Cyclops fans we lost, my 2 cents

[The Guard]

Scott's the obstacle because Wolverine is the main character in the movies-by far-and the audience is supposed to identify with and cheer for him.

Here's your problem: you're viewing things that aren't meant to be taken at all in a black and white manner...in a black and white manner. No one's supposed to neccessarily CHEER for any one side of any issue. It's not that kind of movie, or franchise. It's conflict, with few judgements made about the nature of it by the writers and directors. You're supposed to think about Scott, Jean, and Wolverine, and about the nature of them as people and to each other, and form your own conclusions, but your own conclusions are not neccessarily right if they are simply "so and so is in the way". That's a far too simple view of the love triangle in X-Men.

Think about it. If they wanted you to just cheer for Wolverine, they wouldn't include the scenes where Jean is all "I love you so much!". And they wouldn't have Jean reject him, and him accept that. Duh.

Again, someone explain to me how Scott is being portrayed as "weak".

Did you forget the entire "good guy bad guy" scene from X2? The one where they tried to rip off Leia and Han on the Falcon in ESB? She chose Scott because he's dependable like a pet dog. But if Wolverine had been more attentive, he easily could have her and they imply that heavily.

You're kidding, right? There's no "You excite me I want you". There is: "Girls flirt with the dangerous guy, Logan. They don't take him home."

Yes, she chose Scott because he's a good guy who cares about her and about people, and not about his own pleasure. Is that supposed to be a bad thing? Translation of this line to Wolverine? "You amuse me, but I wouldn't take you to bed." Maybe he does excite her, but nothing beyond basic schoolyard flirtations, and obviously not more than Scott does. Or she would have welcomed the kiss, wouldn't she?

If you were a real fan of Cyclops, you'd never defend this stuff. I've talked to many Cyclops fans about this and none of them have defended it one bit. Clearly your claim that you are a fan of his is not true.

Lord, you give them eyes, but apparently not half a brain. I'm not "defending" this stuff. Do you see me celebrating the fact that Cyclops has been relegated to second stringer in favor of Wolverine? No. I'm just saying there are reasons for it that don't neccessarily involve studio conspiracies to personally offend you.

Actually Han and Luke share about the same amount of screentime in all the movies.

Not in the trilogy I watched. Not even close. I'd love to simply go page by page through the scripts and prove you wrong, but it's hardly worth it. Answer me this: Which one is the main character, with more impact on the story, and who has the most story connections to the main protagonist and mentor figures? Oh. It's Luke.

If only they would have done that with Cyke and Wolverine. But then again, these guys are not in Lucas' league-especially OT Lucas.

They didn't do that with Han Solo and Luke, either.

As soon as Wolverine comes to the X-mansion, Jean is fascinated by him and attracted to him.

Well hells bells...who'd have thought a redblooded woman would be attracted to a rugged, handsome man who pays flattering attention to her? Certainly not anyone with half a brain! You realize, of course, that a human being (or mutant, I imagine) can be attracted to someone and still love someone else more and know that someone else is right for you. Happens all the time.

It's made clear that all Wolverine has to do is try and she's his.

Really? Why, then, when Wolverine TRIES, does she reject him? Oh. Because you're WRONG! And it's a moot point, because Wolverine doesn't try, does he?

At the train station, Cyclops is incompetant.

Why? Because Toad sneak attacks him? Am I now to understand that everytime someone is surprised, they are incompetent? Then, is Wolverine incompetent when Sabertooth kicked his ass at the beginning of X-MEN, when he stabbed Rogue, when Magneto kicked his ass at the midpoint of X-Men, and Mystique kicked his ass at the end? Is he incompetent when Deathstrike was handing him his ass in X2? Will you think he's incompetent when Phoenix hands him his ass, and then Magneto does so...again?

At the Statue of Liberty he's portrayed as stupid.

"Stupid" why? Because he wanted to stop Magneto when they encountered him? At the time, the X-Men were ****ed. Magneto had them bound, and had Cyclops' visor. Cyclops' directive, "Storm, fry him." made perfect sense from a tactical point of view. While Magneto was right about "a bolt of lightning into a huge copper conductor", think about it: Had Storm indeed fried Magneto, Magneto would have been stopped, and the machine's threat would have been stopped. At the cost of the X-Men's lives, perhaps (not neccessarily for sure), but those are the breaks in war. Scott made a tactical decision that would have averted a disaster, period. And that was his job. That's not stupid. That's tactical thinking in the heat of the moment.

His one moment of respect was blasting Magneto.

And saving Wolverine and Rogue. And revealing his feelings about Xavier and the students. And outlining the plan of attack on Liberty. And flying the jet in undetected. And spotting the machine in the torch. And saving Jean's life. And coming up with the plan to stop the machine. And saving the day via blasting Magneto and learning to work with the man he didn't like. Did you even watch X-MEN?

In X2, he's completely worthless and his inability to protect Xavier is what sets the entire storyline in motion. He's been crapped on for 2 movies now, and X3 is just the final blow.

Inability to protect Xavier...right. Deathstrike was portrayed as an extremely capable martial artist/assassin. She even gave Wolverine trouble. And...lest we forget, she essentially surprised, and possibly drugged, Cyclops.

So, as we've seen, while Cyclops wasn't portrayed as perfect, he wasn't incompetent. No more so than say...Wolverine.

I don't sugar coat my opinions, if that's what you mean.

No, what I mean is...do you always poo poo a character that is written less than perfectly? As in, a character shown to fail, or not succeed totally?

And what is there to disprove? She kicks his ass, makes him look like a punk, and then he's captured.

That means "Cyclops got beat by Deathstrike". That doesn't make his character incompetent. There are more times when he is shown to be competent.

If she beat him after a good fight, that'd be one thing. but she took him out like he was a joke.

She did beat him after a good fight, after he kicked the crap out of the guards there. And then she surprised him. Since he'd never seen her before, he did the logical thing. He prepared an optic blast, and she leapt ACROSS THE ROOM (which he couldn't possibly have expectd), and kicked him in the face. Wait...how about Xavier? Is he incompetent because he got gassed?

Therefore the moviegoer has but one conclusion they can come to-that he is a joke.

If the moviegoer is an unforgiving idiot who wants their heroes to always, always, always succeed in every scene...maybe. But he's clearly not a joke.

Disprove it. And I don't mean with quotes of their lies like "Cyclops fans should be pleased with this movie.", etc.

Well, for starters, I can talk intelligently about his character. Secondly, one method of "proof" is that I continue to say "I love Cyclops" and to find the good in his portrayal in this franchise, or the comics, or what have you. I can tell you what I love about him, but you have yet to ask. You just assume I'm not a fan because I quite enjoy the version we've seen so far (which is incredibly, incredibly ignorant of you). What you have done, is make ridiculous and assinine statements about my "hatred of Cyclops", which, btw, I have never once shown. Unless you can find an example of it. Which you can't. Because I love Cyclops.

I don't know why they don't call these movies by what their real title should be. Marketing, I guess. I think that the best title for them should be

No, trust me, if FOX/Marvel wanted to make a Wolverine film sans the X-Men, they'd make it (They are, and oh, uh, ELEKTRA, anyone?). Look up the history of Marvel's VENOM project. They have no problem with making one character from a mythos into a movie.

Well there is always a possibility for an X4, depending on where Fox wants to take the franchise. Perhaps they may wait a few year to reinvent the series for future characters.

Like they waited a few years to make X2 and then X3? Hmm, maybe?

Aside from the first film, Cyclops had a very brief role in X2. He appeared in the begining and then was captured only to show up at the very end. Fox would recieve a large backlash if Cyclops was written out entirely, considering how vital he is to the overall team.

He may have had a brief role in X2 and X3, but, as I said, he has an important arc. Cyclops/Wolverine and Cyclops/Wolverine?Jean has been a large part of this franchise. FOX is receiving a large backlash now, and wait...the movie seems to indicate that he's not THAT vital to this version of the X-Men. So much for that argument.

Huh?! You have completely jumped off the entire point. I could care less about the accuracy of the characterization, my only point is, there is no need to focus (everything) on one character simply because he has popularity

Well, pardon me for not just staying on one point in a broad discussion. They aren't focusing on Wolverine because of his popularity. They are focusing on him because he's the most interesting and relevant character to focus on. And they aren't ONLY focusing on him.

Once again you missed my entire point. I am well aware that if Jackman was to potray Wolverine in another film, it would be the very same character we have already seen, be for real! Once again this has nothing to do with making one character the sole character in a trilogy.

You made a statement about a Wolverine film being able to perfectly characterize Wolverine. I pointed out the fallacy in that statement How is addressing one of your points missing it? If your only point is that Wolverine shouldn't be the only X-Man focused on, watch the damn movies. If your point is that Wolverine has been focused on too much, say so. But don't make stupid comments about "perfection" that are tangental to your point if you only want to discuss one point to begin with.

And regardless of all this...am I to understand that you don't care how accurate Cyclops or his role is to the comics, you just want to see as much of him as Wolverine?

And I find it rather amusing that you can always ignore what I am saying all because you have a clear fondness of Wolverine, funny that if the roles were reversed and Wolverine was simply sidelined you would probably be saying the same thing you accuse Cyclop fans of saying.

No, I wouldn't. I don't make stupid comments like "So and so wasn't explored at all" when one character has less screentime than another, but HAS been explored.

What have I ignored that you have said? Not AGREEING with you is not IGNORING you, and how I feel has little to do with a favoritism for Wolverine. I've said before, I much prefer Cyclops to Wolverine. I'm not ignoring anything. You're simply WRONG about Cyclops being portrayed as "jilted". Either you picked the wrong word in using "jilted", or you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of X-MEN and X2.

You mean X1 correct? since he is actually has more screen time in that one. He is barely in X2 and based off of whats been said he dies early in X3, therefore you must mean film.

No, I mean X-MEN and X2. Cyclops' character and his relationship to characters and to the mythology is explored in both. Exploring a character is exploring a character. You don't need ****loads of screentime to do so. Case in point, The Scarecrow was explored in BATMAN BEGINS, and didn't have that much screentime.

Therefore as long as the producers put the love triangle in there, then that makes everything alright?

Where the hell did I say anything of that nature?

Common sense will tell you that Scott cares for Jean and aside from that love triangle Scott really serves no real purpose, considering that he is the X-Men's field leader, I would have liked for that to be explored more, we only see it briefly in X-Men, but thats about it.

Then he serves no other purpose in X2, beyond his development with Jean and his few action sequences (which rock), and his time with Wolverine, and how about that? It's sort of how Nightcrawler serves no purpose beyond the basic message of the film, and some cool action, or how Storm serves no purpose beyond cool action and the basic message of the film, and Bobby...I think you see where I'm going with this.

Tell me, what purpose would you like him to serve beyond "Teacher", "leader of the X-Men", "surrogate son of Xavier and believer in the dream", "rival/foil for Wolverine", and "lover and best friend for Jean"? That's what he IS. He did, btw, serve as "mind-controlled threat" in X2.

I'm still wondering about this so-called misinterpretation you claim I have. As a matter of fact I never even stated that elements of the comics were not present, you said I did! The only things I'm disputing is his overall screen time, thats basically it. I can count several characters that had alot more screen time than Cyclops.

I'm not saying you misinterpreted how much screentime he has. You said...and I quote: "It appears that the only purpose Scott has within the trilogy is to play the jilted boyfriend of Jean and rival of Wolverine, but I wouldn't say Scott's character has been explored, how did you come to that conclusion?"

That is what I call a misinterpretation of a situation. I.E, you are incorrect. That is, you have misinterpreted, or choose not to see that Scott, while not being much more, is more in this franchise. That is not the only purpose Scott has within the trilogy.

He is Xavier's surrogate son, a follower of Xavier's dream, the leader (one of the leaders) of the X-Men with tactical knowledge and calm in battle, Jean Grey's lover and best friend, and a foil to Wolverine. This is far more than "jilted boyfriend".

I'm well aware this isn't the comics, and nor was I expecting them to be, however it doesn't really need to be told from Wolverines point of view, that is just how you prefer it and if Cyclop fans are displeased with his lack of screentime and the fact that his leadership capabilities was barely displayed then they have that right.

It's not neccessarily, how I prefer it, I'm just saying, that's what they're doing. Fair enough, Cyclops fans are displeased about his lack of screentime. And if they want to whine about that, then they can whine about that. But don't confuse "Cyclops has had less screentime than others" with "Nothing about Cyclops has been explored". Because that simply isn't true.

And as for his leadership capabilities having been "barely displayed", how many scenes does the average fan need to see of Cyclops heading into battle and giving orders and tactical stuff and such to see that, as a character, HE POSSESSES LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS and IS THE X-MEN'S LEADER? We haven't seen an "I'll take care of them" moment since X-MEN. Does that mean Scott has given up on all that? Hardly. Fans are fickle, and seem often to to have selective memories.

Like I said, we don't need to see it through his point of view, and I never thought we were seeing it from his perspective, that is just your way to justify why he is given to much screentime when it wasn't necessary.

No, it's not my "justification", it's actually words right out of Bryan Singer's mouth and the mouths of the writers, Hayter, Harris and Doughtery. Wolverine was meant to be our window to this version of the X-Men's world. It's not justifying anything, that's what the writers and directors intended from the beginning.

He is? Jackman is a good actor, but...................

He is. Notice I didn't say "top three" or anything of the sort, I said "one of the best actors". The man's incredibly talented. He has a fantastic Broadway career, a solid film career that is only improving, and I imagine that X3, THE FOUNTAIN and THE PRESTIGE will cement his status as one of the premiere actors.

They are banking on Wolverine because he is the most Popular not the most interesting. Others may not share that same view of Wolverine as you do, there are plenty of fans that think Wolverine is overrated.

Don't particular care. Know why? Because I've asked for reasons why he's overrated. No one's providing me with any. I've asked for characters that are more interesting and more complex. No one's provided me with any.

Thats not necessary because it appears that you bias towards other peoples views and their favorite characters. Its like you don't want to look at thinks from an objective perspective. And I don't have the time or the will to argue on whether one character was given more screentime than others even though its clearly obvious that one was

I have said not disputed for a second about who has more screentime than others. I'm not being objective? Perhaps I'm being too objective, and it is you and others who refuse to do so (the fact that I can see the good on all sides would tend to indicate this). I'm not arguing who has more screentime. Read the sentences I wrote, and take them literally. I did not say "other characters have had more scenes", I said OTHER CHARACTERS HAVE HAD NUMEROUS SCENES IN THIS FRANCHISE. Which is TRUE.

Please don't because its actually a waste. Rationalize it all you want.

Rationalize what?

Oh! and so the ONLY person able to serve in this capacity is Wolverine eh? For 3 whole movies right? Wolverine couldn't be the focal in X-Men and then another character take center stage for X2 and X3? Whatever

No, and if you pay any attention, you will notice that I never said "Wolverine is the only person who could fill this role", or "this is the only way to do it". I said "it makes perfect sense" for Wolverine to fill the role of protagonist. Didn't I? I.E, it makes perfect sense to build stories around a protagonist. That's what stories do. It would also make perfect sense for Cyclops to fill that role. Or Rogue. Or Jean. Or Storm. Or Xavier. Or anyone, really. The writers chose Wolverine for obvious reasons: he's a bit more visually interesting, complex, and has a more interesting and varied personality type.

 

[chaseter]

Longest post ever!

 

[The Guard]

Hardly.

 

[Aptman]

Longest post ever!

Posts this long just going back and forth between just two people, is what PM is for IMO. It just takes up room, and gets people (such as myself) to write about post length instead of post topic...

 

[The Guard]

Except that, gasp, the post is ON TOPIC!

 

[martinbluther]

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/748766162

 

[Logan Howlett]

So glad he got his ass dematierialized, hehe

 

[Banshee]

You know what, I'll see the movie, I may even enjoy it. Cyclops isn't evne my favorite character... Banshee, Angel, and Iceman come before him, but this pisses me off so much I almost hope the movie bombs just to show whoever screwed cyke over that it was a bad move. Infact, I hope I enjoy it cause of other awesome stuff like Shadowcat, Colossus, Ian's Magneto and more, but the movie tanks. I want to enjoy it, and I'm sure I'll probably still buy the DVD... But for Cyclops, I hope this movie TANKS.

 

[cyke93]

You know what, I'll see the movie, I may even enjoy it. Cyclops isn't evne my favorite character... Banshee, Angel, and Iceman come before him, but this pisses me off so much I almost hope the movie bombs just to show whoever screwed cyke over that it was a bad move. Infact, I hope I enjoy it cause of other awesome stuff like Shadowcat, Colossus, Ian's Magneto and more, but the movie tanks. I want to enjoy it, and I'm sure I'll probably still buy the DVD... But for Cyclops, I hope this movie TANKS.

As an x-men fan, I'm sure the movie will be great. I just got to disregard anything in which cyclops would've played a role, like anything that deals with jean. but since cyclops could've/should've played a major part in this film, then a majority of the film, i will not like. so i hope the movie does tank because cyclop's death was nothing more than political, whether scheduling had a problem/ or to make room for other characters (with bigger names attached to them)

However, as an x-men fan i will haver to turn my attention to the individual characters and not so much plot, such as bobby, angel, beast, etc. How these characters are portayed is what i will use to gauge my opinion of the movie.

 

[vanillacyke]

WTF???? Guard why the hell would you take the time to write that much? that seems boring, I could'nt even read past the first word. Go get laid.

 

[The Batman]

And the game of "Guardball" begins....

 

[Jennifer Walters]

Wow. Vanilla, such a mature post, just because someone can make a grammatically correct, intelligent post, ''it's boring" and they are therefore not getting laid and need to get laid?

Right.

 

[Sunstar]

OK i dont post alot, but i've been following this hole thing since word of his death leaked. I was not a big fan of the character nor do i read the comics just liked the movies & the 90s cartoon, but when i heard that they was actually going to kill him & so early in the movie i couldnt belive it. I thought surely they would change this after the fan backlash, hell who didnt, but thats not going to happen. If they had to kill him, it shouldve been at the end & when jean dies. But anyway yes fox screwed up, they couldve waited & made a really great movie but they didnt. Now i will not go see the movie, will it matter..............no. But i wont waste my money to see this great screw up. I hope the movie fails but it wont. If one good thing has come out of this for me its made me like the character more & im thinking about gettin some tpbs .Now this is just my opinion & wether it matters are not, i just felt like saying somthing. At least everyone tried to get their voices heard.

Don't curse the film just b/c Cyclops dies! I like Cyclops and I'm disappointed about his death but I'm not going to hope the film fails just b/c of it! Your attitude is very childish!

 

[KenK]

I'm still looking forward to the film, but the filmmakers deciding to kill of Cyclops is profoundly stupid. And furthermore, they KNOW fans will be pissed. They've acknowledged concerns about Cyclops' role in the film, and all they've done is give us fans the runaround. I've been hoping for this film to be good, 'cause one I LOVE the X-Men, it's the first comic I ever collected on a regular basis, and I've always been able to relate to it. But many things are clear to me:

*FOX has no intentions of making an X-Men film without Wolverine, as I think Laura Shuler-Donner has even been quoted as saying this.

*FOX screwed Singer. X2 made 85 million its opening weekend. In addition to securing the entire cast, wouldn't you re-up with Singer as well? As a result, Singer leaves to do Superman Returns, and takes just about everyone(minus the cast, of course) responsible for making X2 the blockbuster success it was.

*FOX cared more about coming out before Superman Returns than letting Singer finish SR, when he said he would have done X3 afterwards.

*FOX has never had any love for Cyclops. Sorry, Guard, but they've done nothing but punk Scott since day one. And X2 was worse, as he's gone for the entire second act of the film, and only comes back briefly to fight Jean while under mind control. Other than that, he exhibits zero leadership qualities. And despite the vein attempt to emphasize his relationship with Jean, X3 makes it clear that the studio wants Jean to be with Logan, or at least make him her emotional anchor. Watching the 7-minute preview with Cyclops' scene with Wolverine, it seemed to mirror the whole sentiment of fans and maybe even Marsden; Wolverine talking about about covering his ass and Cyclops sarcastically responding as to say, "take my place since you want it so bad." Marsden maintains that he always intended to return as Cyclops, while filmmakers kept giving the impression that he wasn't returning. Either he lied, or the studio lied. Given all the other factors, I'm guessing on the latter.

*And given the outcome of the film, should it be negative, blame will fall unfairly on Ratner. He's a good director, but people focus on his last film before doing X3 and have unjustly labeled him a hack.

 

[Cyclops-Summers]

Don't curse the film just b/c Cyclops dies! I like Cyclops and I'm disappointed about his death but I'm not going to hope the film fails just b/c of it! Your attitude is very childish!

Dont criticize his point of view!!!! He curses the film just because Cyke dies and doesnt participate at final battle... So ? that poses a problem to you ?
We dont see yet X3 but we know he dies, its very ridiculous and stupid, moreover in a plot including Dark Phoenix, doenst wear Xcostume, has a small role, doesnt possesse any action scene against ennemies, whereas all others X-men do, ..

For all these reasons he can hate the movie, he does what he want!! It's his point of view so stop your stupid words
You are childish!!! I hate when people dont respect feeling of the others, who criticize when others dont like what they like SO STOP

 

[FieryBalrog]

And the game of "Guardball" begins....

Aw man, beat me to it!

 

[LEX]

 

[Kurosawa]

Here's your problem: you're viewing things that aren't meant to be taken at all in a black and white manner...in a black and white manner. No one's supposed to neccessarily CHEER for any one side of any issue. It's not that kind of movie, or franchise. It's conflict, with few judgements made about the nature of it by the writers and directors. You're supposed to think about Scott, Jean, and Wolverine, and about the nature of them as people and to each other, and form your own conclusions, but your own conclusions are not neccessarily right if they are simply "so and so is in the way". That's a far too simple view of the love triangle in X-Men.

Wolverine is clearly the main character in the movies and they clearly want the audience to follow his story. The X-men are just supporting characters. All Cyclops is to the audience is an obstacle for Wolverine to be with Jean and to control the team. He's not a character that is given enough time or development for the audience to care about. All he is is a vanilla character for the audience to sneer at.

Think about it. If they wanted you to just cheer for Wolverine, they wouldn't include the scenes where Jean is all "I love you so much!". And they wouldn't have Jean reject him, and him accept that. Duh.

Sure they would. People want to see the characters struggle and overcome adversity. Getting Jean away from Scott is part of Wolverine's struggle in the movies. Having her flat-out leave Scott for Wolverine could make the audience dislike WOlverine, so instead they kill Scott.

Again, someone explain to me how Scott is being portrayed as "weak".

3 movies and he's hardly done anything right yet. Meanwhile, Wolverine has kicked tons of ass in the films. Wolverine is impressive as hell in the movies-he near unstoppable. True, he takes some punishment, but he always-ALWAYS wins. Scott is portrayed as being weak in the fiels and a poor leader, making idiotic decisions.

You're kidding, right? There's no "You excite me I want you". There is: "Girls flirt with the dangerous guy, Logan. They don't take him home."

And that's exactly what she's saying. He excites her. She sticks with Scott because he's dependable. Scott's a Honda Accord, Wolverine's a Harley.

Yes, she chose Scott because he's a good guy who cares about her and about people, and not about his own pleasure. Is that supposed to be a bad thing? Translation of this line to Wolverine? "You amuse me, but I wouldn't take you to bed." Maybe he does excite her, but nothing beyond basic schoolyard flirtations, and obviously not more than Scott does. Or she would have welcomed the kiss, wouldn't she?

She chose Scott because he's dependable. But it's clear that all the actual sexual attraction is between her and Wolverine.

Lord, you give them eyes, but apparently not half a brain. I'm not "defending" this stuff. Do you see me celebrating the fact that Cyclops has been relegated to second stringer in favor of Wolverine? No. I'm just saying there are reasons for it that don't neccessarily involve studio conspiracies to personally offend you.

First of all, **** you for that comment. I could just as easily say you have half a brain for the way you just blindly accept and defend whatever the studio does. Of course they're not out to personally offend me. They don't care how many Cyclops fans they offend because they're enough apologists like you to take up the slack.

Not in the trilogy I watched. Not even close. I'd love to simply go page by page through the scripts and prove you wrong, but it's hardly worth it. Answer me this: Which one is the main character, with more impact on the story, and who has the most story connections to the main protagonist and mentor figures? Oh. It's Luke.

It's definately Luke. But Han is hardly the background character that Cyclops is in the movies. Cyclops has about as much screen time in X2 and X3 as characters like Wedge. Maybe a bit more, but definately not as much as Lando. Plus when he's on screen he's either getting his ass kicked or captured.

They didn't do that with Han Solo and Luke, either.

Both characters got enough screentime and development to where they drew legions of fans. Cyclops in the movies is a footnote at best, especially in X2 and X3.

Well hells bells...who'd have thought a redblooded woman would be attracted to a rugged, handsome man who pays flattering attention to her? Certainly not anyone with half a brain! You realize, of course, that a human being (or mutant, I imagine) can be attracted to someone and still love someone else more and know that someone else is right for you. Happens all the time.

Yeah, but in these movies it just makes Cyclops look weak. Had X3 been done correctly, it would be easier to look past this crap. But X3 is just the final slap in the face to Cyclops fans. In X1 he's an incompetant idiot. In X2 he's a non factor. Then in X3 he gets killed 15 minutes into the movie. Now what fan of any character would be pleased with that and would defend it?????

Really? Why, then, when Wolverine TRIES, does she reject him? Oh. Because you're WRONG! And it's a moot point, because Wolverine doesn't try, does he?

As I said, had X3 been made correctly, it would be easier to look past this stuff. But X3 didn't, and in it we see her all over him yet again, while Scott's worm food. Of course it's the dark part of her-I'm sure that's the siade of her that's attracted to him in the first place.

By the way, I personally feel love triangles are cheap clichés.

Why? Because Toad sneak attacks him? Am I now to understand that everytime someone is surprised, they are incompetent? Then, is Wolverine incompetent when Sabertooth kicked his ass at the beginning of X-MEN, when he stabbed Rogue, when Magneto kicked his ass at the midpoint of X-Men, and Mystique kicked his ass at the end? Is he incompetent when Deathstrike was handing him his ass in X2? Will you think he's incompetent when Phoenix hands him his ass, and then Magneto does so...again?

Cyclops never gets payback when he gets his ass kicked in the movies. That's the difference. ALL he does is get his ass kicked.

"Stupid" why? Because he wanted to stop Magneto when they encountered him? At the time, the X-Men were ****ed. Magneto had them bound, and had Cyclops' visor. Cyclops' directive, "Storm, fry him." made perfect sense from a tactical point of view. While Magneto was right about "a bolt of lightning into a huge copper conductor", think about it: Had Storm indeed fried Magneto, Magneto would have been stopped, and the machine's threat would have been stopped. At the cost of the X-Men's lives, perhaps (not neccessarily for sure), but those are the breaks in war. Scott made a tactical decision that would have averted a disaster, period. And that was his job. That's not stupid. That's tactical thinking in the heat of the moment.

No, that's stupid thinking and it was done for the precise reason of making Scott look like an idiot.

And saving Wolverine and Rogue. And revealing his feelings about Xavier and the students. And outlining the plan of attack on Liberty. And flying the jet in undetected. And spotting the machine in the torch. And saving Jean's life. And coming up with the plan to stop the machine. And saving the day via blasting Magneto and learning to work with the man he didn't like. Did you even watch X-MEN?

Did you see where he screwed up their cover in Grand Central? Or where Toad kicked his ass? Or where he almost got Storm to fry the entire team?

Although compared to X2 and 3, he gets a better portrayal. I'll grant you that.

Inability to protect Xavier...right. Deathstrike was portrayed as an extremely capable martial artist/assassin. She even gave Wolverine trouble. And...lest we forget, she essentially surprised, and possibly drugged, Cyclops.

It made him look sloppy and incompetant. If he had given her a decent fight, then it would have been different.

So, as we've seen, while Cyclops wasn't portrayed as perfect, he wasn't incompetent. No more so than say...Wolverine.

No, he's portrayed as incompetant. Wolverine is portrayed as incredibly tough and resiliant and impossible to stop. No matter how hard he's beaten down, he keeps coming back. That's because he's the main character and the hero, and everyone else is a sidekick.

No, what I mean is...do you always poo poo a character that is written less than perfectly? As in, a character shown to fail, or not succeed totally?

All Cyke is ever shown to do is fail, except when he blasts Magneto. Which he had to have Wolverine's help to do. That's not a bad thing-emphasizing the team idea-but in X2 they got away from that and it became 100% the Wolverine show.

That means "Cyclops got beat by Deathstrike". That doesn't make his character incompetent. There are more times when he is shown to be competent.

He's incompetant all through X2 and all he does in X3 is die.

She did beat him after a good fight, after he kicked the crap out of the guards there. And then she surprised him. Since he'd never seen her before, he did the logical thing. He prepared an optic blast, and she leapt ACROSS THE ROOM (which he couldn't possibly have expectd), and kicked him in the face. Wait...how about Xavier? Is he incompetent because he got gassed?

Ooooo, he beat up a guard. Big f'n deal. And Marsden had to push to get that much.

If the moviegoer is an unforgiving idiot who wants their heroes to always, always, always succeed in every scene...maybe. But he's clearly not a joke.

The moviegoer would like to see their heroes succeed on occasion. Which Cyke never does.

Well, for starters, I can talk intelligently about his character. Secondly, one method of "proof" is that I continue to say "I love Cyclops" and to find the good in his portrayal in this franchise, or the comics, or what have you. I can tell you what I love about him, but you have yet to ask. You just assume I'm not a fan because I quite enjoy the version we've seen so far (which is incredibly, incredibly ignorant of you). What you have done, is make ridiculous and assinine statements about my "hatred of Cyclops", which, btw, I have never once shown. Unless you can find an example of it. Which you can't. Because I love Cyclops.

If you truly loved the character then you would find what they're doing in X3 unacceptable. That doesn't mena that you wouldn't still go to the movie, but you would at least have a problem with that aspect of it. Every other Cyclops fan in these forums is outraged. hell, even some fans who DON'T like Cyke say it's wrong and lame.

No, trust me, if FOX/Marvel wanted to make a Wolverine film sans the X-Men, they'd make it (They are, and oh, uh, ELEKTRA, anyone?). Look up the history of Marvel's VENOM project. They have no problem with making one character from a mythos into a movie.

Every hero needs a cheering section.

Like they waited a few years to make X2 and then X3? Hmm, maybe?

X3 is one of the most rushed movies ever done. They waited to get started because they were bickering with Singer.

He may have had a brief role in X2 and X3, but, as I said, he has an important arc. Cyclops/Wolverine and Cyclops/Wolverine?Jean has been a large part of this franchise. FOX is receiving a large backlash now, and wait...the movie seems to indicate that he's not THAT vital to this version of the X-Men. So much for that argument.

And the fact that they've made a version of the X-Men where he is not vital is proof that they don't respect the comics or the comics fans.

Well, pardon me for not just staying on one point in a broad discussion. They aren't focusing on Wolverine because of his popularity. They are focusing on him because he's the most interesting and relevant character to focus on. And they aren't ONLY focusing on him.

**** Wolverine. He doesn't interest me one bit. I hate the character with a passion. And yes, smart ass, I know they aren't making these movies for me. He's the main character because they cram him down everyone's throat, just like they do in the comics. He's easily the most overrated comics character of all time.

You made a statement about a Wolverine film being able to perfectly characterize Wolverine. I pointed out the fallacy in that statement How is addressing one of your points missing it? If your only point is that Wolverine shouldn't be the only X-Man focused on, watch the damn movies. If your point is that Wolverine has been focused on too much, say so. But don't make stupid comments about "perfection" that are tangental to your point if you only want to discuss one point to begin with.

He's the main character of the movies 100%. The other characters are nothing but supporting players. The best storyarc besides his is Nightcrawler in X2. I thought every minute Nightcrawler was on screen was cool as hell. they did a great job with him.

And regardless of all this...am I to understand that you don't care how accurate Cyclops or his role is to the comics, you just want to see as much of him as Wolverine?

No, I want him to be accurate to his comic self. I'd rather see more of the entire team and less of Wolverine. Wolverine is a character I tolerate at best. I hate the character.

No, I wouldn't. I don't make stupid comments like "So and so wasn't explored at all" when one character has less screentime than another, but HAS been explored.

Except for Nightcrawler in X2, no other character has had much of their own storyline. Iceman and Rogue are just Wolverine's little sidekicks. Jean's the love interest, Storm finally gets some face time in X3, and Scott's a background character. Mystique has gotten more and better screentime in the movies than Scott. MYSTIQUE!

What have I ignored that you have said? Not AGREEING with you is not IGNORING you, and how I feel has little to do with a favoritism for Wolverine. I've said before, I much prefer Cyclops to Wolverine. I'm not ignoring anything. You're simply WRONG about Cyclops being portrayed as "jilted". Either you picked the wrong word in using "jilted", or you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of X-MEN and X2.

If you can't see the movies are blatently biased in favor of Wolverine and that it's detrimental to the other characters-Cyclops most of all-then you're blind.

No, I mean X-MEN and X2. Cyclops' character and his relationship to characters and to the mythology is explored in both. Exploring a character is exploring a character. You don't need ****loads of screentime to do so. Case in point, The Scarecrow was explored in BATMAN BEGINS, and didn't have that much screentime.

The X-Men's leader is a hell of a lot more important character than a C-list Batman villian.

 

[SilentType]

"Guardball" has caught on.

Awesome.

 

[taintedFB]

Okay. I heard that it's not so much that Fox is against Cyclops. It's just that Marsden isn't as big a name and they don't consider him a Leading Man type character.

First off, I think he's a better actor than Hugh, who has nothing but Wolverine. Jimmy has done more movies than any other X-Men actor since X1.

Second, names are not the draw in a movie like this. So that in itself is a miscalculation.

And it seems that Fox and WB worked and collaborated hard to allow Jimmy to make both movies... I think that also shows how well liked he is...regardless of how THEY feel about his "star" quality.

Try putting Hugh in solid shades and a visor, giving him poor dialogue, minimal scenes, no physical action, and see where he'd be today.... (a small theater production in Australia) LOL

 

[HughJackFan420]

OK i dont post alot, but i've been following this hole thing since word of his death leaked. I was not a big fan of the character nor do i read the comics just liked the movies & the 90s cartoon, but when i heard that they was actually going to kill him & so early in the movie i couldnt belive it. I thought surely they would change this after the fan backlash, hell who didnt, but thats not going to happen. If they had to kill him, it shouldve been at the end & when jean dies. But anyway yes fox screwed up, they couldve waited & made a really great movie but they didnt. Now i will not go see the movie, will it matter..............no. But i wont waste my money to see this great screw up. I hope the movie fails but it wont. If one good thing has come out of this for me its made me like the character more & im thinking about gettin some tpbs .Now this is just my opinion & wether it matters are not, i just felt like saying somthing. At least everyone tried to get their voices heard.

well i agree with the just the part Cyke dying sux...

but i'm still gonna go see the movie...i'm not that anal or anal at all

 

[Star]

Okay. I heard that it's not so much that Fox is against Cyclops. It's just that Marsden isn't as big a name and they don't consider him a Leading Man type character.

First off, I think he's a better actor than Hugh, who has nothing but Wolverine. Jimmy has done more movies than any other X-Men actor since X1.

Second, names are not the draw in a movie like this. So that in itself is a miscalculation.

And it seems that Fox and WB worked and collaborated hard to allow Jimmy to make both movies... I think that also shows how well liked he is...regardless of how THEY feel about his "star" quality.

Try putting Hugh in solid shades and a visor, giving him poor dialogue, minimal scenes, no physical action, and see where he'd be today.... (a small theater production in Australia) LOL

hugh has done more then x-men...

 

[KenK]

Okay. I heard that it's not so much that Fox is against Cyclops. It's just that Marsden isn't as big a name and they don't consider him a Leading Man type character.

First off, I think he's a better actor than Hugh, who has nothing but Wolverine. Jimmy has done more movies than any other X-Men actor since X1.

Aside from Heights (an indy film) and the Notebook (which he wasn't even the main draw in), excluding Superman Returns (another second fiddle role), what else has he really done? Do you really wanna use Sugar and Spice in your argument over him being a better actor than Hugh?

 

[Kurosawa]

Okay. I heard that it's not so much that Fox is against Cyclops. It's just that Marsden isn't as big a name and they don't consider him a Leading Man type character.

First off, I think he's a better actor than Hugh, who has nothing but Wolverine. Jimmy has done more movies than any other X-Men actor since X1.

Second, names are not the draw in a movie like this. So that in itself is a miscalculation.

And it seems that Fox and WB worked and collaborated hard to allow Jimmy to make both movies... I think that also shows how well liked he is...regardless of how THEY feel about his "star" quality.

Try putting Hugh in solid shades and a visor, giving him poor dialogue, minimal scenes, no physical action, and see where he'd be today.... (a small theater production in Australia) LOL

I don't know that he's a better actor than Jackman, but he's certainly capable. Still, had Caviziel done the part instead of Marsden, they would NOT have crapped all over Cyclops like they have. Of course part of what made Jackman a big star was X1 where he was a total bad ass while Scott was a total tool.

 

[taintedFB]

Hey, he was funny in Sugar & Spice!

He did S&S, The Notebook, The Hieghts, 10th & Wolf (not out yet), The 24th Day (indy, direct to video, I believe, and excellent performance), and Superman, and he's doing Bobby, Enchanted, and a voice for a cartoon Conan. He also was a regular on Ally McBeal's last season. He's kept busier thanthe rest of the X-cast.