, more emotional, and much more political than any other superhero, and that is what makes it stand out as something special to me, these are still superheroes, comic book characters, and the fun element IS important. while singer's films were absolutely brilliant, i believe they lacked the excitement factor that comes with good action. singer had some MOMENTS, but that was it. on the same token, singer had absolutely BRILLIANT character moments, but the character continued to carry throughout the entire film (both films actually). ratner had amazing action, but only had great character MOMENTS. in the end, singer's films are better made films. but ratner's style does have it's place, and is not inherently wrong, and i find enjoyment out of the elements that ratner focused on as well. like i said, i think x-men 3 is at the same time the best of the series, and the worst. and one of the reasons why it is the worst is because of the lack of depth and development.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
You could say the same thing about Jean and Professor X's mental battle in X3. At least we got somewhat of a perspective of what the Professor was doing with his mind.
i found the xavier vs. phoenix duel to be much more exciting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
I also, thought many of the fight scenes in X3 were poorly choregraphed. Juggernaut's fight with Wolverine wasn't much of a fight. Storm's second fight with Callisto was lackluster. Beast's fight scenes were all short and some looked totally ridiculous. The scene where he jumps in the air away from the camera, does a back flip, and moves toward the camera was B movie special effects material.
except for beast's one leap, i felt the fights in x-men 3 felt much more natural than the wolverine vs. lady deathstrike fight from x2.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theweepeople View Post
Well, I've actually moved on from this franchise. I still liked Singer's films for what they were considering all of his restrictions but, all 3 movies should have been better. I don't have much of a desire to watch any of these films anymore. When a reboot does come hopefully, it will be treated with more respect.
if you've moved on, then perhaps you can stop hounding me over the fact that i have a positive view of this film, and ratner, and even kinberg and penn.

Nell2ThaIzzay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 11:43 AM   #75
LastSunrise1981
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post Re: Vaughn: 'I could have made X-Men 3 100x better'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell2ThaIzzay View Post
i don't care if you don't believe me or not. the fact of the matter is, i never felt comfortable with vaughn on board. i never liked his attitude towards the movie, and the director before him. and the ideas that i have heard that have come from him, i didn't like.

why should i say good things about the guy when i have liked exactly 0% of what i know about his contribution to the film?



okay, but whether they were ever going to be used or not, those storyboards are just as much of evidence as anything that we never did get towards what he would have done with the movie. and i didn't like it. plain and simple.

it is evidence towards a direction i did not like. and i am not going to not use that as evidence, just because it might not have been used.



so, using your logic, shouldn't ratner be given even MORE credit for walking into an even bigger mess on an even shorter notice?



well, i don't think that jean dying, and mystique being cured are "bad" ideas. and yes, some of it was the result of vaughn's decisions. the script was written under his supervision. and his input was definately put into the script. vaughn even stated he wanted the film to be more gritty, and also have moments to drive people to tears. many of the things that he said he wanted to do were, at the time, heavily believed to be the death of cyclops, as well as xavier. was there studio input to kill off cyclops? i don't doubt that there was. but there was also a creative decision from the team, under supervision of vaughn, to do it as well. such as kinberg's statement that "we" (meaning, the creative team, supervised under vaughn) have found a great way to deal with marsden's limited availability.



okay, but you state that opinion as though it is fact. it is not. i do not think that ratner is a "hack" in the least bit. i for one have yet to see a brett ratner movie that i didn't enjoy. i haven't seen rush hour 3 yet, but the first 2 were rather well made action / comedy flicks. i rather enjoyed money talks, the one time i saw it. and i thought that x-men 3 had many elements that have been sorely lacking from the first 2.



didn't correlate well enough for you. that is acceptable. i don't agree, but i respect your opinion.

it DID correlate well enough for me. i would have liked a better movie overall, as i believe there was TONS more that could have happened with the movie, but i think x-men 3 suffers more from what it could have been, more so than what it was. what it was was a film that i felt did conclude the trilogy rather well, and tie things together. what it wasn't was in depth enough. more characters, and a much deeper conflict could have easily been presented to make it an even more exciting, and epic, and emotional film. unfortunately, many "shortcuts" were taken. as it was, it was a good film that followed the first 2 films rather well. it just didn't follow up and capitolize off of the potential.



fans? sure, i believe they are fans.

competant writers? well, that's debateable. i believe they gave us a DAMNED good plot. and for that, i believe these 2 guys are very creative, and very imaginative. i just don't believe they are very thourough. they gave us an amazing, epic, emotional plot. what they didn't give us was the depth that could truly maximize the epic and emotional scope of the plot.



well, considering that the backbone of the script remains the same, i suppose some credit needs to be given where it is due. but given the evidence, in my opinion, YES, the bad decisions were the result of vaughn while the good decisions were the result of ratner. from all i have seen, vaughn had many ideas that were much worse than what we did get in the film. and according to zak penn, there were many more horrible ideas on the way had vaughn not been canned. now i do not know what these other ideas were, as penn did not expand on that. but given that's all the evidence i have, that's all i can judge off of. there is nothing out there that refutes penn's claim. except for vaughn saying he would have made x-men 3 100 times better. but given the ideas that i have heard from his treatment -> no, he wouldn't have made it 100x better.



i will too, and i like how you conveniently decided NOT to quote the parts of my post which i said pretty much the exact same thing.

what i am saying is that yes, while i love x-men because it's deeper, more emotional, and much more political than any other superhero, and that is what makes it stand out as something special to me, these are still superheroes, comic book characters, and the fun element IS important. while singer's films were absolutely brilliant, i believe they lacked the excitement factor that comes with good action. singer had some MOMENTS, but that was it. on the same token, singer had absolutely BRILLIANT character moments, but the character continued to carry throughout the entire film (both films actually). ratner had amazing action, but only had great character MOMENTS. in the end, singer's films are better made films. but ratner's style does have it's place, and is not inherently wrong, and i find enjoyment out of the elements that ratner focused on as well. like i said, i think x-men 3 is at the same time the best of the series, and the worst. and one of the reasons why it is the worst is because of the lack of depth and development.



i found the xavier vs. phoenix duel to be much more exciting.



except for beast's one leap, i felt the fights in x-men 3 felt much more natural than the wolverine vs. lady deathstrike fight from x2.



if you've moved on, then perhaps you can stop hounding me over the fact that i have a positive view of this film, and ratner, and even kinberg and penn.
No one is hounding you, but it seems that you're hounding those who don't like the film you know? It's all a matter of opinion anyways and a lot of people have moved on.

I will say this though, and whether you like it or not, X-Men will be given a reboot. I know you won't like it and I know you're satisfied with the trilogy that was released. But it'll receive a reboot eventually. Punisher is receiving one and I truly didn't think it needed one, Batman got one, James Bond got one, Superman sort of got one, and now the Hulk, and of course any other remake/reboot that Hollywood is interested in.

It's pretty much inescapable Nell.

  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:51 AM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"
Contact Us - Mobile - SuperHeroHype - ComingSoon.net - Shock Till You Drop - Lost Password - Clear Cookies - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - AdChoices


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.