Phoenix: Did you like her explanation?

[N_z0]

I didn't read the thread but i liked how Xavier mentioned that he and Jean had sessions and that's where it came to call itself Phoenix. If only they had kept that deleted scene in X-men where it could be construed as such a session.

 

[DarknessOfDeath]

I didn't read the thread but i liked how Xavier mentioned that he and Jean had sessions and that's where it came to call itself Phoenix. If only they had kept that deleted scene in X-men where it could be construed as such a session.

I agree. I recently watched x1. if u have xmen 1.5, ur able to watch the deleted scenes during the movie... or with the movie I should say. It was great and watching the scene with prof x and jean inside cerebo put a lump in my throat... and then u think back to x3 and remember what happened between them...holy smokies

 

[ginny_weasley]

I think there is merit to the claim of inconsistencies between the films and the direction of Jean's powers.

But...

IMHO I still think it fits ok. I liked the explanation in X3 as a general concept (not necessarily as to how it was executed - which I think was rushed - but that's another issue). The suppression of Jean's powers was, I believe, part of the comic lore anyway. I also liked the concept of there being a previous or underlying pathology of sorts to the Phoenix within Jean; and the idea of the Phoenix as a subconcious manifestation of Jean's powers was IMHO rather interesting. This was, in fact, the only thing I really liked about the Phoenix element of the story in the film.

I believe it ties in like this: in X1 and X2 Jean's powers were slowly 'growing' because either a) she was starting to tap into them more on her own, or b) they were starting to break through Xavier's barriers. In a sense, she still was 'evolving' as the original impression we were given, just in a more controlled and restrained manner.

For me there aren't any inconsistencies. But I can see how this seems like something of a retcon to the direction Singer seemed to be taking Jean's evolution.

 

[BMM]

Because...the blocks were in place after she went to Xavier's school, limiting her conscious access to power. Jean's subconscious desired this show of power, and she was consciously accessing that power level. She couldn't in X-MEN.



"Concentrate" doesn't mean "concentrate hard". It means "concentrate".



Exactly. Phoenix is about about power and repression and what happens because of it. And Wolverine's line speaks to that.



Then why does it almost perfectly fit their own ideas?

According to you and your explanation, but you are hardly in a position to state whether or not your logic almost perfectly fits someone else's ideas (especially considering the explanation of their ideas has never been expressed). Afterall, you had to come up with your own metaphor for Cyclops representing power and the power that Phoenix could have. Who is to say that matches up to the writer's own ideas . . . or anyone elses for that matter. The fact that you had to come up with your own metaphors speaks otherwise to the fact that the explanation was resolute and clear,

And you think the writers expect people to THINK that much about how all that intersects? Please. Nevertheless, their explanation clearly works.

There are over 100 posts concerning people's different reconciliations of Jean's explanation. If the explanation clearly works, then debate and questioning wouldn't be necessary. That is, if it was explained well enough and made understandable sense to everyone, shouldn't there be no debating it at all? If an explanation works well, there should be little confusion. If the movie's explanation worked so well there would be no need for you to write a page length post about how you are able to come up with your own explantation about what you thought the writers meant.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I still think people are making this to be more complicated than it needs to be.

Pre-X-Men: Xavier recruits Jean Grey for his school. He realizes the potential of her powers, and to prevent it from overwhelming her to a point of inability to control it, he puts the psychic blocks in place in her mind. Isolating Jean's powers to her subconcious mind, where she can't unleash them, creates a dual personality within Jean's mind. The concious Jean... the regular, normal girl. And the subconcious Jean... that wants this power.

X-Men: During the Liberty Island incident, Magneto's machine affects Jean. For a machine that has no affect on mutants, why her? What makes her so special? These mental blocks. These blocks are broken with this machine.

X2: With these mental blocks broken, Jean now has access to this power... as seen with the awesome displays of power with the missles, and during the breaking of the dam. Why hadn't Jean become "Dark Phoenix" here? Because, though she had access to these powers, she didn't reach for their full limit. Only stints, in which the Phoenix hinted to manifest itself (firey eyes, etc...). However, her concious mind was still in control. After she leaves the jet to save the rest of the X-Men, she reaches deep and pulls out the full extent of her power, to save her team. The Phoenix is unleashed.

X-Men: The Last Stand: Jean was overwhelmed by the rushing waters at Alkali Lake. Her powers wrapped her in a cocoon of telekinetic energy, but essentially, her concious mind was now gone. Any resistance from the past from these mental blocks, or Jean's conciousness, to supress these powers and the Phoenix personality was now gone. What's left of the real Jean called to Scott, because she was still alive. But after she rose, the Dark Phoenix took over, and killed Scott. Unlike in X2, where it was Jean Grey wish flashes of the Phoenix, Jean Grey was gone, the Phoenix had taken over, and it was the Phoenix with flashes of Jean Grey.

In X2, her conciousness was able to tap into her full potential because the blocks were broken. That's why she's "good" Phoenix.

In X-Men: The Last Stand, after "dying", her conciousness is gone basically and the dark side can take over. That's why she's "dark" Phoenix.

It makes total sense, and I think we're making it more complicated than it needs to be.

 

[Tony Stark]

Hey all,

Was extremely disappointed with Phoenix's "story" in the film, as it seemed like a bad soap opera plot. Didn't X2 and X-men set up a different story?

Here's the X3: X used mental blocks to supress her powers, and her "bad side" that calls itself the Phoenix. Her death removed these blocks, so bad Jean is free.

X3 set-up: Jean's powers were evolving due to Magneto's machine in X1. In X2, she had changed (it was explicitely mentioned), and her powers were noticeably growing. The Phoenix was growing. Her death was to unleash the full potential of the Phoenix, along with it's corruption, as the Dark Phoenix -due to Jean's confusion with her new powers.

I agree, the split personalities thing was a copout by a horrible writing staff. The setup you describe for Phoenix is correct. Xavier even has a speach to Scott and Logan at the end of X2 about it.

But no we find out in X3 that Xavier lied to everyone all along. He supressed her power, to "protect" Jean.

They setup a situation where Xavier is really the bad guy, and then they kill him off. Brilliant!

 

[mizeidman]

also, consider this from a medical perspective?
why cant people buy the idea of dual personality.

It is a mental disorder in real life.

The professor's psychic blocks are what stop jean from having dual personality episodes, and when they break the symptoms manifest themselves. The only difference is that with these personalities, because she is a mutant when the professor cut off the 2nd personality it also cut off part of her powers.

and lastly, remember this is fiction so dont pretend like it is going to be completely plausible..

additionally, how did they make professor x the bad guy? He says himself he chose the lessor of two evils, neither choice was a good one. So because he protected her and everyone else by using his powers unethically he is a bad guy? give me a break.

 

[N_z0]

Such a shame that pejo's not here. And we have _____________ to thank for that.

Anyways, Bryan (Singer) did say it was Magneto's machine that set free Phoenix.

After X-men came out and an interviewer was asking about Phoenix, Bryan said something to the effect of, look at Jean's reaction after the machine gets destroyed.

 

[PhoenixRisen]

There are over 100 posts concerning people's different reconciliations of Jean's explanation. If the explanation clearly works, then debate and questioning wouldn't be necessary. That is, if it was explained well enough and made understandable sense to everyone, shouldn't there be no questioning it at all? If an explanation works well, there should be little confusion. If the movie's explanation worked so well there would be no need for you to write a page length post about how you are able to come up with your own explantation about what you thought the writers meant.

If 100 people question if 2+2=4, that does not mean that the theory that 2+2=4 "doesn't work." If I start a thread called "Is the sky blue?" and 100 people post in it, that does not mean that whoever created the universe did not do a good enough job making the sky blue. Plenty of threads in this forum have been devoted to moot topics, and plenty of posts have been made in those threads. The explanation works, but people can debate it if they want--and also whether they like it or not (which is the title of the thread).

 

[BMM]

also, consider this from a medical perspective?
why cant people buy the idea of dual personality.

It is a mental disorder in real life.

The professor's psychic blocks are what stop jean from having dual personality episodes, and when they break the symptoms manifest themselves. The only difference is that with these personalities, because she is a mutant when the professor cut off the 2nd personality it also cut off part of her powers.

and lastly, remember this is fiction so dont pretend like it is going to be completely plausible..

additionally, how did they make professor x the bad guy? He says himself he chose the lessor of two evils, neither choice was a good one. So because he protected her and everyone else by using his powers unethically he is a bad guy? give me a break.

I understand and would agree, but your explanation already deviates from other people's understandings. For instance, you say Xavier's psychic blocks stop Jean from having a dual personality disorder . . . whereas, Nell and others, for instance, state that Xavier's isolating Jean's powers is what causes the dual personality to begin with. Hence, the confusion. This is why I think the movie should have explored this further, because clearly people have different understanding as to what happened or what possibly happened . . . hence the confusion.

 

[mizeidman]

I understand and would agree, but your explanation already deviates from other people's understandings. For instance, you say Xavier's psychic blocks stop Jean from having a dual personality disorder . . . whereas, Nell and others, for instance, state that Xavier's isolating Jean's powers is what causes the dual personality to begin with. Hence, the confusion. This is why I think the movie should have explored this further, because clearly people have different understanding as to what happened or what possibly happened . . . hence the confusion.

cant that be one and the same? He is isolating her wrathful personality, and in doing so ends up constricting her powers as well. Or conversly, isolates some of her power so as to not overwhelm her, and restricts the personality as a side effect.

The reason i dont buy that he was simply using psychic blocks to restrict power is because it simply doesnt make sense. If jean was completely sane, healthy and in control, she wouldnt need restrictions on her powers, especially after all the sessions and training with the professor.

 

[PhoenixRisen]

I think it's pretty clear. But then again, Phoenix tends to be a very confusing subject no matter what. That's just her.

 

[BMM]

If 100 people question if 2+2=4, that does not mean that the theory that 2+2=4 "doesn't work." If I start a thread called "Is the sky blue?" and 100 people post in it, that does not mean that whoever created the universe did not do a good enough job making the sky blue. Plenty of threads in this forum have been devoted to moot topics, and plenty of posts have been made in those threads. The explanation works, but people can debate it if they want--and also whether they like it or not (which is the title of the thread).

People aren't simply debating something as clear cut as 2+2=4, or whether or not the sky is blue. People aren't confused by 2+2=4, and aren't simply debating their interpretations of the sky being blue. Obviously people debate moot points all of the time on these boards . . . but you suggest that this is a moot point, such as 2+2=4, which has a clearly definable answer (4) to most people (I'm scared to say all people, because you would probably try to debate me on that as well).

There however, doesn't appear to be a concensus regarding Jean's story (unlike there being a consensus that 2+2=4) . . . hence the debate, which is what I was pointing out in the first place. If people aren't able to reach a clearly definable explanation regarding the explanation given in the movie (one as clear as 2+2=4), then doesn't that mean that the explanation didn't quite achieve it's purpose? That it wasn't clear? If we were all of a consensus about Jean's story, their wouldn't be so much confusion or debate. Besides if there is a clear and absolute answer as there typically seems to be when 2+2=4, then what is the answer regarding Jean's story? . . . why is there all of this confusion over the explanation, infcuding different interpretations.

If the movie explanation (spanning over all three films) worked as well as it should of, there wouldn't be cause for so much confusion . . . but instead there is, which is why I don't think it was explained as well as it could have been.

 

[The Guard]

I don't recall saying the expanation was clear. It's not. Nor is it simple.

 

[mizeidman]

People aren't simply debating something as clear cut as 2+2=4, or whether or not the sky is blue. People aren't confused by 2+2=4, and aren't simply debating their interpretations of the sky being blue. Obviously people debate moot points all of the time on these boards . . . but you suggest that this is a moot point, as something like 2+2=4, which has a clearly definable answer (4) to most people (I'm scared to say all people, because you would probably try to debate me on that as well).

There however, doesn't appear to be a concensus regarding Jean's story (unlike there being a consensus that 2+2=4) . . . hence the debate, which is what I was pointing out in the first place. If people aren't able to reach a clearly definable explanation regarding the explanation given in the movie (one as clear as 2+2=4), then doesn't that mean that the explanation didn't quite achieve it's purpose? That it wasn't clear? If we were all of a consensus about Jean's story, their wouldn't be so much confusion or debate. Besides if their is a clear and absolute answer as there typically seems to be when 2+2=4, then what is it with Jean's story? . . . why is there all of this confusion, infcuding different interpretations.

If the movie explanation (spanning over all three films) worked as well as it should of, there wouldn't be cause for so much confusion . . . but instead there is, which is why I don't think it was explained as well as it could have been.

did everyone who saw memento understand it the first time? I know I had to explain it to many friends. hell I have had to explain the entire mission impossible movie to people.

Just because something is confusing doesnt mean it isnt coherent or is done poorly, it means you either need to think about it, or ask someone competent to explain it to you.

Many people on this board get it.

 

[PhoenixRisen]

^^
I guess I think it's been explained and don't find it confusing?? What's the question?

 

[PhoenixRisen]

did everyone who saw memento understand it the first time? I know I had to explain it to many friends. hell I have had to explain the entire mission impossible movie to people.

Just because something is confusing doesnt mean it isnt coherent or is done poorly, it means you either need to think about it, or ask someone competent to explain it to you.

Many people on this board get it.

I guess this is why I don't understand the so-called confusion. The Professor putting blocks on Jean is one of the ethical issues raised in the film. We are supposed to be talking about it, what it means to have so much power and not be able to control it. The dual nature of people. If the point is the technical details of how the blocks work, I think that has been explained and if you get bogged down in minutae of that, you are missing the point anyways, cuz from a minutae perspective the explanation works.

 

[BMM]

cant that be one and the same? He is isolating her wrathful personality, and in doing so ends up constricting her powers as well. Or conversly, isolates some of her power so as to not overwhelm her, and restricts the personality as a side effect.

The reason i dont buy that he was simply using psychic blocks to restrict power is because it simply doesnt make sense. If jean was completely sane, healthy and in control, she wouldnt need restrictions on her powers, especially after all the sessions and training with the professor.

I don't know what to say. I guess it could work either way. This is why I don't think the explanation was as good as it could have been . . . people don't seem to buy or understand certain aspects of it in correlation with what has been going on in the films.

I don't recall saying the expanation was clear. It's not. Nor is it simple.

. . . which is why I don't think it works too well for anyone not overly familiar with the X-Men comics, or the Phoenix arc. This movie is made for people other than us fans, who are willing to debate bizarre issues endlessly. I think that if the explanation was well done, everyone should be able to grasp it and not have so many lingering questions and confusion as to how it works or what it meant.

 

[PhoenixRisen]

I think that if the explanation was well done, everyone should be able to grasp it and not have so many lingering questions and confusion as to how it works or what it meant.

Honestly, what are your lingering questions? I am trying to help here.

 

[mizeidman]

cant that be one and the same? He is isolating her wrathful personality, and in doing so ends up constricting her powers as well. Or conversly, isolates some of her power so as to not overwhelm her, and restricts the personality as a side effect.

The reason i dont buy that he was simply using psychic blocks to restrict power is because it simply doesnt make sense. If jean was completely sane, healthy and in control, she wouldnt need restrictions on her powers, especially after all the sessions and training with the professor.

I don't know what to say. I guess it could work either way. This is why I don't think the explanation was as good as it could have been . . . people don't seem to buy or understand certain aspects of it in correlation with what has been going on in the films.



. . . which is why I don't think it works too well for anyone not overly familiar with the X-Men comics, or the Phoenix arc. This movie is made for people other than us fans, who are willing to debate bizarre issues endlessly. I think that if the explanation was well done, everyone should be able to grasp it and not have so many lingering questions and confusion as to how it works or what it meant.

well of course the movie is made for people other than just us fans. regarding the confusion i will refer you to my comments regarding that in my earlier post. I still dont understand what is so difficult to grasp.

We all need to realize: this is not the literaly Dark Phoenix Saga
These movies have attempted to stay scientific so as to make them a bit more real.

so jean has 2 personalities whether they were caused by or limited by the professor is up for debate. That is something we will never know.

 

[Doright]

which is why I don't think it works too well for anyone not overly familiar with the X-Men comics, or the Phoenix arc. This movie is made for people other than us fans, who are willing to debate bizarre issues endlessly. I think that if the explanation was well done, everyone should be able to grasp it and not have so many lingering questions and confusion as to how it works or what it meant.

I think the explanation given in the movie was easily understood by the non comic book geeks in attendence. In fact way more understandable than the actual comic book story would have been.

 

[PhoenixRisen]

so jean has 2 personalities whether they were caused by or limited by the professor is up for debate. That is something we will never know.

I agree. In my opinion the blocks initially suppressed her powers. But this caused the Phoenix to grow inside her, and that had to be suppressed in their sessions. But it leaked out every now and then, i.e. nightmares and Jean wearing a Phoenix necklace in X2. However, you can also see from the opening sequence that Jean was a little "bad" as a child in her personality in that she was letting the power control her, so which came first? Who knows? They kind of go together.

 

[PhoenixRisen]

I think the explanation given in the movie was easily understood by the non comic book geeks in attendence. In fact way more understandable than the actual comic book story would have been.

That is the understatement of the century.

 

[BMM]

Here. I'll just ask, and see what the answers are to get a better understanding. These are some of the different issues regarding some of the posts I've been reading.

Did Xavier put mental blocks in Jean restricting her power?

Did Xavier put mental blocks in Jean restricting her Phoenix personality?

Both?

Did the Jean consiousness have access to these powers?

Did the Phoenix consiousness have access to these powers?

Both? One? None?

Was the split personality present before Xavier put the blocks in?

Was the split personality a result of Xavier putting the blocks in?

Were the actions of Jean in X2 a result of the barriers breaking and allowing the power to get out?

Were the actions of Jean in X2 a result of the barriers breaking and allowing the Phoenix perosnality to get out.

Both?

Did the barriers keep both Jean and the Phoenix consiousness from having access to her powers, or did one or the other have access to them? None?

Was the Phoenix consiousness aware of Scott, calling to him, etc.?

 

[mizeidman]

basically, these are all the issues up for debate. I dont think any of us have concrete, supportable answers for them.