James Clyne: A Vision of X-Men 3

[MattC]

Not sure if these have already been posted, but there are some new (I believe?) concept art pieces over on JamesClyne.com:



http://www.jamesclyne.com/projects.php?gallery_id=294

(Mods: Please delete/merge if this has already been posted)

 

[Halcohol]

I think the Nazi symbolism is a little too obvious, but other than that most of the designs are impressive. I really like his take on the Phoenix, I think I saw some of his art somewhere else (with Phoenix attacking San Francisco and leaving a giant swath of destruction behind her).

The only view of the Brotherhood that I think would've worked well in the film is the last one, which could have taken place instead of the church scene. It really gives Magneto a foreboding silhouette.

 

[britrogue]

Wow, Phoenix would have bee everything she was supposed to be under him!

 

[BMM]

Yeah, I think the Nazi symbolism is a bit over the top. Some of the other pictures are interesting though. The Phoenix concept art is nice as is the sentinel concept art (although the sentinel is ridiculously big). I also like the look of what appears to be Worthington Labs with Washington DC in the background (most likely concept art prior to Ratner's script changes).

 

[MattC]

Yeah, I think the Nazi symbolism is a bit over the top. Some of the other pictures are interesting though. The Phoenix concept art is nice as is the sentinel concept art (although the sentinel is ridiculously big). I also like the look of what appears to be Worthington Labs with Washington DC in the background (most likely concept art prior to Ratner's script changes).

I agree about the Nazi symbolism, but I do think that something shot in this style would have made it feel like there were thousands of mutants ready to wage war rather than a couple of hundred, which would have upped the stakes a bit more in terms of epicness.

 

[Retroman]

Damn you beat me to it Matt! *raises clenched fists* Seriously though, great find man.

On James Clyne - I've seen his stuff other before and he's a great artist (check his other work).
On X3 - Now THAT is what i call a real war. Looks really epic in scale. I agree that the Nazi imagery was a tad over the top but boy wouldn't that be something on the big screen? And the Phoenix stuff....*sigh*. Every time i look at the concept pieces for X3 i get a little more depressed about the movie.What could have been...

P.S: It's strange that this wasn't in the Art of.. book. Only one or two of these made it in to the book.I feel a little ripped off....

 

[Angamb]

Totally agreed. Really great stuff, don't understand how the final result was so poor.

 

[X-Maniac]

Concept art always leaves me a little disappointed with the final filmed product. I think most movies do not end up looking like the concept art. You have to go down a very CGI route to create that rich look. What's in most movies is invariably more real, more human, more 'flawed'. Given that we had Dante Spinotti and some very rich, opulent colours and cinematography in places, it isn't a 'fault' of the movie that it doesn't resemble the artwork. Look at the shot of Magneto in the encampment addressing the army with stylised flames etc, it looks nothing like what was in the movie.

Surely we are not going to keep on whining and sulking, almost a year later? Artwork is artwork, comics are comics, movies are movies. Since the movies never really captured the richness of the comicbooks (X3 was closest in capturing the comicbook 'look'), then the movies aren't going to capture the richness of quality graphic arts.

 

[X-Maniac]

Just to add - we'd need Gore Verbinski or possibly Zack Snyder as directors to create the epic richness of those drawings.

 

[Storm22]

To be honest I don't really like the Phoenix concepts, except for the shot of her rising from Alkali, that should definitely have been in the movie. I agree with everyone who said that the Nazi symbolism is too obvious and too much but I love the first shot of Magneto levitating and addressing his army.

I know X3 gave us more flying, particularly from Storm, but in my opinion it was still not enough! Magneto could have levitated more in Alcatraz for example, he could have levitated up and raised the cars up to his level and then hurled them instead of just standing there. Phoenix should definitely have flown more too!

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

That concept art is great, and would have been a whole lot better than what we got.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

A couple of those made the Art of X3 booklet, but most didn't.

Those are pretty wicked, I'd have definatley liked to have seen a lot of those scenes in the final movie.

But alas, we didn't. I'm still happy with the final product, but yea, seeing these, it definatley -could have- been better.

But to me, this is just more evidence -in favor- of at least Kinberg and Penn. Surely, for these concept arts to be developed, they had to have been scripted. And if they were scripted, that means that Kinberg and Penn wrote out a whole lot more than what we finally got. And if that's the case, then much of what's missing comes down to Ratner and Fox for making those changes.

 

[flavio_lebeau]

Some beautiful designs. I would have loved to see Magneto floating upon his subjects. It is also a lot more serious/dark/dramatic on that picture. Surely, a forest isn't the best place for such a speech, X3 proved to me. I imagine Ian saying those same words he said on the forest, but on that scenery, and...wow.

 

[Retroman]

Surely we are not going to keep on whining and sulking, almost a year later? Artwork is artwork, comics are comics, movies are movies. Since the movies never really captured the richness of the comicbooks (X3 was closest in capturing the comicbook 'look'), then the movies aren't going to capture the richness of quality graphic arts.

With the right lighting, vision and director those scenes could be replicated on the big screen. If you see stuff like this you can't help but whine a little even if you liked the movie.

And if that's the case, then much of what's missing comes down to Ratner and Fox for making those changes.

I already came to that conclusion long ago.*sigh*

Some beautiful designs. I would have loved to see Magneto floating upon his subjects. It is also a lot more serious/dark/dramatic on that picture. Surely, a forest isn't the best place for such a speech, X3 proved to me. I imagine Ian saying those same words he said on the forest, but on that scenery, and...wow.

The forrest speech is one of my favorite scenes in the movie but i agree that this would have probably have been 10 times better.

 

[X-Maniac]

With the right lighting, vision and director those scenes could be replicated on the big screen. If you see stuff like this you can't help but whine a little even if you liked the movie. The forrest speech is one of my favorite scenes in the movie but i agree that this would have probably have been 10 times better.

Oh I agree this production art is stunning. I'm more interested in why it wasn't replicated on screen. Lack of time? Lack of money? Trying to keep the story 'real' and not wildly visually different from the previous X-movies?

But I do feel it's rather pointless to keep whining. After all, the movie has been made; an extended edition is the best we can hope for. And ALL movies have stunning production art that doesn't make it into the film, or looks entirely different when it does. Life isn't perfect.

It's the way money is spent that concerns me. In Superman Returns, Singer spent $11m on a Krypton exploration sequence that was cut, and he had to cut a scene with a tidal wave crashing through the city and Superman lifting a train above the water. And yet the movie cost $270m or thereabouts. X3 cost $210 million. 300 cost $65 million. The most visually stunning of those three is 300, which cost the least; SR is next in its visual beauty and look at the price difference. There must be lessons to be learned here about the wise spending of budgets.

So, yes, I'm gutted that the movie didn't have more of the rich beauty of those drawings. But I'm not going to slash my wrists over it.

 

[Retroman]

Oh I agree this production art is stunning. I'm more interested in why it wasn't replicated on screen. Lack of time? Lack of money? Trying to keep the story 'real' and not wildly visually different from the previous X-movies?

It didn't even to have the exact same color scheme. They could have shot it with very dramatic lighting and it would have more than likely been more epic than the forrest scene. (Side note: The James Clyne resembles a similar speech scene in New X-Men Planet X)

I am interested to know why stuff like this was dropped too. The dvd and the 'Art of' book would have been the perfect oppurtunity to do so.

But I do feel it's rather pointless to keep whining.After all, the movie has been made; an extended edition is the best we can hope for.

Even now people still debate the 1966 Geoff Hurst goal and whether or not Zidane was right to headbutt Materazzi in the World Cup final.Nothing can be done about it now yet people still whine (talk) about it. X3 is still very fresh - only 10/11 months ago that it was released in theaters.

And ALL movies have stunning production art that doesn't make it into the film, or looks entirely different when it does.

True.

Life isn't perfect.

I know it isn't.

It's the way money is spent that concerns me. In Superman Returns, Singer spent $11m on a Krypton exploration sequence that was cut, and he had to cut a scene with a tidal wave crashing through the city and Superman lifting a train above the water.

I've said before that i was angered by the decision to leave out RTK. Even now i don't understand why Singer did it and it's not just the expense of the scene, it's a big part of the plot.

BTW i think John Ottman said it cost 10 million. Not that it matters a whole deal.

And yet the movie cost $270m or thereabouts.

204 million, the 60 million or so development costs pre-Singer don't count.

X3 cost $210 million. 300 cost $65 million. The most visually stunning of those three is 300, which cost the least; SR is next in its visual beauty and look at the price difference. There must be lessons to be learned here about the wise spending of budgets.

I have yet to see 300 but from what i've seen yes they did achieve a lot with a smaller budget but i really think he's lucky because didn't have any real A-listers in his cast.X-Men and Superman did and that always pushes up the budget plus 300 was shot almost entirely against green screen.

Side note: I wonder what Snyder would have done with X3 if he took the job?

So, yes, I'm gutted that the movie didn't have more of the rich beauty of those drawings. But I'm not going to slash my wrists over it.

I didn't think you would and i certainly wasn't planning on doing so either.t:

 

[demitri_vampiro]

one of the reasons x-3 was so expensive was because of the lack of time. effects had to be rushed so it costs more money. also had they had more time they would have done more. weta had big plans for the last phoenix scene.

 

[X-Maniac]

I have yet to see 300 but from what i've seen yes they did achieve a lot with a smaller budget but i really think he's lucky because didn't have any real A-listers in his cast.X-Men and Superman did and that always pushes up the budget plus 300 was shot almost entirely against green screen.

Side note: I wonder what Snyder would have done with X3 if he took the job?

Snyder did an entire year of post-production on 300. I doubt he would ever contemplate a film like X3 with one year from start to release.

With 300, the green screen filming isn't really noticeable at all (just as it isn't noticeable in Sky Captain). It was beautifully achieved. I feel sure Snyder's X3 would have been more epic (visually at least), but I'm not sure what he could achieve in just 12 months.

 

[demitri_vampiro]

offcourse x-3 could have been more epic, but the same goes for x-1 and 2. also the problem of it was the time constraint. brett didn't have time to change even the script. he was hired to film it as quickly as possible. had he said no, the fox would have hired someone else, probably a not goodone and that would totally destroy x-franchise. even if many people didn't like x-3, at least it made money and therefore there is still chance for x-4.

 

[Retroman]

one of the reasons x-3 was so expensive was because of the lack of time. effects had to be rushed so it costs more money. also had they had more time they would have done more. weta had big plans for the last phoenix scene.

The studio knew this but yet they still aggresively pushed forward with production on the movie.

Snyder did an entire year of post-production on 300. I doubt he would ever contemplate a film like X3 with one year from start to release.

With 300, the green screen filming isn't really noticeable at all (just as it isn't noticeable in Sky Captain). It was beautifully achieved. I feel sure Snyder's X3 would have been more epic (visually at least), but I'm not sure what he could achieve in just 12 months.

I think he would have to sacrifice stuff like this as well. And no way in hell would he get one year post production.

offcourse x-3 could have been more epic, but the same goes for x-1 and 2. also the problem of it was the time constraint. brett didn't have time to change even the script. he was hired to film it as quickly as possible. had he said no, the fox would have hired someone else, probably a not goodone and that would totally destroy x-franchise. even if many people didn't like x-3, at least it made money and therefore there is still chance for x-4.

Brett knew that before he signed on, he knew he wouldn't have much time to prep the film. Fox even released a teaser poster in theaters before he came on board and a teaser trailer was shot too in DC (the X-Jet promo on the dvd).That just shows their intent of releasing this in May '06 before Superman Returns 'by any means necessary'.

 

[xii22_loop]

and also i heard this (from listening to one of the commentarys on the dvd, I think it was the Ratner and screenwriters one) and they talked about how that last scene on Alcatraz, the last phoenix scene, was the one of the LAST thing to be filmed. Now for something special events heavy you should soooo film it like first.

(but of course who knows if what was said on the commentary was true)

 

[BMM]

offcourse x-3 could have been more epic, but the same goes for x-1 and 2. also the problem of it was the time constraint. brett didn't have time to change even the script.

Ratner obviously changed the script. As he stated, the entire middle and ending of the movie were changed when he decided to take the final battle to Alcatraz Island rather than Washington DC where it was originally intended to take place. He also added the Xavier lives scene as well as had time to reshoot and subsequently add Juggernaut's, "I'm the Juggernaut b****!" scene among others I'm sure.

It's not as though the man's hands were completely tied down with zero time. He had some room to play.

"Arad won't confirm or deny and specific changes, but he says that Ratner has indeed, already left his fingerprints all over the script, originally written by Zak Penn and Simon Kinberg.

Brett Ratner came onto this thing and from the get-go, you felt experience," notes Arad. "He's made lots of changes in the script that are very good, because he's thinking picture, not words. He's very cinematic."

http://movies.zap2it.com/movies/news/story/0,1259,---26229,00.html
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/news/articles/2135.asp
http://movies.ign.com/articles/632/632935p1.html

Besides, Ratner knew what he was getting into when he signed on.

he was hired to film it as quickly as possible. had he said no, the fox would have hired someone else, probably a not goodone and that would totally destroy x-franchise.

Actually, I believe Avi Arad stated that if Ratner hadn't signed on, they would have had to delay... and just out of curiosity, what lesser no good directors do you think would have been hired (aside from the Uwe Bolls of the world who wouldn't have a shot in Hell to begin with)?

 

[xii22_loop]

Actually, I believe Avi Arad stated that if Ratner hadn't signed on, they would have had to delay... and just out of curiousity, what lesser no good directors do you think would have been hired (aside from the Uwe Bolls of the world who wouldn't have a shot in Hell to begin with)?

goddamnit, if Ratner had just not accepted that would have ended it all. No rushed movie rushed unattainably to get out before superman returns, maybe

 

[X-Maniac]

Ratner obviously changed the script. As he stated, the entire middle and ending of the movie were changed when he decided to take the final battle to Alcatraz Island rather than Washington DC where it was originally intended to take place. He also added the Xavier lives scene as well as had time to reshoot and subsequently add Juggernaut's, "I'm the Juggernaut b****!" scene among others I'm sure.

It's not as though the man's hands were completely tied down with zero time. He had some room to play.



Besides, Ratner knew what he was getting into when he signed on.



Actually, I believe Avi Arad stated that if Ratner hadn't signed on, they would have had to delay... and just out of curiosity, what lesser no good directors do you think would have been hired (aside from the Uwe Bolls of the world who wouldn't have a shot in Hell to begin with)?

Fox would probably have gone running next to Stephen Norrington (LXG), Paul W.S Anderson (Alien v Predator), even Stephen Sommers (The Mummy trilogy, Van Helsing). Yikes!

I wonder why they particularly wanted Ratner? He has no background in superhero or comicbook movies and his style and personality is the other end of the spectrum from Bryan Singer. Ratner was a most curious choice in many ways. As was Simon Kinberg as a writer (Zak less so, as he was previously involved). What the franchise needs perhaps is someone who can direct good action thrillers, who isn't perhaps that experienced with superpowered heroes, but can tell a gripping realistic tale (and hopefully the powers and effects will follow on organically) - what about Doug Liman (Bourne Identity), Martin Campbell (Casino Royale), Michael Bay (The Island).

I tend to think Ratner fashioned the script to be achievable and workable. And I'm not sure a battle with mutants running around the streets of Washington, dodging parked cars and crashing into shopfronts, would have been any more epic than on Alcatraz island. Might have been, might not. I don't think location was the problem with the final battle.

There is one advantage in them not having used Washington at all - that could be the location of a final battle in an Apocalypse movie. (I've just plotted an X4 which leads on from X3, referencing and rectifying some loose ends and character threads, and which aims in the general direction of an Apocalypse-type story in a sequel version).