Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by StarTrek1701, May 31, 2011.
We all know it was the Comedian.
Commissioner Gordon killed Kennedy! I knew it.
I gave it an A. Good film, overall. I'm hoping the sequel doesn't follow the film directly, but takes place at least 10 years later. Just because the 70's were so awesome!
There were a few plot holes that bothered me, but not enough to ruin the films. I thought Shaw's plan made very little sense. I understand he wants humanity wiped out, and a nuclear war would certainly do that. But how would that benefit the mutants? As far as I can tell, they have the same need for fresh water and food that the rest of humanity has. Why would they want to live in an irradiated wasteland?
I didn't care for the mutant cure idea either. Hank shouldn't have been so incredibly bothered by looking perfectly normal except for his feet. I know normal people who have worse feet!
Further, how exactly could a super genius make such a huge mistake as creating a serum that amplifies a gene instead of diminishing it? That's rather silly. And how would a serum that changes his feet to look normal not affect his abilities as he claims?
I personally wish that entire subplot had been dropped and Hank had not turned into his blue self at this point.
Don't get me started on the effects.
^ As long as Hank didnt look like the cowerdly blue lion I really did not have a problem with his change and really without the subplot for him he would have had no lines. That subplot also gave Mystique her impetus to change sides. I also think we should pop into the seventies in the next film and get some Dazzler action.
Hank wanting to cure himself and causing his mutation to evolve was taken straight from the comics. Hank isn't a super genius, he's just a really good scientist who happened to make a mistake with his calculations.
Emma Frost, though pretty lacking in depth, was better than the other villains and thus missed in the second half, especially as it was suggested she could break out but didn't.
It's too much of a distortion to overlook it and helps make Xavier seem excessively lightweight, especially when the film puts in archival footage of other news. It could have easily been added at least with dialogue.
And Johnathan Kent fought hard to get Two-Face in jail.
I thought he looked like the blue guy from Monsters, Inc.
I don't know if he was partly CGI or what, but it looked like it. I think he looked pretty ridiculous.
I see what you are saying, but I think they could have found something for him to do. They could have had the subplot without having him change, and thus still have the reasons for her to go with Magneto.
Hell, she would have had a better reason to go if Hank were normal looking. With him changed at least she has someone she can relate to on the team.
I didn't know that was from the comics. Still, it takes more than a calculation mistake to create something that will enhance a gene when you thought it was supposed to suppress the gene.
Cells basically are like factories where DNA is the template to build proteins that serve a function. To suppress a gene, he'd have to find a way to eliminate the proteins that make him look the way he does.
So to use the factory analogy, it would be like someone designed a bin to hold and store widgets as they come off the assembly line but it instead causes the assembly line to run faster. Not entirely impossible, but improbable. Especially since you would think Hank would test it before actually shooting himself up.
Either way, I would have liked to see Beast in his natural form for at least this film. Just my personal opinion.
^ I think they wanted it to be a little bit more on the nose to the casual movie-goer that this was the same character played by Kelsey Grammer in X3.
^ You mean Singer didn't ignore X3?!
THE HELL YOU SAY
Singer and Vaughn most likely ignored elements of X3 that they didn't like or that were changed from the script the two of them originally were attached to...basically they ignored all the Ratner/Penn stuff. IIRC the casting of Kelsey Grammer as Beast was under Vaughn's watch.
Still haven't seen this movie. For some reason I keep thinking that this movie is X-men meets Mad Men. I hate Mad Men btw,
Not at all, it's more X-Men meet James Bond.
The only thing Mad Men-ey about it is January Jones.
So am I also supposed to believe that critics are also actually calling Transformers 3 the best action film of all time?
^ You keep on bringing up another film into this discussion for some reason. I enjoyed Dark of the Moon, it was an improvement over Revenge of the Fallen but it wasn't the greatest action film of all time...and you wanna post a link to whatever critic said that because I can post review after positive review for First Class.
I'm asking if we should trust all statements claiming to come from the critics, not about the films themselves.
The claim is in every TV add for the film on DVD/Blu-Ray.
Just turn on the TV and watch the commercials, you'll see and hear it.
Separate names with a comma.