Addressing some concerns, and X3 as a film

they don't arrest magneto once he losses his powers, STUPID!!!!!!!!
 
X-Maniac said:
Yes...and no... The novelization deviations show that there are several versions of events. In fact, we have versions that differ in: Uncanny X-Men, New X-Men, Astonishing X-Men, Ultimate X-Men, Fox 90s cartoon, X-Men Evolution cartoon, X-Men movies, X-Men novelisation, X-Men graphic novel of movies...

That’s fine. Those can deviate all they want, and in their own right. Regardless, the additional deviations in the novelization don’t impact the film’s deviation from the source material as they are never present within the film.

X-Maniac said:
Nell doesn't know the original comicbook story. He said so on here. He just doesn't want Jean's love to die like that and not be in the movie for longer.
But from the moment Rogue stepped on screen as an insecure teenager in X1, you knew we were in for changes all the way. Big changes. And this is nothing to do with 'essence' of characters - Cyclops in X3 appears to have the same 'essence' he had beforehand. Dark Phoenix totally has the essence of that character. This isn't to do with essence, this is to do with desired/expected placement/dominance in the storyline.

The love between Jean and Scott was not central to the Phoenix saga in Uncanny X-Men. It was a tale of one person's power, manipulation and corruption. Jean briefly snapped out of 'Black Queen' mode when Cyclops was psychically killed by Mastermind on the astral plane, then she went off into Dark Phoenix mode and attacked all the X-Men. Eventually, she sacrificed herself on the moon - she told him she loved him and thgat her death was the only way. We got the essence of that at the end of X2. After that he left the X-Men, which is what we get at the start of X3.

His death is shocking, yes..... But studio politics and actor availability were behind that. How would it have played out if he hadn't died? Jean couldn't just sacrifice herself again - we had that at the end of X2?

Well, I know the original comic book story, and I assume that when you say Phoenix Saga, you mean the Dark Phoenix Saga. In which case, yes, the love between Jean and Scott is certainly central. There is simply no getting around that fact. The next time you read the Dark Phoenix Saga, go ahead and cover up every single panel featuring Cyclops, or every panel that entails Jean and Scott’s love for one another and the lengths they are willing to go for each other, and see how well the essence of the original story remains intact. I’m certain a fair amount of it (that’s being generous) will be lost, as Cyclops and Jean’s love for one another is undeniably a dominant factor within the essence of the storyline.

X-Maniac said:
I don't think the scene with the wall of water is meant to be equivalent only to the solar radiation. The radiation in the comics (which evolved her) becomes the radiation from Magneto's machine. Jean didn't sacrifice herself to the solar radiation - she was trying to get everyone back to earth safely, her shields failed, the radiation seeped through, it was an unintended sacrifice which she survived, re-emerging as Phoenix. The movies have taken certain elements and mixed them into an entirely new storyline. The movie version of the Phoenix saga is entirely different.
She certainly did intentionally sacrifice herself (she was willing to do so), which is why she had to knock Cyclops out with a mind bolt and leave the remaining X-Men isolated within the shuttle’s cabin (he otherwise wouldn’t let her attempt to save them)—i.e. stopping Cyclops by shutting the X-Jet doors, and leaving the remaining X-Men safely isolated within the X-Jet’s cabin. Both allow for Jean’s full transformation into Phoenix. Regardless, this is simple plot point arrangement nitpicking and doesn’t remove the fact that all of the essential elements remain intact in both translations.

X-Maniac said:
Not really. Her love for Cyclops has nothing to do with why she kills herself. The Phoenis begins to emerge again on the moon, and she realises her power cannot be rstrained, that it is destructive and unstoppable.
Yes, but her love for Cyclops allows her to anchor herself (and always has), which in turn allows her to realize that she must be stopped, etc., etc. It is her love for Cyclops, and everything that love entails and represents, which makes her want to salvage her humanity, which is why she finds it important that she die a human rather than become a god.

X-Maniac said:
But is she willing to kill him without a second thought? Surely this is portrayed as an accident, that she thinks she can control his optic blasts, but her onw control is unstable and unpredictable.
Who’s to say? She certainly kills Xavier without a second thought. Regardless, she has the power to kill him and she does. Scott is no longer there, and therefore neither is a large portion of the essence of the storyline

X-Maniac said:
I think many of the essential elements are there - mutation, corruption, lack of control, sacrifice, redemption... She looked like Phoenix in X2 and seems to look like Dark Phoenix in X3. Given the studio politics, we are getting a fairly representative story.

I agree; they are. This is true—but the one essential element that isn’t there (and is certainly a dominant factor within the original story), is the love between Jean and Scott, and the lengths they are willing to go to save each other.

Again, as I said originally, it’s all in what you’re willing to compromise, but there is no denying that the love between Jean and Scott is a dominant factor within the original storyline . . . and for some it removes the essence of the storyline and the essence of the characters and their relationships as well (and ultimately, the reason some may have like the initial storyline in the first place). Take it for what you will. As I mentioned before, if, when the next time you read the Dark Phoenix Saga, you’re able to completely remove Cyclops from the story, and feel it still maintains the same essence as if he were there, then you obviously won’t have trouble accepting the current translation. This, however, doesn’t seem to be the case for some, and it certainly doesn’t make their concerns any less valid.

darkphoenixsanscyclopscopy5qk.jpg


xmen136sanscyclops0vo.jpg


xmen137sanscyclops4gw.jpg
 
Cyclops said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again. It's going to take one hell of an awesome movie not to have the whole thing ruined by the senseless killing of my favorite character.

Agreed:(
 
did i just see someone type that jean and scotts love story wasnt central to the DP saga?

Did you read the same book? Half of the drama was watching Scott seeing his one true love spiral out of control. The scene where jean holds back scotts blast was one of the most touching moments in their relationship. Scott trying to fight mastermind on the astral plane, trying to bring jean back only works because we know of the relationship between jean and scott.

EDIT: BMM pretty much got it spot on.
 
The Batman said:
did i just see someone type that jean and scotts love story wasnt central to the DP saga?

Did you read the same book? Half of the drama was watching Scott seeing his one true love spiral out of control. The scene where jean holds back scotts blast was one of the most touching moments in their relationship. Scott trying to fight mastermind on the astral plane, trying to bring jean back only works because we know of the relationship between jean and scott.

EDIT: BMM pretty much got it spot on.

BMM is saying everything that I'm thinking, in a much better way than I ever could.

"Parameters" my ass.

Parameters meant that Marsden was filming Superman Returns and couldn't film scenes throughout the whole movie.

That doesn't mean kill him 15 mintues in, never to be spoken of again, and give his role to Wolverine.

I'm sorry, the blame goes strictly to Zak Penn and Simon Kinberg as far as I'm concerned.

Penn said they wrote his fate before they knew he was on "Superman Returns", and after his involvement was revealed, Kinberg said that they came up with this "GREAT" way to explain his lack of screentime.

No, now all of a sudden that the **** hit the fan, they wanna throw the blame on the studios and use these parameters as an excuse.

But the fact is, our displeasure over this was voiced a year ago, before principal photography started, with plenty of time to make changes to put Cyclops in the final act. And supposedly, the script went through all these big time changes, and the AICN script review was totally bogus, according to them.

All respect to them for going on xverse to chat it up with us, but quite frankly, they've been decieving us all through this production. They decieved us about Gambit. Talked up a big storm about how the AICN script review wasn't even a real script, it was so old, and an incomplete draft that has gone through massive changes, when we see in actuality that it went through minor changes. They talked up a big storm about how they, Jimmy, and we, would be proud of Cyclops in the movie, and talked about all these surprises he had, and his role was too spoilerish to talk about, DESPITE THE FACT that we knew about his death in the script review, so his death wasn't a spoiler to us anymore.

I won't say that they lied to us. They never said Gambit was in and Cyclops survived. But they misled us. They decieved us. And no amount of "we wanted to do Gambit justice" or "we had to work within the parameters regarding Cyclops" apology posts and answers in interviews will change the fact that they blatantly decieved us about this movie.
 
Nell2ThaIzzay said:
"Parameters" my ass.

Parameters meant that Marsden was filming Superman Returns and couldn't film scenes throughout the whole movie.

That doesn't mean kill him 15 mintues in, never to be spoken of again, and give his role to Wolverine.

I'm sorry, the blame goes strictly to Zak Penn and Simon Kinberg as far as I'm concerned.

But why would they just kill him off like that? It makes no sense unless it was a higher order. Parameters didn't just mean filming conflicts, it means that the studio laid down terms on the characters and what should happen to key people in the film.

I'm prepared to see the film and see if it works within the movie. I'm not going to be one of people who are blinded by hate, or resentment, or anger, before i even see it.
 
Nell, I have to agree with X-Maniac.

And if
the writers can "resurrect" Xavier, and not Cyclops
, I can't see anything else but studio politics playing at hand here.
 
Unless Kinberg or Penn state outright that the parameters were to kill Cyclops, the blame for cyke's death remain squarely on their shoulders.
 
Nell2ThaIzzay said:
BMM is saying everything that I'm thinking, in a much better way than I ever could.

"Parameters" my ass.

Parameters meant that Marsden was filming Superman Returns and couldn't film scenes throughout the whole movie.

That doesn't mean kill him 15 mintues in, never to be spoken of again, and give his role to Wolverine.

I'm sorry, the blame goes strictly to Zak Penn and Simon Kinberg as far as I'm concerned.

Penn said they wrote his fate before they knew he was on "Superman Returns", and after his involvement was revealed, Kinberg said that they came up with this "GREAT" way to explain his lack of screentime.

No, now all of a sudden that the **** hit the fan, they wanna throw the blame on the studios and use these parameters as an excuse.

But the fact is, our displeasure over this was voiced a year ago, before principal photography started, with plenty of time to make changes to put Cyclops in the final act. And supposedly, the script went through all these big time changes, and the AICN script review was totally bogus, according to them.

All respect to them for going on xverse to chat it up with us, but quite frankly, they've been decieving us all through this production. They decieved us about Gambit. Talked up a big storm about how the AICN script review wasn't even a real script, it was so old, and an incomplete draft that has gone through massive changes, when we see in actuality that it went through minor changes. They talked up a big storm about how they, Jimmy, and we, would be proud of Cyclops in the movie, and talked about all these surprises he had, and his role was too spoilerish to talk about, DESPITE THE FACT that we knew about his death in the script review, so his death wasn't a spoiler to us anymore.

I won't say that they lied to us. They never said Gambit was in and Cyclops survived. But they misled us. They decieved us. And no amount of "we wanted to do Gambit justice" or "we had to work within the parameters regarding Cyclops" apology posts and answers in interviews will change the fact that they blatantly decieved us about this movie.

I agree.

If only Singer stayed on this flick....
 
Xavier's resurrection is SO STUPID. Ithink I'm going to just ignore that scene and hope there's a Scott scene after it.
 
The Batman said:
Unless Kinberg or Penn state outright that the parameters were to kill Cyclops, the blame for cyke's death remain squarely on their shoulders.

Fox says Wolverine has to be the hero. Well, in this particular story, you can't have Wolverine be the hero while Scott's around...

So, the only choice left for Kinberg and Penn is.... you know.

However, if Scott doesn't get resurrected like Xavier, that's squarely on the writers' shoulders.
 
The Batman said:
I agree.

If only Singer stayed on this flick....

'If' is the biggest word in the universe.

If I had everything I wanted, if i were perfect, if I had a million dollars, if i was a world-famous whatever... Mostly the word 'if' leads to something that isn't possible.

Face it. Singer left. He didn't do X3. He's moved on. So should you.
 
i would, if the x3 we were getting werent such a disappointment....

Hell, it dosent even have to be singer. If we got a decent director with his own vision, and with writers to boot, we'd get a much better flick.
 
The Batman said:
i would, if the x3 we were getting werent such a disappointment....

Hell, it dosent even have to be singer. If we got a decent director with his own vision, and with writers to boot, we'd get a much better flick.

Well, you are basing all this on the fate of one character, essentially.

Even if my favourite character died, i'd want to see the other characters, how the movie worked as a movie. There has to be a time of acceptance, moving on.

There must be other things you want to see. You are coming off like those people who appear only in the threads where they can be negative - Kurosawa only speaks in the Cyclops thread, and Bluefire only in the Storm thread. It becomes something of a 'one trick pony' after a while, as though negativity is the only capability.

Surely you are not that one-dimensional?
 
Sure, there's gonna be some awesome stuff. Grammar as Beast, Angel, Iceman, Kitty, Colossus, and a bunch of mutant cameos.

But, Cyclops' death has soiled all that. Not because he dies, but because of the petty studio politics, mediocre writing surrounding his death, and the deception from the writers, director, producers, and some of the cast mates regarding scott summers.
That, I cant get over. That, i will never get over.For this, Fox studios will not get my money. The only way i'd see this movie is if its on free TV, or bootleg. Just as long as fox dosent get my money for their deception.
 
The Batman said:
Sure, there's gonna be some awesome stuff. Grammar as Beast, Angel, Iceman, Kitty, Colossus, and a bunch of mutant cameos.

But, Cyclops' death has soiled all that. Not because he dies, but because of the petty studio politics, mediocre writing surrounding his death, and the deception from the writers, director, producers, and some of the cast mates regarding scott summers.
That, I cant get over. That, i will never get over.For this, Fox studios will not get my money. The only way i'd see this movie is if its on free TV, or bootleg. Just as long as fox dosent get my money for their deception.

Okay, fair enough.

But what did you think of Cyclops in X1 and X2? And what are your favourite Cyclops stories in the comics? What makes you like the character so much?

Would you be watching the film if he lived? if he lived but didn't stop Jean? if he lived and did stop Jean?
 
X-Maniac said:
But why would they just kill him off like that? It makes no sense unless it was a higher order. Parameters didn't just mean filming conflicts, it means that the studio laid down terms on the characters and what should happen to key people in the film.

I'm prepared to see the film and see if it works within the movie. I'm not going to be one of people who are blinded by hate, or resentment, or anger, before i even see it.

Why would they just kill him off like that?

Lack of creativity, that's why.

You could still very much have Wolverine be the hero, and keep Cyclops around.

There are 2 major plotlines driving this movie; The Cure, and Dark Phoenix. Wolverine could very well play a major factor in the Dark Phoenix arc (as I think he very well should... the love triangle has been very prominent in this franchise, and should continue to play out here and be brought to a final resolution. Even though it's not as strong as the connection between Scott and Jean, Logan DOES love Jean. And she loves him too. Maybe not in the same romantic sense, and maybe more as a good friend, but she does love him, and he loves her). Scott and Logan fighting to save Jean could be some very powerful drama were it done in this film.

Then you could have Storm headline the Cure part of the movie, and have Wolverine as a major player in that too. I've always been a supporter of Wolverine's roles in the films, even though I'm not a huge Wolverine fan (although, I do like the character, unlike some people around here who are WAY too bitter for it to be healthy). He can play a big role in stopping Magneto / Cure / whatever, while Cyclops focuses his time on Jean Grey.

And you can sideline Cyclops most of the movie too. Have what happens at Alkali Lake continue to happen. Only, he'll arrive in the final battle. And it will be explained that he didn't die, but was blasted far away or something, as Jean fell unconcious. He made his way back to the mansion, where he found Angel and Rogue who told him where the X-Men (and Jean) were at, and they went to Alcatraz to take part.

Or SOMETHING.

But I blame Cyclops' death solely on a lack of creativity on how to get around the parameters of James Marsden's limited availability.

And until I hear officially that the parameters were specifically to kill off Cyclops and bump him out of the way, the blame, in my mind, will always be on Kinberg and Penn for this blunder.
 
What you should do is go during the day (if you can) at a time when the crowds will be considerably smaller, and buy a ticket for some other b.s. movie like Just My Luck or Poseidon. You should buy it for a time close to the time you want to see X3, but a time of day when there will be less chance of a sellout crowd in the theater to see X3 (just in case ushers start checking to see why there are not enough seats available). That is, if you feel that strongly about enjoying the movie without Fox reaping the benefits.
 
X-Maniac said:
Okay, fair enough.

But what did you think of Cyclops in X1 and X2? And what are your favourite Cyclops stories in the comics? What makes you like the character so much?

Would you be watching the film if he lived? if he lived but didn't stop Jean? if he lived and did stop Jean?

In X1, I used to think he was underused. But he basically got the same screentime everyone else did. He was portrayed in a decent manner, though his relationship with jean seemed cold.

In X2, he was barely in it. But the jet scene totally made up for most of it. His fight scene wouldve been much better if it were longer.

Why do I like Cyclops? Because, he's an interesting character beyond the boy scout stereotype. His powers have literally interfered with the way he acts and lives his life. He's much more conflicted than fans give him credit for. When written by the likes of Chris Claremont and Mark Millar, hes actually a pretty good character.

My favorite stories are ones like the Dark Phoenix Saga, and the Paul Smit/Claremont run, where we see him and madelyne pryor get together. The part where he manages to hold off the entire team of X-Men on his lonesome shows how skilled he is. The Proteus story also showed how far he was willing to go as leader.

I'd watch the film if he lived and stopped jean, or died for a better reason than wolverine needed screentime. He could've been gone for the entire movie, as far as i'm concerned. I just wanted to see him in the final battle, and have him be the one who stops jean, and have him take over the school, completing his promise in X1.
 
Nell2ThaIzzay said:
BMM is saying everything that I'm thinking, in a much better way than I ever could.

"Parameters" my ass.

Parameters meant that Marsden was filming Superman Returns and couldn't film scenes throughout the whole movie.

That doesn't mean kill him 15 mintues in, never to be spoken of again, and give his role to Wolverine.

I'm sorry, the blame goes strictly to Zak Penn and Simon Kinberg as far as I'm concerned.

Penn said they wrote his fate before they knew he was on "Superman Returns", and after his involvement was revealed, Kinberg said that they came up with this "GREAT" way to explain his lack of screentime.

No, now all of a sudden that the **** hit the fan, they wanna throw the blame on the studios and use these parameters as an excuse.

But the fact is, our displeasure over this was voiced a year ago, before principal photography started, with plenty of time to make changes to put Cyclops in the final act. And supposedly, the script went through all these big time changes, and the AICN script review was totally bogus, according to them.

All respect to them for going on xverse to chat it up with us, but quite frankly, they've been decieving us all through this production. They decieved us about Gambit. Talked up a big storm about how the AICN script review wasn't even a real script, it was so old, and an incomplete draft that has gone through massive changes, when we see in actuality that it went through minor changes. They talked up a big storm about how they, Jimmy, and we, would be proud of Cyclops in the movie, and talked about all these surprises he had, and his role was too spoilerish to talk about, DESPITE THE FACT that we knew about his death in the script review, so his death wasn't a spoiler to us anymore.

I won't say that they lied to us. They never said Gambit was in and Cyclops survived. But they misled us. They decieved us. And no amount of "we wanted to do Gambit justice" or "we had to work within the parameters regarding Cyclops" apology posts and answers in interviews will change the fact that they blatantly decieved us about this movie.
I think the blame cannot solely lie with the writers. The execs had something to do with Scott's near non existence in X3
 
The Batman said:
I'd watch the film if he lived and stopped jean, or died for a better reason than wolverine needed screentime. He could've been gone for the entire movie, as far as i'm concerned. I just wanted to see him in the final battle, and have him be the one who stops jean, and have him take over the school, completing his promise in X1.
If he was to be alive and be the one to stop Jean, he'd get killed in a second, seeing that Jean went on a major
demolecularizing-rampage in the final climax of the movie.
Wolverine was the only one who could stop her b/c of his healing factor. I can't see how Cyclops would achieve that...but of course, there are other ways. Killing him off was totally unnecessary and it was a stupid move. :down
 
chaseter said:
You didn't like X3 Lex?
No, no, I loved it. It was enjoyable. Apart from
Scott dying, Mystique and Rogue cured
, it was good.
 
Mystique's part for this film was in due time but Rogue and Scott are the shockers.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,765
Messages
21,804,948
Members
45,624
Latest member
pedroxvtt
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"