Warning! Do Not See The New X-Men Movie. IT SUCKS! (No spoilers)

[onehandle]

I am a long time X-Men fan. If you have any fondness for the comic or the first two movies (which I thought were very well done), STAY FAR AWAY FROM THIS FILM.

Now, forgetting the last paragraph, if you have any appreciation for a good movie in general, you will not find anything good in this film. If you know anything about film making, you will be shocked by how badly written and directed it was.

Fox and the film writers/makers must be taught a lesson.

Please do NOT see this film. My wife and I beg you.

[moobu2]

1. Damn, that disappointing to hear

Was looking forward to it.

[Broken_Hero]

2. So

how bad was it? I sent you a pm, you can respond that way, so you can keep the No Spoiler intact.

[jerry611]

3. It's a 2nd sequal

1st one is good..
2nd is so-so..
3rd is horrible..

Most trilogies follow that pattern. Look at the Matrix.

[onehandle]

4. Yep. That's the usual pattern. Different in this series.

The first one was great. I'll give it an 8.5.

The second one was even better. I'll give it a 9.0.

This one was a 1. And that is with my kind heart.

Trust me. The dip in the Matrix was a walk in the park compared to the piece of sh*t.

[Archae]

20. Not always.

Star Trek the Motion Picture was iffy.

Star Trek the Wrath Of Khan was sublime.

Star Trek the Seatch For Spock was damn good.

Now Star Trek 5, directed by Shatner... (urp) (gag)

[Minstrel Boy]

26. There's an even/odd rule to Star Trek films.

Evens are better than the odds.

[lies and propaganda]

5. fuck, that sucks.

Im far from a comic fan, but those two movies were SO rad.

not surprised though.

[onehandle]

6. That's the real shame. It's not just bad for an X-Men movie...

It's bad for an action movie. It could have been a Chuck Norris vehicle.

[MercutioATC]

7. Like any X-Men fan would miss a movie for ANY reason...

If it's great, you gotta see it so you can talk about it.

If it's bad, you gotta see it so you can talk about it.

Beg all ya want...it's an X-Men film...people are gonna go see it.

[Mojambo]

8. Ratner! I knew it!

I'll have to see it to confirm, but I've feared disaster ever since he was put on the film.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

11. I hate Brett Ratner.

The only director worse than him is McG, but they both specialize in that rapid-edit, loud, flashy yet empty style of filmmaking.

[ghostsofgiants]

61. Dude: Michael Bay

He's the fucking KING of that style.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

67. I may get flamed for this...

But I thought "The Rock" was actually very good. That has more to do with the performances than anything, but it is an enjoyable (if sometimes cheesy) movie.

The thing is, Michael Bay is upfront about who he is, and I don't recall him taking over a franchise started by someone else and ruining it (like Joel Schumacher, for example).

My hatred of Ratner also has to do with what I've read regarding him as a person. Stupid, I know, but he comes off as extremely shallow.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

9. I consulted with my consultant on this and this is all I

got...

[theHandpuppet]

10. The reviewer from Entertainment Weekly agrees with you

(Note: The review doesn't contain a lot of spoilers, just comments about the quality of the film -- or lack thereof.) http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/25/ew.mov.xmen/index.html

[Frank Cannon]

12. When even Harry Knowles of Ain't It Cool News Hates it...

you know it has to be bad. That guy spooges over every sucky comic book or science fiction movie ever made.

I liked the first two X-Men (2 more than 1), but ain't no way I'm seeing this one.

[seemunkee]

13. I guess we have to hope for the best with Superman

Bummer, I may have even talked my wife into going but not with the reviews that are coming out.

[newportdadde]

14. How was Sir Ian?

[onehandle]

15. He was fine. What was written for him was weak and plain bad.

I imagine that most of the cast was thinking about their checks as this monstrosity was being made.

[SaveElmer]

16. I've heard some good feedback...

Heard the action was good, the story a bit muddled, but overall no awful. It is getting a high rating on IMDB.

Ebert gave it a thumbs up

[onehandle]

18. Ebert is one of the few critics I trust.

However, once in a while he gets it really wrong. Often when a superhero theme is adapted to film.

Trust me. The vast majority of reviewers are panning it.

[SaveElmer]

19. Metacritic...

Which evaluates a movie based on the reviews of critics all over the country has a "mixed rating"

I'll see it anyway, my kid has been waiting for it for months.

I trust Ebert too, particularly to waive me off of a bad movie.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

41. Ebert hates everything except Woody Allen Movies...

:shrug:

[bikebloke]

17. Famke Janssen

Oh nooooo. I was counting on seeing Famke Janssen. I guess I'll have to hire a stack of DVD's with X Men 3 slipped into the middle.

[Neoma]

21. Don't care.

:hi: I like seeing bad movies once and awhile.

[Ravenseye]

22. I'm going in a few minutes

I'm a huge x-men fan. Every comic from issue 100 on...I am pretty sure I'm going to hate it...

But it's better that people go this weekend and there is a huge dropoff.

If nobody goes, then the first weekend numbers will be so bad that they'll never make another. I'd rather the number sbe great the first weekend and drop horrifically which means people are interested, but that thefilm sucks.

Who knows.

I'm pretty sure from the reviews i'm gonna hate it.

[Deep13]

23. Was it as bad as MI-3?

How about Martix 3?

[onehandle]

24. Didn't see, never will see MI-3.

Far worse than any Matrix movie.

X3 has the worst dialog ever. You could see some of the actors cringing as they delivered their lines.

[GreenPartyVoter]

25. Some ad libbing might have been called for

[onehandle]

27. It only could have improved the film.

Sadly, they stuck to the horrible script.

[GreenPartyVoter]

28. The test of a great actor is being able to leave the script, I say.

[951-Riverside]

58. I will download MI:3

...from a legal source of course :D

[Deja Q]

29. I may as well say "orange juice sucks even if you like oranges"

How is the orange past its prime?

Or, rather, what makes X3 so rubbish?

[onehandle]

30. It's bad.

I'm the first to admit that it is hard to combine so much story from so many comics into one film without messing up the film and the original stories. But they did a damn good job in the first two films. They rewrote the epic into tidy and exciting two hour chunks. But this film was a convoluted mess. Bad dialog. Bad characterization. Bad action. Bad costumes. Bad (and confusing) special effects. Bad editing. Bad directing.

Bad script.

Did I say bad directing? Yes I did.

[Bombtrack]

55. They didn't do a "good job" at all of what you cite in the first movies

They made up a story that never occured in the comics for the first movie and a totally insignifigant out-of-continuity story and main villain for the second movie. Singer made 2 good movies but they could have been alot better and it's utter bullshit that he didn't waste the potential for actually adapting THE COMICS.

Instead of writing an outline for a franchise he's proud to have taken it "one movie at a time".

[tjdee]

70. I agree. I loved those comics so much...

I loved those comics so much, and the movies were crappity crap crap IMO. They were okay if you had no experience with the comics, but I mean...what they did with some of the characters was just...ugh.

[Deep13]

31. My mutant X-powers enable me to like crappy action films.

Sadly, these powers have no other practical use.

[onehandle]

32. Shameless bump. nt

[Ravenseye]

33. Ok I just got back....My thoughts - 2 stars (spoilers)

Actually I liked the movie more than I thought I would, but it was plagued by bad writing and editing.

I thought I would loathe the changes to canon, but those don't really bother me. You can't really do the phoenix saga the way they did it in the comics. 30+ issues in and out of Shi'ar Space fighting the Brood and whatnot..that wouldn't fly. Making the Juggernaut a mutant...that's fine. It would have confused people otherwise (Juggernaut gets his powers from a magical crystal not mutant powers)

Killing 3 major characters...not too happy about that. One of them...ok. Two I can see it. The third one (the first one killed) makes the least sense as far as necessary. I'd have prefered Professor X to have been teleported up to a Shi'ar warbird at the beginning and fly off with Lilandra than have him invovlved at all with this story.

Oh and the golden gate bridge...total bad writing. How bout they had the plastic army coming for Magneto at the research facility in the Presidio thinking they're impervious to his powers cause they're plastic, but then he just uses the bridge to stop em...that'd make more sense. I leaned over to my friend and said "If I were in thismovie I'd have leaned over to Magneto and said 'hey boss, they have ferries that go there ya know.'"

I liked the Angel. Would have been nice if he had a part.
I liked Kitty Pryde. Would have been nice if she had a part.
I liked Collossus. Would have been nice if he had a part.

Not to mention the bad directing. If I have to close my eyes during a non-imax experience it's because you're a bad director. I got dizzy on numerous occasions because of his wastefull close up shots of foliage. Oh and Brett...after you establish a location you dont' have to have a 20 second establishing shot each and every time you switch to that location.

Felt like 3 movies in one rushed to the screen without time for a script rewrite or to hire the right director. Hey....I guess that's what it was.

I still liked it, just because I can see past the bad parts of movies, but definately the worst X movie and proof the franchise should be taken violently away from FOX and restarted.

[onehandle]

36. This, I cannot forgive (spoilers)

Phoenix? She was never in this film. They may think she was. But she wasn't.

What I saw was a hyper-telekinetic Jean Grey. There was absolutely no reason to call her Phoenix. The hint at the end of X2 was the closest they came.

Deviation from canon was the least of my concerns. It is Necessary whey you have to fit an epic comic series into a two hour film.

I can deal with them veering from the "canon" as they did very well in the two first films. But this film is just wrong. The characters go back and forth between being self-important preachy cartoons, and total dishrags. Either bland or over the top. No middle ground. There will be much talk about the fate of certain characters. This is besides the point. It's a bad movie in every way. My wife and I were up until past 4 am after the midnight showing shocking each other with observations.

After the Danger Room sequence, the best part of the film is over. We could only come up with one brief cool scene after that. The conclusion of Kitty vs. Juggernaut.

[onehandle]

37. Bump 2. nt

[onehandle]

38. bump 3. nt

[onehandle]

72. bump 4 nt

[underpants]

34. I heard some audio from it on the radio this morning

it sounded pretty bad. I have never seen either of the first two (comic book movies? no thanks).

This was a scene with Haley Berry and Huge Jackman "They're not ready Storm" or something like that. It sounded bad.

[Efilroft Sul]

35. Actually, there have been some decent movie adaptations lately.

Let's see, "A History of Violence," "Road to Perdition," "From Hell," "Batman Begins," and "Spider-Man" come quickly to mind.

Batman and Spidey aside, comics today aren't limited to characters in spandex. They're a wide-open field for great story-telling. And because Hollywood is so bereft of any original ideas, the smart producers and directors are looking to adapt comics into movies.

Soon to come: "Jinx" with Charlize Theron and "Torso." Both were written by the most prolific comic book writer in the industry, Brian Bendis. I don't think he'll have his stories made into crap by Hollywood.

Oh, yeah... and if my illustrator and I can get our comic book sold to a publisher, look for my story "Murmur" on the big screen in a few years. You heard it here first, true believers!

[YellowRubberDuckie]

39. Not to be a party pooper here, guys....

But this is one person's opinion. Don't not see something because a critic or another DUer hates it. Honestly, most of the time when DU hates a film, it means I'm really going to like it.
Duckie

[onehandle]

43. Everyone I've encountered online and in the real world has hated it.

So far, that is.

[Bombtrack]

57. You're shilling for a corporation and showing off a cat in your sigline

sorry if I'm not bowled over with the need to follow your online decrees and trust your claims of online opinion.

[onehandle]

73. A Blue Corporation. nt

[Ravenseye]

68. I didn't

I didn't love it but I didn't hate it.

And I'm an X-Men Fan.

Take that.

[deadparrot]

40. My brother's seeing it right now.

I'll probably have to go pick him and his friends up in a bit; I have no interest in seeing it, but it'll be interesting to hear their reviews. :hi:

[DerekG]

42. A disaster. It was like watching "Return of the Jedi" all over again.

Ratner and Co. managed to squander every bloody opportunity Singer and Claremont offered up in their respective mediums. I wasn't expecting a faithful adaptation--the Shiar and Watcher business would look awfully silly on celluloid--but I *was* expecting a scintilla of pathos.

What is it about these third films?!?!?!?!

[Bombtrack]

51. Return of the Jedi rules, and when the fuck did "watchers" ever have any

thing to do with the X-Men ?

Singer made it utterly impossible to have an X-Men movie that resembled the comics. Ratner was a bigger fan of that medium than Singer.

[DerekG]

60. Hey, settle down there

Three points:

1. The Watcher provided commentary to the X-Men/Shiar battle that took place on the blue area of the moon in the now-classic Uncanny X-Men #137.

2. The general consensus amongst critics and genre fans is that Episode VI was inferior to its two antecedents; what's more, most consider the prequel film, "Revenge of the Sith," to outshine it as well.

3. I don't care how ardent an aficionado Ratner was: his output clearly demonstrates he's more adept at staging action sequences than he is at exploring the thematic tapestries Singer--a relative virgin to the comic book world--so skillfully weaved.

[nytemare]

52. I am guessing this is not close to the same league as "Return of the Jedi"

There are too many blockbuster action films/comic book films now where not enough has been put into them. They just figure the name will bring the crowds.

The new Batman was good, and the new Superman looks good. Spiderman 1 and 2 were good. I was hoping this would be a good movie, but I probably won't see it. That is a shame, because I used to love to see almost any film based on a comic book.

Return of the Jedi was pretty well done, in my view. Empire was the best of them. I was not too impressed with Episodes 1 & 2, but 3 made up a lot of ground.

[Bombtrack]

53. Empire's "the best of them" because the Wizard magazine intelligencia has

decreed it so. It's utter bullshit. Jedi not only has the best special effects it's just the greatest assembly of adventure and characterization in any of them.

[nytemare]

54. Jedi was my favorite, but Empire was good because it was darker.

I really loved all three of them. Jedi tends to be my favorite because of the redemption factor. The best in terms of story I would say was Empire.

Despite a couple of corny moments, Sith ranks up there as well.


:hi:

[CatholicEdHead]

44. I will see it

in six months when it is on the used rental rack for $6.

[onehandle]

45. Yep. nt

[Nevernose]

46. X-Men 4, anyone?

Three, or "The Last Stand," wasn't bad, exactly, but far from being a really great comic movie. Better than the Hulk movie, not as good as the Spiderman movie ... kind of like Daredevil. Mediocre.

The writing didn't seem that bad, but the final result, whether direction or FOX or whatever, seemed rather choppy. I'm sure we'll see an extended relase theatrical director's true vision (or whatever), but they should have had some more compelling characterization. There's thirty years of material to draw on here, literally hundreds of thousands of pages written on most of them, and yet: Angel's purpose in the movie was what, exactly?

I'll tell you what it was: a set-up for X-Men 4 and, possibly, the oft-rumored Wolverine movie.

That's why they called it "The Last Stand." So people would hear about part four and say "OMG! I thought the third movie was the last one!" and not be afflicted with the numeration curse, like Police Academy or Revenge of the Nerds. When did Batman and Die Hard drop the numbering of the sequels? After the second one.

It still wasn't bad, IMO. At least I had a good time, and have certainly paid six fifty to see far, far worse movies ("Cutthroat Island," for instance).

At least Singer's giving us Superman in a few weeks, right?

[onehandle]

63. No X-Men 4 is planned.

After this, they are considering New Mutant movies (teen-centric) and maybe a Magneto movie (with possibly a different actor.

This piece of crap was the "grand exit" of the series.

[Ava]

47. i just got back from seeing it

although it wasn't as good as the first two, i still thought it was pretty good. :hi:

[TlalocW]

48. It was good

Were there some weak spots? Yes. The confrontation between Wolverine and Storm outside the Danger Room, for instance. But overall, it was a good movie, and it's hard to juggle all the characters and keep everyone happy. My boss shut down the office for half a day to take us out for lunch and a movie, and this was the one that we saw. We had 3 or 4 people (including me) familiar with the X-Men story, and unbelievably, I wasn't the geekiest one there. The guy sitting next to me at lunch before the movie who got emotionally upset over some of the changes that had been made that he had read about online was the geekiest. "They took out my favorite X-Man, Nightcrawler! Juggernaut isn't a mutant; his powers are magic-based! The whole Jean Grey/Phoenix thing is wrong the way they're telling it" etc.

Geeze, it's a fuckin' movie adaptation of a comic book. You cannot make it 100% true to the comic book. The whole Phoenix saga started around 1976 and is probably still going on (that's not really Jean Grey; it's her clone's sister's gardner's brother-in-law's stepdaughter who's been taken over by the Phoenix Force and made to look like Jean) and is so convoluted, Tolkien wouldn't be able to follow the plot. It's more of an action movie although they do make the part about the cure analagous to homosexual rights - something they touched on in the second movie when Iceman "came out" as a mutant to his parents.

TlalocW

[onehandle]

66. As I said earlier in the thread:

"I'm the first to admit that it is hard to combine so much story from so many comics into one film without messing up the film and the original stories. But they did a damn good job in the first two films. They rewrote the epic into tidy and exciting two hour chunks. But this film was a convoluted mess. Bad dialog. Bad characterization. Bad action. Bad costumes. Bad (and confusing) special effects. Bad editing. Bad directing.

Bad script.

Did I say bad directing? Yes I did."


The movie took a nose dive after the Danger Room scene and never recovered.

And Phoenix was not in the film.

[leeroysphitz]

49. Thanks for the warning but... My own counsel shall I keep

concerning the new x-men picture... :0

[Bombtrack]

50. It was great. I garentee I'm a bigger X-Men fan than you, you're probably

a plant from a rival studio.

[Cannikin]

56. Wonder if the hatred wouldnt be so bad if it wasnt a FOX film?

[onehandle]

64. Not from me. I loved the first two.

I have them on DVD.

[The Revolution]

59. I liked it

Story probably could have been a little better, but overall it was a good.

[EstimatedProphet]

62. Is it Batman and Robin bad? Joel Schuster bad? THAT bad?

[onehandle]

65. Yes. nt

[Cannikin]

71. I agree. Those were childrens films

[Cannikin]

69. "Fox and the film writers/makers must be taught a lesson."

Are you sure the problem is a bad movie or a grudge with FOX?

I'm just picking on you, Onehandle. Dont ever take me seriously unless I specify otherwise.