http://www.thexverse.com/community/showthread.php?t=762&page=4
- Were your hands tied as to whether or not Cyclops lives or was that a creative decision that you came up with?
* When Simon and I came onto this movie, we were told that Cyclops wasn't going to be in the film. We thought this was crazy and argued vehemently against it. I don't know what prompted this decision; scheduling conflicts with Superman, a genuine story choice, desire to foreground Wolverine, whatever. I don't know. What I do know is that we were boxed into a corner and we came up with the best solution we could for the story. Not an excuse, just a fact. And please don't ask me to tell you more than that about the backstage politics, because I can't and I won't.
- Many of us feel that the way Cyclops' death was handled was disrespectful to the character. Little mourning was done in his loss and the other characters' reactions could almost be described as indifference. His death was not seen on-screen and no time was spent looking for him, despite the lack of a body. What can you say to defend your treatment of this character?
* I think we should have spent more time dealing with what happened to Scott. Forget disrespectful, it was not great storytelling. As I said, we did not win every fight. But my name's on the script, so it's my responsibility.
That said, I don't think the scene at Alkali Lake is disrespectful in the least. And Logan reveals he loves Jean, but does Jean reveal the same about Logan? Watch again. Watch what happens when Xavier says that Jean "killed the man she loves."
This won't please anyone who wanted the original Dark Phoenix saga to stay intact, but the seeds of Logan taking over Scott's role were planted in the first film. There was simply no way Cyclops was going to be the main character in this film, not if Bryan directed it, not if Spielberg directed. Wolverine, particularly onscreen, is a far more popular character. You can blame me or Simon or James Marsden or Hugh Jackman or Chris Claremont but that's the way it is. I know many of you Cyke fans are nuts about this, but the movies aren't the comics. Period.
- Why do "cured" mutant criminals such as Mystique simply move on to roam free (or work as a Government secretary, as in her case)? When a criminal is arrested, their weapons are removed yet they still go to jail. The "cure" doesn't change the person's mind or intentions, so why are they not held accountable for their actions?
* Mystique did not roam free. She was taken back into custody. Unless I'm missing something.
- Why did you choose to portray Phoenix as a confused, almost zombie like being? Many of us feel that this did not truly portray just how powerful a being Phoenix is supposed to be. Nobody was expecting a direct translation of the Phoenix saga with the shi'ar, Corsair etc. But I didn't feel that this portrayal truly represented the character.
* Probably my biggest criticism of the film is the way Jean stands around in the final act. But up until that point, I think it's incredibly unfair to say she appears as a zombie. I think she is frightening and shows a startling range of emotions in the scenes with Scott, Logan, Xavier and Magneto.
- Several times, we were promised that we would be blown away by the "Phoenix effect" that was going to be a part of the movie. This turned out to be a misleading statement as many of us were expecting to see the firebird effect, but instead we got the "vampire ashing" effect from the Blade Movies. Was this decision made by you, Brett, or the FX team?
* First of all, I don't know who promised you that, but it wasn't me. I didn't see the Phoenix effects until a few weeks ago. As you have probably seen already, we wrote the Phoenix effect in and I don't know why they chose not to do it. Maybe they tried it and it didn't work. I was disappointed because it was something I have waited my whole life to see onscreen. Also, it was in X2.
That said, I don't think it compromised ths story. It's pretty clear that Phoenix is intended as metaphor, even in its original form. The thing that makes the comic books great is not the fact that its about a giant bird of fire, it's the psychological underpinnings.
- Some suspension of disbelief is definately expected in a movie such as this, but in this scene is Xavier supposed to be sepaking to Moira telepathically, or are we to believe that Xavier's consciousness changed the physical anatomy of the body's vocal chords so that it be his own voice.
* I'm hoping that when the DVD comes out, the identity of who is lying in that hospital bed will be clear. When it is, this question will be moot. Incidentally, even if that body was a little girl's, I have to believe that Xavier could make his voice sound like whatever he wants when he's in someone's head.
- Why did you put this scene after the credits. I saw it in a packed theatre opening night, and only 5 other people stayed. This was a very important plot revelation That very few people saw due to it's placement.
* In the theater I saw it in, 90 percent of the audience stayed. That said, those credits were LONG!
-Do you feel the film has lived up to your claims or has the film's ambition been outweighed by it's production schedule? Do you truly feel it is what you wrote or did the studio step in and butcher it?
* I am way too close to the film and the production to answer this. The production schedule was a necessity if X-Men 3 was to be made at all. It had to be made then and there. I have plenty of issues with choices the studio made, but I understand why they needed to release it when they did.
- Why did you introduce Psylocke into this film where she had a miscule role, only to kill her at the end. We knew her role would be tiny in X3, but we had hoped that it would be a jumpoff for a further inclusion in another X-Film. Casting an Asian actress even eliminates the body-switching plot of her chracter, so she cannot come back.
* This is a difficult question for me to answer, because I don't have all the facts. There was some switching of character names later in production, and I'm not exactly sure how Pyslocke got thrown into the mix. One thing I will say is that this movie is supposed to have real stakes, real deaths, real violence that we don't recover from. There would be a real body count in that final scene.
- I was dissapointed by the sentinels in the danger room. I don't mean to rant but both this, and Psylocke's role contradict your resons for not inclding Gambit in X3. You had said that he is such an important character that you did not want to simply give him a cameo where he would do nothing. Now I'm not angry for him not being in the movie, I understand why, but to me it seems Psylocke got the exact treatment that you had promised not to do to Gambit. A minscule role, just to please fans, that leads to nowhere.
* The entire danger room was intended to be a nod to the fans, including the "Days of Future Past" look of it, and the Sentinel head. When every single thing in the movie leaked or was shown, it went from being a nod to the fans to something that a lot of people built up tremendously in their minds. As those of you who followed my Q and A know, I did my best to dispell this without breaking my non-disclosure agreement.
Were sentinels ever intended to be a larger part of the film or we're they always meant to be part of the DR sequence. IMO If the budget was not present to properly do sentinels and there wasn't room in the plot to give them the time they deserve, they shouldn't have been included. Same as Gambit. Also, having them in the danger room scene almost completely eliminates the chance of them actually being the main villain in another x-movie. Do you think a full on Sentinel battle outside the danger room is still possible for a future movie?
* Absolutely! In fact, one of the points of including Trask as a cameo character and introducing the idea that Xavier knew about the existence of mutant hunting robots (an idea implicit in the fact that it is programmed into a simulation) was intended to be a huge Easter Egg for future films. We never intended to use the Sentinels in the plot, because we already had two huge plots to deal with.
For the sake of argument, I'd throw Multiple Man in here as well, he's one of the most loved 'B' mutants and his lack of screentime was dissapointing to everyone hoping to see him in a kickass fight scene. Although for the few lines he had, I thought Eric Dane had the character dead-on. If your gonna put the character in a sequel or spinoff, get this guy back to play him!
* I thought the Multiple Man cameo was pretty damn good. We had very little time with him and built a whole sequence around his powers.
- We have heard unconfirmed reports from some people who claim to have seen a longer version of the movie with a running time closer to two hours, with many scenes that were cut out of the 90 minute version. Some have also reported alternate post-credits scenes featuring Jean rising from her tomb, Cyclops, or Mystique ang Magneto reuninting. Can you confirm whether such a cut of the film exists and is being shown or if this is some people trying to play a prank. I've also heard of a Collossus/Juggernaut battle as part of a longer cut.
* The different versions rumors is bull****. At one point, we wrote a Colossus/Juggernaut fight, but we replaced it with the Kitty sequence, which I quite like, long before filming.
-Can you give us any information on the mixup between Quill and Kid Omega. It seems odd to be to change his name to that of a completely different character when he isn't even referred to by name in the movie.
* See my note about Psylocke above. I think this was a screwup, pure and simple, albeit one that is never mentioned anywhere in the movie but the credits.
- Was it your choice to change Callisto's character so far from the fundamentals. Originally, she was haggard looking, with a missing eye and enhanced sense and agility for powers. In the movie, we got a gorgeous woman, with Caliban's tracking ability and Quicksilver's speed. This character had almost nothing in common with the comics Callisto, except for amybe personality. Why did you decide to give her this power instead of using Quicksilver. If it was simply because you didn't feel you had the time to properly explain his relationship with Magneto, I disagree with the decision. You coud have used Northstar if you wanted a speed powered mutant with no connection to other chracters to explain instead of augmenting the powers of others. Personally I would have liked to see Quicksilver, I think that especially with Pyro becoming Magneto's right-hand man, there could be an interesting rivalry between John and Pietro (who has always had an issue with his father's affection). I just don't see the point in Callisto having the speed. It didn't serve the plot in any way Giving Callisto the super speed as well almost eliminates the chance of seeing quicksilver in another film. To ahve two characters with the exact same power will seem like old news, and now a potential story with quicksilver has been ruined.
* I don't agree with you at all. I think what makes quicksilver so interesting is more than just speed (and he's a LOT faster than Callisto) and I think the combining Callisto and Caliban is perfectly legitimate. If you don't, blame me, I think I suggested it.
- Are you dissapointed with how the marketing of this movie made it seem very different from what we got on screen. From the trailers, there were many hints that Sentinels could be a very large part of the movie, your Q&A was the only thing that made me think otherwise. Why did you choose to make the presidetial advisor Bolivar Trask if Sentinels were not going to be worked into the plot? Having his character in the movie lead many fans to believe Sentinels would be a villain in the film. Also I feel the marketing very much exaggerated how much of a role certain characters had in this film. Colossus had barely more screentime than in X2, he was essentially just there to throw wolverine a couple times and carry a TV. Rogue was absent for most of the film, Angel's scenes were almost entirely shown in the trailer (and the promo shots of him in a x-suit were VERY misleading). Many fans were expecting a very different film than what we got.
* I don't think any of this is accurate. All the hardcore fans want their favorite characters to have more screen time. In X2, Rogue saps one power and then flies the plane. Other than that, what? When I see X3 ads, I see Logan and Storm plastered all over the place. And at one point, Angel WAS in a X-suit. I think many people built up expectations, read every spoiler they could get their hands on, and that isn't the way to see a movie. One thing I've learned from this process is that trying to put big surprises in a summer movie is close to pointless. If the marketing doesn't reveal it, the internet will.
And on another note (I know that the FX looks weren't up to you), Don't you think that the Colossus FX looked better in X2?
* In X2, there is one moment of Colossus metalling up in a dark room. My understanding is that their job was ten times more complicated in this film, so it's hard for me to compare the two.
- Why did you choose not to include any discussion among the X-Men as to whether or not it was the right thing to defend the humans in the final battle. The fact that the President weaponized the cure even after his discussion with Beast should have been a HUGE ethical issue for teh team, but they just seemed to ignore it. Also, I find it odd that Beast was promorted to the UN in the end. Wouldn't any of the American public be a bit angry that he was a part of the battle at Alcatraz? On a similar note, Beast seemed to be in pretty good graces with the President at the end considering the cure weaponization against Beast's wishes.
* I did not like Beast joining the UN. I think he should have returned to the mansion (we shot that, maybe it will be on the DVD.) I also felt that it could have been clearer that the X-Men were going to stop Jean even more than to defend the cure. I did not win that argument, so I can't really disagree with you.
- Was the final scene with Magneto supposed to imply that the cure was only temporary, or that it would only last temporarily on very powerful mutants sugh as Magneto?
* It is ambiguous, and so it shall stay.
- How exactly did Angel fly at the same speed as the blackbird, a supersonic jet, to get to San Francisco so quickly?
* He had to have stowed away on the plane, otherwise it isn't possible.
- Are we to assume that Pyro and Juggernaut are dead after Phoenix ashed everyone, or that they woke up from tehir bumps on the head and got away?
* Don't assume anything.
Well, I hope this helps. I don't know how many of these questions I will be able to get to, as I am directing a movie in four weeks. For those of you liked or loved the movie, I apologize if it seems like I'm negging it. I'm not, I'm very proud of it for reasons I will get into later. It just so happens that these questions are negative and I didn't want to shy away from them. Best,
Zak
- Were your hands tied as to whether or not Cyclops lives or was that a creative decision that you came up with?
* When Simon and I came onto this movie, we were told that Cyclops wasn't going to be in the film. We thought this was crazy and argued vehemently against it. I don't know what prompted this decision; scheduling conflicts with Superman, a genuine story choice, desire to foreground Wolverine, whatever. I don't know. What I do know is that we were boxed into a corner and we came up with the best solution we could for the story. Not an excuse, just a fact. And please don't ask me to tell you more than that about the backstage politics, because I can't and I won't.
- Many of us feel that the way Cyclops' death was handled was disrespectful to the character. Little mourning was done in his loss and the other characters' reactions could almost be described as indifference. His death was not seen on-screen and no time was spent looking for him, despite the lack of a body. What can you say to defend your treatment of this character?
* I think we should have spent more time dealing with what happened to Scott. Forget disrespectful, it was not great storytelling. As I said, we did not win every fight. But my name's on the script, so it's my responsibility.
That said, I don't think the scene at Alkali Lake is disrespectful in the least. And Logan reveals he loves Jean, but does Jean reveal the same about Logan? Watch again. Watch what happens when Xavier says that Jean "killed the man she loves."
This won't please anyone who wanted the original Dark Phoenix saga to stay intact, but the seeds of Logan taking over Scott's role were planted in the first film. There was simply no way Cyclops was going to be the main character in this film, not if Bryan directed it, not if Spielberg directed. Wolverine, particularly onscreen, is a far more popular character. You can blame me or Simon or James Marsden or Hugh Jackman or Chris Claremont but that's the way it is. I know many of you Cyke fans are nuts about this, but the movies aren't the comics. Period.
- Why do "cured" mutant criminals such as Mystique simply move on to roam free (or work as a Government secretary, as in her case)? When a criminal is arrested, their weapons are removed yet they still go to jail. The "cure" doesn't change the person's mind or intentions, so why are they not held accountable for their actions?
* Mystique did not roam free. She was taken back into custody. Unless I'm missing something.
- Why did you choose to portray Phoenix as a confused, almost zombie like being? Many of us feel that this did not truly portray just how powerful a being Phoenix is supposed to be. Nobody was expecting a direct translation of the Phoenix saga with the shi'ar, Corsair etc. But I didn't feel that this portrayal truly represented the character.
* Probably my biggest criticism of the film is the way Jean stands around in the final act. But up until that point, I think it's incredibly unfair to say she appears as a zombie. I think she is frightening and shows a startling range of emotions in the scenes with Scott, Logan, Xavier and Magneto.
- Several times, we were promised that we would be blown away by the "Phoenix effect" that was going to be a part of the movie. This turned out to be a misleading statement as many of us were expecting to see the firebird effect, but instead we got the "vampire ashing" effect from the Blade Movies. Was this decision made by you, Brett, or the FX team?
* First of all, I don't know who promised you that, but it wasn't me. I didn't see the Phoenix effects until a few weeks ago. As you have probably seen already, we wrote the Phoenix effect in and I don't know why they chose not to do it. Maybe they tried it and it didn't work. I was disappointed because it was something I have waited my whole life to see onscreen. Also, it was in X2.
That said, I don't think it compromised ths story. It's pretty clear that Phoenix is intended as metaphor, even in its original form. The thing that makes the comic books great is not the fact that its about a giant bird of fire, it's the psychological underpinnings.
- Some suspension of disbelief is definately expected in a movie such as this, but in this scene is Xavier supposed to be sepaking to Moira telepathically, or are we to believe that Xavier's consciousness changed the physical anatomy of the body's vocal chords so that it be his own voice.
* I'm hoping that when the DVD comes out, the identity of who is lying in that hospital bed will be clear. When it is, this question will be moot. Incidentally, even if that body was a little girl's, I have to believe that Xavier could make his voice sound like whatever he wants when he's in someone's head.
- Why did you put this scene after the credits. I saw it in a packed theatre opening night, and only 5 other people stayed. This was a very important plot revelation That very few people saw due to it's placement.
* In the theater I saw it in, 90 percent of the audience stayed. That said, those credits were LONG!
-Do you feel the film has lived up to your claims or has the film's ambition been outweighed by it's production schedule? Do you truly feel it is what you wrote or did the studio step in and butcher it?
* I am way too close to the film and the production to answer this. The production schedule was a necessity if X-Men 3 was to be made at all. It had to be made then and there. I have plenty of issues with choices the studio made, but I understand why they needed to release it when they did.
- Why did you introduce Psylocke into this film where she had a miscule role, only to kill her at the end. We knew her role would be tiny in X3, but we had hoped that it would be a jumpoff for a further inclusion in another X-Film. Casting an Asian actress even eliminates the body-switching plot of her chracter, so she cannot come back.
* This is a difficult question for me to answer, because I don't have all the facts. There was some switching of character names later in production, and I'm not exactly sure how Pyslocke got thrown into the mix. One thing I will say is that this movie is supposed to have real stakes, real deaths, real violence that we don't recover from. There would be a real body count in that final scene.
- I was dissapointed by the sentinels in the danger room. I don't mean to rant but both this, and Psylocke's role contradict your resons for not inclding Gambit in X3. You had said that he is such an important character that you did not want to simply give him a cameo where he would do nothing. Now I'm not angry for him not being in the movie, I understand why, but to me it seems Psylocke got the exact treatment that you had promised not to do to Gambit. A minscule role, just to please fans, that leads to nowhere.
* The entire danger room was intended to be a nod to the fans, including the "Days of Future Past" look of it, and the Sentinel head. When every single thing in the movie leaked or was shown, it went from being a nod to the fans to something that a lot of people built up tremendously in their minds. As those of you who followed my Q and A know, I did my best to dispell this without breaking my non-disclosure agreement.
Were sentinels ever intended to be a larger part of the film or we're they always meant to be part of the DR sequence. IMO If the budget was not present to properly do sentinels and there wasn't room in the plot to give them the time they deserve, they shouldn't have been included. Same as Gambit. Also, having them in the danger room scene almost completely eliminates the chance of them actually being the main villain in another x-movie. Do you think a full on Sentinel battle outside the danger room is still possible for a future movie?
* Absolutely! In fact, one of the points of including Trask as a cameo character and introducing the idea that Xavier knew about the existence of mutant hunting robots (an idea implicit in the fact that it is programmed into a simulation) was intended to be a huge Easter Egg for future films. We never intended to use the Sentinels in the plot, because we already had two huge plots to deal with.
For the sake of argument, I'd throw Multiple Man in here as well, he's one of the most loved 'B' mutants and his lack of screentime was dissapointing to everyone hoping to see him in a kickass fight scene. Although for the few lines he had, I thought Eric Dane had the character dead-on. If your gonna put the character in a sequel or spinoff, get this guy back to play him!
* I thought the Multiple Man cameo was pretty damn good. We had very little time with him and built a whole sequence around his powers.
- We have heard unconfirmed reports from some people who claim to have seen a longer version of the movie with a running time closer to two hours, with many scenes that were cut out of the 90 minute version. Some have also reported alternate post-credits scenes featuring Jean rising from her tomb, Cyclops, or Mystique ang Magneto reuninting. Can you confirm whether such a cut of the film exists and is being shown or if this is some people trying to play a prank. I've also heard of a Collossus/Juggernaut battle as part of a longer cut.
* The different versions rumors is bull****. At one point, we wrote a Colossus/Juggernaut fight, but we replaced it with the Kitty sequence, which I quite like, long before filming.
-Can you give us any information on the mixup between Quill and Kid Omega. It seems odd to be to change his name to that of a completely different character when he isn't even referred to by name in the movie.
* See my note about Psylocke above. I think this was a screwup, pure and simple, albeit one that is never mentioned anywhere in the movie but the credits.
- Was it your choice to change Callisto's character so far from the fundamentals. Originally, she was haggard looking, with a missing eye and enhanced sense and agility for powers. In the movie, we got a gorgeous woman, with Caliban's tracking ability and Quicksilver's speed. This character had almost nothing in common with the comics Callisto, except for amybe personality. Why did you decide to give her this power instead of using Quicksilver. If it was simply because you didn't feel you had the time to properly explain his relationship with Magneto, I disagree with the decision. You coud have used Northstar if you wanted a speed powered mutant with no connection to other chracters to explain instead of augmenting the powers of others. Personally I would have liked to see Quicksilver, I think that especially with Pyro becoming Magneto's right-hand man, there could be an interesting rivalry between John and Pietro (who has always had an issue with his father's affection). I just don't see the point in Callisto having the speed. It didn't serve the plot in any way Giving Callisto the super speed as well almost eliminates the chance of seeing quicksilver in another film. To ahve two characters with the exact same power will seem like old news, and now a potential story with quicksilver has been ruined.
* I don't agree with you at all. I think what makes quicksilver so interesting is more than just speed (and he's a LOT faster than Callisto) and I think the combining Callisto and Caliban is perfectly legitimate. If you don't, blame me, I think I suggested it.
- Are you dissapointed with how the marketing of this movie made it seem very different from what we got on screen. From the trailers, there were many hints that Sentinels could be a very large part of the movie, your Q&A was the only thing that made me think otherwise. Why did you choose to make the presidetial advisor Bolivar Trask if Sentinels were not going to be worked into the plot? Having his character in the movie lead many fans to believe Sentinels would be a villain in the film. Also I feel the marketing very much exaggerated how much of a role certain characters had in this film. Colossus had barely more screentime than in X2, he was essentially just there to throw wolverine a couple times and carry a TV. Rogue was absent for most of the film, Angel's scenes were almost entirely shown in the trailer (and the promo shots of him in a x-suit were VERY misleading). Many fans were expecting a very different film than what we got.
* I don't think any of this is accurate. All the hardcore fans want their favorite characters to have more screen time. In X2, Rogue saps one power and then flies the plane. Other than that, what? When I see X3 ads, I see Logan and Storm plastered all over the place. And at one point, Angel WAS in a X-suit. I think many people built up expectations, read every spoiler they could get their hands on, and that isn't the way to see a movie. One thing I've learned from this process is that trying to put big surprises in a summer movie is close to pointless. If the marketing doesn't reveal it, the internet will.
And on another note (I know that the FX looks weren't up to you), Don't you think that the Colossus FX looked better in X2?
* In X2, there is one moment of Colossus metalling up in a dark room. My understanding is that their job was ten times more complicated in this film, so it's hard for me to compare the two.
- Why did you choose not to include any discussion among the X-Men as to whether or not it was the right thing to defend the humans in the final battle. The fact that the President weaponized the cure even after his discussion with Beast should have been a HUGE ethical issue for teh team, but they just seemed to ignore it. Also, I find it odd that Beast was promorted to the UN in the end. Wouldn't any of the American public be a bit angry that he was a part of the battle at Alcatraz? On a similar note, Beast seemed to be in pretty good graces with the President at the end considering the cure weaponization against Beast's wishes.
* I did not like Beast joining the UN. I think he should have returned to the mansion (we shot that, maybe it will be on the DVD.) I also felt that it could have been clearer that the X-Men were going to stop Jean even more than to defend the cure. I did not win that argument, so I can't really disagree with you.
- Was the final scene with Magneto supposed to imply that the cure was only temporary, or that it would only last temporarily on very powerful mutants sugh as Magneto?
* It is ambiguous, and so it shall stay.
- How exactly did Angel fly at the same speed as the blackbird, a supersonic jet, to get to San Francisco so quickly?
* He had to have stowed away on the plane, otherwise it isn't possible.
- Are we to assume that Pyro and Juggernaut are dead after Phoenix ashed everyone, or that they woke up from tehir bumps on the head and got away?
* Don't assume anything.
Well, I hope this helps. I don't know how many of these questions I will be able to get to, as I am directing a movie in four weeks. For those of you liked or loved the movie, I apologize if it seems like I'm negging it. I'm not, I'm very proud of it for reasons I will get into later. It just so happens that these questions are negative and I didn't want to shy away from them. Best,
Zak
& then have Logan be the one to go to the lake & thanks to his healing abilities survive the first Pheonix encounter
