X3 - The Last Stand

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 12 May 2006, 09:05

Here's a preview of the newest film that was apparently shown in the US last night. Looks impressive enough, but we'll have to wait and see, I guess. I like the tone of the story (what one can glean from a series of trailers and previews anyway), which seems to hark back to the first film moreso than the second.

P.S. By the way, apologies if anyone else has already started a topic on X3. I did a search and couldn't find one.

edit: very important 'moreso'. Meant to type it in the first place, but gimme a break, it was early.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 12 May 2006, 11:04

Nope no topic and going by the trailers this looks awesome but it's directed by Bret Ratner so who knows.

How do you mean the first not second. They're both similar in tone.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 12 May 2006, 11:54

I felt that the second film, though a better film than the first, covered more ground (part of the reason that it was better; faster pace than the first). The focus of the new film seems to be more about mutantkind as a whole, rather than individual character struggles (going on the fact that most of the preview seemed to be dedicated to this).
It'll be interesting, but as you've said, it's directed by Brett Ratner, so who knows

I've nothing really negative to say about him. But then, nor have I much positive to say either. The Rush Hour films and Red Dragon got by more on the skill of the cast than anything one could pin to his talents. But I could be wrong. He could be a genius. Maybe his style is that he has no style...

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 12 May 2006, 12:42

Kurgan wrote:The Rush Hour films and Red Dragon got by more on the skill of the cast than anything one could pin to his talents.

Exactly, good point. Jackie Chan has being doing Rush Hour type movies for years, Chris Tucker is a comedic natural (even if you don't like his style). Ralph Fines is a very good actor and so are Emily Watson, Harvey Keitel and Ed Norton.

I liked Red Dragon. It's not a patch on SOTL or Manhunter but I thought it was better than Hannibal. It really should've been much darker, grittier and violent though. A 15 rating is all wrong. Still it could've been so much worse.

Kurgan wrote:Maybe his style is that he has no style...

He he no way

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 14 May 2006, 14:41

Friend got to see this and he told me to get ready to cry. He said it was over in a flash and its so underdeveloped it makes you want to walk out.

Then today I found out its running time! 95 minutes!!!!!!

Epic.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 14 May 2006, 15:08

95 minutes WTF. Way to go Ratner!

X-Men is 104 minutes and X2 133 minutes at 133 minutes it was much more fulfilling.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 14 May 2006, 15:21

I guess that means there will be less than 90 minutes actual footage

bugger is the only word, still he loved it he said, just wanted a lot more.

A few reviews have popped up too from screenings and while I havent read them, people seem to be posative still, even if it is short.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 14 May 2006, 15:25

Maybe. The 95 minutes could be before credits. I'm still really looking forward to it. I sense X2 will be the best of the trilogy.

X-Men was decent but also should've been much better. Singer spent to long setting the scene and not enough giving us kick ass X-Men action, he made up for this in X2.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 14 May 2006, 15:48

I have very low expectations for this. The story sounds like utter cock. Whoopty-doo, the Wolverine show - the most overrated character in the Marvel phanteon (aside from Venom). It doesn't help either that Hugh Jackman has no presence at all and is a terrible actor, ditto applies to Hale Berry (who'll also be carrying the film).

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 14 May 2006, 15:54

Maybe a Director's Cut will be released on DVD.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 14 May 2006, 16:47

EvaUnit02 wrote:The story sounds like utter cock.

Personally I think it sounds really good. What aspect don't you like?

EvaUnit02 wrote:Whoopty-doo, the Wolverine show - the most overrated character in the Marvel phanteon (aside from Venom). It doesn't help either that Hugh Jackman has no presence at all and is a terrible actor, ditto applies to Hale Berry (who'll also be carrying the film).

Agreed about Wolverine in the sense the TV show (I never read the comics) featured each character equally. That's how it should be.

I think Hugh Jackman does a fine job as Wolverine and Halle Berry being a terrible actor dude check out Monster's Ball. She's one fine lady too!

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 14 May 2006, 16:48

Btw... how is the directors cut for the first movie? I've seen it in the cinema and didnt like it much, but i believe the DVD has extra scenes or something? (Xmen 1.5)

I dont have high hopes for pt 3 either btw. As Eva said, the cast just isnt good enough, especially Halle Berry and the chick who plays Roque. Roque in the comics is cool as hell, yet in the 1st movie she was a shy kid.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 14 May 2006, 16:59

Nope there is no Director's Cut. The SE is the exact same Theatrical Cut

They were planning it (hence the 1.5 moniker) but at the last minute didn't bother. There was a whole subplot featuring Storm but we'll never see that now

. The 1.5 moniker just stick which is really stupid.

The deleted scenes are just that pants deleted scenes with stupid non-anamorphic branching. It's such a wasted opportunity as X-men could really do with more footage.

It's Rogue btw but agreed Roque of the TV shows/comics is very different of the Rogue of the movies BUT in movies they need to make a character more 3D which they can get away without in comics.

As for X-men 3 lets give it a chance guys it's not even out yet.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 14 May 2006, 17:53

Venom is a great villain!

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 14 May 2006, 18:04

Nope the full running time is 95 mins, so the actuaul screen time action is less than 90

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 14 May 2006, 18:34

It's Rogue btw but agreed Roque of the TV shows/comics is very different of the Rogue of the movies

So which is it Brad...?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 14 May 2006, 19:26

Rogue.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 15 May 2006, 00:40

I know I was just teasing.....

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 15 May 2006, 09:12

bradavon wrote: Personally I think it sounds really good. What aspect don't you like?

I would say, but they're major spoilers.

I think Hugh Jackman does a fine job as Wolverine

Of course he gets the job done in dumb action films like X-men or Van Helsing, but he still has no presence and is a terrible actor IMO. He's only close to approaching decent in the Aussie rom-com "Paperback Hero".

Halle Berry being a terrible actor dude check out Monster's Ball.

*Shudder* I'm afraid of going anywhere near Marc Forster again after the dire Finding Neverland, sentimental tripe.

She's one fine lady too!

No question about that.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 15 May 2006, 17:08

Although I've read a few of the X-Men comics, my main source of information and character comes from the animated series, in which Wolverine brought the hard-man sensibility, which a lot of others didn't.
Gambit is one of my favourite characters though. Cajun style!

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 15 May 2006, 17:17

Just watched Xmen 1.5 last night. Liked it better then the first time, although it still doesnt have much depth and Halle Berry still sucks. The actress for Rogue is doing OK, yet her character is just nothing like the comicbook character.
Hugh Jackman is OK in it. Not the wolverine I imagine from the comicbooks, and it seems like he's just doing an Eastwood impression, but he's still watchable.
Cyclops is an annoying git, but the cyclops from the comics is also an annoying git, so I guess he nailed it. Professor X is great, and exactly as the comicbook character.

Gambit: Is he in any of the movies? I never really liked him in the comics.
Personally, I'd love to see Jubilee in the movies, as she is one of my favourite Xmen. Colussus (sp?) isnt one of my favourites, but I do feel he should be in the group.
Why is beast in Xmen 3? i dont remember him in the Xmen team for a long period of time? I think he was with the Avengers much longer?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 15 May 2006, 17:37

@ Eva: X-Men dumb action no way. Action yes, dumb no.

Nope Gambit doesn't feature in any of the X-Men films. Which one was Jubilee?

X-Men is decent. I saw bits of it on TV the other night, it should've been so much better though. The story is ultimately weak. FYI the 1.5 really only means Special Edition DVD, the film is exactly the same.

Why does the Beast feature in X-Men 3? Because he's part of the team. Why do you ask?

Kurgan wrote:Gambit is one of my favourite characters though. Cajun style!

He's my brother's favourite X-Man. Whenever a new film is announced he always asks if Gambit is going to appear.

I wonder why he's not when you consider he's one of the bigger characters.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 15 May 2006, 17:44

Jubilee is in both X-Men films, I think, but only appears like in classroom scenes and stuff, not a main character at all.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 15 May 2006, 19:34

Yep it says on Marveldirectory.com:

"NOTE: Heather McComb played her in Generation X made for T.V. movie.
NOTE: Katrina Florece played her in X-Men the movie."

LOL oops I've been confusing Jubilee with Rogue all this time. I thought Rogue of the films was Jubilee of the TV show.

It seems Singer got confused too as the film Rogue seems to have much more in common with Jubilee. The Rogue of the TV show was older and much more tough, she was the same age as Storm.

See, this sounds much more like Rogue than Jubilee:

"Over the following months Jubilee accompanied Wolverine in his travels through Asia. He became like a second father to her."

Rogue in the comics could fly too and apparently (I didn't know this) Mystique was her unofficial foster mother. That sure as hell hasn't happened so far.

It also says of Rogue:

"Rogue possesses the superhuman ability to absorb the memories, knowledge, talents, personality, and physical abilities"

We've not seen that yet.

http://www.marveldirectory.com/individu ... ubilee.htm
http://www.marveldirectory.com/individuals/r/rogue.htm

It would be cool if they'd introduced some of the other X-Men villains too.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 15 May 2006, 19:40

I used to own X-Men 1.5 SE in the cool Digi-pack (Exclusive to R1). I wish I hadn't traded it now.

It's flawed but still decent enough.