Discussion in 'Archive: The Amphitheatre' started by THE_MISSING_TRIPLET, May 27, 2003.
Sounds like someone didn't stay for the scene after the credits.
Guilty as charged. I didn't know there was gonna be something during the credits. Care to share what it was?
It showed a hospital room, the same one that Prof. X showed the students on TV towards the beginning of the movie. The "brain dead" man is lying on the bed. Moira McTaggart walks in and starts to do some work and the man looks at her and you hear Xavier's voice say "Hello, Moira". She stops what she's doing and stares at him, shocked, and says "Charles?" And then it ends. So Prof. X may be in a new body but he's still alive. Although, from what I've heard it was Patrick Stewart who played the guy in the bed. You never get a good look at his face in the final scene though.
This is Adam Jahnke's review from over at [link=http://www.thedigitalbits.com/]thedigitalbits[/link]:
It's no secret that I'm a huge fan of sequential art or, as most people would say, a big comic book nerd. Like many comics fans, I spent quite a few years following the adventures of Marvel's merry mutants. I quit reading some time in the late 1980s. Not so much because I lost interest but because I'd have had to get a second job in order to afford to keep up with the plethora of X-titles Marvel was beginning to put out. So I've never been particularly bothered by the changes made to the characters and stories in the X-Men movies. It would be impossible to make a truly faithful film adaptation of X-Men. It would require a TV network with unlimited resources devoted to nothing but X-programs. The X-Men movies have stood on their own merits so far, usually surprising me by being better than I expected them to be, and this latest installment is no exception. First the bad news. This is a massively busy movie, trying to jam way too many characters and plot points into its running time. This movie could have been much improved by eliminating some characters (I'm looking at you, creepy bald kid who's the source of the mutant cure) and beefing others up. The death of at least one major character is treated in such an off-hand way you're not even sure he's actually gone until you see his grave and Angel, who is featured so prominently in the movie's advertising, barely has anything to do at all. Brett Ratner's most unfortunate contribution as director can be heard in the inclusion of some amazingly lame wisecracks punctuating the film's major action sequence. Having said that, this is certainly Ratner's best film to date, though that's not saying a whole lot. He keeps things moving at a fast clip and stages the action effectively and entertainingly. With this and The Da Vinci Code, Ian McKellen proves that he may well the best actor of all time. Whether he's doing Shakespeare, Tolkien or X-Men, McKellen invests totally in the world he's supposed to inhabit. As with all the X-movies, McKellen's performance as Magneto makes the movie worth watching even if you couldn't care less about mutants and superheroes. The Last Stand is definitely the least of the three X-Men pictures but anyone who thinks it's unwatchable needs to go back and check out Superman IV: The Quest for Peace or Batman and Robin to remind themselves just how far off the tracks a once-promising superhero franchise can get derailed. X-Men: The Last Stand is fast, fun, and respectful of the source material, which is all I really expect from any of these movies. (***)
Personally, I find that review to be spot on. I'm not that big a fan of the X-Men movies to begin with. I don't have either of the first two on DVD, the only times I saw either of them in their entirety, was in the theater. I was very underwhelmed by the first, and found the second to be quite overrated. With that being said, I was actually surprised just how entertained I was by X-Men 3. Maybe because I was half-expecting a total disaster, considering all the stuff about rushed production and the fact that Brett Ratner was directing. But screenplay flaws aside, it is surprisingly well-made. And I also think it's Ratner's best flick, which isn't saying much, but still. He handled the big action set-pieces very well for the most part, and the film moved at a brisk pace. I had fun, and it actually got me interested in checking out the first two again.
But three stars? He only gave Da Vinci Code 2 stars, and that was a far superior movie.
Eh, i'd say both films deserve two stars, myself. Funny how really the only redeeming feature of BOTH was Sir Ian.
Saw X3 again, this evening (oddly enough, i had a ladyfriend who wanted to see it, and had no one else to go with). The script really is just a string of one cliche after the other, but that final 45 minutes IS pretty entertaining.
Finally saw X3 last night, and while I didnt find it as offensive as alot of others did I wasnt exactly crazy about it, either. It really showed that a different director was behind the helm for this one, and not in a good way, either, IMO. I also didnt think that they did enough exploring of the whole Jean/Phoenix thing, and I also didnt like how so many of the major characters are no longer mutants anymore thanks to the cure. Overall I found it to be mediocre at best and kind of a dissapointing way to end the franchise (if this is truly the end, of course).
*cough* Cyclops *cough*
Visually. the movie is the best one, but I think X2 treats the characters better.
Definitely. X2 is far and away the best of the franchise.
I think someone mentioned this earlier, but I'll just mention it again since this thought popped in my head while talking to a friend about X-3...
WHY didn't Magneto just drop the bloody bridge on the base? I mean, jsut consider:
1--He knew the kids was in the base, the "detecting mutant" told him.
2--The "detecting mutant" even told Magneto the kid was in the notehrn corner or something, so there's very specific location
Now, at first I thought "Hey, maybe he didn't want to kill the kid" but if I remember correctly, he did ask his mutants to go kill the kid, no? So instead of doing this straight away, he launches a stupid assault that resulted in more mutants being cured (the very thing he supposedly didn't want) and didn't even use his secret weapon, Jean/Phoenix (hell, he could have used Phoenix for the whole bridge thing!).
It's stupid and obviously the director just wanted to have a bridge destroyed probably as a homage to some fanboy fantasy or whatever. Bah!
Wouldn't that be the writers with fanboy fantasies? IIRC, there was a finished script before Ratner was even hired.
I thought that it was better than the other two.
I was disappointed that they didn't have nightcrawler In the Movie, He is my favorite X-Men and I love to see him. I was happy to see Angel in the movie and really thought it added another depth towards the movie. I would like to see them Focus on the students more than just the X-men completely, I know that it is called X-Men but I wouldn't mind seeing them focus on some of the up and coming X-men.
I so wish they had shown more of Angel in the movie! Also Psylocke could be alive, having done the same thing Prof. X did, but that is a very slim chance since she is nowhere near as strong as he is. Also I think that had way to many new mutants running around and then trying to concentrate a bit on each instead of picking one or two and concentrating on them *cough* Angel*