X-3 - Good, But Not Great. Why? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums


View Full Version : X-3 - Good, But Not Great. Why?

10-04-2006, 02:57 PM
After watching this film for the second time (first was at the theatre), I'm trying to figure what went wrong. It worked fine as an average action/superhero flick. But I think it was more in the vein of Daredevil than Spiderman, as far as quality goes. It just looks rushed, like lots of dough was spent on some scenes. Some scenes, however, look absolutely cheap, almost tv-movie like. I'm not just talking special effects, either. Dialogue, pacing, even some of the lighting seemed amateurish. I'm not sure it's totally director Brett Ratner's fault, either. To say he can only direct mindless action, such as the Rush Hour series, is unfair. Red Dragon was, in my opinion, much better than Ridley Scott's Hannibal, and just slightly second to Jonathan Demme's Silence of the Lambs. Even though there were some cheesy, by-the-numbers Capra-lite sappy moments in The Family Man, he still pretty much made it work. I think X-3 suffered from a combination of rushing to get it finished, having new writers involved in the franchise, and trying to keep it under a 2 hour running time. There were also lots of new characters this time around, and that's always a problem to try to introduce them all properly with their own storyline. It totally has the same feel to me that Jurassic Park 3 had. Give us a non-stop adrenaline rush for a little over an hour-and-a-half so we don't realize there's not much fresh story here. The dvd presentation sorta sucks as well. X-2 was released in a feature-rich two disc set. This time, we have to spend more money for a double disc presentation with, half the stuff they're getting overseas in the standard edition! I settled for the bare bones, single disc. The DTS-ES 6.1 audio is pretty sweet, and is probably the best part. The picture looks good, but not the best I've seen from a new release. This edition also features some alternate endings, and filmmakers commentaries, which I haven't checked out. I'm not really trying to review it, I'll leave that to the proffessionals (you know who you are). Just wanted some opinions on what y'all think went wrong.

10-05-2006, 10:11 AM
Agreed. X2 was far better, IMO.

X3 simply didn't have enough character development. Whereas X2 dove into Wolverine's past at Alkalai Lake (or whatever it was called), this one didn't really do any of that. It attempted to center around Jean Gray, but never succeeded. Plus, Cyclops and Professor X were killed off too conveniently.

I'm with you; this was the worst of the series. Let's hope they don't jack up Spidey3.

Dusty Chalk
10-09-2006, 06:31 AM
A friend of mine said it to me best -- it's the same problem as with all the new hollywood movies, it takes no chances. It was entirely 100% predictable. I blame...whomever is responsible for the story.

I mean, the car-throwing scene in Bad Boys II had more drama than the car throwing scene in X3.

Let's hope it is the last stand.

10-09-2006, 07:32 AM
I think X3 had the greatest story of the 3 movies to tell, it was really a grand vision for the series. The problem is it was too damn rushed and suffered because of it. The story could easily have been a trilogy itself, which would have allowed much more character development, more struggle, background, which would ultimately allow for a relatively greater climax. Instead we get - hey, Jean's alive, wow, she's invincible and killed everyone, let's get her...got her...the end. It was condensed into a 90 minute or so effort that just didn't come off very well.

I actually liked it more than the 2nd one which I found dragged on a bit too much in the second half, and didn't have as big a threat or conflict as X3 for me to get into it to begin with. But story aside, it was a much better execution. The first one remains my favorite.

As for Spiderman - I liked the first two enough, but I really hope #3 picks up the pace - if I have to go through another long, drawn out, tell me exactly what inner struggles the characters are going through script, I'm giving up on Spidey. And who does the dialogue? Lucas?

At least it looks promising enough from the previews.

Dusty Chalk
10-09-2006, 09:04 AM
Instead we get - hey, Jean's alive, wow, she's invincible and killed everyone, let's get her...got her...the end.Dude. Spoilers. Warn. (I've seen it, but for those who haven't, you've just...well, actually you just saved them 90 minutes, so...um...kudos.)
...long, drawn out, tell me exactly what inner struggles the characters are going through script...Hey, good call, I had the exact same problem with #2 -- I thought Petey "suffered" too much. He was made into too much of a loser.

10-09-2006, 09:36 AM
Ya know, as lackluster as X3 was, it was still pretty good for a super hero flick - when I think of the bomb disasters that Hulk, Superman, and Fantastic 4 were, it's hard to complain about X3.
I think the problem with all of these movies is that the comic series fans aren't the ones making the movies (though I could be wrong, but I can't imagine anyone reading a Spidey comic and coming away with the notion he grew web spinning glands in his arms).

Parker was a wimp in Spidey 2. Maybe it's just me, but I grew up reading Spidey comics and watching Spidey cartoons - the romance and demon struggles were small, easily forgettable sub-plots to the crime busting, super-villian ass kicking Spidey who could make a Jet Ski out of his webs.

Dusty Chalk
10-10-2006, 10:29 AM
...when I think of the bomb disasters that Hulk, Superman, and Fantastic 4 were, it's hard to complain about X3...I'm going to stop watching bad movies, otherwise my standards are going to drop like yours.

10-10-2006, 06:11 PM
Watched X3 again last night...saw it first in the theater.
It was an enjoyable film but did seem rushed.
I am not sure I could have sat through a 2 1/2 hour movie so they could get everything in without rushing parts.

10-10-2006, 06:26 PM
Easily the weakest link out of the three films, which can be attributed to Ratner's inabilities as a film-maker. It would be interesting to see which scenes were handled by Singer before his 'departure' from the project...although the entire film seems rushed because Fox wanted the film released in the Summer 06 lineup. It's a shame that we get something this sloppy after waiting since the really well-done X-Men 2. Most people were not expected that film to be as good and in-depth as it was. I almost think of the three films similar to the Batman films. The first Batman (1989) was about as good or similar to that of X-Men and then Batman Returns proved to be a bit more creative and in-depth, similar to X-Men 2, but then the Batman series went downhill with Batman Forever and Batman and Robin, which in many respects reminds me of the catastrophe that X-Men 3 was. Even Halle Barry needs to redeem herself after Catwoman and this disaster...sounds like she needs to do another art-house film like MONSTERS BALL.

10-12-2006, 04:45 PM
After seeing this movie last night, it wasn’t a bad flick. Have not seen X1 or X2, but X3 on its own does entertain. The plot line is easy to follow and shoreline moves pretty quickly.

Halle Berry was interesting in this movie, so as the [blue] Beast. There might have been too much reliance on special effects in the story board, but was well excuted. Although as Defshep said, some scenes did looked cheap (the forest).

The DVD image quality probably could stand some improvement as it is getting a sh*tty marks for its DVD video image quality.

10-23-2006, 10:17 PM
I watched this film over the weekend. It is not particually good IMHO. The best thing about it is the marvelous DTS sound track on it with plenty of center back surround imaging(ES). For those who have the sixth and/or seventh channels up, it should be a feast. I think however that the D.D. soundtrack is flawed in some way.

10-23-2006, 10:30 PM
I'll be curious to see where they go from here....

Next year we get MAGNETO and then WOLVERINE in 2008. Both do not have directors at this point, but I think that someone like Stephen Norrington would be a perfect choice, even Christopher Nolan, if he isn't doing something Batman-related. I really think they need to do something a bit darker in nature. We need some momentum again and SPIDER-MAN 3 should help with that to some degree, but we need saved from the bombs like DAREDEVIL, ELEKTRA, CATWOMAN, and the useless parade of poor comicbook-to-film cycles that are going on.

10-26-2006, 04:36 AM
I liked it. Not as nuanced or layered as two, superior in terms of action to one so all in all a "B" if you ask me. I was riveted and enthralled. Thought the death of Cyclops was glossed over if you ask me. Shoulda been 3 hours long.

Da Worfster

Dusty Chalk
10-26-2006, 05:09 AM
Shoulda been 3 hours long.Yeezh. I gotta disagree with you here. The only reason I didn't hate it any more than I already do is that it didn't waste a great deal of my life.

10-26-2006, 01:27 PM
My biggest gripe with this film was the lack of emotion in the film. This was suppose to be the darkest of all the films for reasons like...well, the death of 3 X-men. Oops, sorry SPOILERS ALERT......

So, 3 X-men die...and that's about how exciting or dramatic they make it.

The glossed over the deaths so much that when Cyclopes died...my wife looked over to me about 10 minutes later and was like... "He's dead". Yep, I said. Boohoo.

Why on earth did they make 2 previous movies to make us love these characters and then kill them off in such a poor manner that we hardly even care. Xavier is obliterated into nothingness and it's almost like....oh well.

The film needed more emotional moments and it needed to be darker in order to give us a more mournful experience, but that's what happens when we get Ratner as the director.

10-27-2006, 08:24 AM
It just proves the point that CGI cannot save a crappy plotline or dialoge. It seemed to me that the pacing was off, as if each scene was filmed only for the CGI to be introduced.

I think the worst example was moving the GG bridge. The scene was completely scripted so we can see the bridge be moved. Yawnnnnnn......It was like, comon already.

The acting was a bit stilted, and as others have said, there was no emotional envolvment in the death of Xavier or Cyclops. It was just a bad film all around.

Maybe its like Star Trek, and the next one will be better. However, if whales are involved in any way, I will turn it off!

10-27-2006, 10:29 AM
Maybe its like Star Trek, and the next one will be better. However, if whales are involved in any way, I will turn it off!:lol: :lol: :lol:

10-30-2006, 04:15 PM
I remember as a kid hanging out at my friend's dad's pizzeria and arcade (can you say "mobbed-up"?) and picking up an X-Men comic book off the racks. I think I probably started in the 120s and read through 150 or so.
Much like the Bourne series of movies, this whole series, culminating with this movie, were slickly produced with many effects and top dollar actors. What somebody in H-wood forgot was the stories that made these characters popular in the first place.
I don't deny that these are fun movies with which to test your system. It just seems like the current modus operandi is to take characters with a bit of name recognition and slap together some lame excuse for explosions.