Bryan Singer's X-Men 3

[gambitfire]

 

[Goddessreicho]

Aww look at the cute smiley, if only the poster was just as cute.

Hope and dreams man, hopes and dreams.

 

[X-Maniac]

I share your hopes, Goddessreicho, that some day someone will do our characters total justice.

Storm having an origin and watering her plants (preferably with a microstorm).... now that would be something.

Speaking of dreams, i had one in which Storm did the voiceover for the start of the next movie. I wrote some of it down when i woke up. It was a fantastic sequence!

 

[gambitfire]

X-men Begins For 2012!!

 

[Goddessreicho]

You know what would be great, a plot that involves a team of X-men. Where team work would be vital and having a villian that targets...oh I dunno...THE X-MEN instead of just a "special" few and not making the rest of the team obsolete. Stories that tell me why these people are so passionate about what they do.

Seeing familiar faces with familar personalites. That would be great. Seeing the family atmosphere. Harry's. A trip to the city. Some drama outside of a reluctant virgin, and an indecisive red-head. Great one-liners not said by the runt.

The stuff that made me like it in the first place.

These things aren't something that Fox, Singer, or Ratner did. None of the writers pulled through either.

The X-men need to have a fresh restart or need to be laid to rest. New behind the scenes or nothing at all. I'm officially tired of this arguing about this.

 

[Boba_Fett_123]

There are a few things to bear in mind though. Singer himself says he has only a rough treatment on his computer, nothing more. Who's to say how that would have developed, and how it would have been altered by the time it became celluloid.

Also, Famke herself - who played the character for the two prior movies, as you know of course - insisted on the split personality and said somewhere (wish i could find the source again) that it was Bryan who had told her the Phoenix was a second persona within her.

Bryan's X3 would have been gentler, more considered, less energetic, more serious, with far fewer cameos. I don't think he has the mentality for doing all-out wars, he prefers moody tensions and bursts of activity.

Of course, the very act of Bryan leaving and hiring Marsden had an impact on X3. Singer surely knew that Cyclops should be part of the Phoenix story that would automatically be coming next (whoever was writing/directing) and Marsden should have known that by leaving he was depriving Cyclops of a larger role in the Phoenix Saga. Singer and Marsden must share some blame for, in effect, killing off the Cyclops character.

Blame for Cyke's fate rests solely on the shoulders of Tom Rothman and Fox, who refused to reschedule this film. It was rushed, and that's why Anna and James are hardly in it. It's also why Singer didn't direct it. I would've waited the extra year or two to get Singer's X3, and I'm sure many more would have, as well. Of course, if Fox had signed him in a timely manner to begin with, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[gambitfire]

^^Well i agree with everything excep the "target the X-men" concept, i think the villain like Magneto has done should target humanity and the X-Men need to be the ones who intervene (i like this POV better), on other hand those who hate mutants would attack X-men but besides Sentinels there really aren't that many mainstream human villains to pit up against the X-Men that havn't already been done in the movie. Except Sentinels maybe.

I dunno that's how i feel.

 

[gambitfire]

Aww look at the cute smiley, if only the poster was just as cute.

Hope and dreams man, hopes and dreams.

Were you talking about me cuz if so clearly you didn't see the pics posted of me earlier this year.

 

[Goddessreicho]

Yea that was to you! And I'm allowed to judge cute, for I am Mistress of Cute and Drama. If you'd read my stuff you'd know.

But yar!

 

[gambitfire]

Yea that was to you! And I'm allowed to judge cute, for I am Mistress of Cute and Drama. If you'd read my stuff you'd know.

But yar!

ARGH MATEY, THE TIDE IS RISING THE STORM IS A COMING AND YOU LANDLUBBERS DON'T STAND A FLYING CHANCE OF LIVING.







I dunno


:meow:

 

[Goddessreicho]

^--- LMAO!

All you need to know is that I'm cuter than you

 

[gambitfire]

let us pretend thats true.

 

[Goddessreicho]

The proof is in the pudding, and my pudding...ok that's a little to nasty even for me.

But good looking people always laugh last, and I'm laughing and shall continue to do so.

 

[The Guard]

I think both sides are being extremely ridiculous and argumentative here. Regardless, I'm a little shocked that TheGuard is actually defending X-MEN: THE LAST STAND because I usually am in agreement with his views. Not that I didn't like the movie—I did, but X-MEN and X2 are far superior and I don't think I'd be caught dead defending the third movie. The idea of Bryan Singer's X3 does intrigue me, though.

Just because X-MEN: THE LAST STAND is not superior to X-MEN and X2 does not mean it is not a good movie, with a lot of great elements. I'll defend any movie that has something worth defending. Doesn't mean I think it's perfect.

Keep in mind that the original plan for Sentinels in X2 called for a massive Phoenix vs. Sentinels showdown at the end. Fox continued to cut the budget, until eventually ONE Sentinel would open the Cerebro door. Singer (rightly so) thought that was ******edly lame, and cut Sentinels entirely. Do I think we'd have gotten more than some headlights and a ****ty head in X3 had Singer done the story? Hell yes.

It's not remotely that simple. If you listen to Zak Penn, what happened with X2 was that he submitted his own set of ideas, with the Phoenix locking herself in with Sentinels, among others. Bryan Singer chose instead to take elements from David Hayter's ideas, brought his own writers in, and didn't use almost any of Penn's ideas. Hence Penn being miffed about it whenever he talks about his work on X2. Singer didn't want to go that route. Didn't want to be that big and bombastic. Hence the stuff with the X-jet at the end.

Oh, certainly not, but I don't see what this has to do with the discussion at hand. I merely stated that I usually agree with him, not always. I've always known TheGuard had his qualms about BATMAN BEGINS. Again, this doesn't necessarily mean that I agree with them. I actually didn't know he said this specifically about BATMAN BEGINS, though. If what you said is true, then I'm a little disappointed.

I have "qualms" about every movie. No movie is perfect. Please tell me that you're not that gullible, that you actually think I would say and continue saying something like that. I never said anything close to that. What I said, and which he either has forgotten I said, or simply twists to try to make me look bad...was that BATMAN & ROBIN had better PUNS than the Scarecrow apartment sequence in BATMAN BEGINS. Because the puns in that sequence are pathetic. Even for puns. I mean "Have a drink. Take a seat" from someone who's supposed to be scary?
You all can't possibly be stupid enough to simply not lend me any credibility because (someone with an obvious problem with me, probably his inability to argue anything logically) says that I said something absurd (which I'm pretty sure most of you can not see me saying). If you are, you are, but I expect better. What's even more pathetic is that this is all he has to throw at me. Every time he disagrees with me it's "You said the dialogue in BATMAN & ROBIN was better than the dialogue in BATMAN BEGINS". He can't even come up with a half-ass counterargument.

He specifically stated "Batman and Robin had better dialogue, and the puns Freeze/Ivy used were better than Scarecrow and Ra's in Batman Begins."

Dear Antagonistic Moron, when you assault someone's credibility, it's best to have proof. Do you have proof?

As I said, 3-4 minutes of actual screentime is not that much better. And those two powerful scenes? They were a part of a storyline between Warren and his dad that went NOWHERE.

3-4 minutes and several action/flight scenes and emotional moments are not "much better" than seeing a character fly overhead once? Are you kidding me? Was seeing more from Beast in X3 much better than seeing Hank McCoy on TV in X2?

That's [almost] completely false. Wolverine was developed in the first two to as he was in the comics. A loner that came with rage and a troubled past. Storm, well, she was kinda underdeveloped.

Characterwise, Storm was not really ever developed remotely closely to what the comic book character has ever been (Except maybe until X3 in some ways). And frankly, Wolverine was a bit of a softie the entire franchise compared to who he's been in the comics. And he was taller. There have been changes to EVERY character in this franchise. Not all of them bad ones.

But Angel? Come on. Personality-wise, he was NOTHING like he was in the comics. Where was his self-confidence and ego? Sure, he MIGHT have had those qualities, but the movie didn't spend enough time on him to show that. And he didn't even help the X-Men at the end. The fact that he puts others before himself should have put him in the battle, not just saving his dad.

Who cares where his self-confidence and ego were? A character who is nothing but self-confidence and ego isn't really that interesting an element, seeing as how there are already eight or nine of them in the franchise. I'd rather see Angel involved in the cure stuff rather than "I'm an egotistical *******". That's for another X-Men film. Granted, I did like Andrew Kevin Walker's take on Angel in his X-Men script, where Angel thought he could take on The Brotherhood, and got his wings broken (Although Storm and Rogue weren't in that story, so there was room for that stuff). Still, this is an ensemble movie, there isn't the screentime to flesh out everyone, etc, etc, etc...

And when it comes down to it, his personality is one of, if not his most important traits.

When it comes down to it, Angel's not really ever been that interesting a character. His interactions with others have been, and his actual character arc is, but there just isn't time to get that kind of stuff into this franchise of X-Men ensemble films. It's not like we found out a whole lot about Bobby Drake in X2.

But she wasn't a mute in the first two. It would have been nice to hear her talking during the last part of the movie.

Phoenix wasn't mute. She just didn't talk much.

The Sentinel did it's job in the DR, but why the hell would it just stand there in the shadow and fog? All it was there for was to show off Wolverine under the guise of training.

It's a Sentinel. Standing there thinking they have the upper hand and waiting to get destroyed is what they do. It's probably scanning Wolverine to see if he's a mutant or not.

And that's why Singer would've been better handling Angel than Ratner and his writers. Singer is character-driven.

So, just because he is "character-driven", Bryan Singer would do comic book justice to a tertiary character? He didn't manage to do justice to Storm (or Cyclops) in many people's eyes, why assume that he'd do so for Angel?

I think had Singer stayed we would've seen an excellent X-Men closer. I think the Sentinels should've been introduced after the events of X2. After having numerous car crashes, plane crashes, and humans dying general it should've been given that the Sentinels would've/should've appeared.

If Singer had stayed, odds are the Sentinels would have been too expensive. Or do you think FOX would just hold back on them for Ratner, but let Singer have them?

I'm not saying the ideas in X3 weren't good ideas. The bad ones far outweigh the good ones unfortunately. Penn, Ratner, and Kinberg don't have a good understand for great character driven stories and it shows with The Last Stand.

Because god knows, Bryan Singer cornered the market on character-driven stories in X-MEN and X2. For Wolverine, at least.

I can't believe I'm actually saying this, but I want Singer's (and I've been known to have a love/hate relationship for him around here.) version of X3. I do enjoy the X3 we got, but the Last Stand is easily the most flawed of the trilogy the more and more I watch it.

That depends on what you consider a "flaw". If you consider fast-paced scenes a flaw, you need to go back and take a long look at X-MEN and X2. If you consider deviating from the comic books or important aspects of the comics a flaw, you need to go back and take a long look at X-MEN and X2. Cheesy dialogue? Ditto. Stupid moments? Ditto. Moments that are logically hard to swallow? Ditto. What other "flaws" does X3 have that X2 was devoid of?

Sentinels as an idea is fine, but it's obvious there are budgetary problems with them. i don't know why as other movies have introduced robots - look at Sky Captain, Matrix's Sentinels... How did they afford it???

Because THE MATRIX and SKY CAPTAIN were not chock full of characters using superpowers that needed rendering like X-MEN was. THE MATRIX had powers, but not neccessarily superpowers like the X-Men franchise features. We know why the Matrix sequels had more robots...more money.

Anyway, for those of you who wish Singer had stuck around to do X3 (I sometimes with it would have happened, because then you would still be crying that Singer was butchering the X-Men, instead of Ratner)...am I to understand that you believe that FOX would just have let Singer do what he wanted with the film? Why do you think he left the project to begin with? It certainly wasn't FOX not wanting to make an X3, or FOX not giving him enough time to develop the project.

 

[gambitfire]

The proof is in the pudding, and my pudding...ok that's a little to nasty even for me.

But good looking people always laugh last, and I'm laughing and shall continue to do so.

.....

 

[Goddessreicho]

.....

Awww, how adorable. But I supose cute can come from cute.

 

[Maze]

I think the IDEA of Singer's X3 will become the Donner Superman II. But unless it happens VERY quickly, it's not going to happen at all. It's not one of those things where it can be released more than 20 years after the fact, because there's no footage. I'd love nothing more than for Singer to do Man of Steel, and then to do X-Men 3 afterward, maybe for a 2012 release. I think by that point most of the cast would be willing to show up; certainly Stewart and Romijn would, and more than likely Paquin, Janssen, and Marsden. Singer's name will get Jackman back, especially as a producer. Berry, maybe not, but I don't think Singer wants to do Storm anyway, and honestly, I'd rather have no Storm than the Storm we got. And that far down the line, it wouldn't hurt too much to recast Storm, either. Ultimately, though, a film probably won't work. This is where I think Singer should get his ass in gear and do his X3 as one-shot graphic novel for Ultimate X-Men, instead of the projected arc he's supposedly still doing.

EDIT: *hugs TNC*

Me want that too ! t:

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I find it hilarious that those who LOVE X3 feel the need to be insulted when someone says something negative about it.

I find it hilarious that you continue to ignore my response to you, everytime that I actually counter your absurd insults towards myself and others who love this film.

I showed you the proper respect by responding to you... yet you continue to not even acknowledge my posts...

I wonder if it's because there's not legitamate foundation to your remarks, and everytime I respond to you, I utterly expose you for what you are, and there's not much you can say back about it.

So instead, you go back towards The Guard, twisting his comments into something else that you can hurrel an insult towards. Yes, twist. That's all you do. Alll your accusations and statements are based on your twisting everything myself and anyone who's against you say so that you have something to insult them with. And when you get caught, you ignore it, and go on to the next person you can try to play your stupid games with.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Anyone else think that it's time to move on?

-TNC

Not everyone heals as fast as you, TNC.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

I find it hilarious that you continue to ignore my response to you, everytime that I actually counter your absurd insults towards myself and others who love this film.

I showed you the proper respect by responding to you... yet you continue to not even acknowledge my posts...

I wonder if it's because there's not legitamate foundation to your remarks, and everytime I respond to you, I utterly expose you for what you are, and there's not much you can say back about it.

So instead, you go back towards The Guard, twisting his comments into something else that you can hurrel an insult towards. Yes, twist. That's all you do. Alll your accusations and statements are based on your twisting everything myself and anyone who's against you say so that you have something to insult them with. And when you get caught, you ignore it, and go on to the next person you can try to play your stupid games with.

Yes, I'm so evil that I twist the Guards comments, knowing full well that he's pretty much attacked anyone's intelligence or questioned their intelligence for speaking against X3.

Ever think that I don't respond to your posts because I'm ignoring you and simply don't care enough about you to respond? I could careless if you enjoy X3 or find it to be the greatest film ever. I'm too busy paying bills, going to school, and caring about better films that have been released or are going to be released in the future.

I've exposed you more than you've exposed me. I've provided facts, truths, and other aspects as to why I don't care for the film and so forth. Just because I don't agree with YOU doesn't mean you exposed me at all.

If anything Nell, you've exposed yourself for being sensitive and taking negative comments about a film too personally. In the end it's a matter of opinion. You like what you like, I like what I like. Trust me that I'm not losing sleep over you supposedly "winning an argument" or "exposing me".

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Yes, I'm so evil that I twist the Guards comments, knowing full well that he's pretty much attacked anyone's intelligence or questioned their intelligence for speaking against X3.

Ever think that I don't respond to your posts because I'm ignoring you and simply don't care enough about you to respond? I could careless if you enjoy X3 or find it to be the greatest film ever. I'm too busy paying bills, going to school, and caring about better films that have been released or are going to be released in the future.

I've exposed you more than you've exposed me. I've provided facts, truths, and other aspects as to why I don't care for the film and so forth. Just because I don't agree with YOU doesn't mean you exposed me at all.

If anything Nell, you've exposed yourself for being sensitive and taking negative comments about a film too personally. In the end it's a matter of opinion. You like what you like, I like what I like. Trust me that I'm not losing sleep over you supposedly "winning an argument" or "exposing me".

The thing is you haven't provided truths.

You continue to think that my beef with you is a matter of me liking the film and you not liking it. It has nothing to do with that.

It's your constant attacking me, and others who liked the film. It's you making accusations about me that aren't true; about me wanting you and everyone else to like the film. About me insulting you and others for not liking it.

It has nothing to do with that Yet, you continue to twist my dislike of your attitude into making it seem like a dislike over you disliking the film.

And it has nothing to do with that.

You've exposed nothing. All you do is constantly twist people's words so that you can justify insulting them to yourself.

If you make these big and bold accusations about me, about me insulting you and everyone else for not liking the film, about me forcing my opinion on you and wanting you to like the movie, then why can't you ever back it up? How come you're quick to mention my name, and throw me into that list of X3 lovers who is insulting, and forceful with my opinions, but when I call you out on it, all of a sudden you "don't care enough about me to respond"?

If you don't care enough about me to respond, then don't care enough about me to mention my name, and twist what I say around to suit your absurd accusations and insults.

But if you do care enough about me to mention my name (and obviously you do, since "posters like Nell" or "X3 lovers like Nell" is your catchphrase - and I can quote many instances of you doing that), then care enough about it to back up why you feel that way.

You constantly accuse me of wanting everyone to praise this movie 24 / 7, accuse me of not being able to handle negative opinion about this film, and accuse me of insulting people who don't like this film for not liking it...

Okay, you care enough about what I say to make those accusations, care enough about it to back it up.

And if you don't care enough about me to respond to me, then don't mention my name with your absurd and childish insults and accusations. If you don't care about me enough to respond to me, then show it; don't care enough about me to not mention my name. Don't care enough about me to worry about what I say, if, according to you, I'm so insulting and forceful with my opinion.

Don't talk about it, be about it.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

The thing is you haven't provided truths.

You continue to think that my beef with you is a matter of me liking the film and you not liking it. It has nothing to do with that.

It's your constant attacking me, and others who liked the film. It's you making accusations about me that aren't true; about me wanting you and everyone else to like the film. About me insulting you and others for not liking it.

It has nothing to do with that Yet, you continue to twist my dislike of your attitude into making it seem like a dislike over you disliking the film.

And it has nothing to do with that.

You've exposed nothing. All you do is constantly twist people's words so that you can justify insulting them to yourself.

If you make these big and bold accusations about me, about me insulting you and everyone else for not liking the film, about me forcing my opinion on you and wanting you to like the movie, then why can't you ever back it up? How come you're quick to mention my name, and throw me into that list of X3 lovers who is insulting, and forceful with my opinions, but when I call you out on it, all of a sudden you "don't care enough about me to respond"?

If you don't care enough about me to respond, then don't care enough about me to mention my name, and twist what I say around to suit your absurd accusations and insults.

But if you do care enough about me to mention my name (and obviously you do, since "posters like Nell" or "X3 lovers like Nell" is your catchphrase - and I can quote many instances of you doing that), then care enough about it to back up why you feel that way.

You constantly accuse me of wanting everyone to praise this movie 24 / 7, accuse me of not being able to handle negative opinion about this film, and accuse me of insulting people who don't like this film for not liking it...

Okay, you care enough about what I say to make those accusations, care enough about it to back it up.

And if you don't care enough about me to respond to me, then don't mention my name with your absurd and childish insults and accusations. If you don't care about me enough to respond to me, then show it; don't care enough about me to not mention my name. Don't care enough about me to worry about what I say, if, according to you, I'm so insulting and forceful with my opinion.

Don't talk about it, be about it.

I haven't mentioned your name. If anything I've been frequenting the Casino Royale, Spider-Man 3, and other forums more than I've been posting in this area.

Your obsession with me is getting pretty creepy.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

We haven't forced our opinion on anyone. Look at the posts by X-Maniac and Nell, you'll see them insult those who disagree with them and get defensive. In the end they take the negativity so personally that they get upset about it, which is nothing to get upset over.

Last I recall I haven't called anyone a loyalist, a moron, a cyber terrorist, or saying they suck because they don't like X3.

This is from page 50, a post dated 11-13-2006... that's just a few days ago.

You have mentioned my name.

Quit trying to pretend like you're innocent in this matter when you and I both know damn well that you're not.

You made an accusation about me. You accused me of "insulting anyone who disagrees with" me. Your exact words.

You cared enough about what I said to mention my name, and make that accusation.

Now, I ask you, prove it to me. Show me where I have insulted you, or anyone who disliked X-Men: The Last Stand for disagreeing with me.

If you care enough to make the accusation, then care enough to back it up when you get called out on it.

It's not an obsession with you. It's not appreciating being wrongfully accused of things I have never done. Especially by someone who is notorious for doing the same things he's accusing me of.

 

[WorthyStevens]

3-4 minutes and several action/flight scenes and emotional moments are not "much better" than seeing a character fly overhead once? Are you kidding me? Was seeing more from Beast in X3 much better than seeing Hank McCoy on TV in X2?

The difference between Angel and Beast is that Hank was actually useful in this movie, unlike Warren. And I prefer that if they do the character, that they do the character RIGHT, emotional scenes or not.

Characterwise, Storm was not really ever developed remotely closely to what the comic book character has ever been (Except maybe until X3 in some ways). And frankly, Wolverine was a bit of a softie the entire franchise compared to who he's been in the comics. And he was taller. There have been changes to EVERY character in this franchise. Not all of them bad ones.

He was nowhere near as soft in the previous movies as he was in this one. He was completely out of character, like Angel was. And there have been changes made to characters, but not as drastic as what was done with Angel and even Iceman. However, I will say that some characters were done perfectly in this movie, like Beast, Multiple Man and Kitty.

Who cares where his self-confidence and ego were? A character who is nothing but self-confidence and ego isn't really that interesting an element, seeing as how there are already eight or nine of them in the franchise. I'd rather see Angel involved in the cure stuff rather than "I'm an egotistical *******". That's for another X-Men film. Granted, I did like Andrew Kevin Walker's take on Angel in his X-Men script, where Angel thought he could take on The Brotherhood, and got his wings broken (Although Storm and Rogue weren't in that story, so there was room for that stuff). Still, this is an ensemble movie, there isn't the screentime to flesh out everyone, etc, etc, etc...

I care. That's the thing. His self-confidence and ego are fundamental aspects of his character. He's wealthy, good-looking and he's know it. And he's not afraid to show or tell anyone. I'd rather his character be done right than to be involved in a major plotline, but is the complete opposite of his normal character.

It is an ensemble movie, that's why X3 should have either had a longer running time, or just not introduce so many mutants.

When it comes down to it, Angel's not really ever been that interesting a character.

It's all in the eye of the beholder. I find him to be the most interesting character out there.

His interactions with others have been, and his actual character arc is, but there just isn't time to get that kind of stuff into this franchise of X-Men ensemble films. It's not like we found out a whole lot about Bobby Drake in X2.

Yes, but they didn't advertise Iceman to hell back when X2 came out.

Phoenix wasn't mute. She just didn't talk much.

And that was another problem. Famke didn't have a whole lot to work with except looked pissed off alot of the time, including not having much to say most of the movie.

It's a Sentinel. Standing there thinking they have the upper hand and waiting to get destroyed is what they do. It's probably scanning Wolverine to see if he's a mutant or not.

Destroying/kidnapping mutants is what they do. They usually move around alot to make sure they've killed them.

So, just because he is "character-driven", Bryan Singer would do comic book justice to a tertiary character? He didn't manage to do justice to Storm (or Cyclops) in many people's eyes, why assume that he'd do so for Angel?

As far as I know, he doesn't hate Angel.

If Singer had stayed, odds are the Sentinels would have been too expensive. Or do you think FOX would just hold back on them for Ratner, but let Singer have them?

He would have had a larger budget to work with, like Ratner did.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Worthy, while I agree with you that Angel's role was wasted in this film (amazing buildup, for a crap of a payoff), if I got for Gambit what you got for Angel, I would be the happiest man on the freaking planet.