X-men Sucked

ActionHank

Staff Writer (PC, Xbox)
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
548
0
0
35
Nashville
www.kat5kaos.com
I would also like for you guys to keep in mind that very little of this was Brett Ratner's fault. This is in no way of justifying the way the movie turned out, but before you start blaming him just know that he was a filler director. Meaning that when he got there the script, cast, and almost any other part of the production was already chossen for him. He was just there to actually make the movie. So I am sure he did not have as much say so as Singer did in the first two movies. I think the directorial vision of the movie was great, awsome focus of powers and some interesting scenes. What I thought was sucked about the movie was the script. Since Ratner signed on so late in the production of the move ( did it not go though the hands of 2 or 3 other directors?) he more than likely could not make much changes to the script, nor could not just change the script all together. Pretty much I say this is Fox fault for not wanting to wait on Singer. Ratner was given a bunch of lemons, and was asked to make lemonade. The lemonade just needed a bit more sugar.
 

Darth_Jonas

Future Emperor
Registered
Nov 16, 2005
2,130
0
0
43
right behind you
I would agree with you on the script part, but seriously, the cinematography stank. Sometimes it emphasized things and I wondered why (like the over emphasis on Wolverine's claws in the Danger Room scene). Then the Effects. He had plenty of say in how they should look. Some of them were nice. Most looked as if they had less of a budget than the first movies when they actually had a lot more money this time around.

I agree that Fox should've just waited on Singer, and much of the script could've been used much better as toilet paper, but Ratner is far from innocent in this fiasco.
 

PrinceLUDA21

New Member
Registered
Apr 18, 2006
1,143
0
0
35
Philly
Frrom a movie standpoint it was bad. True it was the last film in the serious but in it self and for the end to that way was weak. Like the Matrix Revolutions sucked as a serious ending. As a movie standing on it's own it was just bad and poor. SCRIBE DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE PLEASE. By now we all have herd the stroy and spoilers and everything.

I'll just speak on this one last time to defend my reason why it was bad.

Stroy was not thick enough. It all went by just to fast and did not have enough. Honestly Brett did not mess up the serous. FOX did, we can blame them for allowing Brett to make this type of movie. Brett had the writers change the story. To much action packed which is not always good. Brett treid to put too much into the movie for fans. Some of this is god abnd bad. Danger Room Good, Jugernut Bad. The love story of Iceman and Kitty was not needed. The Story of Angel waste of time. Too many mutants not enough Story. I agree with everyone who says Singer did a good job in making it more beleiveable. This movie was like the Comic on Film. If this was the first then it may not be that bad. But for the third film with a feel already in place from the first 2 movies it just hurt. Now I understand that Brett did what he thought was good, I mean that is how he saw X-Men which why it came out the way it did. Singer knew nothing about X-Men when he sigined on. He only then went back and read the comics and gave us his vison of X-Men. So I'm not pissed at Brett just hurt that he did what he did with the movie. It could've been much better. All in all the movie is not good ok to watch on DVD because you have the other 2 but this is like the Matrix Good until the end.
 

PrinceLUDA21

New Member
Registered
Apr 18, 2006
1,143
0
0
35
Philly
I dare not blame the directing O no I can't blame that.

Yes I do blame the directing, I blame Brett, the wirters, and Fox for the god awful movie. The script was changed and alterd due to Brett. Brett was put on the Movie Due to Fox. So they are all a fault. I see this serious as the Comic book Matrix. Part 1 was good, 2 was the best, 3 just Sucked, it's whole purpose was to cash in. Instead of giving us something good or worth while it was already gonna make money being the hype and fact 2 movies sucked you in. So we can say what we wont point is Fox got paid and laughed at us.


The movie was not good at all. I stand by my choice it 100%. It had it's moments but it was not good enough to make this movie a good movie. The film was nice to watch for it's good points but the bad points was so spaced in between that it brings the movie down so much. It was like the Cartoon or comic 2 1/2 hrs long. And once you see the mvoie you see that it does not work well. I'm Sure Brett coul've done better, but His vison of X-Men was different then how ISnger visiond X-Men. There was 2 different takes on the story and for Brett coming in at the end he got scrwed big time. I usealy see a movie 3 yimes or more just cause but this one let me down so bad i can't go thorugh it again. All the bad points it had out shown the good factors of the movie.
 

spudlyff8fan

Super Senior Staff
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
4,550
3
0
34
somewhere
::cough::

Read more comics. Seriously, the comics just piss all over the cartoons, movies, novels, etc when it comes to just sheer character depth and interest in story.
 

fantmovies

New Member
Registered
May 31, 2006
1
0
0
Where can i download movies

Pardon for this question but can please anyone tell any direct download site?(I am a tool) I mean(I am a tool) for the movies and games maybe as well.
But i need some more to choose.(Still a tool)
Thank you in advance!(and yet, still a tool)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ActionHank

Staff Writer (PC, Xbox)
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
548
0
0
35
Nashville
www.kat5kaos.com
ohhh ohhh you almost got me. I was about to click on that link and tell you we don't endorse downloading illegal movies and games. But this is an obvious attempt to advertise on our website.

Do you get paid to be that annoying or does it give you some kind of sexual satisfaction?
 

asylum_boy

Executive Editor
Registered
Aug 2, 2005
1,280
0
0
45
On My Throne
I think he's a tool ActionHank, or, maybe just maybe, a moderator stepped in....Fantmovies, this was your last chance at going straight.....Now YOU'RE OUTTA HERE!
 

plasticpsyche

Xbox Editor
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
155
0
0
43
Puyallup
HMmm....You guys are having a lot of nagative feelings toward this movie. I'm a huge comic book fan, a huge X-men fan, a huge movie fan, and I thoroughly enjoyed the first two films...and I have to say that I really liked the 3rd one as well. It was good. It fit nicely with the other two, although you could still see slight differences in style. This film spent less time on character development than the first two, but it was still a blast to watch. They did a great job with all of the characters, and new additions to the films like Beast and Juggernaut were handled superbly.

Most everyone I have talked to has liked it. *shrugs* If you haven't seen this movie, you should go check it out and make up your own mind. Don't let the nay-sayers on message boards make you lose out on seeing the film.

Of course, if you are one of those people who throws a fit if the film version isn't an EXACT copy of what you read in the comics...well, we all know you are going to hate it, so don't bother even seeing it. You'll just have a stroke and waste all that money on medical bills. If you are one of those people, you are an idiot. ;)

The movie is a good fun comic book film. If you like the X-Men comics, or the first 2 films, you should definitely go see this one.
 

ActionHank

Staff Writer (PC, Xbox)
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
548
0
0
35
Nashville
www.kat5kaos.com
Excatly most people I know who are die hard xmen comic book fans thought the movie was ok. You would think that we would be the most dissapointed. I guess its because the die hard xmen fans already vented their furstration witht he first two movies so they knew what to expect. Although I don't think anyone quite expected what all went down in that movie.
 

Darth_Jonas

Future Emperor
Registered
Nov 16, 2005
2,130
0
0
43
right behind you
I would consider myself a huge comic book fan. And I've got the collection to back it up, especially in the xmen department. As ActionHank put it, fans were already disappointed with the first two movies; I would have to say I would agree. The first two were decent, but not nearly as incredible as they should've been. They didn't have the enormous budget of Spiderman, so I let a lot of stuff slide on them because they did have good character development that reflected the spirit of the most of the characters. For instance, Magneto's take on the whole situation made sense given his history with the Nazis.

But this movie had a much bigger budget and it came off cheesier. How much time, money,and energy did they invest in Angel? And he wasn't even a factor to the story! **spoiler alert** But my biggest problem is that they killed Cyclops. He becomes the epitome of an Xman. In the books, even Logan ends up giving him much respect and follows his lead after the prof exits the mansion. In the movies, he comes across as a crybaby that doesn't deserve the position he's been given. I could deal with that as long as they kept developing him into the leader he is in the books. One thing that ol' Scotty Summers could do in the books was bottle up his emotions. He did/does it too much and that makes him a prick, but the kind of prick you would follow in a charge to the gates of Hell with a water pistol. And they simply chopped him out of this story and even friggin' forgot about him for most of the movie!

The odd cinematography I can deal with because the movies were never really driven by special effects or wonderful camera angles, the poor directing (Wolverine is NOT a crybaby) I'll overlook simply because many of the actors never really nailed the characters (like Storm, Sabertooth, Cyclops, Nightcrawler, and Iceman to name a few) and some they got pretty good (like Wolverine, Prof X, Beast, Magneto from 1&2, and even Jean Grey). I even liked the way they spun the Phoenix story and the controversy over the "cure". But I cannot forgive them for killing Cyclops. The parts of the script that killed him off and kept him out of the picture should've been burned and the ashes peed on.
 

PrinceLUDA21

New Member
Registered
Apr 18, 2006
1,143
0
0
35
Philly
spudlyff8fan said:
Read more comics. Seriously, the comics just piss all over the cartoons, movies, novels, etc when it comes to just sheer character depth and interest in story.


I do read them not a huge fan of them but I do read what I can. The fact that DIE HARD FANS enjoyed the movie proves my point in that the film was more comic-esque then Movie-esque. I have no problem with that at all. In fact BATMAN ( 90's) was the most comic-esque and it was good. This is a movie and by movie standards it was not a good film. Ok to watch nice to look at but All in All not a good film. Rmember Batman & Robin and how bad it was. To me the moive failed is so many areas that it did not to fail in. Plot, characters, diaolog and some cinematics. Singer did the best job at translating X-Men into a movie, a world that is apart of the Comics. You have to see it like this He took a huge story and turned it into abotu 4-5 hrs ( the first 2 films). Brett didn't do a great job but he didn't do a suck ass job either. He just caught a bad movie and made some wrong choices.



Darth_Jonas said:
I
But this movie had a much bigger budget and it came off cheesier. .


Exactly, I agree 100%. There was wasted mutants put in place that did not need to be there. Story did not fit and came at you like blah blah. Cornballness filled this movie. Again not good or bad but it did not fit with the first 2 movies. I saw it twice and came to realize that there was two story lines set up which took the movie in different ways. The Phionix story and the Cure story. So it really had no direction what so ever. It was like seeing two sagas come together in one film. From the cartoon standpoint it was about 20 hrs long ( not sure about the comic). You can not cram that into a 2 1/2 hrs film and then have another story to tell. It will not fit it can throw off the plot which is what happen. What shoud've happen was to stick to just the cure story line, elimate some of the not needed mutants and BAM a better movie. Leave the Phionix for another day or just use that as the main story arch. BAD choices just happened
 

kwilson

New Member
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
2,917
0
0
38
Philly
I think the movie was okay. Our expectations were all very high after X-2 and I think we would have been disappointed no matter what. Anyway I thought I would mention a few things that irked me:

1. The turned Marrow into a guy! The dude pulling spikes out of his arms should have been a girl.

2. I would really like to see a script in which the X-Men fight WITHOUT XAVIER OUT OF COMMISSION!!! I for one am getting sick of wondering how they're going to disable the Professor.

3. Halle Berry just plain sucks.

Now that we have that out of the way - did anyone else notice that the kid who could neutralize mutant powers was played by Jake Lloyd? That's right - little Annie Skywalker still has an acting career. He was also in an episode of Stargate acting opposite Cigarette Smoking Man. Stargate - where sci-fi actors go once the spotlight has faded.
 

ImagoX

PC Editor
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
1,177
0
0
52
Columbus, Ohio
www.freakygamer.com
Someone just stick a lampshade on the kid's head and prop him in a corner- that's a fitting role for an actor of his "skillz".

Hopefully I'll see this film this weekend, so I can read people's spoilers.
 

scribe999

New Member
Registered
Nov 8, 2005
359
0
0
44
New Jersey
kwilson said:
Now that we have that out of the way - did anyone else notice that the kid who could neutralize mutant powers was played by Jake Lloyd? That's right - little Annie Skywalker still has an acting career. He was also in an episode of Stargate acting opposite Cigarette Smoking Man. Stargate - where sci-fi actors go once the spotlight has faded.

Yes, such as:

Connor Trinneer of 'Enterprise' guest starred on Stargate Atlantis
Jolene Blaylock of 'Enterprise' guest starred on Stargate SG-1
Ben Browder of 'Farscape' now a regular on Stargate SG-1
Claudia Black of 'Farscape' now a recurring character on Stargate SG-1
Dean Stockwell of "Quantum Leap" guest starred on Stargate SG-1
Colm Meaney of 'Star Trek: The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine' guest starred in Stargate Atlantis

It really is like a Sci-Fi actors graveyard...only, I actually kinda like Stargate.
 

kwilson

New Member
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
2,917
0
0
38
Philly
I like it too - but it's funny to see all the sci-fi guys there.

Don't forget T-100 and Skinner from the X-Files. Also Byers from The Lone Gunman. I think Skinner is a regular now and the other 2 guested.
 

scribe999

New Member
Registered
Nov 8, 2005
359
0
0
44
New Jersey
kwilson said:
I like it too - but it's funny to see all the sci-fi guys there.

Don't forget T-100 and Skinner from the X-Files. Also Byers from The Lone Gunman. I think Skinner is a regular now and the other 2 guested.

Yes, Skinner is a Colonel on Stargate Atlantis in a recurring role.
 

spudlyff8fan

Super Senior Staff
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
4,550
3
0
34
somewhere
kwilson said:
1. The turned Marrow into a guy! The dude pulling spikes out of his arms should have been a girl.
I don't think that was Marrow. There was this guy from Genosha who eventually became entirely covered in spikes, but he started out able to retract them...he was always a colossally minor character, though. But he appears in Xmen 2 on the Genesis.

Something I'm consistently disappointed by is the fact that Angel and Iceman are always stupid little kids. They're supposed to be about the same age as the other original Xmen...except Beast and the Prof. But they're just teens in the movie. And the Juggernaut isn't a mutant. He's a human who found a stone that has a demon sealed in it. He's a superhuman...but not a mutant.

The ending wasn't too hot, either. As a whole though, it was an alright movie.

Edit- I looked it up...his name was Tusk.