If I was concerned with comic book canon, I would never like a comic book movie and I'm sure I've made it clear that my gripes have nothing to do with that. I can't turn my brain off when the previous 2 movies weren't mindless and it's not like this one is meant to be either according to the cast, Ratner, and the producers.
Wolverine is probably the most interesting character in X-Men and has a complex past. Hugh plays his role great too.
Someone answer this puzzling question: When Wolverine and Storm go to the dam where Jean died, they found Cyclops' glasses floating which led me to believe Jean/Phoenix killed him. Yet, when Xavier finds out Cyclops is dead, he shows no feeling. Did Cyclops really die, and if he didn't, why didn't he come back later on in the movie? Also, how did Xavier come back to life?
They are probably leaving it open incase they do a 4th, but if she did kill him, she deatomized him like everybody else she killed, though I wonder why not the glasses??? I pointed out the lack of emotion too, most likely it's just sloppy writing or it could be on purpose, a dig at the actor who played Cyclops because he committed to a part in Superman Returns which caused scheduling conflicts for him on this movie. Early in the movie, Xavier is teaching a class and brings up the moral question of putting the mind of one person into the body of another if that person is basically a clean slate/brain dead and that's what he did at the end.
Lance: That was just bad writing, but it is assumed that Xavier was preoccupied with shutting phoenix down because he knew how dangerous she was. He had to die because, sadly, there was no room left for him in the movie (and he's also in superman) He has a gravestone and no power to assume he could stay alive, so just assume he is dead Xavier came back to life because he transferred his consciousness into the body that Moira was caring for that had no consciousness (he showed it in the video) Saturday morning update: X-Men: The Last Stand made a stunning debut on Friday, earning an estimated $44.5 million - the third biggest day in box office history, and a new record for a Friday. Even with a comparitively weak performance today (Saturday), and a big drop-off on Sunday, it's certain to earn over $100 million for the 3-day weekend, and stands a chance of breaking the all-time weekend record of $114,844,116, earned by Spider-Man back in 2002. http://www.the-numbers.com/index.php X-men made 44.5 million yesterday for the third biggest day in history. I thought it would max out at 98 million for the weekend, but it seems it might top that by more.
Thanks Oski and nyquil. Oski did bring up a good point about why Cyclops' glasses weren't deatomized. If Singer had plans to do a 4th, then hopefully their will be one.
Went to go see it last night and here's my take: Movie: C Reasoning is that I grew up on comic books. I know most of the X-Men character lore by heart. Granted, the first two did not really follow the comic book lines it did capture the essence of the characters and I was fine by that. It had great story telling and Singer did an amazing job with the material. It seemed too abrupt of an ending for a trilogy. Like they just wanted to slap things together just to make it go away and I think the franchise deserved better than that. As for Ratner, he did an admirable job. He didn't bastardized the franchise in any way. He just...simplified it as someone else had said. I went into the movie theater not expecting greatness and I left knowing I didn't see greatness. So I guess I would say that it's an average movie. The acting was horrid. I mean, aside from campy lines, it could have been better. But I think that's been the problem most of the time for the X-Men movies anyways. It's impossible to have Bryne-esque and Claremont-esque dialog like in the comics and still grab EVERYONE moviegoers attention. All in all, it's a decent movie. Being the worst out of 3 films with 2 being very good to great ain't all that bad. I just don't get why Fox wanted to end the franchise after 3 movies. It's ridiculous for them to say that they don't have any more material or can't have any more drawing power. Sure, go ahead and do Wolverine spin-offs (like in the comics). But there is SO MUCH MORE mythology with the X-Men. If Singer were to do an X4 and told me "Look, we can't afford Jackman as Wolverine and Halle as Storm anymore so we're going to focus more on other characters like Gambit, Psylocke, Bishop (!!!), and Cable (!!!!!), would you pay to watch that?" I would give a resounding yes every time. Sure Wolverine has been and will always be the de facto X-Men, but you cannot seriously tell me Fox don't think people wouldn't see an X-Men movie with a cast like (MY OWN DREAMCAST): as Psylocke as Gambit as Havoc etc etc. Great thing about X-Men is that there are hundreds of characters that they can use to put a movie together. What a waste if they all of a sudden give up.
Great point... and what I'm hoping is that this trilogy is a launching point of sorts to branch out into the endless storylines and characters the X-Men universe can produce. The trilogy did a great job of introducing some of the main players in this world and the ongoing battle between humans and mutants. Now that they've gotten that out of the way they can focus on other things. It's almost a shame they even brought the phoenix storyline into that one...it was mentioned on aint-it-cool how great it would have been if the clip at the end of this one showed a rising phoenix from the lake, setting her storyline up for the next installment, cause that storyline deserves a whole movie or set of movies to develop. And people... PLEASE put spoiler in your posts if warranted. Jeez, not that I didn't already have an idea of who dies or not, and not that I care about this film deeply...but I'm still gonna see it and I'd still like to be relatively spoiled free.
I only compare this movie (in terms of plot/storyline) with the other movies, since it is the progression of that series. I think comic book movies should use the source material as their base, but they are still using a different medium and the story must be changed to suit that medium. So, I think the third was decent, not the train wreck I was concerned it would be, but not my favorite of the series. For me: Writing was a little weaker than the previous two. This is probably in part to the whole 'shock after shock' type plot the movie was trying to put out. It works for a few of those 'that's cool' moments, but it just didn't work in comparison to the whole series. A little cheesier, a little worse dialogue, characters a little out of whack from the first and third movie. Not a bad movie, worth seeing, but the change in directors is pretty obvious and just seemed to be missing something.
I thought it was a bad movie. I didn't think the first two were perfect, but overall I thought they were good movies. My wife was actually looking forward to the movie more than I was, and she thought it sucked too. All flash and cameos, and no substance. And I know that they weren't going to be able to faithfully reproduce the dark phoenix storyline, but they still took one of the best xmen story arcs and took a gigantic dump on it. and wolvie and magneto spinoffs? With the way they've used them in the movies so far ... zzzzzz.
I thought the movie was longer than it took. I was anticipating a gotcha moment for some characters to come back. I didn't think that script leaked last year really was the disappointment running this show. So I can't really blame Ratner for the material he was given. Man Fox slashed and burned its way out of this one. I hope Marvel finds a new company and try to set some semblence of righting the ship instead of forcing lame restarts of the same movie ala Batman and Superman. Remakes in movies seem like a waste of money for everyone involved.
I haven't seen the movie and I've read the fanboy reviews at other sites and I have to say I've thought the comments here have been much more level-headed. But I have a question for those that are bothered by the Cyclops visor thingy: Why? ************SPOILER**************************************** In the comics Cyclops being separated from his "glasses" is always dramatic, but in every one of it's incarnations the Phoenix creature cannot bring itself to kill Scott. It always does terrible things to him though. Whatever liberties this film has taken there is no way I'd believe Phoenix killed him even if "it" was shown on camera . If they wanted to kill off Scott I wouldn't have been too surprised, but to have Phoenix do it crosses the most hallowed line in the X-Men canon. I don't even think Marvel would have allowed it.
that chick is also in this movie called hard candy. http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/hardcandy MPAA RATING: R for disturbing violent and aberrant sexual content involving a teen, and for language Starring Patrick Wilson, Ellen Page, Sandra Oh, Jennifer Holmes, and Gilbert John A cat-and-mouse psychotic thriller as incisive as it is stylish, Hard Candy delivers a provocative take on the revenge drama while jangling nerves at every turn. The film plunges us into an unstable universe where we cannot readily identify the "good guy" in the tense confrontation between a 14-year-old girl and the 32-year-old man she suspects of pedophilia and murder. (Lionsgate)
yeah, remember that he took off his glasses then started making out. then we dont know what happened. supposedly .
I don't think it was Fox, it was probably Ratner. Singer rocked the first two films and Ratner traditionally has been all flash and no substance.
