Singers Vision Of Xmen 3?

[pt_photo_inc]

you mean singer wasnt a complete nerd? and that he had a good grounding in movies and what the "Non-Fan" would put up with... then he caught up on what the rest of us wanted to see as well? You mean the guy that did good enough job that AOL TIME WARNER/ WARNER BROTHERS paid him more then he has been paid to take on thier biggest summer project!

You mean the guy that made X2.... man, spidey.... wake up.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

X2 was great... but X3 has a much much much more of a true "x-men" feel to it.

listen.. just because ive liked his x-men movies does not mean i have to like him. hes not a good person.

and supes look like bantha fodder soo im holding my judgement for that

 

[BMM]

X2 was great... but X3 has a much much much more of a true "x-men" feel to it.

listen.. just because ive liked his x-men movies does not mean i have to like him. hes not a good person.

and supes look like bantha fodder soo im holding my judgement for that

I agree with that. Just because you like someone's product, doesn't mean you have to like them personally. I imagine that's true for a lot of people as well. Okay, I'm going to post a reply to your other post as well. I'm not picking on you to try and be a jackass. I just find this to be an interesting thread, and your post brings up a lot of points.

no jean isnt the issue... his X3 doesnt have any new characters other then sentinels... and the return of nighcrawler.. hell its basically what they didnt have time to do in X2.. plus he takes out storm, X4 was going to be the return of jean, and additions of gambit, emma, angel, beast

To be honest, Singer has never really gone into detail about what would have been partioned for either his X3 or X4 . . . in so far as his X3 basically being what they didn't have time to do in X2, that's pretty much what's happening in the current X3. They're tossing in the previous design of a Danger Room, with a sentinel as a nod, adding a bit more to Colossus' role, adding Beast who was planned to be in the other two movies, and Angel who appears to hardly have a role in X3, and the Dark Phoenix storyline as more of a subplot . . . kind of.

Also the current X3 is only touching upon stories set up in the previous film, like all movies have to, whether it be a Singer or Ratner film--such as the Iceman v. Pyro arc.

Apparently Singer's future film would have, at the least, included Angel, Beast, Gambit, Sentinels, the White Queen (Hellfire Club?), as well as increased roles for Colossus, Iceman, Nightcrawler, Shadowcat, Pyro and all of the other remaining cast, among others . . . two movies simply allows for more time to bring characters into the fold.

The truth is we'll never know--and we might as well concentrate and be happey with the X-Men film at hand.

 

[BMM]

This is in response to the Storm issue as noted in the list of Singer's X3, which seems to have been misinterpreted.

The Storm rumor is a falsity according to producers--it has been stated by the producers (notably Donner) that Storm, Halle Berry, would have to be back for an X3, that they couldn't picture it without her, and that they would have only written a bigger role for her. Storm was always wanted back and producers planned on her being back.


"I can't imagine doing it without him or Patrick [Stewart] or any of the main cast...and Halle [Berry]. We have to make sure that she's used well and we have a great great storyline for her, or maybe we do a Storm movie...who knows."

Source: http://www.darkhorizons.com/news03/031216e.php

"She also is encouraged by the fact that despite originally saying she was "X'd" out, Halle Berry is reconsidering resuming her role as Storm." (and this was only in November of '03, long before Catwoman took a bite out of Berry)

Source: http://www.superherohype.com/x-men/index.php?id=396

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

meh singers still an ass.. from what ive heard alot of from people who met him in hollywood... he lies about his comic enjoyment.. as a front.. hes in to young 18-23 year old guys... thinks hes god when his only movies has 3 movies under his belt.. (4 with supes). Halle, Rebecca, Alan, and Ian have all expressed there distaste for him, and how he puts himself first before the actors, Ian directly said

"You say the right words of encouragement. You introduce people to them. Brett is brilliant, absolutely brilliant, but Bryan's not very good at it. I've never been to a party of Bryan's, but I dread to think what it would be like. Bryan is much more internal and self-obsessed and neurotic. That comes out in the films he makes. "

and i'd agree with him. theres alot of reports of Bryan being very much a drama queen and very unprofessional

Bryan has a couple more than 3 movies...

*Usual Suspects
*Apt Pupil
*X-Men
*X-Men 2
*Superman Returns

There's also a low budget indie film that he did before even Usual Suspects, I forgot what it was called though.

From everything that I've heard of Singer's treatment for X-Men 3, and everything that I've seen from what we're getting, it seems to me that the movie was gonna be screwed one way or another anyways.

In what we're getting, we're going to have Cyclops very likely killed off, and non-existent in the Phoenix Saga, and Wolverine likely taking his role as Jean Grey's savior.

In Bryan Singer's version, we would have had a larger role for Cyclops, which is great, but he would have cut out Storm altogether, which isn't great.

People really need to get off of the Cyclops, or Storm, or Wolverine biases. The fact of the matter is, NONE of these characters should just be eliminated. They don't die in the comic books, and they shouldn't die in the movies. Wolverine isn't a leader, and his love for Jean isn't strong enough to save her. And Storm doesn't just up and disappear. Character biases aside, likes or dislikes of the actors or actresses, none of it matters. These characters shouldn't be treated like this.

With Singer, we would have had Emma Frost and Gambit. Well, a lot of people are already upset with how Singer would have handled Emma Frost, since she would have been an empath. And with Ratner, we're getting an inaccurate rendition, at least powers and appearance wise, of Callisto.

We are getting a Sentinel, even if it is just a Danger Room hologram.

So what do I prefer? The one we're getting, or Singer's?

Well, it's really hard to say, because we've only heard rumblings of what Singer might have wanted to do, where we actually have Ratner's vision coming out in 2 weeks.

But I will say this. I absolutley love Bryan Singer's 'X-Men' movies. I believe they were very loyal adaptations of the X-Men source material, even though there are many people who will argue that. In my mind, there are a few inaccuracies, but overall, they were handled very well.

But I will admit this; Singer was a little light on the action. I mean, we got some great action sequences; the train station in X-Men, Nightcrawler's White House attack in X2, the X-Jet / Tornado sequence in X2, Pyro's ambush on the police outside the Drake home in X2, and my personal favorite scene thus far in the franchise, Magneto's escape from prison in X2...

But he did hold back on the action. The final battle that we are getting in Ratner's X-Men 3 is something I imagine we never would have gotten with Singer. I mean, the destruction of the Golden Gate Bridge, the huge mutant battle on Alcatraz... and I don't give a flying **** about Phoenix flames or not, or the fact that it's Wolverine looking back at Jean and not Cyclops... that shot of Wolverine looking back at Jean as the Phoenix, and all those flames and ****... it makes it look like the Devil himself is rising out of the pits of Hell. That is a classic shot that in the theatres, is gonna send chills down my spine.

We were gonna lose a character either way. It was either gonna be Storm or Cyclops by the looks of it. At least this way, we get some awesome action. The cast remains consistant through the entire trilogy.

And hopefully, just hopefully, things aren't 100% as they seem on the Cyclops front.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

blah.. we might get emma but whats the point if shes sigourni weaver and nothing like the emma we know? didnt singer change enough that ratner seems to be fixing? plus the "droideka" sentinel designs look horrible.. hell from the small clip ive seen as is id take the sentinel head and "headlights" we got over that

 

[BMM]

blah.. we might get emma but whats the point if shes sigourni weaver and nothing like the emma we know? didnt singer change enough that ratner seems to be fixing? plus the "droideka" sentinel designs look horrible.. hell from the small clip ive seen as is id take the sentinel head and "headlights" we got over that

It depends on who you ask. I think a lot of newer fans are used to this mysteriouly de-aged kind of twenty year old version of her popularized by recent comics, whereas the other versions fit Weaver well. She's supposed to be a school teacher on par with Xavier, was old enough to work with Magneto in the Hellfire Club, and be old enough and experienced enough to manipulate someone as powerful as the Phoenix played by someone at least as old as Janssen--and Weaver can play smart and seductive--she's even looked good as a blonde . . . So, again, it's all in what you're used to.

As far as the sentinel, I actually like X2's sentinel concept fine. A lot of people say it looks like an overgrown slinky, but if you look at it, it's just as solid (wires, etc.) on the inside as any other concept drawings. It's outer-shell is just detailed via the segments, which may have looked better on screen.

I think the head is actually more faithful to the comics than the one in X3 . . . it's the face, the eyes . . . It even has the eerie search light in the center of its chest. I especially point out the head, because apparently that's all we see in X3 anyway, depending on what report we receive any given day.

Again, it's all in what you like, I guess.

 

[BMM]

In Bryan Singer's version, we would have had a larger role for Cyclops, which is great, but he would have cut out Storm altogether, which isn't great . . .

As posted above, I don't think the producers would have let Halle get away that easy, especially since it seems she was at a turning point in her decision . . . but it's all rumor and conjecture on both sides.

. . . But he did hold back on the action.

I always hoped this would have been explored more in future films, as I really enjoyed the pieces we started to get in X2 from X-Men (Nightcrawler, etc.). If this would not have been further developed in something like the Dark Phoenix Saga, or whatever, I would have been unhappy . . . can't have someone who calls herself the chaos bringer, without bringing any chaos.

 

[Rac]

Man I would'v loved Singers X3 (and X4!!). Now we get one rushed movie which's nickname is crapfest. C'mon! More Cyclops! Hellfire Club! Gambit! Two movies!

God I hate Warner Bros. (for seducing Singer), Bryan Singer (for taking the Superman gig) and Fox (for not waiting until Bryan has done Supes. He said he would done it afterewards. He could also say to WB that he does X3 first.).

"You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!" -George Taylor

 

[J.Howlett]

Singer was building to larger action set pieces. It's clear if you look at the progression from X-Men to X2. What makes people think there wouldn't have been a progression in action from X2 to X3 with Singer?

He would've done it. That's not the issue.

The issue is the handling of characters, the storyline, and the subtext which Singer handled very, very well in his films. With this cure plotline, Singer would've asked the ethical and philosophical questions from every angle dealing with this cure. It would not have been just a plot to get to the action that the "fans want."

He would've explored it and the action would've progressed naturally.

Everyone, take a look at this review of X-Men The Last Stand. It says it all. It comes from filmfocus.co.uk.

In Brief: A mutant cure has been discovered in the mutation of a young boy (Cameron Bright) and a way to harness its power has been developed; much to the chagrin of Magneto who sets about to destroy the cure, and the one who carries it, once and for all. As the X-Men make their last stand, all will be at stake.

In Full: Plucking the most interesting of its ideas from Joss Whedon's special run on the X-Men comic books, X-Men: The Last Stand had the potential to be the greatest of all three films. Building on the massive success of X2, perhaps one of the finest superhero films to date, and combining it with one of the X-Men's most exciting and challenging storylines - that of a mutant cure - was a recipe for success that was ever so nearly impossible to get wrong.

So, that X-Men: The Last Stand is no better or worse than the entertaining first outing in the X-Men franchise is, in fact, a dire disappointment, for the film wastes no time in abandoning the brilliance of its concept - a concept which might have given us the best superhero film ever. The mutant cure is, here, an excuse for yet another stand-off with Magneto, the ethical implications of its conception only coming to play when Rogue decides her boyfriend is losing interest.

For, like most in Hollywood, The Last Stand finds the black and white without ever finding the grey; Magneto is a bad guy, the X-Men are the good guys and audiences want to see the good guys win. But the mutant cure concept is so much more complex than that, hinting at serious ethical and personal conflict that is never explored. As the humans develop guns with which to shoot mutants with the cure the audience is left wondering if we shouldn't be rooting for Magneto's alliance. No cure at all is, after all, far preferable to one forced on those who don't want it.

And, once again, the ensemble nature of the X-Men universe proves difficult to translate; only Kelsey Grammer's Beast gets adequate exposure and even he could quite easily be left at home in favour of the established cast. The other new additions are thrown a line or two here and there and used as nobody's-safe fodder in the climactic Last Stand. Of course, by that point we've been given neither motive nor means to care for them and so the ultimate battle between good and evil is only as fraught with peril as any other battle in the franchise.

Which is not to say that X-Men: The Last Stand isn't entertaining on those base levels a superhero film should be entertaining - it's beyond even Brett Ratner to make the X-Men boring - but it's not a patch on the film it could and should have been. Indeed, the only ramification it leaves for the franchise is in the characters that don't survive, and only one of those deaths feels anything less than unjustified.

In the hands of genuine storytellers, X-Men: The Last Stand might have achieved real greatness. In the hands of Brett Ratner, Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn - who seem merely puppets to the studio's desire to milk fans of the franchise for all they're worth - it's never anything more than average.

 

[X-Maniac]

The Last Stand had the potential to be the greatest of all three films. Building on the massive success of X2, perhaps one of the finest superhero films to date, and combining it with one of the X-Men's most exciting and challenging storylines - that of a mutant cure - was a recipe for success that was ever so nearly impossible to get wrong.

So, that X-Men: The Last Stand is no better or worse than the entertaining first outing in the X-Men franchise is, in fact, a dire disappointment, for the film wastes no time in abandoning the brilliance of its concept - a concept which might have given us the best superhero film ever. The mutant cure is, here, an excuse for yet another stand-off with Magneto, the ethical implications of its conception only coming to play when Rogue decides her boyfriend is losing interest.

For, like most in Hollywood, The Last Stand finds the black and white without ever finding the grey; Magneto is a bad guy, the X-Men are the good guys and audiences want to see the good guys win. But the mutant cure concept is so much more complex than that, hinting at serious ethical and personal conflict that is never explored. As the humans develop guns with which to shoot mutants with the cure the audience is left wondering if we shouldn't be rooting for Magneto's alliance. No cure at all is, after all, far preferable to one forced on those who don't want it.

This review seems odd. We've seen Storm and Beast discussing the cure with Xavier... so there is a moral debate within the movie.. In such an ensemble movie, it's never going to be as deep as in a social documentary, but it's there. Did the reviewer miss all that?

 

[J.Howlett]

Yeah, it's in there but they don't go deep enough. I think that's what the reviewer was talking about. It's not enough to just put it in there and move along. They don't dig deeper with it. And that was my fear from the get go.

Essentially, there should've been a scene where Xavier sat the entire school down and had an open debate with everyone about their feelings on it and where he stood. It would've been an interesting scene.

With Rogue, I think they got it partially right. She's the one we most identify with because of the nature of her power and what she wants.

Again, we have to see how it plays out in the film but they may not go deep enough....or they do but it's so quick that he doesn't leave it's mark.

 

[boywonder13]

I tihnk Singer would have done the Danger Room right!!