Sat, Jun. 3rd, 2006, 03:25 am
mangelamustdie: Here is a good question.
Is X-men 3: the Last Stand even worth the discussion??Discuss.
Sat, Jun. 3rd, 2006 12:36 pm (UTC)
Possibly. We could discuss it's lack of themes, it's rip off style and it's poor filmmaking
Sat, Jun. 3rd, 2006 04:52 pm (UTC)
So, does that mean the Angel was actually a gayman coming out to his father?
Sat, Jun. 3rd, 2006 11:55 pm (UTC)
ha ha, only if he looked like that. Seriously though I've herd people try to discuss the themes of X3 but I don't think there are any. I think any that people pull out are bret ratner accidently semi stumbling onto something. The gay theme with X-men was done in the first two (especially the second one with Ice-man's coming out to his parents) and any possibly idea that the cure represented abortion in a way is just an odd coincidence as they never fully explore it.
I saw an interview where someone said that the movie was full of the theme of being an outcast which is just a stupid theme to rely on in x-men because it's the most obvious one.
Still I don't think the movie was as bad as it could of been. I really enjoyed myself the first time I saw it and it went downhill the second time when I could really look at it closely.
Anyway that's my ideas on the flick. Sorry for bad spelling/grammer...no real time to check this over right yet.
Sun, Jun. 4th, 2006 11:32 am (UTC)
I think the theme is there, but just touched upon. Bryan Singer brought it right to the forefront in the first two, and Brett Ratner simply acknowledged it, made a few remarks about it, and then moved on to moving bridges and blowing up cars. The "cure" in X-Men 3 doesn't represent abortion, but still the gay and racial themes of the comics and previous movies, that anyone who isn't "normal" (which was white and straight in the olden days) can be cured. There's a reason why it's Storm who says "There's no reason for any of us to be cured."
A fine movie, and probably the best it could have been under Ratner's direction.
Tue, Jun. 6th, 2006 03:34 pm (UTC)
What is so great about Bryan Singer's first installment of the series, and inversely, what is so bad about Brett Ratner's first(and last)? It seems like people are hating a guy's name.
Sat, Jun. 3rd, 2006 04:54 pm (UTC)
So, does that mean Rogue actually had an abortion?
Sat, Jun. 3rd, 2006 07:41 pm (UTC)
Yes to both, and for that I think it accomplished something, but Singer could have done it better. It's only worth discussing if you're a geek. I've already discussed the topic to death though. I'd rather talk about Munich as that's the last thing I saw.
Tue, Jun. 6th, 2006 03:35 pm (UTC)
Could Singer have done Munich better? Maybe he would have cut down that final sex scene.
Tue, Jun. 6th, 2006 08:38 pm (UTC)
Hahaha! That's very true.
Sat, Jun. 3rd, 2006 04:56 pm (UTC)
So, does that mean its better than the DaVinci Code
Sat, Jun. 3rd, 2006 09:15 pm (UTC)
You could discuss how Hollywood movies seem to have mastered the swooping camera, swelling music, and grand effects to such extent that even the worst movies can still make us laugh out loud, shed a few tears, and wish we had super powers.
...Or you could rip apart the very last shot of X3 until your voice grows horse. I demand that DoP be shot. Not that the rest of it was too much better, but at least I got into the movie. Leaving the theatre with that image completely ruined the experience for me.
Sun, Jun. 4th, 2006 01:35 am (UTC)
Okay, so the snide comment above was because I didn't have time to do a full post.
I would all like everyone to go back to a time when George Lucas was churning out the prequels to the Star Wars films. Ah, I remember that little snot Jake Lloyd, then the even worse, emo, cardboard acting of Hayden Christensen. He was supposed to love his mother and Padme so much that he was going to learn the powers of the dark side so he wouldn't lose another person.
Are we all thinking of the end scene where Natalie Portman is saying (very unconvincingly) "Anie, you're breaking my heart!" and he's all, "Rar, stay out of this!"
You remember the horror.
My point is this: Lucas tried to give us little bits of their relationship to make us FEEL it. However, who felt it was real? Now, who felt it was hackneyed and annoying?
Then, we have X3. Why do Jean and Logan "love" each other, or at least, why does he "love" her and she "like" him? All we have to go on is some physical attraction, so how could they really "love" each other?
However, we don't think of that in X3 because, and I feel this is really valid, Famke Janssen and Hugh Jackman did a fine acting job. In the medical examination room, the Phoenix and Jean emerge at different times and Janssen's facial features are so...subtle, that it doesn't look forced, it feels real when Jean is looking at Logan and freaking out when he asks about Scott. Logan looks really concerned when he's trying to talk to Jean in the med. room. In the end scene he really is torn apart by having to kill her.
In Star Wars, this type of love was terribly displayed and I would like everyone to use that as a reference as to how this film COULD have turned out and then appreciate the good it did.
Tue, Jun. 6th, 2006 03:36 pm (UTC)
This might be the only thought out objection to the movie that I have heard. It is definitely the best one on this page.