So I saw "The Da Vinci Code". Did I mention that? And I've also see "X-Men: The Last Stand" now. I liked TDVC and I also liked XM:TLS...but for very different reasons.
TDVC was interesting in that it put a book I very much liked onto the big screen...and that's always intriguing. Not only that, but it did a fairly decent job (in my humble opinion) of translating it to the film version without absolutely murdering everything that was the book. This is something many book to film translations cannot claim. However, that having been said, I would understand why the movie might have trouble grabbing a foothold with a wide audience...because it can be a bit long and drawn out if you've not read the book before. Having read the book, I knew in fine detail what was going on...someone else wouldn't have that same advantage.
Warning - Spoilers
XM: TLS was good in that it was yet another part of an already very intriguing franchise. It was entertaining...it had good special effects. That's the best I can say for it. It was not the best story that they've done...and it certainly wasn't the best supporting cast. This time 'round instead of the intriguing character additions such as Nightcrawler, we have people like Kitty Pride and Juggernaught. Not that these characters don't have their merit...not that they don't have their interesting qualities. But perhaps if they'd been hadled better...by a different director, perhaps?
Bret Ratner is perhaps, but not definitively the downfall of this film. What Bryan Singer did for the first two films Ratner has completely cast aside. Instead of making us care for these characters, he not only settles for a pure action spectacle, takes away some of our favourite characters' abilities, such as Mystique and but kills off se of the most important mutants early on, such as Cyclops and even the Prof. himself!
Yet Carey spoke wisdom when he said, "In the X-Men Universe, nobody stays dead for long."
Now, there's a lot of criticism in that review...but remember I said that I enjoyed it. I meant that. I truly did enjoy it. I was entertained the entire time...I was shocked...and I came away from the film happy that I'd seen it. That's all I ask from a movie. Did I like XM: TLS as well as the first two iterations? No. I'll agree with Nic when I say my order of preferance is most definitely X-Men 2, X-Men, and finally X-Men: The Last Stand.
Here's hoping that what Singer did for X-Men he was able to duplicate in "Superman Returns".
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
It's all about me!
- Jer
- Warrington, Cheshire, United Kingdom
- I'm just me. This blog best viewed with Firefox in at least 1024x768 resolution.
Currently Reading:
Get Firefox - Browse Smarter.
Gamers Helping Kids in Need
1 comment:
Hi, this is the Carey he keeps mentioning. I have a slightly harsher view of this film. Brett Ratner treated this film like a 5-year-old (or Aaron) with a set of action figures and some fireworks. The entire film felt like he was sitting there going "ooh, lets blow this up next." He took several characters that could have been exciting additions to the film, such as Kitty Pryde, Juggernaut, Angel and the lesser known Multiple Man and Callysto, and treated them as throw-away space filler. And Pheonix for Christ's sake!! What should have been the most exciting, compelling villains to grace the x-men movies to date was treated as little more than a deranged meat grinder. Rattner also killed off or depowered the majority of the important characters, Cyclops not necessarily among them. My only consolation is that as Jerry stated earlier, no one necessarily stays dead for long in the X-men, especially not Pheonix, and that should they choose to make another x-men movie, someone far more competant than rattner can come in, resurrect as necessary, and conceivably save the franchise from an ignominous end at the ham-fisted fumblings of Brett Rattner.
Post a Comment