What did Bryan Singer think of X3?

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I'll check that magazine out tomorrow....but it's worth bearing in mind:

1. I doubt HE felt the movie was lacklustre, he had top billing and got what he wanted out of it

Just because an actor gets top billing doesnt mean he is happy with the end product, the way he dodged the question, led to believe his thoughts on the movie werent so positive. This is just an assumption based on his answer of course.

2. The opening weekend for the film was incredible and record-breaking, not at all lacklustre

It was more the fan reaction they were referring to, not the money it made.

3. Even the film as a whole doesn't have a 'lacklustre' reception, it had a mixed reaction (which is fair enough) and bitterness has festered among hardcore fans in the period after the film, for various reasons such as what happened with Cyclops (and Rogue) and because the film was, in many ways, so conclusive and final - fanboys like to be left being able to imagine more, so they can obsess about possibilities endlessly with feverish anticipation.

I'd have to disagree, from what I have seen and heard, on and off these boards, X3 was seen as a dissapointment by the majority of people after the first 2. I havent surveyed everyone who has seen it, but just general comments I pick up when I have asked people what they thought. I know people who have hated it in on first viewing and grown to tolerate it since, and others who liked it at first but then have come to hate it over repeat viewings. And there has been the odd one or two who loved it. But overall, the reception I see tends to be dissapointment.

You can see how tiny bits of information or milliseconds of footage are dissected on this forum (such as the Wolverine movie threads) - people love to be excited about what's coming. They don't like it when it seems to be over and when some characters have been written out.

Love it or loathe it, The Last Stand was intended to close off the trilogy and wrap up storylines. The mainstream aren't so bothered about that, but fanboys hate that because they are used to comic book storylines that always return to the status quo (no one ever really dies or whatever in comics, nothing stays final).

To be honest X-M, Rothman basically stated beforehand this would be the closure to the trilogy, or even team-movies, so I dont think that factors in to why people dislike it, as we all knew this from before seeing it.

I'm sure Hugh is aware of online reactions but I am not surprised that, with his movie coming out in a couple of months, he is not entering into debate over the movie that spawned this spin-off. It would be dangerous ground to tread on. The Last Stand is part of the Blu-ray trilogy set being reissued as part of the promotional push for Wolverine so I can see why he might want to avoid being drawn into debate on the previous movies!

Yeah, this i'll agree with, i'm sure he doesnt want to badmouth it with Wolverine on the horizon, but overall, speaking personally, I would have liked him to be honest about it. The way he totally dodged the question indicated to me he wanted to say more about how he felt the movie turned out.

 

[X-Maniac]

Well, that's all a lot of assumptions of course. You don't know why he 'dodged the question', if that is indeed what he did. I haven't even seen the interview yet so I can't judge it for myself. Even so, you can't 'imagine' an answer where he gave no answer, if indeed that's what he did. So, we're back to square one.

EDIT: Just remembered the interviews where Famke spoke out... Look how long it took for her to say anything negative about X3. I really don't think you will see anything negative out of Hugh at this point!

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well, that's all a lot of assumptions of course. You don't know why he 'dodged the question', if that is indeed what he did. I haven't even seen the interview yet so I can't judge it for myself. Even so, you can't 'imagine' an answer where he gave no answer, if indeed that's what he did. So, we're back to square one.

EDIT: Just remembered the interviews where Famke spoke out... Look how long it took for her to say anything negative about X3. I really don't think you will see anything negative out of Hugh at this point!

True, maybe once he is done with Wolverine as a franchise we will hear his honest thoughts, you're right about my thoughts being assumptions, but they were based on the answer he gave and the way he dodged it, IMO he would have openly praised it if he was happy with the end product. But again, this is an assumption, just one based on his response.

 

[Legion]

Jackman was the leading man in X3. Fans biggest complaint in the movie was the way Cyclops and Jean were handled. Hugh is human, acting is his career, and he wants to move foward with it.

You think he's going to say, "Yea, the movie probably would have turned out better if my character took a back seat, we didn't have a hack director or Fox interfering all the time. By the way ,X-Men origins: Wolverine is going to be fantastic! You need to see it to believe it!"

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^If they had made the movie long enough though, Wolverine could still have had top billing, and the best scene's, but it would have been Cyclops 'saving' Jean at the end, the man she loved. A 2 hr 10 min movie, would have had more than enough time for big roles for everyone who already did, and a couple of others.

I wouldnt have expected him to say that either, just an answer like "In hindsight, we wanted to do a lot more, but the time constraints really restricted what we wanted to do with the story, and this is probably why many fans ended up dissapointed."

Something like this would have been a more than diplomatic response. As one of the people who was dissapointed greatly by X3, I was eager to hear his honest thoughts, thats all.

 

[Theweepeople]

Didnt know were else to post this, but has anyone in the UK read the new issue of Total Film and the interview with Hugh?

He totally dodges a question about "the lacklustre reception to X-Men:the Last Stand."

I totally agree with this statement. The opening weekend gross is attributed to all the hype that had been building from the success of X1 and X2. Having a huge second weekend dropoff and losing the #1 spot to a lackluster comedy proves that the film had very little replay value.

In order to get a better understanding of how lackluster X-Men 3 was I decided to compare it's opening boxoffice gross to summer films released in the past 10 years. What I discovered on Boxofficemojo is very interesting.


http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=05&p=.htm

*For the month of May X-Men 3 is the only film with an opening weekend gross greater than 100million that doesn't break the 300million barrier.

*7 of the films on this list had weaker opening weekends than X3 and still outgrossed it.

*X-Men 3 made only 6 million less than Shrek 2/Star Wars 3 and 12million less than Pirates 3/Spiderman for the opening weekend yet all of these films outgrossed X3 by at least 75million(pirates 3). The other 3 films(Star Wars, Shrek, and Spiderman) each individually outgrossed X3 by at least 146million)

*3 films(X2, Davinci Code, MI2) with weaker opening weekends that X3 should have owned at the box office had total grosses that were only 19.4mil, 16.8mil, and 19mil less.


http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=06&p=.htm

*For the month of June there are 2 films with weaker opening weekends than X3 that outgrossed it.

*2 films with significantly lower opening weekends than X3 were only outgrossed by 18.9mil and 10.5mil.


http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=07&p=.htm

*There are 4 films(Spidey2,Harry Potter,Pirates 1,Transformers) on this list that outgrossed X3 inspite of having weaker opening weekends.

*3 of the 4 above films made more than 300million domestically. Harry Potter made only 8million less than 300million. All four films outgrossed X3 by at least 57.7million.

*3 films with much smaller opening weekends than X3 were outgrossed by only 100,000(War of the Worlds), 6.4mil(Hancock), and 21mil(Austin Powers 3)

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=08&p=.htm

*There is one movie on this list that outgrossed X3 inspite of a weaker opening weekend(Sixth Sense). This film outgrossed X3 by 59.2million and unlike X3 it got close to breaking the 300million barrier.

*3 films(Bourne 3, Signs, Rush Hour 2) with smaller opening weekends than X3 were outgrossed by only 6.9mil, 8.4mil, and 6.6mil.

 

[X-Maniac]

Hugh Jackman was being asked about lacklustre FAN RECEPTION not box office.

However, interesting statistics. I don't think anyone's arguing that the film needed to be longer and better, to support the weight of its multiple characters and momentous storylines.

Additionally, the FACTS of what happened in the movie - such as Cyclops dying, Rogue being cured - didn't help with fan reaction. But I have less problem with these factual details than with the time/depth they were given. If you are going to do dramatic things, then make them matter to the audience. Hence my regular calls for an extended edition. Just another 15minutes would help tremendously.

 

[Archangel_Death]

One thing is for sure, Singer's X3 would have been a FAR better movie than the absolute garbage we ultimately ended up with, its just shame it'll never be made. But its nice to see their ideas, just reading those ideas was better than watching X3 for me.

Agreed. And it definitely would have been better than Superman Returns.

Marlon Brando's sound clips of Jor-El were the best part of the film. Or was it when the credits started rolling?

 

[Theweepeople]

Hugh Jackman was being asked about lacklustre FAN RECEPTION not box office.

The reason I posted those statistics is because fan reception and box office correlate(typically versely proportional) with each other. Hugh may not have been asked about what he thought of X3's boxoffice gross however, my statistics are still relevant in regards to the question.


My statistics are also relevant to the following response "2. The opening weekend for the film was incredible and record-breaking, not at all lacklustre" you gave on the previous page to the same statement I was responding to. My statistics show that inspite of having an amazing opening weekend the film's total domestic gross is at best lackluster and at worst pathetic.


I find part of your response to my post to be quite bizzare because your response to AVEITWITHJAMON's post addressed X3's opening box office gross yet you suggest that my box office gross information is irrelevant.

 

[warmachine300]

Actually Bryan Singer loved it. Theres an interview online where he speaks of it. I actually preferred X3 to the first two X-men anyway. I think Rattner did a great job considering all the mess Bryan Singer left when he departed.

 

[X-Maniac]

The reason I posted those statistics is because fan reception and box office correlate(typically versely proportional) with each other. Hugh may not have been asked about what he thought of X3's boxoffice gross however, my statistics are still relevant in regards to the question.


My statistics are also relevant to the following response "2. The opening weekend for the film was incredible and record-breaking, not at all lacklustre" you gave on the previous page to the same statement I was responding to. My statistics show that inspite of having an amazing opening weekend the film's total domestic gross is at best lackluster and at worst pathetic.


I find part of your response to my post to be quite bizzare because your response to AVEITWITHJAMON's post addressed X3's opening box office gross yet you suggest that my box office gross information is irrelevant.

I sense you are trying to pick a fight. However, what I meant was that Jackman was asked about 'lacklustre fan reaction'. I had made that earlier comment about record-breaking box office when - like you - I also misread/misunderstood what Hugh was asked. In his response to what I had said, AVEITWITHJAMON pointed out that it was about fan reception, not box office.

I'm not dismissing your figures as totally irrelevant, I'm pointing out that the original question and issue was about fan reception not box office.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I totally agree with this statement. The opening weekend gross is attributed to all the hype that had been building from the success of X1 and X2. Having a huge second weekend dropoff and losing the #1 spot to a lackluster comedy proves that the film had very little replay value.

In order to get a better understanding of how lackluster X-Men 3 was I decided to compare it's opening boxoffice gross to summer films released in the past 10 years. What I discovered on Boxofficemojo is very interesting.


http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=05&p=.htm

*For the month of May X-Men 3 is the only film with an opening weekend gross greater than 100million that doesn't break the 300million barrier.

*7 of the films on this list had weaker opening weekends than X3 and still outgrossed it.

*X-Men 3 made only 6 million less than Shrek 2/Star Wars 3 and 12million less than Pirates 3/Spiderman for the opening weekend yet all of these films outgrossed X3 by at least 75million(pirates 3). The other 3 films(Star Wars, Shrek, and Spiderman) each individually outgrossed X3 by at least 146million)

*3 films(X2, Davinci Code, MI2) with weaker opening weekends that X3 should have owned at the box office had total grosses that were only 19.4mil, 16.8mil, and 19mil less.


http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=06&p=.htm

*For the month of June there are 2 films with weaker opening weekends than X3 that outgrossed it.

*2 films with significantly lower opening weekends than X3 were only outgrossed by 18.9mil and 10.5mil.


http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=07&p=.htm

*There are 4 films(Spidey2,Harry Potter,Pirates 1,Transformers) on this list that outgrossed X3 inspite of having weaker opening weekends.

*3 of the 4 above films made more than 300million domestically. Harry Potter made only 8million less than 300million. All four films outgrossed X3 by at least 57.7million.

*3 films with much smaller opening weekends than X3 were outgrossed by only 100,000(War of the Worlds), 6.4mil(Hancock), and 21mil(Austin Powers 3)

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=08&p=.htm

*There is one movie on this list that outgrossed X3 inspite of a weaker opening weekend(Sixth Sense). This film outgrossed X3 by 59.2million and unlike X3 it got close to breaking the 300million barrier.

*3 films(Bourne 3, Signs, Rush Hour 2) with smaller opening weekends than X3 were outgrossed by only 6.9mil, 8.4mil, and 6.6mil.

To me,this goes to show people saw it once in the cinema, and didnt feel compelled to watch it again, this is likely to do with what people thought of the movie itself, in fact thats probable.

 

[X-Maniac]

To me,this goes to show people saw it once in the cinema, and didnt feel compelled to watch it again, this is likely to do with what people thought of the movie itself, in fact thats probable.

I think it's quite true that some people didn't want to watch it again (especially Cyclops fans!). If it had been longer/better and had pleased more hardcore fans, it would have made more but probably wouldn't have held on to the No 1 spot for much longer.

Most movies don't last more than a week at the top spot, just like most music releases fly to No 1 then drop. That's part of our 'instant success' society.

For instance, X2 stayed at No 1 for two weeks, then dropped down. In the second week, the new release was the Eddie Murphy comedy Daddy Day Care which went to No 2 but didn't push X2 off the top. But Daddy Day Care did beat X2 in the third week, and Matrix Reloaded beat both of them to take the top spot.

Superman Returns was No 1 for a week before PoTC: Dead Man's Chest came along and knocked it off the top spot, which was bound to happen. No surprise there. But then the next week, along came two crummy comedies (Little Man and You Me and Dupree) which both beat SR, which then fell to fourth place.

SR made $76m over the five-day Independence Day Weekend, then on subsequent weekends: $22m, $12m, $7m, $3.7m,

X3 made $123m over the four-day Memorial Day Weekend, then on subsequent weekends: $34m, $16m, $7.8m, $4.8m.

It's obvious SR (the combo of Singer and Superman) should have made more over a five-day holiday weekend. And it's obvious that X3 did surprisingly well on that four-day opening weekend - although it fell the next week, it still performed better than SR that week and on subsequent weeks.

X2 is very different. It opened back in 2003 and made $86m on opening weekend, which was (at that time) a strong opening (higher than LoTR: RoTK which opened with $73m). In subsequent weekends, X2 made: $40m, $17m, $10m, $13m. Stronger than X3 or SR for sure.

Some films stay at the top for longer. Lord of the Rings did well at the top - the first film was No 1 for six weeks, the second for three weeks, but the third for just two weeks. The Dark Knight was on top for four weeks. Iron Man was No 1 for two weeks.

In conclusion, I think if X3 had been longer/better, and had pissed off fewer fans, it could possibly have beat off Jennifer Aniston's The Break-Up on the second weekend and it would definitely have made more money in subsequent weeks.

 

[Theweepeople]

I sense you are trying to pick a fight. However, what I meant was that Jackman was asked about 'lacklustre fan reaction'. I had made that earlier comment about record-breaking box office when - like you - I also misread/misunderstood what Hugh was asked. In his response to what I had said, AVEITWITHJAMON pointed out that it was about fan reception, not box office.

I'm not dismissing your figures as totally irrelevant, I'm pointing out that the original question and issue was about fan reception not box office.

I definitely wasn't trying to start a fight. It just seemed as though you were suggesting that my analysis wasn't relevant to the question directed at Hugh. None of us can be 100% sure about what the interviewer was referring to. There are different types of X-Men fans. Some are die hard comic book fans while others have a preference for sci-fi movies. Then there's the general audience which are typically less critical then the other two.

Overall, I thought the interviewer was asking the question from a general perspective which would encompass all aspects of how the film was disappointing.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I think it's quite true that some people didn't want to watch it again (especially Cyclops fans!). If it had been longer/better and had pleased more hardcore fans, it would have made more but probably wouldn't have held on to the No 1 spot for much longer.

Most movies don't last more than a week at the top spot, just like most music releases fly to No 1 then drop. That's part of our 'instant success' society.

For instance, X2 stayed at No 1 for two weeks, then dropped down. In the second week, the new release was the Eddie Murphy comedy Daddy Day Care which went to No 2 but didn't push X2 off the top. But Daddy Day Care did beat X2 in the third week, and Matrix Reloaded beat both of them to take the top spot.

Superman Returns was No 1 for a week before PoTC: Dead Man's Chest came along and knocked it off the top spot, which was bound to happen. No surprise there. But then the next week, along came two crummy comedies (Little Man and You Me and Dupree) which both beat SR, which then fell to fourth place.

SR made $76m over the five-day Independence Day Weekend, then on subsequent weekends: $22m, $12m, $7m, $3.7m,

X3 made $123m over the four-day Memorial Day Weekend, then on subsequent weekends: $34m, $16m, $7.8m, $4.8m.

It's obvious SR (the combo of Singer and Superman) should have made more over a five-day holiday weekend. And it's obvious that X3 did surprisingly well on that four-day opening weekend - although it fell the next week, it still performed better than SR that week and on subsequent weeks.

X2 is very different. It opened back in 2003 and made $86m on opening weekend, which was (at that time) a strong opening (higher than LoTR: RoTK which opened with $73m). In subsequent weekends, X2 made: $40m, $17m, $10m, $13m. Stronger than X3 or SR for sure.

Some films stay at the top for longer. Lord of the Rings did well at the top - the first film was No 1 for six weeks, the second for three weeks, but the third for just two weeks. The Dark Knight was on top for four weeks. Iron Man was No 1 for two weeks.

In conclusion, I think if X3 had been longer/better, and had pissed off fewer fans, it could possibly have beat off Jennifer Aniston's The Break-Up on the second weekend and it would definitely have made more money in subsequent weeks.

I just think in general, if X3 had been a better movie, it would have made a lot more money, its not always about faithfulness, as TDK proved. I have no doubt that its superb opening weekend was due to the buzz X2 created among not only fans, but casual movie goers as well. Its obvious the movie dissapointed both of these groups, hence the hasty and big drop-off against what was, really, poor competition.

 

[DarkKnight88]

I totally agree with this statement. The opening weekend gross is attributed to all the hype that had been building from the success of X1 and X2. Having a huge second weekend dropoff and losing the #1 spot to a lackluster comedy proves that the film had very little replay value.

To be fair, X2 had close to about the same legs and that definitely wasn't because of poor fan reception. A lot of your points could be said for that film as well. I just think the series is limited to what it is. Big openings and steep drop offs despite of quality which will probably hold true to Wolverine.

 

[Project862006]

One thing i want to say about x3 is it felt like it was directed and written with no intention of keeping it going.It is like they didn't know it was a franchise that could of spawned like 2 or 3 more films they didn't need to rush the cure and phoenix saga in 1 film.Yes us as fans we want all these characters and arcs in the film but we don't want them all in the same film. X3 could of been about the cure and hinted at dark phoenix saga for the 4th film which could of involved some sentinels.


Fox was just very greedy and inpatient imagine if WB said we want TDK sequel now and nolan said no i want some time off and want to do inception.Then imagine them getting another director for batman 3 WB is more patient fox is not

 

[BillyZaned]

As much as I distest Ratner.. the movies main problem was the script... they rushed it, then mangled it (look at AICN script review) even more... after the success of X2 and Spiderman 2, Fox wanted X3 out right away, and didn't want to wait for Singer or his team, and what me got was a piss poor movie.

The movie had major plot holes, felt rushed, and felt very small when compared to X2. X2 had a pretty tight screen play, and everything flowed well. X3 had none of that, and even the dialouge was craptastic. Some of the mutants, like porcupine dude were lame and laughable, and the whole last action sequence was just stupid, seeing the 5 x-men line up in a revolutionary war style position.

Don't get me started on the Phoenix either... she should have come back, and been good in the this film, then at the end, have her turn bad, setting up part 4. There's a reason Fox isn't going forward on the franchise, and just doing prequels, they ruined characters, killed off ones needlessly, and basically bored people with anyone but wolverine...

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

As much as I distest Ratner.. the movies main problem was the script... they rushed it, then mangled it (look at AICN script review) even more... after the success of X2 and Spiderman 2, Fox wanted X3 out right away, and didn't want to wait for Singer or his team, and what me got was a piss poor movie.

The movie had major plot holes, felt rushed, and felt very small when compared to X2. X2 had a pretty tight screen play, and everything flowed well. X3 had none of that, and even the dialouge was craptastic. Some of the mutants, like porcupine dude were lame and laughable, and the whole last action sequence was just stupid, seeing the 5 x-men line up in a revolutionary war style position.

Don't get me started on the Phoenix either... she should have come back, and been good in the this film, then at the end, have her turn bad, setting up part 4. There's a reason Fox isn't going forward on the franchise, and just doing prequels, they ruined characters, killed off ones needlessly, and basically bored people with anyone but wolverine...

This pretty much sums my feelings up perfectly on the whole situation, the script was poor and Ratner didnt have the talent to produce something good out of a poor script.

As you said, both The cure and The Pheonix were under-used, the latter being butchered at the same time, and X2 as a whole is leaps and bounds better than X3 and is a much tighet package and all the more enjoyable for it.