After watching X1 and X2 again recently.....

[JokerNick]

*wags finger of shame*

Drunk And Typing is a bannable offense.

lol....... I'm actually done drinking, so no need to worry

 

[thegameq]

whats with all the singer praise?? he made the x-world real....
whats the FUN in that?! its a FANTASY!
there are of course good scenes within the first two movies, but as a whole i never felt like i was watching x-men. and it always seems like 'sequences' in the movies. here comes the nightcrawler 'sequence' the dam 'sequence.'
he really didnt care about the x-men going into it, as he has admitted, and he sure didnt seem to want to stay around to finish his story, like most directors i.e. spielberg-jurassic park,burton-batman,columbus-harry potter,cameron-terminator. they make two and leave, good and bad sometimes. but they werent responsible regardless.

now i do think, from how i judge ratner, he doesnt have a unique style, he's just the average director, and whether its the studios decision of not, this new movie truly sounds and looks more like the xmen movie ive been waiting for. its a story that shows the world within and around the xmen. not JUST focusing on 5 characters!
and everyone says, including singer, TOO many characters!
i call b.s. there.
its the story of GROUP of mutants, a TEAM! an alternate WORLD!
its supposed to be littered with MANY faces, and DIFFERENT looking and sounding ones!
as far as i can see the major mistakes of the 'last stand' are too much wolverine and storm, and short length.
blame whomever for those, i blame the studio.
but singer did NOT understand the themes i have pointed out. those Are the themes of X-Men. if they cant handle it in hollywood then dont bother.
but i HAVE seen it effectively done, i.e. robert altman, woody allen movies.
love actually, the family stone, the big chill, silverado, the lost boys, ensemble pieces. it does work!
the problem is ratner and singer as directors CANT handle multiple cast members! and the studio CANT handle the TIME issues. they use excuses like scheduling conflicts and budget limitations, i say dont try then. dont half ass my favorite characters and call it x-men. i wont sit here and just take it.
i want the real x-men movie and i want to see this week, no more excuses.

Pulls mysterious looking flask from under cape and takes a swig...............



How dare you want an X-men movie closer to the comic!! It simply wouldn't work and no one would like it except the fanboys. Look at Spiderman, it was a disaster with all the catering to the fans. Sam Raimi even admitted he was a comicbook fan. Besides if the director and writers want to make the movie and characters their own way, they have every right. This is their big chance and their not going to do it to please the legions of fans that have made the source material popular in the first place. EGO first, material second.

Singer and Ratner are clearly A-list directors. Right up there with Coppola, Jackson, etc. The vision in their movies is artistic and astounding. Exactly what comicbook movies require...



..........Sarcasm potion wears off.

 

[CapBeerCino]

Now while the current X3 may be good, and i'm may not be right with all of my suggestions, i cant help thinking that Singers X3 would have been amazing, a movie to truly knock Batman Begins, X2 and Spiderman 2 off of their perches at the top, and it saddens me.

True. I find it funny that the x-3 crew keeps on saying "yes we respect the first two movies"

Spoiler

then kill 3 out of the

"movieverse original 5".

 

[tirminyl]

Singer killed "4" mutants no one is *****ing about that.

 

[CapBeerCino]

Singer killed "4" mutants no one is *****ing about that.

I was talking about x-men members.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

From what I recall, 90% of the camera zoomtime is on Logan's emotional reaction to Jean's death.

We see the back of Scott's head.

Not really, I rewatched it last night. Cyclops gets a lot more focus in the after Jean death scenes than Logan. He actually gets more lines too. Thats really unfounded to say Singer marginalized Cyclops. He got a small role in "X2: X-Men United/God Loves, Man Kills" because CYCLOPS HAS A SMALL ROLE IN THE REAL "GOD LOVES, MAN KILLS". You know the comic from which it is adapted. In fact he (and storm) both get captured by Stryker with Xavier and we don't see them until the end. AND JEAN NEVER FIGHTS SCOTT. So in fact Scott gets more screentime in X2 than he does in the comic its adapted from. Geez, I get the impression none of you read comics.

X3 is different than X1 (which had quiet a lot of Cyclops..even though he doesn't speak a lot, Cyclops doesn't speak a lot, but he gave orders, joked around and had some excellent interaction with the Professor and Jean) and X2 because they are taking a CYCLOP'S story and making it about Wolverine. Whereas in X2 I would have been pissed if they had taken Weapon X and GLMK and made them about Cyclops since, well they are not.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

Not really, I rewatched it last night. Cyclops gets a lot more focus in the after Jean death scenes than Logan. He actually gets more lines too. Thats really unfounded to say Singer marginalized Cyclops. He got a small role in "God Loves, Man Kills" because CYCLOPS HAS A SMALL ROLE IN THE REAL "GOD LOVES, MAN KILLS". You know the comic from which it is adapted. In fact he (and storm) both get captured by Stryker with Xavier and we don't see them until the end. AND JEAN NEVER FIGHTS SCOTT. So in fact Scott gets more screentime in X2 than he does in the comic its adapted from. Geez, I get the impression none of you read comics.

X3 is different than X1 (which had quiet a lot of Cyclops..even though he doesn't speak a lot, Cyclops doesn't speak a lot, but he gave orders, joked around and had some excellent interaction with the Professor and Jean) and X2 because they are taking a CYCLOP'S story and making it about Wolverine. Whereas in X2 I would have been pissed if they had taken Weapon X and GLMK and made them about Cyclops since, well they are not.

I disagree.

This is a comic book film adaptation. Therefore there are other elements (business, studio politics, marketing appeal, star power, actor availability, etc.,) that greatly impact how these films turn out. The above factors have zero interaction with what occurs on the printed page.

So yes, I've read the comic--several thousand times. But I don't believe Scott's MIAness in X2 was inspired by the comic. Storm sure wasn't MIA...

 

[X-Maniac]

Not really, I rewatched it last night. Cyclops gets a lot more focus in the after Jean death scenes than Logan. He actually gets more lines too. Thats really unfounded to say Singer marginalized Cyclops. He got a small role in "God Loves, Man Kills" because CYCLOPS HAS A SMALL ROLE IN THE REAL "GOD LOVES, MAN KILLS". You know the comic from which it is adapted. In fact he (and storm) both get captured by Stryker with Xavier and we don't see them until the end. AND JEAN NEVER FIGHTS SCOTT. So in fact Scott gets more screentime in X2 than he does in the comic its adapted from. Geez, I get the impression none of you read comics.

X3 is different than X1 (which had quiet a lot of Cyclops..even though he doesn't speak a lot, Cyclops doesn't speak a lot, but he gave orders, joked around and had some excellent interaction with the Professor and Jean) and X2 because they are taking a CYCLOP'S story and making it about Wolverine. Whereas in X2 I would have been pissed if they had taken Weapon X and GLMK and made them about Cyclops since, well they are not.

The movie's relationship to the source material for God Loves Man Kills was minimal. Deathstrike and Mastermind do not figure in the comic version. Stryker was a reverend in the comic, which made his stance more ironic.

Cyclops does get shoved out of the way pretty quickly. James had to plead with the production team for the fight scene with the prison guards. A lot of stuff during his capture was cut (a scene meeting Angel was obviously cut when Angel was cut, a long dream sequence during his mind control was cut from the movie). He is made to fight Jean (I like that part a lot), so we can see his powerful she has become and how she can physically hold back energy/matter with her powers (thus making the end scene with the water more understandable).

It's quite obvious almost from the start of these movies that Wolverine has more of a dominant role, that he is favoured by the studios and also Singer favoured him too.

We just do not know how Cyclops would have been treated in Singer's X3. That's the bottom line. Fox would still be making the movie. Cyclops might still have been pushed to the side, or killed, in a Singer X3. I'm sure James Marsden jumped ship to SR with good reason. He knew Wolverine was the preferrred 'alpha male' in the movies. If he hadn't gone on to SR, his character would almost certainly be kept alive, but probably still given a smaller role than Wolverine.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I disagree.

This is a comic book film adaptation. Therefore there are other elements (business, studio politics, marketing appeal, star power, actor availability, etc.,) that greatly impact how these films turn out. The above factors have zero interaction with what occurs on the printed page.

So yes, I've read the comic--several thousand times. But I don't believe Scott's MIAness in X2 was inspired by the comic. Storm sure wasn't MIA...

Halle petitioned to get her character more screentime otherwise she would have been captured. But Cyclops' MIAness was certainly because of the comic as was Storm's MIAness in the FIRST DRAFT WHEN THEY WERE BOTH CAPTURED. You obviously don't read these things if you think Halle plays Storm like the one in the comic, you had three fans here get on you for that. I am so sure since God Loves Man Kills was obviously not about Cyclops that Singer went okay lets make it about Cyclops, totally wreck whatever basic plotline the story had and take it from there. These scripts are written without STUDIO POLITICS, they are revised by the studio yes, but Marsden dropping off the face of the earth because his character does AND THEN GETTING MORE SCENES THAN HE DOES IN THE ACTUAL GRAPHIC NOVEL yeah I am sure that means the studio was trying to marginalize him in a story where he was already marginalized. They should have just made a story not about Cyclops about Cyclops that would have been a great idea.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

The movie's relationship to the source material for God Loves Man Kills was minimal. Deathstrike and Mastermind do not figure in the comic version. Stryker was a reverend in the comic, which made his stance more ironic.

It stick pretty close to the actual plotline, the details and characters are changed, events are funnelled in. But the idea of a man making a faux cerebro, capturing and dividing the X-Men all are there, plus the sequence of events are the same. The biggest difference is the fact that the Weapon X storyline is a major plotline as well, however to be fair thats an X-Men story that ought to be told.

 

[xantax]

We will never know what Bryan's version would/could have been. I have accepted it that Brett's done an action packed and loyal to its predecessors (just the movies) project.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Thanks Shadow Boxing, i also believed Cyke had a lot of focus in the final scene's. And i believe Cyke would have gotten a good amount of screen time in Singers X3.

 

[X-Maniac]

Thanks Shadow Boxing, i also believed Cyke had a lot of focus in the final scene's. And i believe Cyke would have gotten a good amount of screen time in Singers X3.

You have no proof of how much time Cyclops would have been given.

Even if Bryan Singer ever says that's what he would have done, it's no guaranteee that Fox would not have put its parameters on Cyclops' role in the movie. What the director wants, and what Fox demands are not the same thing.

You are clinging to delusions. There is no proof. No evidence. It can never be proved. There is no Singer X3 to compare it with. Singer jumped ship - it's because of this that Marsden moved on and effectively killed off his own character.

So stop arguing. You have no proof that Cyclops would have had a larger role in Singer's X3. If Singer had been doing X3, Marsden probably wouldn't have left for SR (but he might have still opted for some other project) and if he hadn't left, Cyclops probably wouldn't have been killed off but would quite probably have had a reduced role to let Wolverine have the limelight.

Face the facts. Singer chose to leave. Marsden chose to leave. Studio politics and actor availability came into play. End of Cyclops. The end.

 

[stryfe]

Its hard to blame anyone for suckness when you see the state of affairs Hollywood is in right now.

Bryans movies lack any sort of creativity or immersion but still managed to be decent. X3 will more than likely be the same way.

I will always wonder what these movies would have been had someone had the courage to actually make a faithful adaption of the Xmen.

 

[JokerNick]

Its hard to blame anyone for suckness when you see the state of affairs Hollywood is in right now.

Bryans movies lack any sort of creativity or immersion but still managed to be decent. X3 will more than likely be the same way.

I will always wonder what these movies would have been had someone had the courage to actually make a faithful adaption of the Xmen.

creativity or immersion.......... what are you talking about
he took a comic book, and made it so it was beleivable and so people could relate to it...... if that isn't creative I don't know what is then

 

[Star]

oh lordy, if ONLY singer had stayed! surely then we would have had a cyclops focused movie!

what evidence do you have of this, other then speculation with no proof?

even the speculation is unbelievable to me, considering the role singer gave to cyclops in x2.... what makes you think he'd be all for a cyclops centred movie if he had done x3?

the fact is, with the role cyclops had in x1/x2, its just not possible for him to step up and become the lead character. he's NEVER been a lead character in the movies, and probably never will be because of his previous character development.

just face the facts, crazed fanboys.

 

[The Guard]

I'll tell you this: Singer's X3 would have been very similar. Kinberg and Penn and Harris and Dougherty have similar writing styles.

It's not like X-MEN and X2 had loads of depth, character development and subtlety that X3 doesn't have.

Lost on most of you is the fact that Singer didn't do X3. He decided to do SUPERMAN RETURNS. Brett Ratner did X3, and seems to have done a damn good job.

 

[Octoberist]

The thing is that, sure there's no proof that Singer would of given Cyclops a bigger role. But it's a gut feeling. I do think that Singer would give Cyclops a bigger role: It's the Phoenix Saga. He has to be involved. I'm sure he would included scenes with Logan and Scott working together, sorting out their differences. I'm sure that Nightcrawler would been in. Same with Gambit.

But, it's all speculation on my behalf.

I do know, for a fact, that Singer's X3 whatever it should of been, would be been more polished than Ratner's.

Let's say Fox did interfer with Cyclops in Ratner's flick. It was due to politics and basically it was a punishment. It's beyond me to NOT see how it is. It's very blanant.

Singer

 

[The Guard]

I think it's pretty obvious Cyclops would have had a slightly larger role in X3 had Singer stuck around, since Marsden wouldn't be doing SUPERMAN RETURNS. But he still wouldn't have had a huge one, with Beast, Angel, etc, to be introduced and other plotlines to resolve.

If you were a studio, and you were going to punish someone for bailing on you, would you make an exception, allow them into the film during their downtime, and give them a hell of a good emotional couple of scenes, or would you write them out of the movie entirely or recast?

Common sense, people. It's not a punishment for Marsden. It's just how things worked out.

 

[Octoberist]

But he wouldn't die, Guard. He would die like a punk in Singer's X3. Give him a small role, anything but death.

Please, politics happened. The screenwriters had enough power to do something else then to kill Cyclops off. Not only that, they downplayed his exit while another mutant gets a glorious send-off.

 

[X-Maniac]

The screenwriters had enough power to do something else then to kill Cyclops off.

I'd like to know how you arrive at that conclusion. That screenwriters have all this power over studio bosses. Sounds very wrong to me! I think the only thing they could have done (and did) was to not actually show a dead body, his death is implied but never shown.

 

[Sentinel X]

I love Brian (or Bryan ) as a director but Im not sure if his X3 would be as awsome as people are saying. It would be great but I dont know about awsomeness.....I wish Vaugn was still doing X3...Id love to see how hed do it

 

[Octoberist]

Because it seems like Fox like micro-mange their movies. I have friends who worked there.

If that's the best that they can do (off screen death) then Jesus, they were so limited in what they can do, I guess.

Once X4 gets into production, then Cyclops' death could pay off. There's a mini-conflict: It seems like certain people want an X4, while some can't see it happening. Because everything is so uncertain, right now, Cyclops looks like a schmuck.

Maybe you're right X-Manaic, but we'll see. I have to say that it would be stupid of Fox's part if they ended it now. What else do they have now, besides Fantatic Four? Nothing really. The Devil Wear Prada....LOL

 

[X-Maniac]

But could Cyclops return in an X4? Would the general public buy that idea, of another mutant returning from death? They've had to see Jean Grey returning and also Xavier possibly continuing in some form... Will James be in the next Superman movie? Does he want to come back?

Even with an off-screen death, Cyclops' future in an X-movie looks pretty bleak, i'm sorry to say...

 

[Abaddon]

Exactly, Singer would have had a better script that didnt underuse or kill off characters.

Don't be so sure.