The "we're sorry, Brett" thread...

Mr. Credible

jukebox hero
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
Messages
7,553
Reaction score
1
Points
31
okay, there was alot of bashing thrown at Mr. Ratner ever since he was announced, not only from us posters here, but from major internet and other media sources, too... i think given the movie he gave us has been getting mostly positive reviews, save for a few stubborn people and critics who simply won't admit they were wrong to judge him so badly.

so, if you feel like being a bigger person, and apologizing for giving the guy such a hard time, here's the place to do it.

i don't expect alot of you to post your sorry's in here, and i think even though Ratner turned in a movie better than X1 and X2, alot of you just won't admit it for whatever reason, but, we'll see what happens

(for the record, i never had no strong feeling one way or the other about his appointment to the film, so i owe no such apology)
 
I never thought Ratner would do terrible with the series simply because he's a fan of the X-Men and I like him more then Singer.
 
It wasnt better than X2, but I found it as good as X1, maybe better. The thing is, with the budget he had, anyone could have made X3 as good as X1. That said, it was a good film, and I thought many of the complaints were not as obvious as some had pointed out...
 
Mr. Credible said:
okay, there was alot of bashing thrown at Mr. Ratner ever since he was announced, not only from us posters here, but from major internet and other media sources, too... i think given the movie he gave us has been getting mostly positive reviews, save for a few stubborn people and critics who simply won't admit they were wrong to judge him so badly.

so, if you feel like being a bigger person, and apologizing for giving the guy such a hard time, here's the place to do it.

i don't expect alot of you to post your sorry's in here, and i think even though Ratner turned in a movie better than X1 and X2, alot of you just won't admit it for whatever reason, but, we'll see what happens

(for the record, i never had no strong feeling one way or the other about his appointment to the film, so i owe no such apology)

You mean the 50% of stubborn critics.
 
WTF is with the love of X1. I thought it sucked. The plot was completely stupid and lame. I don't care that much about Rogue. X3 was on par with X2 not X1. It was leaps better then that crap, X1. And I even thought it was better then X2.
 
Nell2ThaIzzay said:
You really need to change your name from Mr. Credible.......


given your stupid name, i take little offense to that.
 
you're kidding me right?

Wow. Fanboys.
 
Ok,

I just have to point out here that there are a plethora of fans who thought the movie was falling apart at the seams. I'm one of them. It had it's moments, but considered in its entirety as a story, it was totally and completely splitting apart at the seams. It was a house of cards.

I didn't hold any negative feelings toward Brett Ratner while he was shooting this movie. There was no reason to! But now that I see the movie, I can definitely see the effect he's had on it.

To be blunt, I don't know how it could have been screwed up so badly considering that Bryan Singer pretty much did all the groundwork for them. They were handed this movie and still somehow managed to make it suck.
 
Mr. Socko said:
WTF is with the love of X1. I thought it sucked. The plot was completely stupid and lame. I don't care that much about Rogue. X3 was on par with X2 not X1. It was leaps better then that crap, X1. And I even thought it was better then X2.
Because outside of Sabretooth it actually treated the characters with respect, made them close to versions of their comic selves (by the way Rogue was an insecure teenager when she joined around Uncanny 171), and actually took time to flesh out the characters rather than reducing them to cookie cutter 1 dimensional versions of themselves who say bad one liners for every piece of dialogue. This movie was on par with Terminator 3 and in largely the same situation, it took a great series of movie of reduced it to a cartoony charicature of itself.
 
ShadowBoxing said:
Because outside of Sabretooth it actually treated the characters with respect, made them close to versions of their comic selves (by the way Rogue was an insecure teenager when she joined around Uncanny 171), and actually took time to flesh out the characters rather than reducing them to cookie cutter 1 dimensional versions of themselves who say bad one liners for every piece of dialogue. This movie was on par with Terminator 3 and in largely the same situation, it took a great series of movie of reduced it to a cartoony charicature of itself.

Singer's trash treated the characters with very little to no respect(leaning toward the latter).

Rogue didn't do **** in these movies, she should've been an active part of the team, all she did was generic stuff anyone could've done like clumbsily landing the X-Jet.

Iceman also contributed nothing to the team in the first 2 films, and they cast possibly the single most wooden actor in mainstream Hollywood today to play him.

Wolverine is nothing but a pathetic, generic bad-ass that can't back up his bs because he gets his ass royally handed to him everytime he fights a mutant. It's ridiculous that Singer and company shoved the rest aside to waste so much time on him, yet still royally ****ed him up. The movie version is a watered down shell of the true Wolverine.

Storm, Cyclops, and Jean might as well have been clones of a character named Generic in Singer's films. They have almost no distinctive personality traits, and are defined only by their powers. It wasn't until Singer's incompetence was put aside that Storm and Jean finally got to be actual characters with personalities.

Moving onto X2, he butchered Deathstrike by making a character with depth into a mindless drone void of a personality, and then unfairly killing her off after about 15 minutes of screen time and one irrelevant line.

Singer's films are paper thin. He had great source material to work with, yet still end up making bland as can be movies with an ensamble that's hardly worth caring about. His versions of the characters were barely one dimensional, and the previous installments had their share of lame dialogue too.

What Rattner did was clean up the horrid mess of sub-mediocrity that layed before him thanks to the guy that destroyed the first two going off to do the same to another franchise this time. Thank God that incompetent hack is out of the way so I finally got to see a good X-Men movie.

Rattner made a good X-Men movie, Singer made horrible episodes of the Wolverine show guest starring hackneyed versions of the X-Men.
 
I am sorry, that I stood up for this guy. "Wait until you see it." That's what I said. Now I saw it, and you know what, I am not impressed. It was a fun movie, it was a terrible X-Men movie.
 
The thing is, with the budget he had, anyone could have made X3 as good as X1.

That has to be the single most ignorant statement I've ever read.

And I think it's safe to say 90% of the internet owes this guy an apology. You'd think this thing was gonna be Batman and Robin going by internet blogs and boards, and it was almost the best yet. It blew X1 out of the water, and just came up a little short with X2.
 
Stormyprecious said:
Singer's trash treated the characters with very little to no respect(leaning toward the latter).

Rogue didn't do **** in these movies, she should've been an active part of the team, all she did was generic stuff anyone could've done like clumbsily landing the X-Jet.

Iceman also contributed nothing to the team in the first 2 films, and they cast possibly the single most wooden actor in mainstream Hollywood today to play him.

Wolverine is nothing but a pathetic, generic bad-ass that can't back up his bs because he gets his ass royally handed to him everytime he fights a mutant. It's ridiculous that Singer and company shoved the rest aside to waste so much time on him, yet still royally ****ed him up. The movie version is a watered down shell of the true Wolverine.

Storm, Cyclops, and Jean might as well have been clones of a character named Generic in Singer's films. They have almost no distinctive personality traits, and are defined only by their powers. It wasn't until Singer's incompetence was put aside that Storm and Jean finally got to be actual characters with personalities.

Moving onto X2, he butchered Deathstrike by making a character with depth into a mindless drone void of a personality, and then unfairly killing her off after about 15 minutes of screen time and one irrelevant line.

Singer's films are paper thin. He had great source material to work with, yet still end up making bland as can be movies with an ensamble that's hardly worth caring about. His versions of the characters were barely one dimensional, and the previous installments had their share of lame dialogue too.

What Rattner did was clean up the horrid mess of sub-mediocrity that layed before him thanks to the guy that destroyed the first two going off to do the same to another franchise this time. Thank God that incompetent hack is out of the way so I finally got to see a good X-Men movie.

Rattner made a good X-Men movie, Singer made horrible episodes of the Wolverine show guest starring hackneyed versions of the X-Men.

Exactly, Singer's wodden movies were basically "Wolverine and his amazing friends"
 
Badfish40oz said:
That has to be the single most ignorant statement I've ever read.

And I think it's safe to say 90% of the internet owes this guy an apology. You'd think this thing was gonna be Batman and Robin going by internet blogs and boards, and it was almost the best yet. It blew X1 out of the water, and just came up a little short with X2.
50% of critics disagree with that statement and very few who gave it a positive review said it was the best of the series or even close to X1. The basic consensus of the good reviews was it had splashy special effects but was "not the train wreck expected". Unlike X1 and X2 which got 80% and 87% respectively and typically loved acrossed the boards.
 
Badfish40oz said:
That has to be the single most ignorant statement I've ever read.

And I think it's safe to say 90% of the internet owes this guy an apology. You'd think this thing was gonna be Batman and Robin going by internet blogs and boards, and it was almost the best yet. It blew X1 out of the water, and just came up a little short with X2.

for me, it did not blow x1 out of the water, and it came up very short compared to x2.
 
Badfish40oz said:
That has to be the single most ignorant statement I've ever read.

And I think it's safe to say 90% of the internet owes this guy an apology. You'd think this thing was gonna be Batman and Robin going by internet blogs and boards, and it was almost the best yet. It blew X1 out of the water, and just came up a little short with X2.



Guess we'd have to agree to disagree. I though the movie was tone deaf and practically incoherent.
 
damn...bottom line for me...i keep looking back and i enjoyed the hell out of X3 last night! i love this movie...i might feel differently after i see it again tomorrow now that the hype has somewhat worn off...but i doubt i'll feel much less different than i do now about it.

people keep comparing it the "this" or b!tching about how they wanted or didn't want "that"...how about taking the movie on its own...for what it is...it isn't "The Wolverine Show!", it is an X-Men movie.
 
Badfish40oz said:
That has to be the single most ignorant statement I've ever read.

Im glad that you explained how it is ignorant. I really liked X3, but the man had a budget far north of $200 million, and gave us a generally average movie. How can you say that Story would have done better, or Raimi, or anyone else? This film was average in the moviegoers eyes.
 
You said anyone could have made a movie on par with X1 with that budget. If you don't what's wrong with that statement I really can't help you.

And someone mentioned it "not being the trainwreck expected." To this day I don't know why everyone expected a "trainwreck." It's like a lot of people wanted this movie to fail. It was branded a failure before a PICTURE even showed up! Give me a break . . X2 is still the best, but this certainly beats X1. X1 was just too . . blah. The story never grabbed me.
 
Stormyprecious said:
Singer's trash treated the characters with very little to no respect(leaning toward the latter).

Rogue didn't do **** in these movies, she should've been an active part of the team, all she did was generic stuff anyone could've done like clumbsily landing the X-Jet.

She also had an excellent character in the first film who got lots of interaction with Wolverine and truly embodied the fear of what a mutant must be going through. The second movie did a good job of continuing her relationship with Bobby

Iceman also contributed nothing to the team in the first 2 films, and they cast possibly the single most wooden actor in mainstream Hollywood today to play him.

I'll grant you he wasn't much, and was better in X3 which just shows how bad the movie was (if he outshines people)

[quotes]Wolverine is nothing but a pathetic, generic bad-ass that can't back up his bs because he gets his ass royally handed to him everytime he fights a mutant. It's ridiculous that Singer and company shoved the rest aside to waste so much time on him, yet still royally ****ed him up. The movie version is a watered down shell of the true Wolverine.[/quote]

Lets see he beat the crap out of Sabretooth and beats Deathstrike in a great fight scene, also kills a mansion full of military men and goes into bezerker rage. Furthermore his dialogue with Stryker actually reveals he has a character, and he doesn't blurt out crappy dialogue like "grows those back" or "I love you". He had motivation in X1 and 2.

Storm, Cyclops, and Jean might as well have been clones of a character named Generic in Singer's films. They have almost no distinctive personality traits, and are defined only by their powers. It wasn't until Singer's incompetence was put aside that Storm and Jean finally got to be actual characters with personalities.

Actually the biggest criticism of X3 across the board is that there were no characters. This film had character abscense. I cannot describe anyone from X3 outside of using power descriptions. Storm was unsure of herself, but a rather quiet reserved woman who had strength when she spoke, "Sometimes anger can help you survive". That was gone and we got to see nothing but flashy special effects. In X2 they actually used Nightcrawler to show Storm had a personality, there was none in X3

Cyclops in X1 had scenes like "I'll take care of them", he figured out Rogue's use in Magneto's plan and planned the strike...ya know the stuff Cyclops does. And he also got to show in both X1 and 2 he actually cared for Jean, we got to see his anger trying to get Jean back and then how shaken he was by her death. Even though he gets little screentime, Singer never b*tched slapped him like they did in X3, he just did not use him enough

Jean also had more than 7 lines in X1 and 2, and did more than act like a frisky sex queen for 30 seconds. The most she did in this film was sit or stand there and look angry, wow way to use a character :rolleyes:

Moving onto X2, he butchered Deathstrike by making a character with depth into a mindless drone void of a personality, and then unfairly killing her off after about 15 minutes of screen time and one irrelevant line.

Similar to how they butchered Juggernaut, Callisto, Psylock, Colossus, and Trask in X3 by removing their characters and making them mindless dead weight, like that right?

Singer's films are paper thin. He had great source material to work with, yet still end up making bland as can be movies with an ensamble that's hardly worth caring about. His versions of the characters were barely one dimensional, and the previous installments had their share of lame dialogue too.

Except 80% and 87% of critics thought the exact opposite.

What Rattner did was clean up the horrid mess of sub-mediocrity that layed before him thanks to the guy that destroyed the first two going off to do the same to another franchise this time. Thank God that incompetent hack is out of the way so I finally got to see a good X-Men movie.

Rattner made a good X-Men movie, Singer made horrible episodes of the Wolverine show guest starring hackneyed versions of the X-Men.

And yet the movie had the pace of Quicksilver and no subtext or plot to speak of. Took the Phoenix Saga and boiled it down to 30 seconds, swapped Wolverine for Cyclops then marginalized every character who was not Wolverine or Magneto (by killing them no less to input drama) took nothing from X-Men lore except a drunk internet video and then called that X-Men, yeah thanks Ratner. :rolleyes:
 
ShadowBoxing said:
Similar to how they butchered Juggernaut, Callisto, Psylock, Colossus, and Trask in X3 by removing their characters and making them mindless dead weight, like that right?

Im sorry, but including Trask in that statement made me laugh. He was a tiny character in the 3 issues he was actually in, and never really showed much, other than "Why did I make them" after the sentinels went beserk....
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
201,162
Messages
21,908,123
Members
45,703
Latest member
BMD
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"