Matthew Vaughn Mentions X-Men

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Cuz you're the only one talking about this. I'm really hoping you made that up.

Nope, not making it up.

It came from a quote by Zak Penn. I believe on the xverse boards, but it may have been in an interview from after the movie released. I remember Penn discussing some of Vaughn's ideas, and that was one of them that came up.

 

[Theweepeople]

What's wrong with movies where you can just enjoy yourself and have fun?

I don't have a problem with action movies that were intentionally meant to be mindless(Rush Hour 1 and 2). I do have a problem with X3 because X-Men films were not meant to be mindless action films that are 30 minutes shorter than they should be.

 

[Neto Magnus]

But... I think Ratner DID make a quality film...

And I think Ratner has made a FEW quality films.

Of course, the kinds of movies that he makes are not accepted in the least bit around here... but I don't see why he gets bashed on so much. As if movies like Rush Hour are the epitome of evil, or something...

What's wrong with movies where you can just enjoy yourself and have fun?

And for someone coming from that background, I still believe he did a pretty damned good job with X-Men: The Last Stand. It might not be what we all wanted, but I still think it's damned good.

Theres nothing wrong with enjoying mindless popcorn movies. Hell, I love all of Michael bay's films. But the thing about Ratner is that he has yet to make an original movie. Just about all of his movies were original supposed to be directed by someone else. Ratner is Hollywood's last resort.

Nope, not making it up.

It came from a quote by Zak Penn. I believe on the xverse boards, but it may have been in an interview from after the movie released. I remember Penn discussing some of Vaughn's ideas, and that was one of them that came up.

This coming from the same guy that said, "Cyclops fans won't be disappointed." Sorry, but I am not taking that as a fact. It wasn't even in teh earlier drafts or storyboarded. If anything it was just a brainstorm idea that was obviously dropped.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

This coming from the same guy that said, "Cyclops fans won't be disappointed." Sorry, but I am not taking that as a fact. It wasn't even in teh earlier drafts or storyboarded. If anything it was just a brainstorm idea that was obviously dropped.

That was actually Kinberg that said Cyclops fans won't be disappointed.

And even among the people who are furious with the writers, Zak Penn gets a LOT more credit for being honest than Kinberg does.

I don't approve of thewheepeople's constant, non-stop *****ing over Kinberg, and the way he used to dig up old quotes in an attempt to attack the guy's character.

But Kinberg DID mislead the fans during his time on the xverse forums. He said things that ended up being flat out untrue.

Zak Penn never made the same absurd claims that Kinberg did. Zak Penn has always been credited with being much more up front and honest regarding the movie than Kinberg was. And unlike Kinberg, it was Zak Penn who came around after the film to ask post-release questions. Something that Kinberg said he would do, but never did.

When it comes to whom to believe about the production, Zak Penn actually has some credibility, and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt when he speaks. He's actually shown us excerpts from the script to show us things that they did indeed write.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

But... I think Ratner DID make a quality film...

And I think Ratner has made a FEW quality films.

Of course, the kinds of movies that he makes are not accepted in the least bit around here... but I don't see why he gets bashed on so much. As if movies like Rush Hour are the epitome of evil, or something...

What's wrong with movies where you can just enjoy yourself and have fun?

And for someone coming from that background, I still believe he did a pretty damned good job with X-Men: The Last Stand. It might not be what we all wanted, but I still think it's damned good.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying mindless action popcorn films.

I enjoyed Crank, Transporter 1 and 2, any Jean Claude Van Damme movie during the 80's and early 90's, Rambo II, Robocop, Con Air, and so forth. The thing is that X-Men 3 wasn't supposed to be a mindless action film. Where did you get the notion that it's wrong to enjoy mindless action? Is this your way of trying to play the victim again? Because if it is, I doubt that there are people feeling sorry for you Nell.

Ratner gets bashed because he doesn't take his craft seriously. He has admitted to having a short attention span and gets bored easily when filming, which means rather than trying to perfect a shot he goes to the next one and wants to keep it moving. All I've ever asked for was a quality emotional X-Men film that is the closer of a trilogy.

I even stuck up for Ratner, Penn, and Kinberg during the production of this film and the aftermath. I just don't like the guy at all. I don't like his movies, I don't like him, and I just don't like the fact that you're so pro-Ratner and anti-anything or anyone that isn't Ratner's X3.

 

[Neto Magnus]

That was actually Kinberg that said Cyclops fans won't be disappointed.

And even among the people who are furious with the writers, Zak Penn gets a LOT more credit for being honest than Kinberg does.

I don't approve of thewheepeople's constant, non-stop *****ing over Kinberg, and the way he used to dig up old quotes in an attempt to attack the guy's character.

But Kinberg DID mislead the fans during his time on the xverse forums. He said things that ended up being flat out untrue.

Zak Penn never made the same absurd claims that Kinberg did. Zak Penn has always been credited with being much more up front and honest regarding the movie than Kinberg was. And unlike Kinberg, it was Zak Penn who came around after the film to ask post-release questions. Something that Kinberg said he would do, but never did.

When it comes to whom to believe about the production, Zak Penn actually has some credibility, and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt when he speaks. He's actually shown us excerpts from the script to show us things that they did indeed write.

Kinberg Shimberg. They're both ****ty writers. You can't just keep bashing Vaughn for some alleged idea that Penn said. If Vaughn says it himself then thats a different story.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

Kinberg Shimberg. They're both ****ty writers. You can't just keep bashing Vaughn for some alleged idea that Penn said. If Vaughn says it himself then thats a different story.

Exactly. I feel his bashing of Vaughn is to make himself feel better for liking X3.

No one has said you cannot enjoy X-Men 3. I know some people who feel it's better than X2, Batman Begins, Superman Returns, and even Return of the King. It's all about taste and difference of opinion really. I refuse to believe anything Kinberg or Penn say since they both did their fair share of lying, difference being is that Penn didn't mislead horribly or get the fans hopes up.

Penn, as I recall, never said Vaughn was fired. I seem to remember him saying that he and Kinberg worked with Vaughn laying out some ideas and Vaughn LEFT afterwards.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Exactly. I feel his bashing of Vaughn is to make himself feel better for liking X3.

You really never change do you?

I have been bashing Vaughn since the beginning, because I never felt comfortable with him at the helm. In every interview, he may have -said- he respected Singer's work, but the fact that he constantly talked about how he wanted to change it shows that he didn't have any respect for Singer's films. He always talked about how Singer's films were flawed, and how they needed to be changed. Vaughn really came off as more concerned with making a Matthew Vaughn film than an X-Men film, and I never felt comfortable with him at the helm. When he walked, I was very happy to see him go.

and I just don't like the fact that you're so pro-Ratner and anti-anything or anyone that isn't Ratner's X3.

Nope, you really don't change.

I'm so "pro-Ratner", as you put it, because I feel he delivered a GOOD movie. I defend Kinberg and Penn, because I feel they delivered an overall good script, with a very intriguing plot and some very epic action sequences.

I don't feel that the film was 100% perfect, I've never claimed as much, and I have expressed my disappointment with this film and some of the creative choices.

What I am sick of is the mindless bashing of Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn. If you don't like the movie, that's fine. Express your opinion. But just because you don't like something doesn't give you the right to personally attack Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn, which is exactly what the X3 bashers have been doing for the past 2 years.

Just as you and the haters have your right to express your opinion, I have my right to express mine, as well. And I believe these guys delivered a quality movie, that is worthy of the X-Men name, and worthy to be placed alongside Bryan Singer's X-Men films.

I find it REALLY funny how all the X-Men: The Last Stand haters can sit here and bash Ratner, Kinberg, Penn, and Fox all day and all night for 2 years straight non-stop, but when I come in and voice MY opinion on Matthew Vaughn, I am attacked for it. And you all make excuses about how I do it to make myself feel better for liking the movie (have you not ever matured in the past year that we've been bickering? Obviously not if you are still making comments like that), or talk about how I can't make such claims because Vaughn never shot those ideas or what have you.

You realize we only ever got a script review, right? Never the full script? The script review didn't give every single detail. And it didn't even cover the 3rd act at all! So we don't know that Wolverine running around with Leech in a backpack wasn't in the script, because the script review never even covered the god damned 3rd act! But Zak Penn has gone on record of stating that was one of Vaughn's absurd ideas.

You X3 haters have to realize this is a 2 way street. You guys can't sit here and bash Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn for 2 years straight, and then get all upset when someone comes by and bashes your guy. It's the same exact behavior that you are doing. And yet you are getting all offended when I do it.

You can't sit here and bash Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn for 2 years straight, get upset when someone with a different viewpoint defends them, and throw insults at them for their defense (by saying things like I'm only doing it to make myself feel better) and then claim that you are okay with people enjoying Ratner films, or X-Men: The Last Stand. Because if this wasn't some kind of personal vendetta you guys were on, you wouldn't care if I came in and defended Ratner and his film. But because you all are just acting like a bunch of whiney brats because you didn't get your way, you have to throw a fit whenever someone comes in and says something you don't want to hear.

And that's exactly why I act the way I do. If you go back to the days before X-Men: The Last Stand came out, you'll see I never got into these kinds of arguements before.

But the whiney, spoiled brat behavior from these fanboys (mainly yourself and thewheepeople, and yes I'm calling out names) can really grind on a person. You are out on some personal crusade to personally attack the character of Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn, as if some great injustice against humanity has been commited by these people. And whenever someone comes in and defends them and their vision, it's all these excuses about how we just want to make ourselves feel better, or we are some Fox apologist, or something. And when I voice my opinion on the other possibilities at the director's chair, you get all offended by it.

You guys are a bunch of hypocritical, whiney, spoiled brats.

And no this isn't trying to play the victim card. It's calling the situation as it is. I'm sick and tired of "fanboys".

 

[JP]

But Nell, you're a fanboy too. Just flouting in a different river, I suppose.

 

[Abaddon]

so the second act would've taken place at Alcatraz, and would lead to the final confrontation at Washington?

 

[LastSunrise1981]

You really never change do you?

I have been bashing Vaughn since the beginning, because I never felt comfortable with him at the helm. In every interview, he may have -said- he respected Singer's work, but the fact that he constantly talked about how he wanted to change it shows that he didn't have any respect for Singer's films. He always talked about how Singer's films were flawed, and how they needed to be changed. Vaughn really came off as more concerned with making a Matthew Vaughn film than an X-Men film, and I never felt comfortable with him at the helm. When he walked, I was very happy to see him go.



Nope, you really don't change.

I'm so "pro-Ratner", as you put it, because I feel he delivered a GOOD movie. I defend Kinberg and Penn, because I feel they delivered an overall good script, with a very intriguing plot and some very epic action sequences.

I don't feel that the film was 100% perfect, I've never claimed as much, and I have expressed my disappointment with this film and some of the creative choices.

What I am sick of is the mindless bashing of Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn. If you don't like the movie, that's fine. Express your opinion. But just because you don't like something doesn't give you the right to personally attack Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn, which is exactly what the X3 bashers have been doing for the past 2 years.

Just as you and the haters have your right to express your opinion, I have my right to express mine, as well. And I believe these guys delivered a quality movie, that is worthy of the X-Men name, and worthy to be placed alongside Bryan Singer's X-Men films.

I find it REALLY funny how all the X-Men: The Last Stand haters can sit here and bash Ratner, Kinberg, Penn, and Fox all day and all night for 2 years straight non-stop, but when I come in and voice MY opinion on Matthew Vaughn, I am attacked for it. And you all make excuses about how I do it to make myself feel better for liking the movie (have you not ever matured in the past year that we've been bickering? Obviously not if you are still making comments like that), or talk about how I can't make such claims because Vaughn never shot those ideas or what have you.

You realize we only ever got a script review, right? Never the full script? The script review didn't give every single detail. And it didn't even cover the 3rd act at all! So we don't know that Wolverine running around with Leech in a backpack wasn't in the script, because the script review never even covered the god damned 3rd act! But Zak Penn has gone on record of stating that was one of Vaughn's absurd ideas.

You X3 haters have to realize this is a 2 way street. You guys can't sit here and bash Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn for 2 years straight, and then get all upset when someone comes by and bashes your guy. It's the same exact behavior that you are doing. And yet you are getting all offended when I do it.

You can't sit here and bash Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn for 2 years straight, get upset when someone with a different viewpoint defends them, and throw insults at them for their defense (by saying things like I'm only doing it to make myself feel better) and then claim that you are okay with people enjoying Ratner films, or X-Men: The Last Stand. Because if this wasn't some kind of personal vendetta you guys were on, you wouldn't care if I came in and defended Ratner and his film. But because you all are just acting like a bunch of whiney brats because you didn't get your way, you have to throw a fit whenever someone comes in and says something you don't want to hear.

And that's exactly why I act the way I do. If you go back to the days before X-Men: The Last Stand came out, you'll see I never got into these kinds of arguements before.

But the whiney, spoiled brat behavior from these fanboys (mainly yourself and thewheepeople, and yes I'm calling out names) can really grind on a person. You are out on some personal crusade to personally attack the character of Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn, as if some great injustice against humanity has been commited by these people. And whenever someone comes in and defends them and their vision, it's all these excuses about how we just want to make ourselves feel better, or we are some Fox apologist, or something. And when I voice my opinion on the other possibilities at the director's chair, you get all offended by it.

You guys are a bunch of hypocritical, whiney, spoiled brats.

And no this isn't trying to play the victim card. It's calling the situation as it is. I'm sick and tired of "fanboys".

I have changed. I'm not insulting anyone nor am I getting angry about the situation. I'm not on any kind of crusade to prove a point. Because quite simply that would be a waste of my time and a waste of good air. Anyone who is on a personal crusade over a movie needs to get a life, just like anyone who is so hurt over someone criticising a movie needs to get a life.

I never, as far as I can remember, never attacked you because you bashed Matthew Vaughn. I did say that your bashing of him and your defending of Ratner makes it seem like you are Pro-Ratner. But never once did I attack you for merely bashing Vaughn. I admit I have attacked you over your opinions and have said many rude things to you, Logan babe, Danoyse, Storm22, and X-Maniac. Difference is Nell I'm admitting it. You come off like you're pure lilly white and have never said any rude words or whined about anything.

You say you're tired of "fanboys"? Well, I'm sure "fanboys" are tired of your incessant whining and blowing things out or proportion. You play a victim because said people aren't agreeing with you. I know I'm guilty of making my opinion seem superior to others, and you want my honest opinion? You come off as if YOUR opinion is absolute gold and that's all that matters. Yes, I said it. You act as though you are on a mission to prove that X3 doesn't suck and anyone who says otherwise is just a "spoiled whiney fanboy".

Look, the movie doesn't suck for you, it doesn't suck for a lot of people. The Box Office earnings it garnered shows that it made its money and that people liked it. The DVD sales provide the same answer that people bought the movie and liked it. However for others it's a different story as some were expecting a better film. It's all a matter of opinion and taste. Please stop being so overdramatic because someone hurt your feelings about X3.

Before X3 came out? What are you talking about? There was nothing to be upset about then. I defended Ratner, Penn, and Kinberg then when posters were bashing them all to hell as well.

If we're on a personal crusade to get people to hate the film, then what kind of crusade are you on? If you truly love the film why justify yourself? Why defend it like it's your life? If the film is good enough for you, you wouldn't have to continually justify yourself as to why you like it, nor would you be getting so angry about it right now. I am very guilty of acting like an immature prick to you and others. Just like you acted immature towards me when I said Blade II was a good film for me.

Like another poster said, you are a fanboy too. You are whining about the supposed whiners. Everyone here is a fanboy or else they wouldn't be posting on a superhero forum.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

so the second act would've taken place at Alcatraz, and would lead to the final confrontation at Washington?

Yes, I believe so. If I'm not mistaken and I could be wrong, but the original script had Magneto using the Golden Gate Bridge to free the imprisoned mutants from Alcatraz which ultimately led to the final battle in Washington.

Of course, I could be wrong and there's a huge chance that I am. Personally I think it would've been amazing to have the battle in Washington. For me it adds a more epic scope to the themes of the mutant cure. It basically brings the battle to the backyard of the government, which in my opinion, adds a serious element that I felt was lacking in X3.

 

[Abaddon]

So how would Phoenix have fit into all that?

 

[JP]

So how would Phoenix have fit into all that?

I suppose the same way she fit into the ending we got on screen. She's just there. Although, I do remember seeing storyboards of her going ape **** in a City area.

 

[BMM]

^ San Francisco, which could have just as easily been Washington DC or anywhere for that matter.

 

[Abaddon]

I suppose the same way she fit into the ending we got on screen. She's just there. Although, I do remember seeing storyboards of her going ape **** in a City area.

There were storyboards of her destroying San Francisco, but that might have come after the script was revised.

 

[Theweepeople]

You really never change do you?

I have been bashing Vaughn since the beginning, because I never felt comfortable with him at the helm. In every interview, he may have -said- he respected Singer's work, but the fact that he constantly talked about how he wanted to change it shows that he didn't have any respect for Singer's films. He always talked about how Singer's films were flawed, and how they needed to be changed. Vaughn really came off as more concerned with making a Matthew Vaughn film than an X-Men film, and I never felt comfortable with him at the helm. When he walked, I was very happy to see him go.

I'm confused Nell. You say you were happy to see Vaughn go yet you were happy with the end product of X3 that included many of Vaughn's original ideas. What original ideas did Ratner bring to the table besides changing the battle at Al-catraz to take place at the end of the film? You can't rationally say that Vaughn was horrible for X3 and Ratner did a great job when Ratner didn't change too many things from the original script.

Nope, you really don't change.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like you've changed much since last January. This is why I was better off not knowing about you apologizing for your rude behavior a few months back. It's obvious that your apology didn't mean anything.

I'm so "pro-Ratner", as you put it, because I feel he delivered a GOOD movie.

Yes, we all know that you irrationally are pro-Ratner and anti-Vaughn even though the script Vaughn used wouldn't have been too different from what Brett ended up using.

I defend Kinberg and Penn, because I feel they delivered an overall good script, with a very intriguing plot and some very epic action sequences.

What was so good about the script?

Was seeing Wolverine and Storm get most of the screentime for the X-Men good?

Could you explain to me how the title of the film applies to any of the core characters of the film? Who was the last stand for? Not Magneto because he gets his powers back at the end of the film. Not for all the mutants who were cured because if the cure doesn't work for Magneto it may not work for any mutants. Not for Xavier because he comes back after the credits. Not for the X-Men because racism against mutants still exists and since Magneto gets his powers back he can build another army to start another war or skirmish(cough. Weak shirmish.). Not for Cyclops because his character was barely in the movie and after he died he was too unimportant for any of the X-Men to notice he was missing. Finally, not for Jean Grey because she doesn't really take a stand for anything. She just wanders around the film sometimes aimlessly and kills people.


Could you explain to me how Wolverine could logically be madly in love with someone he barely knew?

Could you explain to me why Magneto decided to let Wolverine go after he discovered the location of his base?

Could you explain to me why Magneto thought it was better for Pyro to go off on another mission when he could have used him during the fight at Jean's house?

Could you explain to me what the overall theme of the film was?

Did it make sense for Jean to irrationally kill cyclops and irrationally spare Wolverine multiple times?

Did it make sense for Jean to irrationally join Magneto's army?

Did it make sense for Jean to stand around doing nothing for the majority of the time she was with the brotherhood?

Did it make sense for JEan to all of a sudden try to destroy everyone and everthing on Al-catraz at the very end when she could have done this earlier?

Did you think it was a great idea to show Magneto getting his powers back which made the cure conflict of the whole story irrelevant?

Did you think it was a great idea to show Xavier at the end which destroyed the emotional impact of his death?

Did you think it was a great idea to mischaracterize multiple characters in the film?(Cyclops, Storm, Xavier, Wolverine, Magneto)

Did you think it was a great idea to underdevelop multiple characters in the film?(Leech, Callisto, Arclight, Quills, Colosus, Angel,)

Did you think it was a necessary to give Wolverine multiple fight scenes of getting his ass kicked?


Did you think it was believable for Magneto to show no grieve towards the fate of one friends, while grieving for the death of a former friend, and then later sparing the life of an enemy he has no respect for who just discovered his base?!!!! I personally thought the Magneto we got in X3 was an emotionally unstable strategical moron.

Did it make sense for Magneto to waste an army on Al-catraz when he and Jean could have destroyed Al-catraz all by themselves?

Did it make sense for Magneto to want to destroy the source of the cure but, keep some of the cure to use on other mutants?

Finally, what epic action sequences are you talking about. What's funny about your epic action sequence statement is that Simon called X3's action epic. He compared the action sequences to Return of the King, Saving Private Ryan, Empire Strikes back, and Braveheart. Are seriously trying to convince us that X3's action was on par with those films?

What I am sick of is the mindless bashing of Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn.

Nice class act Nell. So now the opinions of the haters are mindless. Don't expect me to ever take your opinions serious anymore.

If you don't like the movie, that's fine. Express your opinion. But just because you don't like something doesn't give you the right to personally attack Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn, which is exactly what the X3 bashers have been doing for the past 2 years..

Could you please explain to me how quoting statements made by these people is an attack on them personally? An attack on them personally would be to tell lies about them. I haven't done that and to my knowledge most of the X3 haters haven't done this either. What you have a problem with is you can't stand the fact that there are many people who have legitimate reasons for disliking this film. For some bizzare reason you take these criticisms personally and see them as an attack on you. That is disturbing.

Just as you and the haters have your right to express your opinion, I have my right to express mine, as well. And I believe these guys delivered a quality movie, that is worthy of the X-Men name, and worthy to be placed alongside Bryan Singer's X-Men films.

When have I ever said that I have a problem with what is stated above?

I find it REALLY funny how all the X-Men: The Last Stand haters can sit here and bash Ratner, Kinberg, Penn, and Fox all day and all night for 2 years straight non-stop, but when I come in and voice MY opinion on Matthew Vaughn, I am attacked for it..

I find it really funny how you can take the criticisms of your opinions so personally. If you truely are this thin skinned then you should stop coming to these forums and all the other forums you might contribute to because it's obvious that debating with a considerate demeanor is impossible for you.

And you all make excuses about how I do it to make myself feel better for liking the movie (have you not ever matured in the past year that we've been bickering? Obviously not if you are still making comments like that), or talk about how I can't make such claims because Vaughn never shot those ideas or what have you...

The reason thelastsunrise and others have called you out is because you made a ridiculous claim about Matthew Vaughn and then you didn't provide a source. How were you expecting us to react?

You realize we only ever got a script review, right? Never the full script? The script review didn't give every single detail. And it didn't even cover the 3rd act at all! So we don't know that Wolverine running around with Leech in a backpack wasn't in the script, because the script review never even covered the god damned 3rd act! But Zak Penn has gone on record of stating that was one of Vaughn's absurd ideas.

No arguments here except that you once again referred to one of Vaughn's ideas as absurd when Ratner took alot of his ideas and included them in the film. This is totally hypocritical.

You X3 haters have to realize this is a 2 way street. You guys can't sit here and bash Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn for 2 years straight, and then get all upset when someone comes by and bashes your guy. It's the same exact behavior that you are doing. And yet you are getting all offended when I do it.

What the heck are you talking about? Matthew Vaughn is not my guy. Singer was my guy. I'd much rather have Singer direct X3 than Vaughn and Ratner. After seeing how crappy X3 turned out I would have liked to see if it would have been better with Vaughn directing. I'm not upset at you criticizing Vaughn. However, I do have a problem with you making up lies about him and acting like a complete hyprocrite when Ratner took most of the script that Vaughn created with Penn and Kinberg.

You can't sit here and bash Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn for 2 years straight, get upset when someone with a different viewpoint defends them, and throw insults at them for their defense (by saying things like I'm only doing it to make myself feel better) and then claim that you are okay with people enjoying Ratner films, or X-Men: The Last Stand. Because if this wasn't some kind of personal vendetta you guys were on, you wouldn't care if I came in and defended Ratner and his film. But because you all are just acting like a bunch of whiney brats because you didn't get your way, you have to throw a fit whenever someone comes in and says something you don't want to hear..

As I said before most of us aren't angry at criticizing Vaughn's ideas. We have a problem with you making outrageous claims, not backing up these claims with sources, and then using a double standard to justify your contempt for one director and praise for another director when both were involved with the production of X3.

And that's exactly why I act the way I do. If you go back to the days before X-Men: The Last Stand came out, you'll see I never got into these kinds of arguements before.

What's your point? Many of us didn't get into these kinds of arguments before X-Men 3 came out. This doesn't negate the level of contempt you and many X3 lovers have shown towards the X3 haters during the past year.

But the whiney, spoiled brat behavior from these fanboys (mainly yourself and thewheepeople, and yes I'm calling out names) can really grind on a person.

Well, I guess if you're weak minded then this so-called spoiled brat behavior which is really just objective criticism can really grind on a person like you.

You are out on some personal crusade to personally attack the character of Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn, as if some great injustice against humanity has been commited by these people.

You really have issues Nell. I almost completely disappear from this forum for a couple of months. I come back and state a few opinions of what I think of X3 in some new threads and you go completely berserk?

And whenever someone comes in and defends them and their vision, it's all these excuses about how we just want to make ourselves feel better, or we are some Fox apologist, or something. And when I voice my opinion on the other possibilities at the director's chair, you get all offended by it.

Blah blah blah. I already responded to this drivel.

You guys are a bunch of hypocritical, whiney, spoiled brats.

Interesting. You've acted this way multiple times and definitely with your last post.

And no this isn't trying to play the victim card. It's calling the situation as it is. I'm sick and tired of "fanboys".

If you truely feel this way then why not do some of us a favor and leave the X3 threads. I doubt that you'll be missed by many.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I'm confused Nell. You say you were happy to see Vaughn go yet you were happy with the end product of X3 that included many of Vaughn's original ideas. What original ideas did Ratner bring to the table besides changing the battle at Al-catraz to take place at the end of the film? You can't rationally say that Vaughn was horrible for X3 and Ratner did a great job when Ratner didn't change too many things from the original script.

I wasn't around for the production, so I don't know what drastic changes (if any) were made. All I know is that the ideas that I have heard that Matthew Vaughn had were absolutley horrible, downright laughable. With Vaughn out of the picture, Kinberg and Penn were able to get rid of his horrible ideas (Stacy X, Leech in a backpack, Danger Room that makes absolutley no sense)... unfortunatley some of the horrible ideas remained, such as killing Cyclops and Xavier.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like you've changed much since last January. This is why I was better off not knowing about you apologizing for your rude behavior a few months back. It's obvious that your apology didn't mean anything.

K...

Yes, we all know that you irrationally are pro-Ratner and anti-Vaughn even though the script Vaughn used wouldn't have been too different from what Brett ended up using.

Irrationally pro-Ratner? What is so irrational about it? Sounds to me like YOU GUYS are the ones trying to make yourselves feel better about not liking the film. What is irrational about defending someone who I believe offered up a good product?

What was so good about the script?

The general plot was the most exciting story of the 3 films, with the most epic and most exciting action sequences of the entire trilogy.

Was seeing Wolverine and Storm get most of the screentime for the X-Men good?

It wasn't a problem. It's a movie. Not a comic book. You gotta have your frontline characters. They were the obvious choice. Jean and Magneto also got tons of focus and screentime as well.

Could you explain to me how the title of the film applies to any of the core characters of the film? Who was the last stand for? Not Magneto because he gets his powers back at the end of the film. Not for all the mutants who were cured because if the cure doesn't work for Magneto it may not work for any mutants. Not for Xavier because he comes back after the credits. Not for the X-Men because racism against mutants still exists and since Magneto gets his powers back he can build another army to start another war or skirmish(cough. Weak shirmish.). Not for Cyclops because his character was barely in the movie and after he died he was too unimportant for any of the X-Men to notice he was missing. Finally, not for Jean Grey because she doesn't really take a stand for anything. She just wanders around the film sometimes aimlessly and kills people.

We're arguing about the title now?

It's called "The Last Stand" because this is the war that has been building up for 2 movies already. And people do take a stand.

Wolverine finally chooses a side.

Storm firmly takes a stand on her beliefs.

Beast makes his choice and takes his stand on the situation.

Magneto builds his army and fights for what he believes in.

Iceman, Kitty Pryde, and Colossus all step up to the plate and grow up, becoming X-Men and not just kids anymore.

Could you explain to me how Wolverine could logically be madly in love with someone he barely knew?

Um, if you know anything about human emotions, most of the time they never are logical.

I have fallen "in love" at first sight before. Is it true love? No. But the feelings are there enough for me to desire that person, to want that person. It wasn't "true love" in the movies though, that is why the feelings aren't returned.

Could you explain to me why Magneto decided to let Wolverine go after he discovered the location of his base?

Um, well he flung him quite a distance away. Perhaps he didn't realize that Wolverine was there to listen to the entire speech. Perhaps he thought his trip through the woods would render him a bit more incapacitated. Maybe you're just thinking about the movie a bit too hard and picking at it a bit too closely.

Could you explain to me why Magneto thought it was better for Pyro to go off on another mission when he could have used him during the fight at Jean's house?

Well, the disappearance of Pyro in this scene actually didn't make sense.

I never claimed the script to be 100% perfect. But neither were Singer's scripts. Afterall, there is a huge moment where the audience is expected to just accept it, when somehow Sabretooth knows exactly where Wolverine and Rogue are in Canada (Magneto and the Brotherhood have no Cerebro to track down mutants over great distances), for Xavier to know that Sabretooth is tracking a mutant, and sends the X-Men to grab Wolverine (Cerebro only shows Xavier where mutants are, not what their intent is, and surely Xavier isn't on Cerebro 24 / 7 tracking down anyone and everyone that might be associated with Magneto and where they might be) only for Magneto to have been after Rogue all along, but there would have been absolutley no way for him to A. know where Rogue was, or B. even know anything about Rogue period.

Sometimes, you just accept those falacies for the greater good of the story.

Could you explain to me what the overall theme of the film was?

I don't think that superhero movies are meant to be extremely deep and metaphorical. But if anything, I think it comes down to being who you want to be. The X-Men are against the cure, but they are willing to fight to protect it. Rogue maybe gave up who she was but she became who she wanted to be. And that's probably more important than sticking with what you were born with just because it's how you were born. Do I agree with the choice? No. But I don't see it as "give up who you are to fit in" like you do, when throughout 2 movies now, what she was isn't what she wanted to be.

Did it make sense for Jean to irrationally kill cyclops and irrationally spare Wolverine multiple times?

Yes. You seem to think that human reactions and instincts are formulaic, or mathematical or something, when they aren't. Do you react identically to every situation that arises? No. Then why should Jean?

The Phoenix is the instinctual, animalistic part of Jean. She reacted by instinct against Wolverine. The situation with Xavier was a bit more threatening to her than anything that Wolverine posed. She didn't "spare" him. She lashed out. She just didn't destroy him. It's not irrational in the least bit.

Did it make sense for Jean to irrationally join Magneto's army?

It wasn't irrational.

Jean was no longer Jean... she was an animalistic, instinctual side of Jean. She couldn't go "home", because "home" she would have been "caged" and locked up.

Magneto offered her encouragement to be what she was, to be free. As a human, you still want that emotional grounding. As a being of instinct, Magneto provided her with the more appealing situation, because he encouraged her to be free, instead of trying to cage her and control her.

Did it make sense for Jean to stand around doing nothing for the majority of the time she was with the brotherhood?

Yes. The majority of the time she was with the Brotherhood, Magneto was giving speeches, and rallying his troops. There was really nothing for Jean TO do.

On Alcatraz, it made sense for her to stand around, because there was no direct threat to her. Just because she -can- do something doesn't mean she wants to. She was perfectly content with watching her minions do her bidding.

Did it make sense for JEan to all of a sudden try to destroy everyone and everthing on Al-catraz at the very end when she could have done this earlier?

It's not "Al-Catraz", it's Alcatraz. It's minor, it's semantics, and it's the same kind of nitpicking I accuse you of doing with this movie, but Jesus Christ it's annoying me.

Yes it did make sense, because now she was directly threatened. As a creature of instinct, she lashed out.

Did you think it was a great idea to show Magneto getting his powers back which made the cure conflict of the whole story irrelevant?

No, I think that was a bad idea, and I never claimed the movie to be 100% perfect. I do have my own complaints with it.

Did you think it was a great idea to show Xavier at the end which destroyed the emotional impact of his death?

See above.

Did you think it was a great idea to mischaracterize multiple characters in the film?(Cyclops, Storm, Xavier, Wolverine, Magneto)

I think that Storm was the only one really mischaracterized, and then she's been done wrong since the beginning.

Cyclops was misused, not mischaracterized. When he was on screen, his character was nailed down pat. Through all 3 movies. Same with Magneto. Same with Xavier.

There were some points where Wolverine was out of character in this one, giving inspirational speeches and such (they should have kept the original speech, from the trailer), but for the most part he was very much in character as well.

Did you think it was a great idea to underdevelop multiple characters in the film?(Leech, Callisto, Arclight, Quills, Colosus, Angel,)

Not all characters get to be fully developed. There are such things as background characters. These were all background characters. They didn't need development.

Angel deserved more, because he was a focus part of the main plot. He was done wrong.

Everyone else... I don't see a problem with how little they were used.

Did you think it was a necessary to give Wolverine multiple fight scenes of getting his ass kicked?

Why not? You have to show conflict. The hero can't just go through whooping everyone's ass with no struggle, or else there is no suspense. The hero has to go through turmoil so that there is a real threat.

Did you think it was believable for Magneto to show no grieve towards the fate of one friends, while grieving for the death of a former friend, and then later sparing the life of an enemy he has no respect for who just discovered his base?!!!! I personally thought the Magneto we got in X3 was an emotionally unstable strategical moron.

Yes.

Magneto thinks that mutants are superior beings. Plain and simple. When Mystique was cured, he showed some remorse for what happened. But at the same time, she was now an inferior creature in his eyes. The way he handled it was not out of character at all.

Also, Magneto does respect Xavier, even if they have different viewpoints. They were always close friends. Much closer than any friendship he shared with Mystique. His reaction seemed very appropriate to me - grief over the loss of his friend, but accepting it as a neccesary loss to further the cause of mutantkind.

Did it make sense for Magneto to waste an army on Al-catraz when he and Jean could have destroyed Al-catraz all by themselves?

Yes. I have already explained in detail why your idea would not be a smart tactical move, but you're too hard headed to want to listen.

Did it make sense for Magneto to want to destroy the source of the cure but, keep some of the cure to use on other mutants?

Yes. Who was going to prove to be a threat to him? Without the cure, the humans no longer had a weapon against him. But he has been beaten by the X-Men before, and obviously they will be standing in his way. He's going to want some kind of defense against them.

Finally, what epic action sequences are you talking about. What's funny about your epic action sequence statement is that Simon called X3's action epic. He compared the action sequences to Return of the King, Saving Private Ryan, Empire Strikes back, and Braveheart. Are seriously trying to convince us that X3's action was on par with those films?

And so what if I did compare it to those films? What is it to you?

For the record, I don't believe it's as epic, at least not as epic as Return of the King. But I wasn't expecting Return of the King. Just because Kinberg said it, doesn't mean you have to buy into it. Return of the King is on a completely different level, in EVERY aspect of film making. I took an "I'll believe it when I see it" approach to expecting X-Men: The Last Stand to be on the level of Return of the King. I never anticipated it.

What we did get I still found to be very powerful and epic.

Nice class act Nell. So now the opinions of the haters are mindless. Don't expect me to ever take your opinions serious anymore.

No, the negative opinions of the film aren't mindless. But the whining and crying is nothing more than acting like a spoiled child who didn't get their way.

And you never took my opinions seriously anyways (nor the opinions of anyone else with a positive view of the film). You blindly dismiss them as impossible lines of thinking. You've never taken my views seriously, so don't expect the same courtesy in return.

Could you please explain to me how quoting statements made by these people is an attack on them personally? An attack on them personally would be to tell lies about them. I haven't done that and to my knowledge most of the X3 haters haven't done this either. What you have a problem with is you can't stand the fact that there are many people who have legitimate reasons for disliking this film. For some bizzare reason you take these criticisms personally and see them as an attack on you. That is disturbing.

What good can possibly come from your tactics?

Your only purpose is to take people down - those who made the film, and those who have a positive view of the film. It is not constructive criticism in the least bit. It's crying like a spoiled child because mommy wouldn't buy you a candy bar.

When have I ever said that I have a problem with what is stated above?

Your actions say all that need to be said.

I find it really funny how you can take the criticisms of your opinions so personally. If you truely are this thin skinned then you should stop coming to these forums and all the other forums you might contribute to because it's obvious that debating with a considerate demeanor is impossible for you.

No, it's quite possible for me. I just need to be in a conversation with someone who isn't going to act like a spoiled brat when things don't go exactly their way, which is exactly how you've acted with all of your "commentaries" to try to bring this film down. What you do does no good for anyone. It's just a bunch of complaining that gets nobody anywhere.

The reason thelastsunrise and others have called you out is because you made a ridiculous claim about Matthew Vaughn and then you didn't provide a source. How were you expecting us to react?

Well, the xverse forums which had the Penn and Kinberg interviews are shut down. At least those particular sections of the forum.

But, just as LastSunrise always says towards me... if your opinion is really that strong, then what I say about Matthew Vaughn shouldn't matter, right?

No arguments here except that you once again referred to one of Vaughn's ideas as absurd when Ratner took alot of his ideas and included them in the film. This is totally hypocritical.

And you did the exact same thing, recently claiming the "original" script was quite dynamic... yet it includes much of the same that you come on here now complaining about. Why was it dynamic under Vaughn, but trash under Ratner? Sounds hypocritical to me...

What the heck are you talking about? Matthew Vaughn is not my guy. Singer was my guy. I'd much rather have Singer direct X3 than Vaughn and Ratner. After seeing how crappy X3 turned out I would have liked to see if it would have been better with Vaughn directing. I'm not upset at you criticizing Vaughn. However, I do have a problem with you making up lies about him and acting like a complete hyprocrite when Ratner took most of the script that Vaughn created with Penn and Kinberg.

I've stated no lies. I have stated the reasons why I do not want Matthew Vaughn anywhere NEAR the X-Men, and why I am glad he left. If you don't want to believe the things I say about him, that's your perogotive. I know what I have read about him, I know the things that he has said, and I know how I view the things that he said.

What's your point? Many of us didn't get into these kinds of arguments before X-Men 3 came out. This doesn't negate the level of contempt you and many X3 lovers have shown towards the X3 haters during the past year.

You have stated you weren't around before X-Men: The Last Stand came out. Don't act like it was peaches and cream around here. It wasn't.

The same arguements that are going on now, were going on back then, because people were upset with aspects of the script. People were criticising Kinberg, Penn, and Ratner, because of their bodies of works previous to X-Men: The Last Stand. The original AICN script review was negative, and everyone followed with that like lemmings. I was one of the only optimistic ones around these parts, myself and a few others. For the most part, there was nothing but doubt and concern over the production of this film, and people upset with the script and the filmmakers involved. I never once got into heated arguements like this with those people that had doubts. Because even though we disagreed, everyone kept it civil. Except for TheVileOne. And kurosawa. But they are a different matter altogether.

Blah blah blah. I already responded to this drivel.

"I already responded to this" needs to become your catchphrase, because you do it anytime anyone disagrees with you as your way of dismissing their arguement completely.

 

[JP]

I wasn't around for the production, so I don't know what drastic changes (if any) were made. All I know is that the ideas that I have heard that Matthew Vaughn had were absolutley horrible, downright laughable. With Vaughn out of the picture, Kinberg and Penn were able to get rid of his horrible ideas (Stacy X, Leech in a backpack, Danger Room that makes absolutley no sense)... unfortunatley some of the horrible ideas remained, such as killing Cyclops and Xavier.

You make it seem as if they are these genius writers who were being brought down by the likes of Vaughn. Once he left, "Thanks God!", they rejoiced. "Now we can fix these travesties like Leach in a backpack!". Unfortunately Vaughn's worst idea, killing Cyke and Xavier, just couldn't possibly be changed.

Oh wait.. it wasn't Vaughn's idea to kill them. Are you forgetting that it was their idea to kill Cyclops? Because Fox didn't want his character ruining the Wolverine show and didn't even want him in the movie.

As a director, Vaughn had a creative input on the original script, but it was still Zac and Simon who wrote it.

 

[Theweepeople]

I wasn't around for the production, so I don't know what drastic changes (if any) were made. All I know is that the ideas that I have heard that Matthew Vaughn had were absolutley horrible, downright laughable. With Vaughn out of the picture, Kinberg and Penn were able to get rid of his horrible ideas (Stacy X, Leech in a backpack, Danger Room that makes absolutley no sense)... unfortunatley some of the horrible ideas remained, such as killing Cyclops and Xavier.



K...



Irrationally pro-Ratner? What is so irrational about it? Sounds to me like YOU GUYS are the ones trying to make yourselves feel better about not liking the film. What is irrational about defending someone who I believe offered up a good product?



The general plot was the most exciting story of the 3 films, with the most epic and most exciting action sequences of the entire trilogy.



It wasn't a problem. It's a movie. Not a comic book. You gotta have your frontline characters. They were the obvious choice. Jean and Magneto also got tons of focus and screentime as well.



We're arguing about the title now?

It's called "The Last Stand" because this is the war that has been building up for 2 movies already. And people do take a stand.

Wolverine finally chooses a side.

Storm firmly takes a stand on her beliefs.

Beast makes his choice and takes his stand on the situation.

Magneto builds his army and fights for what he believes in.

Iceman, Kitty Pryde, and Colossus all step up to the plate and grow up, becoming X-Men and not just kids anymore.



Um, if you know anything about human emotions, most of the time they never are logical.

I have fallen "in love" at first sight before. Is it true love? No. But the feelings are there enough for me to desire that person, to want that person. It wasn't "true love" in the movies though, that is why the feelings aren't returned.



Um, well he flung him quite a distance away. Perhaps he didn't realize that Wolverine was there to listen to the entire speech. Perhaps he thought his trip through the woods would render him a bit more incapacitated. Maybe you're just thinking about the movie a bit too hard and picking at it a bit too closely.



Well, the disappearance of Pyro in this scene actually didn't make sense.

I never claimed the script to be 100% perfect. But neither were Singer's scripts. Afterall, there is a huge moment where the audience is expected to just accept it, when somehow Sabretooth knows exactly where Wolverine and Rogue are in Canada (Magneto and the Brotherhood have no Cerebro to track down mutants over great distances), for Xavier to know that Sabretooth is tracking a mutant, and sends the X-Men to grab Wolverine (Cerebro only shows Xavier where mutants are, not what their intent is, and surely Xavier isn't on Cerebro 24 / 7 tracking down anyone and everyone that might be associated with Magneto and where they might be) only for Magneto to have been after Rogue all along, but there would have been absolutley no way for him to A. know where Rogue was, or B. even know anything about Rogue period.

Sometimes, you just accept those falacies for the greater good of the story.



I don't think that superhero movies are meant to be extremely deep and metaphorical. But if anything, I think it comes down to being who you want to be. The X-Men are against the cure, but they are willing to fight to protect it. Rogue maybe gave up who she was but she became who she wanted to be. And that's probably more important than sticking with what you were born with just because it's how you were born. Do I agree with the choice? No. But I don't see it as "give up who you are to fit in" like you do, when throughout 2 movies now, what she was isn't what she wanted to be.



Yes. You seem to think that human reactions and instincts are formulaic, or mathematical or something, when they aren't. Do you react identically to every situation that arises? No. Then why should Jean?

The Phoenix is the instinctual, animalistic part of Jean. She reacted by instinct against Wolverine. The situation with Xavier was a bit more threatening to her than anything that Wolverine posed. She didn't "spare" him. She lashed out. She just didn't destroy him. It's not irrational in the least bit.



It wasn't irrational.

Jean was no longer Jean... she was an animalistic, instinctual side of Jean. She couldn't go "home", because "home" she would have been "caged" and locked up.

Magneto offered her encouragement to be what she was, to be free. As a human, you still want that emotional grounding. As a being of instinct, Magneto provided her with the more appealing situation, because he encouraged her to be free, instead of trying to cage her and control her.



Yes. The majority of the time she was with the Brotherhood, Magneto was giving speeches, and rallying his troops. There was really nothing for Jean TO do.

On Alcatraz, it made sense for her to stand around, because there was no direct threat to her. Just because she -can- do something doesn't mean she wants to. She was perfectly content with watching her minions do her bidding.



It's not "Al-Catraz", it's Alcatraz. It's minor, it's semantics, and it's the same kind of nitpicking I accuse you of doing with this movie, but Jesus Christ it's annoying me.

Yes it did make sense, because now she was directly threatened. As a creature of instinct, she lashed out.



No, I think that was a bad idea, and I never claimed the movie to be 100% perfect. I do have my own complaints with it.



See above.



I think that Storm was the only one really mischaracterized, and then she's been done wrong since the beginning.

Cyclops was misused, not mischaracterized. When he was on screen, his character was nailed down pat. Through all 3 movies. Same with Magneto. Same with Xavier.

There were some points where Wolverine was out of character in this one, giving inspirational speeches and such (they should have kept the original speech, from the trailer), but for the most part he was very much in character as well.



Not all characters get to be fully developed. There are such things as background characters. These were all background characters. They didn't need development.

Angel deserved more, because he was a focus part of the main plot. He was done wrong.

Everyone else... I don't see a problem with how little they were used.



Why not? You have to show conflict. The hero can't just go through whooping everyone's ass with no struggle, or else there is no suspense. The hero has to go through turmoil so that there is a real threat.



Yes.

Magneto thinks that mutants are superior beings. Plain and simple. When Mystique was cured, he showed some remorse for what happened. But at the same time, she was now an inferior creature in his eyes. The way he handled it was not out of character at all.

Also, Magneto does respect Xavier, even if they have different viewpoints. They were always close friends. Much closer than any friendship he shared with Mystique. His reaction seemed very appropriate to me - grief over the loss of his friend, but accepting it as a neccesary loss to further the cause of mutantkind.



Yes. I have already explained in detail why your idea would not be a smart tactical move, but you're too hard headed to want to listen.



Yes. Who was going to prove to be a threat to him? Without the cure, the humans no longer had a weapon against him. But he has been beaten by the X-Men before, and obviously they will be standing in his way. He's going to want some kind of defense against them.



And so what if I did compare it to those films? What is it to you?

For the record, I don't believe it's as epic, at least not as epic as Return of the King. But I wasn't expecting Return of the King. Just because Kinberg said it, doesn't mean you have to buy into it. Return of the King is on a completely different level, in EVERY aspect of film making. I took an "I'll believe it when I see it" approach to expecting X-Men: The Last Stand to be on the level of Return of the King. I never anticipated it.

What we did get I still found to be very powerful and epic.



No, the negative opinions of the film aren't mindless. But the whining and crying is nothing more than acting like a spoiled child who didn't get their way.

And you never took my opinions seriously anyways (nor the opinions of anyone else with a positive view of the film). You blindly dismiss them as impossible lines of thinking. You've never taken my views seriously, so don't expect the same courtesy in return.



What good can possibly come from your tactics?

Your only purpose is to take people down - those who made the film, and those who have a positive view of the film. It is not constructive criticism in the least bit. It's crying like a spoiled child because mommy wouldn't buy you a candy bar.



Your actions say all that need to be said.



No, it's quite possible for me. I just need to be in a conversation with someone who isn't going to act like a spoiled brat when things don't go exactly their way, which is exactly how you've acted with all of your "commentaries" to try to bring this film down. What you do does no good for anyone. It's just a bunch of complaining that gets nobody anywhere.



Well, the xverse forums which had the Penn and Kinberg interviews are shut down. At least those particular sections of the forum.

But, just as LastSunrise always says towards me... if your opinion is really that strong, then what I say about Matthew Vaughn shouldn't matter, right?



And you did the exact same thing, recently claiming the "original" script was quite dynamic... yet it includes much of the same that you come on here now complaining about. Why was it dynamic under Vaughn, but trash under Ratner? Sounds hypocritical to me...



I've stated no lies. I have stated the reasons why I do not want Matthew Vaughn anywhere NEAR the X-Men, and why I am glad he left. If you don't want to believe the things I say about him, that's your perogotive. I know what I have read about him, I know the things that he has said, and I know how I view the things that he said.



You have stated you weren't around before X-Men: The Last Stand came out. Don't act like it was peaches and cream around here. It wasn't.

The same arguements that are going on now, were going on back then, because people were upset with aspects of the script. People were criticising Kinberg, Penn, and Ratner, because of their bodies of works previous to X-Men: The Last Stand. The original AICN script review was negative, and everyone followed with that like lemmings. I was one of the only optimistic ones around these parts, myself and a few others. For the most part, there was nothing but doubt and concern over the production of this film, and people upset with the script and the filmmakers involved. I never once got into heated arguements like this with those people that had doubts. Because even though we disagreed, everyone kept it civil. Except for TheVileOne. And kurosawa. But they are a different matter altogether.



"I already responded to this" needs to become your catchphrase, because you do it anytime anyone disagrees with you as your way of dismissing their arguement completely.

This is all rather amusing. I've got to go to work soon so I'm going to have to address everything you said later on tonight. In the meantime try to relax.

 

[Theweepeople]

You make it seem as if they are these genius writers who were being brought down by the likes of Vaughn. Once he left, "Thanks God!", they rejoiced. "Now we can fix these travesties like Leach in a backpack!". Unfortunately Vaughn's worst idea, killing Cyke and Xavier, just couldn't possibly be changed.

Oh wait.. it wasn't Vaughn's idea to kill them. Are you forgetting that it was their idea to kill Cyclops? Because Fox didn't want his character ruining the Wolverine show and didn't even want him in the movie.

As a director, Vaughn had a creative input on the original script, but it was still Zac and Simon who wrote it.

Exactly. The reality is the script was already written by Zak and Simon before Vaughn joined the production crew in March of 2005. The script was released 2 months later on Ain't it cool news. I'm sure Vaughn added a few things and got rid of a few things but, the core elements of the script remained. The same core elements that Ratner used to direct the film!!! How some people can justify their hated for Vaughn and praise Ratner is beyond my understanding.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

It's interesting because Vaughn isn't and wasn't my guy. I preferred Singer or some other good/great director before Vaughn and Ratner. I never seen Layer Cake and wasn't familiar with his work. So in a sense I looked at Vaughn as an unknown that made me curious to see how he would do it.

I have no reason to make myself feel better over X3. The film is what it is and cannot be changed nor will be changed anytime soon. I have accepted it and moved on with my life. The majority of the time these days I'm frequenting the Dark Knight forums, Transformers, Iron Man, Misc. Film Forums, and the Community Forums. Of course I come here from time to time to see if any news turns up that interests me.

I don't have a problem with anyone who enjoys X3. I get along with X-Maniac and he was one of the fiercest defenders at the time. I've changed a lot since I was banned twice. I'm not angry nor am I out to expose anyone for any lies. I'm just here trying to have an intelligent debate and I'm not going to lie and say I wasn't a nightmare in the past, especially when it pertains to X3, my mind is nowhere near as plagued about it as it was immediately after it was released and the hype was considerably high.

Nell, I'm not trying to pick a fight. But it seems you take these criticisms very personally and maybe it's best if you took a chill pill and relaxed for a bit. All we said was if Vaughn got fired show us a link or some kind of proof. You got angry, defensive, and started flying off the handle because we asked for a source to your claims and when you couldn't give a source or when we asked questions about the comment it was like we were "attacking you."

You play the victim too much, you get defensive too much and you're too confrontational about your liking of X3. If you love it as much as you say you do there would be no need for you to get angry or justify yourself. I hate the film and wish it was better for me as a fan of the comics and as an admirer of film in general. But it wasn't good for me and I don't accept the fact that they rushed a film of this potential just to beat Singer to the Box Office.

That's why I hope in the future a restart happens and the characters can get the faithful depiction they were robbed of. As much as I love Singer's first two X-Men films they were flawed and characters didn't get their chance to shine. But I think what made up for that was the story, the strong acting, the atmosphere, and the seriousness behind the themes that Singer was exploring at the time which ultimately made a quality film.

 

[X-Maniac]

I feel these arguments are well-rehearsed. Some people liked the movie more than others. That's the bottom line really.

All three movies can be criticised. Singer's are more solid as movies - he left out loads of stuff, for creative or budgetary reasons, but generally not to the detriment of the movie itself. X2 left out a lot of stuff - Danger Room (Wolverine was working out in there when the mansion was raided), Husk (she slipped out of her skin when grabbed by the soldiers), Artie's powers (he turned near-transparent during the mansion raid, but was still seen and captured), a bio-electrical mutant child who absorbed an electrical charge fired from one of the soldiers and shot it back at him, Archangel at the dam, a Toad vs Nightcrawler battle at the dam, Sentinels, Gambit's cards exploding as Dark Cerebro targeted mutants, Beast's blue fur growing during that Cerebro incident, Marrow's bone spikes growing during that incident.... I don't know how much of that was ever filmed... I'd love to see any of those things that were filmed!

All three movies are somewhat odd at the climax... we had Toad defeating everyone at the end of X1 and Storm taking ages to do anything, the various groups wandering round the dam at the end of X2, the odd moments on Alcatraz in X3 (Storm, Phoenix, Colossus not doing enough at some points and creating missed opportunities, Angel appearing suddenly, Psylocke being wasted, Cyclops being absent).

Regarding the idea of Magneto freeing all the mutant prisoners, who were being subjected to government-approved cure serum experimentation by Worthington (Mystique being a victim of this experimentation).... This depicts a large number of mutants as baddies (is that a good thing to show so many mutant criminals?)....and it also depicts Worthington as a baddie who carries out tests on them, making Magneto's cause more justified. Worthington becomes a version of Stryker (nasty scientist with serum to eradicate mutants, testing it on captured subjects). Where do the X-Men fit in? Surely they'd be on Magneto's side, wanting to stop the mistreatment of mutants. How then would Magneto and the X-Men end up on opposite sides in a final showdown? On the one hand, if there are so many dangerous and menacing mutant criminals with deadly powers, then the government is entitled to have a countermeasure and society's fears may be justified.... although experimentation and cure serums should NOT be allowed, under human rights legislation, so Magneto is right to take action, although his extremist measures are not the right way... My head hurts after all that, anyone else care to think that through and respond!?

 

[Abaddon]

I feel these arguments are well-rehearsed. Some people liked the movie more than others. That's the bottom line really.

Absolutely.

a bio-electrical mutant child who absorbed an electrical charge fired from one of the soldiers and shot it back at him

Jubilee.
I believe that's a deleted scene on the 1.2 DVD.

Regarding the idea of Magneto freeing all the mutant prisoners, who were being subjected to government-approved cure serum experimentation by Worthington (Mystique being a victim of this experimentation).... This depicts a large number of mutants as baddies (is that a good thing to show so many mutant criminals?)....and it also depicts Worthington as a baddie who carries out tests on them, making Magneto's cause more justified. Worthington becomes a version of Stryker (nasty scientist with serum to eradicate mutants, testing it on captured subjects). Where do the X-Men fit in? Surely they'd be on Magneto's side, wanting to stop the mistreatment of mutants. How then would Magneto and the X-Men end up on opposite sides in a final showdown? On the one hand, if there are so many dangerous and menacing mutant criminals with deadly powers, then the government is entitled to have a countermeasure and society's fears may be justified.... although experimentation and cure serums should NOT be allowed, under human rights legislation, so Magneto is right to take action, although his extremist measures are not the right way... My head hurts after all that, anyone else care to think that through and respond!?

Agreed.

 

[X-Maniac]

; Jubilee.
I believe that's a deleted scene on the 1.2 DVD.

No, it was a boy, during the mansion raid he is shot with an electrical burst but fires it back at the soldier. Must be a male electro mutant, maybe Bevatron or someone like that. That was in one of the early X2 drafts published online.