Singer's open to directing another X-men film!

[My Red Sight]

^You know, not all fans felt it was as horrible and bad as you generalize.

 

[FNSpidey]

I guess he was talking to you...

So where did I "preach my opinion as a fact"? I gave my thoughts on SR, but I wasn't trying to convince anyone. BMM seemed to dislike both X3 and SR, so I followed his reasoning. If anything, my opinion is completely irrelevant to my initial question. I actually said that if you liked SR, my question was pointless.
I'm obviously referring to gambitfire's comment, not your observation, AznBABYBANDIT.

Why should it scare us? It's not like his style has changed drastically since he made the first 2 X-men movies. We know what the man is capable of. He may not have produced the perfect Superman movie, but judging by his track record he would have produced an X3 movie that was more in line with the first 2, which is what people wanted all along. It's hes pet project, to not let him complete it is a shame.

As you said, we know what he's capable of. The good and the bad (again, unless you don't think SR was bad). So Singer's X4 could be either. Since the franchise already left his hands, why not try a new director for X4 (since it'll most probably be a totally new chapter)?

I mean, I'm a Spidey fan and I like what Sam Raimi has done with the character so far. But if he left and did a terrible Thor film (I'm talking basic mistakes here, like a completely nonsensical script, or lack of even an ounce of originality), I would be reluctant to see him do Spidey 4...

^You know, not all fans felt it was as horrible and bad as you generalize.

You're right, I know. I'm not trying to convince anyone. But it's a fact many people disliked SR and I assume that's the case in the X-boards too. It's their answers I'm interested in.

P.S.: Still, I don't think anyone can make sense of Luthor's plan... Just kidding.

 

[My Red Sight]

^I was talking about X3 fans (I don't know if you thought that I was talking about supe fans or not, but I thought that I would clear that up anyway).

It just kind of seems that the haters of X3 are more vocal about what they disliked about the film, and those who liked it get their post broken up and attacked at every point.

 

[FNSpidey]

^I was talking about X3 fans (I don't know if you thought that I was talking about supe fans or not, but I thought that I would clear that up anyway).

It just kind of seems that the haters of X3 are more vocal about what they disliked about the film, and those who liked it get their post broken up and attacked at every point.

Wait, I'm confused. Were you telling ntcrawler that not all fans thought X3 was as horrible as he thinks, or telling me that not all fans thought SR was as horrible as I think?

 

[My Red Sight]

Wait, I'm confused. Were you telling ntcrawler that not all fans thought X3 was as horrible as he thinks, or telling me that not all fans thought SR was as horrible as I think?

teehee.

 

[FNSpidey]

Gotcha.

 

[ntcrawler]

teehee.

hee hee

 

[gambitfire]

So where did I "preach my opinion as a fact"? I gave my thoughts on SR, but I wasn't trying to convince anyone. BMM seemed to dislike both X3 and SR, so I followed his reasoning. If anything, my opinion is completely irrelevant to my initial question. I actually said that if you liked SR, my question was pointless.
I'm obviously referring to gambitfire's comment, not your observation, AznBABYBANDIT.
.

In your entire post. Sometimes adding a little IMO makes all the difference. Perhaps i took it too offensively since i actually liked SR and your tone (in typing not voice ) came off as Yes this was bad period.

That and if you where only asking a question why bother posting a half paragraph dissing the movie? Couldn't help it, but it came off as Hey this movie sucked what do you think?

 

[AznBABYBANDIT]

your whole post...

 

[gambitfire]

about it?

 

[BMM]

So where did I "preach my opinion as a fact"? I gave my thoughts on SR, but I wasn't trying to convince anyone. BMM seemed to dislike both X3 and SR, so I followed his reasoning. If anything, my opinion is completely irrelevant to my initial question. I actually said that if you liked SR, my question was pointless.
I'm obviously referring to gambitfire's comment, not your observation, AznBABYBANDIT.

Ironically, I find both films commit similar mistakes and maintain similar flaws, although I find, at the least, Returns looks better doing it.

As you said, we know what he's capable of. The good and the bad (again, unless you don't think SR was bad). So Singer's X4 could be either. Since the franchise already left his hands, why not try a new director for X4 (since it'll most probably be a totally new chapter)?

I mean, I'm a Spidey fan and I like what Sam Raimi has done with the character so far. But if he left and did a terrible Thor film (I'm talking basic mistakes here, like a completely nonsensical script, or lack of even an ounce of originality), I would be reluctant to see him do Spidey 4...

Why? Simply because his interpretation of an entirely different character is not of the same ilk as that of another? Raimi's potential ability to misinterpret Thor in accordance with the general audience's liking doesn't retroactively detract from his ability to properly interpret Spider-Man to the general audience's liking. The same applies to Singer and all directors. Simply because Spielberg's Lost World is a misfire, doesn't mean I would dislike the idea of him being attached to a future Indiana Jones project. The same applies to Peter Jackson as well. The general audience very much likes his interpretation of Lord of the Rings but are wary of King Kong. Yet, I wouldn't be opposed to his interpretation of "The Hobbit" because of King Kong's similar situation via Superman Returns. Hell, even Brett Ratner . . . I dislike The Last Stand in accordance with its predecessor, but I don't doubt Ratner's ability to properly direct Rush Hour 3 (the films that helped launch him and are very much in his element).

Every director has a film that doesn't carry as well as some of their prior achievements, but that doesn't discount their ability to properly maintain those films that they are good at making in the first place. The Last Stand's predecessor is lauded as one of the best superhero film's of all time and is very much liked by general audiences moreso than any other X-Men film, so why not bring back the creative team responsible for such a well received picture? Because a director has a misfire in his career? They all do.

Regardless, I don't picture Singer returning to the X-Men franchise . . . if he does, I don't think it will be for a long while. I'm not opposed to someone new. I wasn't opposed to someone taking over after Singer. I expected it. I was opposed to someone taking over this particular saga and vision, as I would be if someone did the same to Jackson's Lord of the Rings or Raimi's Spider-Man in the midst of their interpretations. Each director should be allowed to finish his own vision and then allow the series to move on. Although I don't know why anyone new would want to pick up from where The Last Stand left off. I don't find too many appealing directions in which to take the remaining characters from The Last Stand. I find FOX somewhat pigeonholed themselves with this movie, if this in fact isn't the last X-Men film with the current and original cast.

 

[blind_fury]

Singer had his chance and the results were mixed. It's time to move on. There are better directors out there. Singer is overrated.

 

[gambitfire]

Yes he's so overrated just look at the success of SR.

 

[FNSpidey]

In your entire post. Sometimes adding a little IMO makes all the difference. Perhaps i took it too offensively since i actually liked SR and your tone (in typing not voice ) came off as Yes this was bad period.

That and if you where only asking a question why bother posting a half paragraph dissing the movie? Couldn't help it, but it came off as Hey this movie sucked what do you think?

I apologize if that's how I sounded, but that wasn't my intention at all. I thought some things were bad with SR (my opinion of course), so I just mentioned them as some examples about what possible mistakes Singer could make with future X-films.

Regardless, I don't picture Singer returning to the X-Men franchise . . . if he does, I don't think it will be for a long while. I'm not opposed to someone new. I wasn't opposed to someone taking over after Singer. I expected it. I was opposed to someone taking over this particular saga and vision, as I would be if someone did the same to Jackson's Lord of the Rings or Raimi's Spider-Man in the midst of their interpretations. Each director should be allowed to finish his own vision and then allow the series to move on.

OK, I get you. Thanks for clearing that up.
I hated King Kong, but I wouldn't be opposed to Peter Jackson doing "The Hobbit". But only as a director this time, not a writer.

 

[CapBeerCino]

I don't want to start anything, I'm just curious.

Did you guys see what Singer did to SR? Why would you want him near an X-film again? I know he did quite well in the first two, but doesn't the thought of something like SR happening to this franchise scare you? Or is it that you actually liked SR?

Again, I'm not starting anything, I'd just like to hear your thoughts.

Yes I saw SR - the more the reason I want Singer back.

 

[X-Maniac]

Yes I saw SR - the more the reason I want Singer back.

SR is the reason I do NOT want him back.

I'm glad we got an X3, but Singer should have stayed and done X3 himself, finishing his Phoenix ideas rather than rehashing someone else's Superman movies.

SR proves he is too vague and dark, not epic enough, and not very imaginative. He did well with X-Men because of the variety of characters - making them far less dull than SR.

Spider-Man and Batman show how it should be done. You can't ignore the vast comicboook lore, you can't ignore all or part of previous movies.

X3 was far from perfect... but much more enjoyable than SR, as the box office proves. SR needed a superpowered villain, a fantastic climactic battle, a little more magic in the production designs, and a lot more emotion.

 

[Cosmic Mind]

I will love to see him back, just to fix the continuity and do justice to the characters(Jean, Cyclops, Xavier, Rogue, Angel), and with a good plotline...

 

[CapBeerCino]

X3 was far from perfect... but much more enjoyable than SR, as the box office proves. SR needed a superpowered villain, a fantastic climactic battle, a little more magic in the production designs, and a lot more emotion.

I don't think so. x-3 did well because of the first two movies, not inspite of them. Regardless of how good/bad x-3 was the B.O aren't indications. (the big drop and blah blah blah)

 

[speedracer216]

sweet, he can come back and do x4 - x10 :-d

 

[genufine]

As you said, we know what he's capable of. The good and the bad (again, unless you don't think SR was bad). So Singer's X4 could be either. Since the franchise already left his hands, why not try a new director for X4 (since it'll most probably be a totally new chapter)?

I disagree. Look at the old Batman franchise. What happened? Tim Burton directed Batman and Batman returns, got alot good reviews and did well. Joel Schumaecher rode the boat of Batman hype and directed Batman forever which earned money purely on hype (the movie sucked). He then teamed up with a bunch of different directors to make an even sh**tier Batman and Robin. What happened? Reboot.

See a pattern? Singer two movies -> Ratner rode the boat of hype.

If things dont change, expect a reboot. Even though I'm only a fan of Ratner when it comes to movies like Rush Hour - I'd rather stick with him than a NEW director. But first choice...... goes to Singer.

And for those who say he f**cked up with Superman. Wait till Superman 2. X-men 1 did mediocre as well, but it was gradual as the series moved on. All he wanted to accomplish is character development in SR imo.

 

[ntcrawler]

I disagree. Look at the old Batman franchise. What happened? Tim Burton directed Batman and Batman returns, got alot good reviews and did well. Joel Schumaecher rode the boat of Batman hype and directed Batman forever which earned money purely on hype (the movie sucked). He then teamed up with a bunch of different directors to make an even sh**tier Batman and Robin. What happened? Reboot.

See a pattern? Singer two movies -> Ratner rode the boat of hype.

Interesting pattern indeed. Do you suppose that the Wolverine movie will be the one that gets out of hand and will then require a reboot? Or just be passed over and have a new storyline put together for the next movie? Or go back to the concept of a team movie?

If things dont change, expect a reboot. Even though I'm only a fan of Ratner when it comes to movies like Rush Hour - I'd rather stick with him than a NEW director. But first choice...... goes to Singer.

I agree. With Singer it's fairly certain that the movie would be at least on par with X2, and at least consistent with the first 2 films as far as plot ideas and continuity.

But I do agree that there are other directors who could also do a good job. LastSunrise1981 suggested that if there was to be another trilogy involving the Apocalypse Story Arc, someone like Ridley Scott would do well. His style would fit in nicely I think with the tone than the Apoc stories would require

 

[CapBeerCino]

And for those who say he f**cked up with Superman. Wait till Superman 2. X-men 1 did mediocre as well, but it was gradual as the series moved on. All he wanted to accomplish is character development in SR imo.

I feel the same way (though I really enjoyed SR).

 

[gambitfire]

I disagree. Look at the old Batman franchise. What happened? Tim Burton directed Batman and Batman returns, got alot good reviews and did well. Joel Schumaecher rode the boat of Batman hype and directed Batman forever which earned money purely on hype (the movie sucked). He then teamed up with a bunch of different directors to make an even sh**tier Batman and Robin. What happened? Reboot.

See a pattern? Singer two movies -> Ratner rode the boat of hype.

If things dont change, expect a reboot. Even though I'm only a fan of Ratner when it comes to movies like Rush Hour - I'd rather stick with him than a NEW director. But first choice...... goes to Singer.

And for those who say he f**cked up with Superman. Wait till Superman 2. X-men 1 did mediocre as well, but it was gradual as the series moved on. All he wanted to accomplish is character development in SR imo.

BRAFREAKINGVO!!!!

This is what ive been saying.........or trying to say . But none the less it's a good point and pretty much what happened.

Your SR point is also great

 

[Cosmic Mind]

If X4 comes with new director, is like Batman, first movies good,
third= not so good,
fourth= dead...
It must be Singer to redeem the movies and the characters

 

[X-Maniac]

I disagree. Look at the old Batman franchise. What happened? Tim Burton directed Batman and Batman returns, got alot good reviews and did well. Joel Schumaecher rode the boat of Batman hype and directed Batman forever which earned money purely on hype (the movie sucked). He then teamed up with a bunch of different directors to make an even sh**tier Batman and Robin. What happened? Reboot.

See a pattern? Singer two movies -> Ratner rode the boat of hype.

If things dont change, expect a reboot. Even though I'm only a fan of Ratner when it comes to movies like Rush Hour - I'd rather stick with him than a NEW director. But first choice...... goes to Singer.

And for those who say he f**cked up with Superman. Wait till Superman 2. X-men 1 did mediocre as well, but it was gradual as the series moved on. All he wanted to accomplish is character development in SR imo.

It's NOT a pattern. It's what happened to Batman. Ratner didn't 'ride a boat' - he was asked to step in when Vaughn pulled out.

There is, as yet, no pattern. You are cynically hoping that it is a pattern or that Batman has created some kind of model or template for movies. Wrong.