• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Dark PhoeniX - Review and Discussion Thread

Your Grade?

  • A+

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • A

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • A-

    Votes: 3 6.7%
  • B+

    Votes: 4 8.9%
  • B

    Votes: 7 15.6%
  • B-

    Votes: 7 15.6%
  • C+

    Votes: 8 17.8%
  • C

    Votes: 4 8.9%
  • C-

    Votes: 2 4.4%
  • D+

    Votes: 2 4.4%
  • D

    Votes: 1 2.2%
  • D-

    Votes: 1 2.2%
  • F

    Votes: 3 6.7%
  • Why, God? Why?!

    Votes: 4 8.9%
  • Holy shit! Kinberg stuck the landing!!!

    Votes: 1 2.2%

  • Total voters
    45
I wonder why Kinberg was brought on to the FC movies in the first place, when X3 had been a dud.

Kor
 
I wonder why Kinberg was brought on to the FC movies in the first place, when X3 had been a dud.
Big-budget screenwriters are subject to all sorts of wild/bad whims from studio execs. What appears on screen is hardly necessarily representative of what they might have wanted or originally written.

Matthew Vaughn was right. There was no place for the FC cast to go after DOFP.
Sure there was - there was a big-ass confrontation with full-on supervillain Magneto commanding an entire island/asteroid full of mutants, as promised at the end of DoFP, as distinguished from a hastily convened crowd of campers in a forest as seen in X3. Also, there's Space. (And Matthew Vaughn gave us Kingsman: The Golden Circle, so I'd hardly call him an authority on making quality action sequels.) :p
 
I wonder why Kinberg was brought on to the FC movies in the first place, when X3 had been a dud.

Kor

I have to believe that Kinberg is an incredible expert at studio politics.
 
Big-budget screenwriters are subject to all sorts of wild/bad whims from studio execs. What appears on screen is hardly necessarily representative of what they might have wanted or originally written.
I'd grant you do that if Kinsberg had only one bad film to his name, but the fact that he has multiple bad ones to his name, including repeating the exact same mistakes more than a decade later...yeah, it's him.

I'm inclined to believe Timby's take on the situation. He knows how to play the studio politics.
 
^ Those are hardly mutually exclusive explanations. Also, Kinberg has a lot of producing credits on some very big movies, which, yeah, pretty much means his proficiency at studio politics is a given.
 
Jean dies in the 90s but died in X3 in the 2000s.

Jean is giving a speech at the start of X1 to congress about the emergence of mutants. But Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix has them out in public. Like it's no big deal.

Styker was exposed and arrested by Moira McTaggert at the end of Apocalypse. I very seriously doubt Stryker will be able to be meeting with the president in the 2000s and kick off the events of X2.

There are other incongruities, but you get the idea.

I'm getting the idea you don't understand that things are not supposed to necessarily line up with the original movies due to the timeline change. These are not incongruities.
 
I'm getting the idea you don't understand that things are not supposed to necessarily line up with the original movies due to the timeline change. These are not incongruities.
It should be noted that Jean dies in 1992 in the revised timeline but is also supposed to be alive and well in 2024. Sooner than that, when Logan joins the team in the early 2000s. For the New York Mission. Something referenced ito still have occurred in the Logan film set in 2029.


The FC writing, production crew just stopped paying attention to details and decided to make up the story as they went along. Ignoring the continuity they themselves had previously established.
 
It should be noted that Jean dies in 1992 in the revised timeline but is also supposed to be alive and well in 2024. Sooner than that, when Logan joins the team in the early 2000s. For the New York Mission. Something referenced ito still have occurred in the Logan film set in 2029.

The FC writing, production crew just stopped paying attention to details and decided to make up the story as they went along. Ignoring the continuity they themselves had previously established.

Jean being alive as of 2023 in the revised timeline in no way, shape, or form precludes her dying in 1992, but it does mean that, at some point in the two decades that pass between those dates, she is resurrected.

I really wish people would stop projecting manufactured problems onto these movies.
 
Technically, she didn't die in 1992. She evolved. But to me, there's a strong implication that she is never coming back to the normal plane of existence to live among mere mortal mutants again.

In any case, the screwed up continuity is one of the things that I love about these movies. Fandom these days has become so pedantic about wanting everything to fit perfectly together, and this subverts that expectation quite nicely.

Kor
 
Technically, she didn't die in 1992. She evolved. But to me, there's a strong implication that she is never coming back to the normal plane of existence to live among mere mortal mutants again.

Kor

And my understanding of the film's ending, even from an outside perspective, is the opposite and is supported by Kinberg's pre-release comments.
 
Jean being alive as of 2023 in the revised timeline in no way, shape, or form precludes her dying in 1992, but it does mean that, at some point in the two decades that pass between those dates, she is resurrected.

I really wish people would stop projecting manufactured problems onto these movies.
It could be argued that you are projecting a self-manufactured solution to the problems inherent in the film. We will never know if Jean comes back to life and live at the Xavier Mansion in 2024. Because the writer/director/producer (Simon Kinberg) decided to end would he knew would be be the last movie in the series with loose ends, and incongruities.

It's similar to ending a show on a cliffhanger, with dangling plot threads. When the creatives know beforehand the show is cancelled and not being renewed.

It's irresponsible.
 
^ Unless I've grossly misinterpreted plot synopses and analysis of the film's ending, there are no loose ends or incongruities, and if you believe otherwise, you're manufacturing problems that don't actually exist.

It is not a great stretch or even an illogical presumption to conclude that Jean's resurrection at some point between 1992 and 2023 is an inevitability based on both the ending of this film and prevuously established continuity.
 
I tried to watch this this morning, and I got as far as the X-Men coming back from their space mission, before I gave up. Well technically, I stopped because it was the time I like to go on my morning bike ride, but I'm not going back it.
It's weird, I'm not sure what it was, but there was just something kind off about it, I just couldn't get into it. I literally spent the entire time I was watching it, thinking about what other movie I'd rather watch once I turned it off. Usually I'm easy to please, but not in this case. I was really shocked to look at Amazon and see that it has 4 1/2 out 5 stars with 23,000+ reviews. I can't wrap my mind around that many people liking it that much.
 
They should have played the alien threat more I feel. The scene where he says, “they’re not mutants” should have been a bigger deal
 
I stand by my review from (*checks post*), damn, three year ago. Not a perfect film but not nearly as bad as many people make it out to be. I haven't seen it since its release but I imagine my initial grading of A- will drop to B+. I think I was surprised how much I enjoyed it (much like Jurassic World: Dominion) despite the poor reviews.
 
I was really shocked to look at Amazon and see that it has 4 1/2 out 5 stars with 23,000+ reviews. I can't wrap my mind around that many people liking it that much.

Well if someone bothered to pay money to buy it from Amazon... they MUST have liked it.... everyone else who hated it probably saw it somewhere else and gave their ratings accordingly.

At this point everyone else has forgotten about it.
 
Really disappointing that they botched this storyline twice.

I think the problem is that they didn't even do the storyline once...it wasn't even an adaptation of the story. It was a different story entirely (both times) and they called it Dark Phoenix.
 
I've never been able to get through this film. I've watched Fant4stic twice, but I get about 20-30 minutes into this and just can't go any farther. I still can't believe they let the guy who wrote the horrible X-Men 3 not only try to write the story again, but also let him direct the movie. Simon Kinberg failing upward in the X-Men franchise will always be one of the most mystifying FOX X-Men decisions for me. He even wrote Fant4stic and they still let him write/direct Dark Phoenix. I mean, he managed a decent script with DoFP, but Fant4stic and then X-Men Apocalypse should definitely have disqualified him from more comicbook film writing work, even forgetting the fact that he'd already screwed up the Phoenix story line once before.

This movie and New Mutants are some of the only mainstream comicbook movies I've never been able to get through, the FOX X-Men franchise really went out with a wet fart.
 
I daresay mistake #1 is trying to do Dark Phoenix (or a DP-based story) in a single film, versus giving it the room it needs to build-up and breathe.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top