Marvel's losing its edge and DC's getting its back

[Erzengel]

I'm hoping FF doesn't suck but what have we heard of the movie beside the title? This movie was moved up 2 weeks as to not compete with Transformers. So you have 10 months to "slap" a movie together and filming hasn't even begun yet? Not a good start.

 

[Darthphere]

I'm hoping FF doesn't suck but what have we heard of the movie beside the title? This movie was moved up 2 weeks as to not compete with Transformers. So you have 10 months to "slap" a movie together and filming hasn't even begun yet? Not a good start.

Filming started 3 days ago.

 

[Erzengel]

So 9 and a half months?

 

[Darthphere]

Yes, im pregnant.

 

[Erzengel]

So essentially they could slap together as fast as we can create life. Way to go Fox Studios.

 

[Darthphere]

So essentially they could slap together as fast as we can create life. Way to go Fox Studios.

I assume actually shooting the movie would take like 3 months, since really theres not much acting going on anyway. The rest would be effects work.

 

[DACrowe]

Effects work takes A LOT longer than to make acting scenes. I mean it is basic logic that filming two character actors performing a scene takes less time than getting a whole set or location designed one pyro effect or one moment with stunt men/etc.

For a basic example take what Tobey Maguire said about Spider-Man 2. To paraphrase he said he preferred doing non-costume scenes because then they could get 3-5 minutes of film done a day while on the effects scenes they'd get more like 10 to 20 seconds and spend months on a single scene.

Why do you think a simple character drama can be shot in 3 or 4 months but most action movies with heavy special effects take usually 5 months and the Spider-Man movies take 6 to 7 months.

But hey X3 was shot in 4 months with all its effects and they still spent time on the characters and look how that turned....oh, damn, nevermind.

FF2 will have an even worse production schedule than X3 did. At least X3 started work in late July (as did FF1) but for a movie coming out essientially the same time as X3 did this year, the filming didn't start until September. Wow.

 

[brainchild81]

Well I thought Superman Returns was decent and lightyears ahead of X3.

SR & Wolverine 3 sucked pretty evenly although Wolverine 3 pissed me off more because I expected better

 

[DACrowe]

At least Superman Returns had some competent directioin and cinematography and didn't look sloppy in a rushed "point and shoot" style of X3. And as you said X3 is much more disappointing after two good X-Men movies that offered the potential to see the best X-Men story ever on film and certain character arcs unfullfilled (like Rogue) and then them all **** on by Fox this summer.

Oh well though.

 

[Chris Wallace]

The problem w/this thread-& others like it-is that it's entirely OPINION-based but people keep presenting it like it's fact.

 

[Erzengel]

What can we present as facts?

Grosses and critic reviews?

You are never going to have everyone to agree.

Let's take X3 as an example. X3 made more than X1 and X2, does it make it a better movie? X3 did not get as good as reviews as X1 and X2 does it make it a worse movie? It seems among fanboys that X3 isn't as well received as it's predecessors.

Yes everything is an opinion but that's what a messageboard is for.

 

[Chris Wallace]

True. But opinions are being presented as if they're gospel, & the debate rages on. In order to have a discussion such as this, you have to be receptive to other points of view. The title of the thread alone makes it sound like this is just how it is, no ifs, ands or buts. But what if somebody liked Fantastic Four & didn't like Batman Begins? Who's to say that they're right or wrong?

 

[Erzengel]

Or what if they think Catwoman was the best comic representation movie?

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

Well, in my "opinion", Superman Returns and Catwoman have hardly proven that DC has got its "edge" back. The only masterpiece that company's produced so far is Batman Begins. 2 out of 3 failures is not a good ratio, is it (and yes, chop it however you like, SR underperformed--let's not be naive)?

Say what you want about Marvel, but for now they STILL have the upper hand box-officewise and hypewise. I will concede the point that the quality of FOX's films has left a lot to be desired; yet the monopoly remains in their favor as proven by the huge success of the mega-selling Fantastic 4 and X-Men films. I think Marvel's hold on this genre will be further cemented by the upcoming Spider-Man 3 project.

DC has yet to really "get back in the saddle" as far as I'm concerned. I'm hoping that Dark Knight and Wonder Woman will do a lot to help that situation--Superman Returns certainly didn't.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

At least Superman Returns had some competent directioin and cinematography and didn't look sloppy in a rushed "point and shoot" style of X3. And as you said X3 is much more disappointing after two good X-Men movies that offered the potential to see the best X-Men story ever on film and certain character arcs unfullfilled (like Rogue) and then them all **** on by Fox this summer.

I definitely disagree. Competent direction means little if what's being directed doesn't satisfy moviegoers.

Bryan Singer faltered bigtime with SR--and that's surprising to me considering how well he crafted X2. But that's what happens when you ignore both the comics' source material and cherished trademarks of a proven franchise in favor of regurgitating a tired 1970's concept for jaded audiences of the 21st Century.

X3, though seriously flawed, was intentionally fast and furious and showed true comic-book-movie flavor. I can't think of one heart-pounding moment in SR that compared to The Dark Phoenix tearing her mentor apart, while Wolverine and Juggs battled for blood, as Storm spun down from the skies with lightning and fury simitaneously. THAT'S A COMIC BOOK on film.

X3 was brutal--it covered a war--and that's exactly what audiences had been primed for for six years. SR was flaccid to me, on many levels...it never really had me on the edge of my seat, except to go pee.

 

[Erzengel]

I've stated this earlier but LS has inspired me again. I'm not trying to turn this into a Marvel vs. DC battle.

Everyone is right. DC had one hit in Batman. SR while not exactly successful didn't live up to any of it's hype. DC has a long way to go to even come close to Marvel's Success.

But Marvel is slipping. It's quality of movies are becoming subpar especially movies from Fox. I don't know why Fox seems to think they can package something together in 9 months and call it a movie? Fox was given 2 of Marvel's greatest books and began packaging it for the lowest common denominator. I'm not trying to sound like a Fanboy but I am aware of how successful X3 did. It just seems they are substituting action and pretty pictures for substance.

 

[Chris Wallace]

And there are those of us who saw plenty of substance in X3-the question of survival vs. the end to their persecution, the moral conflict surrounding Phoenix, the fact that in many ways, Magneto was right this time. I did not see an empty popcorn flick.

 

[Erzengel]

Sure the action sequences were great just they just tried to put too much into an hour and 40 minutes of movie. The bastardization of the Phoenix saga, Wolverine as a leader, killing of Cyclops, too many characters not enough screen time.

I know most people here don't care about the critics but I think Rotten Tomatoes says it best. X2, 87%. X3, 57%. Both around 200 reviews. That's saying something.

 

[Darthphere]

Yeah really, if they just stuck with The Cure storyline, the movie wouldve had some redeeming quality. More screen time for other characters, no pointless deaths, and possibly seeing Cyclops be ****ing Cyclops for once.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

Sure the action sequences were great just they just tried to put too much into an hour and 40 minutes of movie. The bastardization of the Phoenix saga, Wolverine as a leader, killing of Cyclops, too many characters not enough screen time.

Those are all problems and I agree with you.

I know most people here don't care about the critics but I think Rotten Tomatoes says it best. X2, 87%. X3, 57%. Both around 200 reviews. That's saying something.

All it says to me is that critics were split almost right down the middle on what to make of X3. When you read the reviews, few actually hated the film; from what I've read they all gave it kudos on the elements it excelled in--darker drama, more action sequences, SFX, etc. However, many compared it to X2--which, although an excellent piece of cinema in of itself, was not the consummate outline of a true X-MEN film according to much of the fanbase's standards.

Many things were bastardized in the X-franchise under Singer's care.

* Do I really need to highlight how poorly Storm was cast and developed?

* Do I need to go into how Wolverine was groomed to take Scott's place from jump?

* Should I reiterate that for two films straight the plot revolved around an uncreative "Doomsday Weapon"?

See, when one considers it closely, he/she will find that X1 and X2 were flawed too--and Singer took those same "close-but-not-quite" concepts with him in casting for SR...and then he romanticized it. Sadly, such themes didn't work for that franchise.

The difference between Bryan's X1/X2 and Brett's X3 is that all of the former's CBMs played it safe. The latter's film was just as flawed, but at least it took RISKS--it raised the stakes for once...and that's why it connected so well with audiences. Bryan's films hinted at a war, and no war is fought without real sacrifice, death and loss.

Keep in mind that if X3 was soooooo terrible as some of you guys say, it would not be approaching $500 million worldwide. It would have flopped much like Snakes On A Plane or even Fantastic Four after bad buzz...

That says something.

 

[Erzengel]

Keep in mind that if X3 was soooooo terrible as some of you guys say, it would not be approaching $500 million worldwide. It would have flopped much like Snakes On A Plane or even Fantastic Four after bad buzz...

That says something.

I ranked it 5 out of 10 at IMDB. Not terrible but the ****ty sister of the X-Men Franchise.

And I admitted how much X3 grossed. But I could spin that as well. You Got Served was #1 the first week it was released and Titanic is the #1 grossing movie, does that make it the best movie ever?

You were right they played it safe but it felt like they slapped this movie out in a hurry for an audience that just likes flashing lights and action scenes.

One thing that always stuck with me watching Spider-Man 2 and some kids were cracking jokes during some of the serious scenes. I just thought to myself, yeah what do these kids know about sacrifice, or honor.

I'm not saying audiences are stupid but it doesn't take too much to entertain them for less than 2 hours.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

You Got Served was #1 the first week it was released and Titanic is the #1 grossing movie, does that make it the best movie ever?

Never saw You Got Served, but what was wrong with Titanic? That's a modern day classic by most people's standards.

 

[DACrowe]

Meh to that point about X3's "great battle sequence," it was merely okay. Wolverine vs. Lady Deathstryke was better in X2 and the catfight between Storm and Morlock girl (forget her name) was cheesy to say the least and felt like something in a Jean Claude Van Damme movie if they had superpowers.

I'll give you it was a nice moment from McKellan when he saw his friend ripped apart (that was much more powerful than anything else in that scene) but Logan and Storm crying and holding each other felt forced. I thought X2 was much more emotional when Jean "died" and Cyclops and Wolverine cried on each other's shoulders and Nightcrawler gave Jean last rites. far more moving by a director who didn't mind lettin ga scene breathe instead of trying to rush us to the next. And for that matter I think SR scene where Superman gets the **** beat out of him by Lex Luthor is more emotional than any scene in X3, as is when Superman visits Jason's bedroom at the end. And I think the scene in with the piano and Lois getting a beatdown was far more suspensful than the rest of SR even with no Superman and more suspensful than all of X3.

In short X3 had more action but there was no life or suspense to it for me. I thought with a budget less than half of X3's, X1's climax was more heart pounding and edge of your seat (not to mention emotional, what with the Rogue/Logan scene ignored in X3) than either film and the cliffhanger of Magneto in prison blows both movies' attempt out of the water.

I agree SR is no masterpiece and this all opinion based but I think despite SR flaws it was a decent flick and created more emotional pull and at least for two scenes more suspense than X3 did. And the first two X-Men movies just blew both away though.

 

[DACrowe]

P.S.

Titanic is a good movie, but it sure as hell ain't the best movie ever made. It sure as hell wasn't even the best movie that year, not when LA Confidential came out at the same time. And can you honestly say that Titanic is better than The Godfather, Cassablanca, Citizen Kane, The Grapes of Wrath, Bridge on the River Kwai, Lawerence of Arabia, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, Goodfellas, Raging Bull, Jaws, etc. ?

No, but it made more money than those films....doesn't mean it is better because more people saw it though.

 

[Erzengel]

I wouldn't use the words classic and Titanic in the same sentence. LOL I've gotten into this arguement before. I saw it once and that was it for me. Maybe it's cause I wasn't a prepubscent or teen girl at the time of it's release.

Edit: Agree with DaCrowe LA Confidential was a much better movie and was robbed that year.

Edit 2: Something I noticed whenever someone does best movies ever, or top 10, 25 or even 100 lists, you never really see Titanic. I was just looking through IMDB's top 10 movies. Godfathers, LOTR, Shawshank, Schindler's List, Empire, Casablanca. Those are classic. I