Watching X2 again, I could cry!

[flavio_lebeau]

^I could say more or less the same...

In the comics:
The original he has flesh colour and sounds like a jerk, the same with the Avengers period.
X-Factor: Hardly does a friggin' thing. And still sounds like a jerk.
New X-Men & Astonishing X-Men: He's dialogues are awesome, but he has... haha! a cat nose.
Ultimate: He's dead.
Movie Beast: Great performance and costume/suit, but any depth on his feelings? No siree.

Will I ever get my Beast? The Beast I want?

oh...

i understand the Rogue from comics and cartoons is a lot different from movie Rogue, for example, but i never wanted a huge change. I just wanted a little tougher Rogue, who could use her powers in an offensive way and get some fighting skills. No need for flying and superstrengh. But instead, they make her entire arc a circle, where she ends X3 the same way she started X1. What was all that for? she became the same person, nothing changed, this pisses me off a lot. I loved her arcs in X1 and X2, she seemed to be growing up, becoming secure in X2, but X3 regresses her in a way that makes her entire story absolutely pointless. Guess I'll have to watch TAS and remember Rogue and how i love her...


but about Beast, i think he was portrayed really well, or at least better than most other characters...if only he was my favourite...The ones i love, never, for one moment (okay maybe Rogue in the first two) get their justice...they're all screwed.

 

[chaseter]

Sorry i just figured because we are all X-Men fans we would not be pulling out the you're discriminating card it would be very hypocritical. Then again like you said every place has its couple of wackos.

Over all my point was that Rogue represents so much which is why i was dissapointed when she was cured. Yea i can totally see why she would want to be cured, but i can also see why she wouldn't and too me that outweighs the other.

In the end it's not just because how i feel about it but because having her cured does not stay true to the source.

Sorry for the misuderstanding.

I guess it all comes down to selfishness. I guess Rogue is the movies in selfish and in the comics she is not. I didn't want Rogue to be cured either...believe me...I want her to be bad @ss, but I want every character to be that way in the movies and I know it won't happen. But I do completely understand why movie Rogue would want to take the cure. I don't want to name any names but there are a couple of posters that frequent this forum that use any method of tactics...race, discrimination, stereotypes, etc...to try and validate their points.

 

[gambitfire]

That's the thing it never was a situation of it won't happen. There was a high probability it was going to happen otherwise they wouldn't have filmed it.

Just remember this Zak and Simon said in an interview, Rothman showed both alternate endings to his daughter, SHE PICKED THE ONE THAT STAYED.

HOW SAD IS THAT!

and as for using those tactics, while to an extent it may be wrong, What else do you expect them to use? that's what she stand for.

Besides that there is not much of another argument, except the simple fact that as mutant she could do so much more and probably help save lives.

 

[gambitfire]

funny how all my favorite characters got the end of the stick in these movies. Scott, Storm, Gambit and Rogue: none had their justice. I should have chosen Wolverine, Jean and Professor to be my favorites although Famke Janssen made me start to love Jean...

SAME HERE BUDDY.

for me add on Psylocke and Jean because i did not feel that she had justice done to her either. Freaking Dark Willow rip off we got.

 

[kg576094]

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.

How can Angel's role be a cameo when his character is so integral to the cure plot....without Angel there will be no motivation for the cure and therefore no cure. If Angel is a cameo then the Dark Phoenix is also a cameo in her own story arc sadly since apart from her back story, her character is so badly characterised we don't know what she's doing half the time in the movie? What is her reasons for killing Cyclops? Why did the Dark Phoenix go back to Jean's house? Why did the Dark Phoenix conviently kill Xavier while leaving the rest in the house unharmed unlike in Alcatraz Island? Why did the Dark Phoenix love Magneto and willing to be his Queen? Why did the Dark Phoenix have to kill eveyone at the end? Let's just admit the writers and director got too busy with Magneto's war and war preparation they forget about all the crucial plot details about the cure or the Dark Phoenix ?

 

[La_She-Beast]

oh...

i understand the Rogue from comics and cartoons is a lot different from movie Rogue, for example, but i never wanted a huge change. I just wanted a little tougher Rogue, who could use her powers in an offensive way and get some fighting skills. No need for flying and superstrengh. But instead, they make her entire arc a circle, where she ends X3 the same way she started X1. What was all that for? she became the same person, nothing changed, this pisses me off a lot. I loved her arcs in X1 and X2, she seemed to be growing up, becoming secure in X2, but X3 regresses her in a way that makes her entire story absolutely pointless.

Talk about idiocy... I was hoping that Ratner was going to be loyal to X1 and X2, but not so much, for god's sake! And I thought they were going to use more or less the same technique of introducing characters... but everything was just lame. It was like: "Ha! Heeeere's Callisto! Aaaaand Quill!"

Guess I'll have to watch TAS and remember Rogue and how i love her...

Lol I can't even say that... Beast with a backpack was indignant and funny to watch, and always got beaten by anything, and X-Men: Evolution... well. He doesn't do anything. Either. Loved the artist's animatin style though, compared to others.

but about Beast, i think he was portrayed really well, or at least better than most other characters...

Don't get me wrong... I thought Beast's portrayal was great... the thing is that they didn't take much advantage of what they had, the material/documentation. They've could develop something else with the relation of the cure and him, but they drived to the most obvious and left it quite unfinished. I wanted something more 'worth it', since it's his first appearence (and last, I guess)

 

[The Guard]

How can Angel's role be a cameo when his character is so integral to the cure plot....without Angel there will be no motivation for the cure and therefore no cure.

I said "essentially" a cameo. I don't, of course, think Angel is actually a cameo character. I think he's an integral part of the movie on many levels, and have said so. I think I see what you're saying, though. You're telling me Warren Worthington (Angel's father) wouldn't have sought the cure if Angel wasn't around in the movieverse. Fine, but if Angel wasn't in the movie, the writers would simply have written the cure coming from some other source. I do not feel Angel is worthless in this film at all. I thiunk he is very strongly (if not extensively) tied into the story and the thematics of the movie.

If Angel is a cameo then the Dark Phoenix is also a cameo in her own story arc sadly since apart from her back story, her character is so badly characterised we don't know what she's doing half the time in the movie?

You can see what she's doing right onscreen. What's this about "We don't know what she's doing half the time"???

What is her reasons for killing Cyclops?

Her powers went out of control.

Why did the Dark Phoenix go back to Jean's house?

She was seeking something familiar. An anchor to the life she knew. It's common when people "lose" themselves.

Why did the Dark Phoenix conviently kill Xavier while leaving the rest in the house unharmed unlike in Alcatraz Island?

Because she was angry AT Xavier. He was the one who tried to control her, and had tampered with her mind before.

Why did the Dark Phoenix love Magneto and willing to be his Queen?

There isn't neccessarily a Black Queen aspect to Phoenix's part in X3 (though I suppose if you look at Magneto as a chess king, you can make the connection). Where is this found in the movie? If anything, she showed she could destroy him if she wanted to. Why did she stay with Magneto? He wasn't trying to control her. He wanted her to reach her full potential, and that's what she wanted.

Why did the Dark Phoenix have to kill eveyone at the end?

Same reason she killed Xavier. Her power went out of control, and so did her rage.

 

[gambitfire]

I said "essentially" a cameo. I don't, of course, think Angel is actually a cameo character. I think he's an integral part of the movie on many levels, and have said so. I think I see what you're saying, though. You're telling me Warren Worthington (Angel's father) wouldn't have sought the cure if Angel wasn't around in the movieverse. Fine, but if Angel wasn't in the movie, the writers would simply have written the cure coming from some other source. I do not feel Angel is worthless in this film at all. I thiunk he is very strongly (if not extensively) tied into the story and the thematics of the movie.

I must have missed this, considering how quickly it went by.
IMO pacing killed the importance of Angel's character.

You can see what she's doing right onscreen. What's this about "We don't know what she's doing half the time"???

Yea we saw her stand there and do nothing, IT WAS A DARK WILLOW RIP OFF. She was so mindless and speechless half the film.

Her powers went out of control.

How inconsistent and convenient. THIS WAS THE ONLY TIME SHE "LOST CONTROL".

She had no reason for killing him, that we know of.

She was seeking something familiar. An anchor to the life she knew. It's common when people "lose" themselves.

This i understood, after all it happened in the source. .

Because she was angry AT Xavier. He was the one who tried to control her, and had tampered with her mind before.

This bugs me because she can read minds, in other words, she could of read Xavier's mind and read his true intentions, thus meaning it was

a. something bad that makes Xavier look two faced and evil.
b. Something good for everyone but not for the sake of Phoenix.
c. Both

There isn't neccessarily a Black Queen aspect to Phoenix's part in X3 (though I suppose if you look at Magneto as a chess king, you can make the connection). Where is this found in the movie? If anything, she showed she could destroy him if she wanted to. Why did she stay with Magneto? He wasn't trying to control her. He wanted her to reach her full potential, and that's what she wanted.

She could of done this on her own, she didn't need Magneto, and i think she knew it. Her following him was pointless. We don't even see that she actually wants to put a stop to the cure, she's clearly a mindless zombie following a cause she doesn't know and the worst part is that she can read freaking minds.

Same reason she killed Xavier. Her power went out of control, and so did her rage.

Her power was not "out of control" they where in control, by the Phoenix Persona, the same persona that spared Wolverine but not the man she loved. are we to believe that this is her evil side? Because the explanation for that is too out of left field.

In this case Young Jean must of been a little B!tc#. She sure came of as one.
They didn't even know where they were going with this did they?

 

[The Guard]

I must have missed this, considering how quickly it went by.
IMO pacing killed the importance of Angel's character.

You must have missed it indeed. Pacing doesn't kill importance of a series of sequences or a character. It might affect its moment to moment "impact", but not "important".

Yea we saw her stand there and do nothing, IT WAS A DARK WILLOW RIP OFF. She was so mindless and speechless half the film.

Define "nothing". Just because she didn't have a lot of dialogue doesn't mean she didn't do any talking. And just because she wasn't talking doesn't mean she was mindless. Famke's performance doesn't indicate this at all.

How inconsistent and convenient. THIS WAS THE ONLY TIME SHE "LOST CONTROL".

I did not say she lost control. I said her powers...went out of control. The film makes it very clear she cannot control her powers when Dark Phoenix takes over.

She had no reason for killing him, that we know of.

Xavier, or Cyclops? She definitely had a reason to kill Xavier, be it good or not. And she didn't kill Cyclops on purpose. It was essentially played as a tragic accident. Brought on by Jean Grey succumbing to a lust for power, but an accident nonthelesshis i
Quote:

She could of done this on her own, she didn't need Magneto, and i think she knew it. Her following him was pointless.

Pointless to join the Brotherhood...maybe. I don't think so, as it led to some fantastic drama from Magneto and Phoenix alike. She was pretty much drifting, in the context of the film. Storywise, it's essential to anchor her to one of the storylines. You can't have her go off on her own...or you lose most, if not all of the drama and relevance of her becoming Phoenix in the context of this film's storylines.

We don't even see that she actually wants to put a stop to the cure, she's clearly a mindless zombie following a cause she doesn't know and the worst part is that she can read freaking minds.

Maybe she doesn't CARE what happens to the cure. She's BEYOND those emotions as Dark Phoenix, caring about her fellow mutants and humans. She desires only power...and fears only being controlled. That's why when they try to shoot her with the cure, she simply atomizes them. Again...just because she's not speaking does not mean she's mindless.

Her power was not "out of control" they where in control, by the Phoenix Persona, the same persona that spared Wolverine but not the man she loved. are we to believe that this is her evil side? Because the explanation for that is too out of left field.

Dark Phoenix is not played it like Jean is actually literally controlling what happens. Clearly the power corrupts her, and combined with her rage, her power grows beyond her ability to control on any real level. She even tries to kill Wolverine as he approaches her.

In this case Young Jean must of been a little B!tc#. She sure came of as one.
They didn't even know where they were going with this did they?

No, it's pretty clear that Young Jean didn't want to be controlled...and thought she could control her immense power. That's the entire main point of that opening sequence. That the seeds for Phoenix were found in Jean's childhood.

 

[The Guard]

I must have missed this, considering how quickly it went by.
IMO pacing killed the importance of Angel's character.

You must have missed it indeed. Pacing doesn't kill importance of a series of sequences or a character. It might affect its moment to moment "impact", but not "important".

Yea we saw her stand there and do nothing, IT WAS A DARK WILLOW RIP OFF. She was so mindless and speechless half the film.

Define "nothing". Just because she didn't have a lot of dialogue doesn't mean she didn't do any talking. And just because she wasn't talking doesn't mean she was mindless. Famke's performance doesn't indicate this at all.

How inconsistent and convenient. THIS WAS THE ONLY TIME SHE "LOST CONTROL".

I did not say she lost control. I said her powers...went out of control. The film makes it very clear she cannot control her powers when Dark Phoenix takes over.

She had no reason for killing him, that we know of.

Xavier, or Cyclops? She definitely had a reason to kill Xavier, be it good or not. And she didn't kill Cyclops on purpose. It was essentially played as a tragic accident. Brought on by Jean Grey succumbing to a lust for power, but an accident nonthelesshis i
Quote:

She could of done this on her own, she didn't need Magneto, and i think she knew it. Her following him was pointless.

Pointless to join the Brotherhood...maybe. I don't think so, as it led to some fantastic drama from Magneto and Phoenix alike. She was pretty much drifting, in the context of the film. Storywise, it's essential to anchor her to one of the storylines. You can't have her go off on her own...or you lose most, if not all of the drama and relevance of her becoming Phoenix in the context of this film's storylines.

We don't even see that she actually wants to put a stop to the cure, she's clearly a mindless zombie following a cause she doesn't know and the worst part is that she can read freaking minds.

Maybe she doesn't CARE what happens to the cure. She's BEYOND those emotions as Dark Phoenix, caring about her fellow mutants and humans. She desires only power...and fears only being controlled. That's why when they try to shoot her with the cure, she simply atomizes them. Again...just because she's not speaking does not mean she's mindless.

Her power was not "out of control" they where in control, by the Phoenix Persona, the same persona that spared Wolverine but not the man she loved. are we to believe that this is her evil side? Because the explanation for that is too out of left field.

Dark Phoenix is not played it like Jean is actually literally controlling what happens. Clearly the power corrupts her, and combined with her rage, her power grows beyond her ability to control on any real level. She even tries to kill Wolverine as he approaches her.

In this case Young Jean must of been a little B!tc#. She sure came of as one.
They didn't even know where they were going with this did they?

No, it's pretty clear that Young Jean didn't want to be controlled...and thought she could control her immense power. That's the entire main point of that opening sequence. That the seeds for Phoenix were found in Jean's childhood.

 

[gambitfire]

You must have missed it indeed. Pacing doesn't kill importance of a series of sequences or a character. It might affect its moment to moment "impact", but not "important".

importance.

and yes it does and can, in this case alot of ppl not just me feel it has.
So because it didn't to you it doesn't mean it didn't too others.
Oh and it's not just the pacing it's the amount of screen time and development.

Define "nothing". Just because she didn't have a lot of dialogue doesn't mean she didn't do any talking. And just because she wasn't talking doesn't mean she was mindless. Famke's performance doesn't indicate this at all.

She was a Zombie. Nothing is when your character stops developing and stands there for the sake of a plot that tries to take over the story that seemed to have originally mattered more.

Define "nothing"?

Nothing = What Pheonix does in half the 2nd and all of the 3rd act from X3.

I did not say she lost control. I said her powers...went out of control. The film makes it very clear she cannot control her powers when Dark Phoenix takes over.

her powers went out of control............so then she must of lost control.

Read this again and think about it.

She didn't lose control of her powers......her powers lost control on their own?

Well when Dark Phoenix takes over she would not be having to control anything would she, Dark Phoenix would?

You sound very confusing now.

Xavier, or Cyclops? She definitely had a reason to kill Xavier, be it good or not. And she didn't kill Cyclops on purpose. It was essentially played as a tragic accident. Brought on by Jean Grey succumbing to a lust for power, but an accident nonthelesshis i

Cyclops.

She had no reason too, and i honestly don't by the accident bull crap.
If it happened more than once maybe but just once?
Let's face it, we all know this is a major issue there is no point in arguing it considering the politics behind it.

Pointless to join the Brotherhood...maybe. I don't think so, as it led to some fantastic drama from Magneto and Phoenix alike. She was pretty much drifting, in the context of the film. Storywise, it's essential to anchor her to one of the storylines. You can't have her go off on her own...or you lose most, if not all of the drama and relevance of her becoming Phoenix in the context of this film's storylines.

For the sake of drama?
Shouldn't it be more for the sake of the story or plot?
She shouldn't be anchored to another story line, SHE IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE STORY LINE!
This is why Singer planned on doing 2 movies for DP.

Maybe she doesn't CARE what happens to the cure. She's BEYOND those emotions as Dark Phoenix, caring about her fellow mutants and humans. She desires only power...and fears only being controlled. That's why when they try to shoot her with the cure, she simply atomizes them. Again...just because she's not speaking does not mean she's mindless.

Yea i figured she doesn't care, therefore why the hell would she even go with them.

She is now above and beyond them, why should she bother. She should know better.

If she wanted to find the X-Men she would go to them, it seem to me like she wanted to get away from them....so why join the brotherhood?

And i doubt it was to get the X-Mens attention.

Dark Phoenix is not played it like Jean is actually literally controlling what happens. Clearly the power corrupts her, and combined with her rage, her power grows beyond her ability to control on any real level. She even tries to kill Wolverine as he approaches her.

This is flawed thinking for the simple matter the She doesn't try to kill Wolverine.

If she wanted to kill Wolverine....she would of killed Wolverine.

Unless the plot hole here is that now she isn't powerful enough to kill Wolverine?

So which one is it?

Her dark persona tried to make out with Wolverine and it didn't hurt anyone unless they tried to hurt her........so why would it hurt Scott?

Because the studio said so of course.

I will give you this, she did raise the gun at Magneto. But that whole scene did not make sense.
For the simple fact that he called out to Jean and she stopped but she still looked like she was in Phoenix more.

So at this point we don't know who she is anymore

No, it's pretty clear that Young Jean didn't want to be controlled...and thought she could control her immense power. That's the entire main point of that opening sequence. That the seeds for Phoenix were found in Jean's childhood.

We can't assume that, we only had 2 minutes with Young Jean, in order for us to truly know this we would have to be side by side with Xavier while he was training her.

As far as i was concrened she was a brat(which would somewhat make sense that she didn't want to be controlled). Which is already not staying true to the source.

Yes he did mention this persona but we are still left up in the air about alot of it.

This is why i think Singer would of had a better approach.

Singer was clearly stearing for EVOLUTION, not this whole i'm an Omega level since i was 8 with a split personality.

I really disliked this whole Phoenix story they had going.

I while ago i actually thought it was new and interesting but when i think about the direction it was heading the hints they had dropped and everything they had developed then it no longer makes sense when taking the previous movies into consideration.

Singer had a clear emphasis on EVOLUTION.

So while in X3 it may be clear where they where going with it even though the go into too many places, the previous movies did not necesserily head in this direction.


Making it a split personality in this sense too me made things unnecessarily confusing, of course we all know it was for the sake of the movie that everything conveniently plays out. Just to make Wolverine the hero.

 

[xii22_loop]

somebody needs to find Bryan Singer and just ask him what exactly he had planned. (i know he said ebfore he wrote only like half of a treatement for it but that still means hes got ideas about lots of stuff involving the Phoenix and whatever).

We need to find him and ask him!



and then we'll all end up discusing what we like, and imagine how it would look, and yes there would probably be people who get agrivated and don't like the ideas and try to agrue and stuff, but yeah.

 

[TKing]

Singer had a clear emphasis on EVOLUTION.

So while in X3 it may be clear where they where going with it even though the go into too many places, the previous movies did not necesserily head in this direction.

It's true, Singer did emphasise Evolution. But Jean's monologue at the end of X2 suggests, as X-Maniac has set in another thread, that she has evolved so much where all barriers are broken. She has evolved into a new species of power, and that is where the psychic blocks come in, to contain this evolution.

 

[gambitfire]

Soo he suggested the she evolved beyond the point where the already set-up blocks where broken.

OK well that would be fine but the movie never left it open for that kind of interpretation.

The movie clearly puts it that "the beast was awoken".

As in she didn't become more powerful she simply tapt into power she already had.

 

[X-Maniac]

Soo he suggested the she evolved beyond the point where the already set-up blocks where broken.

OK well that would be fine but the movie never left it open for that kind of interpretation.

The movie clearly puts it that "the beast was awoken".

As in she didn't become more powerful she simply tapt into power she already had.

Xavier says Jean's 'potential' is virtually limitless. Not her powers, but her potential. In other words, her power can expand and expand and expand...

She clearly had evolved. Compare her powers as a child to what she was doing on Alcatraz. She even evolved within X3 itself. She went from lifting cars as a child to being able to destroy matter at a molecular level, create impenetrable force fields to stop the darts and raise all the water around the island. She was evolution for sure, a power that could expand and destroy everything.

Xavier tried to contain the power and he managed it for many years, but it got to the point where he could not. Something happened at Liberty Island, we are never told what. Could be that the blocks were broken, the Phoenix starting to reawaken. She was so powerful in X3 he couldn't put the blocks back in her mind, so she must have evolved since he first put them in.

 

[gambitfire]

but you just said not her power her potential was virtuasly limitless.
meaning her power does not necessarily expand it's just harnessed with skill.

She didn't necessarily evolve she just had more "control" or atleast knew how to do much more. In this case not her but the Phoenix.

Now that i look at it, it makes less sense, the double persona thing makes it confusing.

In other words only her evil side can tap into her greater power, The only thing that backed Jean up was the professor stating how she was hesitant of her powers.

Again you keep bringing up the cars excuse but i told you already SHE EFFORTLESSLEY LIFTED THOSE CARS WE DON'T KNOW THAT AS A CHILD IF SHE HAD ALREADY HAD THE RIGHT TRAINING THAT SHE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO WHAT SHE DID WHEN SHE WAS OLDER!!!.



Oh and yea while he couldn't put the blocks in X3 because she was powerful it may also be because she was fighting back and was not so much powerful but if not MORE EXPERIENCED, enough to stop Xavier, after all when he put them there she was unexperienced and probably didn't resist as much.

But we don't know if that for sure, just pointing out this as it seems like an apparent inconsistent in between movies.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

How can Angel's role be a cameo when his character is so integral to the cure plot....without Angel there will be no motivation for the cure and therefore no cure. If Angel is a cameo then the Dark Phoenix is also a cameo in her own story arc sadly since apart from her back story, her character is so badly characterised we don't know what she's doing half the time in the movie? What is her reasons for killing Cyclops? Why did the Dark Phoenix go back to Jean's house? Why did the Dark Phoenix conviently kill Xavier while leaving the rest in the house unharmed unlike in Alcatraz Island? Why did the Dark Phoenix love Magneto and willing to be his Queen? Why did the Dark Phoenix have to kill eveyone at the end? Let's just admit the writers and director got too busy with Magneto's war and war preparation they forget about all the crucial plot details about the cure or the Dark Phoenix ?

Exactly, that shows how pathetically incompetent they all are, what an oppurtunity missed this movie was.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

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.

Really? So we dont find out about Nightcrawler that he is a strong believer of God, someone who pity's normal humans, and also someone who would never commit the act of violence in the White House without being driven to do it and that he is actually a very frightened and calm individual. We also find out he is willing to help people who fear him, or who he doesnt know (Rogue, the X-kids). And we find out he has a slight cheekiness to him "I coulds take a closer look."

And certain words from Xavier in X1 tell us everything about students at the school. "Most are runaways......some with powers so extreme they've become a danger to others and themselves." That explains all we need to know about most of the mutants at the school. Also "Storm, Jean and Scott were some of my first students." Meaning they have been their a while and were some of the first to face the fear and anomosity of normal humans.

Some characters exist as what is called a 'foil' - a secondary character who helps us understand a major character by providing a contrast. Nightcrawler's faith contrasts with Storm's apparent lack of it, and she later appears to have found some faith at the end when she and Kurt teleport into Dark Cerebro. It's a fairly small, some might say feeble, example of character growth but it is there.

Kitty is similarly there to provide a contrast to Rogue, to incite a change in Rogue's character. The scenes with Bobby made Rogue do something dramatic. Thus, Kitty served her purpose in the storyline in creating a character development in Rogue - who decided to get cured. (Regardless of whether you agree with Rogue taking the cure - and i don't - that was Kitty's main storyline purpose and it's as clear as day).

Yes but we need to know more about these foils. Why exactly is Bobby attracted to Kitty? We never know, if its just because he can touch her then he should be attracted to every woman at the school. We get to know plenty about both Storm and NC in X2 so we know why their views differ.

I know you are very fond of SR and how you appear to be able to read things into scenes when we are not actually told anything, you know you often have to imagine how someone is thinking, how Superman felt when he found Krypton's remains, what Lois might have felt while he was gone. There wasn't a lot of information if i recall correctly. So you must also do the same in other movies, including X3, when the information isn't handed to you directly.

I know you have only seen SR once, so i'll go easy on you, but those things are clear as day in SR. Did you miss the scene were Superman is flying over NK with an extremely disgusted and pissed off look on his face, or where he lands and surveys his surroundings with the same look on his face, or where he says to Lex "I see an old mans sick joke!"

Also its obvious from Lois's reaction to Supermans return how she felt about him leaving. Her anger and anomisity towards him shows she felt hurt, alone and angry at him for leaving, also the fact that she wrote the pulitzer article "Why the world doesnt need Superman" Shows her bitterness towards him, not to mention the way the line "How could you leave us like that?" says a lot also. You need to watch SR again my friend.

Angel has obviously had wings growing for ten years. His father's been trying to find a cure, because he has the financial resources to do it, but since there has been no way to get rid of the wings, Angel has had them all this time and is probably not continually hacking himself to pieces in the bathroom. He had learned how to conceal them with straps and a big coat, he had got on with his life for ten years. Warren's dad's search for the cure is like the parents of a gay teenager trying desperately to get their son/daughter to go to counselling or electric shock therapy or to get them married or in a straight relationship. In the end it's like forcing that person to deny what they actually are. And usually they snap and in a dramatic outburst, they make a big decision. Which is what happened with Angel in the movie. He came out, he decided he wasn't going to have any more of these endless attempts to make him 'normal'.

But why all of a sudden does he decide to come out. Gay people who do come out often have a reason for it, the influence of others like them, falling in love, or a certain experience. But we dont know this with Angel we never get to find out, and IMO thats poor filmmaking. Also the fact that your using words like obviously and probably show we are given very little info in the scene. What makes suddenly decide to give up a persecution free life? We never find out.

 

[X-Maniac]

Really? So we dont find out about Nightcrawler that he is a strong believer of God, someone who pity's normal humans, and also someone who would never commit the act of violence in the White House without being driven to do it and that he is actually a very frightened and calm individual. We also find out he is willing to help people who fear him, or who he doesnt know (Rogue, the X-kids). And we find out he has a slight cheekiness to him "I coulds take a closer look." .

Yes, there are clues to Nightcrawler's character but not his backstory of how a Munich circus acrobat ended up sleeping in a Boston church (where he had obviously been for some time, before being used by Stryker, as there were circus posters on the church wall).

And certain words from Xavier in X1 tell us everything about students at the school. "Most are runaways......some with powers so extreme they've become a danger to others and themselves." That explains all we need to know about most of the mutants at the school. Also "Storm, Jean and Scott were some of my first students." Meaning they have been their a while and were some of the first to face the fear and anomosity of normal humans..

Except Storm still has her fear in X1 and still has her fear and animosity/anger in X2 (the scene with Nightcrawler indicates she believes the school is where they feel safe from the world, and she says anger can help with survival). We don't know why she feels that way - and she feels that way after a considerable time at the school. Scott and Jean noticeably do not feel the same fear and anger. We just don't know why.

Yes but we need to know more about these foils. Why exactly is Bobby attracted to Kitty? We never know, if its just because he can touch her then he should be attracted to every woman at the school. We get to know plenty about both Storm and NC in X2 so we know why their views differ.

Kitty and Boby are thrown together by circumstances (both in the X-Men) and an affectionate friendship. What matters more is Rogue's perception of it. She is jealous and sees in Kitty/Bobby's hug what could be, what a normal relationship might feel like, it makes her feel even more of an outsider, even more 'abnormal'.

I know you have only seen SR once, so i'll go easy on you, but those things are clear as day in SR. Did you miss the scene were Superman is flying over NK with an extremely disgusted and pissed off look on his face, or where he lands and surveys his surroundings with the same look on his face, or where he says to Lex "I see an old mans sick joke!"

Also its obvious from Lois's reaction to Supermans return how she felt about him leaving. Her anger and anomisity towards him shows she felt hurt, alone and angry at him for leaving, also the fact that she wrote the pulitzer article "Why the world doesnt need Superman" Shows her bitterness towards him, not to mention the way the line "How could you leave us like that?" says a lot also. You need to watch SR again my friend..

I'd rather not watch SR again. Once was enough. I meant his reaction to the discovery of Krypton's remains and his reaction to seeing Krypton's remains, but the whole Krypton sequence (which defines the movie) is missing. The arguments for the movie's failure as a Superman movie are well known, and well explained on the SR forum. The fact Warner wants a lower budget sequel with more action says it all.

But why all of a sudden does he decide to come out. Gay people who do come out often have a reason for it, the influence of others like them, falling in love, or a certain experience. But we dont know this with Angel we never get to find out, and IMO thats poor filmmaking. Also the fact that your using words like obviously and probably show we are given very little info in the scene. What makes suddenly decide to give up a persecution free life? We never find out.

He's strapped to a trolley, with a needle coming at him. It's a now or never moment. Simple.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Yes, there are clues to Nightcrawler's character but not his backstory of how a Munich circus acrobat ended up sleeping in a Boston church (where he had obviously been for some time, before being used by Stryker, as there were circus posters on the church wall).

But we didnt need all of that in the context of the movie did we? We found out enough about him for one movie, he has faith, is almost a pacifist, worked in a circus, is german, is often afraid and we learn the limits of his powers ("No, i have to be able to see were i'm going or i could wind up inside a wall.") We learn practically nothing of Angel.

Except Storm still has her fear in X1 and still has her fear and animosity/anger in X2 (the scene with Nightcrawler indicates she believes the school is where they feel safe from the world, and she says anger can help with survival). We don't know why she feels that way - and she feels that way after a considerable time at the school. Scott and Jean noticeably do not feel the same fear and anger. We just don't know why.

Well, another quote from Xavier in the first movie tells a lot about those 3 characters also. "Jean, Scott and Storm were some of my first students, I protected them (indicating they needed to be protected from something, most probably people), taught them to control their powers (indicating they had trouble doing so), and in time teach others to do the same." Storm has her fair because she afraid of people, she says this clearly in X1. And people like Senator Kelly make it clear why Storm is afraid of people "If it were up to me i'd lock 'em all away." There are so many Senator Kelly's in the world it is easy to see why Storm is afraid.

Now it is true that we dont find out why Cyclops and Jean are not afraid, but we also see that Jean very rarely goes out on missions. Storm and Cyclops both go on three what you would call 'missions,' while Jean goes on one, and she doesnt encounter any humans on it either. The only time she sees how humans react is at the conference at the start and admittedly she looks afraid when Kelly goes on his rant. Cyclops is the leader and so wont show fear, he also seems the biggest advocate of Xaviers ways.

Also, you do know Singer was going to shoot, Cyclops, Storm and Jean origin scene's in X1 before Fox cut the budget back dont you?

Kitty and Boby are thrown together by circumstances (both in the X-Men) and an affectionate friendship. What matters more is Rogue's perception of it. She is jealous and sees in Kitty/Bobby's hug what could be, what a normal relationship might feel like, it makes her feel even more of an outsider, even more 'abnormal'.

But Bobby has never shown any affection towards Kitty before, so why does he all of a sudden find her attractive? Because she misses the first snow? Sure she may have saved his life in the Danger Room, but she is supposed to as they are both part of the team. Why does Bobby go to her room and not stay with Rogue?

I'd rather not watch SR again. Once was enough. I meant his reaction to the discovery of Krypton's remains and his reaction to seeing Krypton's remains, but the whole Krypton sequence (which defines the movie) is missing. The arguments for the movie's failure as a Superman movie are well known, and well explained on the SR forum. The fact Warner wants a lower budget sequel with more action says it all.

Warners wants a lower budget because many of the rigs and SFX used in SR dont have to be R&D'd. and if you dont want to watch SR again then stick with this plot hole, inconsistisy ridden piece of ****.

He's strapped to a trolley, with a needle coming at him. It's a now or never moment. Simple.

He's strapped to a trolly? Ha ha what a lame excuse, you forget about the part were he breaks free within about 5 seconds? Not to mention as soon as he says stop, Dr. Rao does so. Again poor excuses show that they didnt show enough in the movie.

 

[X-Maniac]

But we didnt need all of that in the context of the movie did we? We found out enough about him for one movie, he has faith, is almost a pacifist, worked in a circus, is german, is often afraid and we learn the limits of his powers ("No, i have to be able to see were i'm going or i could wind up inside a wall.") We learn practically nothing of Angel.

You cannot expect Angel to equate to Nightcrawler - this isn't a formula you can apply to characters. Nightcrawler was a secondary character, Angel was a tertiary character, an extended cameo. There are many more characters in X3 than in X2 because it X3 intended to show a wider mutant world existing, which was necessary to then lead into Magneto's building of a mutant army so that the story arcs could move towards a climax. It's impossible to imagine a mutant army existing within the story structure of X2, because the story was smaller and involved covert activities, background actions, simmering tensions and a Brotherhood of a massive two members right till Pyro joins at the end - it was all about things going on in secret and behind the scenes. X3 isn't.

Regarding Angel, we do see that Angel as a child tried to hack his wings off, locked in the bathroom with an array of knives. We see his father's shock and disappointment, we see Warren hiding himself from his father's reaction. This scene then cuts straight into the opening credits showing scientific research, linking Angel to the cure. We then see Worthington Labs, implying a large industry run by Angel's father, who is therefore motivated to find a cure. We see Angel as an adult, we see his reluctance as he enters that room and is strapped down. We also see his full wings neatly hidden under his coat, they are not hacked off, therefore he has learned to live with them and try to lead a normal life. We see a decision made - a 'coming out' - as the cure presents a life-changing choice, a 'now or never' moment. He bursts free. He then seeks a place of safety. He later appears at Alcatraz, saving his father...showing that what his father considered a disease can be wonderful, life-saving, a gift. He appears literally and unexpectedly like an angel, as they do in religious texts.

Angel was the symbol of the cure (in fact, the reason for it). He stands for everything that is different, and for the fact that it can be angelic and beautiful to be different, to be a mutant. His role is also symbolic of freedom (when he flies past Leech's containment room) and a wider acceptance of mutants (flying over SF at the end).

For a cameo role, he played a vital and symbolic part in the story. If you cannot see that, you need to watch it again. We've gone over and over and over and over Angel's role on here. I do not know why I have to explain it again. It should be obvious by now, if you had any comprehension skills. If you can read subtexts and themes in SR, then you sure as hell are capable of reading them in X3.

Well, another quote from Xavier in the first movie tells a lot about those 3 characters also. "Jean, Scott and Storm were some of my first students, I protected them (indicating they needed to be protected from something, most probably people), taught them to control their powers (indicating they had trouble doing so), and in time teach others to do the same." Storm has her fair because she afraid of people, she says this clearly in X1. And people like Senator Kelly make it clear why Storm is afraid of people "If it were up to me i'd lock 'em all away." There are so many Senator Kelly's in the world it is easy to see why Storm is afraid.

Someone with Storm's powers and proud, regal background does not need to be afraid. The movie screwed her up, simple as that. She is not a simpering, wimpering scaredycat, she has a dramatic power over the elements. The X-Men movie writers failed to grasp the character's unique perspective. And so do you. Her fear makes no sense, within the movie itself and when compared with the source material. Storm is not a timid mouse. End of that.

Now it is true that we dont find out why Cyclops and Jean are not afraid, but we also see that Jean very rarely goes out on missions. Storm and Cyclops both go on three what you would call 'missions,' while Jean goes on one, and she doesnt encounter any humans on it either. The only time she sees how humans react is at the conference at the start and admittedly she looks afraid when Kelly goes on his rant. Cyclops is the leader and so wont show fear, he also seems the biggest advocate of Xaviers ways. Also, you do know Singer was going to shoot, Cyclops, Storm and Jean origin scene's in X1 before Fox cut the budget back dont you?

They wanted to shoot origins for Storm and Cyclops. Both origins are in the novelisation. They were cut but it's still no excuse for not including something more in the dialogue.

But Bobby has never shown any affection towards Kitty before, so why does he all of a sudden find her attractive? Because she misses the first snow? Sure she may have saved his life in the Danger Room, but she is supposed to as they are both part of the team. Why does Bobby go to her room and not stay with Rogue?

Circumstances dear boy, circumstances. You are very unworldly and seem to know little of how things work in real life. It's probably because you, like many on here, are very young and spend too much time in front of the computer! Straight men locked up together in prisons end up having same-sex relationships because of the situation, how shocking and out of nowhere is that!

Bobby and Kitty are in each other's company more because of the fact that she, and also Colossus, are being trained to be full X-Men members in this movie. Circumstances push them closer together. There is an affectionate friendship there, clearly shown when he takes her out on the pond. And perhaps their hormones are raging as teenagers' hormones do. They share some nice moments that do not amount to anything but are perceived by Rogue as what she wants to have - the ability to hug and touch with no fears. Bobby is quite entitled to flirt, it's what teenage kids do, and he was quick enough to flirt with her when she arrived. Don't be so judgemental and fixed about everything.

Warners wants a lower budget because many of the rigs and SFX used in SR dont have to be R&D'd. and if you dont want to watch SR again then stick with this plot hole, inconsistisy ridden piece of ****.

Keep dreaming. Bryan already had to be reined in with the budget on SR, it was wildly overblown considering the end result. Millions spent on sequences that were never seen. He was given far too much freedom. More control and discipline is needed - look at the amount X1 was made for, it's quite possible to use money in a better way than he did on SR. That Krypton sequence would have made a massive difference and also set up a sci-fi element to the movie, making it easier to introduce more sci-fi outer space stuff in the sequel. For the sequel to suddenly be more sci-fi is a vast change in direction from the human melodrama of the first movie. Also, Warners are insisting on more action, which effectively says the first movie didn't have enough dynamism (which is a widespread criticism).

He's strapped to a trolly? Ha ha what a lame excuse, you forget about the part were he breaks free within about 5 seconds? Not to mention as soon as he says stop, Dr. Rao does so. Again poor excuses show that they didnt show enough in the movie.

Quite clearly, he broke free and swiped aside the guards in an unexpected show of his strength, a reaction created by the adrenaline of stress. His father's shocked reaction at his son's massive outstretched wings showed this was something new that hadn't been seen before. Part of his coming out, becoming an adult, standing proudly as a mutant and realising the extent of his powers. Simple. And obvious.

He was a tertiary character. We saw what we needed to see. You need to buy some of those 'dot to dot' puzzle books so that you can learn to connect the dots on screen as well.

 

[chaseter]

but you just said not her power her potential was virtuasly limitless.
meaning her power does not necessarily expand it's just harnessed with skill.

She didn't necessarily evolve she just had more "control" or atleast knew how to do much more. In this case not her but the Phoenix.

Now that i look at it, it makes less sense, the double persona thing makes it confusing.

In other words only her evil side can tap into her greater power, The only thing that backed Jean up was the professor stating how she was hesitant of her powers.

Again you keep bringing up the cars excuse but i told you already SHE EFFORTLESSLEY LIFTED THOSE CARS WE DON'T KNOW THAT AS A CHILD IF SHE HAD ALREADY HAD THE RIGHT TRAINING THAT SHE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO WHAT SHE DID WHEN SHE WAS OLDER!!!.



Oh and yea while he couldn't put the blocks in X3 because she was powerful it may also be because she was fighting back and was not so much powerful but if not MORE EXPERIENCED, enough to stop Xavier, after all when he put them there she was unexperienced and probably didn't resist as much.

But we don't know if that for sure, just pointing out this as it seems like an apparent inconsistent in between movies.

I agree. Jean as a girl had the same powers as she did when she was older...she just didn't know how to harnass them yet. After the Professor placed the mental blocks to keep her from that vast and limitless power potential, another persona developed...much like people with schizophrenia...only they can ash people and lay waste to cities. Only the evil side, The Phoenix, can tap into that power because that was what it was used to, blocked away behind those mental walls. Jean couldn't use it because she had no access to it. That is why she was sometimes weak and unable to control her powers, unlike when she was a child and could effortlessly lift cars as compared to her struggling to destroy a missle in X2. But that is what we have to assume due to X3. If Singer had done X3, then maybe the evolution and Liberty Island incident might have pointed us in a different direction regarding Phoenix. But for what we have and the trilogy we got, that is what we must assume.

 

[X-Maniac]

I agree. Jean as a girl had the same powers as she did when she was older...she just didn't know how to harnass them yet. After the Professor placed the mental blocks to keep her from that vast and limitless power potential, another persona developed...much like people with schizophrenia...only they can ash people and lay waste to cities. Only the evil side, The Phoenix, can tap into that power because that was what it was used to, blocked away behind those mental walls. Jean couldn't use it because she had no access to it. That is why she was sometimes weak and unable to control her powers, unlike when she was a child and could effortlessly lift cars as compared to her struggling to destroy a missle in X2. But that is what we have to assume due to X3. If Singer had done X3, then maybe the evolution and Liberty Island incident might have pointed us in a different direction regarding Phoenix. But for what we have and the trilogy we got, that is what we must assume.

The concept of evolution was still present.

Magneto mentions that he and Xavier thought they had found the next stage in evolution, meaning that Jean had always appeared to represent an evolutionary leap.

Also, Jean's powers do seem to evolve. As a child she lifted cars (we don't know if she could atomise matter), but as Dark Phoenix her powers at the end of the movie, on Alcatraz island, seemed to be much more extreme than earlier in the movie. The implication was that her power would keep expanding until SF was destroyed and then eventually the world was destroyed.

 

[chaseter]

The concept of evolution was still present.

Magneto mentions that he and Xavier thought they had found the next stage in evolution, meaning that Jean had always appeared to represent an evolutionary leap.

Also, Jean's powers do seem to evolve. As a child she lifted cars (we don't know if she could atomise matter), but as Dark Phoenix her powers at the end of the movie, on Alcatraz island, seemed to be much more extreme than earlier in the movie. The implication was that her power would keep expanding until SF was destroyed and then eventually the world was destroyed.

"THOUGHT" we had found the next stage in evolution. That statement could go either way. Plus evolution doesn't create multiple personalities. I am not arguing that Jean could not be the next stage in evolution...she certainly could be, she certainly could be and represent a new form of mutant, a newer, more powerful form of mutancy. I am arguing that evolution didn't occur to her within the stem of her lifetime. She was born with those powers, albeit she would learn how to use them with time, practice, knowledge, and experience.

 

[X-Maniac]

"THOUGHT" we had found the next stage in evolution. That statement could go either way. Plus evolution doesn't create multiple personalities. I am not arguing that Jean could not be the next stage in evolution...she certainly could be, she certainly could be and represent a new form of mutant, a newer, more powerful form of mutancy. I am arguing that evolution didn't occur to her within the stem of her lifetime. She was born with those powers, albeit she would learn how to use them with time, practice, knowledge, and experience.

Yes, evolution does not create multiple personalities. Mental blocks did. Surely you don't need reminding of this?

In X1, before she was ever exposed to Magneto's machine, she tells Xavier 'my power is expanding all the time' (I'm not sure if it's a deleted scene or not, but it shows that various ideas were being layered into the story).

I believe her power was evolving in X3. The way she was at Alcatraz island seemed way beyond what she did as a child. It might be argued she could do all that as a child, or had the potential to do all that, but we weren't shown that. We saw her lifting the water of a hosepipe, whereas at the end she was lifting the water of the bay hundreds (thousands?) of feet into the air. That's what i think anyway. She was evolving beyond anything Xavier could control - he was unable to put the blocks back into her at her parents' house.