Singer Saw X3

Angry Sentinel said:
I really don't need you to agree...

You sure are trying hard to convince me otherwise for a guy who doesn't need me to agree.

Too much drama in your action movie is just as bad as too much comedy in your horror, which is also just as bad as too much drama in your comedy.

Which is the better Rambo movie? Rambo is a better drama, and Rambo III is a better action flick. Not to mention the delicious irony of Rambo teaming up with Al Queda back when they used to be an ally of the U.S.

that may be the focus of typical action movie, which is why it isn't usually considered to be a good movie. But when one aspires to make a good movie, they usually do want the audience to care about the personality of the individual...
It must suck living in your black and white world. I claimed that char. development should be secondary to action in an action movie, yet somehow you walk away with the notion that I claim char. development is irrelevant. Oh well.
 
Newb said:
You sure are trying hard to convince me otherwise for a guy who doesn't need me to agree.

Too much drama in your action movie is just as bad as too much comedy in your horror, which is also just as bad as too much drama in your comedy.

Which is the better Rambo movie? Rambo is a better drama, and Rambo III is a better action flick. Not to mention the delicious irony of Rambo teaming up with Al Queda back when they used to be an ally of the U.S.


It must suck living in your black and white world. I claimed that char. development should be secondary to action in an action movie, yet somehow you walk away with the notion that I claim char. development is irrelevant. Oh well.


new b.. your comment about action movies being good or not based off how they show us the action... is the reason why we have **** movies like elektra and charlies angels....

but i havent read all your post so i may be missing your point. if soooo... then let me know and i will try again
 
and this is NOT only an ACTION movie... it is a struggle movie that happens to have to be thrown to the grinder
 
Newb said:
You sure are trying hard to convince me otherwise for a guy who doesn't need me to agree.

Too much drama in your action movie is just as bad as too much comedy in your horror, which is also just as bad as too much drama in your comedy.

Which is the better Rambo movie? Rambo is a better drama, and Rambo III is a better action flick. Not to mention the delicious irony of Rambo teaming up with Al Queda back when they used to be an ally of the U.S.

This may come as a huge shock to you. But Rambo III does not start a lot of water cooler discussion in the US, nor does T3, Predator 2, Batman and Robin, Charlies Angels, or AVP. However Alien/Aliens, Terminator 1 and 2, Rocky I, Batman Begins, Predator 1 and Spider-Man do. Why, what do all these films have in common. They are more character driven. When you watch a movie one of two things happen. You either walk out and think wow that was cool/sucks and forget about it. Or you think wow and it sticks with you for a long long time. Good action movies are a dime a dozen. Most (even entertaining ones) are about as memorable as car commercials.

To make a good action film that you watch 100s of times over (like BB, T2, Predator 1) you have to create characters who the audience are emotionally attached to. This in turn helps the action because it creates suspense. In the case of X3 (for me) yeah the action rocked, but I kinda shrugged when I saw someone die or win a fight. I did not care who won, because I was not emotionally attached. Same with AVP, T3 and Charlie's Angels (my girlfriend wanted to see it:( ). In X2 when Jean died I almost shed a tear right then and there, and years later it still gets me choked up. Batman Begins I actually get tense thinking will Bruce Wayne make it in time to save Gotham:eek: . Why, because I actually have a vested interest in him winning.

X3 will by and large fall into that forgettable category, because while it has it's fanbase even they don't say they had a huge emotional attachment or even rave about the characterization.

So no, if you want a good film character development, story and dialogue come first, then you add the action.
 
pt_photo_inc said:
...but i havent read all your post so i may be missing your point. if soooo... then let me know and i will try again

I claimed that character development should be secondary to action in an action movie, yet somehow all of you, walk away with the notion that I claimed character development is irrelevant. Oh well, I guess reading comprehension isn't a nessecary skill for the movie aficianado.
 
Newb said:
No it means your standards are skewed.
Skewed? Simply because I don't share your enthusiasm for mediocre character development in an action movie?

Newb said:
No the reason why I insult you is because of your arrogance. I'm here expressing myself, about my subjective opinion, and you show up to challenge me, that I must back up my opinion to you or I'm not entitled to it. Who do you think you are exactly? What significance do you play in the grand sheme of things. By putting my opinion on trial at your request in and of itself invalidates my opinion, because I would be submitting it to your review before it can be validated. Like I said, if you have such a hard on to disprove what I think, the burden of proof is on you.
Ah. Anyone who submits an opinion on these boards has the burden of proof to back up what they say, or else, why post an opinion at all? Why the evasion? What is so difficult about listing specific examples to support your opinion? I've done it multiple times and yet you fail to bring anything to the table other than clumsy attempts at insults, poor generalizations, and complete evasion of direct questions.

And yes. Everyone's opinions on this board can be challenged. It's a discussion board. That's what happens. I don't invalidate your opinion. You invalidate it by your lack of specifics to support your opinion.
 
im mad... i wanted to buy tickets to mann's chinese theater.. but since they only play one movie at a time it wasn't listed when i was buying tickets a week in advance :(
 
pt_photo_inc said:
and this is NOT only an ACTION movie... it is a struggle movie that happens to have to be thrown to the grinder

...

...

HUH?! :confused:
 
Singer liked it (“He kept saying, It’s unbelievable, it’s unbelievable,”) as I knew he would...the X3 haters are not gonna like him now. Punish him by not going to see Superman Returns.:cool:
 
Newb said:
I claimed that character development should be secondary to action in an action movie, yet somehow all of you, walk away with the notion that I claimed character development is irrelevant. Oh well, I guess reading comprehension isn't a nessecary skill for the movie aficianado.
No, everyone see's your 'claim' clearly and have tried in vain to explain to you why they disagree. And when I approached you all you met me with was the same babblings about defining the classification of a movie and unpleasant snide remarks.

They also know that characterizations, even in an action movie, make all the difference in the world. And lopsided, plot heavy, or FX heavy action movies will be forgotton long before action movies (good ones) that are built evenly developing drama, emotion, and tension.

development should be secondary to action in an action movie, yet somehow you walk away with the notion that I claim char. development is irrelevant. Oh well.
*sighs* NO YOU ARE THE ONE that keeps making this statement. I have clearly stated SEVERAL TIMES, as have others, (but somehow you claim we are the ones with the comprehension problems) that these elements should be EVEN not SECONDARY regardless of the genre... here is where we disagree.

You are the only one NOT getting it.
 
Bishop2 said:
...

...

HUH?! :confused:

what i meant was.... stop looking at xmen as an action movie.. XXX is an action movie... charlies angels is an action movie... Xmen is an action drama- in equal parts. There is fighthing... but it is more like UNLEASED with jet li, then it is THE ONE! The real struggle is the students dealing with each other then the world that hates them. the action is SECOND!
 
watched X3 for my 2nd time tonight.. much better and slower paced the 2nd time around, loved it
 
LMason said:
The funniest part of that story is that he refers to Rebecca Gayheart's "husband". Her husband is Eric Dane, who plays Multiple Man and is a key player in the movie.

A "key player"? well, he just had like two lines...but in comparison with Colossus, he is definitely "Key"

I liked the part where they mentioned the possibility of romance with either storm or jean...funny, because it is supposed to be a prequel so he would not know neither of them and if it is not a prequel...well, how come Jean is alive?
 
Angry Sentinel said:
No, everyone see's your 'claim' clearly and have tried in vain to explain to you why they disagree. And when I approached you all you met me with was the same babblings about defining the classification of a movie and unpleasant snide remarks.

They also know that characterizations, even in an action movie, make all the difference in the world. And lopsided, plot heavy, or FX heavy action movies will be forgotton long before action movies (good ones) that are built evenly developing drama, emotion, and tension.

*sighs* NO YOU ARE THE ONE that keeps making this statement. I have clearly stated SEVERAL TIMES, as have others, (but somehow you claim we are the ones with the comprehension problems) that these elements should be EVEN not SECONDARY regardless of the genre... here is where we disagree.

You are the only one NOT getting it.

But is there really such a heavy focus on action in X3, as compared with X2 for instance?

In X2, Magneto's action is to rip the iron out of a guard, uses the iron to escape, suspends the nosediving X-jet, removes a metal wall to get into the control room where Mystique is, removes grenade pins and blows a wall up, stops Cerebro with waves of magnetic energy, realigns Cerebro's panels, wraps a chain around Stryker's neck...

In X3, Magneto stops the prison convoy and frees the prisoners, pushes cars aside on the bridge, moves the bridge, creates a metal shield to stop explosive charges, hurls cars that are ignited by Pyro. In NON-ACTION scenes, we hear him talk to Charles about the use of power, see his delight with the young Jean, learn of his international travels (implying his global terrorism activities), see his bitterness in the church scene, see him gathering an army and rallying his mutant troops, his horror at Charles' death, recruiting Jean, talking to Jean of her being a goddess who was turned into a mortal, remonstrating with Pyro over his regret over Charles' death, his shock and then the mutant supremacist coldness at the curing of Mystique, the comment of building bridges (from a comicbook storyline in which he tears apart the bridges of New York), his cold terrorism over the use of pawns in battle, his regret and powerlessness (literally) at Jean's full-on Dark Phoenix moment, his stubborn willpower in trying to regain his magnetic powers... We learn more of Magneto in X3 than we ever did in X2...

Compared with X2, we also learn more about Xavier, more about Jean and we learn a similar amount about Storm (she now needs an origin scene so badly to be a background for her responses - and we could have had more discussion in that balcony scene). We see a similar amount from Cyclops
(but with a seemingly more final and fateful outcome).

I think the movies are similar in terms of action and drama components, but X3 is more 'expansive' in showing a wider world's existence and response, and thus seems less introspective and confined than Singer's versions, replacing the internal moodiness of mutants flitting about as secret operatives with the broader passions of a conspicuous mutant world. With the war coming in X3, it suited the story to be shown on a larger scale although Bryan Singer might well have added more 'seriousness' and finesse in places.
 
tkenji69 said:
I know this has been discussed before... Singer did actually run int Ratner at the theatres... Even he liked the movie.

http://superherohype.com/news/featuresnews.php?id=4381

Q: What about it did you like?
Singer:
I thought when you have to balance all of those characters and then you have to introduce new characters on top of that as well as service all of the characters that have been created. It's a momentum task. I was genuinely impressed with what he did. I ran into Brett [Ratner] at the theatre and we had this moment. We're friends so we're like 'Oh my God!' He's talking to me about the movie. He's telling me and I'm holding the cup. A Superman cup from the theatre. It's weird. It's like when Brandon and I one night, Warner Brothers sent us a print. We'd get Warner Brothers movies sent out there and one night after a long night of shooting me and Brandon and some of the other crew came over and opened a beer and watched "Batman." Do you know what it's like to spend all day making "Superman" with Superman and then watching "Batman?" Very bizarre moments

Bryan couldn't have sound more "Meh" if he tried.
Singer states a fact (I thought when you have to balance all of those characters and then you have to introduce new characters on top of that as well as service all of the characters that have been created. It's a momentum task.) He never say Ratner achives that. If anything to me it sounds like he's saying 'too many characters'.
I don't see an ounce of enthusiasm. He said he was impressed (Hey, so was I - badly impressed by this movie)
So much like his "unbelievable" remark, this doesn't say he loved the movie.
 
CapBeerCino said:
Bryan couldn't have sound more "Meh" if he tried.
Singer states a fact (I thought when you have to balance all of those characters and then you have to introduce new characters on top of that as well as service all of the characters that have been created. It's a momentum task.) He never say Ratner achives that. If anything to me it sounds like he's saying 'too many characters'.
I don't see an ounce of enthusiasm. He said he was impressed (Hey, so was I - badly impressed by this movie)
So much like his "unbelievable" remark, this doesn't say he loved the movie.

He does quite clearly say 'I was genuinely impressed by what he did'. Beyond that, we can't read anything more about whether he 'loved' the film or not. But 'impressed' is obviously a favourable response; one rarely speaks of being 'impressed' if one doesn't like something.

'Momentum task' should obviously be 'momentous task' in the Singer quote.

It's fruitless to attempt to twist or interpret Bryan's comments to suit your own arguments or dislikes. His comments must stand as they are.
 
phizzul said:
are you kidding?
magneto didnt get cured, xavier didnt die, jean didnt die
the movie never happened.

Good to know I am not alone thinking that jejejje
 
Newb said:
I claimed that character development should be secondary to action in an action movie, yet somehow all of you, walk away with the notion that I claimed character development is irrelevant. Oh well, I guess reading comprehension isn't a nessecary skill for the movie aficianado.

Sorry to jump in here, but i have to disagree with you Newb, you say character development should be secondary to action in an action movie, i believe the opposite. By your reckoning is XXX a better action movie than Aliens, simple because XXX focuses more on action? I'm sorry but that is just not true. Is Van Helsing a better action movie than Batman Begins, because it has more action than character development? No, sorry again.

I'm not trying to be offensive here so please dont take it that way, i just strongly disagree with your statements.
 
CapBeerCino said:
Bryan couldn't have sound more "Meh" if he tried.
Singer states a fact (I thought when you have to balance all of those characters and then you have to introduce new characters on top of that as well as service all of the characters that have been created. It's a momentum task.) He never say Ratner achives that. If anything to me it sounds like he's saying 'too many characters'.
I don't see an ounce of enthusiasm. He said he was impressed (Hey, so was I - badly impressed by this movie)
So much like his "unbelievable" remark, this doesn't say he loved the movie.

Well if were reading into his quote... it sounds to me like he was scared to even attempt a movie with a lot of action characters... he probably wanted to do another character film with another doomsday device... oh nevermind he is. I'll take genuinely impressed as a good thing.
 
X-Maniac said:
But is there really such a heavy focus on action in X3, as compared with X2 for instance?

In X2, Magneto's action is to rip the iron out of a guard, uses the iron to escape, suspends the nosediving X-jet, removes a metal wall to get into the control room where Mystique is, removes grenade pins and blows a wall up, stops Cerebro with waves of magnetic energy, realigns Cerebro's panels, wraps a chain around Stryker's neck... We also find out that Magneto knows who Wolverine is, and what his past is. As well we find out he knows everything about Charles, the limits of his powers, and how Cerebro expands them, and the layout of the mansion. We also find out that he is willing to sacrifice Charles for the better of mutantkind. Abd that he holds all mutants in high regard and try's to recruit them at every oppurtunity (I.E Exchange with Pyro). And he knows details of Strykers past and his sons powers.

In X3, Magneto stops the prison convoy and frees the prisoners, pushes cars aside on the bridge, moves the bridge, creates a metal shield to stop explosive charges, hurls cars that are ignited by Pyro. In NON-ACTION scenes, we hear him talk to Charles about the use of power, see his delight with the young Jean, learn of his international travels (implying his global terrorism activities), see his bitterness in the church scene, see him gathering an army and rallying his mutant troops, his horror at Charles' death, recruiting Jean, talking to Jean of her being a goddess who was turned into a mortal, remonstrating with Pyro over his regret over Charles' death, his shock and then the mutant supremacist coldness at the curing of Mystique, the comment of building bridges (from a comicbook storyline in which he tears apart the bridges of New York), his cold terrorism over the use of pawns in battle, his regret and powerlessness (literally) at Jean's full-on Dark Phoenix moment, his stubborn willpower in trying to regain his magnetic powers... We learn more of Magneto in X3 than we ever did in X2...

Compared with X2, we also learn more about Xavier, more about Jean and we learn a similar amount about Storm (she now needs an origin scene so badly to be a background for her responses - and we could have had more discussion in that balcony scene). We see a similar amount from Cyclops
(but with a seemingly more final and fateful outcome).

I think the movies are similar in terms of action and drama components, but X3 is more 'expansive' in showing a wider world's existence and response, and thus seems less introspective and confined than Singer's versions, replacing the internal moodiness of mutants flitting about as secret operatives with the broader passions of a conspicuous mutant world. With the war coming in X3, it suited the story to be shown on a larger scale although Bryan Singer might well have added more 'seriousness' and finesse in places.


As you can see, we find out about the same in both movies. And X3 doesnt have near enough the drama and characterisation of X2.
 
^^ What more do you want to find out about Mags???? I'm glad we got to see him use his powers to the extent that he did. That golden gate bridge scene was awesome. Crushing those cars in that caravan almost made me fall out of my chair. I know everyone is complaining about Wolverine hogging up the movie but Ian's performance was spectacular.


magneto11ry.gif
 
McKellan is an acting god imo, and his performance as Magneto was one of the few good things about this movie, i was just pointing out someone elses mistake.
 
tkenji69 said:
^^ What more do you want to find out about Mags???? I'm glad we got to see him use his powers to the extent that he did. That golden gate bridge scene was awesome. Crushing those cars in that caravan almost made me fall out of my chair. I know everyone is complaining about Wolverine hogging up the movie but Ian's performance was spectacular.




magneto11ry.gif

I agree. Mags was great in the movie. It was good to see him vulnerable when Jean domianted prof X.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,560
Messages
21,760,193
Members
45,597
Latest member
Netizen95
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"