"Wasted Motion"

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

How many of you are sports fans?

How many of you are familiar with the term "wasted motion"?

Well, to me, I think this is one of the things that I enjoy about X-Men: The Last Stand over X2... it doesn't have any "wasted motion".

What I mean by this is that, in X-Men: The Last Stand, every scene counts. In X2, I feel there are some scenes that are just... not as neccesary.

Example: Nightcrawler. He has a great set up (White House attack), and a great character establishment (his talk to Storm and Jean at the church), and then except for a talk about faith to Storm in the X-Jet, really does nothing and is just there.

X-Men: The Last Stand doesn't have any scenes like that, in my opinion.

It doesn't neccesarily make X-Men: The Last Stand the better film. I don't know which of the 2 is my favorite (all I know is that my favorite of the trilogy is NOT X-Men...). Maybe they are tied... they both offer something to make them stand out from the other. X-Men: The Last Stand has awesome, amazing action that I love, as a superhero and comic book fan. X2 has some amazing character moments that really define these characters, and make them something truly special. So it's hard for me to pick a favorite between these 2.

But the "wasted motion" thing is something I like about X-Men: The Last Stand over X2. I'll probably watch X2 sometime over this weekend, and I can give better examples of just what I mean by that.

 

[Boba_Fett_123]

Generally I agree with you, Nell, but you don't think Phoenix in the entire third act is "wasted motion" (until the very end)?

 

[phoenix_force]

Generally I agree with you, Nell, but you don't think Phoenix in the entire third act is "wasted motion" (until the very end)?

it needed more motion

 

[La_She-Beast]

I think X2 needs like you call it "wasted motion"... to enrich, specially the pacing, and give more nature to the movie. It also makes a contrast with action moments... and so they 'surprise you'. (e.g. the attack in the x-mansion... Wolverine takes a walk around the school, meets two of the members...) if it were constantly action, action... well, you know, it would be a stupid movie. Taht's more or less what happened to X3.
But see, I think Beast also plays the same role you consider Nightcrawler's... he does not do anything. He's a friggin' X-Men/government messenger, just that. He has no depth moments to represent his emotions, therefore he has no soul. ¬¬
Nightcrawler, on the other hand, demonstrated that he has feelings, he cares for other people, and sacrifices his life for them.

 

[Iceman]

Little wasted motion is one way of looking at it. The problems with X3 were more to do with missing motion, about a half hour's worth.

 

[TKing]

I agree, there were no scenes in X-Men The Last Stand that were put in just to fill the time. Everything had a purpose.

The only thing that I found "wasted" about the film, is the cure. As it is hinted that Magneto has regained some of his powers, is there any real point to the cure?

 

[lordofthenerds]

I didn't think X2 had "wasted motion". It just had character development, something that wasn't found in X3. Also if you say that Nightcrawler had some wasted motion scenes, wouldn't you say that Angel had some as well? I mean the whole character was pointless.

 

[Halcohol]

I agree with you for the most part, Nell.

TLS had no wasted scenes, every single scene in the movie contains dialogue pertaining to where someone is going, what they are doing, or who they are. This, while not "wasting motion" as you say, makes for a very shallow movie.

One of my biggest gripes about the 3rd movie was that it contained so little superfluous information about characters, something that made the first two movies rather enjoyable. It's the extra line where Colossus mentions growing up in Russia, Storm talks about her African village, or Beast quotes Shakespeare; these are the lines that, while "wasting motion", give the film another dimension.

A film should always be more than just actions & motivations, and a lot of the wasted motion contributes to expanding our understanding of the characters. Yes, Nightcrawler didn't do much but talk after his attack on the White House. However, he still got arguably better development than Beast, Angel, Juggernaut, Multiple Man, Arclight, Callisto, Quill, Psylocke, and Colossus. At least Nightcrawler got the chance to discuss his thoughts & motivations after one REALLY good action scene.

The mutants from X3 (with the exception of Beast in the scene with Jimmy) did nothing other than use their powers, stand around, repeat (note that the repeat is optional).

I don't have a problem with the wasted motion in X2. In fact, had TLS had a bit of it added, it's fair to say it would only have made the movie better.

 

[flavio_lebeau]

I didn't think X2 had "wasted motion". It just had character development, something that wasn't found in X3. Also if you say that Nightcrawler had some wasted motion scenes, wouldn't you say that Angel had some as well? I mean the whole character was pointless.

i agree completely. I think X3 actually has more "wasted motion" than X2. The ''wasted motion'' moments in X2 had a good purpose, character development. The ones in X3 just don't do anything to the story. Angel's entire story arc is pointless (the cure plot could be centered in one X-men, Beast, or Rogue), Phoenix has some bad wasted motion and so on...

 

[La_She-Beast]

Yes... even, I think the 'Danger Room' scene was pointless too.

 

[PeRfEcT_StOrM]

finally a non-negative thread...and the danger room being pointless...well i guess the Sentinels are pointless as well.

 

[Halcohol]

Hey Nell, what other scenes in X2 did you feel were wasted?

EDIT: I guess that's a question to everybody? Anyone think there were scenes in the first two that didn't really gel with the tone of the 3rd?

 

[PowersOfMind]

I have to agree with you on the "wasted motion" point Nell. I enjoyed X3, mainly because finally the mutants were using thier powers instead of standing around talking about using their powers.

 

[The Ones]

I have to agree with you on the "wasted motion" point Nell. I enjoyed X3, mainly because finally the mutants were using thier powers instead of standing around talking about using their powers.

Yes, just like the brotherhood mutants. They werent just running all over the place wanting to get killed at all.

 

[PowersOfMind]

Yes, just like the brotherhood mutants. They werent just running all over the place wanting to get killed at all.

Well not them... I was really talking about Professor X, Magneto, Jean, Storm etc.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

Wasted motion? Well, I guess it really depends on what you mean by wasted motion.

Perhaps if X1/X2 were done exactly like X3 then it wouldn't be completely wasted. However, X1/X2 built up what was supposed to happen in X3, and in my honest opinion, the final product of The Last Stand isn't what was supposed to happen.

Nightcrawler not doing anything after the White House attack? Are you kidding? He saves Rogue as she's sucked out of the jet, he saves the children at Alkali Lake, he has a heart to heart with Storm, and he attempts to try and save Jean at the end. He definitely did more than just sitting around doing nothing.

I feel X3 had more wasted motion and wasted potential considering the overall concept.

 

[DarknessOfDeath]

I was gonna mention that he saved Rogue and tried to save Jean but Jean wouldn't let him. He really had no choice but to stay put after Logan told him.

 

[jimjam-06]

I was gonna mention that he saved Rogue and tried to save Jean but Jean wouldn't let me. He really had no choice but to stay put after Logan told him.

Hehe, where you put "me" instead of "him" is kind of scaring me You know Jean?!

But I have to disagree that Wasted Motion made X2 bad and X3 good. I think quite the oppisite. X3 needed Wasted Motion, it would have made it so much better, this Wasted Motion you speak of is what makes x2 such a great character film.

 

[DarknessOfDeath]

That was a typo...and I edited it in my earlier post.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Wasted motion? Well, I guess it really depends on what you mean by wasted motion.

Definatley, I don't mean what people have interpretted me to mean.

By "wasted motion", I don't mean non-action moments. I just mean that every scene in X-Men: The Last Stand pushed the plot forward, while some scenes in X2 didn't really push forward as much.

By that, I don't mean character moments. The character moments in X2 are some of the best scenes in the entire trilogy. It's why I love X-Men so much because these characters are much richer than typical, generic superhero characters, and the characterization in both X-Men and X2 showcases that. So by wasted motion, I don't mean Wolverine and his conversation with Iceman as the mansion is getting raided. I don't mean Nightcrawler's discussion about faith to Storm on the X-Jet.

In fact, I think a lot of that "wasted motion" actually comes more towards the 3rd act.

The tent scene with Mystique and Wolverine is DEFINATLEY wasted motion, as it adds absolutley nothing to the plot. It doesn't continue an established story arc... it was just a chance to get every leading lady in this film on top of Hugh Jackman, and if I recall correctly, that scene was Tom Rothman's idea rolleyes: )

Everything is fine until Cerebro begins to take effect, and then it begins to drag... and a bunch of people just fall to the ground in pain...

Between the time of Magneto switching Cerebro to target humans, up until the dam bursts, is what I consider "wasted motion". Perhaps it's because, except for Stryker, we don't actually see humans getting nailed by Cerebro, the way we did with the mutants, and the only way to show a sense of urgency was to make it last so long. Whereas with X-Men: The Last Stand, we do get a better look at the world beyond the X-Men (the many protests against the cure, the family in the SUV on the Golden Gate Bridge, the many people jumping or falling off the bridge during Magneto's "reallignment") and so we do have a better idea of the stakes. Like I've seen stated a few times, just how many people DID die during the Cerebro assault? How many car accidents were caused because of it? How many planes crashed? How many people just had their minds explode because they couldn't handle it? After the mutants aren't being targetted anymore, there's not much of a sense of the stakes anymore, so the whole targetting humans bit just feels like "wasted motion", I guess. If they were able to better present the stakes, then I suppose it wouldn't be so bad.

With X-Men: The Last Stand, we SEE the stakes. With Magneto's war, we've seen the terrorist attacks he's done against the public. They were talked about early in the film, and then we actually see the same thing when Pyro attacks the cure clinic. We see how Magneto's bridge assault effects the public. The government is involved against Magneto, and gets the military involved. With Phoenix, we see the personal stakes, in how she killed Cyclops and Xavier, and we see the global stakes in all the soldiers she took out, and the destruction to Alcatraz. In the commentary, Kinberg and Penn mentioned "we wanted it to seem like if she wasn't stopped, San Francisco was toast" and that's exactly how I felt. The stakes were shown to me, I knew how high they were.

Now, obviously I know that the stakes were high in X2 with Cerebro targetting humans. But, we don't get a sense of it. We don't get a sense of just what kind of destruction is happening. So it seems as if it just drags, and to me, comes off as wasted motion.

This isn't to say that X-Men: The Last Stand is better than X2. Again, I don't know what my opinion on the matter is. I like them both, probably about equal, for different reasons. X2 takes me into who these characters are, and why I love them so much. X-Men: The Last Stand puts them into action reminiscent of the cartoon series that originally got me hooked on these characters. They both have something to offer that's just as vital.

This just happens to be one advantage that I find X-Men: The Last Stand has over X2. (I would also say that X-Men doesn't have much, if any, wasted motion... it's probably only something I really feel from X2.)

 

[La_She-Beast]

Well, in X3 we don't get much evidences either:
-Beast 'denies' the cure? We don't know, but we do make ourselves that question because he sighed when he saw his hand change to human form.
-Angel suddenly changes his mind, but why exactly? We don't know. So all his scenes can go to garbage.
-Charles suddenly becomes a dark character. He even 'suddenly' lowers his voice when speaking with Storm. Why? Why 'suddenly'?
-Kitty meeting Bobby, ice-skating... does that bring us to something? Yes, Rogue taking the cure. An absolute !"$% excuse

And some more...

 

[flavio_lebeau]

-Kitty meeting Bobby, ice-skating... does that bring us to something? Yes, Rogue taking the cure. An absolute !"$% excuse

yeah. Seriously, maybe that scene "drives the plot forward" on Rogue, but it's useless and makes all the characters involved look bad. Rogue taking the cure because "of some boy"? If she wanted to take it for him, we didn't need that scene, we knew she was going to take it for him. What the hell? And, to me, that's where X3 fails: it might not have "wasted motion", but the motivations and the characters as a whole are either bad or wrongly explored.

 

[Cyclops]

Well, of course X3 had no wasted motion. It had so little motion where it really counts that it had to stretch what it had.

 

[bosef982]

How many of you are sports fans?

How many of you are familiar with the term "wasted motion"?

Well, to me, I think this is one of the things that I enjoy about X-Men: The Last Stand over X2... it doesn't have any "wasted motion".

What I mean by this is that, in X-Men: The Last Stand, every scene counts. In X2, I feel there are some scenes that are just... not as neccesary.

Example: Nightcrawler. He has a great set up (White House attack), and a great character establishment (his talk to Storm and Jean at the church), and then except for a talk about faith to Storm in the X-Jet, really does nothing and is just there.

X-Men: The Last Stand doesn't have any scenes like that, in my opinion.

It doesn't neccesarily make X-Men: The Last Stand the better film. I don't know which of the 2 is my favorite (all I know is that my favorite of the trilogy is NOT X-Men...). Maybe they are tied... they both offer something to make them stand out from the other. X-Men: The Last Stand has awesome, amazing action that I love, as a superhero and comic book fan. X2 has some amazing character moments that really define these characters, and make them something truly special. So it's hard for me to pick a favorite between these 2.

But the "wasted motion" thing is something I like about X-Men: The Last Stand over X2. I'll probably watch X2 sometime over this weekend, and I can give better examples of just what I mean by that.

Wasted motion....have we come this far in order to attempt to make X3 seem like a good movie?

No wasted motion = underdeveloped.

This is like a teacher going to a student who took a test, and who failed the test, and saying, "What I really like about your test is that there's no wasted answers -- you answered every question. Every answer counted."

Please...

 

[bosef982]

The tent scene with Mystique and Wolverine is DEFINATLEY wasted motion, as it adds absolutley nothing to the plot. It doesn't continue an established story arc... it was just a chance to get every leading lady in this film on top of Hugh Jackman, and if I recall correctly, that scene was Tom Rothman's idea rolleyes: )

Everything is fine until Cerebro begins to take effect, and then it begins to drag... and a bunch of people just fall to the ground in pain...

Between the time of Magneto switching Cerebro to target humans, up until the dam bursts, is what I consider "wasted motion". Perhaps it's because, except for Stryker, we don't actually see humans getting nailed by Cerebro, the way we did with the mutants, and the only way to show a sense of urgency was to make it last so long. Whereas with X-Men: The Last Stand, we do get a better look at the world beyond the X-Men (the many protests against the cure, the family in the SUV on the Golden Gate Bridge, the many people jumping or falling off the bridge during Magneto's "reallignment") and so we do have a better idea of the stakes. Like I've seen stated a few times, just how many people DID die during the Cerebro assault? How many car accidents were caused because of it? How many planes crashed? How many people just had their minds explode because they couldn't handle it? After the mutants aren't being targetted anymore, there's not much of a sense of the stakes anymore, so the whole targetting humans bit just feels like "wasted motion", I guess. If they were able to better present the stakes, then I suppose it wouldn't be so bad.

With X-Men: The Last Stand, we SEE the stakes. With Magneto's war, we've seen the terrorist attacks he's done against the public. They were talked about early in the film, and then we actually see the same thing when Pyro attacks the cure clinic. We see how Magneto's bridge assault effects the public. The government is involved against Magneto, and gets the military involved. With Phoenix, we see the personal stakes, in how she killed Cyclops and Xavier, and we see the global stakes in all the soldiers she took out, and the destruction to Alcatraz. In the commentary, Kinberg and Penn mentioned "we wanted it to seem like if she wasn't stopped, San Francisco was toast" and that's exactly how I felt. The stakes were shown to me, I knew how high they were.

Now, obviously I know that the stakes were high in X2 with Cerebro targetting humans. But, we don't get a sense of it. We don't get a sense of just what kind of destruction is happening. So it seems as if it just drags, and to me, comes off as wasted motion.

With all due respect Nell, this is the kind of **** that pisses me off. When people state things that are COMPLETELY FALSE to the reality of the situation.

We only saw Stryker affected by Cerebro targetting humans? So, via the cerebro affect, we didn't see and hear thousands -- millions -- of humans being affected and reeling in pain? Or we didn't see the Secret Service and Presdient McKenna in near death pain? The President of the United States is being assassinated and that isn't "setting the stakes" high enough for you?

But even so, your statement saying that, beside Stryker, we don't see the destruction Cerebro's causing is just ludicrous and false.


And those aren'ts stakes your talking about --- your talking about death. Setting the stakes is setting something at RISK -- not actully destroying that thing. If Phoenix kills soldiers she's not putting them at risk -- she's destroying them. At that point the suspense of setting the stakes is over since she's completed her task. In fact, not one thing you listed there "set the stakes" because in the end -- Nell, tell me...what was Magneto's ultimate goal? What was "at stake" at Alcatraz?

The cure? The cure had already been distributed. So destroying the cure really wasn't at stake.

The fate of humanity? Nope. Not at stake really. Magneto was just going to destroy the source of the cure -- not realizing that I guess it's already distributed.

If Magneto succeeded -- and in a way, he did since Leech left the island -- what changes? As we see, Rogue still got cured?

So, tell me Nell, what are the stakes? What "stakes" -- what devestating POTENTIALS -- does X3 raise?

In X1, it's the possiblity of all the leaders of the world being mutated into humans, and as we discover later -- dying. This is a potential should our heroes not succeed and our villian suceed.

In X2, it's the possiblity of all mutantkind being exterminated -- then humanity. These stakes are cleary set. These are the stakes that, should the heroes lose, shall become a reality.

In X3, its the possibility of ...... what? If Magneto succeeded, what happens? If the X-Men succeeded, what happens? What changes either way? What was the X-Men's goal? To...stop Magneto from destroying the cure that had already been distributed across the United States?

I'm really not getting you here, Nell.