X-Men (2000) in Second Takes on Films of the 2000s Forum

0 Points

Forum Jump

X-Men (2000)

Author	Comment
hermanthegerm	X-Men (2000)	Lead	[-]
Jul 18 12 9:03 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Tags : None I got all three films for three buck each and I revisited the first (I still have not seen any of the others.) Frankly, even looking for a thread was a bit difficult as they all share the X-Men title and it's hard to separate the first from the others in a search. If you guys like I can rename this thread to The X-Men Marvel Series and everything can be discussed together instead of trying to figure what goes where. Don't even get me started on trying to find the movie Paul (2011) in libraries, catalogs or searches. It is nearly impossible. Anyway, I thought this was an OK film, certainly nothing to get excited about or start a franchise. I'm sure fans of the comics are more excited about this than anybody else. This was such a blah film that so far I had not bothered to seek out any of the other films in the series. "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING
	Remove this ad
Andy Sheets		#1	[-]
Jul 18 12 2:49 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I think in retrospect X-Men is getting creaky. At the time it went over pretty well because it established that you could do a movie about a team of superheroes, each with a distinct power and background, battling a team of villainous counterparts without the whole thing collapsing into a campy mess. I remember seeing it and feeling happy afterward not so much because it was so great, but simply that "it didn't suck!" X-Men 2 is still pretty decent, I think, but X-Men 3 is a painful slog that fails to properly resolve any of the continuing subplots that had built up through the previous two movies.
blackbiped		#2	[-]
Jul 21 12 3:43 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I got the three-pack for ten bucks and really enjoy revisiting the series from time to time. 2 is definitely the best, but I like them all. I think it's a pretty solid series. Legend, oh legend, the third wheel legend...always in the way. Porfle's Secret Blog HK and Cult Film News Andersonvision.com
TheLizard		#3	[-]
Jul 27 12 12:11 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I think this was the film that made Hollywood go "okay, this can work." It was preceded by Blade, which was a somewhat obscure franchise, and to an extent The Matrix, which is just very comic book-ish. After X-Men was successful, and pretty much accepted as not sucking, it was like "Well, those three did okay. Let's get that Spiderman movie out there". And low and behold, it did really well, and we've had a decade of superhero movies since. Some I find amusing, some make me want to shoot myself, but hey, I probably would have loved them all as a kid. I saw X-Men 2 in the theatre, and I still think it's the best, same with Spidey 2. That Wolverine movie wasn't too bad, and all those direct to video animated films Marvel and DC have been doing have been pretty high quality. I think X-Men was the breaker though. It proved you could take the traditional superhero premise and make it work in a real setting. I think it had a good influence on the books immediately following it's release, that Grant Morrison run was fantastic, as was Stracinzky's run on Spiderman. There was sort of a brief comic rennaisance after that where Marvel was letting their writers and artists be really creative. Too bad they had to chicken out and pave over all the innovative changes made and set things back to a comfort zone. Oh, well. But yeah, this is a fun movie, I like it.
hermanthegerm		#4	[-]
Aug 21 12 9:42 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Saw the next two sequels. There are things I liked, but overall, they are pretty by-the-book super hero pictures. The script keeps ignoring the superpowers these guys have: a dam is breaking, the the ice guy does not think to freeze the lake (which would not only solve the basic problem but save one of them from 'dying',) enemy agents invade the school and only two or three kids use their powers, no one else does. I did like the fact that Magneto was allowed to work with the heroes, but for example Mystique's treason and playing stoolie for the humans (whom she hates) feels false. I also liked Nightcrawler, whom I thought was an interesting character with (underused) potential. I haven't seen the other X-Men movies and am not likely to seek them out. "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING Last Edited By: hermanthegerm Aug 22 12 8:26 AM. Edited 1 times.
Servant of Legendre		#5	[-]
Aug 22 12 7:24 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	That would be a pity, Herman, cos X-MEN: FIRST CLASS is by far the best of the bunch, IMO. ( Apart from a tedious getting-to-know-you segment with a bunch of new recruit muties ).
Robert Troch		#6	[-]
Sep 24 12 5:58 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Servant of Legendre wrote: That would be a pity, Herman, cos X-MEN: FIRST CLASS is by far the best of the bunch, IMO. ( Apart from a tedious getting-to-know-you segment with a bunch of new recruit muties ). Yes that was the worst section of what was actually a pretty good/different take for an X Men film. Why it was Havoc though, instead of Cyclops? I don't get that one. Robert T.
Andy Sheets		#7	[-]
Sep 26 12 12:10 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Based on the movies' timeline, Cyclops (and the other non-Wolverine X-Men from the earlier films) would have been too young to place in the early 60s.
Tim Smyth		#8	[-]
Sep 26 12 1:51 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	hermanthegerm wrote: Saw the next two sequels. There are things I liked, but overall, they are pretty by-the-book super hero pictures. Trying not to offend anyone here, but what are you talking about? There were no super hero movies like these at the time, how can they be by the book?? I obviously saw a different film than you guys.The first X-Men was the first Marvel movie that everyone said, WOW, and it totally blew away any DC movie ever made! Again not to make this about Marvel VS DC, but heck, this movie started the whole cycle we are in now, it was the first real serious attempt at super hero film making, sure it was low budget, so what, it had great characters? The sequel, modeled after The Empire Strikes Back, I thought was in many ways better, hated the third one though, since it hated the fans of the first two. To think otherwise is crazy, in my opinion. Tim
hermanthegerm		#9	[-]
Sep 26 12 10:29 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Tim Smyth wrote: hermanthegerm wrote: Saw the next two sequels. There are things I liked, but overall, they are pretty by-the-book super hero pictures. Trying not to offend anyone here, but what are you talking about? There were no super hero movies like these at the time, how can they be by the book?? By the book: to do something exactly as the rules tell you. Thus, no inspiration, no personality, no flair, no style, no pizzazz. Generic, workman-like films. Functional, but not memorable. If you read what I wrote, I said I only saw them recently, I did not see them at the time they came out. Therefore I am judging them by my standards today, not ten years ago. "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING
Tim Smyth		#10	[-]
Sep 28 12 12:42 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Hey Herman, I dd read that, but you said you were revisiting the first one, so I thought you had seen that one new. So sorry for any misunderstanding. I do not think films last the way they used to, maybe because there are just so many similar films all around at once, heck folks talked about Star Wars for years, now if folks talk about a film for two weeks that's an achievement. I guess we just don't agree on those X-Men movies, at least the first 2 that is, which I think are two of the finest super hero films ever made. I also enjoyed X-Men First Class. But I still think all you guys are crazy for not agreeing with me. All I can say is, at least we have super hero movies now to disagree upon. Tim Last Edited By: Tim Smyth Sep 28 12 12:45 AM. Edited 1 times.
	Remove this ad
hermanthegerm		#11	[-]
Sep 28 12 1:12 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I agree with you in that sense, the bar has been raised for action films (to the point of incoherence even) but there is always room a quality film that does something unique, and thus achieve classic status of sorts. I doubt Star Wars would raise many an eyebrow, even if it was an achievement at the time. But even then it still holds up, as do many other older, and slower paced action films. Some solid, entertaining (if flawed) films still manage cult status, but I just don't see these X films do that. A film like Hulk, for all that it was hated, and for all its flaws, might possibly achieve something like that cult quality I mention, before these two sequels do. (Not that I'm betting on it...) Even if Ang Lee did not understand the super hero comic style (inserting stupid cliches that should not be in there,) he managed to say something personal and to expand on themes he has worked on before. ...Kinda like Kubrick with his Shining, many hate if, but also many think it's a masterpiece. "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING
Servant of Legendre		#12	[-]
Sep 28 12 7:08 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Tim Smyth wrote: hermanthegerm wrote: Saw the next two sequels. There are things I liked, but overall, they are pretty by-the-book super hero pictures. .The first X-Men was the first Marvel movie that everyone said, WOW, and it totally blew away any DC movie ever made! I think that honour should really go to BLADE, but X-MEN was the one that made the mainstream audiences go WOW. BLADE was more a fan WOW. ( Though some loathed it ).
hermanthegerm		#13	[-]
Sep 28 12 8:32 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The Crow (1994) and Spawn (1997) were probably precursors of the 'new' dark superhero. Burton's Batman Returns (1992) might have gotten it close, except for its comic (as in funny) qualities, and, of course the fact that the bat-line totally fizzled out immediately afterward. Blade (1998) was already following a trend. "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING
Servant of Legendre		#14	[-]
Sep 29 12 5:52 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	True enough. I overlook The Crow and Spawn on account of finding them terrible.
hermanthegerm		#15	[-]
Sep 29 12 10:07 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Agreed, particularly Spawn. But I did see both, so I suspect their moderate success fed the genre for a while, and fed it enough that it was able to continue on. "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING
blackbiped		#16	[-]
Sep 29 12 1:54 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I never cared for SPAWN, but THE CROW is one of my favorite movies. Legend, oh legend, the third wheel legend...always in the way. Porfle's Secret Blog HK and Cult Film News Andersonvision.com
hermanthegerm		#17	[-]
Sep 29 12 9:25 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	My sister in law walked out saying it was the worst movie ever... But I just don't see it. It was a OK neo-goth vigilante/revenge movie, but I get why some would not like it. Too dark for mainstream audiences, maybe? "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING
TheLizard		#18	[-]
Oct 2 12 2:08 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Spawn is cheesy, but kind of fun in a way. Todd has been pushing for a more horror-oriented film to be made, but I don't know if Spawn is popular enough now to get the backing. The HBO animated series though? Way cool. The Crow... I don't know. I have mixed feelings about it. I can kind of watch it in a reminiscent 90's goth mindset, but I just see all the flaws in it now. The book is one of my favorite comics ever, and it's just not very true to it. And The Crow II? Well... At least it had Iggy in it.
reddog122		#19	[-]
Oct 5 12 6:32 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The X-Men trilogy was a real blown opportunity as the excellent X2 seemed to be setting up the Claremont/Byrne Dark Phoenix Saga to round out the story. It would have been interesting to see how close Brian Singer would have stayed to the source. Instead, the third one turned out to be a complete waste of time.
Robert Troch		#20	[-]
Oct 6 12 9:53 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Referring back several posts. Ang Lee's Hulk is already becoming forgotten and I see no cult status for it anytime. It's dull, disappointing and The Hulk wrestles around with mutated poodles. It joins misfires like the Shadow and Doc Savage never to be spoken much of ever again. The first 2 X Men movies were enjoyable (even with those horrid leather outfits) and X Men first class was pretty good. Looks like the sequel has some very good possibilities. Robert T,
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

X-Men (2000)

X-Men (2000)