Official X-Men: The Last Stand Review Thread [SPOILERS!]

New movies! Old movies! B-movies! Discuss discuss discuss!!!

With 10 being the best and 1 being the worst, how would you rate X-Men: The Last Stand?

10
4
3%
9
4
3%
8
20
17%
7
27
23%
6
18
16%
5
12
10%
4
9
8%
3
7
6%
2
3
3%
1
5
4%
I will not be seeing this/I am waiting for DVD
6
5%
 
Total votes : 115

Postby BuckyO'harre on Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:47 am

I just went into a well thought out,in depth post over each point. But I'm half asleep and it took soo long the zone said I had to log in again. Post go bye bye. :evil:

Anyway,I'll only touch on bits I feel differently from than MW & austen.

Jean's powers through the films-
Remember in X1 when Wolverine asks if Jean ever used Cerebro? "No, I lack the control" & "too dangerous".
Who says? Professor said so that's who. A power amplifier might loosen those mental bolts. Ofcourse they meant exactly what they said in X1 but in X3 it could be another what if?

Magneto's bridge move-
Am I the only one who didn't have a problem with this? I mean come on!
Magneto knows (aside from phoenix) he's the baddest mo-fo around.These pathetic humans called down the thunder,and he's gonna bring it. Now he's got an army...how to transport? Swipe a fleet of greyhound buses and float them over? Hell No! He wants to send a message.In a matter of minutes he twists a great symbol of the west.Something that took years of labor.

Mutant Maker- That machine is draining him like a battery.Soo much power it's giving off it's own unique radiation. The bridge moving is more an act of concentration.

Curing Jean- He wants to ease her suffering. If he cured her,she would be a mental wreck over killing her mentor and her boyfriend. And that's assuming she can be cured. Heck,the syringe would have melted into goo.

Bucky go bed-bye now.
Thank you, Zoners, for the kindness, tolerance, and enlightenment you've shared with me. It may not have been deserved, but it was greatly appreciated nonetheless. Soupy twist.
BuckyO'harre
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3724
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:14 am

Postby RogueScribner on Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:04 am

I can buy into Magneto wanting to make a statement with the Golden Gate Bridge sequence. What I don't buy is his ability to perform such a feat. That was MASSIVE and we've never seen such a display of power from him before, and no one has heretofore mentioned that he is even close to being that powerful. You know what would have made more sense? Jean Grey ripping the bridge apart and swinging it across the water and Magneto using his abilities to keep the bridge upright and move cables out of the way, etc. That I could buy. But the way it plays now, it just seems like they sacrificed believability for a cool FX shot.
My eye isn't lazy; it's ambidextrous!
User avatar
RogueScribner
The Dork Avenger
 
Posts: 9609
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, FL

Postby RogueScribner on Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:24 am

What's his range of influence? There has to be a limit to how far his powers extend and how much he can manipulate. Again, we've never seen anything of that scale from him before nor has anyone ever spoken of it. It's a cool shot to be sure, but I just didn't believe he could do that.
My eye isn't lazy; it's ambidextrous!
User avatar
RogueScribner
The Dork Avenger
 
Posts: 9609
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, FL

Postby AtomicHyperbole on Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:32 am

@Tony - I'm talking about believability and credibility within that universe. If you're selling realistically rendered people as mutants, then if it's done well, it can be sold to the audience. Science fiction plot devices are far less easy to sell on top of that. There's a difference between that and realism. If you can render smoeone like Wolverine or Jean Grey as credible characters, or better still Rogue with the struggle against her own powers, then selling their astonishing abilities becomes easier. Particularly when set upon a realistic, modern backdrop.

But something like having your jet in your back yard, a blob coming out of a spinning machine that turns people into mutants for some unknown reason, a hard-light machine or a holographic representation of someones mind on a massive scale, you lose the viewer. Things become less believable as you've effectively broken the rules of the world you've created. Even in animation we have a strictly defined ruleset for each different cartoon so we don't break style or the rules we're working to on a number of different levels, from story to animating itself.

In the context of buildup of power we've shown from Magneto, to me it makes sense if the old showoff were to pull a stunt like the bridge. It suits his personality. It's a show of power, we know he can effectively do what he wants with metal. It might be stretching it a bit far, but he's really going for it this time. A last stand, if you will, as Bucky says above.

X3 is more cartoony in the sense that it doesn't hang around. The pacing, the adherence to an action formula, the over-the-top nature of the action... The colourful nature, it just felt far more "comic book" than the previous films. This doesn't mean "dumb", it's the frantic pace, the far more cheesy lines per minute... I enjoyed them. Whereas' Storm's line stuck out for the piece of crap it was in X1, X3 was full of actually quite fun one-liners. As I said, even the London Zoner trip, made up of cockneys, was ok with Vinnie! Believability is so stretched to such a line, it doesn't matter any more. Singer restrained himself for me, in X1 at least, and so the realism and comic elements didn't sit well enough. X2 was damn near perfect spoilt slightly by some messy, slow pacing and its episodic nature. Ratner at least went balls out even if the script lefts its brains behind...

IMO IMO IMO. ;)
Image
User avatar
AtomicHyperbole
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7438
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:30 am

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:55 am

Where were the rules that you couldn't have the X-Wing or cerebro set out in the first movie? Cerebro is in the movie from the begining, if it was some deus ex machina type thing I could understand it, but cerebro is used throughout the film. How does Singer break rules he hasn't made?
You can have a man who's skeleton has been coated with admantium by secret government experiments but not cerebro? Neither is anymore or less believable than the other

Re the comic book nature, so basically you think the 3rd film is inconsistent in tone from the other 2? That kinda makes it a bad movie. The "rules" have been set up by the third one and it proceeds to not care about them for the sake of getting to the action quicker...it means the trilogy takes a dive in the 3rd because it is so incongruous with the tone of the first 2.
Now I happen to believe that the tone is meant to be the same throughout all 3 films. Comic books can have a serious tone and more character driven pacing.

And you agree the script left the brains behind...wel ugh. That is a problem, you have 2 movies that are reasonably smart and then a 3rd which misses that by a mile in favour of spectacle, it' a dissapointing end to what had come before.
Had it been a standalone movie or the start of a new trilogy then it would have been cool. But by losing what made the other 2 interesting it looks shabby in comparison.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby AtomicHyperbole on Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:05 am

You can argue all you want, fella, it's how I feel. The devices felt out of place compared to the setup. I've explained why I think this is the case, and yes, you can have a man with metal bones and make him seem more real than a fantasy piece of machinery in the context of the time and the place and the realism of the setup. I'm not talking realism, after all. I couldn't believe in the feasability of such an easy device nor its use, but I could believe in the character of Wolverine and his conflict and search.

Stop twisting my words too. Ratners film may have left its brains behind, but it STILL gave you stuff to think about. It STILL dealt in ethics. I'm not saying its a bad movie... you think that, not me. Don't put words in my mouth or simply, just stop talking to me period and say you disagree! I don't take kindly to people twisting my statements.

YOU think it takes a dive. YOU think the tone is the same. YOU think the rules are being broken when Singer set it up that rules didn't matter. I don't agree, I've given my reasons. The tone is similar, not identical. I THINK it followed on and did a great job in doing so, whilst changing the tone to allow for its quicker pace and slightly less serious nature... X1, to me, is a bad film. X3, to me, is a good film.

I can't make you hate it any less. You can't make me hate it any more. I've said enough on this subject... next movie!
Image
User avatar
AtomicHyperbole
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7438
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:30 am

Postby RogueScribner on Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:13 am

Group hug?
My eye isn't lazy; it's ambidextrous!
User avatar
RogueScribner
The Dork Avenger
 
Posts: 9609
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, FL

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:22 am

Well I don't really hate it. Just dissapointed by it. I wouldn't have given it a 6 if I hated, so don't twist my words :wink:

And I'm only going on what you gave me, you said the film left it's brains behind, not me.
The thing is, I don't really understand why you think on one hand, that the films should follow their own "rules" by not having cerebro, but then say that with the 3rd that following the rules didn't matter? Why treat x3 any differently to the rest of the trilogy? I mean, and perhaps I'm not being clear enough, you have problems with the more outthere elements of the first 2 becuase of how realistic and/or how serous they were, but when the whole 3rd film disregards that beliavability you don't seem to care. Which is odd because you are annoyed with the first 2 films breaking the "rules" in your opinion; well seeing as it's a trilogy all 3 films should have the same tone/level of seriousness/believability/adherence to the "rules" why should x3 be judged any differently?


And, who said I think that Singer set it up so rules didn't matter? You are the one who doesn't like cerebro or the jet or the blob thing because it doesn't follow the "rules" not me.
I have no problem with them.
Did you like the danger room, or did you think it was to unrealistic for the universe that Singer has set up?

I mean weren't you saying that we should respect Ratner for being able to replicate Singer's vision? If he doesn't follow the rules, or the serious and more subtle tone, how is he replicating Singer's vision?

Please understand I'm not just arguing with you for the sake of it, or because we have had diferences in the past, I'm just trying to make sense of what you've said and how it fits with all 3 films.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby AtomicHyperbole on Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:32 am

And I'm not explaining again.
Image
User avatar
AtomicHyperbole
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7438
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:30 am

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:34 am

Well you haven't done it for the first time yet.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby AtomicHyperbole on Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:50 am

Look, seriously, I could go on and on and there'd just be another thing to pick at. Its all about bringing things to a point, asking to invest faith in something, and forging beyond that faith. If it grabs you, then great. It didn't work for me. I was already investing into mutants and powers within a realistically realised world, Star Trek technology was a dealbreaker. X2 and to a greater extent Ratner's X3 invested my faith further by going beyond trying to deal with the mutants on a realistic level, so therefore I could believe in it more. That's it! Done!
Image
User avatar
AtomicHyperbole
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7438
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:30 am

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:57 am

So you don't care about the films not following their own rules if there's bigger action sequences and cheesy one liners?

Ok, that was a little harsh. I just don't see why you judge X3 differently from the others when you say yourself the films should follow the rules/tone/seriousness of that particular universe.


EDIT, you know I'm just kidding with that first bit.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby AtomicHyperbole on Fri Jun 02, 2006 6:18 am

Yeah, but you see them as a complete set. They're a trilogy, but they're very different films beyond the production design.

I'm saying its more committed to following a ruleset than X1, which couldn't decide what it wanted to be. It starts with a visceral scene in where Magneto is ripped from his parents... sure his powers aren't "realistic", but that manner in which the card is dealt means you believe it. The same with Rogue. Then later on you have to invest yourself in the X-Wing, Cerebro and a blob. I didn't buy that one bit as he broke what he set up, which is why I never liked X1. Was it camp? Was it going for realism? Who could tell? Singer set up rules like pins and bowled them over, which smacked of no confidence in his own ruleset.

X2 solved this because he went more balls-out from the offset and found his grounding. He managed to make excuses for the credibility stretching technology by making it intergral to the plot. In this way, it made much more sense, I could buy into that. I still didn't like Cerebro but other than that the only issue for me was its messy structure and slightly episodic nature. The action and universe found a grounding.

X3 pulled a similar trick. By investing us in a rather more dreamlike real world I could let the Danger Room slide. It didn't suddenly take you aside and try to ground it in realism anywhere nearly as often as X1 did. It was a balls-out crazy film, but it didn't invest quite as much drama in its characters although I felt its pacing made it tighter than X2 which occasionally ground to a halt.

But we're never going to agree on this, so is it really worth the effort to keep digging into it any more? Its all down to what you find more important in this kind of movie.

Can I go now? I feel like I'm being given the third degree.
Image
User avatar
AtomicHyperbole
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7438
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:30 am

Postby AtomicHyperbole on Fri Jun 02, 2006 6:23 am

To the edit - when a film is balls out cartoony crazy shit and revels in its silliness, as long as its inventive, not dull and has fun with itself, then great. X3 bolstered this with the already defined characters and thematic interests which made it a better than average blockbuster. For me, it followed on from the others and respected them (not the comics universe) whilst showing me something I'd been waiting to see... it was like letting go, in fact it did let go.

What I see is a short first film that likes its characters, a long second film that likes its characters and action and a short third film that likes its action.

This is not an excuse for drek like Van Helsing or The Mummy Returns. There is a point where it just becomes far too much.
Image
User avatar
AtomicHyperbole
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7438
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:30 am

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 6:51 am

I can't help it if what you write makes me think of more questions. You don't have to answer anyway, I'm not forcing you.

And I do see how you could look at 3 like a 3rd act, but for me, the fact that characters didn't behave how they did in the first 2 and that the elements we've come to associate with the first 2 like the subtelty, the building of character and drama were disregarded in favour of action is totally incongrous with what's come before.
Of course I see them a complete set, that's what they are meant to be, a trilogy IS a complete set. If ROTK all of a sudden decided to have cheesy one liners Sam turn into a coward and Aragorn lose his resolve - things not started in the second film then they wouldn't follow the precedent of the first 2. You seem to not care that the precedent wasn't followed because there was more action...which I can understand, but what doesn't sit right is that you bitch about the first not following the precedent set and not the 3rd, when in fact the 1st was the precedent and the 2nd built on it, where as the 3rd disregarded the 1st and character moments from the 2nd in favour of empty spectacle. I don't see why that's cool in your book as you seem so insistent and things following whatever precedent was set in the 1st movie. Why be more forgiving of 3 than 1? Of course if you liked the action then you liked the film, but it didn't follow up, in any truthful way at least, the 2nd movie. It upped the action but at the expense of everything that was great about the other 2, thereby negating the whole point of the others as there was no real character pay off just action.
You say x3 was a rather more dreamlike world...well in that case it breaks the rules of realism set in the first 2, rules you don't like being broken with cerebro and the blob thing, but don't care about being broken in the 3rd. Again I thought you said we should respect Ratner for replicating what Singer has done, but now you say they are very different films apart form production design, so by your own point Ratner hasn't replicated Singer.

As for your second post, X3 didn't stand by the characters of Wolverine or Xavier. It didn't bolster what had gone before, it took what had gone before for granted and played fast and loose with it when required, in other words it didn't follow the rules set out in the firt 2. It didn't build on anything with the others either, except for Rogue, and at a push Iceman/Pyro, but that was such a small moment it felt like an afterthought.
I agree it let go though....of everything that made the first 2 (X2 especially) so compelling for the sake of action and that is why it didn't follow on so much as take what was already established and use it to make an action film...that's a pooe ending for a trilogy that showed so much promise with the 2nd.
I can settle for x3 as a action movie, or as a standalone x-men film (although without the other 2 it really is as shallow as a puddle in terms of character) But really, I don't like to settle for something mediocre when there was so much potential at the end of the 2nd for a brilliant film that would have given us sweet character pay offs AND action scenes. And like you said, wasn't Ratner meant to be building on Singers foundation and emulating it rather than foregoing all that in favour or a fast moving and, at times, incoherent action blockbuster?

Where in x1 are we pulled to the side and grounded in realism? The characters behave like real people dealing with those situations but that's just good, truthful writing

you say Singer broke his own ruleset in x1, but how is that possible when x1 is all about establishing the rules, tone and themes of the films?
If you didn't like cerebro or whatever then fine, but you can't really turn that in to a criticism of Singer as he clearly had the intention of creating fantastical things in a real world setting. How is a man with an adamantium skeleton any more or less believable that Cerebro? Yes Wolverine is a believable character because he's written well, but you can't write Cerebro as a believable character because it's just a piece of tech, tech like that exists throughout the whole movie as I say it wasn't a deus ex machina thing that popped up unrealistically to save to the day it was an establised part of the universe, if you didn't but it then cool and the gang, but it wasn't through Singer breaking rules...because he hadn't set the rules up...cerebro was part of the rules.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby AtomicHyperbole on Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:16 am

I can't disagree with you more vehemently. But that's another time, another place. Your LOTR analogy doesn't work, because to me X1 is as different a film from X2 as X3 is from X1. And good, truthful writing goes beyond setting up characters if they don't vibe with later events in any way, shape of form. Writing goes beyond dialogue.
Image
User avatar
AtomicHyperbole
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7438
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:30 am

Postby doglips on Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:27 am

It's official, Tony and Atomic have now typed three times the amount of words in the actual X3 screenplay.
User avatar
doglips
MOD FAIRY
 
Posts: 6288
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 6:08 am

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:30 am

AtomicHyperbole wrote:I can't disagree with you more vehemently. But that's another time, another place. Your LOTR analogy doesn't work, because to me X1 is as different a film from X2 as X3 is from X1. And good, truthful writing goes beyond setting up characters if they don't vibe with later events in any way, shape of form. Writing goes beyond dialogue.



Writing goes beyond dialogue??? Really?? :o I had no idea, thank you for being so smart and telling me that :lol:

And hell yeah x2 is different film from x1, but what about Star Wars, what if Luke thought, "sod this Jedi lot" and Yoda went from wise old master to slightly nasty tactless guy who mishandled Luke during a crisis. It might have made an interesting film but it wouldn't have been true to what was set up before.

Truthful writing is about making a character true to themselves and about having them change and grow with some semblance of internal logic. They can be terribly comflicted but that needs to be shown otherwise they just seem to behave erratically for no good reason.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:34 am

thedoglippedone wrote:It's official, Tony and Atomic have now typed three times the amount of words in the actual X3 screenplay.



Well it is pretty short :P
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby AtomicHyperbole on Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:43 am

I know what this is about. BTW I've got an X1 study brewing I'll post another time.

You see, you see Xavier as an all-out good guy. He suprised Wolverine by what he'd been doing ALL ALONG behind the scenes because he couldn't see the ethics for fear of what Jean was capable of. That's not suddenly becoming nasty. This added some depth that wasn't there to an otherwise quite dull paternal figure in the other films. His ethics were as grey as Magneto's.

As for Magneto abandoning Mystique, his hate for humans as a lesser species is well documented, so it didn't suprise me one bit. Pyro was never particularly nice, now he was let free of his leash. I can't see how it was NOT true to what had been set up before.

I guess it depends on your point of view, and mine is different from yours.
Image
User avatar
AtomicHyperbole
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7438
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:30 am

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:52 am

AtomicHyperbole wrote:I know what this is about. BTW I've got an X1 study brewing I'll post another time.

You see, you see Xavier as an all-out good guy. He suprised Wolverine by what he'd been doing ALL ALONG behind the scenes because he couldn't see the ethics for fear of what Jean was capable of. That's not suddenly becoming nasty. This added some depth that wasn't there to an otherwise quite dull paternal figure in the other films. His ethics were as grey as Magneto's.

As for Magneto abandoning Mystique, his hate for humans as a lesser species is well documented, so it didn't suprise me one bit. Pyro was never particularly nice, now he was let free of his leash. I can't see how it was NOT true to what had been set up before.

I guess it depends on your point of view, and mine is different from yours.


Ah well, not quite, but kinda. I didn't mind too much that Xavier had some hidden depths, it was quite cool, but again I would have liked just a few hints here and there in the other films, becaue he is portrayed as an out and out good guy. So it does make it rather incongruous what he did to Jean and seeing as it's a trilogy I do think things should follow through, but I disregarded it really cus I liked the idea of Xavier having a darkside.
My major problem with Xavier and Jean was the that he did act completely stupidly when he was trying to talk her down, whether he had a dark side or not Xavier was far from stupid and that is wht ruined those bits for me. It's like in Lost when half the castaways drop 40 Iq points so the writers can get plot point it might servive the plot but it pulls you out of the film cus you know that Xavier wouldn't be so damn tactless.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby austenandrews on Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:22 am

You knew Magneto was pulling out heretofore unseen levels of power when McKellen made that funky face on the bridge, like someone had run over his toe.
User avatar
austenandrews
SUSAN CAGLE
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:45 pm
Location: Austin, Texas

Postby AtomicHyperbole on Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:24 am

Nah, he had one of those root vegetable things stuck up his ass from that forest mutant.
Image
User avatar
AtomicHyperbole
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7438
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:30 am

Postby Doc Holliday on Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:50 am

OK...now I donna wanna go wading in to eggshell city wearing my big boots or nuthin'.....but...yeh....nah....yeh I do.

Just some casual poiints I throw out for prospective mauling:

Isn't there a shot of Magneto pretty much in pain and struggling as he moves the bridge? Yes, yes I believe there was.

It looked to me like it was no walk in the park for him at any rate, that he was nearing the limits of his powers with that little stunt.....and I didn't get a sense from the first two movies that his powers had been permanently weakened at all....doesn't he get the chance to heal and restore during all that time recouperating in his plastic cell for example (despite the occasional beating)?

In X2 the first physical/visual manifestation of the Phoenix rising were the monitors blinking away in the museum trip right at the start. Given it was Ratner at the helm, I like that this was revisited with the monitors in the medical bay at the X-Mansion...a nice little detail/pay-off.

For me personally - as proved on the Xasperation comic book thread...a lot of these vaguaries are compounded by the many different realities now in existence in the X-Universe. There's enough there for you to defend X3 if you liked it....or to tear it down if it didn't quite work for you.

Another little detail that is most likely to be missed by loads of the the films audience is - and I'm gonna side with AH on this - that Prof X was far more ambiguous than X1 and even X2 led you to believe (the morals of the twist ending alone could start a debate that would rage for years, after all). Now - I'm pretty sure one of the backstories in the comics is that Prof X's Dad was complicit in Wolverine being experimented on - THAT's why Prof X won't help him so readily remember some stuff from Alkali Lake. Which makes that oh-so-small-and-subtle line in X3 from Jean about the Prof being in Wolvie's head FAR more sinister.....and quite probably accurate.

Look....I get its not a perfect movie, and if it weren't you're bag then fair enough...there's enough there to take a shot at......but I think quite a key point is within the trilogy's own sensibilities, every single character faces a chain of events COMPLETELY unlike anything they have faced before - the many deaths, coming of age, trying to fit into a team after decades of solitary existence; a cure for mutancy; a genuiinely GLOBAL rather than individual threat.

The events of these films aren't that unlike what the Cuban Missile crisis did to the US...he humbly offered.....even though there'd been Two World Wars previously, the nature of what could come to pass was so different that its effects were profound, unheard of and far-reaching.

I see with the trilogy those characters....all of them....being taken on a journey into the unknow - some adapt and others change completely. Its what makes the X films different and at the same time vulnerable....a lot of people hate change after all. And to those I give you the upcoming Superman film.....

All bileous retorts gratefully received, naturally....but you're a daisy if you do :lol:
"I think the worst time to have a heart attack is during a game of charades..."

Demetri Martin
User avatar
Doc Holliday
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 6434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 10:11 am
Location: Crawling along a razor's edge

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 9:04 am

Change is good, but it needs to be organic for it to be belivable in a film, and the only way to achieve that is to spend time with the characters so we can see how they develop. If this film had done that then it would have been much more satisfying. IMO

Also re: Xavier being ambiguous, well that isn't even hinted at in the first 2. If we are going to take the films as seperate from the comics and hence not bash the way Phoenix or Cyclops are treated it's a bit rich to say things happened in the comics which may explain stuff in the 3rd film.

But anyway I just read Charlie Brooker's "Supposing..." piece on the Guardian, so; my penis is bigger than everyone elses and good day.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby Doc Holliday on Fri Jun 02, 2006 9:08 am

Hey Tony...please don't take exception fella. You and I haven't crossed thoughts too often as of yet....and I'm not looking to get off on the wrong foot - I'm outta time now in terms of office lunch hours being over (eyes.....eyes everywhere). But I will return to this thread when I can and pick things up with you - you've made some very good points....until then, have yourself a very good weekend :)
"I think the worst time to have a heart attack is during a game of charades..."

Demetri Martin
User avatar
Doc Holliday
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 6434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 10:11 am
Location: Crawling along a razor's edge

Postby Lady Sheridan on Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:40 am

austenandrews wrote:
9. What would happen if Wolverine got the cure? Would his mutant healing powers fight it?

No. His hands would bleed when he popped out his claws.


Yes, the perfect in for a question that came to me at 2am last night!

Wolverine's claws...what prevents him from bleeding every time they pop out? In X1, he says it hurts "every time." In X2, we got the fantastic shot of the first time they burst out of his hands at Alkali Lake...and they are dripping with blood.

Now why don't his hands bleed anymore? I can see why the healing factor kicks in, but to the point that he doesn't bleed? Is he just used to it by now?
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby TheBaxter on Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:10 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:
austenandrews wrote:
9. What would happen if Wolverine got the cure? Would his mutant healing powers fight it?

No. His hands would bleed when he popped out his claws.


Yes, the perfect in for a question that came to me at 2am last night!

Wolverine's claws...what prevents him from bleeding every time they pop out? In X1, he says it hurts "every time." In X2, we got the fantastic shot of the first time they burst out of his hands at Alkali Lake...and they are dripping with blood.

Now why don't his hands bleed anymore? I can see why the healing factor kicks in, but to the point that he doesn't bleed? Is he just used to it by now?


funny, i've been wondering the exact same thing since X2. i think i have a personal experience that may shed light.

last friday, i had a light bulb shatter in my hand. i couldn't feel any pain right away, so i sat there and stared at my fingers for several seconds, before i finally saw some blood start rising out of a couple cuts on the tips of my fingers. i think when you get cut by something really sharp, it takes some time for the pressure of the blood to build up to the point that it overcomes the natural suction between the skin and starts bleeding. maybe that's enough time for wolverine's cuts to heal, so they never start bleeding. the blood from that scene in X2 might have been from them putting the claws in, not from him extending them.

it's also possible that the claws extend so fast that there's a suction between the claw itself and the broken blood vessels that keeps them closed and prevents bleeding. at least i've seen lots of movies and tv shows where someone had something sharp stuck in them like a knife, and they wouldn't pull it out because pulling it out might let them bleed to death.

then there's the obvious answer of course, which is the same reason wolvie's pants won't come off: the movie is only rated pg-13.

i don't read the comics, so i wonder, has this question ever come up in the comic books?
Image
User avatar
TheBaxter
Carlos Danger
 
Posts: 19210
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Postby Lady Sheridan on Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:22 pm

TheBaxter wrote:
then there's the obvious answer of course, which is the same reason wolvie's pants won't come off: the movie is only rated pg-13.

i don't read the comics, so i wonder, has this question ever come up in the comic books?


We needed an R-rated X-Men...I demand to see Hugh Jackman without pants before I die. :evil:

I don't read the comics either, but from what I have understood from friends, when they took away his adamantium they discovered he had bone claws? Which would mean his hands were born like a cat's, with sheaths, and it wouldn't hurt him at all. Frankly, from the cartoon, that was always how I understood them to work.

And then the movie had to go and mix me up. :?

So yeah, comic experts, do his claws cause him pain in the books?
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby TheBaxter on Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:28 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:We needed an R-rated X-Men...I demand to see Hugh Jackman without pants before I die. :evil:


that would most likely be an X-rated X-men. which would kinda make sense. i'd be down, if it meant we got to see a more "revealing" shot of mystique laying on the ground after she lost her mutant powers.
Image
User avatar
TheBaxter
Carlos Danger
 
Posts: 19210
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Postby Lady Sheridan on Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:34 pm

TheBaxter wrote:
Lady Sheridan wrote:We needed an R-rated X-Men...I demand to see Hugh Jackman without pants before I die. :evil:


that would most likely be an X-rated X-men. which would kinda make sense. i'd be down, if it meant we got to see a more "revealing" shot of mystique laying on the ground after she lost her mutant powers.


Maybe Patrick Stewart should have written it so we could see everything...

But really, just Jackman's bum would be fine and I think that's still PG-13--though maybe not, anymore. He bared all in "Van Helsing" but decided women would be too distracted during Anna's death scene, so they CGI'd his pants back in. Thanks alot, Sommers.

That Mystique scene was kind of funny for that reason. They wanted you to see, but not see...and how she was laying just so. Movie people are so lucky. The rest of us would fall down, exposing everything, while everyone pointed and laughed. :oops:
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby tapehead on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:00 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:
Maybe Patrick Stewart should have written it so we could see everything...

that's comedy gold, and extra points for getting there via an English situation comedy

I Impampilash in your general direction
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Postby Al Shut on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:15 pm

Wolverine will never lose his pants there made of adamantium and directly connected to his skeleton.
Note to myself: Fix this image shit!
User avatar
Al Shut
THE LAUGHING ZONER
 
Posts: 6223
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:57 pm
Location: Oberhausen, Germany

Postby tfactor on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:30 pm

for the last time lady s, my bosses will get really pissed off at me if they find out I spent another day searching celeb porn sites for snap shots of hugh's ... um .. junk.

Twice in one week is just too much
User avatar
tfactor
KING SMARMY
 
Posts: 2754
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 8:45 pm
Location: Gridlock

Postby jgraphix on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:31 pm

I'm finally getting to check this out tonight. Woot!
"If toast always lands butter-side down, and cats always land on their feet, what happens if you strap toast on the back of a cat and drop it?"
User avatar
jgraphix
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 1391
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:38 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Postby austenandrews on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:32 pm

TonyWilson wrote:Also re: Xavier being ambiguous, well that isn't even hinted at in the first 2.

This is the same Professor X who mind-froze his way into the Oval Office to deliver a veiled threat to the POTUS, mind-froze an entire museum just to bail out some uppity kids, threatened to make Wolverine think he was a little girl if he didn't cooperate, etc. He's a good guy, absolutely, but he's not afraid to use his powers to achieve his goals.
User avatar
austenandrews
SUSAN CAGLE
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:45 pm
Location: Austin, Texas

Postby austenandrews on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:36 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:Wolverine's claws...what prevents him from bleeding every time they pop out? In X1, he says it hurts "every time." In X2, we got the fantastic shot of the first time they burst out of his hands at Alkali Lake...and they are dripping with blood.

Now why don't his hands bleed anymore? I can see why the healing factor kicks in, but to the point that he doesn't bleed? Is he just used to it by now?

The first time it severed blood vessels. The vessels healed around the claws, making room for them to slide in and out. The dermal wounds don't bleed enough to overcome his healing factor.

I just made that up, but it works.
User avatar
austenandrews
SUSAN CAGLE
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:45 pm
Location: Austin, Texas

Postby Brocktune on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:37 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:
austenandrews wrote:
9. What would happen if Wolverine got the cure? Would his mutant healing powers fight it?

No. His hands would bleed when he popped out his claws.


Yes, the perfect in for a question that came to me at 2am last night!

Wolverine's claws...what prevents him from bleeding every time they pop out? In X1, he says it hurts "every time." In X2, we got the fantastic shot of the first time they burst out of his hands at Alkali Lake...and they are dripping with blood.

Now why don't his hands bleed anymore? I can see why the healing factor kicks in, but to the point that he doesn't bleed? Is he just used to it by now?


he developed callouses.
just like pierced ears.
Image
User avatar
Brocktune
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 6490
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 10:32 pm
Location: Pico & Sepulveda

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:41 pm

austenandrews wrote:
TonyWilson wrote:Also re: Xavier being ambiguous, well that isn't even hinted at in the first 2.

This is the same Professor X who mind-froze his way into the Oval Office to deliver a veiled threat to the POTUS, mind-froze an entire museum just to bail out some uppity kids, threatened to make Wolverine think he was a little girl if he didn't cooperate, etc. He's a good guy, absolutely, but he's not afraid to use his powers to achieve his goals.


True enough. I really meant specifically to do with Jean Grey and creating psychic barriers to contain her power.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby Lady Sheridan on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:42 pm

tfactor wrote:for the last time lady s, my bosses will get really pissed off at me if they find out I spent another day searching celeb porn sites for snap shots of hugh's ... um .. junk.

Twice in one week is just too much


Yeah, I got busted too. :oops: Thanks for trying.

Why can't offices just understand that the human body is a beautiful thing, and there's nothing wrong with appreciating it in full. :evil:

austenandrews wrote:The first time it severed blood vessels. The vessels healed around the claws, making room for them to slide in and out. The dermal wounds don't bleed enough to overcome his healing factor.

I just made that up, but it works


It does indeed! I accept it until Marvel brings one down from on high, via MasterWhedon, DennisMM, or Adam Balm... ;)
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby austenandrews on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:45 pm

Brocktune wrote:he developed callouses.
just like pierced ears.

Wouldn't his healing factor preclude developing callouses? He doesn't scar.
User avatar
austenandrews
SUSAN CAGLE
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:45 pm
Location: Austin, Texas

Postby Brocktune on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:46 pm

no, his healing factor caused the callouses
Image
User avatar
Brocktune
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 6490
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 10:32 pm
Location: Pico & Sepulveda

Postby Lady Sheridan on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:49 pm

But callouses would mean it wouldn't hurt, and Wolverine complains that it does.

And it must be more than a twinge if Mr. Tough Guy is willing to admit to it.
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby MasterWhedon on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:52 pm

Well, it makes sense that whatever parts of his hands the claws tear through each time he pops them would immediately heal up, leaving no scar, callous or "groove" of any kind. Thus, every time he pops them, it's like the first time.

The guy is conditioned to deal with a shitload of pain. He tends to grimmace a bit and wait to heal, like, "Come on already..."
User avatar
MasterWhedon
KEEPER OF THE PURSE
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Postby athenabodicea on Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:59 pm

You know I dont remember them ever actually saying in the comic that it was painful for him to unsheath his claws...??? The way I remember it is that they always alluded to his pain by having him lean backwards and make a grimacing face... Sometimes he would bleed and sometimes he wouldn't... I'm curious to know myself what the deal is here?? I was certain that he didnt scar... Anybody??
ImageImageImage
User avatar
athenabodicea
GEEK GODDESS
 
Posts: 5181
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 8:42 pm
Location: Hell if I know!!!

Postby Pacino86845 on Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:04 pm

athenabodicea wrote:You know I dont remember them ever actually saying in the comic that it was painful for him to unsheath his claws...??? The way I remember it is that they always alluded to his pain by having him lean backwards and make a grimacing face... Sometimes he would bleed and sometimes he wouldn't... I'm curious to know myself what the deal is here?? I was certain that he didnt scar... Anybody??

I think the best answers would come from those who were reading X-Men and Wolverine when he had his adamantium removed by Magneto. When the bone claws would get unsheathed, it was a nasty affair, and you'd see skin and bits of flesh dangling from them.

I stopped following the X-titles just before then, so I only have a vague notion of how things "work" with the claws. They are painful, every time, but the bone ones were far more painfaul to unsheath, so I'm guessing the sharp-object-piercing-through theory is correct.
User avatar
Pacino86845
EGYPTIAN LOVER
 
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:20 am

Postby MasterWhedon on Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:05 pm

I don't remember them ever specifically addressing it, but I'll bet it's along the lines of the movie Wolvie: it hurts, but he's too tough to say shit about it unless someone directly asks.

I'm reminded of the fucking beautiful moment in Wolverine #75, right after he'd had his adamantium ripped out of him by Magneto. He'd healed up and went into the Danger Room for the first time, intent to prove he was still part of the team. He was getting floored, then two robots came right at him. He gave a look, a smile, clenched his fist--then a full frame "SCHLUCKT!" or some shit, followed by a full page of Wolvie howling with bone claws popped and the rest of the team yelling like crazy.

One of my single favorite comics memories.


EDIT: HAHAHA!! Tony, you know what they say about great minds!
User avatar
MasterWhedon
KEEPER OF THE PURSE
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Al Shut on Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:08 pm

SCHLUCKT sounds pretty nasty.

Now that I look at it it sounds like german for he/she/it swallows. Bit it did sound sound nasty for a moment.
Note to myself: Fix this image shit!
User avatar
Al Shut
THE LAUGHING ZONER
 
Posts: 6223
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:57 pm
Location: Oberhausen, Germany

Postby Lady Sheridan on Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:24 pm

And the blood, is that just one of those inexplicable movie continuity errors...like the healing shirt and the non-removable pants?

The X-Men movies are pretty bloodless, so I'm probably just answering my own question here.

It's odd that his bone claws would cause pain and bleeding, if it was something he was born with, you would think his hand would then be designed for it, like a cat's are.
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby MasterWhedon on Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:35 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:And the blood, is that just one of those inexplicable movie continuity errors...like the healing shirt and the non-removable pants?

The X-Men movies are pretty bloodless, so I'm probably just answering my own question here.

It's odd that his bone claws would cause pain and bleeding, if it was something he was born with, you would think his hand would then be designed for it, like a cat's are.

Baxter's explanation about how it takes deep cuts a second to bleed to the surface works for me. After all, the second the cut happens, his healing factor kicks in.

The adamantium claws never bled in the comics, most likely for the same reasons as the movie: bloodless is funness.

Thing about the bone claws is that he blocked out his memories of them. If you read Origin, you see the first ever appearance of them (as cute little nubbins). They pop for the first time in an incredibly traumatic experience that he eventually blocks out.

He goes on, gets hardened to the world, and begins to forget about the past. Then he eventually joins up with Weapon X, gets him memory fooled with some more and comes out with the adamantium skeleton. He just assumed (as did we, the reader) that the claws were given to him by the program. Not so, as we see in Wolvie #75 when, on instinct, he pops his claws.

My take is that while the popping the claws did hurt physically, the emotional WTF? was what caused him to lurch the way he did.
User avatar
MasterWhedon
KEEPER OF THE PURSE
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Los Angeles

PreviousNext

Return to Movie Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests

cron