How much do you really care about X3 being only 103 minutes?

[FieryBalrog]

Yes profit. You know how much money they rake in from all of the other **** they put out??

I'm talking about making a ****ty movie. That usually doesnt turn a profit, or nearly as much of a profit as a good movie. Elektra, DD and F4 all made a crapload less than the X-men movies, which in turn made a lot less than the Spiderman movies. ****ty movies dont make money. Rushing the production schedule, juggling directors and making a threadbare 1:35 movie is not a recipe for success. Its been tried before.

But somehow Fox thinks aha, this time, this time hurriedly throwing eggs in the pan will somehow result in a world-class omelet.

 

[Jennifer Walters]

Wasn't there a case like this with RoTS? I didn't follow that film's production, but I recall hearing something about a confusion over runtime.

That was also a Fox production.

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

Isn't the screenplay like 125 pages?? If so it doesn't add up with the current running time. Sounds like some things possibly weren't even filmed.

 

[Jennifer Walters]

Why would they purposely not film that much stuff though? .

Something isn't right about the situation PERIOD.

 

[freshandclean]

You seem to be making a lot of how people came down on you about that which I didn't. And you seem to be making a lot about some valid concerns people have about the movie, so I think you should lay off already and let us have our concerns.

I don't even agree with TheVileOne in general but I have to agree that concerns over the runtime are valid. If something like the opening sequence is a valid concern to you, why can't something that might possibly effect the enjoyment of the film by others be just as valid, if not moreso? You talk a lot about arrogance but some of your statements, i.e "And quite frankly, I don't want to be sitting in the movie theatres the whole time, thinking about how this, that, or the other thing proves all the nay-sayers wrong, and I was right from the get go." are quite arrogant themselves. As if you have some inside scoop that everyone else doesn't.

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

I'm talking about making a ****ty movie. That usually doesnt turn a profit, or nearly as much of a profit as a good movie. Elektra, DD and F4 all made a crapload less than the X-men movies, which in turn made a lot less than the Spiderman movies. ****ty movies dont make money. Rushing the production schedule, juggling directors and making a threadbare 1:35 movie is not a recipe for success. Its been tried before.

But somehow Fox thinks aha, this time, this time hurriedly throwing eggs in the pan will somehow result in a world-class omelet.

Well like Zer00 said Elektra was Fox's only real mistake PROFIT-wise of course. DD, X1 and X2, and F4 made them a damn good amount of money.

 

[freshandclean]

Isn't the screenplay like 125 pages?? If so it doesn't add up with the current running time. Sounds like some things possibly weren't even filmed.

From my understanding, the film is very dialogue heavy which could explain the longer screenplay.

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

Why would they purposely not film that much stuff though? .

Something isn't right about the situation PERIOD.

Rushed schedule. It is possible but I hope that isn't the case. They didn't have enough time so dropped some scenes they thought they could do without. Its not too far fetched.

 

[FieryBalrog]

Why would they purposely not film that much stuff though? .

Something isn't right about the situation PERIOD.

These are the genius masterminds who made Elektra, Daredevil, Blade Trinity, Alien vs. Predator, and Fantastic Four.

 

[FieryBalrog]

Well like Zer00 said Elektra was Fox's only real mistake PROFIT-wise of course. DD, X1 and X2, and F4 made them a damn good amount of money.

again, good movies make MORE money than bad movies. If Fantastic Four was better it would have made more money. Daredevil didn't make much money and Fantastic Four was meh, ok. X2 made more money than X1 even thought it was a sequel, simply because it was a much better movie.

 

[Jennifer Walters]

That's a hell of alot of script though that either was filmed and cut, or not filmed at all. Hell, that much could potentially lead to NOTHING in the film making sense at all.

No director/screenwriter would butcher his movie that bad. I'm sorry. Not even Uwe Boll would do that to his film. This reaks of something else, but not the crew/production team/Ratner's fault.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I don't even agree with TheVileOne in general but I have to agree that concerns over the runtime are valid. If something like the opening sequence is a valid concern to you, why can't something that might possibly effect the enjoyment of the film by others be just as valid, if not moreso? You talk a lot about arrogance but some of your statements, i.e "And quite frankly, I don't want to be sitting in the movie theatres the whole time, thinking about how this, that, or the other thing proves all the nay-sayers wrong, and I was right from the get go." are quite arrogant themselves. As if you have some inside scoop that everyone else doesn't.

Except I'm not complaining about people having concerns.

My problem is with people who have declared this as an utter disaster because of the runtime, and are acting like there is no possible way this movie can be done properly now.

 

[X-Maniac]

Well, I guess we have to have faith..and wait till we see the actual film.

Doesn't sound like there's any extra film footage for an extended DVD cut, which is a shame. I'm a great fan of extended DVD cuts, they normally improve the movie, and make it more tantalising than simply buying the 'normal' edition. (Daredevil, Hellboy and Alexander being instances that spring to mind).

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

That's a hell of alot of script though that either was filmed and cut, or not filmed at all. Hell, that much could potential lead to NOTHING in the film making sense at all.

No director/screenwriter would butcher his movie that bad. I'm sorry. Not even Uwe Boll would do that to his film. This reaks of something else, but not the crew/production team/Ratner's fault.

Kinberg also said that the 1 page = 1 minute rule doesn't always apply. I think he mentioned the Mr. & Mrs. Smith script, saying it was 138 pages, but the movie was only 120 minutes....

 

[FieryBalrog]

Except I'm not complaining about people having concerns.

My problem is with people who have declared this as an utter disaster because of the runtime, and are acting like there is no possible way this movie can be done properly now.

Uh, its not just the runtime. Sure, if you pretend thats the only bad sign about this whole production, it doesnt make much sense.

And yea, I dont think this movie is being done properly. Runtime is PART of why I feel that way, and yes its important.

 

[freshandclean]

again, good movies make MORE money than bad movies. If Fantastic Four was better it would have made more money. Daredevil didn't make much money and Fantastic Four was meh, ok. X2 made more money than X1 even thought it was a sequel, simply because it was a much better movie.

That's not necessarily true. A lot of good movies don't make money simply because studios don't think they'll appeal to the general public and thus don't put any marketing money towards (i.e. a lot of indie films). But I agree that a studio will make more money investing in a well put together big budget movie than scrapping together a "get rich quick" film that will probably open big but peter out pretty quickly which is what happens to a majority of films.

 

[FieryBalrog]

That's not necessarily true. A lot of good movies don't make money simply because studios don't think they'll appeal to the general public and thus don't put any marketing money towards (i.e. a lot of indie films). But I agree that a studio will make more money investing in a well put together big budget movie than scrapping together a "get rich quick" film that will probably open big but peter out pretty quickly which is what happens to a majority of films.

True, but the indies arent the concern here, I'm talking about blockbusters. Its simply a fact that good big-budget movies generally make a lot more money than terrible big-budget movies, especially in the long run because they open up the road to sequels, spinoffs, merchandising, DVD sales, etc.

Its especially true with superhero movies. Is there a single bad superhero movie that has made more money than something like Spiderman 2 or X-men 2?

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Uh, its not just the runtime. Sure, if you pretend thats the only bad sign about this whole production, it doesnt make much sense.

And yea, I dont think this movie is being done properly. Runtime is PART of why I feel that way, and yes its important.

Well in my mind, the runtime isn't even a problem, and neither is much of anything else.

This movie had a very similar schedule to that of X2, and that movie turned out well, and wasn't rushed. There's no reason why this movie would be any different.

 

[freshandclean]

Except I'm not complaining about people having concerns.

My problem is with people who have declared this as an utter disaster because of the runtime, and are acting like there is no possible way this movie can be done properly now.

And you proclaiming it's going to be 100% awesome is different how exactly? You're making the exact same assumption except in the opposite direction.

 

[XBoy]

As long as it's quality, I don't mind 103 minutes. That's fine with me.

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

again, good movies make MORE money than bad movies. If Fantastic Four was better it would have made more money. Daredevil didn't make much money and Fantastic Four was meh, ok. X2 made more money than X1 even thought it was a sequel, simply because it was a much better movie.

Your still not getting the business side of it. Fox usually puts out 2 or 3 dvds of a movie which easily makes them alot more profit cause fans will buy any crap they put out. Fox thinks about selling more and more. And you would be wrong in saying good movies make more than bad movies. I wish that were the case. Technically FF made more than BB.

 

[XBoy]

I had no idea FF made more money than Batman?

Reall?

 

[FieryBalrog]

Your still not getting the business side of it. Fox usually puts out 2 or 3 dvds of a movie which easily makes them alot more profit cause fans will buy any crap they put out. Fox thinks about selling more and more. And you would be wrong in saying good movies make more than bad movies. I wish that were the case. Technically FF made more than BB.

I'm so glad Marvel is done with Fox. Fox blows in terms of taking care of its superhero franchises. So much potential is dead in the water thanks to this studio.

 

[freshandclean]

True, but the indies arent the concern here, I'm talking about blockbusters. Its simply a fact that good big-budget movies generally make a lot more money than terrible big-budget movies, especially in the long run because they open up the road to sequels, spinoffs, merchandising, DVD sales, etc.

Which is what I agreed with you on. I just wanted to inject that good movies don't always necessarily mean profit which is why a lot of crappy movies are made, so they can recoup their losses on good films that they think no one will want to see, but can always sucker viewers in with a good trailer but crappy movie.

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

I'm so glad Marvel is done with Fox. Fox blows in terms of taking care of its superhero franchises. So much potential is dead in the water thanks to this studio.

Marvel is done with Fox??