I kinda hope this movie bombs....

FieryBalrog said:
The X-men could be dressed in tutus and people like you would be defending the need to appeal to the 7 year old girl demographic. :down

Some changes are good and necessary. No one is clamoring for the Shi'ar or Lilandra or a battle on the moon. Killing Cyclops and putting in Wolverine... thats a change that was built towards "kewl" marketing, the same sort of bull**** that has ruined other comic book movies.


Sorry but your trolling is idiocy at its best.

Yeah , so folks like Bryan Singer, Hugh Jackman, Ian Mckellan , Patrick stewart , Breatt Ratner, crew , artists, techs and the investors that put up million of dolloars are all in it to put out crappy product just to screw you Cyclops fans cause they have guranteed bucks?

NO, what killed other movies is not taking the characters seriously, and deviating from what the chracters are......Most folks in these movies have respect for the characters and the themes that make the comic great.



you're simply delusional.


like it or not Jim Marsden and Bryan singer chose to do Superman, ( by comparison, Shawn Ashmore chose not to do it for time reasons) thus leaving the writers to deal with his potential absnce or limited involvement. I also am sure that Fox was pissed....


BTW I Hate the Xcostumes in general, I also have stated many time that IF cyclops does die, that its a bad idea.


be a hater , but I'm not playing your game, troll elsewhere
 
Singer and Marsden only choose Superman because Fox was dragging their butts to sign everyone.

Think about this: Why did it take so long for Fox to sign Singer and his company along with the cast after X2 opened to 85 million in the US? Seriously, the film had a 110 to 130 million dollar budget. By day ten, worldwide, X2 had well over 120 million as its gross.

A month after X2 opened, Fox should've started negiotating with everyone involved so they could get the process started on X3.

Singer would've had the entirety of 2004 to work on preproduction and the script before they were to start shooting in 2005.

Fox didn't start preproduction on the Last Stand until February of 2005. What the hell did they do in 2004?

That's why all of this is screwed up.
 
Listen I'm just going to say this because this is really pissing me off.

1. X-3 can be a great movie minus cyclops.
2. Stop blaming Ratner, Zak, Simon etc...Singer was the one who gave cyclops the minors rolls in the first to films therefore making him expendible.
3. I understand that he is a popular character and has a lot of fans but why can't you just be thankful that he is in the movie. Gambit fans, Jubilee fans, Emma fans Nightcrawler fans don't have that luxury.
 
Seriously, knowing from the very get go that they were setting up the Phoenix storyline, do you really think Singer would've put Scott on the backburner in the third film?

The last few scenes in X2 all but confirmed, for me, that Scott was going to be major in Singer's third film.

Scott was not expendible in the first film. He has a great bit of screen time and you understand who he is. Wolverine is our guide into the world of Xavier and his students but Scott does just enough to understand who he is in that film.

X2 was juggling alot but when time came to give Scott the proper moment to shine, Singer killed it with the final scenes.

Singer's third film would've put him front and center with Jean, Xavier, and Magneto.
 
Why would you want the movie to bomb? :confused:

I won't go into all the things everyone has been complaining about, I think we all know what they are.

But you're going to pay and see this movie in a week. Wouldn't you hope that in spite of everything you enjoy the movie and that it turns out to be a big hit after all?

Just trying to be optimistic. It's easier. :)
 
Tony Stark said:
As far as team superhero movies, however you feel about the Fantastic Four movie, you can't deny that at least Frost wrote the script that was complimentary to the characters, with the possible exception of the contraversial changes to Doom.

But dealing with the FF themselves, the characters on film are for the most part the same personalities that are in the book.

I realize that movie had some problems, although I think it's better than most people give it credit for. But as far as showing a team of people and developing their characters, Frost did a wonderful job of keeping a focus on all four. And even though he's no the same Doom from the comics, they still kept McMahon as a focus in the plot.

All I can say is Ford showed a hell of alot more respect for the FF than these idiot writers did for the X-men.


Compared to X3 the FF movie is Citizen Kane. And I thought the FF movie stunk. Well, mostly Doom stunk.
 
X-Maniac said:
Do you honestly believe there was any character development in Matrix? We knew nothing about almost all of the characters. Neo and Trinity loved each other, eventually - that's about it. We got no depth or texture at all, just lots of action... The same applies to Star Wars Revenge of the Sith, no real development in there either. There is far more depth and humanity and soul in X-Men, including X3 (judging from the trailers).

I think there is a ton more depth and drama and emotion in X3 than in ANY Star Wars or Matrix movie. I missed ROTS at the cinema, bought it on DVD and immediately sold it on because it was so piss-poor. It did well because it was Star Wars, not because it was good. I was talking about it at work and i couldn't find one person who liked the film - everyone was ripping it apart.

Trust me, X3 will deliver far more than that. We won't know everything about all the villains and peripheral characters, but then we never did in X1 and X2.

Every film in the SW series destroys X3 at the box office and in terms of quality. Episodes IV, V and III are all highly regarded by critics and rightdully so. There's nothing in any of the SW films as disgusting as them killing off Cyclops.
 
Kurosawa said:
Every film in the SW series destroys X3 at the box office and in terms of quality. Episodes IV, V and III are all highly regarded by critics and rightdully so.

'Return of the Jedi' was NOT highly regarded by critics. It was referred to as a two hour toy commercial.


There's nothing in any of the SW films as disgusting as them killing off Cyclops.

Not even the Ewoks?

::shakes head::

::goes back to work:: :rolleyes:
 
Kurosawa said:
Compared to X3 the FF movie is Citizen Kane. And I thought the FF movie stunk. Well, mostly Doom stunk.
That is a ridiculous statement for a movie you haven't seen.
 
god/devil said:
Listen I'm just going to say this because this is really pissing me off.

1. X-3 can be a great movie minus cyclops.
2. Stop blaming Ratner, Zak, Simon etc...Singer was the one who gave cyclops the minors rolls in the first to films therefore making him expendible.
3. I understand that he is a popular character and has a lot of fans but why can't you just be thankful that he is in the movie. Gambit fans, Jubilee fans, Emma fans Nightcrawler fans don't have that luxury.

1. It can but that died for me when Storm became leader, My favorite characters all die or arn't there(pyslocke dies!! she just got introduced, i hope they are wrong) No fire pheonix or so they say :-( and most heinous crime was Wolverine front man no offense to any wolvie fans but the character is know for being the loner yep this movie potrays that real well :rolleyes: (or so it seems cuz i havnt seen it).

2. X-1 wasn't ment to revolve around Cyke but he got he's fairly good share of screen. X-2 was disapointing with the whole Cyke thing but things where set up to give him X-3 this was supposed to be his. And im sure Singer wouldn't have done this but im also sure Singer wouldn't have given us soo much action. I don't blame the writers but they could of made it better. I don't blame director either.

3. i have no luxury, NO gambit, Scott dies, Pheonix gets killed by Wolverine WTH!!!, Rogue doesn't do anything, and psylocke has one line kills a lady and then dies.
 
god/devil said:
Listen I'm just going to say this because this is really pissing me off.

1. X-3 can be a great movie minus cyclops.
2. Stop blaming Ratner, Zak, Simon etc...Singer was the one who gave cyclops the minors rolls in the first to films therefore making him expendible.
3. I understand that he is a popular character and has a lot of fans but why can't you just be thankful that he is in the movie. Gambit fans, Jubilee fans, Emma fans Nightcrawler fans don't have that luxury.

Cyclops did not have a minor roll in X1.

X2 was Nightcrawlers movie, to complain about the lack of Nightcrawler in X3 is like complaining about the lack of Beast in X2.

There may be more movies where Gamit, Jubilee et all can be developed.

The point is the Phoenix saga is about Jean and Scott PERIOD.
 
I agee, this movie is going to be ******ed. They can't keep making comic book movies like this.
 
This movie looks about on par with rush hour 2.

yes, I like rush hour 2, but it's not a great movie, fun but not great.

x3, I predict, will be popular and make a lot of money but exist in the same table alongside RH 2 in my mind.
 
Kurosawa said:
Every film in the SW series destroys X3 at the box office and in terms of quality. Episodes IV, V and III are all highly regarded by critics and rightdully so. There's nothing in any of the SW films as disgusting as them killing off Cyclops.

What rubbish. Truly you are blind and delusional. Can i just say - Ewoks, Jar Jar Binks, the swamp-dwellers in the first prequel having African-American voices (some terrible racist undertones in that film), the hammy cackling Sith Lord in ROTS, the 'dramatic' (NOT!) final battle by the lava in ROTS, the feeble portrayal of Padme's story... Those movies SUCKED. Big time. They climbed on the success of the 70s classics and delivered a big steaming heap of poop. Are they memorable.. Do people talk about them.. do people like them? - based on my own experience, a big NO. Forgettable rubbish that only became successful because of the name Star Wars stamped on it.
 
I dont hope it bombs,but i understand where you're coming from.
The Dark Phoenix saga was such an incredible story.
I mean i know it cant possibly include everything that was in the comics otherwise the budget would have been 400 million dollars.
But that emotional connection,and Jean sacrificing herself in front of Scott,that was powerful stuff,and i feel the movie will be lacking in that area.
 
nightwing06 said:
I dont hope it bombs,but i understand where you're coming from.
The Dark Phoenix saga was such an incredible story.
I mean i know it cant possibly include everything that was in the comics otherwise the budget would have been 400 million dollars.
But that emotional connection,and Jean sacrificing herself in front of Scott,that was powerful stuff,and i feel the movie will be lacking in that area.

Jean already sacrificed herself in front of Scott in X2.

We can't reheat the same stories in the microwave and serve them up again... Something different HAD to happen...
 
X-Maniac said:
Jean already sacrificed herself in front of Scott in X2.

We can't reheat the same stories in the microwave and serve them up again... Something different HAD to happen...

Of course not, but im just trying to point out,you wont be as emotionally involved with the characters as you were with the comic.
The movie will be lacking in that area.
 
why would someone want a movie to bomb...????


idiots!
 
X-Maniac said:
What rubbish. Truly you are blind and delusional. Can i just say - Ewoks, Jar Jar Binks, the swamp-dwellers in the first prequel having African-American voices (some terrible racist undertones in that film), the hammy cackling Sith Lord in ROTS, the 'dramatic' (NOT!) final battle by the lava in ROTS, the feeble portrayal of Padme's story... Those movies SUCKED. Big time. They climbed on the success of the 70s classics and delivered a big steaming heap of poop. Are they memorable.. Do people talk about them.. do people like them? - based on my own experience, a big NO. Forgettable rubbish that only became successful because of the name Star Wars stamped on it.

Cyclops. Dead. DEAD. No Jar-Jar, no Ewok, nothing at all is as offensive as the X-Men's leader DYING in the movie where he should have shined.
 
J.Howlett said:
Singer and Marsden only choose Superman because Fox was dragging their butts to sign everyone.

Think about this: Why did it take so long for Fox to sign Singer and his company along with the cast after X2 opened to 85 million in the US? Seriously, the film had a 110 to 130 million dollar budget. By day ten, worldwide, X2 had well over 120 million as its gross.

A month after X2 opened, Fox should've started negiotating with everyone involved so they could get the process started on X3.

Singer would've had the entirety of 2004 to work on preproduction and the script before they were to start shooting in 2005.

Fox didn't start preproduction on the Last Stand until February of 2005. What the hell did they do in 2004?

That's why all of this is screwed up.

Exactly! Well put. Notice how Fox fast-tracked X3 the week after Singer signed with WB? In a perfect world Fox would be professional enough to swallow their pride and wait for Singer to be available (considering they were responsible for delaying X3).

But I think Fox ego's have ruined the original vision.
 
X-Maniac said:
Do you honestly believe there was any character development in Matrix? We knew nothing about almost all of the characters. Neo and Trinity loved each other, eventually - that's about it. We got no depth or texture at all, just lots of action... The same applies to Star Wars Revenge of the Sith, no real development in there either. There is far more depth and humanity and soul in X-Men, including X3 (judging from the trailers).

I think there is a ton more depth and drama and emotion in X3 than in ANY Star Wars or Matrix movie. I missed ROTS at the cinema, bought it on DVD and immediately sold it on because it was so piss-poor. It did well because it was Star Wars, not because it was good. I was talking about it at work and i couldn't find one person who liked the film - everyone was ripping it apart.

Trust me, X3 will deliver far more than that. We won't know everything about all the villains and peripheral characters, but then we never did in X1 and X2.

Hi Maniac,

My point wasn't to compare Star Wars, LOTR or the Matrix to X-Men.

My point was that these films were "real" trilogies that followed a consistent vision via a consistent creative force (Lucas, Jackson or the Wachowski Bros). Unfortunatley X-3 has taken a 90 degree turn and ignored the personalised ensemble films that Singer made in favour of an unoriginal war film that will make money by cashing in the recent blockbusters (whether they were good or bad).

X3's commercial profitablity in favour of X2's creativity.
 
Chris M said:
Hi Maniac,

My point wasn't to compare Star Wars, LOTR or the Matrix to X-Men.

My point was that these films were "real" trilogies that followed a consistent vision via a consistent creative force (Lucas, Jackson or the Wachowski Bros). Unfortunatley X-3 has taken a 90 degree turn and ignored the personalised ensemble films that Singer made in favour of an unoriginal war film that will make money by cashing in the recent blockbusters (whether they were good or bad).

X3's commercial profitablity in favour of X2's creativity.

I'll agree those are real trilogies that were conceived that way in the beginning...

However, the events of X1, X2 and X3 are interconnected. The same actors (mostly), a lot of the same sets (the mansion, jet), characters' storylines do flow between the movies, rather than each being self-contained. I don't think X3 is an unoriginal war film, it's the culmination of events that have been foreshadowed in X1 (Magneto predicted war, Wolverine mentioned it to Storm) and X2 (Mystique/Kelly challenged Stryker over whether he was trying to start a war). In X1 Rogue asks Storm (in a deleted scene though) if she can be cured...in this film she develops that dilemma. These aren't three separate films Chris.. even though not written at the same time, they do honour and respect and follow through on the preceding events and bring them to a climax. I don't think the writers sat down and thought of profits, they sat down and tried to continued the characters' stories (though some parameters were set by the studio).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,509
Messages
21,742,881
Members
45,573
Latest member
vortep88
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"