The Full List of "Crimes" Committed by Fox's Tom Rothman

[Octoberist]

K.B., exactly.

 

[Timstuff]

Well, X3 did make more money than SR, so it's not exactly like losing Singer bit Fox in the butt. I think X3 would have been better if Singer had directed it, but I kind of have to question by how much. I mean, the dropoff in quality between X2 and X3 isn't nearly as big as a lot of people make it out to be, because a lot of the things people complained about the X3 were merely extensions of trends started while Singer was in charge.

 

[Octoberist]

i didn't like X3 because it felt like a quick cash in , just like Wolverine. I didn't like Superman Returns but at least SINGER was TRYING. If you put down the effort, even if the movie turns out to be a turd, as least you tried and that was Singer did with Supes. On the other hand, X3 felt effortless.

 

[Darkness Falls]

yea compared to X2 it fell tremendously short

 

[returntovoid]

Bryan Singer's initial plan for X3 was billion times better then what we got.

Here's what Singer's plan was:

Though Singer, Harris and Dougherty had yet to complete a script, the director has revealed that at the time of his departure they had partially completed a story treatment for the film which would have focused exclusively on Jean Grey's resurrection[6] with the new villain Emma Frost, a role intended for Sigourney Weaver.[7] Frost was an empath manipulating Jean's emotions in the treatment, and like the finished film Magneto desires to control her. Overwhelmed by her powers, Jean makes Cyclops kill her, but her spirit survives and becomes a god-like creature, which Dougherty compared to the star child in A Space Odyssey.[8- Wikipedia

 

[dark_b]

Well, X3 did make more money than SR, so it's not exactly like losing Singer bit Fox in the butt. I think X3 would have been better if Singer had directed it, but I kind of have to question by how much. I mean, the dropoff in quality between X2 and X3 isn't nearly as big as a lot of people make it out to be, because a lot of the things people complained about the X3 were merely extensions of trends started while Singer was in charge.

actually it did. X3 was having an insane big drop. if the movie would have good reviews,good word of mouth and would be a good movie then it would brake records.

but thats FOX. lets only make 5 million profit insted of 50 million.s

 

[nogap87]

Well, X3 did make more money than SR, so it's not exactly like losing Singer bit Fox in the butt. I think X3 would have been better if Singer had directed it, but I kind of have to question by how much. I mean, the dropoff in quality between X2 and X3 isn't nearly as big as a lot of people make it out to be, because a lot of the things people complained about the X3 were merely extensions of trends started while Singer was in charge.

Exactly. Under Fox and Singer's watch Wolverine was PG-13'ed to hell, Cyclops became an afterthought, and Storm (one of the worlds most popular heroines) did nothing more than roll her eyes up and make half hearted quips. The only thing that made X2 better than X1 was Nightcrawler's opening scene. X3 is far from the greatest of superhero movies but at least the X-Men fought as a team for once.

 

[Octoberist]

they fought as a team in X3, and guess what, it wasn't anything special.

 

[EdRyder]

Well, X3 did make more money than SR, so it's not exactly like losing Singer bit Fox in the butt. I think X3 would have been better if Singer had directed it, but I kind of have to question by how much. I mean, the dropoff in quality between X2 and X3 isn't nearly as big as a lot of people make it out to be, because a lot of the things people complained about the X3 were merely extensions of trends started while Singer was in charge.

I think the drop off in quality is significant when you view it in production terms. Look at all the sets that were designed and built for X2.(Two cerebro's ,A new X jet interior,A new plastic prison, New mansion interiors, Strykers Base interiors: like the weapon X program equipment, the exterior of the dam itself,..And maybe more I'm forgetting)
Look at the amount of Fx sequences that were designed and rendered.(Nightcrawlers opening sequence, Magnetos escape, Storms tornado's sequence, The cerebro visual effects)

 

[Octoberist]

i also think they created a script that catered to the schedule and budget (i'm sure the budget was mostly based on the actor's salaries). The Phoenix storyline could have been the heart of the story, and while it IS in X3, it wasn't the main focus. It was all about the serum.

People talk about how X3 steams from what was built up from the first two movies, then why is every plot point in X3 so underwhelming? Cyclops' arc, Jean's arc, Iceman and Pyro's feud, Nightcrawler's absense, Mystique's anti-climatic departure, and the list goes on and on.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

I think the problem with both X3 and Wolverine was character development, neither movie had enough of it. They just threw characters people knew about in front of the camera just to have them. Angel and Gambit are the two biggest examples of this, both characters really had nothing to do, but the producers knew the general audience knew their names. It was just action without any meaning behind it. Take the fight between Wolverine and Gambit, why were they fighting?!?! They both had problems with Sabertooth, who's at the end of the alley, so instead of fighting Sabertooth they fight each other, which makes so much sense.

 

[Electrix]

In a way FOX rushed X3 out to screw Singer and SR. Remember, Singer tried to work a deal where he would go do Superman and come back and do X3 next so it would be done right. Fox said f that we dont need Singer and proceeded without him.

In an ideal world that would happen, but not everything can revolve around Bryan Singer and what he wants. While he is a good director, he chose to do Superman instead of X-Men 3 and Fox moved forward because the franchise is bigger than one person.

Fox had a 3 year plan they wanted to stick too, and you can't mess around with the actors who have to turn down work to make sure they have 4-6 months free to work on it. Singer wanted to 'follow his dream' and direct a Superman movie, but he can't expect hundreds of people and $200+ million to sit around and wait for him.

Warner Bros have given Christopher Nolan $$$ to make a movie he has wanted to make for years. It's not particularly commercial but The Dark Knight made over $1 billion so they'll kiss his ass and they will probably have some sort of agreement whereby he'll return for Batman 3. Fox/Singer should have done something similar.

 

[dark_b]

In an ideal world that would happen, but not everything can revolve around Bryan Singer and what he wants. While he is a good director, he chose to do Superman instead of X-Men 3 and Fox moved forward because the franchise is bigger than one person.

Fox had a 3 year plan they wanted to stick too, and you can't mess around with the actors who have to turn down work to make sure they have 4-6 months free to work on it. Singer wanted to 'follow his dream' and direct a Superman movie, but he can't expect hundreds of people and $200+ million to sit around and wait for him.

Warner Bros have given Christopher Nolan $$$ to make a movie he has wanted to make for years. It's not particularly commercial but The Dark Knight made over $1 billion so they'll kiss his ass and they will probably have some sort of agreement whereby he'll return for Batman 3. Fox/Singer should have done something similar.

i thought Singer wanted the movei out in 2006 but FOX was in no rush. then after singer went to superman they rushed the project for 2006.

how was FOX planning for 2006 when it was rushed and filmed at the end of 2005?

 

[nogap87]

they fought as a team in X3, and guess what, it wasn't anything special.

I was just comparing it to the first two films. I wouldn't even have said anything if X1 and X2 didn't look like above average sci-fi channel movies.

People talk about how X3 steams from what was built up from the first two movies, then why is every plot point in X3 so underwhelming? Cyclops' arc, Jean's arc, Iceman and Pyro's feud, Nightcrawler's absense, Mystique's anti-climatic departure, and the list goes on and on.

Underwhelming plot points/characters has been a trademark of Fox superhero movies since X1. Fox, Singer, Story, Johnson, Rothman, etc. has never given us anything special. I would have cut Singer some slack is SR turned out great, but it just showed that he wasn't meant for superhero movies and Fox should have hired somebody who wanted the X1 gig in the first place.

 

[Electrix]

i thought Singer wanted the movei out in 2006 but FOX was in no rush. then after singer went to superman they rushed the project for 2006.

how was FOX planning for 2006 when it was rushed and filmed at the end of 2005?

http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/536/536563p1.html

X-Men 3 had a May 2006 release date before Singer left. Some people seemed to think that Fox rushed a $200+ million film just to score a point over Singer, which wasn't the case.

X-Men 3 filmed for 5 months, and while post production was only 4 months they got all the special effects completed on time. Because of the Matthew Vaughn/Brett Ratner situation the pre-production probably wasn't as focused as it should have been. Ratner came on-board 6 weeks before filming so things much have been a bit frantic.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I was just comparing it to the first two films. I wouldn't even have said anything if X1 and X2 didn't look like above average sci-fi channel movies.



Underwhelming plot points/characters has been a trademark of Fox superhero movies since X1. Fox, Singer, Story, Johnson, Rothman, etc. has never given us anything special. I would have cut Singer some slack is SR turned out great, but it just showed that he wasn't meant for superhero movies and Fox should have hired somebody who wanted the X1 gig in the first place.

You have the exact view that I have when it comes to Singer, Fox and the X-franchise.

 

[Octoberist]

to be honest, X1 and X2 have their following and they did provide some relevance to the comic book movie genre. and you cannot deny that, even if you don't like 'em.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I give the studio and Singer credit for following the prejudice part of the comicbooks eventhough everything else was handled so poorly.

I'm not dissing anybodies love for those films but it takes more than an important theme to make a movie good to me. Crash had an important and serious theme too but it was a bad movie IMHO. I'd take the non seriously themed Pirates of the Caribbean 1 over it any day of the week.

 

[Dark Victory]

to be honest, X1 and X2 have their following and they did provide some relevance to the comic book movie genre. and you cannot deny that, even if you don't like 'em.

'God Loves, Man Kills,' anybody?

 

[Doctor Jones]

My God, that description of X3 sounds fantastic. Except the whole Weaver part. She's too old ot be in that thing. Ehhhh.

 

[Darkness Falls]

i always saw ali later as emma frost personally

 

[BlackLantern]

funny Darkness...I pictured an actress who could actually ACT....

 

[Darkness Falls]

well played black lantern, well played

 

[TheVileOne]

At the end of the day, I'm disappointed Singer and co. left.

I know working for Fox sucks and they were seduced by the prospects of getting everything they wanted and more from WB. But it failed in just about every direction.

Fox slaughtered X-men without anyone to protect it.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

X2 is still the best Marvel film ever made.

You do have admire Singer though. He was able to make the type of films he wanted to make, under one of the most difficult studios to work for. You don't see too many other directors stand up to Fox or Rothman like he did.