If you Don't like the movie - POST HERE

[flavio_lebeau]

I have a eighty minutes disease. It's incredible. Whatever movie I'm watching, there's a time in which I sigh and ask myself how much time is left. And, wonderfully enough, this happens ALWAYS when the movie comes to 80 minutes, maybe 3 minutes less or more. Sometimes I'm really digging into the movie, but it comes anyway, and when I look at the dvd player, there it is: eighty something minutes. If the movie is catchy and good, it gets my attention again and I can handle hours more of movie. If it's bad, I start yawning. But it happens with every movie I watch, even my favorite ones.

 

[BMM]

I didn't realize Zodiac was that long... I saw it last night, and it didn't feel that long.

 

[Theweepeople]

What a surpise? Despite making 459mil worldwide X3 fails to make Boxofficemojo's Ten Best Box office performances of 2006.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2258&p=.htm

 

[CapBeerCino]

I hadn't read that one before.OMGt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Rothman

What am I missing?

But authentic stupidity I find is always funnier than pretend stupidity.

Glad to see you're alright Heard you had quite a mess...

What a surpise? Despite making 459mil worldwide X3 fails to make Boxofficemojo's Ten Best Box office performances of 2006.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2258&p=.htm

What a shame t:

 

[LadyVader]

Glad to see you're alright Heard you had quite a mess...

I'm still a mess...y person.

What a shame t:

:heart:

 

[nite-owl]

What am I missing with the Rothman article?

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

I will say that it feels great to be back in the haters thread. Seems like I have my own couch, my own drink, and my own realm with my fellow X3 haters on the SHH! forums.

I'll cheer to that!

And on the topic of X3 in relation to the previous X-films and Batman Begins...here's the thing.

There's varying degrees of faithfulness when you're talking comic movies. The vast majority of them change a great many things, from organic webbing to leather costumes to Joker killing the Waynes. But you have to ask yourself "what works?" Some change works. Organic webbing, for me. I love the webshooters, but I think the scenes in Spidey 1 were too amusing to lose for the sake of comic accuracy. I'm a comic fan, but I'm a moviegoer at heart, and I'm just looking for compelling and fun cinema. The books will always be there in their truest form.

But where you run into problems is when the source material is better than the changes the film makes. Which is often the case. Chris Claremont and Co are simply better writers than guys like Simon Kinberg.

The biggest problem with X3 isn't even it's failure to accurately reproduce the comic storylines. It's biggest failure is this:

It fails to successfully continue the pre-established continuity of the film series. The books aside, X3 is simply a poorly written, lousy sequel. It either directly contradicts previous characterizations and plot threads, or simply treats them to a poor conclusion.

The first two X-Men movies weren't perfect. Far from it. But one thing they were not were bastardizations. Their biggest failing was not going far enough with certain things. But the characters were there -

- Logan was the loner with a heart of gold, the one who would learn to work as a team (not as the leader of the team).

- Cyclops was the boyscout. Devoted to Xavier and Jean, above all. He suffered, but he would make it through (too bad he didn't...)

- Rogue was the runaway, scared and alone but ultimately confident in herself (until X3...)

- Storm had a quiet dignity (mistaken by fools [including the actress playing her] as having "no character" - their idea of character turned out to be something far worse - a stereotypical 'tude)

-Nightcrawler; sweet, playful and deeply religious

and so on.

And the themes were there, in spades.

X3? Ugh, I'm too tired to go into it again.

Crap. t:

 

[xmenfilesfan05]

Brilliant post Paste Pot Pete!

 

[chaseter]

I agree with the above.

 

[Rac]

What am I missing with the Rothman article?

Bah. Someone edited it. It read that "Tom Rothman is also a big ashole. He's responsible for such disaster as X-Men: The Last Stand aka Fck You Bryan Singer and turned down Alien 5 by Ridley Scott and James Cameron because of AVP."

 

[LastSunrise1981]

I'll cheer to that!

And on the topic of X3 in relation to the previous X-films and Batman Begins...here's the thing.

There's varying degrees of faithfulness when you're talking comic movies. The vast majority of them change a great many things, from organic webbing to leather costumes to Joker killing the Waynes. But you have to ask yourself "what works?" Some change works. Organic webbing, for me. I love the webshooters, but I think the scenes in Spidey 1 were too amusing to lose for the sake of comic accuracy. I'm a comic fan, but I'm a moviegoer at heart, and I'm just looking for compelling and fun cinema. The books will always be there in their truest form.

But where you run into problems is when the source material is better than the changes the film makes. Which is often the case. Chris Claremont and Co are simply better writers than guys like Simon Kinberg.

The biggest problem with X3 isn't even it's failure to accurately reproduce the comic storylines. It's biggest failure is this:

It fails to successfully continue the pre-established continuity of the film series. The books aside, X3 is simply a poorly written, lousy sequel. It either directly contradicts previous characterizations and plot threads, or simply treats them to a poor conclusion.

The first two X-Men movies weren't perfect. Far from it. But one thing they were not were bastardizations. Their biggest failing was not going far enough with certain things. But the characters were there -

- Logan was the loner with a heart of gold, the one who would learn to work as a team (not as the leader of the team).

- Cyclops was the boyscout. Devoted to Xavier and Jean, above all. He suffered, but he would make it through (too bad he didn't...)

- Rogue was the runaway, scared and alone but ultimately confident in herself (until X3...)

- Storm had a quiet dignity (mistaken by fools [including the actress playing her] as having "no character" - their idea of character turned out to be something far worse - a stereotypical 'tude)

-Nightcrawler; sweet, playful and deeply religious

and so on.

And the themes were there, in spades.

X3? Ugh, I'm too tired to go into it again.

Crap. t:

I agree. Every thing you said is spot on and people who aren't educated in the comics will blow it off.

Right now at this particular moment, I'm writing a scene of Angel escaping the facility and being chased by Sentinels sent by Trask to eliminate all the mutants. It's very complex, unique, and interesting. It's just very difficult adding some very tense emotion into Angel trying to escape a very vicious Sentinel attack.

 

[LadyVader]

It's very complex, unique, and interesting.

We'll be the judge of that.

 

[La_She-Beast]

I agree. Every thing you said is spot on and people who aren't educated in the comics will blow it off.

Right now at this particular moment, I'm writing a scene of Angel escaping the facility and being chased by Sentinels sent by Trask to eliminate all the mutants. It's very complex, unique, and interesting. It's just very difficult adding some very tense emotion into Angel trying to escape a very vicious Sentinel attack.

Hey LS are you going to write your scene for the competition?

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I agree. Every thing you said is spot on and people who aren't educated in the comics will blow it off.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

Hey LS are you going to write your scene for the competition?

I'm hoping to have it finished soon. Between writing papers for classes and going to work, time seems to be severely lacking at this particular moment you know? I almost have the scene finished up for viewing; all I need to do is add the finishing touches and add a more emotional power to it.

Right now I have the Angel escaping the Sentinel almost finished and after that I'm possibly work and add on to a Rogue rejecting the cure scene.

 

[flavio_lebeau]

Okay, after months, I finally rented Superman Returns. And all I can say is: how I regret. I regret supporting X3 until May 26, and I regret not watching SR on cinemas. My effin bias didn't let me go there and watch it. I do regret it.

SR is, undoubtely, a beautiful looking, touching movie.

I've never been a fan of Superman. I don't watch Smallville. I probably watched 3 or 4 eps from Lois and Clark. And I watched the Superman movies when I was a kid, they never impressed me. But, somehow, these pop culture things stay on your subconscient. Because I couldn't help but shiver when I heard the Superman theme. I shivered when he saved the plane, and so did my parents, my friend and my brother who were watching it. I shivered again at seeing him being beaten up by Luthor. And I loved his "space shots".

Superman Returns is the best Superman movie ever, imo. Until months ago, I was still mad and sad about Brian, but damn, it's clear as the sunlight which recovers Clark that Singer is a-hell-of-a-mother*****in'-good-filmmaker. Beautifully shot, moving, touching. It's been a long time since me and my entire family had rooted for a character. It was a great experience.

Does the movie has flaws? Of course. Just like every movie. CG Superman sometimes look too much like CG Superman. Luthor's idea isn't exactly brilliant. The kryptonite thingg too. But you know what? Just like it happened to me in both X1 and X2, I could care less. Simply because I was so involved by the story and by those characters, that I couldn't pay attention to those mistakes to the point where they lessen my experience. Exactly like what happened to the first and second X-men movies. Exactly the opposite to what happened when I wathed X3. The movie was so weak at involving us to the story, that, to kill the time, you HAD to start paying attention to the endless mistakes, even if you didn't want to. Even if you closed your eyes to not see the mistakes, you would still hear the terrible dialogue.

The action in SR? I loved it, it has a great balance with the story. It's exactly what I wanted to see. I was afraid I would get bored, because some people said it doesn't have action at all. Well, I loved the action. So what if Superman doesn't get in brawl with a thug twice his size? Does a movie really need that to be considered good? I prefer that to a lackluster pretentious war that looks more like a raid in Paris with cars being torched up. I prefer the action that actualy makes you root for the hero, and not one where they look like headless chickens fighting whoever they see "just because". Just for the "wow" factor.

I couldn't help but get sad by the end of it, thinking how much X3 could be in Singer's hands. Go ahead, call me a Singernatic, a lover, I don't care. To me, it's as simple as 2+2=4 that Singer is a brilliant director.

The only way I can see X3 being better is when you put the name Summer behind the two movies. Is X3 a better summer movie? Sure, it's dumb, has action and no character development. Just what people want to see on the summer. But as movies, and I mean only movies, I think SR is hundreds, thousands, zillions better than X3. Both technically and emotionally. It's a real, real pity to me that Singer had to leave. I hand't notice his impact to a full extention until yesterday.

And if you prefer X3, ok, I understand, everything I just wrote is simply my opinion. But in my opinion, Jesus, what a pity we changed Singer for Ratner. Singer made two wonderful X-men movies, and made a wonderful Superman movie. His style, technique, careful direction, all the beautiful photography, the camera movements, the way he films Superman: he is a terrific director. So what if the cast gets stressed on set? We're not watching the movie to see the set, we want to see the end result. And the end result is simply marvelous. Singer is brilliant.

 

[La_She-Beast]

I agree completely with your opinion, but that's my opinion

 

[LadyVader]

Wow Flavio, you didn't see SR until now? WHY!?

 

[flavio_lebeau]

Wow Flavio, you didn't see SR until now? WHY!?

I kept hearing how bad and boring it was, and I really wasn't that thrilled to see the same old story of Superman yet again. There were lots of movies I thought were more original and interesting. Yesterday though, our home theater arrived and I wanted to start with a movie with good sound and effects.

 

[CapBeerCino]

I regret not watching SR on cinemas.

That's too bad - it was great seeing it in IMAX, but I agree with every word you wrote. That's why when Singer said he was impressed by TLS I just couldn't buy it.

 

[flavio_lebeau]

That's too bad - it was great seeing it in IMAX, but I agree with every word you wrote. That's why when Singer said he was impressed by TLS I just couldn't buy it.

I also can't believe he truly liked X3. It goes almost totally against his style. I would say I liked it too. Why lose a friend because of something as simple?

 

[Hugh'sMrs]

I think Bryan was simply being polite. You'd have to be part of his inner circle to know what he really thought of it. t:

 

[X-Maniac]

I also can't believe he truly liked X3. It goes almost totally against his style. I would say I liked it too. Why lose a friend because of something as simple?

What Singer said after seeing X3 was the comment 'unbelievable' and that he was impressed by what they had achieved in the time they had available (Beast, Angel, Danger Room, Sentinel, Juggernaut, Multiple Man, Morlocks, Magneto's action sequences with the bridge, Storm flying).

What they did achieve in the time available was impressive, whether you like the movie or not.

I truly don't believe X3 was that bad. Beast and Angel had similar screentime as Storm, Cyclops and Nightcrawler in X2 - a couple of scenes of character dialogue, a couple of cool action scenes. Other minor characters (Multiple Man, Arclight, Quill, Psylocke, Juggernaut etc) had similar or less time on screen, much like Colossus or Siryn or Jones or Artie or Deathstrike in X2.

The presentation of the material in X3 was not to everyone's taste, especially after it had been handled by Singer. Ratner is another kind of director completely - colourful, fun, energetic, impatient. (whereas Singer is introspective, moody, gloomy, neurotic). Directors' movies tend to mirror their personalties.

With the release date booked and the cast contractually signed, it would have cost a lot of money to let the cast go (they'd have to be paid even if they didn't do the movie), so when Singer walked out and then Vaughn realised he'd bitten off more than he could chew, Ratner's energy was about the only thing that kept the film on track. It would cost millions to scrap or delay the movie at this stage.

What was achieved by everyone in the time available, especially the new additions, was indeed impressive.

 

[X-Maniac]

Okay, after months, I finally rented Superman Returns. And all I can say is: how I regret. I regret supporting X3 until May 26, and I regret not watching SR on cinemas. My effin bias didn't let me go there and watch it. I do regret it.

SR is, undoubtely, a beautiful looking, touching movie.

I've never been a fan of Superman. I don't watch Smallville. I probably watched 3 or 4 eps from Lois and Clark. And I watched the Superman movies when I was a kid, they never impressed me. But, somehow, these pop culture things stay on your subconscient. Because I couldn't help but shiver when I heard the Superman theme. I shivered when he saved the plane, and so did my parents, my friend and my brother who were watching it. I shivered again at seeing him being beaten up by Luthor. And I loved his "space shots".

Superman Returns is the best Superman movie ever, imo. Until months ago, I was still mad and sad about Brian, but damn, it's clear as the sunlight which recovers Clark that Singer is a-hell-of-a-mother*****in'-good-filmmaker. Beautifully shot, moving, touching. It's been a long time since me and my entire family had rooted for a character. It was a great experience.

Does the movie has flaws? Of course. Just like every movie. CG Superman sometimes look too much like CG Superman. Luthor's idea isn't exactly brilliant. The kryptonite thingg too. But you know what? Just like it happened to me in both X1 and X2, I could care less. Simply because I was so involved by the story and by those characters, that I couldn't pay attention to those mistakes to the point where they lessen my experience. Exactly like what happened to the first and second X-men movies. Exactly the opposite to what happened when I wathed X3. The movie was so weak at involving us to the story, that, to kill the time, you HAD to start paying attention to the endless mistakes, even if you didn't want to. Even if you closed your eyes to not see the mistakes, you would still hear the terrible dialogue.

The action in SR? I loved it, it has a great balance with the story. It's exactly what I wanted to see. I was afraid I would get bored, because some people said it doesn't have action at all. Well, I loved the action. So what if Superman doesn't get in brawl with a thug twice his size? Does a movie really need that to be considered good? I prefer that to a lackluster pretentious war that looks more like a raid in Paris with cars being torched up. I prefer the action that actualy makes you root for the hero, and not one where they look like headless chickens fighting whoever they see "just because". Just for the "wow" factor.

I couldn't help but get sad by the end of it, thinking how much X3 could be in Singer's hands. Go ahead, call me a Singernatic, a lover, I don't care. To me, it's as simple as 2+2=4 that Singer is a brilliant director.

The only way I can see X3 being better is when you put the name Summer behind the two movies. Is X3 a better summer movie? Sure, it's dumb, has action and no character development. Just what people want to see on the summer. But as movies, and I mean only movies, I think SR is hundreds, thousands, zillions better than X3. Both technically and emotionally. It's a real, real pity to me that Singer had to leave. I hand't notice his impact to a full extention until yesterday.

And if you prefer X3, ok, I understand, everything I just wrote is simply my opinion. But in my opinion, Jesus, what a pity we changed Singer for Ratner. Singer made two wonderful X-men movies, and made a wonderful Superman movie. His style, technique, careful direction, all the beautiful photography, the camera movements, the way he films Superman: he is a terrific director. So what if the cast gets stressed on set? We're not watching the movie to see the set, we want to see the end result. And the end result is simply marvelous. Singer is brilliant.

Well, I did go to see SR when it came out. I must admit I felt disappointed. I think more than anything it was the gloomy tone especially the muted colours - I found it depresssing, not at all uplifting, and far too trapped in an homage to the past rather than creating something new for the future. It holds together better on DVD (I got the Ultimate Collection for free). But I still don't like the reuse of the fanfare theme, which now seems dated and tired (to me).

I also don't think X3 has 'endless mistakes' and I don't think it's dumb or lacking character development (Angel, Beast, Storm, Cyclops, Wolverine, Xavier, Jean, Mystique, Rogue, all have character development) though I agree the final battle scenes were far from perfect!

A Superman movie, with only one superhero, and far fewer characters, is bound to be able to give more time to its characters than any X-Men movie.

But I agree Bryan is a better storyteller and moviemaker than those behind X3. If Bryan had brightened the colours and tone to be more uplifting, changed the intro to use the Krypton sequence, explored the impact of Superman's absence and return a bit more and made Lois a bit less drippy, the movie would have been much better. The tension of the plane rescue was never achieved again in the rest of the movie, making it an anti-climax as there was not enough human peril at the end of the movie.

But anyway. SR and X3 are very different. Don't let bias put you off seeing movies, even out of curiosity!

 

[La_She-Beast]

Well, I did go to see SR when it came out. I must admit I felt disappointed. I think more than anything it was the gloomy tone especially the muted colours - I found it depresssing, not at all uplifting, and far too trapped in an homage to the past rather than creating something new for the future. It holds together better on DVD (I got the Ultimate Collection for free). But I still don't like the reuse of the fanfare theme, which now seems dated and tired (to me).

Really? IMO it was rather artistic. Like an atmosphere of old, the colour of "past" newspapers.

I also don't think X3 has 'endless mistakes' and I don't think it's dumb or lacking character development (Angel, Beast, Storm, Cyclops, Wolverine, Xavier, Jean, Mystique, Rogue, all have character development) though I agree the final battle scenes were far from perfect!

A Superman movie, with only one superhero, and far fewer characters, is bound to be able to give more time to its characters than any X-Men movie.

But I agree Bryan is a better storyteller and moviemaker than those behind X3. If Bryan had brightened the colours and tone to be more uplifting, changed the intro to use the Krypton sequence, explored the impact of Superman's absence and return a bit more and made Lois a bit less drippy, the movie would have been much better. The tension of the plane rescue was never achieved again in the rest of the movie, making it an anti-climax as there was not enough human peril at the end of the movie.

But anyway. SR and X3 are very different. Don't let bias put you off seeing movies, even out of curiosity!

But... don't you think there wasn't a mood, an atmosphere to make us care for the characters? Like any work of art, if there's no atmosphere, there's no life. That's what I felt from the movie