X-Men 3: News and info thread

[Advocate]

From what I was told they used the Ultimate Xmen universe for the basis of this movie. Juggs in Ultimate U is a mutant, Dark Phoenix is Jean's split personality, Charles blocked Phoenix mentally, etc. From what I was told X-Men Last stand was Ultimate X-Men issues 1-6. Maybe not word for word, but the basis, the essance, the core.

If anyone who reads Ultimate X-men can verify or debunk this info, please do.

[Drewbacca]

SPOILERS - HO!

How? Prof. X is a lame one-dimensioanl character in Singers portrayal of him(Jesus Christ) I prefer Ratner's dark, manipulative Prof. X becuase that is who the comicbook character really is.

They were the same man (protecting people from themselves, from humanity). I believe when Phoenix and Professor X actually went head to head in the comic books she sent him in to a deep coma, which would have atleast made some sort of sense instead of him dematerializing and somehow surviving (probably without a lick of explanation).

No not really, Juggs worst stories are the ones that reflect on his past with charles. He works best as an unstoppable guy who is also relatively normal. His 2 most acclaimed stories is his bar fight with Peter and a Spider-man issue where he beats the shit out of Spider-man. Not his gay ass fight with charles.

The depth of a character like Juggernaut and his motivations have always been interesting. There's no reason why a little of his backstory couldn't be explained amongst the chaos. The best fight sequence of the movie was when he was tossing Wolverine through Jean Grey's childhood house (through the roof, out the other room floor).

I don't care if they choose to not explain anything, but he looked fucking retarded in the movie, aesthetically. Dunst-helmet isn't threatening.

Peter was misused. However their were some great action scenes. The fight at Jean's house, Wolveirne fighting Marrow, Alcatraz. IMO the fight scenes werre miles ahead of X1 and X2.

X2 had some of the best emotional payoffs of the entire series (seeing Wolverine slice a commando in to the fridge, a commando in the foot, and don't even fucking tell me Nightcrawler's rampage in the White House of X2 wasn't the best fucking sequence in all of these movies). Hell, the introduction of Colossus was pretty rad as well. The best action sequence in X3 was Beast swinging around the lamp post, killing one soldier and then spinning off and killing like 8000 more. Beast, in this movie, was one of the only mutant's who really seemed to develop and I credit that more to Kelsey Grammar moving and acting believable as the character (he was born to play this mutant).

What. All of that was just Wolvy getting kicked. It wasn't really a fight. Pyro fight at was letdown. I wished Pyro had reflected more at the end.

It had the best visceral feel of a fight in the entire movie. Seeing Professor X and Phoenix go at it was fine, but hardly an "action" sequence. Seeing Juggy toss Wolverine around inside the house was fucking rad (Wolverine fighting Spike was pretty cool too, but again, lasted about 50 seconds).

This is where yopu are wrong. Just wrong. I think Ratner has a better understanding of the X-Men than SInger does.

There is no way this is true. The Phoenix saga was terribly weak in this movie, to the point where there was 0 emotional impact when Cyclops, Jean Grey or the Professor are killed. You can't help feel that if Cyclops was played by a bigger marquee actor he would have been utilized a lot more, nothing more.

X2 is probably one of the best superhero movies. It didn't get all of the little facts right (and it didn't need to), but it got the feel of the movie right. It had the right balance of cool special effects, visceral action (Lady Deathstrike peppering Wolverine's back with like 8 quick jabs with her claws was brutal) and an ending that kind of made a lot of sense (Magneto turning)

I disagree with you that Ratner understands the feeling of this series entirely. He probably thought Beast was Nightcrawler.

The best character moments of the movie came from the protests and rallies segments. That felt like X-men. Mutants having secret meeting. That was X-Men.Rash decisions made by mixed feelings. That was X-men. Big explosive fights with one liners and friendly banter during a fight. That was X-Men.

What character moments? Rogue walking in and taking "the cure" (which we didn't even see. Rogue had 3 scenes in the movie). A story arch with Arch Angel that is given 3 short scenes (and not even full scenes, like tacked on to other ones) to resound (him flying out of the window, him asking X-Men for refuge, him saving dear old dad and everything being OK even though nothing was ever talked or emotionally thought out).

You can have all of the things you listed above without compromising the integrity of your franchise. And if you can't? Then don't do it. Singer's movies were pretty good movies first and foremost. X3 isn't a good movie, it's a somewhat decent superhero movie at best. It has plot holes all throughout the final part on Alcatraz and too many "secondary" mutants who aren't explained and no one cares about.

This is IMO the best X-men movie. It finally had aan all-out brawl with all the x-men working as a team. How come Singer never did that once in X1 or X2. Instead it was Logan running around stabbing people while Singer makes the rest of the team look like shit(X1) or they stand around doing nothing(X2)

You have them working as a team with no Cyclops to helm it. Cyclops was always the guy who lead the team throughout all of the shit happening, Wolverine was the unreliable guy who would take off to suit his own needs. How is this Ratner understanding the fundamentals of the X-Men? Wolverine is a tame as shit baby sitter the entire movie.

And if Singer gave a fuck about his "hard work" he wouldn't have so eagerly jumped ship to make Superman. A prequel? sequel? that argubably looks worse than X3.

We'll see. Singer said he would come back and helm X3 once he was finished with Superman Returns. Fox was pissed and rushed it out the door with Ratner in an attempt to cut Superman's momentum.

I would care if Scott actually did shit in the past 2 movies. Seriously WTF did he do that all of a sudden got him this huge fanbase in the movies. He blasted 3 things in X1 and beat his girlfriend in X2.

He was atleast a part of everything, being the leader. You're essentially insulting Singer for including Cyclops in a minimal capacity (controlling Jean, for one, which would have made him having to kill his wife all the more good) when Ratner didn't use him at all. Do you see the flaw in that logic?

Becuase she didn't care. Remember the scene with her and Eric in the woods. She doesn't give a fuck about the fight.

She obviously cares enough to go ape shit once Magneto is forced to eat the cure by Beast, so that assumption is wrong given what we saw.

I really don't feel like arguing with you anymore, you obviously enjoy action over substance in your X-Men movies and I enjoy a little less pointless action, a little more substance (and some one-on-one action to boot). We're not going to agree here.

I don't care how you feel about Ratner or Singer or X3 vs. X2, these movies had very little emotional resound, which is a sign of bad writing and bad directing (I DID IT FOR YOU JEAN!). If X4 comes out and puts X3 in to context it will soften the blow. What that means is we have an incomplete movie that wasn't wrapped up in the first place.

There'll obviously be an X4, based on the ticket sales of the weekend for X3, so we'll see then won't we?

[Shinobi128]

Going back to collect X-Men comics would be too much of a chore. Recommend graphic novels please.

[animegirl]

Peter was misused. However their were some great action scenes. The fight at Jean's house, Wolveirne fighting Marrow, Alcatraz. IMO the fight scenes werre miles ahead of X1 and X2

I thought Marrow was a chick?

[Glass Joe]

I don't understand people saying that Singer did anything better. He fucked up just as many back stories as Ratner while making a decent action movie that sells to the masses. This movie is at least as good as the Singer ones.

[Drewbacca]

I don't understand people saying that Singer did anything better. He fucked up just as many back stories as Ratner while making a decent action movie that sells to the masses. This movie is at least as good as the Singer ones.

I don't give a shit about back stories. I really like the Juggernaut character and didn't care for a second that he was a mutant in this movie. It makes no difference to the film whether or not you waste time explaining his gem origin story.

Singer really hit the nail on the head with X2. The backstory of Wolverine was juggled against his duty as a member of the X-Men, and Striker was given enough time to really shine as a smart, collected enemy. It wasn't simply a ploy to set up a crazy action sequence. Nightcrawler felt and acted like Nightcrawler in X2. In this movie Beast was the only mutant who seemed really developed.

The last battle in X3 was rife with holes. Once the boy was taken out of the equation everything happily fell in to place to give Wolverine his big emotional "RAH RAH!" moment. What a leader that Wolverine is.

[Glass Joe]

I don't give a shit about back stories.

And this is why your opinion means shit. It was as acurate as the other two whether you like it or not.

[Drewbacca]

And this is why your opinion means shit.

It's why my opinion is valid. This isn't a comic book, nobody gives a shit other than comic nerds that Juggy was a mutant and not someone bestowed with magical powers (which actually sounds silly in the context of the movies). Nobody cares whether or not Juggernaut has a gem in his stomach or if his powers are mutated like everyone else. It's a waste of screen time to run people through it. There's no emotional payoff other than feeding geeks like you with no concept of the differences between movie continuity and comic continuity.

It was as acurate as the other two whether you like it or not.

I never argued accuracy (read please). In fact the point was that things can be altered from comic continuity and still be great. I said X2 was a better movie, and it is. Not because it gets all of the origins right, but because the connections between its characters is stronger, the final climax of the movie isn't riffled with gaping holes, and you actually care about the people involved with the conflict.

Make no bones about it, X2 is a better movie hands down than X3.

[Glass Joe]

Make no bones about it, X2 is a better movie hands down than X3.

Nice blanket statement. I'm sure everyone agrees with you because you proclaim it.

X1-X3 all have the same problems but at least X3 had some good actions scenes. People go see Xmen movies for the big dumb action movies they are and the X geeks go see it for the characters they love. If you think it is anything other than that, you're fucking crazy.

[Drewbacca]

Nice blanket statement. I'm sure everyone agrees with you because you proclaim it.

Get over yourself and stop acting like "And this is why your opinion means shit. It was as acurate as the other two whether you like it or not." is some attempt at rational discussion. I've also states numerous times why I feel X2 is better than X3 (in fact, just a paragraph above it I give you 3 pretty good reasons that you carefully took the time to remove from your quote). You can agree or disagree (and be wrong), I don't give a shit.

X1-X3 all have the same problems but at least X3 had some good actions scenes. People go see Xmen movies for the big dumb action movies they are and the X geeks go see it for the characters they love. If you think it is anything other than that, you're fucking crazy.

X2 had better straight up action sequences than X3. You're really not making a strong case for X3 being better. Why do you like X3 more, anyway? Oh and try not to use blanket statements.