If you Don't like the movie - POST HERE

[gambitfire]

I kinda always figured a Tease and a Sneek peak where somewhat related. I mean the words Sneek and Tease sound like cousins.



I just didn't think they needed to tell you anything. You know the 4 already, you see this new guy come out of nowhere. You want to know who he is now. Exactly!!.. All the more to look forward for the next one.

 

[gambitfire]

No, you can't. While I do like Hulk better, I wanted Nell's opinion on how he feels about them restarting the Hulk and ignoring what happened with the first film.

If i where a huge Hulk fan i'd probably like X3 better.

Although as much as i dislike X3 atleast it didn't bore me for the first half of the film.

I still prefer the CG, Action and Drama of the Hulk film. I just wish Mr. Ang knew how to evenly distribute it through out the film.

 

[chaseter]

No, you can't. While I do like Hulk better, I wanted Nell's opinion on how he feels about them restarting the Hulk and ignoring what happened with the first film.

I am not a huge fan of the Hulk but I think restarting the franchise would be stupid. Eric Bana was a great Hulk and I don't know what his status is on the future films. The Hulk had many extremely cheesy parts in it...like the giant poodle. X3...although a mediocre film, is better than the Hulk. I love things to look realistic and CGI that can come as close as it can to realism has to be the next best thing to a real actor. That is the problem with movies such as Hulk and King Kong. It has a degree of fake to it. I think for the Hulk series to survive, it needs to be boosted up quiet a bit much like Fantastic Four 2 is getting. A cheesy first film taking a deeper dive into great CGI and great characters. Hulk 2 needs a lot of help. Now back to X3 and the future of that franchise. For the X-Men franchise to survive, it needs a reboot. I don't think that an X4 directly following the events of X3 is a great idea. It's time to allow some fresh faces to come in...ones that don't have 1-5 Oscars and demand 25 million per film. Look at X1, look at Spider-Man 1, look at most succesful comic book movies and see that they have mostly new, younger hollywood faces and 1 or 2 great veterans to add to the depth. The series gets jaded and so do the actors. My hopes are that Spider-Man 3 breaks that dreaded trilogy curse. X3 had a chance to break that, but Fox and some of the actors and minds behind the film got greedy and hastey...that led to it's ultimate plunge.

 

[kg576094]

I think the movie needs additional dialogue in places to perhaps make such character scenes more obvious. Somewhere - in the writing, directing or editing - the flow became less smooth.

Like I before I'm not questioning about the possibility of these behaviourial changes but rather about the lack of interlocking scenes that defined the motives for such changes bridging the gap between the two separate scenes
That's my problem with Ratner and his so-called MTV cut of feature film - he filmed what he liked in scene A and then moved on to scene B doing a different thing without bothering whether or not both A or B links streamlessly for the viewers
The result is that there were not only discrepancies in his character behaviours but also day/night discrepancies (why on earth did he cut out the sunset scene with Jean?) and traveling distance/time discrepancies (where's that scene of Angel hiding in the blackbird?)
In the end the movie we got felt like impt little details were intentionally left out because of a certain directional style (similarly why the firebird and phoenix rising were left out even though we have all seen how awesome the concept art of those looks because Ratner thinks what he put on screen works for himself)

(1) I want a final scene whereby Angel have a good talk with his dad. A simple dialogue would have worked as such:
Son, you rescued me with those wings. How is this possible?
I learned long ago I could rescue people with my power. Remember our neighbourhood's sexiest babe Susan and her daughter Julie, I saved their dog from a freefall a few years back. Julie had since loved me and my wings!
Son, I was wrong about you ...about the cure! Please forgive me what I've done to you and many others!
Yes dad, let me fly you home.
That's character development for both Angel & his dad that appropriately conclude their story. The scene is at most 2 minutes max!

(2) I want a scene whereby Storm apologised to Rogue about being harsh to her about the cure and that she now understood that some mutants may want the cure after much thinking.
However, as leader of the X-men, Storm hoped that Rogue could still join the team in their final confrontation with Magneto because the team needs her and Magneto was destroying the source of the very cure that Rogue and many other mutants needed.
After all that was done, Rogue must then decide whether she wants to stay as a X-man or be cured as a human.
That's character development for both Storm & Rogue, and it clearly explained why she was defending the cure despite having early opposition like any of the members of the Botherhood of Mutants
For Rogue, she became torn between 2 polar choices (her responsibility to the school and her love for Iceman) and we weren't made as viewers to think she make her decision based on sex only
Replace the scene with the one with Wolverine (enough of Wolverine in every scene caring for everybody!?!!)

(3) I have no issue with Wolverine using the cure as a weapon since he hadn't made any comments about the cure. He's pretty much worthless agt Magneto since he was basically a toy against the Master Of Magnetism....so can we have either Rogue or Storm take out Magneto instead?
However with Beast it became a complicated issue because by using the cure as a weapon himself it negated his political stance against the President's weaponisation of the cure as well as taking away his reasons for rejecting the cure if asked to by the President.
I want a scene where Beast expressed great regret to the President and quit his political career altogether because he had flip-floped on his political stand also because he still did not agree with the weaponisation of the cure.
Essentially Beast learnt that he was happier as a X-men and went back to the school because he felt this was the place he should be to teach students who had rejected the cure like himself, Angel and Rogue.

(4) A scene whereby flocks of students left the school either becasue of wanting to take the cure or because of what happened to Xavier & Jean preceding the closure disscusion would have worked better than jumping right to the heart of the closure discusion from Xavier funeral scene earlier on
In my culture people who discuss about closing the old man's shop or school right after the funeral are seen as money-grabbers who can't wait to get a cut of the old man's fortune and earned a quick buck ...it's insensitive and done in extremely bad taste
The bridging scene would also have effectively explained the purpose of the discussion and why the appearance of mutants like Angel skewed the discussion suddenly

(5) Unnecessary cameo

(6) Thank God Mystique MIA

And to Nell, I'm talking about the Dark Phoenix not Jean the confused X-woman.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

I am not a huge fan of the Hulk but I think restarting the franchise would be stupid. Eric Bana was a great Hulk and I don't know what his status is on the future films. The Hulk had many extremely cheesy parts in it...like the giant poodle. X3...although a mediocre film, is better than the Hulk. I love things to look realistic and CGI that can come as close as it can to realism has to be the next best thing to a real actor. That is the problem with movies such as Hulk and King Kong. It has a degree of fake to it. I think for the Hulk series to survive, it needs to be boosted up quiet a bit much like Fantastic Four 2 is getting. A cheesy first film taking a deeper dive into great CGI and great characters. Hulk 2 needs a lot of help. Now back to X3 and the future of that franchise. For the X-Men franchise to survive, it needs a reboot. I don't think that an X4 directly following the events of X3 is a great idea. It's time to allow some fresh faces to come in...ones that don't have 1-5 Oscars and demand 25 million per film. Look at X1, look at Spider-Man 1, look at most succesful comic book movies and see that they have mostly new, younger hollywood faces and 1 or 2 great veterans to add to the depth. The series gets jaded and so do the actors. My hopes are that Spider-Man 3 breaks that dreaded trilogy curse. X3 had a chance to break that, but Fox and some of the actors and minds behind the film got greedy and hastey...that led to it's ultimate plunge.

You mean Eric Bana was a good Bruce Banner. But, seriously they said he's not coming back for the restart. It's a complete restart with a lower budget and a lot more action.

A shame really, because I liked Hulk and found it to be a really great film.

I think the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Die Hard, Saw, and The Godfather are the only films to have escaped the trilogy curse.

 

[chaseter]

You mean Eric Bana was a good Bruce Banner. But, seriously they said he's not coming back for the restart. It's a complete restart with a lower budget and a lot more action.

A shame really, because I liked Hulk and found it to be a really great film.

I think the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Die Hard, Saw, and The Godfather are the only films to have escaped the trilogy curse.

I was trying to stick to comic book movies but LOTR was great and the Harry Potter films have been extensively better with each film. It is a shame it will be a restart. I don't know how they are going to have a lower budget and more action...those two seem to contradict each other in terms of the Hulk being completely CGI and the feats he performs are extensively hard to film with real props...ie throwing a tank. X1 had a sad budget compared to X3 and I give X1 major props for it's good fight scenes and quality of the film for such a low budget. I understand some of the feats the Phoenix would do needed to be CGI for X3 but nothing can beat an old fashioned fist fight IMO. But once again, I think if the X-Men franchise is to survive, it needs a reboot.

 

[gambitfire]

So Eric Bana isn't on board?

 

[LadyVader]

If i where a huge Hulk fan i'd probably like X3 better.

Although as much as i dislike X3 atleast it didn't bore me for the first half of the film.

I still prefer the CG, Action and Drama of the Hulk film. I just wish Mr. Ang knew how to evenly distribute it through out the film.

I doubt that. I really like the first half of the Hulk movie. It's the ending that ruins it for me. That has to be one of the dumbest, weirdest endings in a superhero movie yet. And that says something.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I think the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Die Hard, Saw, and The Godfather are the only films to have escaped the trilogy curse.

It's weird, I hear that about The Godfather, but my father, who's a huge fan of the Godfather films, isn't so high on 3. The first one is definatley his favorite, and he really likes 2, but I don't think he was too big on 3.

As far as your Hulk question is concerned; well, the idea of a reboot with Hulk isn't really something I've thought about, because really, well, I didn't like the Ang Lee one, And Hulk isn't a comic book character I follow at all. I didn't think there was much to the film, and with comic films like X-Men, X2, and Spiderman, and the first Blade, which added more substance to comic book films, I think that Hulk tried way too hard to be serious, and just failed in the process. I don't think it was really that well done at all.

Having said that, I don't really know why they are rebooting it to begin with. They might as well just make a sequel.

But from what I've heard, Bana and Connelly aren't too high on another Hulk movie, so I guess when you have an entirely different core cast, and a new director anyways, there isn't going to be much connection to the original.

X-Men and Hulk are in completely different situations, however.

Hulk was a not all that well recieved film, the cast and crew want nothing to do with further films, and I don't know how the fanbase felt about it.

X-Men is a very well recieved franchise that, despite some inaccuracies to the source material (most of them coming in X-Men: The Last Stand), remained more accurate to the comics than not, and has a complete, full story arc to it that, while some of the conclussions my be questionable (in terms of quality), all is brought to resolution, with all 3 movies and their subplots truly acting as smaller pieces to one larger story. Maybe not AS seamless as Lord of the Rings or even Star Wars, but definatley one "bigger" story by far.

Hulk was a failure. It's getting redone. The original Batman films were failures. While the Burton's are considered to be okay (I still think that those ones are horribly wrong as well), the latter 2 put a horrible taste in the mouths of Batman fans and casual viewers alike. Batman is, behind Superman, the single most popular comic book character in American culture. One of the most popular CHARACTERS in American culture. A new Batman franchise during the peak of comic book films is pretty much a given. Same goes for Superman, who hasn't had a movie since the early 80's. And Casino Royale, I hardly consider a "reboot" to the Bond franchise, as, except for having it be his first mission, and taking place in post 9-11 times, the formula is pretty much still the same as other Bond movies. And if I can accept 5 different actors playing the role (6 now with Craig) over the span of 40 years, and the character never aging from the Cold War to 21st Century, then I think I can handle a "prequel" that takes place in modern day.

I can understand remakes, or reboots, moreso when the original was a failure, and the remake is an attempt to do justice to the source material. When the source material has, for the most part, been accuratley represented, I feel no need to ruin what's been made, and ruin the integrity of it, with remakes. Batman NEEDED to be remade and done justice, Superman NEEDED to make a return to the big screen. X-Men, for the most part, was done right. Of course there were changes, and I'm not saying that I'm 100% happy with the films (and despite the fact that I highly enjoy it, and may even call it my favorite, X-Men: The Last Stand also has the most complaints from me in the trilogy).

As far as Hulk goes, I find myself absolutley not caring because

A. The original movie sucked
B. I've had absolutley 0% interest in the character my entire life
and
C. Hulk isn't nearly on the same level as Batman or Superman

So honestly, I'd rather that it weren't a remake. I'd rather that they didn't try to "reboot" the series. The movie came out like, 4 years ago, and I didn't like it then, so I probably won't like it now.

But at the same time, I have absolutley no care in the world what happens, because I have no emotional investment or attatchment to the project. If Hulk doesn't happen, I'll sleep at night. If Hulk is rebooted, I'll see it in theatres, and sleep at night.

X-Men is a totally different ballgame. I have an immense amount of emotional investment and attatchment to the X-Men. And while there are tons of things that I never got to see in the movies that I'd want to see brought to life (Gambit, my favorite fictional character ever; Sentinels; just to name a couple), I feel that the overall, big picture, is more important than whether I see a Cajun and a robot or not.

The X-Men trilogy is one that tells one larger story through many different subplots, and all connect together, ala Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, or The Matrix. The X-Men trilogy is one that I find did the source material an incredible amount of justice, despite certain differences from the source material. It is one that, as a whole, is very well recieved by the fans and general audience alike. Unlike Batman, Superman, and even The Hulk, which needed to be "done right", X-Men has already been "done right". It's like doing a reboot of The Godfather, or Star Wars, or The Matrix, because there were certain elements that weren't favorable. Would you reboot Jurassic Park just because the first one didn't feature the boat ride down the river with Alan Grant and the children? Would you reboot Lord of the Rings because there was no Tom Bombadil, or the confrontation of the Hobbits and Saramon at The Shire?

Just because a reboot happened to one franchise, and was successful, is not justification to run around doing reboots to every franchise that faulters a little bit, and I get tired of these damned Hollywood trends. X-Men is done... it's time for Hollywood to move on to something else now. Cuz remaking these movies everytime a fan has a complaint with something is not going to get us anywhere, because somewhere, a fan will always have a complaint with it.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Do you even understand why I suggested she should have fired a lightning bolt?

Yes, but the lack of that element does not constitute "bad writing"

 

[gambitfire]

I doubt that. I really like the first half of the Hulk movie. It's the ending that ruins it for me. That has to be one of the dumbest, weirdest endings in a superhero movie yet. And that says something.

You're right it was pretty dumb. As far as action goes it was well done, but Story wise.....yea, it sucked IMO.

I would of liked the first half if it didn't take itself so seriously and if they didn't make up so much Serious reasons behind The Hulk.

 

[gambitfire]

C. Hulk isn't nearly on the same level as Batman or Superman

Nell that's alot too say for someone who absolutley has no care in the matter.

Anyways, He isn't in the same level in what sense?

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Nell that's alot too say for someone who absolutley has no care in the matter.

Anyways, He isn't in the same level in what sense?

Popularity. His status as an icon of American culture.

 

[Halcohol]

Popularity. His status as an icon of American culture.

That's true, the Hulk's fanbase is a lot smaller than that of, say, the X-Men.

 

[La_She-Beast]

I doubt that. I really like the first half of the Hulk movie. It's the ending that ruins it for me. That has to be one of the dumbest, weirdest endings in a superhero movie yet. And that says something.

Yeah I agree the end came out weird. As for the whole movie everybody has different tastes... personally, I loved how they could give dignity to such story like Hulk's.
Hulk has a developed story, X3 doesn't.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

That's true, the Hulk's fanbase is a lot smaller than that of, say, the X-Men.

Or Batman and Superman, rather, which was my point.

 

[X-Maniac]

When the Hulk was released, my company's movie critic loved it - I saw it and liked it too. The level of 'art' applied to the movie was obvious.

But the film 'fails' in a few ways. The origin is too complex (dad's experiments on sea creatures; nanomeds; gamma exposure), it was too long before we saw the Hulk, and when we did get Hulk action it was too over-the-top for many people - the mainstream viewers did not like those 3-mile leaps across the desert, they'd never seen that in the TV series and did not buy it.
I also didn't like the shots of desert life, the mutant poodle, but I did like the jellyfish at the end which was supposed to be a manifestation of pure energy and reflected back to the sea creatures Banner's dad was expermenting on at the beginning.

I've rewatched Hulk several times and it's not a crap movie, it just didn't deliver what was expected of a Hulk movie.

There is a danger in making superhero movies too 'arty'.

 

[Hugh'sMrs]

Being against the cure but using it when it's convenient is the height of hypocrisy. Sorry, but I don't see where there's a way anyone can defend Simon, Zak and Brett's decision to go with that plot point. Horrid storytelling. Far worse than any plot hole in the first two films. There's a reason this film has been so harshly criticized by both the fans and professional critics. If there is an X4 I doubt Ratner, Kinberg and Penn will be back. Despite Fox's public insistence that the film was a 'huge' success you can bet it's a different story behind closed doors.

 

[Theweepeople]

Despite Fox's public insistence that the film was a 'huge' success you can bet it's a different story behind closed doors.

Of course its a different story behind closed doors. It's no coincidence that Ratner was never considered to make an X4 while Singer's name has been rumoured to be involved with future X-Men movies and Wolverine. inspite of Singer's commitment to Superman. Even Hugh Jackman publicly stated he wants Singer to direct Wolverine.

Fox can spin their opinions about X3 any way they want but, my domestic profit percentage data comparison of the X-Men volumes shows that X3 was definitely the least successful financially and needed foreign profit to be considered a hit. X1 and X2 made a fortune overseas like X3 but, were still very profitable without the foreign gross.

Domestic Profit Percentage comparison

Domestic grosses: X1(157mil), X2(215mil), X3(235mil)

X-Men Profit% 109 Budget 75 million Foreign gross $138,950,336

X-Men 2 Profit% 95 Budget 110 million Foreign gross$192,607,919

X-Men 3 Profit% 11.9 Budget is 210 million Foreign gross$224,390,850


Rate of domestic financial growth in between X1 and X2.

X2(215mil)-X1(157mil)= 58million dollar increase.

Rate of domestic financial growth in between X2 and X3.

X3(235mil)-X2(210mil)= 25million dollar increase.

If you take these numbers and place them on a chart with the dollar increase set as the Y axis and number of X-Men films made as the X axis the measurement of the slope for points 1(X1) and 2(X2) has to be a larger number than the slope for points 2(X2) and 3(X3). Therefore, the domestic financial gross transition between X2 and X3 shows an obivous decrease in the X-Men franchises stock potential.

Rate of worldwide financial growth in between X1 and X2.

X2(407mil)-X1(296mil)=111mil dollar increase.

Rate of worldwide financial growth in between X2 and X3.

X3(458mil)-X2(407mil)=51mil dollar increase.

More evidence that the X-Men franchise stock potential dropped a few months after X3 was released.


In retrospect Tom Rothman's treatment of Singer after hearing his decision to direct Superman speaks volumes of how regrettable Fox was about losing Bryan. Fox clearly lost out on the long term gain of Singer's idea to direct two probable blockbuster sequels(X3,X4) that could have generated billions of dollars for fox and given X-Men the recognition as one of the best franchises ever. Instead Fox ended up with a lackluster film that generated a lot of money but, ruined the prospect for sequels and ticked off the majority of the X-Men fanbase.

People also, seem to forget that Ratner was the last director choosen to direct X3. Fox had already considered Bryan Singer, Joss Whendon, Rob Bowman(Why Fox?(Director of Electra)), Alex Proyas, and Matthew Vaugn before settling with Ratner. Fox acted like the signing of Brett last June was a great thing but, I doubt they truely believed this. They went with Brett to direct X3 because he was the only one available.

 

[Leon the Professional]

Yes, but the lack of that element does not constitute "bad writing"

Yes, it does. Bad writing because they gave no explanation whatsoever for why Storm did not even attempt to use her powers against Magneto, something she surely should have tried to do before hypocritically resorting to using cure darts.

 

[Leon the Professional]

double post

 

[Leon the Professional]

Of course its a different story behind closed doors. It's no coincidence that Ratner was never considered to make an X4 while Singer's name has been rumoured to be involved with future X-Men movies and Wolverine. inspite of Singer's commitment to Superman. Even Hugh Jackman publicly stated he wants Singer to direct Wolverine.

Fox can spin their opinions about X3 any way they want but, my domestic profit percentage data comparison of the X-Men volumes shows that X3 was definitely the least successful financially and needed foreign profit to be considered a hit. X1 and X2 made a fortune overseas like X3 but, were still very profitable without the foreign gross.

Domestic Profit Percentage comparison

Domestic grosses: X1(157mil), X2(215mil), X3(235mil)

X-Men Profit% 109 Budget 75 million Foreign gross $138,950,336

X-Men 2 Profit% 95 Budget 110 million Foreign gross$192,607,919

X-Men 3 Profit% 11.9 Budget is 210 million Foreign gross$224,390,850


Rate of domestic financial growth in between X1 and X2.

X2(215mil)-X1(157mil)= 58million dollar increase.

Rate of domestic financial growth in between X2 and X3.

X3(235mil)-X2(210mil)= 25million dollar increase.

If you take these numbers and place them on a chart with the dollar increase set as the Y axis and number of X-Men films made as the X axis the measurement of the slope for points 1(X1) and 2(X2) has to be a larger number than the slope for points 2(X2) and 3(X3). Therefore, the domestic financial gross transition between X2 and X3 shows an obivous decrease in the X-Men franchises stock potential.

Rate of worldwide financial growth in between X1 and X2.

X2(407mil)-X1(296mil)=111mil dollar increase.

Rate of worldwide financial growth in between X2 and X3.

X3(458mil)-X2(407mil)=51mil dollar increase.

More evidence that the X-Men franchise stock potential dropped a few months after X3 was released.


In retrospect Tom Rothman's treatment of Singer after hearing his decision to direct Superman speaks volumes of how regrettable Fox was about losing Bryan. Fox clearly lost out on the long term gain of Singer's idea to direct two probable blockbuster sequels(X3,X4) that could have generated billions of dollars for fox and given X-Men the recognition as one of the best franchises ever. Instead Fox ended up with a lackluster film that generated a lot of money but, ruined the prospect for sequels and ticked off the majority of the X-Men fanbase.

People also, seem to forget that Ratner was the last director choosen to direct X3. Fox had already considered Bryan Singer, Joss Whendon, Rob Bowman(Why Fox?(Director of Electra)), Alex Proyas, and Matthew Vaugn before settling with Ratner. Fox acted like the signing of Brett last June was a great thing but, I doubt they truely believed this. They went with Brett to direct X3 because he was the only one available.

When X1 opened at 54m, it had at the time the biggest ever opening weekend gross of any non-sequel movie, demonstrating wide public interest in an X-MEN movie.

When X2 opened at 86m, it was because X1 was a good movie that brought in a larger audience, including those who'd only seen X1 on DVD. Because of X1, people were expecting a great movie, and they got one.

When X3 opened at 103m, it was because X2 was an even better movie that brought in an even larger audience, including those who'd only seen X2 on DVD. Because of X2, people were expecting a great movie, but this time they didn't get one. That is why X3 suffered a 67% drop its second weekend, and actually made less than X2 did in every single weekend following their opening weekends.

If an X4 is made, I would bet mad money that it's opening weekend gross will be significantly lower than X3's and even X2's, probably right back down to the range of X1's. Because of X3, people won't be expecting a great X-MEN movie anymore, just an amusing one.

 

[Leon the Professional]

FOX probably mandated X3 be as short as it was because they expected the movie to be mediocre and had to milk the opening weekend boxoffice for as much as they could.

Shorter movie = more showtimes = more tickets sold before word spreads that the movie is just "okay"

 

[Horhey]

To play Devil’s advocate here, they obviously introduced Callisto because that character has a comicbook history of rivalry with Storm. What we saw in the movie was a nod to that. As with many of the characters’ connections and histories in all three movies (Sabretooth, Mystique, Nightcrawler, Juggernaut, etc) there was no time to go into the comicbook histories in depth or detail; much was omitted or only presented as the briefest nod.

I dont think it would of been all that much trouble to briefly establish Juggernaut as Xavier's brother. The X-Villains for no good reason got extremely limited character development except for Magneto and to some extent Mystique.

If there is an X4 hopefully Juggernaut will be in it.

 

[Leon the Professional]

What annoys me even more about the movie is that Ratner changed the already mediocre script for the worse.

Originally Alactraz was going to be a mutant prison, and Magneto was going to move the bridge there to free the mutants. We would've gotten an awesome scene with Magneto attacking an entire prison faciltiy to free Mystique and gather Brotherhood members, not to mention Magneto just moving the bridge made sense. Then the final battle scene was supposed to be in Washington DC, where the public would be in direct danger. This all sounded really good to me.

But Ratner, genius that he is, thought they should save the bridge-moving sequence for the end because it's too cool to have in the middle of the movie.

So instead, we just got Magneto wrecking a few cars on an isolated road in the middle of nowhere, and then having the final battle on a little island isolated from the public. Not to mention setting the bridge down right next to the facility he wants to destroy instead of, oh, I don't know, maybe DROPPING THE BRIDGE ON IT?