|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 9:32 am
AJ and I went and saw it Saturday evening, cuz we couldn't get tickets for Friday Opening Night.
Now I really enjoy X-Men I & II, even though they completely strayed from the original storyline from the comics and orignal cartoon; but I've tried to keep and open mind and bash my book/story purest side down. But X3 went too far, they completely trashed the story. Not to mention everything was so fast paced you couldn't get a full grasp of what the 3rd storyline was supposed to be.
SPOILER
arrow Xavier never died in the comics or the original cartoon! And Mystique never lost her powers. Rogue never got rid of her powers....of course power sucking was never her power, but she is a whole different subject.
The Idea for "the cure" was a great idea, now if they had actually ran with that instead of the cure, evil Jean, no mystique, human Magneto, Mutant Cults, it might have been good. But they crammed waaaaaaay too much into such a small time frame. And then left it open for X4 because Magneto might get his powers back, which means the cure might not be permanent after all. But then was was the point of having the cure in the first place!!
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 12:06 pm
I actually really liked the movie and besides being too short I think they did a good job
SPOILERY exclaim The thing is that the X-men universe is messed up. You have MAINLY X-men, eXcalibur, and the Wolverine comics (not to mention others) where there are nutty story lines that have crazy otherworldly nonsense going on.
People die and then come back (which if you stayed for after the credits they explain how Charles is coming back which if you WATCHED the movie you should know already), there are multiple alternate demensions, alien races/wars, crossovers with other Marvel comic heroes and baddies, crazy islands where Charles can walk, a Shadow earth on the other side of the sun, trips to a dystopic possible future where Ororo and Logan are a couple. Keeping up with the Xmen story line in the comics would be impossible and rediculous.
I like that they stuck to the main tenants of the stories, the MAIN important parts, the overarching story lines. I think people tend to forget Stan Lee signs off on this and I think he does a decent job of making crazy worlds believable in film (oh and did you spot him in the movie?). If we were asked to believe all the crap on film that we are asked to believe in the comics it just couldn't happen, it'd be insane. Comics can go all over the place because they're largely based on expository diolouge. But no one wants to sit through a movie where they just talk at you and break the fourth wall constantly to hand hold you through the twisty crazyness of the plot.
It was way too short, which left out some really important things...they just needed a BIT more exposition, no one explained who/what the morelocks were, no one introduced callisto by name. Technically Storm did defeat her which means in the future we may have the whole "Storm in charge of the Morelocks" story line added in.
I wasn't upset that the Angel didn't get more time I think and have always thought that he was a pretty big liability as a mutant and pretty much a joke which is why to bring his a** back in the comics they had to spiff him up and make him the Arch Angel. I mean he's just a dude with wings. And in the comics he's a self important rich pretty boy until he decides to put on a blond wig and save people. So boo on the Angel anyway.
I expect the cure wouldn't last for very long, because it hadn't even been tested long range at the point they released it to the public. PLUS if they were trying to re-create Leech's DNA it goes to reason that it would only be semi-permanent because Leech's powers are only semi-permanent/short term/within range.
I don't think Scot is dead. Jean said "I think I killed him" and his glasses were there whole but not him...odd. And we know Charles is alive still because of the cut scene at the end of the credits. But we knew this anyway when he was showing a video of Moira to the students. Plus Charles Xavier is the strongest mind on the planet.
Also, I'm confused, Rouge's power has always been to absorb the life force of other people/mutants. She put her first kiss in a coma. She never had the ability to fly, super strength until she absorbed the powers of Ms. Marvel and put her in a coma, when she was being manipulated by Mystique (who I think has gotten a raw deal in ALL the movies, she's just some chump attache/eye candy to Magneto, while in the Comics Mystique was a forced to be reckoned with herself. She was a HEAD badguy, with her own chump lackeys).
I could just go on and on and on about this...but I'll stop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 6:02 pm
I know this is merely the book purest in me. But it really bothers me when things get changed so drastically.Yes I know Lee signs off on everything just as JKR signs off on the HP stuff. But I think the screenwriters don't take a lot into account when they write out their storylines. Maybe I just got my hopes up too much when it came to the things I loved the most from the original comic/cartoon.
arrow Yes I saw that Charles had a way to come back; but Charles never died in the first place and (in my opinion) his death in the movie served absolutely no purpose. Oh and the whole, Phoenix issue. Phoenix was a completely different entity that possessed Jean's body because she didn't have one. And Jean had been fighting her control, hence why there was this huge love problem between Jean/Scott and Phoenix/Phoenix's Husband ( I can't remember his name). So that bugged me too.
I agree it was way to short, especially with all they tried to fit in. They spent so much time introducing new mutants that had pretty much no purpose in the plot; and I think they did it just to use nifty graphics. Why introduce pointless mutants when they could introduce the ones that had some bearing in the story. For example, Gambit. Gambit was my all time favorite mutant and he had huge bearing in the original storyline. And Rogue was with Gambit; but they couldn't bring him in the movies cuz Rogue ended up with Iceman, which again never happened. Angel was just chump time, like most of the other ones introduced he had no purpose....of course he never really had a purpose to begin with.
It didn't make sense to publicize the cure the way they did in the movie if indeed they couldn't guarantee it permanent use. Especially with knowing about Leech's powers. Which means in the movies Roque will probably get her powers back too and she'll be all miserable.....again. And then there'll be the whole Kitty/Bobby/Marie thing.....again. I'm happy Mystique will get her powers back cuz she was a bad a** in the comic/cartoon not the tag along.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 7:52 pm
SPOILER See I understand why they didn't make the Phoenix an interstellar ultimate immortal entity because then they have to get into all that what is it Shi'ar multidemension, Apocolypse, star travel crap. And that would make for well...Starship troopers, essentially a rediculous plot about nutbar out there situations. They're trying to make it seem like it COULD happen that it's all a result of her DNA.
The BIGGEST problem with X-men in General is that they never age. Jean Grey is essentially the same age (roughly) in the X men comics of the 20th century as she was in "The Uncanny X-men" issue 1. All this s**t happens in their lives and they fall in love with this person and that person and they essentially just live one long time line where they are exactly the same age. Because they are comics they are reimagined over and over sometimes their relationships changing.
I have a book with the first five Xmen issues in it. And Jean was in a love triangle with Warren and Scot, which...disappears later. And Bobby is older, like in his twenties and then later when reintroduced is a teen. It jumps all over the place.
I guess what I'm saying is I could see where integrity to a story line would be important in a BOOK or something with a linear plot. Comics are not linear plot lines and every 10 to 20 years they revamp the characters and often their relationships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:58 am
arrow I understand it the phoinex entity vs. DNA phoeinx, but I don't like it. If certain plot elements were going to change so drastically they shouldn't have been introduced.
I think when it came to to Xmen not aging as it were, was simply because different generations where still interested in Xmen. So they wanted to keep characters that all generations could relate too. I understand the lack of age and it doesn't bother me too much. What does bother me in the age section is major characters, such as Roque, have this sudden jump back to their teenage years to make them more plausible for the movie.
And yes a linear timeline is not important in a comic, but when it trasnforms into a book or a movie, it should become important.
Movie companies started doing the comic book movies because of the people who remember them when they first came out, and people loved to see their childhood comics come to life with such good intergrity to the story line and character being "live action" vs. animated.
I didn't hate X3......I just think it deviated too much for its own good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
