weatherwitch said:
Like X1 and X2 weren't abuses of the source material? Come on. Rogue: a scared, teenage, southern belle who's taken in by frikkin' Wolverine. Riiiiiiight. That's not a severe deviation from her comic counterpart at all.
Storm: a frightened, weak powered woman afraid of humans. Mmmhm. Yup, just like I remember her from the comics.
Scott: Taking a backseat to Wolverine in plaid pants and lowered eyes. Yeah, right. Mystique not being recogniozed as Nightcrawlers mother. Mmmmkay. Angel: Not part of the original 5. WTF? Iceman a kid with a thing for Rogue? Sure, sure. A cheap cameo of Hank McCoy as opposed to including Beast as a member of the team. Yeah that fits. The shallowness of the Epic Wolverine/Sabertooth rivalry. Do I need to keep going? Because I have lots more.
Movies deviate from the source material. It happens ALL the time.
I'm not picking on you weatherwitch. I'm just using your examples as they are some of my own for my argument. I agree with you that movies deviate from source material all the time. Here is my reasoning.
The difference for me between the deviations of the first two movies and the third, is that the first two left things perfectly open, whereas the third does not, without doing some major changes. For instance, all of the above bold are debatable.
Scott--takes a backseat to Wolverine (along with every other X-Man) in the entirety of the Marvel universe (blame the fans--Wolverine is featured in every X-title, he has had a couple of his own successful titles, he crosses over into other teams of other Marvel titles) . . . he and Wolverine go at it plenty in the movies . . . of course they aren't going to all out brawl everytime they see each other like they do sometimes in the comics. It is unecessary and hardly makes any sense.
Plaid pants--homage to the comics where he wears plaid pants.
Mystique not being mentioned as Nightcrawler's mother--so what? Just because it wasn't said doesn't mean it's not there. The characters do not need to rattle off their 40+ year history to ensure fans know things they've already read.
Angel not being a part of the original five--completely left open as a possibility after the first two movies, as Angel frequently left the team during the comics . . . the team was pre-established when the audience was first introduced to them, who is to say he wasn't one of the original five--blame
X3 for that one (which is an example of it shutting out a possibility).
Iceman a kid thing with Rogue--Iceman was hardly an adult when he first joined the X-Men--he was a kid, the youngest. The Rogue thing, I understand as well as the not being a first member.
A cheap cameo of Hank McCoy--this one is grasping at straws, and can be said for anyone's favorite character. Budget. Budget. Budget--they've been wanting him in it since the first one, and is no different than the cheap cameos in
X3.
The shallowness of the Sabretooth/Wolverine rivalry--opinion I guess. They fought twice . . . and the fight cannot last forever. It was the longest fight of the movie--again how epic is it supposed to be for the first movie of an uncertain franchise? Besides, people always say they dislike Wolverine being the center focus, and yet people want more.
X-Men did a fine job of establishing Wolverine and Sabretooth as enemies, and left everything open about their past together--all can be done in spin-offs planned from the beginning.
These are the kinds of things that differentiate the first two films for me and
X3. All of these things are left open and can be further explored without deviating a whole lot or changing things up to the extent that fans seem horribly outraged (as some seem to be now with things like Cyclops death, etc.)