Critics' X3 Film Reviews: Master Thread

A review from 'mweb.co.za':
http://www.mweb.co.za/news/?p=salonarticle&i=152500

"X-Men: The Last Stand"May 26, 2006 12:00:00 PMA new director takes too many liberties with the popular comic-book film franchise, but captures its poetry and pathos.Very early in "X-Men: The Last Stand," a fair-haired, preteen mutant -- we don't yet know his name -- stands in front of his bathroom mirror in tears, struggling to complete some barbaric grooming ritual that we can't quite see. His father bangs on the bathroom door, knowing, as we do, that the boy is trying to hide something -- but what? The camera gives us a few quick clues: First, a few household implements streaked with blood, which the boy has thrown to the floor, frustrated by their uselessness; then a scatter of white feathers on the pristine tiles. But the frustration on the kid's tear-stained face is even more distressing than the suggestion of his self-mutilation. So we're not particularly surprised or shocked when the camera shows us, not directly but reflected in the bathroom mirror, the bony, bloody bumps on this kid's back: He's been trying to hack the feathered wings that sprout from both sides of his bony spine -- to literally clip the very wings that set him apart from everyone else he knows. The brutal beauty of the image is a mini-encapsulation of the appeal of the "X-Men" comics, created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby more than 40 years ago: For lots of kids, these stories of mutants who band together to fight evil have been a metaphorical salve for the way our bodies turn against us in adolescence -- or maybe more specifically for the way, during adolescence and even beyond, our sexual impulses sometimes seem to be fighting against us. But what's most surprising about this small, lovely sequence in "X-Men: The Last Stand" is that it's been given to us by perhaps the last director we'd think would be capable of such bluntly effective poetry: Brett Ratner made a name for himself with the hugely popular but instantly forgettable "Rush Hour" movies, clattery action pictures with chunks of metal for brains. The first two pictures in the "X-Men" franchise, the smart, emotionally complex "X-Men" and the slightly less rich but no less entertaining "X2: X-Men United," were both directed by Bryan Singer, who clearly understood the lush emotional possibilities of the material. I suspect many fans of the first two pictures feared, as I did, that Ratner would simply make a mess of the third. The good news is that "The Last Stand" is only half a mess -- and even with all its flaws, it's an enjoyable diversion that shows both respect and affection for the formidable legacy of the "X-Men" comics. That's not to say that Ratner and his screenwriters, Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn, haven't taken some bodacious liberties with the source material. "The Last Stand" is based partly on "The Dark Phoenix Saga," by Chris Claremont and John Byrne, an operatically intense work in which Dr. Jean Grey, or Phoenix (played in the movies by Famke Janssen), becomes a Kali-like creature whose destructive impulses are strong enough to obliterate whole solar systems -- but who also still has the physical and, to an extent, the emotional makeup of the "good" Phoenix, which means her colleagues are torn between destroying her and saving her. If radical departure from the original text is going to rob you of sleep, don't even bother to see "X-Men: The Last Stand": Ratner uses only the essential ideas of "The Dark Phoenix Saga," and he enlarges certain characters' roles while diminishing others. But while he could have stuck a bit more closely to the "Dark Phoenix" narrative than he did, "The Last Stand" at least retains some of the spirit of the source material. And particularly in the finale, Ratner manages to capture some of its majesty. In fact, the biggest problem with "The Last Stand" isn't that it lacks feeling; it's simply that it's too cluttered with characters -- characters that we'd like to see more of -- to have the emotional resonance it should. There's a lot going on here, and Ratner pedals fast to cram it all in. Cyclops (James Marsden), still grieving over his fiancée Jean's death, discovers that she's still alive, in a manner of speaking: She looks and sounds like Jean, but, as Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart), the mutants' leader and good-guy role model, explains, she isn't the same Jean all the X-Men mutants used to know and love. She's a creature reduced to her most elemental components, "all desire, and joy, and rage," as he puts it. What's more, a fat-cat captain of industry, Warren Worthington II (Michael Murphy) -- the father of the boy we met in that early scene, who has grown up to be Angel (Ben Foster) -- is pushing a "cure" for mutancy, which will at last give the mutants a chance to be like everyone else. But is that what they want? And if some do make that choice, will they be viewed as traitors by others of their kind? Magneto (Ian McKellen), Charles Xavier's onetime friend and now rival, believes the cure is a danger to mutants everywhere -- a Holocaust survivor, he's ever mindful of humans' potential to commit genocide -- and hopes to harness Phoenix's dark powers in a war against the humans. The inherent possibilities in those infinitely interlocking stories are so vast that Ratner can only touch on them. The other problem is that he's simply working with too many characters. "The Last Stand" introduces several characters new to the movie franchise (though not, of course, to the comic-book series): In addition to Angel, there's Ellen Page's Kitty Pryde, who can walk through walls; Vinnie Jones' Juggernaut, a witty reinvention of the circus strongman; and Kelsey Grammer's Beast, a furry, blue tough guy who's also a charismatic and eloquent diplomat. (Tucked into the margins are Eric Dane's Multiple Man and Dania Ramieriz's Callisto, who can instantly read the powers of her fellow mutants.) Ratner also, of course, has to make room for all the old favorites, including Halle Berry's Storm (who has more lines than she's ever gotten in either of the two previous pictures, and yet barely any more presence), Rebecca Romijn's sleek blue Mystique, Anna Paquin's Rogue, whose touch has the power to kill, and Hugh Jackman's cigar-chomping townie roughhouser, Wolverine, with his adamantine claws and ability to heal his own wounds instantaneously. "The Last Stand" is a hugely ambitious picture, and it would have been far more successful if Ratner had scaled it down to focus more on the interaction between the characters. Because despite a jazzy destructo-sequence in which Phoenix unleashes all the fury of the universe, and a sprawling showpiece in which Magneto, clad in his ludicrous yet comfortingly nostalgic-looking art-deco bee helmet, bends the Golden Gate Bridge into a shape that pleases him, it's the relationships between the characters that mean the most in the "X-Men" universe. Ratner is sensitive to those relationships; the problem is that he just doesn't give himself, or his actors, the space to explore them. Some of the characters appear only as afterthoughts. And even after they undergo changes that could fundamentally affect our feelings for them, they're simply dropped from the plot. After one such major transformation, Magneto glances disparagingly at the now-ordinary mutant and sneers: This creature has outlived its usefulness and, to him, is no longer beautiful. The moment is potent for the way it cuts straight through Magneto's hypocrisy -- his obsession with the rights of mutants renders him unwilling, or unable, to recognize the individuality of humans. But Ratner barely allows the moment to resonate -- he doesn't have that much time to spare. And the character in question virtually disappears from the movie. There's also not nearly enough of Rogue, who, for reasons that are deeply poignant, would find a "cure" irresistible: She's unable to touch anyone she loves, including her boyfriend, Iceman (Shawn Ashmore). But again, the picture simply careers off that subplot as if it were a pinball-machine bumper. It's weird, too, that Janssen's Phoenix, so pivotal in the story, doesn't have many lines, or even many significant scenes. Janssen isn't merely a pretty actress: Her finely chiseled beauty is its own kind of vitality. But aside from a crucial scene with Wolverine, in which she seduces him in a way that the "real" Jean Grey never would, she barely registers. At least not until the movie's climax, where Ratner manages, almost miraculously, to combine action and pathos in a way that makes the movie's flaws recede, even if only temporarily. Ratner is fully attuned to the emotional underpinnings that have made the X-Men comic books so enduring, but he seems to have been distracted by the challenges posed by the comics' narrative complexity. "X-Men: The Last Stand" is more rushed and jumbled than it needs to be. Even so, scenes like that early one, in which Angel tries to make himself over into someone he's not, suggest that there's more to Ratner than many of us would ever have suspected. What would "The Last Stand" have been like if only Ratner had slowed down and taken one panel at a time?

It got 1/5 stars!
 
X-traordinary!, 24 May 2006
100.gif

Author:
redoddball from United States
X-3 is as good of a movie, regardless of genera, as I've seen in years. Everything here is larger, broader, more developed and complex, mutated(yes mutated!) beyond all expectations.

Brett Ratner has delivered a rarity in Hollywood – a sequel that not only outperforms its predecessors but one that gives the audience credit. If you really want to enjoy the subtleties of X3 you should see the first two X-Men first, because although events from X2 are referenced, no time is wasted explaining them to the audience. Instead of wasting time with exposition, we're treated to character and story development, expanding the X-Men saga rather than retelling it for everyone whom missed the first installments. Personally, I'm pleasantly amazed that a major studio allowed the release of a blockbuster sequel that doesn't cater to the lowest common denominator. After all, if you didn't feel the need to see an instant classic like X2, why should this one accommodate you? It's refreshing to be treated as something other than a drooling movie-going moron. X-Men works on so many levels, more fun then you can handle but emotional to the tenth degree.
 
RagingTempest said:
X-traordinary!, 24 May 2006
100.gif

Author:
redoddball from United States
X-3 is as good of a movie, regardless of genera, as I've seen in years. Everything here is larger, broader, more developed and complex, mutated(yes mutated!) beyond all expectations.

Brett Ratner has delivered a rarity in Hollywood – a sequel that not only outperforms its predecessors but one that gives the audience credit. If you really want to enjoy the subtleties of X3 you should see the first two X-Men first, because although events from X2 are referenced, no time is wasted explaining them to the audience. Instead of wasting time with exposition, we're treated to character and story development, expanding the X-Men saga rather than retelling it for everyone whom missed the first installments. Personally, I'm pleasantly amazed that a major studio allowed the release of a blockbuster sequel that doesn't cater to the lowest common denominator. After all, if you didn't feel the need to see an instant classic like X2, why should this one accommodate you? It's refreshing to be treated as something other than a drooling movie-going moron. X-Men works on so many levels, more fun then you can handle but emotional to the tenth degree.

Since when did IMDB user comments become official critic reviews? . . . :rolleyes: This might as well be just another fan review.
 
TheSumOfGod said:
I can't believe X3 made $120 million during the week-end... :eek:

I wish Marvel took some of that money, and waved it in Hitch's face to draw faster! :(
 
xwolverine2 said:
LOL..WTF!?!?

Bryan Hitch, the artist for The Ultimates, there are so many delays for that comic it is amazing. :(
 
PWN3R RANGER said:
Bryan Hitch, the artist for The Ultimates, there are so many delays for that comic it is amazing. :(
************************************************
 
I just checked Yahoo, and the average grade is B-.

Critics Reviews Average Grade: B-

Source Brief Review Grade*
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Eleanor Ringel Gillespie "Not Xceptional, but still quite entertaining." more... B-
Boston Globe
Wesley Morris "At a comparatively slender 108 minutes, the movie manages to cram in even more, without producing outrage at the short shrift some characters will get." more... B
Chicago Sun-Times
Roger Ebert "I liked the action, I liked the absurdity, I liked the incongruous use and misuse of mutant powers..." more... B
Chicago Tribune
Michael Wilmington "It's not stuporous, and it's not super." more... B-
E! Online "...Ratner sticks close to the look and feel of the first two, even while amping up the action with some spectacular set pieces..." more... A-
Entertainment Weekly
Lisa Schwarzbaum "This is interesting stuff. So why does The Last Stand feel driven to dumb itself down, as if embarrassed by its own ideas?" more... B-
filmcritic.com
Sean O'Connell "It's too much material for one movie. Last Stand has as many characters as a deck has cards." more... C
Hollywood Reporter
Michael Rechtshaffen "Super visual effects aside, the trilogy's final chapter is a pale mutation of its predecessors." more... C
New York Post
Lou Lumenick "The Last Stand isn't awful, but Ratner lacks Singer's subtlety and ability to cleanly navigate convoluted story lines crammed with super-powered characters." more... B-
New York Times
Manohla Dargis "...generically serviceable..." more... C
ReelViews
James Berardinelli "...the first blockbuster of the 2006 summer season that hasn't caused me to shake my head with disappointment." more... B
Rolling Stone
Peter Travers "...the third and weakest chapter in the X-Men series..." more... C
San Francisco Chronicle
Mick LaSalle "...a cut above the previous two X-Men movies in that it comes up with an arresting premise..." more... C
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
William Arnold "...an eye-filling fantasy extravaganza and a big crowd-pleaser." more... B
USA Today
Claudia Puig "...expands on the themes of discrimination and alienation explored in the first two films, and still retains the franchise's signature kick-butt action features." more... B-


...........Guys, with awesome earnings and B average ratings, this movie will most likely get another sequel!! YEAH!! It better not be in like 4 years!! Next year please!! I just checked the user reviews, and the average is B+.
 
Lil_Flip246 said:
I just checked Yahoo, and the average grade is B-.

Critics Reviews Average Grade: B-

Source Brief Review Grade*
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Eleanor Ringel Gillespie "Not Xceptional, but still quite entertaining." more... B-
Boston Globe
Wesley Morris "At a comparatively slender 108 minutes, the movie manages to cram in even more, without producing outrage at the short shrift some characters will get." more... B
Chicago Sun-Times
Roger Ebert "I liked the action, I liked the absurdity, I liked the incongruous use and misuse of mutant powers..." more... B
Chicago Tribune
Michael Wilmington "It's not stuporous, and it's not super." more... B-
E! Online "...Ratner sticks close to the look and feel of the first two, even while amping up the action with some spectacular set pieces..." more... A-
Entertainment Weekly
Lisa Schwarzbaum "This is interesting stuff. So why does The Last Stand feel driven to dumb itself down, as if embarrassed by its own ideas?" more... B-
filmcritic.com
Sean O'Connell "It's too much material for one movie. Last Stand has as many characters as a deck has cards." more... C
Hollywood Reporter
Michael Rechtshaffen "Super visual effects aside, the trilogy's final chapter is a pale mutation of its predecessors." more... C
New York Post
Lou Lumenick "The Last Stand isn't awful, but Ratner lacks Singer's subtlety and ability to cleanly navigate convoluted story lines crammed with super-powered characters." more... B-
New York Times
Manohla Dargis "...generically serviceable..." more... C
ReelViews
James Berardinelli "...the first blockbuster of the 2006 summer season that hasn't caused me to shake my head with disappointment." more... B
Rolling Stone
Peter Travers "...the third and weakest chapter in the X-Men series..." more... C
San Francisco Chronicle
Mick LaSalle "...a cut above the previous two X-Men movies in that it comes up with an arresting premise..." more... C
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
William Arnold "...an eye-filling fantasy extravaganza and a big crowd-pleaser." more... B
USA Today
Claudia Puig "...expands on the themes of discrimination and alienation explored in the first two films, and still retains the franchise's signature kick-butt action features." more... B-


...........Guys, with awesome earnings and B average ratings, this movie will most likely get another sequel!! YEAH!! It better not be in like 4 years!! Next year please!! I just checked the user reviews, and the average is B+.

I think it will be 4 years since the Wolverine and Magneto spin-offs are next!!!:( :down
 
X3 was awesome to me. Within the fanboy bubble known as Superhero hype there are deaf ears to the wide acceptance of Brett Ratner and X3. It was a fun film and it was well directed and looked beautiful. It wasn't perfect but not many films are.
 
newwaveboy87 said:
i do not want another sequel.

Again...don't watch it then when it comes out. I think you need to remember the title of Ratners other film...."Money Talks".
 
I personally don't blame Brett Ratner at all for this clusterf***. I re-saw Red Dragon two nights ago, that man can make a good, high quality movie. I blame the screenplay and the time restraints (and Tom Rothman, obviously). :o
 
Advanced Dark said:
X3 was awesome to me. Within the fanboy bubble known as Superhero hype there are deaf ears to the wide acceptance of Brett Ratner and X3. It was a fun film and it was well directed and looked beautiful. It wasn't perfect but not many films are.
Critics & naysayers be damned! I loved it.
 
Advanced Dark said:
Again...don't watch it then when it comes out. I think you need to remember the title of Ratners other film...."Money Talks".
so far, Arad is sticking to the "no X4" statement. :up:
while i know that could, and probably will, change they seem to be more interested in going on with the spin-offs. i am ok with this.
 
From Audacity Magazine:

A Review of X-Men: The Last Stand from a Disability Perspective

By Kara Sheridan
Driving to the theater to catch the matinee showing of X-men: The Last Stand, I heard some pretty dismal reviews expressing what many expect from a third movie in any series.

It can be difficult to match or top one, much less two, previous blockbusters. But, unlike many who rushed to the theaters on the day of the film’s debut, I have next to no interest in the literal X-men politics or how closely this movie recaptures the years of comics many viewers have devoured.

Instead, I was ecstatic from the parallels I noticed in the previews with many of the underlying themes of the Disability Movement. It’s safe to say that my boyfriend and I were probably one of the few in the theater that noticed nearly every twist and turn of the action-packed movie symbolically portray several issues that disability activists fight today with equal fervor.

Of course, I’d like more to be aware of our issues, but it was also interesting to enjoy a different side of a film from hundreds of fellow movie-goers. Perhaps, that’s the reason that my review is completely contrasted to many of the critics I’ve heard share their opinions.

Definitely no worry of spoilers from me since I’d have a difficult time updating from the last movie if I was asked to! But one thing that everyone sees in this movie is the premise of the cure and to what degree people will sacrifice their defining differences in exchange for greater acceptance within society.

The X-men and people like them are classified in this fictional world as mutants, conveniently matching the genetic explanation of my own condition! In this sequel, the humans (non-mutants) have developed a cure to permanently squelch the many differences among mutants.

Most have what would be considered positive powers, like the ability to manipulate metal, read thoughts, or animalistic strength.

But all of these attributes come at the price of marginalization and fear from the general public. Mutants have a representative within the Presidential cabinet of this world, who immediately expresses his concern when the announcement is made to the country that a cure is now available.

Mutants on both sides take the streets, whether it be standing in long lines for the cure or protesting to preserve the future of a culture.

One of the first questions raised in the movie is fairly obvious. If a cure for your particular disability was available tomorrow, would you seek to acquire it? For the sake of the principle, let’s exclude considerations such as the improbability that past body changes as a result of your disability could ever be altered.

At the moment the cure was injected in this hypothetical condition, all mutant differences from the majority were eradicated. Many, if not all, of us have already pondered this question and likely have a determined opinion on what our personal decision on this matter might be.

The representative of Mutant Affairs also had strong feelings along these lines, which strongly opposed the notion of cure.

Still, one of the more subtle, yet poignant, moments in the film occurs when this character touches the boy from whom the cure was developed.

A simple handshake temporarily morphs the representative’s hand into normal function and appearance. Without speaking, the character’s gaze at his now normal hand brings about the question of whether even the most hard core of our activists might at least temporarily waiver on the same question were it to actually be raised in our world.

As the movie erupts into a few battles, another interesting parallel is drawn reflecting many recent controversies of the disability community that have elicited quarreling within the culture and the ever present danger of apathy.

Two groups of mutants are led throughout all three of these films, not as necessarily arch enemies, but as two parties of sorts with differing agendas. For this reason, they often do square off, but they remain bonded by their mutant status.

The X-men are composed of a group of elite leaders, which fight for both the preservation of their culture and acceptance into the greater society. Their goal could be conceptualized as inclusion without assimilation. This group excitingly enough is led by a character in a wheelchair, Professor Xavier.

The opposing group is headed by primarily one staunch character, who uses the gathering of the masses of other mutants as his most potent weapon. These hundreds of other mutants have no name in neither the movie or within our context the disability movement.

It might be viewed that these individuals had not yet had the chance to develop their cultural identities or their most significant flaw might be in their previous apathy and lack of action to propel any agenda related to battling oppression.

Once they were rallied for a cause, many jumped upon the bandwagon without looking to the past or with considerations of the future. What does this say about our Disability Movement? Do you share similar frustrations with our apathetic members during times of war within the community?

Before seeing the film, take a guess at which side you predict will prevail?

Part of the fun in the experience of X-Men: The Last Stand was most certainly in finding my own meaning to the countless quite obvious underlying messages and questions of the film.

In this not-so-critical review, it was my aim to offer a teaser of just a few that you can consider. There are many more, including parents’ quests to accept their children’s disabilities and the variable of severity in considering the degree of disability.

I appreciated the questions posed instead of the feeling of a forced persuasion. You can truly enjoy the movie from many different angles and I would encourage anyone with an interest in the history and future of people with disabilities and the issues that surround our lives, both personal and political, to check it out and form your own parallels.

For those of you without an interest in digging deep to find barely there symbolism, rest assured! You’ll definitely connect the dots within the first few scenes of the movie.

Whether you find the movie overflowing with connections or simply relish in the action scenes, we can all appreciate the dialogue this film opens to consider these possibilities within the futures of our own societies.

What revelations do these questions and discussions reveal as you discuss them with friends, family, and perhaps most importantly, with yourself?
Source: http://audacitymagazine.com/audacity.php?op=article&y=grfx&v=&i=38&a=510
 
I caught this show, The Movie Show, a few days ago on SBS. The reviews were positive and the reviewers sounded like they liked the movie a lot. Sorry if it was posted before.

They both gave it 3 1/2, I think.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"