Watching X2 again, I could cry!

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I hope u do understand that character dev is morethan jus giving characters their background story, it's also abt giving them their thought processes & motivations as well which make them interesting. For instance, why did Angel reject the cure when they have him cutting his feathers in the first scene which is really self-amputation, not even Rogue who nearly killed her boyfriend did such a thing to hurt herself; how abt Beast who had before attempted to make a cure that turns him blue and furry instead, why didn't he take the cure; Why was Storm so against the cure when she has a student like Rogue and friends like Beast who has so much problems with their mutancy; Also why is she so hostile towards Jean when Jean is part of the family/team and clearly in need of help because of her schnizopenia, it's like only Wolverine bother to care; Then what's the purpose of the Phoenix in Magneto's war, has the Phoenix fallen in love with Magneto like in the TAS? While the Jean in the Phoenix was confused & lost, the Phoenix should have a clear objective & motivations in the movie. The major problem with X3 is that the movie has all the big-time actions but what's clearly missing is the thought processes & motivations behind these actions.

Exactly, brilliantly put, all of these events happen in X3 for no reason. Why does Angel go from someone who hates his mutancy to someone who cant live without it? I mean, thats literally, from one extreme to the other and would require not much explanation.

And why does Beast go from someone who's "polotical views are at odds with his personal issues" to someone who outrightly rejects the cure and is disgusted by the thought of it?

This is poor, poor movie-making.

 

[TKing]

Exactly, brilliantly put, all of these events happen in X3 for no reason. Why does Angel go from someone who hates his mutancy to someone who cant live without it? I mean, thats literally, from one extreme to the other and would require not much explanation.

This is poor, poor movie-making.

You have to remember that in the flashback, Warren was just a kid, and generally kids do what they're told, and are fearful if they get into trouble. For example, when his father bursts in the bathroom, and Warren cries, "I'm sorry," he is more upset with himself for embarrassing his father.

But as he has matured and gotten used to his powers, he has realised that you should be proud of who you are and people should be able to accept that.

Hence, why he chose to deny the cure. He felt that his father was treating him like a kid again, by deciding what's best for his son, without actually listening to him.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

You have to remember that in the flashback, Warren was just a kid, and generally kids do what they're told, and are fearful if they get into trouble. For example, when his father bursts in the bathroom, and Warren cries, "I'm sorry," he is more upset with himself for embarrassing his father.

But as he has matured and gotten used to his powers, he has realised that you should be proud of who you are and people should be able to accept that.

Hence, why he chose to deny the cure. He felt that his father was treating him like a kid again, by deciding what's best for his son, without actually listening to him.

He is not more upset with himself, he is upset that he is a mutant, and so is his father, hence why his father looks disgusted and says "Not you" as if to say, 'you cant be a mutant!'

 

[La_She-Beast]

And why does Beast go from someone who's "polotical views are at odds with his personal issues" to someone who outrightly rejects the cure and is disgusted by the thought of it?

That phrase DEFINETELY shoudn't been said by Kavita. Neva. It had to be said by Beast

 

[X-Maniac]

Exactly, brilliantly put, all of these events happen in X3 for no reason. Why does Angel go from someone who hates his mutancy to someone who cant live without it? I mean, thats literally, from one extreme to the other and would require not much explanation..

Parental pressure (‘It’s a better life, it’s what we all want - ‘No it’s what you want&#8217. He was ashamed of being a mutant... you can see his reluctance when he comes into that room to take the cure. He makes a choice. Classic ‘coming out’ metaphor. A gay metaphor. I felt such resonance with that scene - hiding away, hating yourself, ashamed, terrified, parents trying to urge you to fit in, then one day you decide to live your life the way you want, often when you are forced to make a decision in an uncomfortable situation... If you can’t see that, I’m astounded, maybe you’ve never felt that way or known anyone who has....

And why does Beast go from someone who's "polotical views are at odds with his personal issues" to someone who outrightly rejects the cure and is disgusted by the thought of it?

This is poor, poor movie-making.

Beast’s political views are in mutant rights, hence his appointment as secretary - he clearly tells Wolverine he has long history of fighting for mutant rights. He objects to the weaponisation of the cure and tells the president this (‘What happened on that convoy was inexcusable&#8217. But he, Wolverine and Storm are forced to use that cure as a weapon to stop Magneto, hence his disgust at having to do the thing he believes is inexcusable and against mutant rights. It’s also likely that once the cure becomes a weapon, it is a less attractive/acceptable idea (for him or others)

 

[gambitfire]

Parental pressure (‘It’s a better life, it’s what we all want - ‘No it’s what you want’). He was ashamed of being a mutant... you can see his reluctance when he comes into that room to take the cure. He makes a choice. Classic ‘coming out’ metaphor. A gay metaphor. I felt such resonance with that scene - hiding away, hating yourself, ashamed, terrified, parents trying to urge you to fit in, then one day you decide to live your life the way you want, often when you are forced to make a decision in an uncomfortable situation... If you can’t see that, I’m astounded, maybe you’ve never felt that way or known anyone who has....

Why must you keep making these bad assumptions about ppl?

And no matter how much you defend it, this "gay" metaphor will never compare to that of X2 bobby scene.

This one was too small and subtle so savor.

Beast’s political views are in mutant rights, hence his appointment as secretary - he clearly tells Wolverine he has long history of fighting for mutant rights. He objects to the weaponisation of the cure and tells the president this (‘What happened on that convoy was inexcusable’). But he, Wolverine and Storm are forced to use that cure as a weapon to stop Magneto, hence his disgust at having to do the thing he believes is inexcusable and against mutant rights. It’s also likely that once the cure becomes a weapon, it is a less attractive/acceptable idea (for him or others)

and do we see any of this?
Is there any time to accept any of this? or even notice it?

It falls in the background and is too subtle to pay attention too.

I'm sure even at first watch in the movie you didn't really pay attention to this.

 

[La_She-Beast]

I'm sure even at first watch in the movie you didn't really pay attention to this.

I must confess, the majority of the assumptions/explanations here have no evidence the first time you watch it. It's something you must look over again to see what the heck is this/these character/s standing for.

 

[X-Maniac]

Why must you keep making these bad assumptions about ppl?

Because people don't notice the clues, there must be a reason. Maybe they forgot if they only saw it once five months ago and didn't like it, but then how can people argue something clearly and with all the supporting evidence and dialogue if they only saw it once five months ago? It's almost pointless to argue if you watched it once five months ago and were angry about it. If you were asked to write a paper arguing the details of a movie, you would not rely on memory from five months ago, you would watch the movie again. All movies get better with further viewings. You will always notice more and appreciate more the second time round, and on even more viewings. But I guess if you hated it, you wouldn't want to see it again - the problem with that is you won't remember the details of the movie.

And no matter how much you defend it, this "gay" metaphor will never compare to that of X2 bobby scene.

That's not relevant to this argument. I'm not comparing it with, or arguing it against, the X2 Bobby scene. This is about Angel. This is not a Ratner vs Singer, or an X3 vs X2 comparison. Too many people on here are seeing everything that way, as a competition between the two. That's a big mistake. Rather than keep saying 'But Singer planned to do this and this' (for which we have no real proof, and no finished Singer X3 to compare it with), or 'Singer wouldn't have done that' (for which there is no proof), let's look at what we actually did get.

This one was too small and subtle so savor.

I disagree. An opening flashback of a boy hacking at himself with huge knives. A key scene of a mutant being first to be cured - by his father. The only scene of the cure being administered (or almost administered). Then breaking free and smashing out of the window. None of that is small or subtle.

and do we see any of this?
Is there any time to accept any of this? or even notice it?
It falls in the background and is too subtle to pay attention too.

Beast's role is quite clear. He is a secretary of mutant affairs, whose diplomacy is called on when the cure is discovered. He delivers the news to the X-Men, and debates the cure with them. He later resigns from the govenrment when the cure becomes a weapon and fights alongside the X-Men. Those scenes are obvious parts of the movie.

I'm sure even at first watch in the movie you didn't really pay attention to this.

Yes, I did. If I only saw it once five months ago, i wouldn't be able to give you all the dialogue word for word but Beast and Angel had vital roles in the movie that were obvious. Thank God we finally got to see these characters that Bryan had struggled to be able to include. People talk as though it was a wrong choice to include Angel and Beast.

If you cannot recall the things I describe, then why not watch the movie again and take a look for yourself? Don't let stale negativity that is five months old be all you have to offer on here. After all, this is an X3 discussion forum so a knowledge of the movie would come in very handy on here.

 

[X-Maniac]

I must confess, the majority of the assumptions/explanations here have no evidence the first time you watch it. It's something you must look over again to see what the heck is this/these character/s standing for.

The explanations do stand out for Beast and Angel on first viewing, but you will certainly appreciate it more if you watch it again, as with any movie. Someone would hardly be in a position to argue well about the movie if they saw it once five months ago and were in a fog of hatred about it.

Get armed with the facts and information!

 

[gambitfire]

Because people don't notice the clues, there must be a reason. Maybe they forgot if they only saw it once five months ago and didn't like it, but then how can people argue something clearly and with all the supporting evidence and dialogue if they only saw it once five months ago? It's almost pointless to argue if you watched it once five months ago and were angry about it. If you were asked to write a paper arguing the details of a movie, you would not rely on memory from five months ago, you would watch the movie again. All movies get better with further viewings. You will always notice more and appreciate more the second time round, and on even more viewings. But I guess if you hated it, you wouldn't want to see it again - the problem with that is you won't remember the details of the movie.

That's horrible, if anything it should stick upon first viewing. Not everyone is going to sit there and watch the movie 10 times in order to fully get it.

That's not relevant to this argument. I'm not comparing it with, or arguing it against, the X2 Bobby scene. This is about Angel. This is not a Ratner vs Singer, or an X3 vs X2 comparison. Too many people on here are seeing everything that way, as a competition between the two. That's a big mistake. Rather than keep saying 'But Singer planned to do this and this' (for which we have no real proof, and no finished Singer X3 to compare it with), or 'Singer wouldn't have done that' (for which there is no proof), let's look at what we actually did get.

It's relevant to any argument in this board, I for one continue to argue X2's superiority IMO over X3. And because of this is why X3 is in my eyes is not that great of a film. Vs or not the little bit of time the Angel arc had, made it lose some significance.

I disagree. An opening flashback of a boy hacking at himself with huge knives. A key scene of a mutant being first to be cured - by his father. The only scene of the cure being administered (or almost administered). Then breaking free and smashing out of the window. None of that is small or subtle.

It was a good scene, but it was in the very beginning by the very end you don't care about it especially since he was not really around.

Beast's role is quite clear. He is a secretary of mutant affairs, whose diplomacy is called on when the cure is discovered. He delivers the news to the X-Men, and debates the cure with them. He later resigns from the govenrment when the cure becomes a weapon and fights alongside the X-Men. Those scenes are obvious parts of the movie.



Yes, I did. If I only saw it once five months ago, i wouldn't be able to give you all the dialogue word for word but Beast and Angel had vital roles in the movie that were obvious. Thank God we finally got to see these characters that Bryan had struggled to be able to include. People talk as though it was a wrong choice to include Angel and Beast.

If you cannot recall the things I describe, then why not watch the movie again and take a look for yourself? Don't let stale negativity that is five months old be all you have to offer on here. After all, this is an X3 discussion forum so a knowledge of the movie would come in very handy on here.

You know what i honestly find it hard to believe that you grasped all this upon first viewing, if you say you did then there isn't anything i could do, it's yourself your lying too. Since i have no way of proving you otherwise i leave you with this, While your apprantley such a huge brilliant young man who managed to grasp so much from X3, not everyone is like you, and Not just because we have the hate it mentallity but because we had problems with alot of things that can justify the reason for which we disliked X3. So i still can't help it feel that you can't comprehend that, that you must always be on the defensive over it.

So while it may have had some good moments to alot of us the bad outweighs the good and i know to you it doesn't but just comprehend that to us it does before you go around posting against everything negative said about the film.

 

[tonytr1687]

He is not more upset with himself, he is upset that he is a mutant, and so is his father, hence why his father looks disgusted and says "Not you" as if to say, 'you cant be a mutant!'

The line "not you" suggests that his father didnt know about his mutation until this incident. The implication is that he sought a cure for mutation BECAUSE of this incident. BECAUSE he saw that his son was in pain and wanted to be normal. So therefore the scene is supposed be showing Warren as a kid who is desperate to be normal, regardless of his father.

And in the end what do we get...no character development. No arc that shows us why he ends up rejecting the cure and becoming proud of being a mutant.

 

[gambitfire]

^ Thank you.

 

[X-Maniac]

That's horrible, if anything it should stick upon first viewing. Not everyone is going to sit there and watch the movie 10 times in order to fully get it.

I agree, and for me a lot of it did 'stick' on the first viewing. I agree that not everyone is going to watch the movie 10 times. The problem is, I suppose, that those people who liked it will watch it more and therefore notice even more (like me, and also Nell); and those people who hate it won't watch it again and might forget the details of it. This means the people who like it probably have more information in their mind than the people who didn't like it.

You know what i honestly find it hard to believe that you grasped all this upon first viewing, if you say you did then there isn't anything i could do, it's yourself your lying too. Since i have no way of proving you otherwise i leave you with this, While your apprantley such a huge brilliant young man who managed to grasp so much from X3, not everyone is like you, and Not just because we have the hate it mentallity but because we had problems with alot of things that can justify the reason for which we disliked X3. So i still can't help it feel that you can't comprehend that, that you must always be on the defensive over it.

Yes, not everyone will see it like I do. But don't you think it's interesting to hear the views of people who have seen it many times and who do have a deeper (or at least different) insight into it? Doesn't that add something? Isn't it interesting to hear another side of the story from someone who either knows the source material or has seen the movie many times or who knows some of the answers to people's questions? There are other posters on here (like ntcrawler, for instance) who have lots to offer, and they sometimes disagree with me. I admit I am obsessive about X-Men - I've read the comics for many years - and I was a very bright student in English language and literature studies and work in a job that involves writing, editing (a lot of human drama stuff) and presenting information to the public.

So while it may have had some good moments to alot of us the bad outweighs the good and i know to you it doesn't but just comprehend that to us it does before you go around posting against everything negative said about the film.

Yes, I understand that. I just don't want people to think it's bad for a reason that is wrong. And this is a forum for debate, it's not just one side. One thing this forum is good for is giving people more information that they didn't have before. I refuse to be biased against the movie for the reason it is not by Bryan Singer because I knew that more than a year ago. There is no doubt he wouldn't have done the same thing in X3, though we don't know exactly what would have ended up in his finished movie. I wonder what would have happened if James Marsden hadn't followed Bryan to SR...would Cyclops have had a greater role, would he have lived?

 

[X-Maniac]

The line "not you" suggests that his father didnt know about his mutation until this incident. The implication is that he sought a cure for mutation BECAUSE of this incident. BECAUSE he saw that his son was in pain and wanted to be normal. So therefore the scene is supposed be showing Warren as a kid who is desperate to be normal, regardless of his father.

And in the end what do we get...no character development. No arc that shows us why he ends up rejecting the cure and becoming proud of being a mutant.

Rejecting the cure and becoming proud of being a mutant IS by its very nature 'character development'. His character developed, changed.

It was obvious to me that he felt parental pressure, from which he finally broke free (emotionally and physically). He makes a choice. It's all there in the dialogue 'It's a better life Warren, it's what we all want' 'No it's what you want'. He feels pressured and when put in a corner he 'comes out'.

The difficulty people seem to have is that nothing is shown between him crying in the bathroom and walking into the room for the cure. In that time, he has obviously grown up and has become an adult capable of making his own choices and being what he wants to be. He is able to stand up to his father.

The idea of family pressure from an over-protective father is key to Angel's story. The wings obviously didn't go away, there was no cure for them when he was a child, so he had to live with them and get used to them. He couldn't keep hacking them off.

 

[gambitfire]

I agree, and for me a lot of it did 'stick' on the first viewing. I agree that not everyone is going to watch the movie 10 times. The problem is, I suppose, that those people who liked it will watch it more and therefore notice even more (like me, and also Nell); and those people who hate it won't watch it again and might forget the details of it. This means the people who like it probably have more information in their mind than the people who didn't like it.

Well i know i have only seen it twice once bootleg, but there are those who dislike it and watch it for the sake of debating and disecting so it's not just those who like it that watch it.

Yes, not everyone will see it like I do. But don't you think it's interesting to hear the views of people who have seen it many times and who do have a deeper (or at least different) insight into it? Doesn't that add something? Isn't it interesting to hear another side of the story from someone who either knows the source material or has seen the movie many times or who knows some of the answers to people's questions? There are other posters on here (like ntcrawler, for instance) who have lots to offer, and they sometimes disagree with me. I admit I am obsessive about X-Men - I've read the comics for many years - and I was a very bright student in English language and literature studies and work in a job that involves writing, editing (a lot of human drama stuff) and presenting information to the public.

I assure i'm a very obsessive X-Men fan as well. It's because of this that i dislike the movie. It didn't stay true to the characters or the source IMO,
and i don't mean silly little accents, and origins.

Yes, I understand that. I just don't want people to think it's bad for a reason that is wrong. And this is a forum for debate, it's not just one side. One thing this forum is good for is giving people more information that they didn't have before. I refuse to be biased against the movie for the reason it is not by Bryan Singer because I knew that more than a year ago. There is no doubt he wouldn't have done the same thing in X3, though we don't know exactly what would have ended up in his finished movie. I wonder what would have happened if James Marsden hadn't followed Bryan to SR...would Cyclops have had a greater role, would he have lived?

I'm sure everyone on here can think forthemselves and have their own view on it. So no one is going to think it's bad because of we say. If they do well then they might be too gullible to be here.

I for one am not biased because of Singer. The issues that you managed to overlook i did not. So while some manage to overlook, the death of Scott, the cure of Rogue, The IMO bad potrayal of Storm, The improper use of the Phoenix Saga IMO, the bad pacing, the short flim run time, the underuse of so many excellent characters, i cannot overlook those thing and those are more than enough reason to make this film justifiably bad for me.

We are all different and see things differently and i saw this as a bad film and you really can't tell me otherwise because well that's my opinion.

 

[The Guard]

X-Maniac's saying everything that needs to be said. He's spot on regarding Angel and Beast and their development/character in the movie.

If you truly don't get it, or don't see it, rather than just assume it's not there because it's not explained during the film...think about it a little deeper. The crew of X3 expects you to think about what's onscreen and form your own conclusions about their themes and impact on the plot and characters, not just assume they are random scenes. If you can't see it, rather than assume it doesn't exist, try listening to those who do see what's there. There's still not a LOT of development, or multiple scenes of it, but there is development to this film. And depth. And it's not subtle or impossible to discover. It's right there.

And it just occured to me in terms of actual character motivation...Angel has more shown in his few minutes of screentime than Cyclops, Jean, and Storm had during an entire franchise in some ways.

 

[kg576094]

Parental pressure (‘It’s a better life, it’s what we all want - ‘No it’s what you want&#8217. He was ashamed of being a mutant... you can see his reluctance when he comes into that room to take the cure. He makes a choice. Classic ‘coming out’ metaphor. A gay metaphor. I felt such resonance with that scene - hiding away, hating yourself, ashamed, terrified, parents trying to urge you to fit in, then one day you decide to live your life the way you want, often when you are forced to make a decision in an uncomfortable situation... If you can’t see that, I’m astounded, maybe you’ve never felt that way or known anyone who has....

The problem with ur interpretation is that Angel isn't a metaphor for gay people. On the hand, Angel, Beast, Nightcrawler and Mystique represent people affected by physical deformities brought on by their mutation....funny thing that all 4 of them are eventually blue in appearance after Angel become the Archangel. So imagine growing a pair of wings, gorilla arms and legs, or even developing pointed ears, blue skin and a tail....there's no reason why these people wouldn't take the cure when one become available because their mutation are the most difficult to accept or simply hide away. So when they don't, we are supposed to be given a compelling reason why they choose to live with their different physical form as a valuable tool of education. We learn from Nightcrawler how he accepted himself by finding peace with religion; Mystique, on the hand, cope by becoming hateful and despising human. I suppose the reasons for Angel and Beast are something different as well and should therefore not be omitted from the film, which is bad storytelling or character development. This is what make x-men characters so rich and interesting...every mutants are different and they deal with their problems with different ideals and philosophy.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

The line "not you" suggests that his father didnt know about his mutation until this incident. The implication is that he sought a cure for mutation BECAUSE of this incident. BECAUSE he saw that his son was in pain and wanted to be normal. So therefore the scene is supposed be showing Warren as a kid who is desperate to be normal, regardless of his father.

And in the end what do we get...no character development. No arc that shows us why he ends up rejecting the cure and becoming proud of being a mutant.

Actually, the scene suggests that Angel was cutting off his wings for his father, because he felt his father wouldn't accept it. And his father's reaction suggests that he didn't accept it.

Warren: "Oh no, not you" (Suggests what you said, "Not you, you can't be a mutant, why can't you be normal?")

Angel: "Dad, I'm sorry" (Suggests that he feels his father will be ashamed of him for being a mutant, and gives us all the motivation we need for why he's cutting off his wings; he wants to make his father proud. It doesn't have much to do with how he feels about his own mutation, but rather, how he will be seen in his father's eyes. It is very important for young children to have the acceptance of their parents, and this is what that scene was showing; a boy trying to find acceptance from his father)

Angel eventually rejects the cure, because he realizes that it's not what he wants, it's what his father wants. Hence the line "No, it's what you want"

Warren thinks mutation is a disease, as we see through his introduction of the cure on the Alcatraz news conference. He wants mutants to be able to be "normal".

Angel doesn't have those same feelings. He goes along with it for his father, to find that acceptance in his father's eyes, but then realizes it's not what HE wants, and that he has to live his own life, and make his own decisions.

The character arc is actually pretty obvious.

 

[La_She-Beast]

I suppose the reasons for Angel and Beast are something different as well and should therefore not be omitted from the film, which is bad storytelling or character development. This is what make x-men characters so rich and interesting...every mutants are different and they deal with their problems with different ideals and philosophy.

Agree completly here. Ok, so now somebody explained why suddenly changed to 'accept' himself-which the technique to demonstrate imo was cheap, because that expression when he was with Leech, demonstrated he had much further concern with his appearence- which he thought the cure was gross. Firstly, I didn't even notice that. What I see is the evidence [when Hank is speaking with the President] that it's very dangerous now turning the cure into a weapon, and that since the Presi is walking on a 'slippery slope' he resigns and goes back to the X-Mansion.

 

[La_She-Beast]

The explanations do stand out for Beast and Angel on first viewing, but you will certainly appreciate it more if you watch it again, as with any movie. Someone would hardly be in a position to argue well about the movie if they saw it once five months ago and were in a fog of hatred about it.

Get armed with the facts and information!

Yes... well... I've seen X3 a zillion times now... and if it weren't for the explanations here, I wouldn't have realized some things... and that's bad. Because it demonstrates there's bad storytelling and imo, cheap excuses. (We know Ratner & co. for their cheap excuses, don't we?)

 

[Halcohol]

The character arc is actually pretty obvious.

There's no doubt that Angel's arc is defined. He goes from point A to point B to point C. But that's it.

As a physics student, I spend a LOT of time working with graphs on the computer. If you're going to define a curve on a graph, the more points you have the more defined your curve is. If you have 2 points, you get a straight line. 3, you get an angle. 4, you get a blocky curve, etc, etc. You see where I'm going with this.

Angel just wasn't fleshed out as a character. Yeah, he had an arc, but that's all he had. We're supposed to take the what, four lines he had and extrapolate the rest of his thought processes?

I've got no problem with his story, nor with any of the actions or decisions he makes within the plot. My big problem with Angel (and really with X3 in general) was that the majority of the character depth was left to us to fill in the blanks. We were supposed to read between the lines and figure it out, when all we really wanted was more screen time and interaction with other characters.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

There's no doubt that Angel's arc is defined. He goes from point A to point B to point C. But that's it.

As a physics student, I spend a LOT of time working with graphs on the computer. If you're going to define a curve on a graph, the more points you have the more defined your curve is. If you have 2 points, you get a straight line. 3, you get an angle. 4, you get a blocky curve, etc, etc. You see where I'm going with this.

Angel just wasn't fleshed out as a character. Yeah, he had an arc, but that's all he had. We're supposed to take the what, four lines he had and extrapolate the rest of his thought processes?

I've got no problem with his story, nor with any of the actions or decisions he makes within the plot. My big problem with Angel (and really with X3 in general) was that the majority of the character depth was left to us to fill in the blanks. We were supposed to read between the lines and figure it out, when all we really wanted was more screen time and interaction with other characters.

Well I'm not going to argue with you that his arc was well defined.

All I'm saying is, what he did and why he did it are pretty well established, at least in my opinion.

But yes, there should have been more depth with Angel, as well as a couple other things. This I won't deny.

 

[Halcohol]

Well I'm not going to argue with you that his arc was well defined.

All I'm saying is, what he did and why he did it are pretty well established, at least in my opinion.

But yes, there should have been more depth with Angel, as well as a couple other things. This I won't deny.

That's what underlies my dislike for the film. I mean, when I look at it, I'd give it a B-. But the things that I didn't like about the film are represented best in Angel.

It just seemed like the facade of a house. Sure, it's got all the walls and a nice roof and look a pretty little garden, but you step inside and... it's barren. Think Harry & Lloyd's apartment from Dumb and Dumber on the inside. It looks fancy, and to all outward appearances it's spectacular.

It stands on its own foundations and won't collapse, but that still doesn't take away the fact that inside there's a worm farm and a bird without a head

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The line "not you" suggests that his father didnt know about his mutation until this incident. The implication is that he sought a cure for mutation BECAUSE of this incident. BECAUSE he saw that his son was in pain and wanted to be normal. So therefore the scene is supposed be showing Warren as a kid who is desperate to be normal, regardless of his father.

And in the end what do we get...no character development. No arc that shows us why he ends up rejecting the cure and becoming proud of being a mutant.

Thats exactly what i was trying to say! I'm defending the movie i'm criticising it!

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Actually, the scene suggests that Angel was cutting off his wings for his father, because he felt his father wouldn't accept it. And his father's reaction suggests that he didn't accept it.

Warren: "Oh no, not you" (Suggests what you said, "Not you, you can't be a mutant, why can't you be normal?")

Angel: "Dad, I'm sorry" (Suggests that he feels his father will be ashamed of him for being a mutant, and gives us all the motivation we need for why he's cutting off his wings; he wants to make his father proud. It doesn't have much to do with how he feels about his own mutation, but rather, how he will be seen in his father's eyes. It is very important for young children to have the acceptance of their parents, and this is what that scene was showing; a boy trying to find acceptance from his father)

Angel eventually rejects the cure, because he realizes that it's not what he wants, it's what his father wants. Hence the line "No, it's what you want"

Warren thinks mutation is a disease, as we see through his introduction of the cure on the Alcatraz news conference. He wants mutants to be able to be "normal".

Angel doesn't have those same feelings. He goes along with it for his father, to find that acceptance in his father's eyes, but then realizes it's not what HE wants, and that he has to live his own life, and make his own decisions.

The character arc is actually pretty obvious.

But Angel himself must be ashamed of his mutancy as well, otherwise he would just hide them instead of cutting them off. He could have used any number of jumpers, etc to keep hiding his wings until they got to big and THEN he could have tried cutting them off.

But then all of a sudden he loves his mutancy, why exactly?

And Worhtington Snr says to Angel "We've talked it about son" during the cure scene, indicating Warren junior has already agreed to take the cure sometime in the recent past maybe. But then what made Angel do a total turnaround? Did go flying and love the freedom, did he save someones life that he couldnt have without his wings, we just dont know, and will never know, and IMO thats poor filmmaking.

And X-Maniac, you mentioned earlier that Angel rejecting the cure is a classic 'coming out' scene, i totally disagree with this, how can it be a coming out scene if his father has known he was a mutant for 10 years? There is nothing to come out about is there.