The Last Stand vs Wolverine

Which was, um, better?

  • X-Men: The Last Stand

  • X-Men Origins: Wolverine

  • They Equally Sucked!


Results are only viewable after voting.
Watching X3 the first time was like a slap to the face. The hand that slapped me was laced with aids and acid tipped spikes. They slapped me twice. X3 just made me mad and was a disappointing 'finish' to the 'triology' if you will.

Now with Wolverine, I just don't care. It's bad, really bad, but I'm not angry. It's sad that this is what we've grown to expect. It's FOX, after all.

Both are bad, but Wolverine is so stripped of everything that draws me to the character in the first place, I don't even care.

Not even going to mention Deadpool. X3 wins.:csad::csad::csad:
 
To me, a movie is a collection of moments, and if you come out of it feeling good, it had enough good moments.

And I think if we're honest, X3 has more good moments and more genuine moments than WOLVERINE does. Easily. It has better performances, too. A better overall story and themes. X3 actually deals with issues. WOLVERINE talked about them, and was essentially a half-ass revenge flick.

Thus, X3 is a better film, period. In terms of structure, dialogue, effects, you name it, except maybe for action. But ultimately, X3 has less varied, but still better and more believeable action. Even Wolverine's action sequences in X3 are arguably better than they are in WOLVERINE, his own movie.

And as far as acting goes...you can say Liev Schreiber was good. Ian McKellan's Magneto wipes the floor with him and Stryker if you combine them. As does Famke's Jean/Phoenix. Patrick Stewart was fantastic. Even Halle Berry sucked much less than usual. And Kelsey Grammer was phenomenal. Even James Marsden was great in a limited role. Whereas Ryan Reynolds basically just played himself, and Wolverine's love interest could barely emote. I'll put X3's cast up against WOLVERINE's relatively cardboard characters any day of the week.

It always amuses me that people hate X3 for the following reasons:

1. It's not what I expected or wanted it to be.
2. They killed Cyclops and Xavier and Jean, and it didn't happen that way in the comics.

I mean, it's almost laughable at this point. If all you care about is faithfulness to the comic books, then you should be hating on WOLVERINE and the prior two movies just as much as X3, because WOLVERINE made just as many changes to the source material.

Yes, Cyclops died in X3. Before they killed off Cyclops, they gave him a fantastic couple of scenes with him mourning and with Wolverine, and frankly, one of the best and arguably most tragic romantic scenes of any superhero movie.

Yes, Xavier died in X3. Again, one of the best and most powerful scenes of the trilogy before his death, and a fantastic use of the character before that.

And Angel was developed? Beast? Magneto's cronies?

Angel had some of the best emotional sequences of any superhero film. Magneto's cronies may not have been developed, but they WERE given motivation by the cure storyline and their allegiance to Magneto's cause. Something you cannot say of the Weapon X members, or even Stryker, beyond his recycled "I hate mutants because of my son" motivation from X2.

Wolverine. X3 was a huge mess. I don't see how anyone could think it's better over this really. Brett Ratner totally disrespected X-Men fans by taking a huge dump on what was established in the first two movies.

How did Brett Ratner disrespect X-Men fans? What did he dump on that had been established in X-MEN and X2?
 
Last edited:
Wolverine was defenitely way better than X-3. X-Men 3 was pretty dissapointing while WOlverine was awesome. Look, X-3 was...okay, but it had things that affected me and alot of other people. The death of Cyclops for instance. Uhhh....why kill off cyclops and Xavier? Singer should have directed X-Men 3. Would have been an amazing movie, if you ask me. X-Men 3 felt like all action and not a whole lot of story, which made it even more dissapointing. Not saying I hate the film in any way, but it was, as I said, defenitely dissapointing.

As for Wolverine, the movie, as I said, was way better than X-3. It was fun, enjoyable, and overall action packed and it was great to finally see Wolverine's origins. been waiting for a film about him for a while. :up:
 
Wolverine, while terrible, didn't disgust me like X3. So it was ...ummm less offensive, I guess.
 
As someone who owns a copy of the Dark Phoenix Saga, I can confidently say that there was no way the entire plotline of the Shi'ar and the Starjammers could be crammed into a two-and-a-half hour movie. Go watch the first two films again. There were mutants with powers, but most of them just looked like regular folks (aside from Beast, Nightcrawler and Mystique). There was never any indication that there was life outside of Earth, and to introduce that into the third installment of a franchise would have looked stupid.

As much as I can say that there are many things wrong with X3, it was a story that needed to be told. It was exactly what the final scene with Magneto, Mystique and Pyro was building to from X2. Sure, they killed off Scott, but for God's sake, he hardly did anything in the first two films! Honestly, his entire contribution to the X-Men movie franchise can be summed with the three words he said to Wolverine: "You're a dick".

Wolverine's origin wasn't needed. He works better when there's an air of mystery about his past. We already learned enough about the adamantium surgery and Alkali Lake through X2.
 
Last edited:
As someone who owns a copy of the Dark Phoenix Saga, I can confidently say that there was no way the entire plotline of the Shi'ar and the Starjammers could be crammed into a two-and-a-half hour movie.

So cramming the Phoenix saga in with another plot in a less-then-two hour film is the way to go. :up:
 
To me, a movie is a collection of moments, and if you come out of it feeling good, it had enough good moments.

And I think if we're honest, X3 has more good moments and more genuine moments than WOLVERINE does. Easily. It has better performances, too. A better overall story and themes. X3 actually deals with issues. WOLVERINE talked about them, and was essentially a half-ass revenge flick.

Thus, X3 is a better film, period. In terms of structure, dialogue, effects, you name it, except maybe for action. But ultimately, X3 has less varied, but still better and more believeable action. Even Wolverine's action sequences in X3 are arguably better than they are in WOLVERINE, his own movie.

And as far as acting goes...you can say Liev Schreiber was good. Ian McKellan's Magneto wipes the floor with him and Stryker if you combine them. As does Famke's Jean/Phoenix. Patrick Stewart was fantastic. Even Halle Berry sucked much less than usual. And Kelsey Grammer was phenomenal. Even James Marsden was great in a limited role. Whereas Ryan Reynolds basically just played himself, and Wolverine's love interest could barely emote. I'll put X3's cast up against WOLVERINE's relatively cardboard characters any day of the week.

It always amuses me that people hate X3 for the following reasons:

1. It's not what I expected or wanted it to be.
2. They killed Cyclops and Xavier and Jean, and it didn't happen that way in the comics.

I mean, it's almost laughable at this point. If all you care about is faithfulness to the comic books, then you should be hating on WOLVERINE and the prior two movies just as much as X3, because WOLVERINE made just as many changes to the source material.

Yes, Cyclops died in X3. Before they killed off Cyclops, they gave him a fantastic couple of scenes with him mourning and with Wolverine, and frankly, one of the best and arguably most tragic romantic scenes of any superhero movie.

Yes, Xavier died in X3. Again, one of the best and most powerful scenes of the trilogy before his death, and a fantastic use of the character before that.



Angel had some of the best emotional sequences of any superhero film. Magneto's cronies may not have been developed, but they WERE given motivation by the cure storyline and their allegiance to Magneto's cause. Something you cannot say of the Weapon X members, or even Stryker, beyond his recycled "I hate mutants because of my son" motivation from X2.



How did Brett Ratner disrespect X-Men fans? What did he dump on that had been established in X-MEN and X2?

Angel didn't do a whole lot, man. Plus, I think Cyclops never had any redemption even after his death, so I felt like they just stepped over his character.

IN the end I think X3 was better than Wolverine, I agree. But both movies are beyond average that puts them in the level as Terminator 3, Spider-Man 3, and Indy 4. (I probably like Indy 4 out of those movies I just listed HOWEVER)
 
So cramming the Phoenix saga in with another plot in a less-then-two hour film is the way to go. :up:

They shouldn't have even bothered with the Phoenix, to be honest. I would have been happy with the final battle at Alcatraz Island.

The diehard fans whined and complained for months after X2 came out for a full-fledged Phoenix Saga. They should have waited until the inevitable X4.
 
i've always wanted the Phoenix to be used as a weapon of some sort by the govt or Magneto. Easy story. Water down the original story and BAM, there you go.
 
at this point, I don't care too much for the X franchise. I'll still see it but if Fox continues down this path of being cheap and lame, I'm not expecting much for the future installments.
 
As someone who owns a copy of the Dark Phoenix Saga, I can confidently say that there was no way the entire plotline of the Shi'ar and the Starjammers could be crammed into a two-and-a-half hour movie. Go watch the first two films again. There were mutants with powers, but most of them just looked like regular folks (aside from Beast, Nightcrawler and Mystique). There was never any indication that there was life outside of Earth, and to introduce that into the third installment of a franchise would have looked stupid.
As much as I can say that there are many things wrong with X3, it was a story that needed to be told. It was exactly what the final scene with Magneto, Mystique and Pyro was building to from X2. Sure, they killed off Scott, but for God's sake, he hardly did anything in the first two films! Honestly, his entire contribution to the X-Men movie franchise can be summed with the three words he said to Wolverine: "You're a dick".

Wolverine's origin wasn't needed. He works better when there's an air of mystery about his past. We already learned enough about the adamantium surgery and Alkali Lake through X2.

Sorry, but I have never heard ANYONE complain about the lack of Shi'ar and Starjammers in X3, what I HAVE heard them complain about is poor story-telling, a shoddy screenplay and even shoddier directing. Added to that is the unnecessary killing off of characters that should have been the focus of the story and then the downright raping of the majority of characters who lived and you have perfectly good reasons to hate the movie in my book.

I also disagree that that Scott did little in the first 2 movies, he did plenty in X1, and in X2, when he wasnt on the screen, he wasnt just forgotten about like he was in X3 after he freaking died.
 
I truly do want Marvel to get the filming rights. I know people say its a long shot but thats the only way we'll start getting better X-Men films.

Heck, I wouldn't even mind if they decided to reboot and get a new director and cast as well. Like some folks have said, Singers X-Men universe has been exhausted by the likes of X3 and Wolverine, and its obvious that Fox doesn't plan on delivering quality any time soon.
 
Sorry, but I have never heard ANYONE complain about the lack of Shi'ar and Starjammers in X3

I guess you weren't around for the whole X3 script debacle at AintItCool.com. There were scores of people decrying the script and asking to make a 100% faithful transfer of the Phoenix Saga.

Now, I'm not going to say X3 is perfect, because it's far, FAR from it. If there's someone I'm going to hate on, it's the editors for deleting tons of footage from the final print (including more scenes with Rogue, extended fights, the extended Phoenix Rage during the climax and a larger focus on characters like Colossus and Psylocke).

Scott always was the third man in the love triangle. That's all he ever was. He had one or two interesting moments in the franchise (blasting Toad's spit off Jean Grey, blasting Lady Deathstrike), but almost all the time, he was an arrogant, whining brat. You can lay that at the feet of Singer.

I don't think you understand the meaning of the words "downright raped". These characters had been changed long before X3 came along. Now, we're at Wolverine, and we're getting more stupid changes. Throwing in a fifteen-second scene with Deadpool at the end of the credits doesn't count as respecting a character.
 
Last edited:
Angel didn't do a whole lot, man. Plus, I think Cyclops never had any redemption even after his death, so I felt like they just stepped over his character.

I didn't say he did a whole lot. What he did do, though, even in a smaller role, was phenomenal.

That one opening sequence with young Warren in X3 did more to flesh out the issues young mutants have with their mutations than almost anything else in the franchise has, short of maybe Rogue's X-MEN scenes. Ditto the second scene with Warren. More emotional and heartrending than most of the scenes mutant characters have been given in these movies.

We all know FOX/Rothman didn't want Cyclops featured prominently, and that Marsden was shooting SUPERMAN RETURNS as well. Yes, that was a weakness of the film. But oddly enough, it doesn't drag down the entire film, because his presence and the impact of his death is still felt in a big way.

I also do not agree that Scott was simply ignored in the X-Men franchise, or that he was only the "third man". He simply was not given the screentime Wolverine was. But he was fantastic in X-MEN, and while he wasn't at the forefront, he did have some great emotional stuff in X2 and X3.
 
The people who voted Wolverine:

"Oh thank goodness, Fox finally realized what was holding the other movies back and got rid of all that stupid soap-opera character drama stuff! CG helicopter blades, WOOO!"

:o
 
The people who voted Wolverine:

"Oh thank goodness, Fox finally realized what was holding the other movies back and got rid of all that stupid soap-opera character drama stuff! CG helicopter blades, WOOO!"

:o

The same could be done with X-Men 3. Killing off crucial characters for shock value, a completely butchered version of Phoenix, a side story of the cure which when combined with the Phoenix story creates a jumbled mess of a story that didn't have time to breathe at all.

Let's be fair now.
 
So they played X3 on FX last night, so I watched it again. Seriously not a bad movie! You have great climatic moments, even if you don't think Wolverine's healing could keep up with the raw power of the Phoenix, it was still a cool scene. Magneto moving the bridge, awesome display of his power.

Xavier getting killed by Jean...another excellent scene. They really put a lot into a what, 2 hour movie. At least X3 had a plot, had some heart.

In XO:W, you see characters that look like they were just thrown together. Blob? Why was even in there? For that matter, who was Stryker trying to be? Mr. Sinister? Creating a mutant with all the other mutants' powers? Yeah, good luck controlling that.

In X3, all the characters served a purpose, in XO:W, you really didn't have that association, it seemed too forced. The only thing I truly liked was Liev playing Creed. A much better job than I anticipated.
 
How did Brett Ratner disrespect X-Men fans? What did he dump on that had been established in X-MEN and X2?

That puzzles me too. He did a fair job sticking to what was established in the previous two movies (in terms of plot and characters), as well as the same visual look and the same sets from previous movies. He wasn't trying to put a Michael Bay spin to the universe, after all.

If there's anything to fault Ratner for is that he should've demanded a much better script than Kinberg & Penn churned out. I think if Dougherty & Harris had turned in a draft for Singer's X3 before Singer jumped to SR, Ratner would've had more to work with.
 
In XO:W, you see characters that look like they were just thrown together. Blob? Why was even in there? For that matter, who was Stryker trying to be? Mr. Sinister? Creating a mutant with all the other mutants' powers? Yeah, good luck controlling that.

:huh: Angel, Callisto, Multiple Man, Psylocke, etc.
 
i think people ***** to much about the Phoenix thing

i mean what were they supposed to do ?

have the X-men go into space and battle aliens just so it could be like the book?
 
We didn't need the Shi'ar, but Zombie Jean that just stands around also wasn't the way to go.
 
i think people ***** to much about the Phoenix thing

i mean what were they supposed to do ?

have the X-men go into space and battle aliens just so it could be like the book?
 
Wolverine was better than X3. X3 wasn't long enough. It felt rushed. It needed to be longer. Whereas Wolverine felt it was the right length. I believe that it didnt feel rushed. It moved at its own pace and told the story of how Wolverine became who he was.
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"