Bryan Singer's X-Men 3

[LastSunrise1981]

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.



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.



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.



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



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



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.



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



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



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

Bravo.

I will say that Singer would've built up Angel and most likely we would've had a better result. Singer was building up Cyclops, Jean, Rogue, Iceman, and Colossus, and I feel if he had stayed the result would've really been something that some fans could smile about in the end.

From what I understand he had intentions on bringing in Gambit, Beast, Angel, and Emma Frost, the budget wasn't big enough and Fox apparently didn't want to go with his concepts.

 

[WorthyStevens]

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.

The thing is though, Nell, is that I feel from the advertising and the writer's Q&A on the Xverse I've been promised that Angel would have a larger role in this movie (and more development). And this isn't the first time either. Angel was originally supposed to be in X-Men Legends 1, but was cut out at the last minute for freaking Jubilee.

While I think Gambit should have had a role in the trilogy, at least he's been blessed when it comes to comics, TV, and videogames. Unlike Angel, which I was hoping would change with X3.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

The thing is though, Nell, is that I feel from the advertising and the writer's Q&A on the Xverse I've been promised that Angel would have a larger role in this movie (and more development). And this isn't the first time either. Angel was originally supposed to be in X-Men Legends 1, but was cut out at the last minute for freaking Jubilee.

While I think Gambit should have had a role in the trilogy, at least he's been blessed when it comes to comics, TV, and videogames. Unlike Angel, which I was hoping would change with X3.

I thought he was in the game and is a playable character?

 

[WorthyStevens]

Bravo.

I will say that Singer would've built up Angel and most likely we would've had a better result. Singer was building up Cyclops, Jean, Rogue, Iceman, and Colossus, and I feel if he had stayed the result would've really been something that some fans could smile about in the end.

From what I understand he had intentions on bringing in Gambit, Beast, Angel, and Emma Frost, the budget wasn't big enough and Fox apparently didn't want to go with his concepts.

Singer always had intentions on bringing in Angel in, and has tried to do it in X1 and X2. I would have LOVED to have seen him add Gambit and the Hellfire Club, like he planned.

I thought he was in the game and is a playable character?

Nope. He was in XML2 though - but just as a villain and NPC - and had a great role. But when it comes to videogames, he's been playable in one old PC game. And that's it.

 

[Boba_Fett_123]

Well, Guard, I do understand that this is an ensemble film. Well, at least I understand that it should be. What we got, however, was "Wolverine and Halle and their Amazing Friends". If there's not enough room to flesh everyone out, then include less people. Instead, Kinberg and Penn filled this movie to the brim, and it just did not work.

As far as the "who cares?" comment...well, I imagine fans of Angel cared. A lot. So let's not callously write them off. And, for that matter, fans of Rogue are hella pissed. Let's not even get started on fans of Cyclops, Storm, Mystique...seriously, now. People do care about these movies, and we're not all going to sit back and be satisfied with what is, essentially, eye candy. The depth and substance are either hinted at or gone completely, but they are NEVER there in full force, and it's a problem. Instead of insulting people's intelligence, you should maybe consider that.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

The thing is though, Nell, is that I feel from the advertising and the writer's Q&A on the Xverse I've been promised that Angel would have a larger role in this movie (and more development).

You're absolutley right.

Angel was promised to us to have a much larger role than he really did. And his arc was totally wasted at the end. Something that I myself found very disappointed with, and I'm rather indifferent to Angel as a character.

I wouldn't say that Gambit is so blessed in the comics and such. From my experience with the X-Men universe, Gambit is often taking a back seat to the likes of Wolverine, or others. Unless it's a totally Gambit-centric story (the arc in Uncanny issues 346-350 for instance), I never get a chance to see much Gambit in action, save for a one liner here, or a charged card there... it's rather disappointing.

He had next to nothing to do in the animated series...

I'm so used to Gambit getting shafted in the comics and cartoons, and everything else, that an extended cameo role the likes of what Angel got in X-Men: The Last Stand would have been a godsend for me.

Unfortunatley, just like every other form of the X-Men, Gambit ended up getting the shaft in the movies, and all I got of him was a name on a computer screen...

At least you got to see your boy in the flesh, and do some amazing things while he was at it.

 

[WorthyStevens]

You're absolutley right.

Angel was promised to us to have a much larger role than he really did. And his arc was totally wasted at the end. Something that I myself found very disappointed with, and I'm rather indifferent to Angel as a character.

I wouldn't say that Gambit is so blessed in the comics and such. From my experience with the X-Men universe, Gambit is often taking a back seat to the likes of Wolverine, or others. Unless it's a totally Gambit-centric story (the arc in Uncanny issues 346-350 for instance), I never get a chance to see much Gambit in action, save for a one liner here, or a charged card there... it's rather disappointing.

He had next to nothing to do in the animated series...

I'm so used to Gambit getting shafted in the comics and cartoons, and everything else, that an extended cameo role the likes of what Angel got in X-Men: The Last Stand would have been a godsend for me.

Unfortunatley, just like every other form of the X-Men, Gambit ended up getting the shaft in the movies, and all I got of him was a name on a computer screen...

At least you got to see your boy in the flesh, and do some amazing things while he was at it.

Well, remember that Gambit was on the main cast in TAS, so it wasn't like he did nothing. And he's had his own comic series. Warren had a few episodes, but like X3, he wasn't in complete character either. And he's never had his own series, just the Psylocke/Archangel Crimson Dawn series, and just a single one-comic special.

And yes, he was in the movie, but it still wasn't the Angel that I know and love. But if Gambit were in it, he probably wouldn't be the same Cajun either, which is unfortunate.

I guess we could hope for a reboot, much in the vein of Batman Begins and Casino Royale, to accomodate Gambit, Angel, Cyclops and others.

 

[The Guard]

Just in one ear and out the other around here, isn't it? Sure, Singer would have introduced and fleshed out Angel. Just because. You keep right on telling yourselves that.

So, Penn and Kinberg and Ratner filled the movie to the brim with characters, but somehow Singer and his team could have done the same AND fleshed out everyone (even though they didn't manage to do so with even LESS characters in X-MEN and X2)? Sure.

People, Bryan Singer, had he done X3, would have had the following characters to continue to develop: Xavier, Cyclops, Wolverine, Storm, Iceman, Rogue, Colossus, Jean Grey/Phoenix, Magneto, Mystique, and Pyro. Odds are that he would have added Beast and Angel in some capacity, and probably Juggernaut or another Brotherhood member, and you all still think he'd manage to tell a satisfying version of the Dark Phoenix Saga AND flesh out Beast and Angel somehow? How, exactly? Some of you simply do not understand how screenwriting and screentime works. Even if Nightcrawler and say, Wolverine were cut out of Singer's X3 completely, even if Storm was dropped from the team, it would STILL be difficult (or next to impossible) to "flesh out" Angel in X3, especially while established characters remained, and new ones were being introduced.

In the comics, Sentinels have always just sort of attacked, then stood there so the X-Men can destroy them. It's almost a running joke. This shouldn't even be a debatable issue. It's one of those "hilariously ironic" things from the X-Men comics. The Sentinel grabs Cyclops, he says something witty, then destroys it. It's a classic Sentinel moment.

From what I recall, Gambit said "Cherie" every so often in the animated series, and tossed some exploding cards, and that was about it.

Speaking of reboots...I'm currently outlining, and will be writing a prequel script with Dan Marcus to the movieverse featuring a young Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm, Beast, and Magneto's first Brotherhood. Should be interesting. The idea is to fit the story into the movieverse's timeline, but to flesh out the characters a bit more, and show more of their stories, sans Wolverine and Rogue.

 

[Seen]

Just in one ear and out the other around here, isn't it? Sure, Singer would have introduced and fleshed out Angel. Just because. You keep right on telling yourselves that.

So, Penn and Kinberg and Ratner filled the movie to the brim with characters, but somehow Singer and his team could have done the same AND fleshed out everyone (even though they didn't manage to do so with even LESS characters in X-MEN and X2)? Sure.

People, Bryan Singer, had he done X3, would have had the following characters to continue to develop: Xavier, Cyclops, Wolverine, Storm, Iceman, Rogue, Colossus, Jean Grey/Phoenix, Magneto, Mystique, and Pyro. Odds are that he would have added Beast and Angel in some capacity, and probably Juggernaut or another Brotherhood member, and you all still think he'd manage to tell a satisfying version of the Dark Phoenix Saga AND flesh out Beast and Angel somehow? How, exactly? Some of you simply do not understand how screenwriting and screentime works. Even if Nightcrawler and say, Wolverine were cut out of Singer's X3 completely, even if Storm was dropped from the team, it would STILL be difficult (or next to impossible) to "flesh out" Angel in X3, especially while established characters remained, and new ones were being introduced.

In the comics, Sentinels have always just sort of attacked, then stood there so the X-Men can destroy them. It's almost a running joke. This shouldn't even be a debatable issue. It's one of those "hilariously ironic" things from the X-Men comics. The Sentinel grabs Cyclops, he says something witty, then destroys it. It's a classic Sentinel moment.

From what I recall, Gambit said "Cherie" every so often in the animated series, and tossed some exploding cards, and that was about it.

Speaking of reboots...I'm currently outlining, and will be writing a prequel script with Dan Marcus to the movieverse featuring a young Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm, Beast, and Magneto's first Brotherhood. Should be interesting. The idea is to fit the story into the movieverse's timeline, but to flesh out the characters a bit more, and show more of their stories, sans Wolverine and Rogue.

Very well said Dave and I look forward to tackling the X-MEN prequel script with you.

 

[Theweepeople]

It's hard to see you simply not getting the impact of this scene, and WHY he is acting like this.

It's hard to see why you don't understand why I won't except your flawed reasoning.

It is absolutely consistent with Magneto's character, and his actions in previous films and X3. Mystique has become a human. Magneto HATES humans.

It is not consistent since there is no frame of reference to compare this situation to. This is the first time that Magneto has been in a situation where he witnesses one of his friends lose their powers. I understand Magneto's beliefs of mutant superiority. I understand Magneto's hate for humans. But, having hate for humans and hate for people who were forced to take the cure are too different ideas. Magneto has thought of himself as a champion for mutant rights since X1 and had to be enraged by the thought of any terrorist mutants taking the cure against their will. There is no way you can convince me that Magneto would want to stop this atrocity from taking place but, not feel sorry for the ones who get cured.

On the other I wouldn't have had a problem with this scene if Magneto's callousness was consistent throughout the film. Magneto made it clear that his hatred for mutants who oppose his beliefs is just as great as his hatred for humans. Yet, he regrets the death of a nemesis that had foiled his attempts for mutant superiority over humans on at least two occasions. Magneto should have expressed joy in the scene at Jean's house after knowing Xavier wouldn't be a problem for him anymore. Lazy writing and bad filmmaking.

He is clearly torn when she is cured,

I didn't see any anguish on his face. I can only guess at the thoughts that are going through his mind as looks at mystique with an expressionless face. The writers did a horrible job of making Magneto's actions believable in that scene.

The scene serves to show just how bigoted Magneto himself has become. He has become the thing he once hated.

Completely taking the humane element out of that scene is what bothers me. I've heard some of the most hateful people(KKK) speak words of pity towards people they believe are inferior. I thought it would be cool to see a Magneto who was tormented at coming to the realization that it was not Raven's fault that she was forced to become what Magneto hates.

What...the hell...are you talking about? Watch Ian McKellan's performance. Look at the anguish on his face. Hear his words. "It's a shame. She was so beautiful". There's the regret you speak of, right there. He would not show her any reverence, because he no longer values her now, simply because she's human. However, "She was so beautiful" shows reverence for who she was.

Magneto refers to the cured Mystique in a mocking tone of voice. I saw no regret and reverance for what had happened to his friend.

There's pretty much nothing inconsistent in the film about Magneto's character. Magneto didn't react to different situations the same as others because they were DIFFERENT situations. You don't react the same way to every situation, do you?

You totally misinterpreted the message I am conveying. Of course people don't act the same way to every situation. However characters that have reputations for acting a certain way in previous storylines shouldn't start changing personalities from scene to scene with no clear motive. In real life my best friend who is an introvert does not act anti-social at some social gatherings and social at others. His personality consistently and understandably dictates his actions the same way at all social events.

Fighting. As in struggling with herself. It's there. You obviously needed it to be more overt and in-your-face, but it's there in Famke's performance and in the story.

Interesting. I saw Dark Pheonix in every scene of the film. The only scenes I questioned whether Jean was fighting the Phoenix was the beginning of the infirmary scene and the scene after Wolverine kills her. I know that Kinberg and Penn said it was there intent for Jean's conflict with the Dark Phoenix to be like the story of Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde. The personalities of Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde are equally powerful and complete opposites motivationally.

Besides, the last scene of X-Men United along with Jean's background commentary suggests that Jean's power had come from evolution. I still think the mental block explaination was bullcrap but, not quite as sickening as Xavier's change in personality from a trustworthy father figure in X1 and X2 to a manipulative bastard who has the audacity to insult wolverine who merely questioned his methods(Cyclops death presumed dead and Jean is in a coma.

Its obvious the writers of X3 decided to re-write the back stories of two characters with no concept of how it would affect the quality of the continuing story. These back story rewrites are almost as bad as the origins of Cobra in G.I. Joe: The Movie.

He didn't have to manipulate her.

All he needed to do was say to her "Come with me" to convince her to follow him.

All he had to do was tell her the truth about how he felt about her powers.

This argument was started on the basis of what motivated Jean to join Magneto's brotherhood. Now you are trying to convince me that after killing the only deterent(Xavier) to preventing her from becoming all powerfull Jean decides to go with Magneto just to hear something that she already knows Magneto believes since she is a telepath.

She did the rest, through her desire to be all powerful. It's possible he wanted to taking advantage of her power at some point, and he does appeal to her at the end of X3 as a last resort, but he doesn't ever truly manipulate her into anything.

Everything you say above is irrelevant since Xavier was the only person who could hold Jean back and Jean is a telepath who knew everything Magneto would do or say before he acted.

All of this should make one wonder why a genuis schemer like Magneto would risk recruiting an extremely dangerous and emotionally unstable mutant that hurt and killed some of her friends. Did Magneto really think she would treat her enemies any better? Did he think that she would never try to manipulate him with her powers? Lazy writing and bad filmmaking.

There's not a single part of the film where he actually asks her to do anything for him, or lies to her, or any of that nonsense.

You're right. Magneto didn't order Jean to not inject him with the cure needles in the forest scene.

Why are you suggesting that Magneto could lie to a telepath?

She thinks Magneto might want to control her, which is, notice, what makes her angry.

Since Jean is a telepath she would know whether or not Magneto wanted to control her.

However, you must have missed the part where Magneto says "I want you to be what you are", and points out that Xavier limited her, and that they're all in the cure conflict together.

.

Jean needed to join the brotherhood to hear Magneto say what she already knew since she is a telepath? She already took out the person who was holding her back so why would she need to follow anyone's advice at this stage of the story.

The pattern is that Jean Grey cannot control the immense power Dark Phoenix wields, and that she had control issues.

Jean can't control the phoenix in scenes where she kills Cyclops, Xavier, and many of the people on Al-catraz. But, in scenes with Magneto, the brotherhood of evil mutants, Wolverine and other X-Men characters she conveniently does not lose complete control. Lazy writing and bad filmmaking.

YES! That is EXACTLY the intent of that scene. To make you go "What the hell is going on?"

I wondered what the hell was going on in The Matrix Reloaded. None of that ackwardness compelled me into liking the film anymore than the intense displeasure I had for it. The scene in Star Wars The Phantom Menace where Qui Gon Jin takes a mitachlorean count of Anakin Skywalker was also an ackward moment. After the ackwardness wore away a headache set in. Having ackward scenes in a film simply for shock value can hinder the flow of a film. Unfortunately, X3 was has too many of these scenes for my tastes.

So because she's all powerful, she would just go off alone? All-powerful people tend to need their egos stroked. People who want control badly often need to control others. Who is she going to control if she's off on her own? That, and the fact that she's clearly still looking for an anchor.

I'm glad my you asked these questions. Since Jean is all powerful and wants her ego to be stroked why not use her all powerful telepathic powers to control the brotherhood to obey her every command?



What you just proposed is also considered lazy writing. You turned Jean into a plot device, and destroyed any suspense the story could have had with that proposal. It's called Deux Ex Machina. Perhaps you're familiar with it?

And you continue to miss the point that Magneto wasn't going to ORDER Jean to do anything.

Except, of course order her not to cure him with the needles in the forest.t:

Nor COULD he have.

What were his motivations for having the most powerful mutant on the planet by his side again? Oh I forgot. Magneto had a position in his army designated for an all powerful mutant to do nothing.

Or did you miss that part of the movie?

I think you missed the evidence of the lazy writing and bad filmmaking.

Didn't you just tell me that other mutants would stand against Magneto? Were they going to stand against him peacefully?

You totally misunderstood what I was implying. I said "where did you get that random idea from" because I didn't think my original idea about mutants opposing a mutant with magnetic powers was random. In your simplistic thinking you suggested that I was contradicting myself when I wasn't.

and they would likely fail miserably against the likes of Magneto, Phoenix, Callisto, Juggernaut and Pyro, and an army of superpowered mutants.

Based on what evidence. That all powerful group you mentioned couldn't even successfully raid a pharmaceutical company. It's hillarious that you even dare to mention Phoenix being on the brotherhood's side since she was as great a danger to the brotherhood as she was to everyone else. The first wave of Magneto's so-called superpowered mutants got taken out by the marines. A large portion of the other brotherhood members were taken out by an X-Men member who came out of retirement(Beast) and 3 X-Men members(Colosus, Kitty, Iceman) who had technically become a part of the team hours before arriving at Al-catraz.

In X2 it is obvious from the cerebro scenes that 40 to 50% of the world is made up of mutants. It is silly for you to think that apart from the X-Men, the rest of the most high powered mutants in the world or even in the US, decided to join Magneto's army.

And you think there's some all-powerful mutant who is going to stop (once again) Magneto, Phoenix, Callisto, Juggernaut, Pyro, and a Brotherhood of mutants? It's really fairly irrelevant, because this movie is about the X-Men.

See above response.

Someone else beat me to the nuke example, but I'll repeat it. Just because she didn't unleash her power does not mean she didn't have it. Nuclear weapons, and the fear they produce, is a prime example of the kind of deterrence Jean would serve as to those who opposed Magneto.

First of all Magneto never had control of Jean so your nuke comparison is horrible. This would be like a country that has nuclear weapons but, no means of firing them threatening a country with nuclear weapons that can be fired.

You really don't understand storytelling, do you? Storytelling is not always having characters doing what is easiest, or the most logical.

God forbid the writers to keep Magneto's logical and ingenius scheming consistent with X1 and X2.

It is having characters do what produces the most interesting interaction, and the most suspense and emotion.

It would have been nice to see characters doing everything you mentioned above with consistency.

You don't know what mutants had what powers. Just because you don't see them used against the X-Men doesn't mean they didn't have any.

Give me a break. I saw scenes of Wolverine, Colosus, and Beast being surrounded by mutants who must have possessed the mutant powers of getting their asses kicked if you consider that a power. Kitty took out a mutant with the mutant power of having weird looking eyes. Storm and Iceman were the only X-Men who actually fought brotherhood members who weren't wimps.

Why should the X-Men have got their asses kicked? The X-Men were fighting untrained mutants, and the X-Men were trained, and had greater powers in most cases.

This is believable. So Magneto and his army all sat on their collective asses doing nothing to prepare themselves for the assualt on Al-catraz.

Yes, but there is a pattern to WHY her power goes out of control. The key words here are "power" and "control". You still don't get it. Phoenix has very clear motivations. Just not very deep ones. But then, she never did.

You tell me there is a pattern without giving me a shread of evidence. You tell me that Jean motivations are simply the words power and control. If that's the case then she truely is nothing more than a zombie in the film. Of course this contradicts her ability to focus on using her powers for extended periods of time to control and destroy things. It also, makes the actions that resulted from her motivations even more unclear. Lazy writing and bad filmmaking.

This all makes sense. Jeans powers went out of control to the extent of Cyclops and Xavier dying. But, not out of control to the extent of killing Magneto, Wolverine and Storm.

No kidding. What's funny is your above commentary does not suggest or even hint at a pattern. In fact it's barely a theory that does not address the heart of the matter. I always wanted to know why did Jeans powers get out of control to the extent of Cyclops and Xavier dying. But, not out of control to the extent of killing Magneto, Wolverine, and Storm. I have already stated my explaination for why Jean conveniently lost control of her powers in these ways and it is not a theory. It is a fact that Rothman wanted all these things to happen this way regardless of how confusing it might be to an audience.

The movie doesn't have any clear message. If you think those are poor messages/themes, that's your issue. The message has many sides, just like the issue of assimilation.

The movie has a clear message. Just not the one that was intended. The message is "X3 is the perfect example of everything that can go wrong with a movie after the director of previous films in a series is changed, a CEO gets involved with the development, hack writers get involved, a hack director is signed, and a fortune of the budget is spent on advertising."

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^Great post and i totally agree and posted most of this a few pages back, but people conveniently missed it.

 

[Boba_Fett_123]

Just in one ear and out the other around here, isn't it? Sure, Singer would have introduced and fleshed out Angel. Just because. You keep right on telling yourselves that.

So, Penn and Kinberg and Ratner filled the movie to the brim with characters, but somehow Singer and his team could have done the same AND fleshed out everyone (even though they didn't manage to do so with even LESS characters in X-MEN and X2)? Sure.

People, Bryan Singer, had he done X3, would have had the following characters to continue to develop: Xavier, Cyclops, Wolverine, Storm, Iceman, Rogue, Colossus, Jean Grey/Phoenix, Magneto, Mystique, and Pyro. Odds are that he would have added Beast and Angel in some capacity, and probably Juggernaut or another Brotherhood member, and you all still think he'd manage to tell a satisfying version of the Dark Phoenix Saga AND flesh out Beast and Angel somehow? How, exactly? Some of you simply do not understand how screenwriting and screentime works. Even if Nightcrawler and say, Wolverine were cut out of Singer's X3 completely, even if Storm was dropped from the team, it would STILL be difficult (or next to impossible) to "flesh out" Angel in X3, especially while established characters remained, and new ones were being introduced.

In the comics, Sentinels have always just sort of attacked, then stood there so the X-Men can destroy them. It's almost a running joke. This shouldn't even be a debatable issue. It's one of those "hilariously ironic" things from the X-Men comics. The Sentinel grabs Cyclops, he says something witty, then destroys it. It's a classic Sentinel moment.

From what I recall, Gambit said "Cherie" every so often in the animated series, and tossed some exploding cards, and that was about it.

Speaking of reboots...I'm currently outlining, and will be writing a prequel script with Dan Marcus to the movieverse featuring a young Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm, Beast, and Magneto's first Brotherhood. Should be interesting. The idea is to fit the story into the movieverse's timeline, but to flesh out the characters a bit more, and show more of their stories, sans Wolverine and Rogue.

I'll debate you when you stop insulting everyone's intelligence. You're no smarter than the rest of us. Get the **** over yourself.

 

[X-Maniac]

^Great post and i totally agree and posted most of this a few pages back, but people conveniently missed it.

Your posts tend to get conveniently missed, largely because all you ever say is 'I loved SR' or some other one-line statement. We know you don't like X3.

What's wrong with people like you and Theweepeople is that you are unable to accept that this is not a Bryan Singer movie. Which is pretty stupid. Different director, different writers. different creative ideas. You can't spin the world backwards to undo all that. What's also wrong with your sort of biased criticism is that you (and theweepeople) refuse to see what's in the movie because you do not want to like the movie. Those who like it can admit its failings, generally, because they are more realsitic and balanced
and have a sense of perspective. People like you and Theweepeople don't like it but cannot bring yourself to see any positive in it at all; thus, you lack perspective and insight and balance.

There is no arguing with what the movie showed, as it is plain to see. You may not like how it showed it, and the style of presentation, but attempting to find nitpicks as it being done in this thread says a lot more about the person doing the nitpicking.

For instance, Theweepeople says Magneto stared at Mystique with an expressionless face. Which is plainly wrong. He looked in shock and horror. But, as he had a war to fight and as she had become the thing he hated, he swiftly moved on. McKellen himself says on his website that he was unsure of Magneto's reaction (though he didn't say he had argued about it, and I have sent a question asking why) but he said there were more pressing matters at hand for Magneto and the time for grieving/reflection would come later, privately.

 

[Dan33977]

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.

And I agree. Recall that I said in my original reply:

Not that I didn't like the movie—I did...

As I said, in my opinion, X-MEN and X2 are far superior to X-MEN: THE LAST STAND, but, like you, I do believe that there are some nice elements to the third installment. To be honest with you, I actually liked the movie quite a bit—my only complaint is that it was far too short for a movie with far too much going on in it (and the fact that Halle Berry is a terrible actress). I would've liked for it to have been split into at least two different movies: one featuring the Phoenix and the other featuring the cure.

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.

Of course I don't think you'd say something that absurd, hence the uncertain tone of my original reply. I didn't automatically assume that what he was telling me was true. I hardly know who he is or what credibility he has, while I am quite familiar with you and your posts, on the other hand. Again, recall that I said:

If what you said is true, then I'm a little disappointed.

But, regardless, it's nice to know what you really said.

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).

Again, I certainly didn't jump to any conclusions about you as you usually are fairly levelheaded when it comes to these sorts of things, in my opinion. You've already proven that you have credibility here, so I don't think you really have anything to worry about.

 

[WorthyStevens]

Just in one ear and out the other around here, isn't it? Sure, Singer would have introduced and fleshed out Angel. Just because. You keep right on telling yourselves that.

Can't stick to debate without resorting to snide comments?

So, Penn and Kinberg and Ratner filled the movie to the brim with characters, but somehow Singer and his team could have done the same AND fleshed out everyone (even though they didn't manage to do so with even LESS characters in X-MEN and X2)? Sure.

Your forgetting the fact that X3 would've been a hell of a lot longer than it was had Singer directed. And less characters.

People, Bryan Singer, had he done X3, would have had the following characters to continue to develop: Xavier, Cyclops, Wolverine, Storm, Iceman, Rogue, Colossus, Jean Grey/Phoenix, Magneto, Mystique, and Pyro. Odds are that he would have added Beast and Angel in some capacity, and probably Juggernaut or another Brotherhood member, and you all still think he'd manage to tell a satisfying version of the Dark Phoenix Saga AND flesh out Beast and Angel somehow? How, exactly? Some of you simply do not understand how screenwriting and screentime works. Even if Nightcrawler and say, Wolverine were cut out of Singer's X3 completely, even if Storm was dropped from the team, it would STILL be difficult (or next to impossible) to "flesh out" Angel in X3, especially while established characters remained, and new ones were being introduced.

Your assuming he would add more characters to the Brotherhood. And odds are, this movie would have stuck with the Phoenix storyline, and nothing with the cure. Which means we wouldn't have had other filler characters, like Arclight, Quill and possibly Juggernaut. Which would mean more time for Gambit, Angel, Beast and Emma.

And I didn't say he would be fully fleshed out. But his character wouldn't have been forgotten as he was in X3. Plus he probably would have been more in character.

In the comics, Sentinels have always just sort of attacked, then stood there so the X-Men can destroy them. It's almost a running joke. This shouldn't even be a debatable issue. It's one of those "hilariously ironic" things from the X-Men comics. The Sentinel grabs Cyclops, he says something witty, then destroys it. It's a classic Sentinel moment.

Yes, but we actually saw Cyclops destroying the Sentinel. And it was only there to make Wolverine more badass, point blank.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Which would mean more time for Gambit, Angel, Beast and Emma.

If Singer would have stuck strictly to the Phoenix Saga (as many of us assume he would have) where would the room for those characters, other than Emma, come from?

Gambit wasn't even around yet during the time of the original Phoenix Saga. He didn't arrive until about 12 years later.

Though Beast and Angel were around, it is my understanding that they don't play major arcs in the saga.

Emma... yes, as Singer obviously could have gone Hellfire Club route.

But then again, if we focus strictly on the Phoenix Saga, and introduce the Hellfire Club, then what exactly is it again that Magneto and the Brotherhood is doing?

We saw Magneto get away with Mystique at the end of X2. We saw Pyro join the Brotherhood at the end of X2. That's not just unconcluded plot points, that's opening up entirely new ones. New ones that can't just be ignored in X3 so that Singer could focus entirely on the Phoenix Saga.

I totally agree with what Avi Arad saying about the Phoenix Saga in X-Men: The Last Stand, that it should never be about just 1 person.

There are too many plot points leftover from X2 that don't even touch on Jean in the slightest that need to be dealt with. So already, any X3 would need another plot besides just the Phoenix Saga.

Then, despite what damage Phoenix could cause, it's really a more personal struggle for the X-Men. After the 2 global / political conflicts of X-Men and X2, any X-Men 3 would need to have plotical stakes as well. Especially with the open plot arc of Magneto's building war...

X-Men 3 could not have just solely focused on the Phoenix Saga. Something else had to happen. And though a lot of people have suggested it, leaving the Phoenix for a potential part 4 is not a good idea either. Many casual viewers might not know about the Phoenix, but we do... and even then, many casual viewers DO know about the Phoenix Saga... at least the basics (Jean coming back from the dead). You set that up. Again, like the Brotherhood's open plot arcs, you can't just ignore the open plot arc of Phoenix and do something else.

The Brotherhood and Phoenix had to be focuses of this film. On that aspect, Kinberg & Penn totally nailed it, including both the Phoenix and Cure plots.

If Singer did X-Men 3, he'd be stuck in the same predicament. He'd need to include the Brotherhood (blatant open plot arcs), and he'd need to include the Phoenix (blatant open plot arcs).

If you toss the Hellfire Club into the mix, that adds even ANOTHER bad guy to the mix. Then you're still going to add in Angel, Beast, and still use Gambit?

That'd be even more cluttered than what we got.

Certain things were said about Gambit by Singer's creative team that make me really doubt their desire to put him into the films. Angel and Beast I believe we would have gotten still.

But if Singer's plot focused on the Phoenix Saga the way you say, what exactly would have been their roles?

And if Singer implemented a secondary arc (just as Kinberg & Penn did), then it would end up about the same as what we got.

I don't even think it was really all that cluttered. The only thing that suffered was payoff for Angel, and that didn't come from being too cluttered a movie, it came from them just not giving him payoff. He could have just joined the X-Men for the final battle, been part of the X-Men, and helped them fight in the final battle. THEN he could have saved his father, and said something to him along the lines of "I've found a home now", and instead of flying overhead at San Francisco, could have been back at the school with the X-Men when the school re-opened. Would have added, what, a minute to the film? And given Angel's character a purpose.

Nah, I don't believe the film was over cluttered with characters. Most of them were just henchmen or cameos anyways.

 

[BMM]

If Singer did X-Men 3, he'd be stuck in the same predicament. He'd need to include the Brotherhood (blatant open plot arcs), and he'd need to include the Phoenix (blatant open plot arcs).

Perhaps this is why they began considering filming X-Men 3 and X-Men 4 back-to-back. Perhaps they knew there would be entirely too much to be crammed into just one movie and would have rather spread the various arcs across two instead . . . but this is an entirely other could've, would've, should've can of worms that I don't particularly feel like getting into . . . and it isn't exactly fair.

 

[X-Maniac]

If Singer would have stuck strictly to the Phoenix Saga (as many of us assume he would have) where would the room for those characters, other than Emma, come from?

Gambit wasn't even around yet during the time of the original Phoenix Saga. He didn't arrive until about 12 years later.

Though Beast and Angel were around, it is my understanding that they don't play major arcs in the saga.

Emma... yes, as Singer obviously could have gone Hellfire Club route.

But then again, if we focus strictly on the Phoenix Saga, and introduce the Hellfire Club, then what exactly is it again that Magneto and the Brotherhood is doing?

We saw Magneto get away with Mystique at the end of X2. We saw Pyro join the Brotherhood at the end of X2. That's not just unconcluded plot points, that's opening up entirely new ones. New ones that can't just be ignored in X3 so that Singer could focus entirely on the Phoenix Saga.

I totally agree with what Avi Arad saying about the Phoenix Saga in X-Men: The Last Stand, that it should never be about just 1 person.

There are too many plot points leftover from X2 that don't even touch on Jean in the slightest that need to be dealt with. So already, any X3 would need another plot besides just the Phoenix Saga.

Then, despite what damage Phoenix could cause, it's really a more personal struggle for the X-Men. After the 2 global / political conflicts of X-Men and X2, any X-Men 3 would need to have plotical stakes as well. Especially with the open plot arc of Magneto's building war...

X-Men 3 could not have just solely focused on the Phoenix Saga. Something else had to happen. And though a lot of people have suggested it, leaving the Phoenix for a potential part 4 is not a good idea either. Many casual viewers might not know about the Phoenix, but we do... and even then, many casual viewers DO know about the Phoenix Saga... at least the basics (Jean coming back from the dead). You set that up. Again, like the Brotherhood's open plot arcs, you can't just ignore the open plot arc of Phoenix and do something else.

The Brotherhood and Phoenix had to be focuses of this film. On that aspect, Kinberg & Penn totally nailed it, including both the Phoenix and Cure plots.

If Singer did X-Men 3, he'd be stuck in the same predicament. He'd need to include the Brotherhood (blatant open plot arcs), and he'd need to include the Phoenix (blatant open plot arcs).

If you toss the Hellfire Club into the mix, that adds even ANOTHER bad guy to the mix. Then you're still going to add in Angel, Beast, and still use Gambit?

That'd be even more cluttered than what we got.

Certain things were said about Gambit by Singer's creative team that make me really doubt their desire to put him into the films. Angel and Beast I believe we would have gotten still.

But if Singer's plot focused on the Phoenix Saga the way you say, what exactly would have been their roles?

And if Singer implemented a secondary arc (just as Kinberg & Penn did), then it would end up about the same as what we got.

I don't even think it was really all that cluttered. The only thing that suffered was payoff for Angel, and that didn't come from being too cluttered a movie, it came from them just not giving him payoff. He could have just joined the X-Men for the final battle, been part of the X-Men, and helped them fight in the final battle. THEN he could have saved his father, and said something to him along the lines of "I've found a home now", and instead of flying overhead at San Francisco, could have been back at the school with the X-Men when the school re-opened. Would have added, what, a minute to the film? And given Angel's character a purpose.

Nah, I don't believe the film was over cluttered with characters. Most of them were just henchmen or cameos anyways.

I agree with much of this.

X2 showed several dangling plot threads - Pyro leaving with Magneto and Mystique, Jean's voiceover and the symbolic Phoenix.

Therefore the Brotherhood and Phoenix are logical things to include in the next movie.

Nightcrawler was less certain as a 'given' for a next movie. As are Angel and Beast this time round. Those sorts of 'unconventional' characters tend to be 'guest appearances' as they are FX/make-up-heavy (Mystique being the exception for staying the course) and they can detract from the 'humanity' of the movie, so less can be more. I think X3 may have used this 'less is more' factor with Angel and Beast in X3 - they gave us character moments and power displays with these two characters but tried to keep the basic story very real, very human and not dominated by 'freakish' mutants whom the audience can easily see as far-fetched and unbelievable. Which is why Leech wasn't green of course.

The other thing is that Phoenix does tie into the cure story. Her fear/hate/anger of being fixed/controlled/caged is a parallel to the mutant community's fears and anger of being cured. Magneto even says as much when at Jean's parents' house -'You'd think you want to cure her, Charles' or something like that.

A few more scenes of characterisation and a longer movie would have helped immensely. If there is no news of an extended edition, I'm going to have to do my own! (Remember also that X2 was criticised for lack of character development - it too tends to have character moments between the action, as in X3, rather than full-on character development).

 

[kg576094]

During X2, Xavier never seemed to sense what was happening to Jean (whether you accept evolution or the breaking of mental blocks) and he seemed remarkably indifferent to her power display at the end of the movie. He isn't always constantly psi-probing everyone around him. And for the story to work, that has to be the case. As in the comics, where he never intervened at an early stage.

Now there lay the greatest contradiction of them all...why didn't the Professor do anything for Jean while she was experiencing all that problem with her new power and it seemingly corrupting her by giving her nightmare and frighting Cy. The equation is pretty simple: when u hav cold or flu, you go see a good doctor...if you have problem sleeping having nightmare and doing stuffs like shaking the bedroom, you go see the professor! Even our dear Wolverine know that! It doesn't explain why either Jean nor Cy went to see the Professor when he's the one who had an easy solution to all these like the doctor giving piriton or other meds. So why didnt cy also go see the professor and tell the professor his wife just kicked him out of his bed when he tried to kiss her last night and he think she might just kill him the next time they kissed....oops, that really happened!


For me this sticks out as a sore thumb when the professor knew about the phoenix at that pt in time and have a clear solution to the phoenix problem but yet he did absolutely nothing at all before it is too late in x3. This made the Phoenix tragedy the ultimate fault of the professor in the whole movie because have the professor acted in X2 none of what happened in X3 would have occured and Jean wouldn't have to die a second time. After his resurrection how is the professor still going to go back to the mansion and explain to Storm or Beast what he had done because it was clearly his decision to cage the creature years back making it suppressed and angry that lead inadvertently to the death of his own student which imo is the wrong focus of the saga. Can the school still function with such a corrupted & twisted head , should the professor head the Weapon X program instead?

 

[The Guard]

It's hard to see why you don't understand why I won't except your flawed reasoning.

Flawed reasoning about what? Why Magneto reacts the way he does?

It is not consistent since there is no frame of reference to compare this situation to.

If there's no frame of reference, than how could you say it is, or is not consistent? Wait, are you whining because it's something new?

This is the first time that Magneto has been in a situation where he witnesses one of his friends lose their powers. I understand Magneto's beliefs of mutant superiority. I understand Magneto's hate for humans. But, having hate for humans and hate for people who were forced to take the cure are too different ideas. Magneto has thought of himself as a champion for mutant rights since X1 and had to be enraged by the thought of any terrorist mutants taking the cure against their will. There is no way you can convince me that Magneto would want to stop this atrocity from taking place but, not feel sorry for the ones who get cured.

He doesn't seem to HATE her, he's biased against her because she's human now. Magneto clearly showed remorse/shock at Mystique being cured. He was clearly upset that she had been cured (this should not even be an issue, and I think it's one of the best moments in the film), but she was a human now, and Magneto leads the Brotherhood of Mutants, not the Brotherhood of Mutants and One Powerless Human. She was not a mutant anymore. And so he left her behind.

On the other I wouldn't have had a problem with this scene if Magneto's callousness was consistent throughout the film.

It was. Watch how callously he disposed of human life. Watch how callously he sent his troops into battle.

Magneto made it clear that his hatred for mutants who oppose his beliefs is just as great as his hatred for humans. Yet, he regrets the death of a nemesis that had foiled his attempts for mutant superiority over humans on at least two occasions. Magneto should have expressed joy in the scene at Jean's house after knowing Xavier wouldn't be a problem for him anymore. Lazy writing and bad filmmaking.

Wow. Just...wow.

I didn't see any anguish on his face. I can only guess at the thoughts that are going through his mind as looks at mystique with an expressionless face. The writers did a horrible job of making Magneto's actions believable in that scene.

If you didn't see anguish, you are not watching this film. Expressionless face? When was the last time you saw this movie?

Completely taking the humane element out of that scene is what bothers me. I've heard some of the most hateful people(KKK) speak words of pity towards people they believe are inferior.

Magneto is not the KKK. He is Magneto. It's clear he pities her from the look on his face.

I thought it would be cool to see a Magneto who was tormented at coming to the realization that it was not Raven's fault that she was forced to become what Magneto hates.

So because you thought that would be cool, what they did in the movie is just ****e?

Magneto refers to the cured Mystique in a mocking tone of voice. I saw no regret and reverance for what had happened to his friend.

??? He's not mocking anything. Regret is EVIDENT on his face, and in the words "It's a shame", which, by itself, implies regret. Reverence can also be found in the line "She was so beautiful". Reverence for who she was.

You totally misinterpreted the message I am conveying. Of course people don't act the same way to every situation. However characters that have reputations for acting a certain way in previous storylines shouldn't start changing personalities from scene to scene with no clear motive.

But you yourself said it...we never saw Magneto react to someone he knew who was cured. Are you averse to seeing new sides to a character?

In real life my best friend who is an introvert does not act anti-social at some social gatherings and social at others. His personality consistently and understandably dictates his actions the same way at all social events.

That's kind of sad. However...so does Magneto's. His obvious hatred of humans and belief in mutant superiority, which is the basis of his character in this franchise...absolutely affects his actions toward Mystique in the scene where she is cured.

Interesting. I saw Dark Pheonix in every scene of the film. The only scenes I questioned whether Jean was fighting the Phoenix was the beginning of the infirmary scene and the scene after Wolverine kills her. I know that Kinberg and Penn said it was there intent for Jean's conflict with the Dark Phoenix to be like the story of Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde. The personalities of Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde are equally powerful and complete opposites motivationally.

You take things they said far too literally. Allusions to similar stories are just that, allusions. They are not meant to be taken literally. If you only see Dark Phoenix, and don't see Jean struggling, you are not watching this film closely enough. You are not watching Famke Jansenn's performance closely enough. Every movement of her eyes, of her facial muscles, has significance in a performance. It's subtle, but it's there. Watch more closely.

Besides, the last scene of X-Men United along with Jean's background commentary suggests that Jean's power had come from evolution. I still think the mental block explaination was bullcrap but, not quite as sickening as Xavier's change in personality from a trustworthy father figure in X1 and X2 to a manipulative bastard who has the audacity to insult wolverine who merely questioned his methods(Cyclops death presumed dead and Jean is in a coma.

I see someone comes from the school of Black and White. Jean's POWER came from evolution, but POWER itself does not create evil. The personality wielding the power, and the choices that person makes create evil. The mental blocks explanation explained why Jean turned into Dark Phoenix, not only why she was powerful. What Xavier did wasn't exactly wrong, considering what he knew about Jean Grey from the start.

All he needed to do was say to her "Come with me" to convince her to follow him.

Then he's not manipulating her even more. That is not manipulation of the sort you are implying. If I tell someone "Come over here", that is not manipulating them. That is me asking them to come with me. If I give them some bull**** reason to come with me to trick them into coming with me and to bring them under my power...that's manipulation. But Magneto does not do that to Jean in the film.

This argument was started on the basis of what motivated Jean to join Magneto's brotherhood. Now you are trying to convince me that after killing the only deterent(Xavier) to preventing her from becoming all powerfull Jean decides to go with Magneto just to hear something that she already knows Magneto believes since she is a telepath.

I don't believe I ever implied that she goes with Magneto to hear how he feels about her. She goes with him because she has nowhere else to go, and he provides an anchor of sorts.

Why are you suggesting that Magneto could lie to a telepath?

You continue to miss the point. He doesn't HAVE to lie. He's telling her the truth the entire time. Yes, he clearly thinks about her power being useful, but she makes it obvious that this isn't going to happen. And he lets her make that decision. You're acting like Magneto has some sneaky ulterior motive. He doesn't. He has the same damn motives he knows Phoenix has: to not let the humans cure them/control them.

Since Jean is a telepath she would know whether or not Magneto wanted to control her.

Then she knows (or thinks)...but all she sees is that he sees her great power and believes it could be useful, not that he wants to twist her to his ends (she's already in line with his thinking about the cure, which is the issue in this film). She calms down once Magneto points out that he just wants her to be what she is, and that yes, the cure is a common threat to them both.

Jean needed to join the brotherhood to hear Magneto say what she already knew since she is a telepath?

I didn't say she joined the Brotherhood just to hear his speeches. I didn't even say she joined the Brotherhood. Uh, yes, she can read Magneto's mind, but the audience needs to hear how Magneto feels about Phoenix beyond just wanting her powers on his side. The audience cannot telepathically scan the minds of fictional characters, like Jean can. It's a neccessary scene.

She already took out the person who was holding her back so why would she need to follow anyone's advice at this stage of the story.

She's not taking his advice. The movie never shows her taking his advice. There's no indication of ANY of that. Phoenix has evolved into Dark Phoenix by this point. There's no change in her character from here on out, until she goes back to Jean before she dies. Just Jean's struggle to go back to herself, to avoid destroying everything.

Jean can't control the phoenix in scenes where she kills Cyclops, Xavier, and many of the people on Al-catraz. But, in scenes with Magneto, the brotherhood of evil mutants, Wolverine and other X-Men characters she conveniently does not lose complete control. Lazy writing and bad filmmaking.

I said she cannot control the "immense power" she wields. As in the power that Dark Phoenix can tap into via her desire to simply use power. Not that she can never control any of her power. The power she displays in the encampment (taking a gun apart and levitating needles) is hardly "immense" power. It's stuff Jean could already do in X-MEN without Dark Phoenix's aid. It's when she basically goes nova that she cannot control her power, as what happens with Cyclops, Xavier, and in the end of the film.

I'm glad my you asked these questions. Since Jean is all powerful and wants her ego to be stroked why not use her all powerful telepathic powers to control the brotherhood to obey her every command?

What commands, exactly, would Phoenix be giving? Why would she need them to do anything for her?

Except, of course order her not to cure him with the needles in the forest.

You think that's him ordering her not to use the needles on him? Look at him. He's afraid. He's panicking. That is not him "ordering" her. That is essentially Magneto begging her not to cure him. Do you miss the point of every scene, or just most scenes?

What were his motivations for having the most powerful mutant on the planet by his side again? Oh I forgot. Magneto had a position in his army designated for an all powerful mutant to do nothing.

Out of all the stupid questions you could ask, that one takes the cake, because it essentially answers itself. "What were his motivations for having the most powerful mutant in the planet by his side"? Uh, to have the most powerful mutant on the planet by his side, just in case. She's his last resort, as we see in the end of the film with the final appeal he makes to Dark Phoenix.

I think you missed the evidence of the lazy writing and bad filmmaking.

OH, SNAP! HE REPEATED HIS PULL-STRING PHRASE! THERE GOES MY DEBATE!

You totally misunderstood what I was implying. I said "where did you get that random idea from" because I didn't think my original idea about mutants opposing a mutant with magnetic powers was random. In your simplistic thinking you suggested that I was contradicting myself when I wasn't.

Simplistic thinking? I was the one who made the "random issue" more complex in asking just who would stand against Magneto and his Brotherhood. Regardless, as someone else pointed out, this is X-MEN, not RANDOM MUTANTS WHO MAY OR MAY NOT STAND AGAINST MAGNETO IN A FICTIONAL FUTURE WHERE HE WON THE BATTLE AT THE CURE FACILITY.

 

[The Guard]

Based on what evidence. That all powerful group you mentioned couldn't even successfully raid a pharmaceutical company.

Yes, their efforts failed, because the X-Men were present. If the X-Men weren't present, though, or if they were defeated, and the Brotherhood won the battle, who would stop them?

It's hillarious that you even dare to mention Phoenix being on the brotherhood's side since she was as great a danger to the brotherhood as she was to everyone else. The first wave of Magneto's so-called superpowered mutants got taken out by the marines. A large portion of the other brotherhood members were taken out by an X-Men member who came out of retirement(Beast) and 3 X-Men members(Colosus, Kitty, Iceman) who had technically become a part of the team hours before arriving at Al-catraz.

So what you're saying is that these "random mutants" you speak of would compare to Beast, Wolverine, and the others?

In X2 it is obvious from the cerebro scenes that 40 to 50% of the world is made up of mutants.

(Falls over laughing)
How you can say that is "obvious" is beyond me.

It is silly for you to think that apart from the X-Men, the rest of the most high powered mutants in the world or even in the US, decided to join Magneto's army.

No, and I never said they'd JOIN him, I said they probably would be hard-pressed to STOP him. Odds are that the other mutants with powers either hate human beings, or aren't trained like the X-Men.

First of all Magneto never had control of Jean so your nuke comparison is horrible. This would be like a country that has nuclear weapons but, no means of firing them threatening a country with nuclear weapons that can be fired.

So now we're assuming that every mutant who would stand against Magneto and his Brotherhood would know the intimate details of Magneto and Jean's personal relationship? For all the mutant population of the world knows, he CAN "fire" Dark Phoenix. She's there, marching with the Brotherhood, standing with them at the battle. For all anyone knows, Dark Phoenix is a member of Magneto's Brotherhood of Mutants, and takes orders from Magneto.

God forbid the writers to keep Magneto's logical and ingenius scheming consistent with X1 and X2.

Magneto didn't do what was easiest or the most logical in X-MEN, either. Magneto's plot in X2 is debatable as to it's ingenuity. All he does is take advantage of Stryker's weapon and Xavier's attempt to kill all the humans. That's not ingenius, that's opportunistic and obvious. Maybe it takes some genius to change the panels around. Regardless, nice try.

Give me a break. I saw scenes of Wolverine, Colosus, and Beast being surrounded by mutants who must have possessed the mutant powers of getting their asses kicked if you consider that a power. Kitty took out a mutant with the mutant power of having weird looking eyes. Storm and Iceman were the only X-Men who actually fought brotherhood members who weren't wimps.

So you just assume that none of the mutants they fought had useful powers? A ton of them could leap. One could breathe lava. Callisto has obvious ability. Ditto Quill, Juggernaut, and Pyro. Boy, I wish I was a wimp who could breathe lava. This, children, is called "lack of an imagination and the ability to reason".

This is believable. So Magneto and his army all sat on their collective asses doing nothing to prepare themselves for the assualt on Al-catraz.

Who cares? I mean seriously. "We didn't see multiple scenes of Magneto training his army to fight!" Cry about it.

You tell me there is a pattern without giving me a shread of evidence. You tell me that Jean motivations are simply the words power and control. If that's the case then she truely is nothing more than a zombie in the film.

Sort of. She's a creature of instinct. Zombies definitely fall into that category. So yes, she's kind of like a zombie. Except she has immense powers that zombies don't tend to have.

Of course this contradicts her ability to focus on using her powers for extended periods of time to control and destroy things. It also, makes the actions that resulted from her motivations even more unclear. Lazy writing and bad filmmaking.

Lack of imagination and an ability to suspend disbelief or reason properly, so he's pulling the string...

No kidding. What's funny is your above commentary does not suggest or even hint at a pattern. In fact it's barely a theory that does not address the heart of the matter. I always wanted to know why did Jeans powers get out of control to the extent of Cyclops and Xavier dying. But, not out of control to the extent of killing Magneto, Wolverine, and Storm. I have already stated my explaination for why Jean conveniently lost control of her powers in these ways and it is not a theory. It is a fact that Rothman wanted all these things to happen this way regardless of how confusing it might be to an audience.

Wow, your theory about the writers and studio deciding what Jean did is brilliant. Just like Bruce Wayne's parents died in BATMAN BEGINS because the writers wanted it to happen. Teach us more, Pullstring!

Power and control. It is, and has always been, the heart of the Dark Phoenix Saga. It must suck not to be able to figure something so simple out.

As I said, in my opinion, X-MEN and X2 are far superior to X-MEN: THE LAST STAND, but, like you, I do believe that there are some nice elements to the third installment.To be honest with you, I actually liked the movie quite a bit—my only complaint is that it was far too short for a movie with far too much going on in it (and the fact that Halle Berry is a terrible actress). I would've liked for it to have been split into at least two different movies: one featuring the Phoenix and the other featuring the cure.

And so you said you wouldn't be caught defending it why, exactly?

If what you said is true, [/b]then[/b] I'm a little disappointed.

I'm still baffled as to why you would say this, even leaving open the option that I said it.

Can't stick to debate without resorting to snide comments?

Sure. But it's less fun. And the fact is, around here it often is "in one ear and out the other".

Your forgetting the fact that X3 would've been a hell of a lot longer than it was had Singer directed. And less characters.

Assumption. For all we know, FOX would have cut the film like they did X-MEN, DAREDEVIL, ELEKTRA, THE FANTASTIC FOUR...half their other movies...it's almost like there's a pattern there. It doesn't really matter that Singer's X3 might have been 30 to 45 minutes longer. It's still a ton of characters, it still would have been incredibly difficult to flesh out all of them, or too many of them, period. Again, he did not exactly excel at it in X2 with far fewer characters, even when Cyclops was removed from two thirds of the movie..

Your assuming he would add more characters to the Brotherhood.

He introduced two new villains in X2, why wouldn't he add more members to the Brotherhood (which was set up to return in X3)? Bigger movie, obvious battle/action sequences needed. If Singer didn't want to add more villains, I can guarantee you FOX would have. We would have seen at least one more villain beyond Magneto, Mystique and Pyro in Singer's X3. And since Singer apparently wanted to use the Hellfire Club, that's four more right there.

And odds are, this movie would have stuck with the Phoenix storyline, and nothing with the cure. Which means we wouldn't have had other filler characters, like Arclight, Quill and possibly Juggernaut. Which would mean more time for Gambit, Angel, Beast and Emma.

But Gambit, Beast, Angel and Emma are four characters. You're saying you can lose three filler characters from the story and somehow gain the screentime to flesh out four new ones?

And I didn't say he would be fully fleshed out. But his character wouldn't have been forgotten as he was in X3. Plus he probably would have been more in character.

You forgot Angel in X3?

Why exactly do you think that he would have been more in character? Singer presented a Rogue and Storm (and even Iceman) who weren't really all that close characterwise to their comic book counterparts. Why would he have just done justice to Angel?

Yes, but we actually saw Cyclops destroying the Sentinel. And it was only there to make Wolverine more badass, point blank.

Hey, that's great. But the issue was not whether we saw it or not. The issue was that Sentinels standing around is a classic comic book thing. And since you agreed, I see no reason to further discuss this topic.

If Singer would have stuck strictly to the Phoenix Saga (as many of us assume he would have) where would the room for those characters, other than Emma, come from?

Exactly.

Gambit wasn't even around yet during the time of the original Phoenix Saga. He didn't arrive until about 12 years later. Though Beast and Angel were around, it is my understanding that they don't play major arcs in the saga. Emma... yes, as Singer obviously could have gone Hellfire Club route. But then again, if we focus strictly on the Phoenix Saga, and introduce the Hellfire Club, then what exactly is it again that Magneto and the Brotherhood is doing?

I don't think they considered this. Singer is, after all, a god.

X-Men 3 could not have just solely focused on the Phoenix Saga. Something else had to happen. And though a lot of people have suggested it, leaving the Phoenix for a potential part 4 is not a good idea either. Many casual viewers might not know about the Phoenix, but we do... and even then, many casual viewers DO know about the Phoenix Saga... at least the basics (Jean coming back from the dead). You set that up. Again, like the Brotherhood's open plot arcs, you can't just ignore the open plot arc of Phoenix and do something else.

I suppose you could have had her come back as Phoenix...and then had her become Dark Phoenix in X4. But there would be no guarantees the cast would want to stick around that long.

If you toss the Hellfire Club into the mix, that adds even ANOTHER bad guy to the mix. Then you're still going to add in Angel, Beast, and still use Gambit? That'd be even more cluttered than what we got.

Four more bad guys, henchmen or not. Exactly. It simply wouldn't have been possible to do much "fleshing out".

Certain things were said about Gambit by Singer's creative team that make me really doubt their desire to put him into the films. Angel and Beast I believe we would have gotten still. But if Singer's plot focused on the Phoenix Saga the way you say, what exactly would have been their roles?

Good point. The Cure allowed both Beast and Angel to come into the story in relevant roles. Where does Beast/Angel come from in the Phoenix Saga? Does Beast just return to the X-Mansion after a long absense and have no relevant arc? Does Angel just show up?

And if Singer implemented a secondary arc (just as Kinberg & Penn did), then it would end up about the same as what we got.

Exactly.
I fail to see how Singer could have fleshed everyone out with the following characters almost surely in the film:
Xavier
Wolverine
Cyclops
Jean/Phoenix
Storm
Iceman
Rogue

Add Beast, Angel and Colossus as potential X-Men to be added into the mix. Maybe Gambit. The Brotherhood would have almost certainly featured Magneto, Mystique and Pyro at least (given the events of X2), and it's a good bet that Juggernaut would have shown up in Singer's X3. Let alone the Hellfire Club or human characters like Bolivar Trask, The President, or anyone like that. All those characters require screentime.

Singer and his writers couldn't or didn't flesh out 12-13 characters in X2. What makes you all think he could flesh out/do justice to 15 to 20? Even if Storm was dropped from the film, even if Cyclops was dropped from the film, even if Gambit wasn't introduced, even if Colossus and Juggernaut weren't around...and even if he didn't use any of the Hellfire Club (And people, realistically, what are the odds of all that?), Bryan Singer would still have around the same number of characters he had to deal with in X2 to flesh out.

 

[The Guard]

Edited.

 

[Boba_Fett_123]

I have an idea. Everyone, ignore Guard. He's just insulting everyone anyway. Time to move on.

 

[The Kid]

This reminds me so much of the arguing over Fantastic Four. I just wrote it off as crap and moved on.

Same here... X3 was just a rushed out dumb forgettable cash-in. Just Let it die.

 

[Theweepeople]

I have an idea. Everyone, ignore Guard. He's just insulting everyone anyway. Time to move on.

You shouldn't let X3 lovers like The Guard bother you. Regardless of what he says his silly attempts at insulting me won't make me change my opinion about my X3. After that 7 day debate I had with X-Maniac I can't take any X3 lover opinions seriously. I'm responding to their posts simply because they are amusing. Though, I might take a vacation from this website for a week or longer like nightcrawler has done. I'm starting to enter a different stage of my life that will take away time from some of my hobbies. My priorities will go through significant changes in the next month.

This may be off subject but, I just got back from seeing Casino Royale. That movie kicked butt. Here is how I rank the movies I've seen this year on a scale from 1 to 10.

POTC2 9
Casino Royale 9.5
Superman 7.5
X3 6