Just Watched X-Men 3 #no spoilers#

kaks said:
An absolute joke of a film and is no where near as good as the previous 2.
Click to expand...

Blunt, but I have to agree.

I thought x2 was a fantastic, fantastic film and this was such a letdown :(

Halle Berry needs beating, shooting, and to be set on by a rancor :/
 
I watched the 12:01 showing here in Seattle last night, and I quite enjoyed it.

It was obvious that the 'plot' was there to tie the action sequences together and the cheesy lines were a bit OTT (You, more than anyone should know that the weather can change quickly, Storm (or words to that effect)) but on the whole I liked it.
 
Mic said:
I think this film will need to make a lot more than 80 million to ensure a sequal.. It cost a whopping 200million
Click to expand...

profit i meant.

anyway, i haven't even seen it yet - i think i'll go see it tomorrow lunchtime.

most people say its not as good as the others but i might aswell go and see it anyway - i haven't been to the cinema since king kong (which was crap)
 
The clue to the bit after the end credits is in the lecture being taken by Xavier at the beginning of the film. Angel was the gay bit, Juggernaut was the comic bit, Beast is still a psychiatrist (Oooh, Kelsey Grammer just can't ditch Frasier can he?), Mystique is still fit, even without her blue plastic bodysuit but I am sure Rebecca Romjin has put a little weight on.
I liked the film. Remember people, it's based on a cartoon book, anything goes.

The only thing which I felt was silly, was Magneto moving the SF Harbour Bridge. He could have just got the ferry to Alcatraz.

I don't think this is a spoiler as it's in every trailer seen on tv and cinemas.
 
Shootist said:
Beast is still a psychiatrist (Oooh, Kelsey Grammer just can't ditch Frasier can he?),
Click to expand...
He is supposed to be. Beast is an incredibly smart man in the comics. And kelsey grammer is perfect as him.

but I am sure Rebecca Romjin has put a little weight on.
Click to expand...
Either way, she looks better in that film than iv ever seen her before.
 
I thought it was a huge let down, the script was poor, the one liners were poor, the acting was poor, the story was poor.

but most importantly there was just no need for soem of the things that happened in the film to happen at all.


overall though they tried to cram too much into 1 movie, they could easily have made 2 films out of everything that was going on in this one.
 
memphisto said:
I thought it was a huge let down, the script was poor, the one liners were poor, the acting was poor, the story was poor.

but most importantly there was just no need for soem of the things that happened in the film to happen at all.


overall though they tried to cram too much into 1 movie, they could easily have made 2 films out of everything that was going on in this one.
Click to expand...

i'd agree with that, to me it felt like there were just too many stories going on to allow the plot to focus on one of them and offer any real depth to it.
 
Calum said:
Brilliant film but missed the scene after the credit's!!!! :mad:
Click to expand...
Its on youtube.
People keep putting it up and fox keeps taking it down. You have to get lucky to see it.

The film is raking in the money however, with a 44million opening friday apparently
 
Saw it tonight, some bits were a bit over sentimental and I thought Brian Foster's Angel was underused as well as a few character's but definately a worthy end to the trilogy, one of the few film's that could have done with another 15-20 mins just to fill out some of the characters *hopes for an extended DVD cut*
 
Decent movie, the last 30 minutes were good, before then I got a bit bored. Some really excellent special effects, must have cost a bucket load of money. Better than the first one for sure, not seen the second.
 
I thought they really rushed it, the story was too straight forward, action sequences was ok. But i felt the second one was better.
 
Quite enjoyed it myself, although I had read reviews saying it wasn't amazing which nicely set me up not to expect too much from it. Second one was better though - more thoughtfully written and a better script. First one it's hard to say, as that was such a smaller scale movie, but I'd probably put them both on a par in terms of overall enjoyment.


memphisto said:
overall though they tried to cram too much into 1 movie, they could easily have made 2 films out of everything that was going on in this one.
Click to expand...

Amen. Just too many characters that did nothing, and they coud have expanded so many of them and given them meatier roles. Angel being a prime example.
 
MarkyMark said:
Just a tip for anyone who goes to watch this at the cinema. Just got back from seeing it and there is a short sequence right at the end after all the credits. Kind of turns some of what you thought you knew on its head.

Am not spoiling anything for anyone though. Just thought i'd make you all aware since a nice guy at the cinema gave us the heads up
Click to expand...


thanks for the tip, glad we stayed to catch that bit :)
nobody else knew, kinda cool it's a bit secret...
 
Well I haven't read the comics at all, only watched the three films, and I have to say this one is the worst of the three. It didn't feel like it was heading anywhere, and all the cool characters are either gone, didn't have a bigger part, or both :/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom