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

[Mr Sensitive]

That's one of the worst posts I've ever answered, but let's go.

Well, I've been involved in the arts all my life and feel it relies on natural talent more than anything else.

“Natural talent”. Bet your next move will be very interesting. Like, genetics?

Technique I would consider more of a tool, used to express the artist's intention. Whether it be the written word, a picture, or what have you. Thought, emotion, and passion are far more important IMO.

I’m astonished you consider yourself an artist. See the huge problem in what you just said: everybody has thought, emotion, passion (regular joes love all these idealistc words). What differentiates an artist? Craft.

They are the raw materials needed to fuel human imagination. It's like comparing a garage band to studio musicians. The recording act is definately going to have a more polished sound. But the live act will most likely have more integrity in their audio performance.

Sure. Stupid people looking for Karajan’s records. Any live performance of Beethoven is better than that. Another problem in what you said: if they have more integrity live, you propose hierarchy.

Any art, in its truest form, is about what the individual is trying to convey, not how they're trying to do it.

Definitely, and with all due respect: you are not an artist, and don’t have the slightest idea of what you are talking about. An artist knows that how is what make him what he is. Easy to prove, follow me: you have poems of love from more than ten centuries. Why don’t we just read one? Because of how. It makes one what he is.

I mean what would you rather have, style... or substance? Ideally, for me, the answer is both. But if I had to choose, the latter will ALWAYS win out!

An artist knows that form and substance is one thing. The one who chooses between one or another is a journalist.I

s that so? I've always felt that art, much like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

For an artist, you like too much an old and battered cliché of those who choose not to think.

Better yet, I'll use a quote to sum up my opinion:
"Those that cannot DO... teach. And those that cannot teach... CRITIQUE!"

An example that you don’t know what you are talking about: François Truffaut, great French director, was a great critic of cinema. His texts in the Cahiers du Cinema are pure gold.

Another example: great poet and writer from Argentina, Jorge Luís Borges, was a professor.

You should think before coming to a debate. Your bunch of pocket wisdom is mindless.

There's a lot of wisdom to be found in that simple little statement if you really think about it. Not the least of which is how some people funnel their shortcomings into an outlet steeped in negativity, trying to compensate for their feelings of inadequacy and ultimately... failure.

You know: you should really try some reading, once in a while. It’s good for the brain. And for substance, also. You have quite a lack in it. Wisdom..hah.

 

[Maze]

I didn't mind Hannibal, I thought it was decent, it had it's shinning moments, namely oldman, but you have to understand that Silence is a classic, and ridley was given an almost unrealistic goal, and that was to make a sequel that measured up to Silence, and that was impossible...... after his faliure, it was easy for them to make another "hannibal Lector" movie, because they new people weren't goning to judge it as hard as Hannibal......... don't get me wrong, I own red dragon, I watched it just the other day, I enjoy the hell out of the film until the last scene where Fiennes is at Nortons house...... I just feel that red dragon was Ratners only good movie, and it's not a great movie..... everyone at Fox makes him sound like he's the next big thing, like the next speilberg or scorscesse (I butchered that spelling), but i think he's "eehhh", nothing special, line him up with Renny Harlin IMO......... look at X3 from my perspective, I loved the first two x-men, I think Singer is a very good director, he's not great, not yet, but he is very very good, fox does not contract him after X2 (shows foxs intellegence, and don't even get me started on them)....... so he leaves to make superman, fox is upset and feels betrayed, they now relize they need to make X3, so they get Vaughn, who is another very good directer IMO, but he leaves under strange circumstances, then they bring in Ratner, who he going to do superman until Singer came along, so now we have him, none of his movies impress me, and the only one I like I mentiones above, he makes questionable casting decissions and ommits chatacters (gambit), I understand Fox is pushing him to get this movie released before superman, but if Ratner was a director that had any pull, he would get them to give him more time, or a better script, instead he goes along with them, and I think fox just threw money at this film, thinking it would turn out better if they did........... yes to first two trailers were very good, but then fox starts comming out with this "last of the x-men series" crap, making us think that this will be the last x-men film, that right there depressed me, why would they do that to what could possibly be the next huge franchise, and when I say huge, I mean like Harry Potter 7 film huge.......... and now this 1 hour 43 running time, this is like a tease when compared to X2,............. yes, this turned into a rant, and all these points have been made before, but I feel that ratner wasn't the right choice, they needed to wait for Singer IMO, Singer said that he would have loved to come back, and infact, they would be in preproduction right now if they chose to do this, we'd be looking at a 2007 release, but you know what, I guarentee this movie would have knocked all our socks off......

it was indeed a rant LOL , but i agree one hundreth prct..

if Vaught had stayed onboard for example , i would be really more excited about X3.

Not that layer Cake is a great film imo ..but for a first film it is really impressive..

yup imo , ok imo the movie feel more like disjointed sequences sometimes ,the plot is not so interesting ,i have seen it one hundreth times elsewhere , and it doesn't feel like it is really that important.. at time it is slightly boring imo ..but the movie surprising visually (Vaughn do a lot with with little money ) really imaginative ,really elegant,really meaningful on the inner conflicts of the characters .On top of that , the performance of his actors are top notch.

Vaughn is a talent to watch

 

[Super_Ludacris]

I dont think it will be too much of a big deal

 

[neotheone]

the movie was long to get in all the details and somehow they still cutted out a lot. Lord of the rings was long but was one of the best in box office

 

[Maze]

That's one of the worst posts I've ever answered, but let's go.

Well, I've been involved in the arts all my life and feel it relies on natural talent more than anything else.

“Natural talent”. Bet your next move will be very interesting. Like, genetics?

it is indeed scary to read that..

and when one read after that criticism is just frustration personnified even more..

I'm sure than some "men in power" would love that theory..

thanks for your knowledge Mister sensitive

An example that you don’t know what you are talking about: François Truffaut, great French director, was a great critic of cinema. His texts in the Cahiers du Cinema are pure gold.

Another example: great poet and writer from Argentina, Jorge Luís Borges, was a professor.

You should think before coming to a debate. Your bunch of pocket wisdom is mindless.

and there are countless other example ( Nicholas Boukrief , christophe Gans are two others )

 

[JokerNick]

it was indeed a rant LOL , but i agree one hundreth prct..

if Vaught had stayed onboard for example , i would be really more excited about X3.

Not that layer Cake is a great film imo ..but for a first film it is really impressive..

yup imo , ok imo the movie feel more like disjointed sequences sometimes ,the plot is not so interesting ,i have seen it one hundreth times , and it doesn't feel like it is really that important.. at time it is slightly boring imo ..but the movie surprising visually (Vaughn do a lot with with little money ) really imaginative ,really elegant,really meaningful on the inner conflicts of the characters .On top of that , the performance of his actors are top notch.

Vaughn is a talent to watch

vaugn's interpretation would have been interesting, but I still feel the reason he left was because the script and conditions were bad...... and he passed the test in my opinion if this movie does turn out bad...... this script was thrown together, it feels like a rehash of X2 story btw....

I just really really hate fox, there are all about money and nothing else, they don't care about the qaulity of thise story, they just want the nice return check.......... it's like the age old question, if you were hitlers parents, what would you do??? would you let him grow up and but try to change him so he wouldn't become the evil, or would you put an end to him before it happens, meaning death.......... same goes for fox, would they rush the movie that would possibly destroy the franchise, but make them money, or would they wait, and make a quality film, that everyone enjoys............chances vs certenty IMO...fox knew that Singer would have made a great x3, but their pride got in the way, so they decided to gamble with the franchise....... will it pay off??

 

[Mr Sensitive]

thanks for your knowledge Mister sensitive

You are most welcome, Maze carissimo.

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

who said the contrary?

Mr Sensitive did; read who I quoted.

your definition of criticism is really scorning ..

Good, it was meant to be! Funny how when you use people's own weapons against them, they cry foul. It's ironic too, that "critics" would possess such fragile egos to begin with, considering their chosen vocation. Be careful also, the above remark has you bordering on becoming hypocritical.

without

OBJECTIVE

criticism, some of the greatest artist of our time would have not became, without doubts, so great.

The word "objective", which I inserted above, is key here because it's lacking in most of the criticisms that've been posted. You are right though, to better ourselves we seek out the advice or OPINIONS of those around us. Sometimes, they can see things we can't, 'cause we're so involved that our perception of things is skewed. But to continually unleash a barrage of unfounded insults on something, based solely upon mere speculation, is irrational to say the least. Some of you have been so far away from being objective with your comments, that you couldn't see the "O" with a telescope. In other words, I'll use another quote: "You can't see the forest for the trees."

I'd like to add something else to the art essentials debate. Some of you generalize way too much, making sweeping arguments to encompass anything and everything. Remember, one man's trash is another man's treasure, and vice versa. So in a sense, any individual's critiques will undoubtedly be influenced by their personal preferences... to varying degrees, of course.

 

[BizarroAids]

If you look on the SHH main page, they say that the running time is not yet confirmed...so we may just get an over two hour movie yet.

 

[Maze]

Good, it was meant to be! Funny how when you use people's own weapons against them, they cry foul. It's ironic too, that "critics" would possess such fragile egos to begin with, considering their chosen vocation. Be careful also, the above remark has you bordering on becoming hypocritical.
OBJECTIVE

lol i'm not sure if you are implying that i am a critic..
I am not , i am in fact in their eyes if you wan't to know.

i hate generality and i have learnt to respect the art of critic.

You don't ..and even more you don't understand it..i find it's a shame.

ps: do you imply that you are also more objective than other people?
that's quite a statement.iF that's the case ,Can you explain me why?

 

[JokerNick]

If you look on the SHH main page, they say that the running time is not yet confirmed...so we may just get an over two hour movie yet.

someone asked rothman, and he confirmed that the time is not official, but it will be somewhere around 1.43

 

[gap5ewl]

fox just said that cannes guessed the running time and new rinning time has been confirmed yet. I really hope its at least 120 minutes (2 hrs)

 

[Maze]

I'd like to add something else to the art essentials debate. Some of you generalize way too much, making sweeping arguments to encompass anything and everything.

LOL aren't you the one making statements on an entire profession?

when i read mister sensitive ,i read somebody who have knowledge of what he is talking about..No, offense, but you are the one making generality.

.

But to continually unleash a barrage of unfounded insults on something, based solely upon mere speculation, is irrational to say the least. Some of you have been so far away from being objective with your comments, that you couldn't see the "O" with a telescope. In other words, I'll use another quote: "You can't see the forest for the trees."

i agree , but i didn't see that often here.quite the contrary , i've read a lot of criticism who are imo,deserved.

You don't agree , ok.But criticize the argument , give counter argument to prove your point,don't make general statement who doesn't add anything to the debate.

i say that you seem very sensitive on the topic of criticism ..

ps: anyways , personnaly i'm going to stop there the commentary on a person, i hardly know , it doesn't make help to make a real healty and constructive debate..

 

[_BB_]

from the main page

X-Men Running Time Not Locked in Yet
Source: 20th Century Fox
April 25, 2006


We previously reported that the Cannes Film Festival, where X-Men: The Last Stand is screening out of competition, had listed a running time of 1 hour and 43 minutes for the third film.

As we expected, this was simply a guess by the Festival because 20th Century Fox couldn't confirm the true lenght of the film in time for their schedule to be published. As of today, no running time has been locked in yet, so stay tuned.

X-Men was 104 minutes and X2: X-Men United ran 133 minutes.

 

[JokerNick]

from the main page

X-Men Running Time Not Locked in Yet
Source: 20th Century Fox
April 25, 2006


We previously reported that the Cannes Film Festival, where X-Men: The Last Stand is screening out of competition, had listed a running time of 1 hour and 43 minutes for the third film.

As we expected, this was simply a guess by the Festival because 20th Century Fox couldn't confirm the true lenght of the film in time for their schedule to be published. As of today, no running time has been locked in yet, so stay tuned.

X-Men was 104 minutes and X2: X-Men United ran 133 minutes.

they've stated in the past, it won't be longer then X2, it will be shorter....... Im willing to be 1.43 it prety close, but also your argument could go both ways, it could be shorter then 1.43............ what is it's a buck 30?

 

[Prognosticator]

I have known ever since Bryan Singer left that we would get a crap third movie that would be as short as possible. And everything except the trailers have since proved me right, I hate Fox, i now dont look forward to any project they do because they are the ****test movie studio out there. They have ruined what should have been the best comic book movie ever, even better than Batman Begins, which is by far the pinnacle of CB movies, but no, Fox give us two terrible writers, an average director and an hour and a half "return of the king". **** you Fox, **** you very much.

Oh and Batman totally agree with your post.

Where were these people yesterday when i felt as if i was almost standing alone with this topic?? Bravo Jamon! Bravo! You guys are hitting on all sylinders and i hope those stupid SOBs at Fox get word of all the trash talking on places like this! The whole situation is one big clusterf@$%, and it's going to bite Fox in the ass! Actually, it already has. Electra was a flat out bomb. There will be no Daredevil sequel. FF will putter along only so far in its own mediocrity, and the X-franchise is starting to look like a brainchild of Joel Schumacher (at least his batman movies were a little over 2 hours a piece!)

When X3 opens big (and we all know it will, if anything b/c its so short and people will cram into multiple showings), those Fox schucks will be kissing each other's asses, pretending they're geniuses but week 2 it'll crash 60% if this thing sucks like Ratner's other cinema trash!

 

[Retroman]

If you look on the SHH main page, they say that the running time is not yet confirmed...so we may just get an over two hour movie yet.

*breathes sigh of relief*

 

[SilentType]

I can not believe this discussion is still going on. Nobody has even seen the movie. There are little or no actual facts to support either side of the argument, so it has been page upon page of:
-It's SHORT! It's going to suck.
Not necessarily. It can be short and good.
-Nope. There is too much in it. If its short It won't be very good.
It could be. Wait for the move.
-Fox sucks. They only care about money.
YOU HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN THE MOVIE!
-But it’s short so it won't be very good. Hopefully they will wait 10 years and do a reboot.
Wait until you see the movie
-TOO SHORT!
It could still be good
-You’re delusional
At least give it a chance
-Fox sucks

 

[JokerNick]

Where were these people yesterday when i felt as if i was almost standing alone with this topic?? Bravo Jamon! Bravo! You guys are hitting on all sylinders and i hope those stupid SOBs at Fox get word of all the trash talking on places like this! The whole situation is one big clusterf@$%, and it's going to bite Fox in the ass! Actually, it already has. Electra was a flat out bomb. There will be no Daredevil sequel. FF will putter along only so far in its own mediocrity, and the X-franchise is starting to look like a brainchild of Joel Schumacher (at least his batman movies were a little over 2 hours a piece!)

When X3 opens big (and we all know it will, if anything b/c its so short and people will cram into multiple showings), those Fox schucks will be kissing each other's asses, pretending they're geniuses but week 2 it'll crash 60% if this thing sucks like Ratner's other cinema trash!

\


**nods head in agreement**

 

[JokerNick]

I can not believe this discussion is still going on. Nobody has even seen the movie. There are little or no actual facts to support either side of the argument, so it has been page upon page of:
-It's SHORT! It's going to suck.
Not necessarily. It can be short and good.
-Nope. There is too much in it. If its short It won't be very good.
It could be. Wait for the move.
-Fox sucks. They only care about money.
YOU HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN THE MOVIE!
-But it’s short so it won't be very good. Hopefully they will wait 10 years and do a reboot.
Wait until you see the movie
-TOO SHORT!
It could still be good
-You’re delusional
At least give it a chance
-Fox sucks

and your point is????

we all know we are pationate about X3, somepeople are optomist, some are pessimist, I'm a realist......... like I've said, chances are this movie will blow, I'm going to see it and give it a fair shot, but most signs are pointing in a bad direction..........

 

[rashad]

Everybody calm the heck down and read the SHH main page!...lol

 

[ultimatefan]

Well, in another thread Simon Kinberg confirmed the running time is about right... It will definitely be shorter than X2

Why that worries me? Because from everything that´s being said and shown, this movie has a lot of story to cover... there´s the cure plot, there´s the rise of the dark pheonix, an X-Men dies, we´re introduced to Beast, Angel, Juggernaut, and yet old characters like Wolvie, Storm, Professor X, Magneto, etc. are supposed to have important roles. I want the movie to be energetic and entertaining, with lotsa action, but I want plenty of character development too, dialogue, all this... Kinberg says the movie has a lot of character and dialogue moments, so it remains to be seen whether Ratner managed to properly tell the story in the running time he´s got or not.

All these complaints come from Fox´s history with comic book projects... They seriously butchered Daredevil out of much of its best parts, including an entire and crucial subplot, and FF was also mutilated of some important character moments - even though they don´t really fix the inherent problems with the tone of that movie. The first X-Men was pretty good but still felt short to me... I don´t want the same to happen to TLS.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

I really, REALLY think you guys need to cool off for a while. The studio has made it clear to us that the Festival had to guesstimate because the film wasn't locked yet. This is not a completely unrealistic circumstance when you think about it.

As far as those fans who are relentlessly bashing Ratner, FOX, the actors, the film etc. based on this foreign company's estimate, I'll say this: I hope for your sake that everything your whining about comes out true. Because if it doesn't you're going to have much egg sliding down your face come May 26th--and we will be here to remind you to wipe it off.

 

[SilentType]

and your point is????

we all know we are pationate about X3, somepeople are optomist, some are pessimist, I'm a realist......... like I've said, chances are this movie will blow, I'm going to see it and give it a fair shot, but most signs are pointing in a bad direction..........

A realist? You people have been squealing and moaning and gnashing your teeth about a movie you haven’t even seen. It's ludicrous. You people have assumed the running time will be the death of this movie and have subsequently reamed everyone involved in the film. How very presumptuous.
It could be a steaming pile of Fantastic Four, or it could be great, I don’t know. But I’m not going to light my torch before I see the monster.

 

[Maze]

A realist? You people have been squealing and moaning and gnashing your teeth about a movie you haven’t even seen. It's ludicrous. You people have assumed the running time will be the death of this movie and have subsequently reamed everyone involved in the film. How very presumptuous.
It could be a steaming pile of Fantastic Four, or it could be great, I don’t know. But I’m not going to light my torch before I see the monster.

i read that a lot of people here expect it to be good but don't expect a great film.And some of them have stated why in great lenght.

please , if you want' to have a debate, don't generalize , reread what has been written, or at last ask to people that they precise their thoughts.

it help to have an healty debate to understand the point of view of the other..