Is Joss Whedon partly indirectly responsible for X3?

[Dr. Remy Lebeau]

Don't get me wrong, I am a die hard Whedon fan. I watched Buffy and Angel religiously. He's a god to me and that will never change.

The problem with his talent is that Marvel hired him to write X-men at the wrong time. He wrote this amazing run on Astonishing X-men which caused Fox to want to incorporate his 'Cure' story into what had been originally set up as a 'Dark Phoenix' film.

My question for this thread is, had Joss Whedon been hired maybe a couple years later to write his X-men run, could X3 have been a better film, despite the behind the scenes directing turnover and the bane that is Brett Ratner?

Discuss...

 

[Tanin]

If they had hired proper writers... shifted Cyclops from dying... got rid of the Juggernaut Memes. Made Cyclops the one to confront Jean instead of Wolverine I think the film would have been fine.

It was rushed and the "cure" storyline in with the Phoenix story wasn't the main problem with the film so I don't think it's Joss' fault at all.

 

[Dr. Remy Lebeau]

If they had hired proper writers... shifted Cyclops from dying... got rid of the Juggernaut Memes. Made Cyclops the one to confront Jean instead of Wolverine I think the film would have been fine.

It was rushed and the "cure" storyline in with the Phoenix story wasn't the main problem with the film so I don't think it's Joss' fault at all.

I'm pretty sure the Cyclops dying early thing was due to Marsden jumping ship with Singer for Superman Returns.

I guess its possible that a good writer would have been able to pull the two big storylines together. The Dark Phoenix story needed to be it's own film though, imo. It's such a rich tale that to have another main story arc interfering with it can only detract from a film's ability to do the story justice.

 

[henzINNIT]

Seriously? Joss is no more responsible for TLS than Claremont. If Fox fudge a good story with a bad adaptation, it's not the original writer's responsibility in any way.

 

[Matt.S99]

Sorry, but what a ridiculous question.
He wrote a story for a completely different medium. Just because they took his good story and adapted it to something sub par, does not, in no way make him at all responsible.

 

[X-Maniac]

The studio wanted the cure story, the writers wanted the Phoenix story. The compromise was mashing them together.

If Whedon's cure story hadn't existed, the studio still didn't like the Phoenix story much (for some reason I cannot fathom) and would have wanted something other than Phoenix.

But the cure story is, ultimately, offensive to the minorities (such as gays) who love the comics and films. The idea of curing a piece of DNA is ridiculous. It made an interesting social theme for X3 but it should never have been done, either in the comics or the movies.

A lot of the core audience of the movies moved on from the franchise when it was suggested mutants could be cured. It's like those nutters who suggest homosexuality can be cured. Insensitive. And damaging to the franchise.

 

[The Endless]

I don't see how it's damaging when the ones wanting to "cure" mutants are portrayed as blatant bad guys, as they should be. The minorities reading it wouldn't be offended unless the "cure" was shown as the good thing to do. It could have been a very powerful and thought provoking story if done well.

It's like not having a film with Nazi's as bad guys because it might offend Jews.

 

[The Endless]

And as to the OPs question? Lol what...?

 

[X-Maniac]

I don't see how it's damaging when the ones wanting to "cure" mutants are portrayed as blatant bad guys, as they should be. The minorities reading it wouldn't be offended unless the "cure" was shown as the good thing to do. It could have been a very powerful and thought provoking story if done well.

It's like not having a film with Nazi's as bad guys because it might offend Jews.

The concept of being able to cure genetics (the Mutant X gene, which presumably triggers access to bits of the unused 'junk DNA' we all have, hence all the mutants having different powers) doesn't really make sense.

Preventing the birth of mutants is more logical. Eugenics. Genetic selection (designer babies). Equally controversial though.

Bottom line is that it didn't really work too well to have the Cure and Phoenix storylines in one movie, because they were not that well interwoven. Better directing and writing would have resolved that.

 

[psylockolussus]

Hmm I'm gay and I don't think the cure was "damaging" to the franchise or offensive. And for a franchise series that started this "humans hate mutants because they are different" a cure storyline isn't really surprising. And I've seen this kind of thing in other shows and movies.

 

[ArawakTaino]

I'm gay too and I saw nothing wrong with using the Cure storyline, I thought it was tactful and respectful to the real-life issues it was representing. I also appreciated that the movie showed contrasting views to the cure with Rogue and Angel characters, and thought it was a bold decision to have Rogue actually take the cure.

It also played off the Phoenix storyline rather well, too.

But then again, X3 is one of my favorite X-films.

 

[X-Maniac]

I heard there were some gay groups offended by the cure storyline. It didn't bother me that way so much as the way it was 'fighting' for space with the Phoenix story.

I really can't figure out what the studio thought was so wrong with the Phoenix story. It has some great themes about uncontrollable power that can corrupt, that we are not meant to be gods, that we have to keep our humanity and not think we are above that.

 

[psylockolussus]

I think its becuase Fox wanted to give Magneto another reason to declare war to the humans.

 

[SuperFerret]

No matter what you do, there will be groups that are offended by it. Hell, this very thread has already offended MADD, the People's Republic of Congo, and Dairy Queen.

 

[psylockolussus]

How?

 

[SuperFerret]

How?

Like this.

 

[MM2Dylan]

I'm pretty sure the Cyclops dying early thing was due to Marsden jumping ship with Singer for Superman Returns.

I guess its possible that a good writer would have been able to pull the two big storylines together. The Dark Phoenix story needed to be it's own film though, imo. It's such a rich tale that to have another main story arc interfering with it can only detract from a film's ability to do the story justice.

I've heard that Cyclops was going to die from the initial script-writing stage when Singer had still been on board.

 

[X-Maniac]

I've heard that Cyclops was going to die from the initial script-writing stage when Singer had still been on board.

At one point, Cyclops was going to have died off-screen between X2 and X3. Not sure what they had in mind.

But now Rothman isn't there dictating the plot points, we can hopefully get a better Cyclops.

 

[Schlosser85]

I don't see why gays should be offended by the "cure" storyline. It wasn't presented as a good thing, or as if mutants needed to be "cured".

I'm gay and I took it as negative commentary on stuff like "gay conversion therapy". Storm's "we don't need a cure because there's nothing wrong with us" definitely seemed like a pro gay statement to me.

It's not like X-Men, on the page or the screen, is exactly subtle about its metaphors. Iceman's "coming out" in X2 was about as subtle as a sledgehammer.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

I've heard that Cyclops was going to die from the initial script-writing stage when Singer had still been on board.

Singer would have never killed Scott.

http://www.empireonline.com/interviews/interview.asp?IID=1892

You left X3 while the project was in its infancy. Had you directed it, would you have killed Scott?
[quietly] No.

 

[X-Maniac]

I don't see why gays should be offended by the "cure" storyline. It wasn't presented as a good thing, or as if mutants needed to be "cured".

I'm gay and I took it as negative commentary on stuff like "gay conversion therapy". Storm's "we don't need a cure because there's nothing wrong with us" definitely seemed like a pro gay statement to me.

It's not like X-Men, on the page or the screen, is exactly subtle about its metaphors. Iceman's "coming out" in X2 was about as subtle as a sledgehammer.

It was presented in many cases as a better option. Warren's dad wasn't evil or forceful about it, but he said 'it's a better life'. Storm was the only one bothered about it, and then she gets a lot of stick for being 'too aggressive' in the movie. Even Xavier sort of shrugged it off : 'Yes, Rogue it appears to be true.'

Like many other things in the movie, it wasn't handled in the best way.

 

[Octoberist]

What was damaging was the X3's average script and direction, not the actual 'cure'.

 

[Schlosser85]

And also it just disposing of essential characters like they were nothing. And mashing the Phoenix and cure into one movie when either could have easily been the A plot of their own movie. Phoenix especially.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

I say X3 couldve been fixed.

- Have Phoenix disintegrate Wolverine when him and Storm visit foggy Alkali Lake. Thus putting him into weeks of recovery at the x-mansion. Out of commission for most of the film.
- Cyclops shows up alive in the Grey Home scene to battle the new brotherhood and witness Xavier's death.
- Cyclops leads the X-Men to the Last Stand at Alcatraz.
- Cyclops confronts Jean who has barely enough control not to atomize Scott because of love. She says "kill me" to him. Maybe he blasts her or maybe he uses the cure syringes, idk.

This only barely changes The Wolverine as he would still have nightmares about Jean brutally destroying his body. But I suppose DoFP wouldn't have tasted quite as sweet if X3 was actually decent.

 

[Mad Ones]

The cure storyline in Astonishing X-men and X3 isn't offensive?? Warren's dad thought it would give him a better life because he's a bigot. The cure is vilified completely. Specific things like Rogue taking the cure are offensive, but the comic book storyline it's based on handled the issue extremely well. I can't see a large group of LGBTQ being offended over the cure.