You know, if you think about it, Rogue's characterization is actually pretty inconsistent in X2.
That Rogue/Angel analogy is awful. One, it distills the sequences to "this happens", which is not all we see onscreen. There is depth to what we see that ties into the thematics of the film. Two, that analogy would only work if the film in question had THEMATICS about...whatever you just made up...Rogue killing people or being afraid of doing so or whatnot. Angel's scenes fit right into the thematics of THE LAST STAND.
You can't really compare Rogue and Angel's portrayals in an attempt to whine about Angel's portrayal. Rogue was not a CAMEO or TERTIARY character. So what's the point of comparing them? What, Rogue was done better and fleshed out more than Angel? Well, that's a brilliant statement.
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.
True, but Angel was essentially played as a cameo...so frankly, that's pretty good development for a cameo, I would say.
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.
True again, but even in a two hour and fifteen minute movie, you can only have so many "points". Yes, it's a rough curve, but it's X-MEN: THE LAST STAND, not ANGEL: THE MOVIE.
Angel just wasn't fleshed out as a character.
True, but again, he's a cameo. That puts him on the same level as almost any character in the entire franchise except for Wolverine, Magneto, and in some small ways, Xavier.
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?
No. The movie expects you to make the obvious connection.
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.
You're supposed to read between the lines to get the message of the film. It was written that way on purpose. As has every major characterization or thematic element in the entire franchise. Almost none of the thought processes have been explicity stated.
But then all of a sudden he loves his mutancy, why exactly?
Who says he loves it? The point of the scene is that he would rather find his own answers than let others tell him how to feel. He and Rogue make up the "choose for yourself" message thematic of the film.
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.
I think it's pretty obvious, given how hesitant he looks coming into the lab, that he was never very keen on the idea in the first place. That "curing" himself was not the answer, but that he let his father tell him what to do. Until the moment he "broke free".
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.
It's not so much a coming out scene, it's a "This is who I am, you've tried to change me, but I'm not going to change, I'm going to deal with it, and so should you" scene.
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.
Well this sentence just sums it up, we are not sure so we are meant to guess, thats poor film making, they just wanted to get to the next action sequence and you making excuses means it was poorly executed.
He decided to take matters into his own hands. To live his own life, without others telling him what to do. Who CARES what the details of that were? Do we see the ONE moment that made Cyclops follow Xavier's dream? Do we ever see ONE moment or scene that shows why Wolverine does a complete turnaround from who he was in X-MEN?
Haha, that's true. But in all honesty I don't think the writers ever intended for people to read much detail into the film. They prob just wanted to deliver a cool, action-packed summer flick. And that's what we got.
You got a cool, action-packed summer flick with social depth.
The only thing that disappointed about Angel's character was his decision not to travel to Alcatraz with the X-Men.
Ah, but clearly he did travel to Alcatraz with the X-Men.
If he had helped in the final battle, it would further illustrate that he has grown used to his powers and actually accepts them as a blessing, rather than a curse.
What he did in terms of rescuing his father in the middle of a warzone would tend to indicate that, wouldn't it? I think it's a little unrealistic to expect a fairly unexperienced kid to suddenly go into battle with the X-Men.
And I disagree. We are given the opportunity to feel for the characters, for example, The Kitty/Bobby/Rogue relationship. We saw that expand and develop, and followed Rogue's logical reasoning to have the cure to be closer to her boyfriend. That made sense, and we were able to feel what the character was feeling as she went through her particular story.
And the Storm/Headmistress of the school aspect. At the beginning we saw Storm training the younger students, displaying her skills as a leader and as a mentor. Later on, Xavier admits that he would chose Storm to become the new Headmistress of the school, displaying his trust in her to lead his beloved school. And when Warren enters, and Storm stands up and defends the school, it shows that she does care and she has a duty to fulfil and a promise to her mentor to carry out.
We saw Storm go all through this, as a quiet, fearful young woman in X1, into a self-assured, proud fighter in X3.
Agreed. That's development.
Well i'm just assuming as the movie never told us and thats my point about it, we dont spend enough time with the characters.
Ok, but what would be "enough time" in a two hour movie? Honestly. Some things we would like to see...simply are not feasible. We didn't really spend "enough" time with the characters in X2 either, did we? And yet, it's hailed as one of the greatest superhero films of all time. Why? Because while we didn't spend "enough" time with characters, we spent quality time with them. I think the same could be said of X3.
But they didnt seem like peopl who had an uneasy relationship when Angel walks into the room to be cured, they looked like two people who have good relationship together. Hence the father asking "How are you son?" And then he keeps assuring him it'll all be okay. They didnt seem like two people who have had a really troubled relatioship until the moment Angel break free.
Try watching that scene again. There's obvious tension there. About the time his father starts talking to him like a child...you should be able to see the "troubled relationship" you speak of.
Your kidding with these supposed arcs right? What did we see of the Rogue/Kitty/Boboy arc, Kitty(a character we know barely anything about, hence we dont know why Bobby is attracted to her) and Bobby go skating, so Rogue goes to get the cure. ****ing terrible, not to mention comic book Rogue would NEVER take the cure. AND she went from someone gaining more and more confidence in X2 back to a scared little girl in X3, some character development that is.
Prove to me that Rogue actually gained much more "confidence" in X2. She used her powers more, to be sure. A couple pissed off stares does not character development make. Ok, she was there with the X-Men in the White House. That's great. In the one moment where her character could have grown, she was still a scared little girl, almost crying when she landed the X-Jet. She had a long way to go.
And Storm was already a strong warrior in X2, was it not she who rescued the children and stopped cerebro when Magneto switched it?
That's not neccessarily a "warrior", though. I think people wanted to see the Storm who could take a punch and throw one. The Storm who was willing to kill, who was willing to do whatever it took to get the job done. Who was take-no-prisoners. We saw her develop into that Storm in X3.
Not too mention that its ALWAYS been Scott that xavier looked to to take over the school.
Scott was a changed man.
Exactly, most of the characters in the final battle we know barely anything about, so how are we meant to give a **** about them?
You're not. This isn't SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. It's X-Men. You're not supposed to neccessarily CARE about the X-Men in the final battle, in those terms. You're supposed to care about their CAUSE. Give a **** about what they're FIGHTING for.
Fair point. But the Rogue that was set up in the end of X2 would NEVER have taken the cure, either.
Where is that ever implied?
So it's a lose-lose situation. The Rogue from the beginning of X1, maybe. But the Rogue from the end of X2? No way in hell.
Why?
Some characters just do not have huge back stories in an ensemble movie about opposing teams of people. We never really find out why Storm, Cyclops and Jean are at the school or why they do what they do (we finally get some backstory on Jean in X3), we never find out why Sabretooth, Toad and Deathstryke do what they do, we never really find out much about Nightcrawler's story and motivations except he has faith that helps him survive. Only that dialogue on the plane gives us any clue about who he is.
Exactly. People who b itch about the lack of development or character motivation in X3 amuse me, because X-MEN and X2 (and almost any ensemble film) are largely devoid of this kind of thing except for the main characters.
At the end of X2, Rogue was getting stronger. Speaking up for herself (like how she took off her glove when Magneto made a comment on her hair). She joined the X-Men at the end of the film.
Bobby was also at the White House...and what the hell did he do to deserve an X-uniform? Xavier needed bodies.
If anyone can't see that, then you obviously missed a very crucial development for this character.
Bryan Singer's films were no more about obviously developing secondary characters than Ratner's X3 was. Did Nightcrawler have any development? Cyclops? Even Magneto? These movies are, first and foremost, about who characters are and what they do and why, not neccessarily how each of them changes.
And to have Ratner just backpeddle Rogue like that was laughable. The gradual evolution of her character would for her to not accept the cure and be comfortable with her mutation, which was a recurrent theme throughout the first two movies (and at the end of the second, something Rogue was contending with).
Gradual. And predictable, and hardly impactful. Could there be a more boring, cliche end to Rogue's arc? She goes to the cure clinic line...and every audience member "knows" she won't take the cure. And then she DOES, and instead of going "aww, generic movie moment", the audience starts to think about why she did. Much more impressive, I think.
If I may put my opinions out there, I don't believe Singer was setting Rogue up to be cured in the future movies.
I'm hard-pressed to believe Singer really cared deeply about Rogue's development. He gave her some stuff to do, and a conflict, but didn't seem to interested in her actual "struggle" or development of it.
t:
