X-Men 3 is headed in the same direction as Mortal Kombat Annihilation.

Thank you. I appreciate your opinion, although I don't share it. But thanks for substantiating your views all the same. And again, welcome to the Hype!

 

I can see some of your points most definetly, but the only thingt i disagree with is the mutant cure issue.. I think it's an interesting idea that really toys with the individual concerns on the characters.. I think if used correctly, it could work nicely.. Generally with X-Men, you cqan't stray in too many directions besides "Humans trying to rid themselves of Mutants" or "Mutants trying to rid themselves of Humans"... it's kind of a one or the other situation, that in my opinion, has to be taken. It just depoends on how you will take this approach and i like the cure idea.

 

That's good for you buddy!

 

That's the most ridicuous thread ever. Even more so than my David Coulier for Gambit thread. You can't compare MC2 to the mega-budget X3 directed by Brett Ratner with some very popular stars including Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart, Kelsey Grammar, etc...This is an event film and it's gonna be a huge battle. Many of these new faces are coming out of the woodwork for a reason. They're not just being thrown up onto the screen for kicks. Only a handful will have the spotlight though so there is no problem with too many characters. It's like one of the producers said. It's a Marvel movie it's about the X-Men. The X-Mansion has more people in it than just the main characters. So you need extra's and smaller roles to fill it in. So when Wolverine walks through the mansion he's not going to bump into some random school boy. It'll be a mutant and you want to take advantage of that and maybe make it a cameo that the fans may recognize...but the general audience probably won't.

 

It's not over cast. All the characters mentioned to be in the movie are not even going to get a speaking role. They may not even end up in the final cut. They just wanted to give names to the background characters. Yes, there are a few new characters that will get introduced, but it's clear that it's being approached as efficiently as possible.
Everything is going to be all right, just relax, and you'll see.

 

How pretentious.

 

1) Mortal Kombat Annihilation was originally a much better film, but because of shotty editing and taking a lot of stuff that didn't need to be cut out, it became a sloppy mess.

2) The directors and producers didn't think the movie-going audience would get the MK-Mythology so they took out most of the juicy bits of storyline like the first MK had and just made it a movie full of action.

3) X-Men has already established its background and story and after 2 movies, people get it well enough so that with X3, they won't have to worry about people 'getting lost' among the storytelling.

 

If at first your thread is locked, try try and make the same thread again.

 

"Mortal Kombat! Dun Dun Deh Deh Dun Dun!"

 

I have a new post.

 

But Mortal Kombat has no substance anyway. Annihilation is no different to the first Mortal Kombat film - weak characters and a story-line just there to set up multiple fights.

X-Men is about much more than just fighting.

 

The Mortal Kombat story has gained MUCH more depth since the 90's with the recent games, but thats not the point. The point is, like James Bond in Die Another Day, the director gained too much control and ruined the film.

With X-Men, that hasn't been the case and I don't see why it would be now seeing as it rakes in oh so much money.

 

Die Another Day was bad...The World is Not Enough was freaking boring.

 

What made Mortal Kombat: Annihilation suck was that Paul W.S. Anderson was involved in it. Any movie he touches is crap.

 

Hahaha.What was her fatality?

 

I feel bad for PAUL THOMAS ANDERSON...(also knowns as P.T. Anderson).

Poor guy...people confuse this genious with Paul W.S. Anderson..a geniue hack.

With Alien Vs. Predator, Paul WS displayed his raw talents of being bad. That script was terrible. That one Italian scientist was JUST there to deliever the 'backstory' before he got killed off. That was his only intention; his only purpose. He's not even a character; he's a exposition plot device. A big no-no in screenwriting!

 

That's right.
Like I mentioned earlier. I'm afraid X3 is in danger of ending up like MKA b/c that was a sequel where they tried to do way too much with SO LITTLE TIME during filming and post production. That's all I've gotta say.

 

MKA was NOT directed by Paul Anderson (he had no input on MKA either). It was directed by this unexperienced director named John R. Leonetti. Most of the blame goes to him basically.

 

sigh, the "too many mutants" argument is getting way old. the only real new characters are going to be Beast, Angel, Kitty, and Juggernaut. everybody else who has been cast is just there for a cameo role -- if you need someone to be a henchman, why have it be someone totally random and new? why not have it be "avalanche" or "omega red" as a cameo/nod to the fans? if you need a doctor, why have it be someone totally random and new? why not have it be "dr. rao" as a cameo/nod to the fans? if they made it clear that we were seeing Blob and Cable and Forge and Trevor Fitzroy and Mastermind during the Cerebro scenes in X2, nobody would have complained about "too many characters" and "lack of development." hell, nobody complained about having so many new characters (Beast and Siryn and Colossus and Nightcrawler and Stryker and Artie and Deathstryke and Pyro etc etc) in X2. X3 is going to be no different.

 

Even though I don't think X3 is going the way of MKA, I can see some of the similarities. The pretty boyfriend getting killed off in the beginning of the movie (Johnny Cage/Cyclops), and then the mentor after that (Raiden/Xavier), the dozens of characters and cameos that serve no real purpose, a bunch of different storylines crammed together. Despite all this though much of these similarities are only rumors for X3, and I'm confident the team will deliver a much better movie.

Oh and to clear things up, Paul WS Anderson was not involved in the MK sequel but he did direct the first movie, which I thought was decent for what it was.

 

Mortal Kombat Annihalation was an awesome movie. There was no need for character development, because its a way to show fans the characters without waxing poetic about it. They did a fine job, just not alot of people respected it, although it was what I always wanted to see in a game movie. Yet then there is Final Fantasy Advent Children, that movie had all the original characters in it, and they did an excellent job, a beautiful, terrific movie.

 

And WHAT exactly is it that hints that X3 will head down that route?

All we have to go on is rumours and it's already been stated that there are around 11 chars considered as "main" that's not THAT many and is still no indication of their screen time