X-Men: O Confronto Final

I must be one of the few, it seems, who enjoyed X-Men: The Last Stand. I have been an X-fan for many years and my expectations were still met by this film. Do I think that it could have been a bit better? Certainly. The script seemed to pack too many elements into a short running time. With those issues solved I believe that it would have been fantastic. Still, I felt that X-3 was almost on the level with X-2's greatness. It has taken another viewing and some time to reach this point. At first, I felt betrayed at the many liberties taken with story elements. But after I left the theatre, I could not shake the feeling that I needed to view it again. After the second time, I came to grips with the film and now like it quite a bit.

Contrary to some critics' reviews, I do not believe that X-3 became overshadowed by action. There really is quite little of it until the finale, which feels quite epic. There are excellent character moments sprinkled throughout. The acting is generally superb across the board. More Ian McKellen is always nice, and Hugh Jackman impresses again with Wolverine. Kelsey Grammar actually does a respectable job with Beast. The other characters all do well with what they are given. There are a few poorly written one-liners that reminded me of the ones in X-Men 1, but the script is mostly intelligent with powerful themes such as the Cure. Another difficulty is that the film cannot pay the proper amount of attention to the many characters, including the new ones. But they still all seem to contribute something to the larger plot movement in the film. Ratner's only obvious difference from Singer is his frenetic pacing and energy. X-3 really moves quickly, and this does not have to be a negative. I also enjoyed the emotion that was hinted at in X-2, and came into full force during X-3. I do not think that it reached sentimentality or was melodramatic; it really felt powerful. The stakes really do seem to be high for the final chapter of this trilogy. The viewer finds this out quickly concerning Cyclops and Mystique, later with Jean and Xavier (in a particularly awe-inspiring scene), and during the finale in a nice moment with Jean and Wolverine. I think that many of the problems people are seeing in the film resulted from the pressure the entire production team was placed under in order to develop and finish the entire film in less than a year.

But all in all, I have really come to enjoy it as a satisfying film that met my high expectations. Look at it this way if you must. Try to see X-3 as not a stand-alone film but more as the third portion of one large story. The first X-Men had the difficult job of introducing a large ensemble cast of mutants and establishing a story and tone (other superhero films with one primary character have it much easier). X-2 had the most enviable position as most of the characters had already been partly developed and it did not have to conclude the entire story. It could work mostly on its own, just having to leave threads open for the next one. X-3 had the extremely difficult task of closing out the entire trilogy for good. I see it more as the third portion of one expansive tale, thus in the larger scheme it must move quickly toward a complete conclusion. In my opinion, the many actors under the abrupt switch in direction did an x-cellent job.

First off, X-Men: The Last Stand was by no means "drivel." In combination with the previous ventures, moviegoers and fans will receive a decent whole. The plot itself is not convoluted, but there are numerous mini-plots for just about every other character in the film. The huge number of plot lines Ratner chose to cast wound up limiting the film, removing key emotional elements. The film just was not long enough to adequately cover everyone's story. The music did not add anything to the movie either, it seemed tacky and amateur. Through length, plot numbers and music, X3 failed to properly and satisfyingly tie up the trilogy.

Problems aside, X-Men did succeed in creating a fabulous action-driven film. Ratner and Fox worked magic on the special effects side of things. I was particularly impressed with the opening scene, which found a 20 year younger Xavier and Eric (Stewart and McKellan) at the house of Jean Grey.

Despite being somewhat of a letdown, the film does bring in some interesting parallelism to the first two films. Speaking of the first films, I recommend viewing them right before or soon after seeing the third, as viewing them reminds you that you do care about the characters (being underdeveloped in X3). Most should find the third entry reasonably enjoyable and miles ahead of poorer entries into the superhero genre (Fantastic Four, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Ultraviolet, and the extraordinarily bad Batman Forever and Batman and Robin).

Positives:

• Most of the action
• Interesting ideas (Though explored better in the comics)
• Main cast
• Musical score

Negatives:

• Writing
• Messy story
• Pacing

First of all, let me say that X3 was a great action film. If you want to have a great time at the movies, this is a fun film to watch. However, as a fan of X-Men and the film trilogy, there were some problems with the film.

There are a lot of characters that are undeveloped. It's not such a problem with the one's we already know, but it is for the one's that we don't. There's also unneeded information for certain characters that aren't really in the movie. Certain characters play big roles, but we don't get to know them. Others have minor roles, and the info is meaningless. For instance, a character is introduced in the prologue to the movie, but is barely seen in the remainder of the film. The movie was way too short. It seems like everyone's in a hurry throughout the film. If it had been 2 and a half hours, it would have been able to develop all of the characters, and the back stories would have been more relevant to certain characters. The movie is action packed and fun, but it really doesn't draw you into it the way the first two did, say for a couple of scenes.

Overall, it was worth seeing on the big screen, and I'm glad that I saw it. It is a good film. But again, you'll be a little disappointed as an X-Men fan. 7/10.

One final thing, stay after the credits for the final scene. It seems nobody saw the entire movie.

I have the luxury of not being a fan of the comics, so I find no offense when some character's superpowers or origin don't match the "book." Also, I have seen enough Marvel-licensed projects to set my expectations low. In short, I was expecting almost nothing.

The first two X-men were poor projects, but at least had *some* imagination. Sadly, it wasn't visual or cinematic. This lacks everything, but you can read all about that elsewhere. Here, all you'll find is some speculation about the root of thing: why it is rotten and probably unfixable at the core.

The book depended on a the universality of differentness. The idea behind the notion of "mutant" was that there were perhaps tens of millions of mutants including nearly every reader. Different, strange but talented beyond the norm in some usually unappreciated way. Spurned or at least misunderstood by parents and bosses.

In this cosmology, we all live in a modified noir world, one that toys with the fate of a whole class rather than a single, accidentally selected individual (and his girl). When we see higher level mutants behaving heroically, they do it as representatives of us, or so the comics go.

That's turned on its head here: lower level mutants are innocent pawns just as all the other types of people, soldiers, random motorists — whose idea was it to show that every car had children in it, then use those occupied cars as firebombs?

And if the target demographic is 14 year old boys and those who wish they were, why use 40 year old women? Or is it not supposed to matter? Well, it didn't to me, but the complete lack of cinematic imagination says this needs to go away.

The anti-mutating mutant was apt, though.

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.