Cool News
UPDATED! Is Alan Cumming Leaving X-MEN'!
Hey, everyone. "Moriarty" here. Just saw this on the site and wanted to chime in briefly. This news strikes me as a bit odd. I've been talking more with people involved with the film in the last week, and Nightcrawler is included in the script, or was in a very recent draft. Not a huge role, but I like where and when he was introduced, and it seemed like at least he'd show up in the film. If this is true, then that's a shame.
I also want to correct the impression that we printed the script review because we think the film is doomed. Far from it. The only thing that would doom this film would be rushing it into production to meet an arbitrary date when the script's still unfinished. I actually liked a lot of the ideas discussed in that review, and I would say the review itself was actually mixed more than negative. TheBigHurt certainly didn't say he hated the script. Go back and read that review again. There's a lot of things he says he likes. And even in the intro to the piece, where did we ever say, "Oh, that's it, the film is ruined"? As always, the fan community focuses only on the negative, and I'll take some of the responsibility for that. By including the script review and the opinion piece on Rothman together, it made it seem much more negative than it should have. I hope this film gets sorted out. I hope we get a great X3 when it happens. I'm not about to give up on the film or on the larger franchise. I like the world of the X-MEN too much to do that, and I think there are plenty of people working on the films who still give a shit, just as I think that guys like David Hayter and Dougherty and Harris and Bryan Singer and Tom DeSanto and even Chris McQuarrie have all obviously cared deeply about the series while they were working on it and helping make it what it is right now. I want a great X3, and that's the point in discussing this stuff right now. Things can definitely change between now and when they shoot, and when you've got people who want to make it work giving it their full attention, then maybe they'll pull it off. I can tell you this... Fox and Marvel are well aware of the reaction to last week's leaks, and they do listen. Keep it in perspective, though. If all you can do is complain about what you hate, it won't make any difference at all. If you can focus on what might be, and try to channel that passion into pushing for positive change, then that's the way to affect some real change, hopefully.
Anyway... I'm sure we're just getting warmed up with all of this. Expect much more X3 news in the weeks and months ahead. For now, here's the original story...
Hey folks, Harry here... X-fans sure could use some good cool news right about now... like the film being delayed so that it can be given the time and attention necessary for it to be the best film it could possibly be. Or a new head of Fox that wants to protect one of its most valuable properties instead of just exploiting it into extinction. Sigh. Here ya go...
Wow. This is depressing. I'll let the article speak for itself.
Are You Cumming?
If that doesn't link you directly to it, click on the "Up and Cumming"
section and read the first bit of news.
If ever there was a time when Ain't it Cool needed to exploit the vast
legion of fans to stop a trainwreck in motion, now is it.
I mean, come on. He was great.
Invader Ace
-
+ Expand All
-
shits overrated...this movie will most likely suck
-
will make me so sad...like the death of a family member...this could be the death of a great franchise
-
I hate Fox. Can't wait for King Kong though. Yeah!
-
is nightcrawler just NOT going to be in this one? what a waste of a solid character...sigh...it is literally like watching a train wreck about to happen
-
No way in hell am I going to pay to see this. This is coming from someone who watched the first 2 opening day.
-
There are all these emotive words being thrown around. "Train Wreck", "Car Crash", "Raping my childhood". Can we please get a little perspective here? Please? X3 is gonna be way worse than that.
-
I can't say I really care as I thought the first two films were pretty mediocre anyway. Great potential, poor delivery.
So yeah...errr...bad one to you guys that love it. Oh well... -
So in the end, it's not like the decision to scratch the Nightcrawler character will cost FOX any coin. Sure, the fanboys will chirp, but FOX has already insinuated (with the hiring of Ratner) that they don't give a flying fuck about the fanboys. So, this news shouldn't really come as a surprise. Come to think of it, I don't really care about not having a Nightcrawler. His accent bugged the fuck out of me. Cumming was still cool, but his departure really isn't that big of a deal. On the other hand, having someone other than Halle play Storm - - as much as that broad bugs me, something like that completely torpedoes the series' continuity. T3 anyone? Why in the blue fuck didn't they get Furlong to do that shit?
-
Seriously. Not a joke. Click the link.
-
I too have often thought about the X-Men like a family member. It was like the cool cousin who'd smuggle you alcohol when you were fourteen. Turns out I was wrong. X3 seems to be morphing into Uncle Robert. Drinking too much. Doesn't give "a shit who hears him curse his bitch of a wife out". What the fuck just happened? I want my cool cousin back.
-
prolly still is
-
I liked Nightcrawler in X2 a lot but there's no reason to keep him in the third movie - just another guy you'd need to keep busy. better to focus on the introduction of new and core characters. Dont get me wrong though - lots of the newas about this movie sucks so far. Just not this.
-
I guess I've just stopped caring... Peace.
-
Teehee. It's a pun. Teehee. Anyway, how is this surprising anyone? He wasn't in the script reviewed, he wasn't mentioned in the cast announced. A cast can only inflate so large. Some focus has to be kept. Besides, they didn't do much with him last time anyway.
-
so he wont be in the 3rd movies, as long as they dont recast the part and simply not use the character, why does it matter? people have bitched that the movies focus too much on the same gang so this is a good thing. removing one leaves room to add someone new. its not like wolverine, jean or X aren't returning..its just a minor character in the scheme of the movies so far. and about the whole Furlong and T3 thing, he had the job guranteed but then he went and got caught with cocaine so poof went the role.
-
I for one am happy that Cumming is out. He was great?? Ugh... worst German accent ever. Some bad dialogue (not his fault, but his delivery didn't help). What was great were the action scenes that he was involved in, but there's no need to have more of the same in X3. It could get old really quick.
-
Why is there such a preoccupation with creating new characters anyway? Did we really need Mr Freeze and Poisen Ivy? The Nightcrawler character didn't need to be quite so in the limelight come X3. But he should have been there. You want a bunch of new mutants? Here's an idea. Make a film called "New Mutants". Of course, it'd suck. But probabIy about the same as X3 will. I'm all for judging it on the finished product. It's just that, like the esteemed Ribbons said in an earlier talkback, there's been so many shithouse decisions made already. I find it hard to believe that, after so perfectly nailing Nightcrawler's abilities in X2 it's all going to be swept away come the third film. That's right, you read me right. They're stupid dumbheads.
-
At least that first scene in the White House in X2 will be forever preserved in all its DVD glory. Damn I love that fight.
-
Jun 19, 2005 6:01:56 PM CDT
The need to make room to introduce characters we are all waiting
by big bad clone
The Starjammers, Weapon X (the guy that was involved with Cable, not Wolvie), Reaper, Forearm, Morlocks, and all sorts of shit mutant characters I'm too tired to name. BTW- Avi, make sure we can get some Dazzler hands that spit out dangerous sparks
-
Jun 19, 2005 6:02:22 PM CDT
Well that explains the Storm/Wolvie hook up (come on sarcasm pul
by press lenox
Has anybody at Fox read the comics...or seen the first two movies?
-
What else are they going to do to X3? Wolverine is changed into a woman and is played by Hillary Duff? Aaaaaaaaaaaaarrgh! This is just so fucking frustrating.
-
How about working with the established characters and not introducing new ones? Jesus, we dont need to see every last mutant on the big screen! www.armchairwarriors.net
-
That's it. I'm done. I want nothing more to do with this movie, and the piece of crap train wreck this is quickly becoming. All, I can say is that I'm not too surprised, and that Fox can go blow themselves at this point in time.
-
Nightcrawler wasn't as much fun in X2 as I thought he could've been (plus, I'm on record that X2 is overrated and ridiculous--Magneto trying to kill all the humans? Gee, that doesn't violate his holocaust background :rolleyes:). What I really wanted to know was whether Harry was going to make a visit to Philly or San Fran this week, as that's what constitutes news around here.
-
Jun 19, 2005 6:28:57 PM CDT
I've been reading the X-books for over 20 years now and. . .
by macstone
what I've alway liked about them is that if you don't like the current team lineup, just wait a few months and it will change. Plus not every character goes on every single mission whether they are in the current roster or not. The absence of Nightcrawler doesn't even need to be addressed in X3, and honestly I've never really liked the character to begin with. If they really wanted to do us a favor they'd drop Halle too.
-
... it kind of makes introducing him in X2 a waste of time. Lack of decent continuity in this series seems to be the least of their worries though.
-
Personally, I don't think it's the biggest loss. I suspected as much with the script review. If I had to put together the list of my favorite five, ten X-Men, he probably wouldn't be on it. HOWEVER, I did really like him in X2 and I thought he had a complete, well-done character arc. YOU CAN LOSE MUTANTS IN THEIS SERIES AND STILL GO ON!! And but cutting the fat here, you can spend more time on the others, especially the newbies.
-
Stupid enter key... You think you can mess with my posts huh. *SNAP!* There! Who is laughing now? WHO? Peace.
-
that they're giving us Beast and Angel in this one, so who really cares if we have Nightcrawler bamfing around saying lines that are too hard to understand anyway.
-
there are dozens of marvel characters better than Nightcrawler who gives a shit!
-
Jun 19, 2005 6:40:44 PM CDT
So anyway... has there ever been an version of X-men without Sto
by neosamurai85
Yup, you guessed it... I read about as many comic books as beaver in a crock pot. Still... has there?
-
Fox, Avi Arad listen! This is not good. The complete destruction of the X franchise isn't necessary. X2 literally relied on Nightcrawler's presence and was better off for it. He should be included in this film (it won't be too many blue people). Don't kill Cyclops! Don't kill Magneto! Don't kill Professor X! It is not only ridiculous but counterproductive. Cyclops should be integral in the Dark Phoenix saga as Jean's only hope. Avi-why has Spiderman been so successful? Think about? Respect for the source material! Do the right thing......fix this mess before it is too late.
-
There have been PLENTY of incarnations without Storm as leader, or, more to the point, WITHOUT HER AT ALL! Storm has never been one of my favorite characters and I don't believe the films have set her up in any way to be Team Leader. I say they could lose her altogether and not miss a beat, and I very much hope that's the course they take.
-
It truly boggles the mind... Why on earth would they drop Alan Cumming, of Son of the Mask and, uh, The High Life, and yet keep oscar-winning bombshell Halle Berry on the payroll... Seriously, it seems the suits in the know are banking on the drawing power of big names (Jackman, Berry) and dropping the lesser known actors, like Cumming (And i hear Marsden doesnt fare too well, either). Wait and hear who they cast as Angel; probably some teen heart-throb to appeal to that tricky 11-19 year old female demographic. This is what confounds me; have they never heard of the original X-Men movie? That was such a hit despite a roster full of then-unknowns? Which appealed due to its mature take on comic book material, treated its audience with respect... And followed on with x2, bigger, better, faster, more!! And yet for x3, it seems like we are back to square one with this dumb generic de-mutant serum storyline. I just don't understand how the fox executives sit down each day to discuss this movie and make such braindead decisions. This will be next years Catwoman. Inconceivable.
-
http://www.iesb.net/fox2005/061705.php
-
I have to say that I completly disagree with what you say about X2 relying on Nightcrawlers presence. He was really just filler (for lack of a better term). They could have very easily taken him out, substituted another character, and with a few minor edits, had essentially the same story. I think you give the characters contribution to the movie far more credit than it is due.
-
Why are they giving the one single character that sucked in the other two movies and who hated being in the other two movies and who keeps threatening to not be in the next or last movie a chance to fuck the single coolest superhero character in film to date? Man. I liked Hally Berry until she started acting like she is a real actress instead of the model/actress that she really is.
-
Is there anything a vast legion of fans (such as mentioned) can do to actually get this movie stopped before it is ruined? Because if so, I would jump all over the chance.
-
I'm slightly repeating someone else from another forum, but this is worth saying again. First step, Fox, get yourselves a DVD player. Then, pick up Buffy, Season 6 and watch how Joss Whedon tackles the Saga over the course of the season and, specifically, with the last few episodes. Willow slowly loses control of her powers, eventually going crazy nuts and killing from folk. It's only Xander, her best friend from childhood, who can TALK HER DOWN and PULL HER BACK FROM THE EDGE. There's all sorts of nifty, whiz-bag effects and fights and such, but it culminates in an EMOTIONAL CONNECTION between two characters. I can deal without Nightcrawler or Storm, but Cyclops is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to get it right.
-
My interpretation of Magneto's desire to kill all the humans was the very fact that humans were responsible for the holocaust. He believes mutants are the next evolutionary step, and humans are responsible for every historical act of savagery. That is what seperates he and Xavier. Magneto sees humans as obsolete, hateful barbarians to be done away with. And that is the great flaw in Magneto's philosophy.
-
Seriously. Fire Halle, rehire Alan, wait for a better director and script, and forget about trying to wedge in the romance angle with anybody.
-
Well, after reading that article I have to say that they did make a few good points. However, they missed the main idea of all the negative aspects that everyone is talking about. Yes, the script may have changed, but it doesn't seem like it has changed all that much, or at least enough to put the train back on the tracks. I have no problem with Ratner directing this movie. The man can direct and will do a fantastic job, better than nearly all of us but, it's the script that we all have a problem with. You can have a great director, but if the script is lacking all you're going to get is another "Lost World" and not a classic. If Fox has any confidence in the product that they are making why don't one of the big wigs release an updated shooting script of X-Men 3. That way we can all see if it's anything like the review that started all of this.
-
When in the hell did this become "Mutants Ball". "Make me feel gooooood...."
-
Shared a kiss or two in the 80's. Why is that gross...cause she's black. Storm (in the comics) was a fantastic character before the new generation forgot how to write her...much more interesting leader than Cyclops. Unfortunately, this hasn't translated to the big screen. (Just because she's black...half...doesn't mean she can play Storm.)
I'm sure Fox has paid out waaaaay too much money in pre production costs to push the movie back. Of course, no one consider's the business part when bashing these films. I kind of like the fact that the all the work has been done BEFORE Ratner came on board...that way it's not really his vision, but he can film the action (something Batman Begins needed).
Is this going to be better than X2...probably not. Here's hoping for something entertaining anyway.
I'm sorry was that too optimistic?
Fine.
Fuck X-Men, fuck Fox, Fuck Cumming.
Better? -
First Brett Ratner and now, no Nightcrawler? Seriously, he's the best character. Fox can shove Chris Tucker up Storm's ass.
-
question mark after "cause she's black?" in the above post. Changes the meaning COMPLETELY :)
-
Sorry, Fox. That's just wrong. You have royally screwed the pooch this time.
-
Isn't he like best buds with Avi Arad. He could tell us where he lives so we could go and kidnap him. This site stopped Superman! Stop this!
-
Jun 19, 2005 7:28:02 PM CDT
I'm just aggravated from the narrative angle, of character a
by demosthenes2
X2 was a proper introduction to Nightcrawler, and now apparently the introduction is all there will be to him?? If each subsequent installment introduces new characters to only feature them in that movie and then leave them for new characters and so on, then that's awfully depressing and uninteresting, as far as keeping us involved with them; it just becomes a stroll through a gallery. The first two installments did an excellent job of keeping us attentive to its wonderfully expanding cast; if this had the same talent behind it I doubt that they would discard any characters so callously.
-
Jun 19, 2005 7:37:51 PM CDT
Disappointing, but it hit me harder when I read it last night on
by axelfoley
and Lightstormer, suckle my ballbag. -
Good point. Again, I don't mind that Nightcrawler's gone so much because he was used VERY effectively in the second film, from both character and action aspects. While he could've been further expanded upon, his role was complete. I agree that I don't want characters to be used and discarded, but some of them CAN fall by the wayside. The two bits from X2 I want continued (aside from Phoenix, duh) would be the build up to the impending Iceman/Pyro fight and the promise of something more with Colossus. There was nothing much on either in the scripts review, and I get that the Colossus kid can't act (notice all his lines were looped and delivered off camera), but who really wouldn't like to see a Fastball Special in X3?
-
Hoo Hoo Robin, I invented making shitty sequels, tell em fred!
-
There is one thing that I forgot to mention. We're the audience for these movies. They are marketing these movies for us casual and comic book fans. They have an obligation to make sure that not only are these comic book movies faithful to the characters portrayed on screen, but to the overall tone and spirit of the comics in which the movies are based. That's right, I said that they have an obligation to make a good film, using the best of their resources and abilities. If it's all about money, and sadly most of the time it is, then just let us know... I mean put it in the title. X-Men 3! (Contractually Obligated Piece of Crap.) At least that way we know what we're shelling out 10 bucks a pop for, and won't be sadly disappointed.
-
I mean really, at this point we all know the film will be bad. Is it not a good thing that Cumming will not be around for the commin catastrophe? No. It's good that he is not for his own sake. XMen was horrible, and X2 was ok. Whoever was expecting something great wasn't paying attention to what they have seen on screen and what has been rumored to be on the way. The only thing that could have helped these characters is if they were not at Fox, which sadly cannot be fixed. So, lets all just wait calmly for this rushed piece of shit to come by and then we can all hang our heads in complete utter disgrace for what characters we love have become, complete charactures of what we have know them as.
-
And really, whats with everything being stolen from Joss. Everything from the whole mutant cure to Cassaday's cover art from the first issue being the teaser poster. It is going to Suck Suck Suck!!! Unoriginal assholes...
-
Call me crazy, but I have a feeling that X3 is going the route of the Batman movies post Tim Burton (with the exception of Batman Begins of course which has done for the Batman movies what Frank Miller's run did for the comics). I don't understand how the powers that be at Fox don't get how this project is falling apart at the seams: the script is subpar at best, the director attached is the most mediocre unexciting director in Hollywood just one notch above Paul Anderson, there were rumblings of replacing Patrick Stewart as well as Ian McKellan, the addition of Juggernaut as a villian (which is okay, but doesn't fit very well into the X Universe Bryan Singer has built up so far), and now this news of one of the most charismatic characters in X2, not to mention one of the best actors, not returning. It's looking baad.
-
Abandoning the character of Nightcrawler is just a bad idea. He was one of the stronger aspects of the last film and Cumming could do a great German accent. I don't know why producers would want to lose one of the few positive things this movies had going for it. I actually think that the casting of Cummings contributed significantly to reviews of the movie as many critics enjoy him for his various roles on Broadway (playing a German in the Tony winning Cabaret). Nightcrawler is one of the most unique and popular superheroes out there. This is just an indicator of how Fox will completely scrub this movie clean of any originality. Out with teleportation and in with, um, wings... I guess I'm really disappointed because Nightcrawler is my favorite superhero. When I used to read comics in the 80's and early 90's, he was one things that enabled the X-Men to stand apart from many other cookie-cutter superhero teams. At first glance, he was a straight-up freaky devil looking thing, but his personality was completely opposite. He was even embarrassed about the way he looked and often ridiculed for it. One of the first comics I read had this cool chase sequence in it where Nightcrawler was pursuing one of Galactus's heralds, Firelord I think, through New York, scaling walls, flipping through the air, spinning around flag poles and teleporting, just to catch him before he could reach some sort of portal. I also liked it when he would use his 'porting to deck a bunch of villians, knocking out the last guy before the first one even hit the floor. Oh well, looks like we can always look to past comics instead of theaters next summer to get our superhero fix. Hopefully, in another decade or so when when they decide to revisit the X-Men, they will learn from their past mistakes.
-
Think about it for a second, though. In the first movie, Magneto wasn't trying to kill anyone except Rogue --- just make mutants so that the leaders would understand. This becomes, in the second film, him trying to wipe out over 5 billion people? Would there even be enough mutants left to repopulate the world? And lord knows how'd they eat... It undermines the intrinsic nobility of Magneto's character to turn him into a purposeful attempted megamass murderer.
-
Do I even need to elaborate?
-
...may as well have been written by FOX's PR department, for all the objectivity on display.
-
This isn't all that bad. Now they should pull Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart (Phoenix kills Prof. X, you know) and just about anyone who had something to do with the first two. I'd like that.
-
Well, I'm done funding this franchise. Hello speed-viewing via bittorrent.
-
Nightcrawler won't be in there at all. Cumming sucked, Nightcrawler sucked, and this entire cinematic franchise has sucked since X-Men 1. These guys need to take a look at Sam Raimi's Spiderman, Christopher Nolan's Batman, and Ang Lee's The Hulk to see how a real comic adapatation is done. These movies just shit all over the comics and my entire childhood. I don't give a flying fuck either way, I'm not going to watch it.
-
the movie moved too damn slow. I realize the Hulk is a different kind of "hero" and that he doesn't necessarily oppose supervillainry, I understand that. But for crying out loud, Bana and Connelly had no chemistry whatsoever. Nick Nolte was sensationally annoying and complex. I know that he was supposed to be hateable, but he wasn't abhorant for the right reasons. I didn't like Ang's repressed feeling from childhood take on the Green Goliath mythos. It didn't work for me. Talk about a 180. Josh Lucas was miscasted as "anal retentive, obnoxious asshole government guy" when he should have played Rick Jones. On the plus side, I liked Sam Elliot. He was cool. The editing effects and cinematography was a mixed bag. I liked the comic book panels, but after a while I was like "meh". And keep in mind, this is from someone who adores comic book movies. Ang Lee can direct, but two summers after seeing this thing in the theatres, I still feel empty. I can't figure if Lee tried too hard to make the Hulk character into this Shakesperean tragedy Jekyl/Hyde epic or if Universal marketed this movie the wrong way, and overlooked releasing it in the winter like they should have. I can modestly say both are the case. Did I hate the Hulk? No..but I can't recall a movie I was more disappointed in in my entire life. Alright, you twisted my arm, Beverly Hills Cop III. -
I understand your disagreement. I personally felt Nightcrawler was was important to the film. He represented the juxaposition of character and appearance (as stated earlier by adolfoliver). He provided a humanity that was really absent in the other characters. He was the personification of the struggle for mutants. Apparently this role will be played by Beast in X3. To me his character was an awesome addition that I would love to see more of. My appeal was really about how this movie has gone awry and needs something to save it or we will witness the death of a great franchise.
-
is one of my fave marvel characters...to hear he's not involved and cyclops is killed off...well fuck this...who wrote this again? did anyone? did lucas?
-
I had no idea it could get any worse, but I was wrong...Nightcrawler was a total scene stealer in X2. What a shame though to let such a great character and actor slip through the cracks. Too bad, can FOX mess up even more?
-
I Am really hating Fox overall.
Not only did there tv Division Cancel Firefly and Wonderfalls two great shows, they seem to have no common Sence.
But With all Big Buisnes The reason the Dumb Asssess get there job to Begin with is not becouse of there talent but how much ass they kiss. And in return Produces utter CRAP!
And lets Forget Berry She has never really wanted to be in the films and if you go back to the first X-men she is the worst actress in the bunch!
Cummings was a great casting Choice one of the better ones.
As for killing of Cyclops that is Just insane he is a sorely underused Character in the movies and He is there leader in the Field.
-
Jun 19, 2005 9:40:35 PM CDT
Um...maybe we could wait until the film is ACTUALLY filming befo
by techtite
I'm no Nightcrawler hater, BUT: among dozens of X-characters, if the Dark Phoenix saga is to be the next storyline covered then there
-
Its time for all of us talkbackers to wise up. Fox could give to hairy shites about us or our opinions. They want this to fail, its the only explination. Do you thinh they care about fleshing out a good storyline that has already had its framework lain by two previous films? Hell no they don't, they have a release date already on the teaser poster and they haven't even started filming yet for Christ sake. They want to give Storm something to do (Wolverine wink, wink) because they want Hallie Berry happy, lord knows she was great in Catwoman...and while I'm on this rant, why do I care if Nightcrawler comes back when they are offing Proffessor X? Why not just kill them all off in the first five minutes and save anyone who is idiot enough to go see this garbage the numb ass they would get sitting at the theatre? Want to cheese off Fox? Don't go see this, download it instead then watch it and shit all over it in the talkbacks....thats all they deserve any way. Screw em I'm out.
-
Seriously, I think the people at FOX must have a whole "How can we screw up X3" creativity team to come up with this stuff.
-
Batman begins isn't bombing. And X3 is not necesarily going to suck either. Geez, enough hate already. So Cummings isn't gonna be in this one. Not a big fucking lose. We'll get over it.
-
The one thing I missed about the movie Nightcrawler was the lack of swashbuckling. I guess I mean they played him so heavy, especially with the angelic tattoos (which I don't remember from the comic). I guess it's cool to introduce the character that way (and it worked), but it would have been nice to see him lighten up in further movies, do some sword fights, have a beer with Logan, maybe even try his hand at leading a mission and screw up, etc. Oh well. And though I agree with some of the IESB thing, they came off sounding like total assholes, and kinda illiterate ones at that with all the run on sentences. From what I read about those interviews from Vaughn they were referring to, I didn't think he showed a lack of respect for Singer at all - he was just trying to differentiate his style, something that Ratner apparently doesn't have. And BTW, thanks for the quote on the Dark Phoenix/Willow thing, Master Whedon. That was me.
-
Hey, Powermetal1!
Guess what??!! I am a faggot. Or fag. Or butt bandit. Whatever you want to call me. Trust me, I've had read it all and had it said to my face, baby cakes). What you fear is the queer inside you. The one with the crush on that upper classman. Or the wrestling coach. Or even that burly guy down at the hardware store (Oh, you'd just die if your dad knew why you're always tagging along..). Or whoever it is in those "doesn't mean a thing" dreams you're keep having.
Oh, and Osama Bin Laden? Oh, honey! That's SO 5 minutes ago (and less time it would take him to own you're ass).
Toodles!
ps. My husband's a big metal head! Maybe you used to date! -
Jun 19, 2005 10:35:48 PM CDT
"I have a feeling that X3 is going the route of the Batman movie
by big dumb ape
To me, the loss of Nightcrawler is no biggie since the prime complaint fans AND the actors themselves perpetually have is that there's a fractured structure to these things going in where everyone wants to see a particular character getting more and more screen time. So it seems to me that it's pretty obvious if you've ALREADY got Jackman and Berry and McKellan and Stewart and Jansen bitching up a storm about coming back unless they have enough to do AND that collides with you needing to make time onscreen to likewise introduce all-new characters as a box office stunt/draw (ie. Beast and Angel and new villain), you've clearly got to cut SOMEONE out, so Cumming's becomes expendable. Hey, did I like him? Sure. Would I like him back? Sure. Personally I would have kept Nightcrawler and punted Iceman and Roque this time around. But all in all, trading off Cummings to get Beast AND Angel introduced with worthy screen time is fine by me. As for the analogies to this franchise going downhill and comparing it to the Bat franchise -- and the way people perpetually bag on the Schumacher films -- you know here's a little historical tidbit for people to consider when they debate what the diehard fans want versus what the "suits" at the studios want versus what the GENERAL PUBLIC will actually want or prefer to pay for. Schumacher gets a bad rap here for "killing" the Bat films with BATMAN & ROBIN, but the other half of history to remember is that Schumacher's BATMAN FOREVER actually made a lot MORE money for the studio than BATMAN RETURNS, the Burton film. In fact, it was BECAUSE Warner Bros. was so disappointed in the box office drop off between Batman and Batman Returns that they asked Schumacher to come in and give the franchise a different look and a fresh attitude and it worked. FOREVER actually opened to favorable reviews, many thought it was more appropriate a tone than the overly dour and dark RETURNS, and in the end FOREVER actually outgrossed RETURNS pretty substantially. The problem was, Warner and Schumacher translated that success into this whacked logic of "See? They do want Batman lighter and a bit campier. So we'll go even MORE campy the next time out"...and hence a major miscalculation where BATMAN & ROBIN became a true campfest and simply went TOO far over the edge and thus bombed. But the bottom line is that the transition from Burton's version & vision to Schumacher's version & vision actually started just fine...and the GENERAL PUBLIC (not the diehard comic fans) preferred Schumacher's way. So like others here, I'd say let's give X3 a chance to see what it's like before we go too crazy on its ass. Personally, I liked the RUSH HOUR movies and I thought RED DRAGON was essentially competent, so I can see Ratner potentially delivering on this.
-
Would you just drop your stupid "I'm not homophobic" rant? No one bought it the first 20 times you posted it. Call it what you want. Ignorance is ignorance. Hate and fear are pretty much the same thing - haven't you seen Episode III? And I finally saw Batman Begins and it blew my away, what I always wanted Batman to be, a true mythic hero. It almost makes me care a little less about X-Men, knowing that amazing films like this are getting made. We'll always have the comics.
-
I'm sure you can single handedly convince enough people to buy tickets to Batman to make it not be a flop. I liked Batman Begins, I really did. The problem was that it was a bad concept from the start. 7 years is not enough time to start a whole franchise all over again and as good as it was, it just didn't have the imagination of Burton's vision. Burton's Gotham was a German expressionist wet dream, Keaton an unlikley psycho vigilante. Of course you can find a more buff, more pissed off Batman but that wasn't the point. Keaton's Batman wasn't a ninja. He was a very disturbed person with everything to lose and nothing to gain. I know DC Comics basically has nothing compared to Marvel in terms of viable franchises but going back to the Batman and Superman well is kind of pathetic, no matter how good the films turn out to be. Batman begins had some cool ideas, taking Bruce Wayne out of Gotham City and giving believable explanations for all his toys but now what? He's going to fight the Joker AGAIN? Between Nicholson and Hamill we have that pretty well covered. As for Cummings, now that Singer is gone, the franchise no longer has to bow down to the gay agenda, so it seems they're taking advantage of that by leaving out Nightcrawler and killing off Fa--Mag-neto. What can I say, all the world loves homosexuality when it involves two hot girls but it ends there. No one said life is fair.
-
Moriarty, it's ok to vehemently protest something that you think is going to be shit. This "new" post is just weakening your (justifiably) enthusiastic prior comments on the seemingly craptastic X3 we are likely to get. I understand you want to make sure that FOX knows you only want a good movie, but serioously, do you really think that's possible in the given timeframe left? Don't pull this see-saw crap, esp if it's because you think FOX is gonna give you shit because of your comments. Stand by your convictions, we will back you up.
The movie looks like it's going to be shit. Killing off key people (Xavier/Cyclops) is a stupid move. If anything, they should DO something with Cyclops, he should be a much more bad ass character. They need to not worry about whatever the fuck Bryan Singer wants to do with his film, and just get this one right.
Giant sentinels, Dark Phoenix, stop adding useless characters. That's all we want. If you need to get rid of peripheral characters, leave 'em out and make some comment as to how they're off on a mission somewhere. It worked in the funny pages. It's not that hard. And stop trying to get Gambit into this picture. We dont care. He's cheesy. keep the ones we have, and do something GOOD with them. Cumming not coming back? Good. It won't matter if the story's good. Let's deal with something solid, a GREAT story. Something us X-fans can sink our teeth into. Not some cardboard cut-out of the last two films, not some stupid knock-off of Whedon's X-men comic story. Let's see somehting worth my $10 please. Jesus Christ, go back to re-writes, and Hire someone who gives a fuck. Get Rodriguez, he obviously cares about source material. Hell, wait 'till Bryan Singer comes back. Who gives a fuck as long as it's good, and people involved care about the characters! -
I've followed AICN for some time, and never bothered to comment. After the pretentious fashion that so many movies have been handled, I don't see why you should suddenly change style and become a whimpering marketing tool.
I don't care if Stan Lee personally knocked on your door and told you he'd ban you from all the comic book stores, AICN has gone so long being an honest yet highly opinionated forum that I see no reason to wuss out now.
I hope that X3 is great; now they have to try to hold themselves to the new comic book standard of Batman Begins. But if they aren't willing to do things right, it simply won't happen and there's no reason to flinch after saying that.... -
Jun 19, 2005 11:46:46 PM CDT
Mori, "As always, the fan community focuses only on the negative
by immortal_fish
He who holds the bag of rabid ferrets agrip...
-
Looks like Indy is going to be the only good movie out next year. IF it fucking gets made. And, of course, providing it isn't steaming shit. I could understand if Cumming had told them to fuck off but it says on his site that Fox has failed to pick up his option to play Nightcrawler in X-men 3. Are they screwed?? You can bet your ass that Singer would have used him, or else what was the fucking point of using him in X2? Fuck Fox. Fuck Ratner. Fuck Singer for leaving to make a movie that nobody wants to see.
-
Switch to decaf. 'Nuff said.
-
...it's hard to not be negative. I mean, I said there are things to admire about the script: I like the way they introduce Angel as described and, if they can preserve the scene where he flies through the window to escape, regardless of context, that would be cool as well. That said, some of the ideas introduced in the script are so bad that there isn't much worth being "constructive" over. A romance between Storm and Wolverine is a BAD idea, no matter which way you slice it, as is killing Xavier. As for Cyclops -- I'm not sure exactly whose idea it was to snuff him out, but if the basis of the decision has to do with money concerns or not having enough material to give the character (which seems odd considering the juiciest material should come out of the whole Dark Phoenix situation), then why not just write him off in a way that doesn't kill him? There is the obvious problem of large chunks of the plot resembling both of the first two movies, but I'm not sure there's any way to fix that at this point. The de-mutant serum thing is actually interesting to me, but it depends on how it's presented. As it was done in "Astonishing," I admired. That is to say, the whole marketing of the drug, mutants waiting in line for their "cure," etc. I'd actually think it would be a better idea if somebody besides for Papa Worthington helped engineer the drug and he merely bought it for his son. It would keep the motivations of his character in place but could free up opportunities to look at the "mutant problem" from a different perspective -- perhaps a self-loathing mutant creates the cure? But methinks I ask too much by now. I'm also skeptical as to how much Fox would listen to us ferrets. But those are my two cents, presented in a way I consider fair. Take it or leave it.
-
You know, just like the fabulous third entry in the "Jaws" franchise! It'll be almost like Wolverine's adamantium claws are cutting right through the screen! Hey, but seriously..."Blade: Trinity", "Daredevil", "Electra", "Fantastic Four", and "Ghost Rider" alongside this...is it safe to say that the Marvel Magic has been officially extinguished from the film universe? I fear for even the Amazing Spiderman these days. Of course, the presence of Topher Grace might have something to do with that. Has there ever been a more 'emo' film franchise than that one?
-
If the movie sucks, which there is a good possibility at this point, it won't matter if Cummings is in the movie or not, that's the least of the problems right now with X3. With BB, I can't wait for the sequel, Bale is a better Wayne/Batman than Keaton ever was and Nicholson as the Joker isn't the be all and end all of the character.
-
Jun 20, 2005 12:28:40 AM CDT
Well, now that everyone is singing my song, shouldn't I get
by adambalm
So all of the sudden people collapse like Yoda grabbing his chest while Order 66 is carried out, when they hear the news that Batman Begins is underperforming. Which is that I've been saying Wednesday's estimates were in. (Oh, that's just low because it's a weekday) blah blah. I'm not goint to rehash the reasons, but this could get better, or this could get worse. Either way, it's going to do great on DVD, most likely.
-
Nightcrawler is actually one of my favorite characters. However, I echo the sentiments of people in here who've said that the X-Men movies should basically be like a revolving door of characters. His arc was pretty complete in 'X2,' and while I'd like to see more of him, it's not the biggest loss to the franchise if they don't really devote any time to him in number 3. That said, this whole "expanding Storm's role" thing might end up being a bad idea. I know there might be more in play with this decision than merely trying to meet Halle Berry's whims (not enough female characters), but really, look at the B.O. that the first 'X-Men' did? Do you think a substantial amount of that was from people who went to see it because Halle Berry was in it? In turn, look at 'Gothika' and 'Catwoman.' Halle Berry does NOT equal box office success. It's okay to not bend over backwards to meet her demands, or to keep her around because of some perceived demographic you feel like you have to cater to. Guess what, Fox? We're a demographic too, and we want a good movie.
-
Jun 20, 2005 12:33:15 AM CDT
Nightcrawler and Archangel were always my favorites as a kid.
by mr. anderson
When I was little and reading the comics and watching the cartoon, I always thought they were the coolest looking characters. But now that I'm older, they're still my favorites, but for different reasons. In the hands of a talented writer, they can actually play really well off of each other, given that Nightcrawler is demonic-looking with a pointy tail, and Angel is a friggin angel. Brian K Vaughan handles those two characters perfectly in ULTIMATE X-MEN, my favorite X-book because it's exactly how I remember the X-Men from when I was a kid. And when I heard that Angel was being introduced in X3, I was hoping for some cool interaction between him and Kurt, given that Kurt is deeply religious, but also how people react to seeing the two of them together. There are some really great possibilities there, and I just hope Fox gives this movie the chance it deserves to be as good as it deserves.
-
Emo = immature existentialism. Some examples: what if I cut my wrists? Black is nonconformist. Parents in general don't respect the individuality of the youth of America. What's wrong with kissing strangers? ****** The subculture of emo usually listens to emo music, alternative rock that is marked by either a difference in key or lyrics that focus on existential angst or sincere reactions to heartbreak. More popular emo bands include Jimmy Eat World, Dashboard Confessional, and Coheed & Cambria, but there is a subsubculture within emo that eschews these bands as too populist and instead opts for emo bands with "integrity" like The Used, Story of the Year, Atreyu and Hawthorne Heights, who sing melodramatic, ludicrous and completely irresponsible songs about how important insincerely sincere romantic relationships are and what it would be like to cut yourself...for good!!! Emo kids and young adults are also known to shop at Hot Topic, have an irrational infatuation with the '80s, and own a MySpace account. And if this stuff isn't on Wikipedia somewhere, it should be, dammit.
-
I've got the 80s cartoon series and watched the 90s one and played almost every game since the Nintendo one that had Iceman... that's about all I've got to run off of. (Unless you want to count the mint issue 0 X-men alpha that's under my bed...) Anyway, glad to hear Storm is not the big deal that all things outside the comics have made her. I could do without her too. Peace.
-
until they give me cyke how he should be...leading the damn x-men in what needs to be done. a living professor x if you'd please as well.
-
Jun 20, 2005 12:44:35 AM CDT
Shouldn't NightCrawler have been built like Bruce Lee; all r
by monkey_king
Cummings was great, but not perfect as Kurt/Nightcrawler. Now, Mark Dacascos on the other hand, just for a brief fight scene as Kurt, would be fan-fucking-tastic....just fix his teeth this time dammit!
-
I can see through them immediately. I fucking suck.
Thanks for that voodoo you do, folks. Much love. -
They should put nightcrawler in it expose him and Rogue as siblings and Mystique as the mother... Oh and have Nightcrawler kicking some serious ass with a sword. Less Storm (although Haley Berry is hotter than Hell) and more Nightcrawler I say. Oh... and Jesus agrees with me. He told me so. Take that Fox...
-
I only have two words for you (and they're not what you think - I wouldn't stoop to your level) and then I'm done with your bullshit: seek therapy, you unconscious fuck. Oh well, I guess that's more than two. Too bad.
-
Kee-ripes! Can't remember the last time I heard that term phrase!!! Maybe when "Tainted Love" was a top 10 hit... Uh-huh-huh. I said "taint"! ... 'Scuse me, but I ain't never been a "switch hitter" (i.e. bisexual). I'm a HOMOsexual, you fool! You "emoticon"-using-fool!!!
ps. Loved your interview on "Fresh Air" -
then you have more problems than me "riding pony". I'm... I'm SO sorry. Now I'm the weeping girly guy... for you! Are you happy? ARE YOU???
-
Unfortunely it looks like the fox executives may be unndervaluing the importances of Nightcrawler to the X-Men Mythology.
Currently he is the only member of the team that LOOKS DIFFERENT he is SCARY looking, the rest of them are pretty people, including wolverine. It is hard to believe that a bunch of beautiful people with cool superpowers are shunned as a minority. In this day and age they would be regarded as celebrities, maybe with a little fear entangled. But Nightcrawler highlights the difference between mutants and 'humans' by him looking so different but behaving so 'human', with the exception of Xavier, Nightcrawler is the only character that really wants EVERYONE to have better lives, the others are just soldiers being ordered. Removing Nightcrawler takes away a VERY IMPORTANT element of the X-Men. That is the whole tag of 'sworn to PROTECT a world that FEARS and HATES them'. People don't hate an angel, they are in awe of him, they don't hate a smart friendly 'beast' they are comforted by him. Nightcrawler is a 'devil' and thus people are afraid of him, but the point of the mythos is that BEHAVING like humans is what counts, and this is what nightcrawler does.
However with that said, this isnt such a great deal, a great movie CAN be made without him, and he still has the option to return in a future film. It wouldnt be so hard to believe that after being brainwashed he needs to reclaim his humanity or return to germany or perhaps he pursues his religion in a fundamental manner. If they are removing the character of Nightcrawler because to many characters clog up the script, that is fine; but i the executives and scriptwriters realise the visual and thematic importance he has to the X-Men.
Also in response to Bootskin, making Cyclops a 'Badass' is a bad idea. The key to cyclops is that he doesnt lose his cool, he has a zen-like calm in battle and is able to direct the team. That is why he is a leader, not because he shouts and yells and loses his cool. Giving him an 'attitude' is how bad writers would go about making him interesting, i admit he was weak in the previous films but he can be reserved and cool at the same time, he just needs to be written with a little more calmed intensity. -
I'd let it pass if they had a death scene at the beginning, or at least a flashback.
-
I do agree with the AICN staff. It does seem rather foolish to just rush a movie. Honestly, I'd rather wait a year or two more for another X-Men movie and have it be great than have an average movie come earlier. Here's hoping the studio gets a killer script that actually does the right thing. I also hope they don't make the mistake of thinking that Halle Berry is the star of this franchise compared to Hugh Jackman. Hell, Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen are the blood of the franchise, and look what might happen to them.
-
I'm sorry to any emo kids who may be patrons of this site. Obviously the characteristics listed above are stereotypes of what makes one "emo," and I'm not trying to imply that you exhibit most or any of those traits, and I also know that there's a philosophy - to an extent - behind the whole "emo" thing. So again, sorry.
-
I'd just like to add: The reason that Spiderman, X-Men and Batman (Begins) have been sucessful film franchises is because they are more than just visually entertaining. Elektra, Daredevil,F4, Ghost Rider,Catwoman etc. These are/will be flop movies because all that they have to bring to the mythos of the comics is to engage on visual level. It is great to pair a director/writer team with a comic book that they RESPECT but it is better to ding a director/writer team that actually UNDERSTANDS the book. Spiderman, X-Men, Batman and Superman have been popular for DECADES because they have a message about humanity: Either overcoming of odds stacked against you, finding humanity in a humanless world, knowing that to do what is right means to isolate yourself these are why these films are watched by the general public and not just the fans. What can a ninja chick, a flaming skeleton on a motorbike and a dominatrix bring to people then a short lived visceral thrill.
Damn it. And Fantastic Four could have been cool if they realised it wasnt all about the aesthetics. As they trailer stands, it is DOOMED. Man im clever. -
Grats on being first man! Yeah X-Men is overrated as far as the films are concerned, but that doesn't mean I want to condemn this one to mediocrity before it's even fully conceived yet. I do hope this turns out good.
-Az -
Nightcrawler not being in the film I can handle. I agree with those who said that Cumming was great in the role and the character was well handled, but storywise, it's not essential to have him be in this movie. There are certainly enough characters as it is. But man, I can't get over how lame it would be to kill Cyclops early on in the movie that should naturally finally give that character some very important material to work with through the whole film, considering it's the Phoenix story. Terrible, terrible idea that I hope is reconsidered. Come on Fox, there's still time...
-
I dug the shit out of his performance, and question the existence of a just God when he goes and Halle Barry stays. At least she dropped her terrible "African" accent on the second go-round. Save a few bones by recasting Angela Bassett as Storm, and I'll even approve of her hooking up with Wolverine.
-
Jun 20, 2005 4:36:51 AM CDT
Anyone else see Cruise get water sprayed at him at the WOTW prem
by trevor goodchild
-
listen to fans if they want this franchise to contin... eh, right... seems they don't want THAT. IF, by any remote chance, you wanna save the franchise, I do have a couple suggestion to the suits:
1) Get a new script, as this one really sucks a hairy ass. Get a new and ORIGINAL script, not a rehash of X2.
2) Fire Halle Berry and replace her with another actress! We don't want that incompetent diva ruining the franchise. *cough* catwoman *cough* say no more...
-
Maybe now the pathetic whining aspect of the talkbacks will dissapear. I wish. But at least this will take care of some of the Puppets that visit the site screaming "I KNOW MOVIES!!!! I SAW LORD OF THE RINGS 8 TIMES!!! THIS MOVIE SUCKS, I HAVENT SEEN IT YET, BUT THE DIRECTOR BLAH BLAH BLAH.... I WILL REPEAT WHATEVER HARRY AND HIS GANG SAY AND ACT LIKE I CAME UP WITH IT!!! BECAUSE I AM A GENIUS!! SO F U!!"
sigh.... -
Ok... no nightcrawler... so what? I mean yeah ok, he was good in X2 and all but the universe is big enough for another cool new X-Man I guess... But a wolvie storm hookup? What happens when she has an orgasm? The sun blazes brighter and hurricanes destroy half of America's coastline? I can already see the Saturday Night Live Skit...
"Hard? Honey I'm as hard as hard is ever gonna get!" -
Sideshow Bob in X3 is going to be a hard one to get over
-
it seem Moriarty knows a lot more about the script right now, and that nightcrawler would have been one of the others good things of X3..
moreover ,I've spoken to a lot of people since yesterday and the majority hoped that nightcrawler would be back.for them , nightcrawler was one of the best things in X2.
it's no to late to change your mind Fox,And to give to X3 all the chances that it is the best possible movie, and hence really succesful..the future of a franchise which could get you millions of dollars for years is in your hands , don't screw up.
-
I saw again Dawn of the the dead OF Zach Snyder , two days ago , and i was absolutely blown away again: this guy would still give greater tension (imagine life after the death of jean..the departure of cyke..the new mutant/human statue quo after the dramatic events of X2..the cure dillemna),a thrilling , chilling sense of doom (that the coming of phoenix need ) much more broadth to X3 ( imagine citizen of new york running with horror by seeing what does phoenix , and other mutants does..)
but also ,greater action (he could make the Xmen teamwork dynamics work..making much needed great heroic moments , for the xmen be even more touching..)with absolutely incredibly touching human characters which would help to understand even their most condemnable act, helping the movie to be really complex ( phoenix's origin ...the cure dillemna again) mixed with great humor ( Snyder knows how to take humans flaws and laugh at it , without making the characters cartoonish..)
he is the guy.
he is the guy.
-
Who the hell is "Alan Cumming"? Who cares?
-
Oh bullhonkey! The review and Mori's commentary really painted a bleak picture. After a Fox somebodyorother ripped him a new one in an email and he defended by saying it was constructive criticism now he wants to blame the "fan community"! I also hate that he just painted the "fan community" with one brush stroke. I didn't read a single talkback before I posted so I apologize. I hope I am not the only one bugged by the softened, friendly stance.
-
Just asking...
-
Jun 20, 2005 6:24:27 AM CDT
Aintitfool and I hope that you're typing this from a clinic.
by proman1984
Because hateful morons like you need to be instutionalized.
-
For me starts and ends with Ratner. Go to IMDB.com and find his directed list and tell me which of those movies gives one even a smidgen of hope. Unless Jackie Chan is joining the team, forget it. I mean, did you see "After the Sunset?" I am gessing the qualities FOX likes best is that he shoots on time and on schedule with quality a distant concern at best. I feel sick after thinking of this again - sick and pissed off!
-
Now there's a shit movie.
-
Moriarty just reposted a piece of news that Harry already posted just so he could chime in with his two cents? Can't you just post in the talkbacks like everyone else?
-
And the best scenes his character's ever going to have were in X2. Wouldn't surprise me if Rebecca Romijn bails for the same reason.
-
Yes it will. Which means it doesn't HAVE to be good. When will you people learn?
-
...and there have been a number of interviews that indicate that they are, I' like to make one point very, very clear. *Killing a hero is always a HUGE risk, and if you do it, it has to be done WELL and should be the subject of a WHOLE FILM.* This is Writing 101. Now, if you wish to trim a cast, or remove a few characters from circulation, there are five hundred ways to do that without *killing* anyone, and hey, if you do it briefly and with a little cretivity, you can *expand* the universe and set up spin-offs. IN the initial leaked script draft, there are definately some scenes that show real promise, but you will *never* get rid of the bad buzz by handling the situation in the manner that is being used, and with the suspiciously short deadline, a director of established middle-of-the-road credentials, and lots of bad press so far, Fox really needs to make some moves in the next few weeks. The internet and blogs are *buzzing* with this topic (in fandom as well as non-fandom places), and I have to tell you, the words are ugly. U. G. L. Y. Good luck.
-
I agree whole-heartedly on your remarks about Cyclops. His almost "zen-like" leadership qualities are exactly what I was referring to by the term "bad-ass". I'm not saying they should Wolverine him up, but in the Marvel Universe, hes second only to Captain America, and maybe Nick Fury in terms of leadership. This has never even been touched on in the movies, and if you asked joe movie goer what he thought of Cyclops as the leader of the X-men, he'd look at you and say..."wha?"
So, sorry if my terminology was bad, but we meant the same thing.
now if this movie can be saved from the shit-can it seems to be heading for... -
They scrap an interesting character with an ace mutant power that works brilliantly for fight scenes, but keep the incredibly boring and "only here because she has to be" Halle "Storm" Berry? What are Fox on...
-
Look, Mori, you have to see this from our POV. We see "Phoenix vaporizes Cyclops early on," "Juggernaut doesn't meet Prof X before he too is killed," and "No Nightcrawler," and we are going to be pissed. SO FUCKING WHAT IF SOME THINGS WORK IN THE SCRIPT! Some things worked in Batman and Robin (Mr. Freeze making the ice sculpture of his wife), that doesn't fix other elements ruin the movie! It doesn't make those crappy inclusions okay. And as fans we're not obligated to compromise. We should not be asked to do that. Not like this. Changing costumes, that's a compromise we can make. Few or no Sentinels...well, I think that's a BULLSHIT line to draw as far as stretching believability, but okay we can live with that. No Apocolypse or Shi'ar Empire. Okay....yeah, we can got that far. Killing off major characters that have been underutilized because we want to do more with the ones played by stars...THAT is not acceptable. Cyclops and Prof X dying (early in the movie and by Jean no less) are not acceptable plot elements. This whole mess is killing my interest in the X-movies as quickly as the deaths of Hicks and Newt killed my interest in the Alien franchise. I don't give two fucks if it's being overly negative or uncompromising, it's the way it is.
-
maybe, if they recast? And I totally agree with GreatWhiteWhale: Nightcrawler is important because he can't hide who he is (and I hoped they never use that silly image inducer from the comics). Maybe they'll pick that up with Beast, but I doubt it since it seems like he's got a respected position. Remember the little exchange with Nightcrawler and Mystique in X2 about hiding who they are? Nightcrawler is definitely the heart of Xavier's dream. I say he's essential. Oh, and people who say Cummings left because of Singer's leaving (some kinda gay solidarity), remember how Cumming said he was relieved when Singer left because they didn't exactly get along.
-
If Moriarty wants fans to focus on positive, let's just say that core characters like Nightcrawler are integral to X-men lore, but considering the X-3 TB of last week in relation to casting questions/character focus in general, if Cumming wants out, it's better now than later. And heavy make-up and a good voice coach can go a long way for continuity.
-
come on people....
-
That needed to be said. Oh, and MasterWhedon, saw the trailer for your firefly movie: fucking awesome. How come you're not directing X-3. As you've pointed out, you did Dark Phoenix so well on Buffy.
-
that way it may be room for halle berry and her giant ego...
x-men franchise 2000-2006 -
I saw it the other night also but I wasn't stoned. So if it's still bad even when high then there is no hope. It was like an old episode of a Peter Davison Dr Who with an extra tenner for CGI.
-
Someone above may have mentioned this, but... Okay, so no Nightcrawler. The X films have enough blue characters as it is(and now Beast as well). Halle Berry wants a bigger part or more money, whatever, and she was never that great in the part to begin with and she doesn't sell tickets(well maybe to Swordfish, but not X-Men). Simply have them off on a mission somewhere else, mention it briefly and you're good to go. There was a hint of romance between the two in X2 anyway so it's a good pairing(hell, send Colossus with them). Other than the primary cast, no one will miss many of these mutants if they are replaced with other mutants. Just please don't recast the roles, that's all I ask. It would be nice to have one series with some good continuity over 3 films.
-
"You're a jerk" You're a jerk". I hate you I hate you. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4107922.stm
-
This seems the most popular TB at the moment and after seeing Batman Begins I was wondering how the Joker got his appearance in the comics. Is it the same as Burton's shot in the cheeks-falling into a vat of chemicals? Nice little reference in BB by the way. "I'll Look Into It".
-
The guy can't act, he thinks that changing his name to James is making people take him seriously, and the only time I can watch him is when he's getting smacked in the head. Please replace him with Kirby Morrow, who ironically played Cyclops in "X-Men Evolution".
-
...elsewhere in the talkback, but I'd like to second the notion that Fox is missing out on a very cool visual/thematic character dynamic by introducing Angel and NOT bringing Nightcrawler back. One is a devout Christian who looks like a devil, the other is a rich, selfish playboy who looks like an angel. Cue the odd couple music and watch the fun. I'm not surprised, though. Compared to killing off Cyclops in the same scene where they introduce Dark Phoenix and killing off Prof. X before even introducing the Juggernaut, not picking up Cumming's option on Nightcrawler barely qualifies as an "oops." Moriarty's backpedal on this movie is amusing, though. Once again, he lights the match and pisses gasoline on the fire only to stand back and tsk, tsk the rest of us for pulling out our marshmallows. Mori, you're the best (serious) writer on this site, but you lack anything resembling integrity concerning the taking of responsibility for what you write. And, while we're on that topic, what's with all the racism and gay bashing in this talkback? I knew the 80s were back last year when we had the rash of "I make big cash, fuck lots of beautiful women and piss on the poor" posts around the time of the election, but now it seems were' headed straight back to the 1950s. Maybe someone should greenlight a "Happy Days" movie to cash in on the prevailing sentiment. For whoever asked seriously, Singer is gay. For those who have used that as a reason to bash his work, guess what? He brought the angst and uncertainty of knowing you are different and shunned by the rest of society to a movie about a comic that dealt specifically with those themes for more than 30 years. Then he built on that foundation in X2. His gayness made the first two movies better. And, in case you're confused like Powermetal and I Dunno, liking those movies doesn't necessarily make you gay. It's your desire to engage in anal and oral sex acts with members of your own gender that makes you guys gay. As for Batman, who cares what kind of box office it does? Did you see it? Did you like it? Will you buy the DVD? If your answers to these questions (like the answers of many who have bothered to share) are "Yes," then WB will make the sequel they set up and we can all look forward to another good Batman movie in our lifetimes. All this talk about box office is just empty dick-waving that has nothing to do with how good the movie actually is.
-
The Joker was an unnamed engineer who quit his job at a chemical company to become a stand-up comedian, only to fail miserably. Desperate to support his pregnant wife, he agreed to guide two criminals into the plant for a robbery. During the planning, the police came and informed him that his wife had just died in a household accident. Grief-stricken, the engineer tried to withdraw from the plan, but the criminals strong-armed him into keeping his commitment to them.
At the plant, the criminals made him don a special mask to become the infamous Red Hood. Unknown to the engineer, this was simply a way to implicate any accomplice as the mastermind of a crime to divert attention from themselves. Once inside, they almost immediately blundered into security personnel and a violent shootout and chase ensued. The criminals were gunned down and the engineer found himself confronted by Batman, who was investigating the disturbance.
In panicked desperation, the engineer escaped by diving into a toxic waste vat and swam through a pipe leading to the outside. Once there, he discovered, to his horror, that the chemicals permanently stained his appearance into that of a clown-like being with chalk white skin, ruby red lips and bright green hair. This turn of events, compounded by the man's misfortunes on that one day, caused him to go completely insane and resulted in the birth of the Joker.
Some call him Joe Kerr, others Jack Napier but this has become the accepted Origin story (As detailed in Batman: The Killing Joke written by Alan Moore, the greatest living contributor to the comic medium) It will be interesting to see where Nolan and Goyer take this character, especially know i hear Tim Roth is close to being cast.
-
Jun 20, 2005 10:46:30 AM CDT
Anyone see the Marilyn Chambers film "Up and Cumming"?
by cutest_of_borg
Just asking.
-
Gotta having Cumming back.
-
Though I agree with most of your post, ChildeRoland, I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say Singer's "gayness" helped the film. The problem so many of the gaybashers seem to have about Singer (esp. w/Superman) is that the "gayness" will overwhelm things. While that may be true for Schumacher (who could forget that "in your face" ass-shot of Batman in BF, the nipples, and the constant "gay-uendo"), it certainly is not true for Singer. He does not, unlike what many gaybashers say, "gay up" his movies. Singer makes good films regardless of his sexual orientation. He certainly doesn't swish about in his interviews (again, like Schumacher, who's a gigantic queen - but then again, I'm not against Schumacher in principle - didn't he do Lost Boys? And Phone Booth was kinda cool). For the Xflix BS decided to work in a potent metaphor about hiding your identity and being persecuted for it. It works for being gay, it works for being politically (hello, Hollywood blacklist in the 50s) or religiously different (like the pagans out there who even use the terms "in the closet"), etc. Singer probably related to the gay interpretation, but he certainly did not need to be gay to come up with it or for it to work. And yes, Ian McKellen is openly gay (and certainly likes them much younger, if you remember the Oscars) but did that in any way hamper his performances as Gandalf? Or Magneto? (well, there's a bit of gay in his interp - it made it especially hard to believe that he had a "thing" with Mystique. But his performance as a whole still worked and you don't notice the winks unless you're really looking for it.) Cummings' performance was way toned down from his usual over-the-top stuff, like in Spy Kids or Son of the Mask, and it would have been cool to see him be all Errol Flynn-esque in sequels (which, if you think about it, is an old school hyper-masculinity, that almost approaches a kind of male drag).
-
Isn't-It-Wonderful-News exclusive:
http://img260.echo.cx/img260/2784/takeitinyourfacetommy0hc.jpg
-
Isn't-It-Wonderful-News exclusive:
http://img260.echo.cx/img260/2784/takeitinyourfacetommy0hc.jpg
-
What I found most interesting and unique about the X-Men and X2 were the philosophical Martin Luther King/Malcolm X style differences. The discussions and such were riveting - and I feel that by killing off both characters is a bad bad decisions, especially without a truly 'final' scene between them both. What would be a more sensible option, would be to simply have Charles and Eric go on somesort of quest together, maybe related to Jean/Phoenix, and so they have the opportunity to return in X4 whilst not being in X3. Personally, I think the fan reaction to X3 news has been totally blown out of proportion, and when you really consider it, things aren't that bad. Only negative things I can point out are - killing off Prof. X and Magneto and Rothman/deadlines. Some other things can be seen either way...Cyclops was a shit character in the films, so no big loss there, but there is also the waste opportunity of some heavy Scott/Phoenix/Logan scenes...Nightcrawler and Mystique have both been pretty muxh exhausted - bamfing and shapeshifting have been used as plot points enough in the first 2 films...the plot may seem repetitive but poses an interesting twist, would mutants give up their powers if they could?..or to apply it to reality, would a gay person be choose to be straight if they could?...not sure if Pyro is in the film or not, can be seen either way. In contrast, some elements are great...Beast + Angel...Phoenix...Bobby/Rogue development...more great action etc. And don't forget that we have no idea what the 3rd Act is, if its anything like X2's then the first two Acts won't matter :D
-
...sounds like Rothman and FOX got to Harry and either offered him a bone or threatened his family or something 'cuz posting that open letter to FOX shareholders with a clearly negative script review didn't sound like a misunderstanding to me.
-
meant to say X and M return in X5, without being in X4..
-
Nightcrawler was just a-Cumming between them. No shame, people.
-
Jun 20, 2005 11:18:22 AM CDT
Wow, what kind of a world do we live in when $71 million over 4
by lost skeleton
Batman was never going to do Spider-Man numbers but the flick is doing well and should cross the 200 million mark this year.
-
Yeah man, I actually watched the first five minutes sober and just couldn't take it anymore. I'm reading the book (it's fucking huge) at the moment and let me tell you: the book is NOTHING like the movie, it's so much better. I'm not gonna convert to Scientology or anything over it, but the movie is just so bad I was forced to get high in the hopes I'd at least laugh at it. Needless to say, I sat there in my stoned state thinking "what a piece of shit".
-
oisin5199: I believe in credit where credit's due, so the Willow/Xander, Dark Phoenix/Cyke bit goes to you for first handing it down (which, PS, is still the strongest comparrison I think I've ever seen along those lines). JaeZion: glad you're liking the trailer to "my" movie--it's going to knock you all sideways, by the by--but I think you're mistaking who I am. See, unlike a certain someone with such a devoted, rabid fanbase, I'm just a lowly Fox plant who trolls the AICN forums looking for ways to fuck up really good franchises. And MU-HAHA! It's working! Then again, I'm very excited about Kitty Pride being featured in this movie, so what does that tell you?
-
might as well kill of dark phoenix, rogue, ice-man, mystique and bring back toad, write in forge, cable, strong guy, zauron, mojo (unless he's gay)...can't have that you know...oh might as well have wolvie and storm have a child who turns out to be omega red or something...hmmmmmm...the script writers prolly have this down on posted notes already.
-
...he did handle that situation with class. I have no doubt he could have punched that guy's lights out, but he decided to make him look like an ass instead, which he did beautifully.
-
is X-Men following the same path of Superman and Batman, more humor and camp. Late next year I bet you'll hear some loser Suit say "Well we rushed it into production and in hindsight I think we should've waited." Does everyone hate Marsden because he's different from the books or is it because he's better looking than all of us? Honestly I had no problem with him.
-
Jun 20, 2005 12:10:29 PM CDT
http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/fantastic_four/behind_the_scen
by bulldoggie
looks great to me, what do you guy's think?!
-
Before anyone flames me, I just want to say I've never read an X-Men comic book in my life, so I'm coming at this as an avid fan of the movie series. And so I have to say that getting rid of Nightcrawler is one of the DUMBEST ideas I've heard from the Hollywood blockbuster machine. He was truly one of the bright spots in X2 - for me, he was at first menacing yet vulnerable and genuine - an incredible arc to pull off within the span of a film for any writer / actor. He gave the movie it's heart...the emotional point of contact for anyone who's ever felt like a freak or an outsider. And after all, isn't that what the X-Men are all about? Embracing your uniqueness and using it for good (or bad). So sad. He truly was one character I was looking forward to seeing again. I sincerely hope they do not kill him off, and instead opt to move him out of the plot somehow, only to have him return later.
-
I totally agree with you about Xavier and Magneto and how they should be handled - they are two sides of a coin and need to be put together. However, I disagree that Mystique and Nightcrawler are done. The surface of these characters (and their potential relationship)has barely been scratched. There is much more to these characters than shapeshifting and bamfing, and they deserve more than to simply be "plot devices."
-
... focus on the positive people! The dude who mentioned that Nightcrawler's arc was pretty complete in X2 is on target. So many cool X-Men, so little time. Nightcrawler was RAD (the opening inside the White House was ridiculous) but he's gotta make room. There should be a few central omnipresent X-Men like Wolvie, Jean Grey, etc; the rest have to rotate or we're never going to see so many cool characters. RIP Nightcrawler; bring on the newbies!
-
Fox, are you listening? Do not misunderstand me; I am not one of those cretins who wallows in negativity. In fact, I'm willing to bet the majority of us here are not the asshat fanboys you would like to write us off as. I understand the bottom-line. I work for a living, too (and more than a little of that money I earn has gone toward your product). I understand sometimes decisions must be made that may not be popular. But we average genre-movie aficionados, fans, and enthusiasts have come to care about these properties you developed. And before all of you go accusing us of being poor, culturally-retarded junkies, I'd like you to consider Ribbons- the Cool Breath of Logic at these boards. I guess I'm sorta the Heated Pulse of Emotion. And as Ribbons said, negativity is a bit difficult to avoid in this insatance. X3 presents nearly limitless opportunities for unforgettable scenes and characters who are perceived by the world as either gods or monsters, but a rather large amount of the intended script concepts, even in a theoretical context, don't seem very well thought out in regard to what has been set up by the previous two films. One could entertain the possibility that you may be indulging that demographic that says, "Well, the action and stuff was okay... and Hugh Jackman and Halle Berry are sexy! But all the rest of the story and characters were gay... So we coulda done without that." If so, what a pity. There was no precedent for a romance between Storm and Wolverine, and the death of Xavier and Cyclops makes no sense. And ofcourse, there's that glaring problem of the story sounding annoyingly unoriginal. In retrospect, when I was growing up, while Wolverine was the character I most identified with, Nightcrawler, with his self-doubt and his irreverent sense of humor, was a lot closer to reality than some of us "geeky" outsiders would care to admit. I accept that he's not essential to the story. I merely point out that having someone who was an outward representation of the X-Men's "difference", who had a childlike sense of wonder, was a great touch. Storm's pointlessly expanded role might be the single worst idea I've heard yet. Berry simply does not make "real" the horrifying goddess-aspect/ beloved big sister Storm. Famke Janssen was better at that. The one small bit of "hope" I've salvaged from this whole piss-poor scenario is that, after seeing X2, I bought the tie-in novelization by Chris Claremont. And was reminded that even up to the last minute, things can change. There were several scenes in that book that didn't make it into the movie (which I've learned over the years is common in these adaptations), and while some were cool (Xavier's "scanning" was a catalyst for many mutants', such as Beast and Gambit, powers to manifest), others (Jean Grey surviving to the end), were not. Okay, so where am I going with this? Fox is responsible for some of my favorite films of all time (Planet of the Apes; Young Frankenstein; Big Trouble in Little China; ALIENS; & Star Wars, among others). It is not impossible to capture the suitable quality this project requires. Hell, even if you've never read a comic book and are at sea where characters and the sequence of events are concerned, the animated series was a decently faithful representation of the mythos.
-
Points well taken Captain Zero, however it would be cool to see one or two of the minor characters rise to prominence, not simply because they are cool or just need some screen time, but more importantly because they bring emotional resonance to the films. I just think Nightcrawler did that extremely well. He wanted to know his purpose in the world... Questioned his faith... These are very human issues. They give the plots relevance and accessibility to to the rest of us who aren't just going to see the movies because of the latest effects or to compare how closely they resemble the comic arcs. So by all means, bring in new characters. But don't kick the characters who gave the franchise credibility beyond established fandom.
-
of bringing juggernaut if you kill professor x off before they get to confront eachother...sighs.
-
What hurts the most is that X-men 3 felt like it was going to be the one to break the 3rd movie curse. Now they got rid of all the good people. It could have been salvaged by not rushing the release date, and not pulling a Fantastic Four (hiring a director of forgettable, or worse, films)
-
They'll just get someone else. With that much make-up it really doesn't matter. There's plenty of folks who can fake a German accent. Get a no-name and save on Cummings salary demands. This is not a big deal.
-
What if there are enough people who actually give a shit about making a good X-Men film left on the project? Do you think they will let all of our fears come true? Is there no hope? I thought "X2" was ARGUABLY the best super hero movie of all time. So by that standard it's a tough hill to clib. But if they slip and fall, it won't be because they slipped on Cumming. "Nightcrawler" was a perfect central character for the last film. I can see how he'd be neither here nor there as a side character in the next.
-
His performance sucked. What was up with that moussed up hair-do? Stupid. Don't worry. Brett Ratner will supply us with a studio friendly X-Men - with humor - lots of humor please. More please. A little more. Oops fucked it up.
-
While Ratner may surprise us, as I and many others have pointed out, absolutely NOTHING he has done prior to this gives any indication he is the proper director for this film, and many are, shall we say, reticent, to invest faith in him to get the job done right. One Thomas Harris adaptation does not an auteur make.
-
I was one of the first to begin to worry about the BO take on this film, then I noticed that the numbers (71 mil) were only for domestic, and wasn't so sure. Comingsoon is now reporting the worldwide figures and it's 112.8 mil worldwide. It's all but impossible that it won't make it's production cost back by the second weekend. But what we don't know is the worldwide marketing budget, which is unlisted. Spider-Man 2's was 50 mil, I'd say that would be low here. So, I think Pirates of the Carribean numbers would be a good bet here, meaning around 650 mil worldwide.(Pirates had roughly the same budget, same rating, similar release date and number of screenings opening, and identical opening weekend numbers. The only difference being Pirates was viewed more as a family film and faced less competition at the box. So things are looking FAR sunnier now, but I still maintain that Begins will make most money on DVD, if it follows the model of previous comic movies (Even ones viewed as flops such as Daredevil, Elektra, and Hulk) and horror movies.
-
Y'know, I just went back and re-read Mori's first post on Rothman, and I must say I'm pissed. Mori, you come on here, post this charged up point of view, get everyone all up in arms; "yeah, Rothman's the devil! he's screwing up our movie!"
and then come on here and post this "slap on the wrist" to us?
What the fuck is that? Try to keep the integrity in check eh? Start the ball rolling, and then tell us to be positive? You should work in politics Drew, seriously.... -
A STUPID, STUPID move.
Who is in charge up at Fox?
They need to be cockslapped, yo.
No homo. -
Jun 20, 2005 2:50:21 PM CDT
The BEST thing about arguably THE greatest Comic Book Movie ever
by b a m f !
...was NIGHTCRAWLER. Love or Hate the character that is an absolute FACT. I remember reading SO many overwhelmingly positive reviews for X2 when it premiered. SO many critics...many of whom admittedly had little-to-NO knowledge of the comic universe...were almost pathological in their praise of NIGHTCRAWLER's role and ALAN CUMMING's performance in the movie. I cant even remember how many times I read a review stating how Nightcrawler literally "STOLE THE MOVIE" and how whenever Cumming's Nightcrawler was on screen you "COULDNT TAKE YOUR EYES OFF OF HIM". As so eloquently stated in some of the above posts Kurt Wagner is the living, breathing embodiment of Xavier's dream and Alan absolutely nailed it to the wall with his performance. Because of how well Nightcrawler was received in X2 and all of the overwhelmingly positive (fanboy and non-fanboy)feedback the next LOGICAL step would have been to EXPAND the character's role on the team and in the next movie. Regardless of whether or not BEAST, ANGEL, GAMBIT or whoever is being introduced. But...not surprising if this is shaping up to be the absolute BUTCHERING of the franchise that it seems to be....the current powers-that-be opt to NOT bring back the actor who so incredibly brought Kurt Wagner to life in the uber-successful X2. **insert scathing sarcasm here** BRILLIANT move people!! All I can do is hope beyond hope that the current caretakers of this seeming nightmare of a suquel somehow come to their senses. Until then I will go back and watch the masterpiece that is X2 on DvD, amazed at how incredible a 'comic book' movie can be when in the hands of people who obviously have great passion, knowledge and respect for the source material...
BAMF! -
I enjoyed Cummings' earnest-yet-sometimes-silly rendition of Nightcrawler from X2, but I suppose that three blue folks in a movie is a bit overkill. Personally, I'd prefer to see Mystique removed from the series for a movie or so, only to reappear in a later flick as the sexy, non-scaled spy/saboteur I knew and loved from the comic books. I'd also love to see Magneto with his Acolytes, instead of leading a ridiculously undermanned gang o' mutant thugs. He's a real badass in the 'zines, a "god among insects," if you will. I'm still holding out hope.
-
I really hope Cyclops and the prof come out alright in the final draft. The characters are absolutely integral to the X-Men world. It's true that Cyclops hasn't been represented well in the last two flicks, and that he comes off as a major prick in the comic books, but he represents the the restraint and self-discipline that Xavier feels is absolutely necessary for every mutant to observe if the are to live harmoniously with mankind. I also hope they drop the silly "mutant cure" plotline. I know that doesn't leave them with much of their original outline, but doesn't that okay?
-
Sometimes my thoughts don't get translated to well in the language center of my brain. Sorry.
-
What is being missed here, is why 20th Century Fox is doing this. And it may seem petty, but this all has to do with Bryan Singer leaving. Fox needs to get X3 out May 26,2006 just to trump the June 30, 2006 opening of Superman Returns. Its ego, really. Cumming's and Singer did not get along during production of X2 (I'm sure both actor and director were fighting over who was going to do the guy who played Colussus. Bet get Ian got him. I am a bitchy queen). So despite Ratner now taking on the job, Cumming's leaving the project seems more to do with the make-up (which he hated, also). Marsden is doing Superman Returns, which means from Fox's mind, his loyalty is to Singer and not the X Men.
Plus, X3 seems to be doomed if only because how quickly it needs to get done. One of the reasons Michael Vaughn was originally going to direct it was because there was going to limited CGI effects -he has gone on record saying that he hates CGI. So, X3 will keep its effects limited, mainly because they would never be done intime for that May 26 release date. Plus, like I said, Fox is still pissed at Singer. They're hoping that if they put up a solid front, the mainstream audience -and not the fan boys - will make it a huge hit and kill Superman Returns. So then Fox can laugh, sit back and say "See, we don't need a great director. A stupid, half-assed one just delivered our tentpole for summer 2006." Making what should be a big budget film on the cheap may keep the investors happy, but someone should show Marvel and Fox a little craptacular film called Star Trek V. Made with cheap visual effects and a boring script and a untried director, and got the worse film in the entire franchise. But Fox gets what it wants. It will kill this franchise, but they don't care. -
If X3 succeeds, it only emboldens Marvel and 20th Century Fox to ignore their fanbase and lower the bar further. If it fails, fans get to say 'I told you so' and listen as their voices echo through the empty hall that was once filled with comic movie adaptations, that are no longer seen as profitable.
-
I mean, truly, what does it matter?
-
the x-men are more interesting for their personalities then their dynamic powers. Misundersstanding this by the studio wil ruin the franchise. Nightcrawler is interesting because he is religious but looks like a demon. wolverine because he is a reluctant hero with a dangerous edge because of his mysterious past. Cyclops because he must be a straight up unflawed leader under the crush of immense pressure. Storm because of her powerful persona. magneto and xavier because of their different viewpoints on getting peace for mutant kind who have no home and are outcasts to the world. Nightcrawler is a very interesting character that properly utilized really adds to the franchise... hopefully he's not molecularized like they want to do to cyclops ....the x-men team leader!!!!....by the way I imagine storm in action to do more than float up slowly and clouds to appear... she is supposed to be much more physical and dynamic!. Please someone at the studio read the pheonix saga.. and show us how frying cyclops makes sence at all....
-
A changing of the guard needed to happen. Singer was starting to see these films as too much of a soapbox for his personal beliefs. NO, he's no Joel Schumacher, but look at the new superman costume, and tell me that is not gay chic. Seriously. I think losing the gay subtext to these films will be a good thing, because heterosexual folks would enjoy some heterosexual subtext too, thanks. And believe it or not, you don't have to be gay, black, or goth, to understand equality, oppresion, and persecution.
-
Jun 20, 2005 5:02:54 PM CDT
Singer gets hired to direct "SUPERMAN RETURNS" and now this... n
by jdanielp
Yeah, I'm kidding. But how many of your nerdy hearts skipped a beat? But hey, he WOULD make a great Joker in the style of "The Killing Joke", perhaps with a little song and dance (in the big band style) while he mentally tortures some unfortunate soul. Oh,... and the BEST OF LUCK for "X3".
-
I hope you're not trolling, because you're wasting a lot of people's time and encouraging people to join the Anti-Singer Campaign in the name of a "joke." However, since I know there are people who sincerely feel the way you say you do about Singer and X-Men, I'll continue with this post: The only overtly gay subtext in the X-Men franchise was Bobby's "coming out" scene. And, as I've heard it, Singer didn't even write that line about Bobby "not being a mutant." You're talking about a franchise that opened during the Holocaust, for crying out loud. Singer is a better match than someone like Brett Ratner because he understands what it's like to be ostracized simply because of who he is, period. There's no "gay chic" in X-Men. You would say he "gayed up" Superman's uniform no matter what the final design looks like, but it's still essentially the same. But you "just know" that it was Singer who told the costume designer to lower the underoos, right? Come off of it. Getting someone who can actually relate to the material off of X-Men is not a good thing. I wouldn't go as far as to say that Ratner is incapable of making a good film because he's less likely to have connected with the material emotionally, or as strongly, but homosexuality certainly shouldn't disqualify anyone. My guess is you don't know the first thing about Bryan Singer, but you "feel" like he made the X-Men movies too gay, which is why you and people with similar messages always state that he used it as a "personal soapbox" but fail to present much evidence (if you bother to present evidence at all), or a very convincing argument besides for the fact that he's gay and hires openly gay actors (Ian McKellen, Alan Cumming, and Shawn Ashmore are basically as good a match for their respective roles as you could ask for, by the way). Lastly, so what if he used the X-Men franchise as a platform for personal expression? Isn't that the point of art in the first place, even if you don't happen to agree with it? I'd rather see an X-Men film from someone who connects with the material than one from a mercenary who's hired to shoot whatever's put in front of him.
-
I don't know if I know what I'm talking about. Whatever.
-
First of all, the fan community and many casual viewers simply DO NOT LIKE Halle Berry. She's got an attitude problem, she's a lousy actress, and she's not even the right race for the character (Ororo is African- Not half watered-down American African). She's demanding time we don't want her to have, and it's damaging to the script. FIRE HER. Seriously. Fire Halle Berry and hire either Iman or Angella Basset. You'll be doing yourselves a favor getting rid of Ms. Berry and her attitude. Second thing: The plotline being a rehash of X2 is the worst gripe we have. We all wanted Sentinels, and instead you're giving us another father bent on ending the mutant gene scenario? Look, my friends: X-Men is not an exciting comic because we keep seeing the team fight guys like Senator Kelly. It's exciting because guys like Kelly turn to supervillains and super-science to get the job done. Not just viruses and energy waves, but GIANT ROBOTS, super-powered madmen, and massive displays of power. Who wants to watch people with super powers hunting down a VIRUS? Give us Sentinels, and give us the Hellfire club, and give us more than just one madman with a complex. Finally- PAY MARSDEN what he's worth. He's team leader, he deserves more lines and scenes, and he deserves a stronger character. The same goes for Patrick Stewart! Professor X is important to this franchise- Don't let him go unless it's unavoidable. Finally, do not- I repeat- do NOT relegate a major character like Juggernaut to a minor role in the movie. It didn't work for Bane in Batman & Robin, and it won't work for Juggernaut. This is a guy who is invulnerable- He's been enough of a foe in the books to beat the entire team of X-Men without breaking a sweat. Turning him into a third-rate lackey is poor form. Give him a starring role- Make him the number one baddie, and then follw him up with sentinels, Apocalypse, or Mr. Sinister. And one more time- Let me repeat this- Replace Halle Berry as Storm if you want the fans to enjoy her character at all.
-
Not yet, anyway.
-
Jun 20, 2005 5:54:23 PM CDT
BTW, Magic Cure-All Potions have no place in the X-Men franchise
by magunga
Sentinels wouldn't work either, for the same reason. They just aren't realistic enough. For all you fans of Gundam or any other "Giant Robot" show, movie or video game, tanks, guns, and hordes of humans in armor would be far more effective, not to mention cheaper, than massive, near-sentient Robot Troopers. Ask Honda how much their dinky ASIMO cost!
The movies should focus on the characters without introducing cheesy plot devices. I'd rather have a super-villain any day over glowing blue potions. -
...people teleporting and shooting lasers out of their eyes are fine, but robots...that's where we draw the line. That stretches suspension of disbelief sumpin fierce. Fuck out my face wit dat shit.
-
Although I do happen to think that commissioning a bunch of large, hyper-sophisticated robots, possibly even larger than skyscrapers, would be pushing it. EEEEEEVEN for a movie with "mutants" in it. But think about it: so someone who has the bank, maybe even the government, decides to wipe out mutant life. The easiest way to do that is to build robots? Yeah right. A much easier and cost-effective way was devised in 'X2,' and it had less room for error than a bunch of robots did.
-
Your response to Noeland is spot on and it really epitomizes my feelings about the ridiculous homophobia people are hurling Bryan Singer's way. And this last bit of yours bears repeating: "So what if he used the X-Men franchise as a platform for personal expression? Isn't that the point of art in the first place, even if you don't happen to agree with it? I'd rather see an X-Men film from someone who connects with the material than one from a mercenary who's hired to shoot whatever's put in front of him." FUCK YEAH!!
-
Kinda curious if anyone associated with the movie reads these boards or places any value about what is discussed herein. I think that Halle Berry was forgettable in the first film, decent in the second, and is shaping up to be "Exhibit A" on why X-Men 3 failed. The X-Men are an ensemble, no one character should expect (or be expected) to carry the film on his or her own. That being said...be sure to INCLUDE the following: A) Nightcrawler B) further build-up to the Dark Phoenix Saga C) At least one huge, all-out superhero vs. supervillian brawl that showcases team chemistry. Feel free to NOT INCLUDE the following: A) A squishly romance between Storm and Wolverine. Yuck! B)the Virus plot line or any other plot line that resembles those from the first two movies. C)Brett Ratner. Just remember that this is supposed to be an ensemble. As producers, you have a certain luxury that other kinds of superhero movies that focus on one character do not. You do not have to cave in to oversized egos. Be sure to focus on the stronger aspects of the first two movies without obviously copying them.
-
Thanks for the assist, and I'm right there with you. "Plausibility" would have been a better word for me to use, rather than "Realism."
-
Because there aren't enough puns in this thread...
-
arrhhhh ughhhhhhh PLOOP ahhhhhhh dont kill off cyclops big of a mistake as wolverine hooking up with storm after all this time trying to hook up with jean grey so shouldnt he be heart broken and dealing with her death just like cyclops ... and not be trying to be get some storm lovin ....ughhhhh
-
As I recall, that was a word for word repeat of what Buffy's mother said to her on the show: "Have you tried not being the Slayer?" And right ON, Ribbons and Adambalm for calling Noeland on the stupid gay issue (see my earlier "gayness" post, I guess some people can't be bothered to read earlier posts). "Heterosexual subtext"! I had to laugh. Give me a break.
-
didn't know shawn ashmore was gay...but anyway...did rothman write this script himself??
-
I'm still for sentinals purely because messing with the mutantology-changy thing has been pretty heavily explored in the previous two films. There's a wealth of plots available out there too - although many are just too damn problematc to bring to the screen. Yes, I would be concerned about the plausabilty of giant robots. Despite the teleporting and shit still has to be grounded in some form of 'reality'. And that reality get's it's focus in how the human characters react to mutants. After all, we're all humans who are gonna be watching the damn thing (or not). That's what made the Nightcrawler scene so brilliant in X2. It was how the guards reacted to the incredible nature of the elf's powers. Bring in some form of robots and you get to see the X-Men as they should be. Cutting loose, working as a team etc. And you get to see the fear and anger with the humans who made this technology. Do it right and you'll have audiences questioning if they'd do it in 'real life'. Which ties in nicely to the first films opening.
-
Sorry, been away for a while. You make a very good point. Perhaps I was a bit melodramatic in my interpretation. However, think about this. He never had an opportunity to use cerebro as it was being used. He helped build it, but probably knew there was no psionic as powerful as Xavier anywhere. So, plan B. But as soon as the chance presented itself, he jumped on it. Not to mention the fact he had just spent an extended amount of time being tormented and pumped for information by a sadistic human and his neanderthal flunky. I don't doubt for a second he knew what cerebro was capable of, he just never had a chance to use it. Remember, he told Pyro he was "a god among insects". Not a very charitable opinion of humanity. He was playing the X-men the whole time to get close to Xavier. I think it was a case of "if I can't change homo sapiens, then I'll end them." The backbone of his philosophy is "by any means necessary."
-
Fucken hell. You write it out and it looks fine. Then, after posting you read it back. Sorry for all the spelling mistakes and chopped up sentences. Should try harder. Oh - and Singer 'gaying' up Superman and the X Men? That's so lame. Thank god someone sprinkled some rational on their cornflakes this morning. Cheers, Ribbons.
-
I read over the script and I really want to have hope that X3 will be a good film but I just don't think that can happen. The bottom line the timeframe to get this movie done is too short for it to be done, "properly." Spider-Man 3 isn't coming out until 2007 and I have more hope for that. Why you ask? Because Sam Raimi has been working on it since after Spider-Man 2 came out. He's using this time to flesh out the script, make sure the costumes look good, have sets built, special effects, etc, etc, etc. Fox on the other hand is trying to stick it to Bryan Singer and have this movie out by next Memorial Day. Are they smoking crack? No, I'm sorry crack doesn't do that to someones brain. No, they are smoking a combo of cocaine and crystal meth. Maybe it's just me but if you really want to stick it to Bryan Singer wouldn't it be better to take your time and in a year come out with a film that kicks the shit out of X2 like a white boy living right in the middle of Compton? And why on Earth would you give Halle "Make me feel good!!" Berry more screen time. After all her bitching I would have dumped her the way Wesley Snipes and David Justice did and got Nona Gaye to play Storm instead. The whole Cyclops and Professor X things sounds like somebody is about to get recast. The whole, "I have a serum that will take your powers away," story just isn't cutting it. What, is Magneto going to find a way to change the serum using his powers so that it turns humans into mutants instead? I don't have much hope for X3. Push comes to shove I hope that Fox is just looking to stick it to Singer and if they do a X4 they'll go all out on it.
-
Jun 20, 2005 7:55:22 PM CDT
Tom Cruise should have gone apeshit on those pranksters and beat
by triumph poops!
Seriously, what an asswipe stunt by those people towards someone who's just being nice walking the red carpet, signing autographs, and even as Cruise will do for fun, take someone's cell phone and talk to the person's friend. Cruise is exceedingly well-known for being nice to the fans, so of course these morons think its fun to get their moment of shock cinema onscreen because...oh, no reason. Just because they feel they're ENTITLED to do something asswipe like in public. So fuck 'em up the ass. Cruise is a celebrity who has a security detail for a reason (ie. he gets threats and such). So for the people to squirt him that way, who knows "what" could have been in the fluid -- thus he would have been entitled to "defend" himself and wail the living crap out of those clowns. And have his security detail beat the living shit out of them as well, which frankly would have been the TV I'D prefer to see. To see the joke fuckers getting whipped bad.
-
Ok Mori, Affect positive change I will! To all those out there that are desperate to hear my two cents, this is what I want to see in an X3 film. This is not a treatment, just some snapshots.
I want to see pyro and iceman duke it out in a wooden building, perhaps a church with burning rafters collapsing around them with Iceman trying to cool them off while containing Pyro. I want to see a Nightcrawler/Toad bouncy fight .... no a Storm/Avalanche rock and wind fight! I want to see Cyclops leading the X-Men into battle, hell I want to see Cyclops properly realised. I want to see references to the comics; Warren Sr's working partner is Nathaniel Essex etc. I want to see the mutant community, not just the x-men, I want to see a mutant/Friends of Humanity riot! I want to see the Mutant Registration act. I want to see the ostrization of a minority!
I want to see the beast jumpy scene, the angel flyey scene, the magneto bridgey scene! I want to see Juggernaut vs. Walls. Juggernaut vs. Charlie.... actually i could probably do without Juggernaut. I want to see Magneto vs. Wolverine after he 'destroys' phoenix, i want to see some of that adamantium tear off in shreds. I want to see one of the X-Men lose it and kill! Iceman! Storm frys the fuck out of some FOH in the Ocean! I want to see Rogue and Shadowcat... umm... do something useful. I want to see the repercussions, I want to see the Mutant Registration Act at the finale. And lastly i want to see a script that doesn't incorporate all these things, i want to see a storyline not a mish/mash of cool scenes. I want to see Characters not Powers, lose Nightcrawler because Shadowcat can do the same thing? It's the characters that have made the mythos interesting not the power-beams. I want to hear a voice at the beginning of the movie that has a point to make about evolution, entropy, fear, diversity, unity, anything ... and i want to see that point come full circle. I want to be able to walk out of X3 and not just feel visually hyper-entertained. I want to walk out of X3 and feel. -
Don't want to walk out of x3 and feel like i've wasted my money, because the script resorted to ocer-the-top shock tactics and 'controversy' in order to woo the audience.
-
i mean it mades shit loads of cash last time, why resort to switching it up so much?
-
Echoing the many sentiments that Nightcrawler's character as played by Alan Cumming was an asset to X2 this is very disappointing to me indeed. I'd like to see him and his character back in X3. Comic book fans, critics, and people seeing the XMen for the first time all thought Nightcrawler was great. Even before now the XMen franchise was far from perfect, why break something that really worked?
-
Jun 20, 2005 8:34:16 PM CDT
The BEST thing about arguably THE best Comic Book Movie ever mad
by b a m f !
...was NIGHTCRAWLER. I have to add to my previous post because it still just boggles my mind that they arent asking ALAN back as NIGHTCRAWLER. To paraphrase from my previous post....
"I cant even remember how many times I read a review stating how Nightcrawler literally "STOLE THE MOVIE" and how whenever Cumming's Nightcrawler was on screen you "COULDNT TAKE YOUR EYES OFF OF HIM". As so eloquently stated in some of the above posts Kurt Wagner is the living, breathing embodiment of Xavier's dream and Alan absolutely nailed it to the wall with his performance. Because of how well Nightcrawler was received in X2 and all of the overwhelmingly positive (fanboy and non-fanboy) feedback the next LOGICAL step would have been to EXPAND the character's role on the team and in the next movie."
Just did a little googling and I cant even count the number of reviews praising the character and Alan's incredible performance.....
USA TODAY.COM
In 'X2,' Nightcrawler steals the scenes
By Susan Wloszczyna, USA TODAY
NEW YORK -
Jun 20, 2005 9:07:01 PM CDT
It just keeps getting better and better! I'm waiting for th
by darksider
If Nightcrawler is so unnecessary, then why did we have the great scene with him attacking the President and kicking major ass to boot? Oh, because it was cool. As far as the Sentinels? Because they are cool too. Are they realistic? No. But neither are mutants. And it is a fucking comic book, so it's all fake anyway. Now, fuck the viruses and molecular mind gimicks or whatever and give me the X-men that we liked to begin with, kicking Sentinel or Apocalypse or Sinister ass because IT'S THE THIRD FUCKING MOVIE. WE'VE DONE MAGNETO AND GENECTIC SHIT ALREADY! People like the comics, so just make the comics into film. It's not fucking difficult.
-
A word that gets thrown around too much at this site is "overrated." Sometimes, freedom of speech is overrated. Just when I think people can't say anything more inane than what we've seen already, we get some yahoos who confide in us their concern over X-Men's homosexual subtext... Excuse me, I can be a bit thick sometimes, but I missed this. Yeah, I've watched the movies. And I understand the metaphors for oppression vs. tolerance/acceptance. That aside, for good or ill, I really don't go looking for this stuff. Unless said film is flamboyantly out there, I tend not to notice subversive gay connotations in Spongebob Squarepants, occult messages in Harry Potter, or hippy revolutionary undercurrents in Star Wars. Pardon me, but that's fuckin' stupid. To me, Lord of the Rings was a grand adaptation of Tolkien's fantasy world, an addition to a genre we had all too few good examples of. Folks like to point out the characters of the film were physically demonstrative in their affection and open with their emotions. Well, I didn't grow up in a vacuum! I'd read the books, and I'd also seen people from other cultures. To me, this is a sign of people with unresolved issues who have too much damn time on their hands. A lot of us are more concerned with the business of living, to worry about peoples' (fictional or otherwise) sexual orientation. I mean, you're free ofcourse to interpret any damn thing you want out of books, music, and movies. Be proud if your media of choice has any content to interpret. That's a plus nowadays. Mostly, I look for inspiring, thought-provoking, compelling, thrilling escape. I don't care what Bryan Singer does in the privacy of his own bedroom any more than I care if Brett Ratner snorts coke off a studio intern's genital area. I'm pretty sure Singer didn't use the X-Men films as a forum to convey a gay message. And if he did, so fucking what? Good on 'em. I still stand by my opinion that these films are quality examples of imaginative entertainment. Leave the cultural analysis up to the people who get paid for it! Y'know, it's nice to have someone besides petty studio pricks to direct this ire towards. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, even the most casual of comic book scholars knows, aside from the usual subculture of freaks, "geeks", and angry loners, the X-Men have always a had a large gay following, as did DC's Legion of Super-Heroes. This is due to the fact that both titles presented models of families of peers that most "drop outs" from society have to create on their own. In retrospect, I can see that, but that doesn't interfere with one's enjoyment of the teams adventures. I think it makes 'em that much cooler that they are so accessable to such a wide variety of people, and still manage to entertain.
-
Yeah, 'Crawler had mousse in his hair. So do the other X-Guys. It's all the rage among mutant don'tchewknow.
-
Nightcrawler not one of the main characters? Is he even IN this film. Alan Cumming was one of the best things about X2. How could Fox possibly even consider leaving him out of this one!! I wanted to see Kurt and Ororo, not Ororo and Wolverine. :P
This is the proverbial straw. If much of what I've read about this movie DOES make into the actual film, not only will I not see it, I won't even rent it! Marvel, please step in an save this film. Otherwise it's going to be an unmitigated disaster. -
maybe a part of the problem is that we all have different opinions on how X3 should be. I mean some people want Nightcrawler in, some don't and some others want him to be recasted.
Yeah we don't want Halle on the next one and we don't want Xavier and Cyclops killed, but besides that...?
There are so many different ideas around here, with which one should they go?
I just can't imagine Fox not doing their own thing anyway. This movie really needs a director who brings in his own vision, just like Singer did. -
Enter DC. The changing of the guard, the changing of the guard.
-
They had such erotic promise. They lost my dollar if I can't see those two get all messy. Why would they sell the sizzle in movie 2? Where's my effing steak?
-
Agreed on all accounts. But it's trying to make the best out of a bad situation. If Fox is truly forging forward with this picture, the best you can do for yourself is to ask for what you'd hope to see. There's no guarantee you're being heard in the first place, nor is there a guarantee that a group of people who can't even get a consensus among each other is one that any studio is interested in listening to, but it's better than trying to create a consensus for an idea that you don't believe in anyway because, really, that just leaves you in the same situation as not saying anything at all would. So just say what you feel and discuss differences in opinion. It's at least as good as not saying anything at all.
-
I really want them to show just how powerful Magneto is. He tore a freakin' city to pieces in the comics! Fox has had a great villain all along, and he's been grossly underused. Please give him his Acolytes, and please let him unleash unholy Hell on mankind!
-
...should be shown as a crack military team. They're soldiers. Here's to hoping that that they can be utilized as such.
-
Ribbons, I love the way you went off on me, and the next post stated you don't know what you're talking about. :) YOU DON'T. How the fuck can you go off like that? You assumed an aweful about what I meant, didn't you? Honestly, I mean that was just silly. And yes, Singer had final design approval on the new superman costume, and yes, he wanted it to look "sexy and contemporary". Seeing that he is gay, what looks sexy to a gay man is going to look "gay chic". It's not meant as derogatory, it's just a description. But I happen to disagree with the design of the new superman suit, I think it should have been a simple classic design. I mean, I didn't even have to say what design features I was talking about, you threw in there "The underoos". I never said that, did I? But, what else could I have meant right? It's just a statement of fact, he's gay. He also happens to be one of my FAVORITE film makers, and I happen to think, because my friends met him in San Diego, and told me so, that he's a very nice person, so eat piles of shit Ribbons. I love the way no one can criticize anything gay. If you do, you must hate ALL gay people, and everything that GAY stands for right? YOU come off it ribbons. Fuck you. You don't know me, or anything about me. I'm glad that when I speak to my friends who are gay, and we are talking about thier lives and my life, and I criticise a decision they made, they don't take it the way you did "Oh, Noeland you don't think I did the right thing, you must hate ALL gay people, and everything gay. You MUST be a biggot" And you bet, when my homosexual friends talk about my life, and they critisize me, I KNOW they hate all heterosexuals. Yes they do! You're just a big fat jerkface ribbons. As for X-men, I do think a changing of the guard was neccesary, YES. But OFCOARSE the heterosexual subtext comment was a fucking joke. fuck's sake!
-
Chill. It is interesting to see just how offended some people can get around here. Reading your first post there was little of the "Singer's a great man" and too much "thank god we don't get more gay subtext". Maybe Ribbons did get a little heated but, seeing the general intolerance around here, it sometimes pays to stand up against the idiots. You still didn't say how Singer was using these films to display his personal beliefs in your last post? What, Iceman blew on that bottle a little to softly in X2? I'm sorry but "some of my best friends are gay" doesn't cut it. Guess what - I've got a gay friend as well. And I can hassle him when I see fit. But it doesn't make me see things that ain't there (like X-Men's gay subtext). And as for your joke? About as funny as squirting someone with a water pistol microphone and then having nothing remotely funny or interesting to say when challenged. Not that Tom didn't deserve a little cooling down...
-
Ummm...did I ever say I knew you? Yeesh. I'm sorry I called you on "the underoos" (those are the words I used, congratulations) thing, but really, you called the Superman costume gay. I did a quick run-through to see if I could figure out what was gay about it. Smaller shield? Different cape? Maroon boots? All I could come up with that was remotely close to being any gayer than the Superman costume already is was the lower underwear. So, if I got that wrong, tell me: what IS it about the costume, oh enigmatic one, that makes you think it looks too gay? Also, I'm not sure who the hell YOU'RE responding to, but I never said any of the things you devoted half your post to criticizing. My post was pretty straightforward: you think the X-movies "feel" gay and so you criticize them as such without definitive proof (something you've YET to provide), and even if they did lean towards commentary on the homosexual community, so what, as long as the material is taken seriously? I never said you hate all gay people, or even just little old Bryan Singer, nor did I say anything about your crack about heterosexual subtext. I'll calm down and stop putting the words you think I'm putting in your mouth into your mouth, but I recommend you take your own advice.
-
Well, as a fan of Alan's since I was.. uhm.. 13, I'll chime in!
I personally think his German accent is pretty sound in comparison to a lot of shit out there. If you have heard him on the revival cast (1998) recording of Cabaret (what made him famous), it's pretty much the same accent, and he does a really great job.. even better when he's actually speaking in German. Let's remember he's battling and extremely strong Scottish accent.
I don't know how I feel about this. I hope they don't try to throw in a different actor, but if Nightcrawler is going to be a background character, it's not even worth the stupid hours of make-up. He doesn't really have a reason to stick around.. he drove character development for Storm last movie, so I don't know what they would use him for in this.. especially since Wolverine is apparently her new weird love interest.
-
And all this fighting is stopping us from sending the crisp and clear message we all want Rothman etc to hear. Please, please take more time on this thing! Don't let petty rivalries and cut-off dates destroy what could be a great sequence of films. And don't go killing a bunch of characters for 'controversy'. The only ones who'll really care about the controversy are here. And they don't sound that happy with what' s planned. Jane and Joe Public can be placated with explosions. Fans of the comic and the movies will just be pissed.
-
CRAP I pushed enter. dangit. well anyway. I
-
Indeed, it may be difficult to introduce giant robots (Sentinals)into the movie version of X-Men. Though they don't need to be massive building size. Perhaps the same size as Hulk or slightly bigger? Someone mentioned a concentration camp for mutants in another post. That would be an ideal place for the Sentinals and Steven Lang.
They won't be mutant hunters, but they act as guards at the facility. They would have the abilities to withstand Cyclops' or Magneto's powers. Now Cyclops would have to grow into the Cyclops we know, the one that is calm and "zen-like" forged in the middle of a battlefield, because his powers are no longer effective. He would have to command his team like he's never done so before in the previous movies. How would he do this with the lost of Jean Grey? It would be difficult to envision. How would the norms be able to track down the mutants and round them up? Well, maybe scratch or shelf the Sentinals. Now, the scene that I personally like is Arc Angel flying out in slow motion and everyone, including mutants and humans staring at awe - his divine like wings stretching out in full splendor. Imagine, if one of those captured by the moment was none other than Nightcrawler. He crosses himself at the very sight (maybe that's too much). But yeah, I would like to see those two (Arc Angel and Nightcrawler) interact. There can be several levels of interpretation and symbolisms one could present. Now throw in Dark Phoenix between the whole situation...
Sorry, being super geeky. -
but seriously how do fuck do you kill cyke and prof x off?
-
which means come up with a better different thing we haven't already seen in an X-Men movie problem for Xavier & co. The idea of yet another serum - whether it turns humans into mutants who can't seem to hold their water or mutants into humans who turn into God knows what CGI effect - is lame. Why not actually plow into the human-mutant war? If the Marines v. mutant kids scene from X2 is any indication, the potential there is amazing. As for Nightcrawler (or any other mutant, for that matter), it is far more important to fully develop the emotional life of a few core characters, throw them into some serious doo-doo (both relationship conflict and the kinds of conflict that test their powers while the fate of humanity is at stake, of course) than for we fans to see some huge laundry list of mutants. Don't be afraid to hold stuff back for X7 or X8, ya know? Alan Cumming was great as Nightcrawler, but I'd rather see a lot of him in X4 than an unfulfilling cameo in X3. Oh, and, uh, where's our frelling Wolverine movie?
-
On the mutand/human war front: It is a difficult subject for the film to tackle. One of the main messages of X3 is that there is a light in humanity, you just have to get past the bigotry to see it. If a major war was declared, as in Governments vs. X-Men there would be a general feeling that bigotry had one out. I think the best way to demonstrate the human/mutant war is not via the government and sentinels, but by Koo Klux Klan-esque hate groups that are not affiliated with the government.
Having the government official declare WAR on mutants would tread dangerously close to the 'Days of Future Past' storyline from the eighties,which was basically set in a dystopic future where mutants were held in check by prison camps, giant robots and power dampening collars. If they took this course in the new film then it would REALLY restrict any future sequels... But not as much as say killing off Professor X would. -
GreatWhiteWhale - good point about the issues of gov openly attacking mutants. What about pseudo military groups or well funded organisations? Wait, that was done in X2, Damn. Alright, alright, I'll let the whole Sentinal thing go. *sigh* But I really want to see Cyclops the way he was meant to be - the leader. I must be the minority on that one. And yeah, killing off Professor X and Magneto would be awfull big time.
-
Cut Halle Berry and give Cumming a bigger part in X3. No brainer.
-
There will almost definetely be a sequel, but probably with a lesser budget. Have you not scene or the batman toys and posters dangling eveywhere? Batman is to good a franchise oppurtunity to ignore, thats why WB has such a good relation with DC because it gives them huge marketing potentials. The film isnt reaching expectations, but thats ok it still hasnt hit all the international markets yet. And it should (Will) sell on DVD. There was a little film called Fight Club that hugely bombed at the box office, now every man worth his salt owns it on DVD.
-
There will almost definetely be a sequel, but probably with a lesser budget. Have you not scene or the batman toys and posters dangling eveywhere? Batman is to good a franchise oppurtunity to ignore, thats why WB has such a good relation with DC because it gives them huge marketing potentials. The film isnt reaching expectations, but thats ok it still hasnt hit all the international markets yet. And it should (Will) sell on DVD. There was a little film called Fight Club that hugely bombed at the box office, now every man worth his salt owns it on DVD.
-
I will be positive. Positive that I WANT this franchise to fail. Go on. Make it. Do whatever you want. Like one Talkbacker already said; MAINSTREAM AUDIENCES DON'T GIVE A SHIT. It'll make money. Sites like this will make excuses. We'll make excuses. You'll make money and get fanboy respect. What does it matter? You had the next STAR WARS. I don't mean you had yet another opportunity to pay HOMAGE to STAR WARS, like having the same story structure, or making it a trilogy, or having the same type of characters - I mean you had the next STAR WARS. But, you just made a typical summer blockbuster, and continue to do so. You don't know what you have. You never will. Look for positives, Moriarty? I'm done looking. Becuase with source material like the X-Men - I shouldn't have to.
-
Jun 21, 2005 10:50:27 AM CDT
Love NC, but introducing new characters is good, and Storm must
by the founder
I really like halle berry, but she is just a terriable Storm. I don't know how or why she was cast, but lets also remember that Storm was never written good in the movies anyway. Storm is one of the classic Xmen characters, and has one with coolest powers, so yes she needs to be in the movie, if nothing else for the fx potential. The only other Mutant that would make for great fx is magneto, and i hope they do him justice in the 3rd film. Havok would also be cool, but as far as most of the xmen go, they just don't do it for me visually. Sure Phoenix would be cool, be we're not going to get the huge flaming bird. I hope that FOX slows down and takes it time. Rushing is not good.
-
this will be a rush job no matter.
-
So, Moriarty, you caved. Finally realized that pissing of a studio exec would be an end to your "career" in Hollywood, huh. Have you been pussywhipped by the system already? Did Carpenter tell to back off? It may be pure coincidence that you posted an article about the Showtime series so quickly after your feeble attempt to pull the shoe out of your mouth -- maybe not. Did your writing partner bitchslap you for fucking up his career too? As for the "negativity of the fanbase," don't blame the fans for your own fuckup. That's just the dogshit that you have to wipe from your mouth when you remove the foot that you yourself shoved into that gaping hole.
-
I've heard from a close source working on the film that:
- Angel is being cast using Carson Kressley from Queer Eye
- There is a hardcore action sequence featuring Prof. X, Magneto, and Juggernaut playing "Gooey Cookie" in cerebro. The Wachowski brothers are in talk to help storyboard the money shot sequence, which will rely heavily on bullet time animation.
- With the advances in technology in digital film, instead of the Lucas route of filming real people on CG backdrops, they are filming real backdrops with CG people
and finally -
- Because of her recent rants and Oscar win, Halle Berry will be playing ALL part in the movie, using various accents and dialects. -
To quote Quicksilver, telling off Val Cooper years ago in X-Factor: "Typical flatscan. 'My best friend's a mutant.'"
-
I preface this by saying I am not some self-appointed champion of gay rights. Criticize any thing you like, but you can only make careless statements so many times before someone's going to call you on it. It just seemed your bias was a bit evident. Most of us really didn't see a need for the old order to changeth, and I certainly don't feel Singer was trying to push some kind of queer agenda. Utterly pointless. I have gay co-workers, and I guess I simply lack the rapport you have your friends to say things things like that. Or perhaps I just give a damn and had that common courtesy stuff preached at me too much. It's cool though, seriously. Some of my best friends are jerks who have bigoted brainfarts.
-
Jun 21, 2005 5:01:58 PM CDT
Why wasn't Alan Cumming one of the choices in the AICN SURVE
by jdanielp
-
I'm STILL baffled as to how you DON'T sign the actor who brought to life the break out star and most popular character (outside of WOLVERINE) from the uber-successful X2.
HOW do you NOT automatically make him an integral part of the team? I think a part of it is that they are obviously focusing time, energy and special FX on KELSEY GRAMMER's BEAST.
I like BEAST. I really do and I know that if done right he will be incredibly cool to have onscreen. But if it's a choice between Hank or Kurt? I'm going with Kurt Wagner everytime. Plus who's to say that KELSEY GRAMMER can even pull this off? ALAN CUMMING absolutely nailed it to the wall. Even with all of the make-up, prosthetics and other crap he had to put up with his PERFORMANCE was nothing short of AMAZING. Who's to say they'll capture the same magic with KELSEY's BEAST? If GRAMMER and the rushed FX team cant pull this off it could end up looking like were watching a big blue MUPPET hamming his way through his scenes. I guess we'll find out....
BAMF!
-
"gay subtext" in singer's X-films...no...there's not any. unless you count the "have you tried not being a mutant" part. i think what's great about the story of Xmen is the whole "outsiders hated by society" can be viewed in a billion different ways. and singer may have seen it from a "homosexual" stand point...but by no means is there a part of either films (except the previously mentioned "coming out" scene). i myself am a evangelical christian and see crap on television everyday making fun of my beliefs and saying i hate everyone cuz i'm an evangelical. not true i like lots of people and there are some people i even love. and the people i don't like i don't like for a simple reason: they are probably a douche bag. but i'm getting off the subject. what i'm saying is as a christian i saw elements of christian persecution in his films (one bold statement was the history lesson orroro was teaching in the first film), and i think an african-american or a muslim or a midget or a homosexual would all find something in these movies to relate to. i think everyone can. i've seen the x-films collectively about 30 times. i never once read into anything (except the iceman scene) as a sermon being preached from a homosexual soapbox. i wasn't a huge fan of singer's but not because he gay, i just don't think he did the xmen as well as it could be done. most of that has to do with the plot of the first two films not his take on actual characters. singer spoke as much about homosexuality as stan lee did in the original comic books. and if the movies are true to the comics then as long as homosexuals are thought of as "evil" by a world that fears and hates them there will always be this kind of "gay subtext"
-
Jun 21, 2005 5:30:11 PM CDT
As to the AICN SURVEY (for the Joker)... not only did you miss A
by jdanielp
-
Jun 21, 2005 5:35:41 PM CDT
Again, on the AICN SURVEY... Mark Hamill, with "Arkham Asylum" (
by jdanielp
His Joker-voice was awesome on the animated series. He could be (with the right make-up) the perfect follow-up to JACK. He and Alan Cumming are my top two picks for the Joker.
-
SUPERMAN THE MOVIE.
SUPERMAN II.
SPIDER-MAN's I & II.
BLADE's I & II.
BATMAN BEGINS.
All of those were phenomenal translations that captured the essence of the source material. Of them all the unbelievably well done BATMAN BEGINS makes the best argument for laying claim to the title of "greatest".
The simple fact that Singer so deftly juggled no less than a DOZEN main X-characters, while STILL successfully creating such a tangible rapport with the comic mythos is nothing short of amazing.
If youre part of the minority that thought that X2 "sucked" i'm extremely curious to see what your idea of a good movie is...
BAMF!
-
Do you read "Wizard," by any chance? But 'X2' is a great comic book movie, you're right, and a good movie by any standard.
-
maybe they should just re-release x2 for x3 next year...and what about that lawsuit against zoom?
-
In an all-out, no holds barred battle between Nightcrawler and Batman, who comes out on top? Nightcrawler of course! Scenario: A chance encounter by the two and a case of mistaken identities (cliche, I know, moving on...) pits the Dark Knight against the X-Men's resident demon. Batman, hidden on a different rooftop on an adjacent building is the first to spring into action. While in flight, Batman launches his aerial assault, managing to connect a couple of times with his shuriken: one in his foe's shoulder blade, the other buried in the back of his thigh. A puff of thick smoke, and his quarry is gone! But where? Before he knows it, Batman is being attacked from on top. A seemingly impossible, quick as lightning midair flip corrects the situation, allowing Bruce to sink his forearm blades deep into the blue devil's side. BAMF! BAMF! Dizziness...next thing Batman knows, he is now on the sidewalk, hundreds of feet from where he was. What happened? Did he blackout? More importantly, how did his right leg merge with the pavement! SWEET JESUS! This time...he really does passout. ROUND ONE: Nightcrawler.
-
You're right, teddanson37. The only line in X3 that resembles gay subtext is spoken by Mrs. Drake. And that's just funny. To anyone who remotely knows what "mutant" means, or, I'd imagine, to anyone who's actually had a parent say that to them (not to make light of anyone's situation).
-
As some of you have pointed out, it is quite hard to
make a superhero movie that caters to everyone's tastes.
Example, why is Batman Begins successful with the fanbase?
Maybe because that representation is pretty close to the true Batman?
He's dark, brooding, angst and so on. But there are those
that like Batman Begins, even if they aren't into comic books.
Now, I've seen some reviews from "movie critics" that says -
the reason why this Batman don't appeal to them, is because
it takes itself too seriously. Someone (Big Dumb Ape?)
here said that something similar like this happened
to Burton's Batman Return, thus Schumacher's Batman 3
was born and it appeared to have made more moola than B.Return.
Yes, we are all too well aware of the abysmal Batman and Robin.
Now, are the producers trying to aim these movies at fanbase?
General public? The "Movie Critics"? or all of them.
Understandably, some movie makers are driven by the all mighty moola.
If they want to try and appeal to most people, it would be
difficult. I think Raimi's Spiderman was able to tap into that.
Obviously, not everyone is satisfied by it. Dare I say, another "successful"
attempt is Brad Bird's Incredibles (even if it's not based on
a comic - as far as I know - or live action). Correct me if I'm
wrong, but wasn't one of the ideas for X3 to be more darker
and less FX, post Singer? Would that be better? I can't say,
though the concept would be intriguing. But to everyone else?
Another example, M.Night's Unbreakable, (I know, some of you
dispise this movie and will rail me for bringing it up), but
I think it was the closest to a
serious take on a Superhero with super power, without
gadgets or suits. I'm not saying it's better or worse
than Batman Begins or other super hero movies, let me be clear
on that. I think it has interesting and unique ideas.
Will Fantastic Four be even close to Raimi's Spiderman or Incredibles?
Or will it be super campy style? What about the fate of X3? And then
there's Singer's Superman, which I'm also eagerly awaiting.
In a way I guess, these are what the superheros are facing, "cliffhangers".
I can, but only guess at the difficulties in balancing the elements in
such movies. However, killing off characters
in X3 is a sure way to kill off the movie franchise. Wait,
I think I just contradicted myself... end nonsensical gibberish. -
yeah nightcrawler was my favorite xmen character so im actually glad he will be spared any association with this poop. now i just gotta hope ratner doesnt really pull kitty pryde down into this poop...
-
i do love the x-men films. they are truly some of my favorite. but after seeing batman begins, and seeing how true it was to the source, i feel like an x-men film could be even better. i mean really, if for once they would get a plot that didn't envolve a machine turning all humans/mutants into the other one, and really focused on the team as a whole instead of focusing on wolvie and jean then i think it'd be a better franchise. i think X3 has the potential to be amazing. but who knows.
-
RIBBONS I most definitely do read WIZARD and I am so glad that you brought that up =)! This is taken from the awesome "GREAT DEBATES" article from 2004's "MEGA MOVIE" issue...
Wizard on the BEST SUPPORTING CHARACTER (of all time!) in a Comic Movie........"Quick: What was the MOST memorable scene in "X2"?
If you answered NIGHTCRAWLER's bamf-filled romp through the halls of the White House, youre not alone. When it comes to edge-of-your-seat, 100-percent pure fanboy excitement, it's hard to imagine a scene that got fans geeking out more than that opening sequence, which kicked off one of the most anticipated comic movie sequels of all time - along with the Movie career of a certain "Fuzzy Elf".
WHY DID AUDIENCES RESPOND SO WELL TO NIGHTCRAWLER? There's more to his popularity than just blue skin and cool powers. He's a walking contradiction, A LIVING SYMBOL OF THE FOLLY OF RACISM - A character who looks like a devil on the outside but possesses a kind, pure heart within.
And when it came to bringing Kurt Wagner to life, actor ALAN CUMMING ABSOLUTELY NAILED the sensitive, humorous and soulful characteristics of the X-Men's newest recruit. His brief exchange with ROGUE after his high altitude heroics revealed both his selflessness and his humility. His snooping around to listen in on the X-men's conversation with MAGNETO revealed his mischievious side. And his powerful discussion of faith with STORM onboard the X-jet illustrated his religious side.
"X2" MADE NIGHTCRAWLER AN INSTANT COMIC MOVIE MEGASTAR, ensuring legions of kids dressed up as the blue-skinned mutant for many Halloweens to come. And with "X3" on the horizon, THE SWASHBUCKLING HERO WILL BE BAMFING HIS WAY ACCROSS THE SILVER SCREEN AS LONG AS THE X-FILM FRANCHISE CONTINUES TO ROLL."
Would that the last statement were true =(
The bottom line is that NO ALAN CUMMING and little or NO NIGHTCRAWLER in X3 = BIIIG MISTAKE. What the heck are they thinking?!?
... BAMF!
WIZARD magazine -
In closing the debate and declaring Cumming's Nightcrawler the BEST SUPPORTING CHARACTER...
"THE WINNAH! --> NIGHTCRAWLER: It's extremely tough to compete with a blue-skinned, teleporting mutant that almost steals "X2" away from WOLVERINE. Not an easy feat."
VERY true, considering Wolverine's incredible popularity and HUGH JACKMAN's kick ass performances in both X-movies. The more I dwell on it the more it baffles me...IT IS INSANE NOT BRINGING ALAN BACK. Who is in charge of these decisions? HOW can you just crap on an actor and a character that was such a HUUUUGE part of what made X2 so successful?!? No matter how hard I try to understand, I just completely fail to grasp the 'logic' of this "brilliant" move....BAMF! -
Hey, a fellow Wizard reader! While I didn't agree with all the viewpoints expressed in that article, I have to say they nailed it right on the head with pointing out Nightcrawler as the best supporting character to pop up in a long time. Few movies had such dynamic opening scenes as X2 did. And appearances thoughout the movie reminded me of why I loved the hero in the first place. It was the best Kurt Wagner I'd seen in forever. After such an auspicious beginning, it's a tragedy that we're not going to get to see more of him.
-
"After such an auspicious beginning, it's a tragedy that we're not going to see more of him." EXACTLY!! You have a star in the making the next LOGICAL step would be to expand on that! Oh and Kudos for being a fellow WIZARD reader!
Actually after wracking my brains in the days since this heartbreaking news I have a couple of theories as to why in the world they would not bring Cummings back.
1.) Maybe the fact that Alan DID do so well and that the character was SO UNBELIEVABLY WELL RECEIVED in Singer's X2 actually worked against him. The current powers that be appear adamant in trying to put their own 'stamp' on X3 and 'stick' it to SINGER. So I guess one way to do that would be to dump NIGHTCRAWLER/CUMMING in favor of their OWN attempt at introducing a 'Breakthrough character, which brings me to reason # ...
2.) KELSEY GRAMMER'S BEAST. The Make-up and FX intensive BEAST and by extension Grammer's portrayal of the character is apparently going to be a HUGE part of X3.
Making this character 'work' onscreen is going to take an almost perfect synergy between The Make-up and FX team, RATTNER's direction and (of course) GRAMMER's PERFORMANCE. Who's to say that the current caretakers of the X-franchise can pull this off? If the early moves on this apparent trainwreck of a project are any indication it doesnt seem likely. They MIGHT get lucky and capture the metaphorical "lightning in a bottle" that was Alan Cumming's Nightcrawler in X2. Or as I stated in a previous post we could end up with a ridiculously ungraceful, ungainly 'BIG BLUE MUPPET' hamming his way through all of his scenes as the audience cringes. Now along with the headache of introducing what you hope to be the NEXT blue, super-agile breakthrough mutant star in the franchise, IMAGINE HAVING TO COMPETE ONSCREEN WITH AN ACTOR AND CHARACTER THAT VERY NEARLY STOLE X2 AWAY FROM WOLVERINE. Friggin' HUGH JACKMAN'S WOLVERINE!! And who would probably (whether consciously or sub-consciously) remind fans of a LOT of the things they loved so much about SINGER's X2. Can ya see where i'm going with this?
...BAMF! -
Heh. Either way, Nightcrawler BELONGS in the X-Men, and they are poorer without him. It sounds like Fox has the keys to a car they don't even know how to drive. Y'know, I had an idea last night. I'm a big fan Chris Claremont and Alan Davis and the X-Men's finest offshoot title. Seein' as how Fox wants t'do spinoffs anyway and we still want our Elf-fix, how 'bout a movie where 'Crawler and Kitty Pryde accompany a powered-up Phoenix on a trip to the U.K. to seek help from Professor X's colleague, Dr. Moira MacTaggart (Cate Blanchett), and join up with the Realm's greatest champion, Captain Britain (Jude Law) and his shapeshifting lover, Meggan (Keira Knightley), against the Captain's reality warping brother Jamie Braddock (Clive Owen) and the lunatic Crazy Gang(uhmmm, lots 'o character actors an' cgi). Have Terry Gilliam direct it. Wackiness ensues. Behold- EXCALIBUR!!
-
Nightcrawler is one of my favorite characters, don't get me wrong. However, when you have an ensemble cast and a huge group of characters to choose from and fans all clamoring for their favorites, the best rule would be to have a core team (Jean, Scott, Ororo, Logan and Prof. X) and the rest be walk-ons. In other words, if we're lucky enough to have 5 or 6 movies, then Nightcrawler could be in 2 of them, Psylocke in one or two, Gambit in 1 (or none, preferably), Beast in one or two, Angel in one or two or three, and I'll go so far as to say that Rogue, Iceman and Colossus, who have been in the past one or two movies, should also be regulated to being in only 1 more.
-
no doubt the XMEN will survive as franchise, er, superteam, but in what form? IN WHAT FORM?! ARRRGH! (as america bids fond farewell to the brief golden age of comics related film franchises, one can almost hear the mylar bags sighing in mute desperation -- "we got..cocky... we thought that SPIDERMAN rang the bell that comics would finally get the treatment they deserve! we had it all! it was ours... and we frittered it away... now... it is... too.... late...." >and with that, comics dignity dies<
-
Multiple Man. Yep. You read me right. I think it's an interesting power and, especially after Peter David's excellent miniseries "Madrox" (which I was turned onto by way of the @$$holes and recommend to anyone who likes comics), I can't help but think there are some pretty cool ways to utilize his power. I know that has nothing to do with 'X3,' particularly, but I felt like floating that out there before this article is pushed into the archives. Peace.
-
might as well just make his own movie. Follow Peter David's miniseries and adapt that. Who'd play Madrox?
-
They don't pay me the big bucks for nothing, folks! I mean there are probably a lot of people who could pull it off, but no one immediately springs to mind. Eh. But that would be cool.
-
played by americas sweethearts, soon to be americas skanks, the OLSEN TWINS. in a few years people will be sayin "paris who?"
-
I just can't believe they're gonna get rid of the most interesting character of X2 !
I like Beast, Juggernaut and Kitty Pryde.
But it's totally stupid to forget about the incredible Kurt Wagner !
Nightcrawler has so much potential !!
I'm not sure I'm gonna see this third movie. I'm really, really pissed !
Please, let the producers reconsider this stupid choice !
D.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- A hot redhead (not Harry) is set to play lead in Fede Alvarez's remake of EVIL DEAD! -- 166 total posts 166 posts
- UPDATED: Talkbacker Bob Orci tweets STAR TREK old set pics! -- 243 total posts 87 posts
- The Friday Docback Spelunks 'The Caves Of Androzani'!! DOCTOR WHO Story #136, And More!! -- 90 total posts 81 posts
- RIDDICK Sequel Details Via A New Press Release!! -- 84 total posts 73 posts
- Here Comes THE GODMOTHER! -- 71 total posts 71 posts
- Rest In Peace Ben Gazzara -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- INSIDIOUS-ER? -- 120 total posts 42 posts
- ABC Has Cast The Lead In Its Future Nuclear Nation Pilot!! And They’ve Chosen Wisely!! -- 39 total posts 39 posts
- The Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day, you bitch! You never backed away from anything in your life! Now fight! FIGHT! -- 136 total posts 37 posts
- AWAKE, This Season’s Best Broadcast Pilot, Gets NBC’s Old ER Slot March 1!! THE FIRM To Burn Off On Saturdays!! -- 37 total posts 37 posts