X-Men: First Class (2011)

[DavidSeven]

Damn. Fassbender is totally giving off a Jon Hamm vibe, positioned there next to January Jones.

[[ETM]]

Seriously, do the people who work design for this movie working off of a Photoshop how-to book?

Definitely. At least half the heads were re-attached to the bodies by the least skilled technician imaginable.

[Skitch]

Just...ugh.

[Henry Gale]

Likely the final trailer. (http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/x-men-first-class.html?showVideo=1#belowNa v)

Probably the best one yet. Even though it feels like a lot of the same footage that's been used over and over (both in the various North American and international teasers), this one got me the most excited for some reason.

[number8]

They spent all their marketing budget on the trailer people, didn't they? There has to be an explanation why the trailers are so good and the posters are so bad.

[Dukefrukem]

This looks so much better than any other super hero movie coming out this year.

[Watashi]

Everyone is going to pale in comparison to Fassbender in this movie.

[Morris Schæffer]

Awesum!

[megladon8]

This looks so much better than any other super hero movie coming out this year except Captain America.


Fixed.

[Henry Gale]

Alright, so forget what I said about the trailer from this afternoon likely being the final one we see...

Here's another new international trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkGkVgIVdkA) with even more footage. Some the action there looks really awesome and more gritty and intimate than just big CG things flying around, especially that bit with Magneto and the soldiers.

[Dukefrukem]

Fixed.

Nah I'm still not convinced with Captain America either.

Also side question for the movie Avengers... does Captain America not age?

[Irish]

Also side question for the movie Avengers... does Captain America not age?

Answering that from the comics, I think it might be a bit of a spoiler for the movie (if you're not familiar with the character at all).

[Dukefrukem]

Answering that from the comics, I think it might be a bit of a spoiler for the movie (if you're not familiar with the character at all).

I'm not familiar with him, but I'm trying to connect the timelines of CA, Hulk, Iron Man and it doesn't align. So....

[Irish]

I'm not familiar with him, but I'm trying to connect the timelines of CA, Hulk, Iron Man and it doesn't align. So....

From what I've heard, this question will be answered at the end of the Captain America movie.

But:

At the end of WWII, he gets trapped/frozen (in a block of ice?) and not found until the Avengers dig him up in the present day. So he's the same age as all of them, but the situation is a bit of a "man out of time" kind of thing.

[Dukefrukem]

From what I've heard, this question will be answered at the end of the Captain America movie.

But:


I've decided I don't want the question answered. But rep for helping.

[Irish]

I've decided I don't want the question answered. But rep for helping.

It's a minor, minor spoiler but I think you're making the good choice; it's more fun not to know.

[number8]

http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/428/23007910150174345082426.jpg

[megladon8]

Three clips - one for Beast, one for Havok, and one for Banshee. (http://www.ifitsmovies.com/2011/05/three-awesome-clips-from-x-men-first-class-featuring-beast-havok-and-banshee/)


This is looking better and better.

The Banshee clip I particularly enjoyed.

[TGM]

Yeah, after seeing the newest trailer, this just skyrocketed to the top of my most anticipated list.

[[ETM]]

Highly positive first impressions. (http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/motion-captured/posts/first-reaction-x-men-first-class-offers-sleek-smart-superhero-thrills)

[Wryan]

Haha, what the fuck is this tv spot:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr8srca2Euw

Rambo 7: X-Men

[Dukefrukem]

SO many spoilers; I had to stop watching.

[megladon8]

Preliminary reviews are very, very positive.

I'm stoked.

[Sxottlan]

Uh yeah, this is getting raves so far.

At least from the genre publications. Here's hoping it continues.

[megladon8]

Love the shot with all the missiles flying towards the team and Magneto's all like "come at me, bro!"

[Sxottlan]

Still at 100%. First major publication review is out and The Hollywood Reporter loved it.

[[ETM]]

http://images.hitfix.com/photos/746008/January-Jones-is-the-White-Queen_gallery_primary.jpg
http://images.hitfix.com/photos/746050/January-Jones_gallery_primary.jpg
http://images.hitfix.com/photos/746082/January-Jones-in-full-white-leather_gallery_primary.jpg

[Dukefrukem]

meh no naval shot? boo

[[ETM]]

meh no naval shot? boo

http://im01.thewallpapers.org/wallpapers/23/2321/thumb/600_X-Men-First-Class-202.jpg

[Ezee E]

Why so serious January?

[Dukefrukem]

God, I suck at spelling

[Morris Schæffer]

lol. :D

[megladon8]

I stopped reading the IGN review when I came to this line...

"...superhero movies as a genre have advanced to the point where they can't afford to be hokey and lightweight."


Fuck you, buddy.

[Morris Schæffer]

Depends on the material maybe. I can see how The Dark Knight affords the filmmakers a chance to root their movie in reality whereas With, say, fantastic four or, don't kill me, green lantern, this might be a little harder to pull of. But there's nothing wrong with a more playful style. Captain america appears to have found that balance, the rocketeer i felt had that also. But there's absolutely no doubt that I'm looking forward to X-men FC as much as I am because it looks like a comicbook movie with genuine heft, featuring a background straight from the headlines fifty years ago. Ditto for The dark knight. That's one colossal, legendary, milestone of a movie precisly because there's nary a moment of comic relief in it. I find that gripping rather than something more easily forgotten.

But the ign dude is being hyperbolic, no doubt.

[MadMan]

So is this a soft-core porno? :lol:

[Robby P]

There are four people credited with writing this screenplay. Past experience tells me that this could be a bad omen.

[number8]

There are four people credited with writing this screenplay. Past experience tells me that this could be a bad omen.

The other day, I learned that Catwoman had four people awarded the credits, but in actuality 28 writers went through the WGA arbitration process to get it.

[Raiders]

There are four people credited with writing this screenplay. Past experience tells me that this could be a bad omen.

In addition to Bryan Singer and Sheldon Turner who I believe will receive a "story by" credit. This is in addition as well to Jamie Moss who wrote some early draft but is not getting any credit.

[Irish]

The other day, I learned that Catwoman had four people awarded the credits, but in actuality 28 writers went through the WGA arbitration process to get it.

One of the Charlie's Angels movies was the same way. There were something like 16-20 writers on the project, with a handful getting actual credit.

I got the impression this isn't unusual for big budget pictures.

[Dukefrukem]

The other day, I learned that Catwoman had four people awarded the credits, but in actuality 28 writers went through the WGA arbitration process to get it.

:lol:

[number8]

I got the impression this isn't unusual for big budget pictures.

It is, though.

I mean, if a project is in development long enough, it's standard for the studio to hire new people to do a pass or a patch up, and it can typically go up to about a dozen writers, but that happens all the time and the rewrites are usually insignificant, just facelifts here and there, which wouldn't count for a credit according to the WGA. Quentin Tarantino and Kevin Smith did a bunch of uncredited dialogue passes for studio movies in the 90's.

The producers then choose who they feel deserve credit for the final film and submit it to the WGA. The arbitration is started when people who aren't credited object to the way the credits is presented and those writers who are contesting have to undergo this massive pain in the ass process with the WGA fighting for credit.

The fact that there were 28 writers all fighting with the WGA to be credited for one film makes it pretty unusual, I'd say. The fact that the film was Catwoman makes it fucking insane.

[Irish]

It is, though.

I was referring to the high number of writers on these sorts of projects, not to people forcing arbitration.

As for Catwoman, I'm skeptical.

[number8]

I was referring to the high number of writers on these sorts of projects, not to people forcing arbitration.

The John Goodman Flintstones movie allegedly had 60 writers involved.

[Scar]

I stopped reading the IGN review when I came to this line...

"...superhero movies as a genre have advanced to the point where they can't afford to be hokey and lightweight."


Fuck you, buddy.

Do you ever have anything positive to say about IGN?

[[ETM]]

"X-Men: First Class" is competent weekend entertainment. It is not a great comic book movie, like "Spider-Man 2," or a bad one, like "Thor."

LOL WUT? I absolutely hated Spiderman 2 and really enjoyed Thor.

[number8]

;349717']LOL WUT? I absolutely hated Spiderman 2 and really enjoyed Thor.

Before The Dark Knight came out, Ebert thought Spidey 2 was the greatest comic book movie ever made.

[Morris Schæffer]

;349717']LOL WUT? I absolutely hated Spiderman 2 and really enjoyed Thor.

Well, to be fair, spiderman 2 was one of the best reviewed movies of 2004.

[[ETM]]

I know, it still baffles me.

[Watashi]

Spiderman 2 is 10x the movie Thor is.

[[ETM]]

Spiderman 2 is 10x the movie Thor is.

Let's agree to disagree. I'm not saying Thor is a masterpiece, but the praise it got is about right.

[BuffaloWilder]

I'll never understand why people like Raimi's films as much as they do - I mean, yeah. They're fun, but they're far too corny and self-referential for their own good, and are for the most part pretty dramatically inert until part three, which I'll say is - even though it's a little sloppily composed in a narrative sense - is still the best of the trilogy. And, they get the balance of comedy and wit that is inherent to the character wrong, which is a huge thing.

Spider-Man is witty and referential because that's his response to all the crazy, blood-lust filled dangers that define his rogue's gallery - secretly, that's all that's keeping him from pissing his pants on a regular basis, and this was true even during the Lee and Ditko era. Around him, the world should be as stark and weird as anything found in Nolan's Batman films, but within that, there's him as the guy who sees the funny side of it all, because he kind of has to. Raimi went the opposite direction - the world within the films is this kooky, over-the-top place, very typifiably four-color in definition. Meanwhile, Spider-Man says naught a word, and spends most of his time either moping or outright stalking Mary Jane.

[Dukefrukem]

Spiderman 2 is 10x the movie Thor is.

Rep


Before The Dark Knight came out, Ebert thought Spidey 2 was the greatest comic book movie ever made.

That's how my #1 and #2 are ranked. Spider-man 2 has some of the best action sequences in the last 15 years. The only movie that beats it in that time frame is the Matrix.

[Henry Gale]

Arguing about which superhero movie comes out on top always seems to end up as a battle between "[such and such] 2" or The Dark Knight. I'm pretty comfortable with at least calling Thor my favourite first installment of any Marvel property. It's tightly plotted, really well acted, sets up a much more detailed mythology than most almost entirely in its first act, and it's just a lot of fun to be in the world(s) of. I only say it's the best first Marvel because I still really like Batman Begins.

Either way, I'm actually pretty excited about seeing First Class, however you want to classify its sequencing.

[Dukefrukem]

I'll never understand why people like Raimi's films as much as they do - I mean, yeah. They're fun, but they're far too corny and self-referential for their own good, and are for the most part pretty dramatically inert until part three, which I'll say is - even though it's a little sloppily composed in a narrative sense - is still the best of the trilogy. And, they get the balance of comedy and wit that is inherent to the character wrong, which is a huge thing.


:|

ohhh you were talking about Army of Darkness... I thought you were referring to Spider-man 3 for a second. :lol:

[[ETM]]

Spider-man 2 has some of the best action sequences in the last 15 years.

I thought most of them were embarrassing.

[Dukefrukem]

;349764']I thought most of them were embarrassing.

_NLgY6f60CA

[Irish]

Spider-Man is witty and referential because that's his response to all the crazy, blood-lust filled dangers that define his rogue's gallery - secretly, that's all that's keeping him from pissing his pants on a regular basis, and this was true even during the Lee and Ditko era. Around him, the world should be as stark and weird as anything found in Nolan's Batman films, but within that, there's him as the guy who sees the funny side of it all, because he kind of has to. Raimi went the opposite direction - the world within the films is this kooky, over-the-top place, very typifiably four-color in definition. Meanwhile, Spider-Man says naught a word, and spends most of his time either moping or outright stalking Mary Jane.

One of the better breakdowns on this I've read. Particularly like the bolded line.

[Lucky]

Spider-man 2 has some of the best action sequences in the last 15 years. The only movie that beats it in that time frame is the Matrix.

I prefer the stylized action sequences of movies like Kill Bill, Oldboy, and Hero over anything the superhero genre has to offer. The Matrix fits pretty snugly in there as well. To compare apples to apples, though -- Singer's Superman had more thrilling action pieces than Spiderman 2. I'll echo ETM's bewilderment on why the Spiderman trilogy receives so much attention.

[Dukefrukem]

Singer's Superman had more thrilling action pieces than Spiderman 2.

Oh no you didn't.... :frustrated:

[Scar]

Oh no you didn't.... :frustrated:

Airplane sequence in Superman Returns > Train sequence in Spiderman 2

[Dukefrukem]

Airplane sequence in Superman Returns > Train sequence in Spiderman 2

I was just editing my above and canceled it... I was gonna ask:

What scene beats the 6 min clip above? The Chain-gun scene? The airplane? Flying to the weird island that's crumbling?

The answer to all three is: F@@K no.

[Dukefrukem]

Ugg I just watched it. IT's barely 3 min long and it's terrible. I don't know what you guys see in this scene let alone, in this movie...

7xiwISrp1H4

[Scar]

You watched the clip on youtube.....

.
.
.
.
.


:|

[[ETM]]

_NLgY6f60CA

Dear God, it's even worse than I remembered. I can't think of a single positive thing to say about it at all.

[Scar]

Rep



That's how my #1 and #2 are ranked. Spider-man 2 has some of the best action sequences in the last 15 years. The only movie that beats it in that time frame is the Matrix.

If we went 16 years, I could say that Heat owns them both in spades.

[[ETM]]

You know, I never saw Superman Returns, but that scene was fucking sweet.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Airplane sequence in Superman Returns > Train sequence in Spiderman 2

Nah. The train sequence is more fun. Operates more on Parker negotiating the logic of the fight, allows for more give and take between success and setbacks, and offers more in the way of stakes, due to both dramatic placement (toward the end of the film) and Parker's weakness (by the end, he passes out from the exertion).

The plane sequence is doing something different, showing Superman's complete success as a hero, with little in the way of stakes, and more emphasis on beauty instead of traditional action ideas. None of this is bad. I think both are incredibly well-mounted, but I'm invested in one more than the other.

Regardless, these fight scenes completely out-class Nolan's work in his Batman films.

[Irish]

Regardless, these fight scenes completely out-class Nolan's work in his Batman films.

Sorta a slam dunk, though, doncha think? I mean, one of the appeals of the Batman movies is that they're packaged like traditional comic book/action movies but they're not about that at all.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Sorta a slam dunk, though, doncha think? I mean, one of the appeals of the Batman movies is that they're packaged like traditional comic book/action movies but they're not about that at all.

Given that they're "not about that," the amount of time devoted to "that" is staggering.

[Irish]

Given that they're "not about that," the amount of time devoted to "that" is staggering.

Hm. I dunno about that. Especially in the second film, which is far more interested in the moral choices of its characters than on playing rockem-sockem-robots on top of a train or on the side of a building.

For me, the biggest take away from Spiderman or Superman movies is in the spectacle of the action set pieces. Nolan's Batman strikes me more ambitious.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Hm. I dunno about that. Especially in the second film, which is far more interested in the moral choices of its characters than on playing rockem-sockem-robots on top of a train or on the side of a building.

Regardless of whether or not Nolan's films stray into deeper waters than the other two films (that's a separate argument), the presence of high-action set-pieces in Nolan's comic-book-adapted films allow for the comparison, and the comparison suggests that Nolan doesn't have the eye for imagery (or clarity) that his fellow filmmakers have. To say that he's less interested in such things is to be evasive: action scenes are still a significant part of his movies and deserve to be considered for what they present and how they present.

Imagine if a chef gave you moldy cheese in your sandwich because he's not really interested in the cheese.

[[ETM]]

Nah. The train sequence is more fun. Operates more on Parker negotiating the logic of the fight, allows for more give and take between success and setbacks, and offers more in the way of stakes, due to both dramatic placement (toward the end of the film) and Parker's weakness (by the end, he passes out from the exertion).

The plane sequence is doing something different, showing Superman's complete success as a hero, with little in the way of stakes, and more emphasis on beauty instead of traditional action ideas. None of this is bad. I think both are incredibly well-mounted, but I'm invested in one more than the other.

I completely disagree. The Spiderman sequence is too ridiculously over the top even for a comic. It completely throws reality out the window, especially the laws of physics. I mean, Spiderman may be a super strong, super-human mutant, but he's still flesh and bone. Every single one of the stunts would have crushed his bones, and stopping the train would have left just a bloody spider smear on the tracks. Ock throws people off the train, Spidey catches them and drops them to safety, even though the move would have pulverized every bone in their bodies. And then there's my favorite - Ock throws Spidey forward, towards the oncoming bridge, which he flies through, between the bars, and hits Ock in the back, because the train miraculously outran the flying Spiderman. The people on the train were ridiculous cliches, all three lines in the scene were horribly cheesy, and there was never any feeling of danger or stakes at any point.

Superman, on the other hand, presents the opposite - it's precisely because of Supes' powers that the stakes are much higher. Once you accept that he exists and that he can do what he can do, the whole scene is infinitely more realistic. There were four or five moments in the sequence where I thought "He can't do that, because..." and then the "..." indeed happens right after. Like when the plane enters the uncontrollable spiral, threatening to break up, Supes tries to stop it spinning by pushing on one of the wings. "Wait, the plane wasn't built for that, it will br..." and then it breaks off, and it starts to disintegrate. He flies ahead, and starts slowing down its descent by pushing the nose up. "He can't stop the plane like that, the radar is in the nose, it's not metal, it will..." and it does indeed buckle. His hands go through and he grabs it by the structural elements of the airframe. It takes an appropriately loooong time for him to slow down the fall gradually, so the whiplash doesn't kill the passengers, but by the time it slows down, the weight of the plane starts resting on Superman's hands completely. "He can't hold it like that, the stress will..." and, sure enough, the whole fuselage starts to ripple forward as the weight distributes... I liked the little moments, like the weightlessness on top of the curve before descent, the editing of Lois being thrown around the cabin (she should have been injured way more, but that's beside the point) etc. It's just more intellectually satisfying, and I need to not be insulted, I'm almost 32 and I can't turn my brain off at will any more.

Thor was something else - it's completely consistent within its established set of rules, and it worked as a whole. The absolute tonal cacophony of the Spiderman films was always my biggest complaint, and the source of all that's impossible to digest about them.

[Dukefrukem]

To that entire post I have to say: ridiculously over the top even for a comic??????? Superman just fucking carried a plane into a baseball stadium....

edit: It's my understanding that Spider-man isn't human. That he too has strength like superman, even if it's not as powerful. I don't agree that it's over the top at all.

Spider-man throws people into giant spiderwebs.... how would that pulverize their bones?

[Scar]

To that entire post I have to say: ridiculously over the top even for a comic??????? Superman just fucking carried a plane into a baseball stadium....

:|

Read it again.

[[ETM]]

To that entire post I have to say: ridiculously over the top even for a comic??????? Superman just fucking carried a plane into a baseball stadium....

It's fucking Superman. He can do that. When Spiderman becomes indestructible (not only him, but his suit as well, even though Doc Octopus cut him previously, and he bleeds), it's jut ridiculous.

[Ezee E]

To that entire post I have to say: ridiculously over the top even for a comic??????? Superman just fucking carried a plane into a baseball stadium....

edit: It's my understanding that Spider-man isn't human. That he too has strength like superman, even if it's not as powerful. I don't agree that it's over the top at all.

Spider-man throws people into giant spiderwebs.... how would that pulverize their bones?
:lol:

[Scar]

Spiderman's Strength <*1000 Superman's Strength

[Dukefrukem]

;349805']It's fucking Superman. He can do that. When Spiderman becomes indestructible (not only him, but his suit as well, even though Doc Octopus cut him previously, and he bleeds), it's jut ridiculous.

Wait... one ridiculous post at a time ... why are you brining his suit into this now?

I read the comic where superman dies... he bleeds a lot. His suit also gets torn up.

[[ETM]]

edit: It's my understanding that Spider-man isn't human. That he too has strength like superman, even if it's not as powerful. I don't agree that it's over the top at all.

He is still flesh and bone. He's incredibly powerful and strong, probably heals fast and can take way more punishment than any human, but he has human muscles and skeleton, and the forces he's exposed to in that scene would tear him to shreds. I mean, come on, he tries to stop the train with his feet, breaks a whole bunch of wooden ties, and that doesn't even rip of his footwear, let alone break his legs and drag him under the train?!


Spider-man throws people into giant spiderwebs.... how would that pulverize their bones?

It's not the fall into the spiderwebs, it's the speed and the force with which they hit Spiderman's arms... they "fold" in half when he grabs them, the whiplash alone would tear their heads off...

[Dukefrukem]

;349810']I mean, come on, he tries to stop the train with his feet, breaks a whole bunch of wooden ties, and that doesn't even rip of his footwear, let alone break his legs and drag him under the train?!


Ah i see what you mean now about the suit.

[[ETM]]

Wait... one ridiculous post at a time ... why are you brining his suit into this now?

Again - internal consistency. Doc rips his suit and cuts his flesh with his metal tentacles. It's not carbotanium or anything, I'm saying even if you accept that Spiderman is ludicrously indestructible, his clothes certainly aren't, as established within the movie itself.

[Dukefrukem]

You watched the clip on youtube.....

.
.
.
.
.


:|

I forgot to ask what you meant with this?

[Dead & Messed Up]

;349802']I completely disagree. The Spiderman sequence is too ridiculously over the top even for a comic. It completely throws reality out the window, especially the laws of physics. I mean, Spiderman may be a super strong, super-human mutant, but he's still flesh and bone. Every single one of the stunts would have crushed his bones, and stopping the train would have left just a bloody spider smear on the tracks. Ock throws people off the train, Spidey catches them and drops them to safety, even though the move would have pulverized every bone in their bodies.

Aren't we to assume that his flesh and bones are also super-human and super-strong? Neither Superman nor Spider-man ever establishes the limits of their supernatural abilities in finite terms. Besides, doesn't Spider-Man gingerly toss the people into enormous web-nets created to cushion their fall, so as to better minimize bone pulverization?


And then there's my favorite - Ock throws Spidey forward, towards the oncoming bridge, which he flies through, between the bars, and hits Ock in the back, because the train miraculously outran the flying Spiderman.

Agreement on this one. Makes no sense.


The people on the train were ridiculous cliches, all three lines in the scene were horribly cheesy, and there was never any feeling of danger or stakes at any point.

Why were they cliches? What cliches were they evoking? Certainly they're broad characterizations, but, when you're dealing with a large group of people for sixty seconds, are broad characters a flaw or an inevitability? Mileage varies on this point. Compared against the bridge-goers in the first film ("You mess with one of us, you mess with ALL OF US!"), this sequence is positively serene. Conversely, what are we to make of the faceless hundreds in Lois's plane?


Superman, on the other hand, presents the opposite - it's precisely because of Supes' powers that the stakes are much higher. Once you accept that he exists and that he can do what he can do, the whole scene is infinitely more realistic.

The plane reacts realistically to the stress caused by Superman, but the emotional investment (as established by characters) is muted, because, for Superman, there's no question of ability, and Lois...well, this risks getting into a different realm of discussion, but I found Bosworth's character dull and , so making her into the face of all the victims struck me as a tactical error.

This is the key difference for me. Because Parker and Octavius have been building to this confrontation throughout the whole movie, the impact of their fight hits a little harder to me. I care about who wins, and so the battle (mercifully short on kickpunching, heavy on twisting the two of them around, through, underneath, and above the train) feels more interesting. My appreciation for the plane crash, sincere as it is, is a little more clinical.


There were four or five moments in the sequence where I thought "He can't do that, because..." and then the "..." indeed happens right after. Like when the plane enters the uncontrollable spiral, threatening to break up, Supes tries to stop it spinning by pushing on one of the wings. "Wait, the plane wasn't built for that, it will br..." and then it breaks off, and it starts to disintegrate. He flies ahead, and starts slowing down its descent by pushing the nose up. "He can't stop the plane like that, the radar is in the nose, it's not metal, it will..." and it does indeed buckle.

Agreed. Singer handles the logic of the crash very well. Superman does (a), which leads to (b), which makes him adjust his plan to (c), which in turn causes (d). Smart stuff.


His hands go through and he grabs it by the structural elements of the airframe. It takes an appropriately loooong time for him to slow down the fall gradually, so the whiplash doesn't kill the passengers, but by the time it slows down, the weight of the plane starts resting on Superman's hands completely. "He can't hold it like that, the stress will..." and, sure enough, the whole fuselage starts to ripple forward as the weight distributes

Again, agreed. Like I said, I think the plane crash, overall, is a seriously impressive action sequence. Really, all you need is screen-caps. Singer's film is beautiful, elegantly shot. Keep in mind that my criticisms of this sequence are relatively minor.


I liked the little moments, like the weightlessness on top of the curve before descent, the editing of Lois being thrown around the cabin (she should have been injured way more, but that's beside the point) etc. It's just more intellectually satisfying, and I need to not be insulted, I'm almost 32 and I can't turn my brain off at will any more.

Wasn't beside the point when you were discussing the citizens in Spidey-World.

:P

[Scar]

I forgot to ask what you meant with this?

You said you just watched it. The way the post was worded made it sound like it was the first time you'd seen that scene.

[Irish]

Regardless of whether or not Nolan's films stray into deeper waters than the other two films (that's a separate argument), the presence of high-action set-pieces in Nolan's comic-book-adapted films allow for the comparison, and the comparison suggests that Nolan doesn't have the eye for imagery (or clarity) that his fellow filmmakers have. To say that he's less interested in such things is to be evasive: action scenes are still a significant part of his movies and deserve to be considered for what they present and how they present.

Heh! Not sure I'd call Nolan's work moldy cheese, but a great post nonetheless.

Biggest difference: Supes and Spidey are based very much in scifi fantasy. Batman isn't. Part of the appeal of his character is that he's "real" and unpowered, sort of like a caped and cowled James Bond.

Yeah, Nolan's movies have set pieces in them. They've got action sequences. But that's not their primary concern. (And as you've noted, it shows).

Dinging Nolan for his action sequences is sort of like complaining that Heat isn't Die Hard or Lethal Weapon. All three of them contain cops, robbers, guns, and shootouts but two of them have very different intentions from the third, and approach their material in an entirely different way.

That isn't to say one is better than the other, merely apples vs oranges.

[Dukefrukem]

You said you just watched it. The way the post was worded made it sound like it was the first time you'd seen that scene.

Yeh I meant I just watched it because we were talking about.

[[ETM]]

Aren't we to assume that his flesh and bones are also super-human and super-strong? Neither Superman nor Spider-man ever establishes the limits of their supernatural abilities in finite terms. Besides, doesn't Spider-Man gingerly toss the people into enormous web-nets created to cushion their fall, so as to better minimize bone pulverization?

I'm using basic logic here - he can get beat up, cut, bruised, so he's definitely vulnerable in a human way. If you stick him with a knife, it won't break upon hitting his skin. They use the web a lot to cover for his abnormal abilities in the movies, and it was mostly palatable in the first one, but the train sequence pushed suspension of disbelief to whole new levels. Perhaps if it wasn't presented with such extremes, it would have worked, but as it is... and I explained the people throwing in an earlier post: it's not the fall that would kill them, it's the whole playing catch with their bodies at high speeds thing.


Why were they cliches? What cliches were they evoking? Certainly they're broad characterizations, but, when you're dealing with a large group of people for sixty seconds, are broad characters a flaw or an inevitability? Mileage varies on this point. Compared against the bridge-goers in the first film ("You mess with one of us, you mess with ALL OF US!"), this sequence is positively serene. Conversely, what are we to make of the faceless hundreds in Lois's plane?

They were cartoony, cartoon-scared, cartoon-screaming. I actually liked how everyone picks Spiderman up in the end, and the music sells it, but overall, they might as well cut them out of a comic and put in there as life-size standees.


This is the key difference for me. Because Parker and Octavius have been building to this confrontation throughout the whole movie, the impact of their fight hits a little harder to me. I care about who wins, and so the battle (mercifully short on kickpunching, heavy on twisting the two of them around, through, underneath, and above the train) feels more interesting. My appreciation for the plane crash, sincere as it is, is a little more clinical.

I haven't seen Superman Returns so it played no part for me here, but I'm very ambivalent when it comes to Spiderman and Octavius, because, again, it's emotionally all over the place and equally inconsistent as the rest. I can't really stand Spiderman's whiny ass, and Octavius, despite Molina's sincerest efforts, couldn't really "ground" the film for me. Starting with the needlessly brutal slaughter of doctors scene in the beginning, I was increasingly repulsed by the alternating atrocities and slapstick comedy that by the time the climax of the film came, I didn't really care about any of it.


Wasn't beside the point when you were discussing the citizens in Spidey-World.

:P

Agreed, but I find it a minor gripe compared to Spiderman 2, seeing as how she's the lead and all.;)

[megladon8]

Can't believe I missed this.

[BuffaloWilder]

I don't really understand the problems people have with Nolan's direction of action set-pieces, at least in The Dark Knight - that they're incoherent to some is puzzling to me, because he actually goes out of his way to shoot them in relatively longer takes and shots than is the norm for any kind of fight or chase sequence in modern American cinema. Especially the Joker/SWAT van/Tumbler scene, which is one of my favorite prolonged car chases in the last couple of years, at least.

But even the fights are done in a unique and original way - there's nothing perfunctory about them, and because they seem so subdued and implicit in their execution, the impact of the hits is amplified, partly because Nolan refuses to use the same *wa-PUNCH* sound bits that are the sonic pre-requisite for these types of things. We're informed of Batman's weariness through his sagging shoulders and lagging movement, the way he takes down each and every opponent in the beginning with the absolute minimum of effort required, and even later on in the film, his very human physicality during these sequences plays a big part in their overall composition. I love it.

Also, I love that we're still talking about The Dark Knight like it came out a couple of months ago, when really its been out for near-on three years, now. Mind-blowing.

[megladon8]

I think Nolan is much better at shooting vehicle-based action pieces than hand-to-hand combat.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Dinging Nolan for his action sequences is sort of like complaining that Heat isn't Die Hard or Lethal Weapon. All three of them contain cops, robbers, guns, and shootouts but two of them have very different intentions from the third, and approach their material in an entirely different way.

That isn't to say one is better than the other, merely apples vs oranges.

No. I feel like you're not listening to what I'm saying. My point is not that The Dark Knight isn't Superman or Spider-man. My point is that Nolan is not as good as Singer or Raimi at presenting his action. He's welcome to present his action in a unique manner that fits his own interest and works with his vision of the material, so long as that unique manner doesn't leave the viewer adrift or confused, which it has for me, semi-regularly. To the point of mild annoyance.


;349826']I'm using basic logic here - he can get beat up, cut, bruised, so he's definitely vulnerable in a human way. If you stick him with a knife, it won't break upon hitting his skin. They use the web a lot to cover for his abnormal abilities in the movies, and it was mostly palatable in the first one, but the train sequence pushed suspension of disbelief to whole new levels. Perhaps if it wasn't presented with such extremes, it would have worked, but as it is... and I explained the people throwing in an earlier post: it's not the fall that would kill them, it's the whole playing catch with their bodies at high speeds thing.

How fast is Ock throwing them? Since the passengers and Parker and Ock are all atop the train, isn't its speed incidental?


They were cartoony, cartoon-scared, cartoon-screaming. I actually liked how everyone picks Spiderman up in the end, and the music sells it, but overall, they might as well cut them out of a comic and put in there as life-size standees.

With the exception of the irritating train driver (whose "Any more bright ideas?" line merits a punch to the nuts), they don't bother me at all. Of course they're reactive and broad - they're civilians in a Spider-Man movie being harassed by an evil cyber-being called Doc Ock.


I haven't seen Superman Returns so it played no part for me here, but I'm very ambivalent when it comes to Spiderman and Octavius, because, again, it's emotionally all over the place and equally inconsistent as the rest...

Fair enough. That gets into a larger area I don't feel prepared to discuss (literally - I would have to re-watch the film and prep).

And you should watch Superman Returns. I hardly love the picture, but there's enough beauty to justify a viewing. It may be the prettiest superhero movie ever made.


Agreed, but I find it a minor gripe compared to Spiderman 2, seeing as how she's the lead and all.

A decision for which I'll never forgive Singer.


I don't really understand the problems people have with Nolan's direction of action set-pieces, at least in The Dark Knight - that they're incoherent to some is puzzling to me, because he actually goes out of his way to shoot them in relatively longer takes and shots than is the norm for any kind of fight or chase sequence in modern American cinema. Especially the Joker/SWAT van/Tumbler scene, which is one of my favorite prolonged car chases in the last couple of years, at least.

That sequence is handled a lot better than most of his action. The logic is mostly clear, the escalation of weaponry is very funny, and a couple of shots (the truck flipping, the cycle busting out of the tumbler) feel big and iconic. Even then, I lament the involvement of Nicky Katt's comedian/expo-fountain character. What exactly is the use of him asiding, "That's what I'm talkin' about - air cav"? And some of the complications make no sense whatsoever. How did Joker know exactly when the helicopter would enter the picture, and which buildings it would be flying through, and at what level to have his goons ready with crossed wires?


But even the fights are done in a unique and original way - there's nothing perfunctory about them, and because they seem so subdued and implicit in their execution, the impact of the hits is amplified, partly because Nolan refuses to use the same *wa-PUNCH* sound bits that are the sonic pre-requisite for these types of things.

unvBWMZYNgw

I don't know about your claim of sound effects (sounds like the same ol' Hollywood meat-slammers to me), but you're right that this fight communicates his weariness. I would point to the weird blocking of the man getting bit by dogs as an example of goofy editing, though.

Given Batman's aiming and shooting a grapple down-frame-left, I would think a director would want the reverse to have the victim pulled down-frame-right, to keep the spatial relationship clear through shot/reverse. Of course, a wider angle, so we can see where they are in relation to each other, would be nice. I also don't like how Scarecrow's shots go close-up of his face, close-up of his face, and suddenly his van's hitting Batman. Again, some sort of shot that demonstrates where they are in relation to each other would be helpful.


We're informed of Batman's weariness through his sagging shoulders and lagging movement, the way he takes down each and every opponent in the beginning with the absolute minimum of effort required, and even later on in the film, his very human physicality during these sequences plays a big part in their overall composition. I love it.

This actually ties in to a huge problem I have with superhero movies in general, specifically where masks are concerned, which is that it's impossible for us to feel the full range of emotions the characters are feeling, because they're masked. The Bat-mask is terribly restrictive, and Raimi tries to find excuses to get Parker's mask off for all of his finales.

Which is to say, rather than having to interpret Batman as weary through a couple of seconds of seeing his shoulders sag, I'd love to see it in his face.


I think Nolan is much better at shooting vehicle-based action pieces than hand-to-hand combat.

Agreed. Although I thought he did a generally good job presenting his action in Inception.

[megladon8]

I still think it's super cool that Batman is so vulnerable in the Nolan films.

Look at how the dogs totally pwned him. Several angry dobermans vs. one guy with weapons (regardless of whether or not your suit allows you to turn your neck) will be a losing battle for the guy.

[megladon8]

Oh and I read about a cameo in this film.

Sounds awesome.

[Irish]

No. I feel like you're not listening to what I'm saying. My point is not that The Dark Knight isn't Superman or Spider-man. My point is that Nolan is not as good as Singer or Raimi at presenting his action. He's welcome to present his action in a unique manner that fits his own interest and works with his vision of the material, so long as that unique manner doesn't leave the viewer adrift or confused, which it has for me, semi-regularly. To the point of mild annoyance.

I understand what you're saying (no, really). I disagree with you. I'm suggesting that Nolan is presenting some of these action scenes a certain way on purpose. (To do the kind of showy, flashy staging that Singer and Raimi do wouldn't fit with Nolan's film at all.)

I'd even go so far as to say that leaving the viewer confused and adrift is, at times, his intention. (I think I can guess to what fights you're referring to when you say this).

Partly because of the batmobile/truck chase in the second Batman film; that alone convinces me that Nolan and his crew are working at the same level as Raimi and Singer.

But mostly because I think Batman has different requirements than Spider or Supes, and I'd even go so far as to say different audience expectations too.

[Morris Schæffer]

_NLgY6f60CA

I forgot how awesum that was. The editing is tremendous!

Edit: but I understand some of the points that ETM made a few posts back.

[transmogrifier]

While I admire the guts it takes to claim that Nolan's ineptitude in staging action is on purpose (!), a quick glance at the rest of his filmography would tend to support the idea that he is just not all that good at it. I mean, the hallway fight in Inception is good, but the rest of the action in that movie is bland as all hell (need we mention the ice station level again?)

[Morris Schæffer]

While I admire the guts it takes to claim that Nolan's ineptitude in staging action is on purpose (!), a quick glance at the rest of his filmography would tend to support the idea that he is just not all that good at it. I mean, the hallway fight in Inception is good, but the rest of the action in that movie is bland as all hell (need we mention the ice station level again?)

I agree and yet, as a dream manifestation, that finale is perhaps vague on purpose? I mean, it's virtually impossible to believe this was the best Nolan could do in terms of delivering a thrilling finale. Although I was never forgetting it was a dream state period which elevated the material for me anyway.

[Skitch]

Ah yes...Spider-Man 2 arguments again...I'm so tired of people saying its the best comic book movie ever made. Overrated, big time.

[transmogrifier]

I agree and yet, as a dream manifestation, that finale is perhaps vague on purpose? I mean, it's virtually impossible to believe this was the best Nolan could do in terms of delivering a thrilling finale. Although I was never forgetting it was a dream state period which elevated the material for me anyway.

Well, as long as Nolan keeps on making films with premises that allow his poor action chops to be explained away, then he should be fine.

EDIT: In fact, I may as well add here that I don't think Nolan is much of a director, full stop. I mean in terms of his eye and shot selection etc. It's all pretty functional and it gets the job done. His most impressive performance as director was Memento, which was tight and lean and claustrophobic. Everything else is just him standing out of the way of whatever big premise he is working with. And that's both his major strength and weakness - generating interesting premises and committing to a depth of story, which leads to bums in seats and things to think about afterwards, but also contributes to saggy, portentous narratives that spend too much time explaining themselves over and over.

[Dukefrukem]

I forgot how awesum that was. The editing is tremendous!

Edit: but I understand some of the points that ETM made a few posts back.

It is indeed awesome. ETMs points are valid, if you REALLY want to play the realism factor in a comic book movie. But I suppose in my 20s I'm still able to turn my mind off and on very easily.

I also agree with everything D&MU is posting- esp with Nolan's extra long action takes.

[Dukefrukem]

While I admire the guts it takes to claim that Nolan's ineptitude in staging action is on purpose (!), a quick glance at the rest of his filmography would tend to support the idea that he is just not all that good at it. I mean, the hallway fight in Inception is good, but the rest of the action in that movie is bland as all hell (need we mention the ice station level again?)

A quick glance would suggest he hasn't directed many action movies.

[[ETM]]

It is indeed awesome. ETMs points are valid, if you REALLY want to play the realism factor in a comic book movie. But I suppose in my 20s I'm still able to turn my mind off and on very easily.

So you do admit it... :lol:

I never argued against unrealistic comic book action - it's the inconsistency and dissonance that bothers me. Spiderman movies push for emotional impact and real life stakes while deflating it at every corner with action cues that borderline on slapstick humor and Tom&Jerry-level realism. At the other end of the spectrum, Thor has pretty much nailed the balance between realistic and cartoony, because it picks a tune and sticks with it all the way through.

[Dukefrukem]

;349909']So you do admit it... :lol:

I never argued against unrealistic comic book action - it's the inconsistency and dissonance that bothers me. Spiderman movies push for emotional impact and real life stakes while deflating it at every corner with action cues that borderline on slapstick humor and Tom&Jerry-level realism. At the other end of the spectrum, Thor has pretty much nailed the balance between realistic and cartoony, because it picks a tune and sticks with it all the way through.

No you most certainly did. You would never say " ridiculously over the top even for a comic" if you didn't argue against the realisms factor and go as far as talking about Spider-man's suit and how stopping a train would tear the fabric. I mean... really?

And my turning off my mind comments was more of a facetious poke at you. I don't think that has anything to do with me enjoying the Spider-man franchise.

Here we go again.. Real life stakes? There's numerous examples in the series about deliberate campy-stereotypical-hero-saves-the-day drama. Woman getting mugged in an alley? Spidey saves people from a burning building? Two bank robberies!? people falling from a building? and the train scene we're talking about. Of course it's slapstick humor!

Raimi is nowhere trying to be inconsistent with realism versus his spin on comedy in the franchise. The trilogy is great because he is able to intertwine the two, loosely while still making them incredibly enjoyable.

[[ETM]]

he is able to intertwine the two, loosely while still making them incredibly enjoyable.

Definitely not, no and HELL no. So we just disagree and that's that.

[Dukefrukem]

;349917']Definitely not, no and HELL no. So we just disagree and that's that.

What do you think of the Evil Dead Trilogy?

[[ETM]]

What do you think of the Evil Dead Trilogy?

Haven't seen it. Out of the few Raimi films I've seen, I actually don't think I liked a single one.

[Dukefrukem]

Was gonna say your funny bone is malfunctioning but I don't know which Raimi films you've seen. Probably A Simple Plan and Quick and the Dead. Two movies Raimi did probably only to get work, rather to show off his REAL creative talent.

[Dukefrukem]

Where the heck are all the Spidey supporters btw??

[number8]

Where the heck are all the Spidey supporters btw??

Over here, not really caring all that much.

[Wryan]

Over here, not really caring all that much.

There are first-class breasts to ogle, goddamit!

[MadMan]

Hey I liked Spiderman 2, and even the third Spiderman, which was an entertaining mess. But I didn't care for the first Spiderman at all.

[Sxottlan]

So some of the early reviews inflated my expectations a bit, but overall this was very enjoyable, if a bit messy. I had hoped for a bit more of a delirious period style (more era music etc.), but if anything it really worked as a new 60's era James Bond film with mutants.

Some funny cameos. :D

And by the way, this film works as a great audition tape for Michael Fassbender to play 007 some day.

Some plot points here make me wonder if producers now consider X3 and Wolverine apocrypha, especially when...

Xavier suffers his spinal injury here and yet we see him walking around during the 1970's as well as still working with Magneto.

And what was up with Michael Ironside being credited as M. Ironside?

[TGM]

So this movie didn't quite live up to my admittedly ridiculous expectations, though it was still enjoyable. I'll agree that the cameos in this film were awesome! :D

[Bosco B Thug]

Totally liked it. Vaughn is good. So colorful and kitschy, in a good way. Smart and appropriately preachy, despite barely-relatable "Woe is me, we're mutants" angst. W. Chaw and Slant, god bless 'em, are trying too hard this time.

[Watashi]

Not as good as X2, but still fun. Everything featuring Fassbender and McAvoy were sublime. Everything with the other mutants.... were not.

[Watashi]

My biggest problem is that Vaughn crammed too much in this film while trying to balance the story out. It felt like the Star Wars prequels at times where they would try to explain everything and how it pieced together with the other films. None of the other mutants besides Charles, Erik, Shaw had a real impact on the story.

That cameo was pretty fucking awesome though.

[Dukefrukem]

So this movie didn't quite live up to my admittedly ridiculous expectations, though it was still enjoyable. I'll agree that the cameos in this film were awesome! :D

All two of them. Also, explain to me why

Beast doesn't know any of them in Last Stand?

I really didn't like the emphasis on each character going over their code name... fans can figure it out. You don't have to write it out in crayon for us.

"I prefer, Magneto"

Also, the "I can't feel my legs" scene was eyes rolling worthy



A lot of the jokes were forced pretty hard;

"next thing you know I'll be going bald"...

[Dukefrukem]

My biggest problem is that Vaughn crammed too much in this film while trying to balance the story out. It felt like the Star Wars prequels at times where they would try to explain everything and how it pieced together with the other films. None of the other mutants besides Charles, Erik, Shaw had a real impact on the story.

That cameo was pretty fucking awesome though.

I disagree. I didn't think anything was crammed in but I do agree the other mutants were kind of expendable. Why were they all just sitting around as their compound was getting stormed?

[Dukefrukem]

Overall though, as it holds up in the franchise:

1. X-men 80s
2. First Class mid 70s
3. X2 50s
3. Last stand 40s
4. Wolverine 20s

[TGM]

All two of them. Also, explain to me why

Beast doesn't know any of them in Last Stand?

I really didn't like the emphasis on each character going over their code name... fans can figure it out. You don't have to write it out in crayon for us.

"I prefer, Magneto"

Also, the "I can't feel my legs" scene was eyes rolling worthy



A lot of the jokes were forced pretty hard;

"next thing you know I'll be going bald"...

Yes, all two of them were awesome, though I don't see the need to point out how many there are, as if they don't count unless there's a certain number of them. :\

Concerning the continuity errors, as was posted above you, there were several in this film. It's probably just best to try not to think about them too much.

As for the kids just standing around, you have to remember that this was all new for them. They had never seen combat before, and some of them still couldn't quite control their abilities yet. This was before their little training montage, so they were obviously scared and unprepared.

I'll agree that many of the characters were quite expendable. Other than Charlies and Erik, I honestly didn't really care much about anyone else, and was given little reason to for the most part.

[Dukefrukem]

I guess I was kind of expecting more, but then I realized it takes place in the 60s

[Ezee E]

Definitely seeing this tomorrow. Looking forward to it.

Kinda wish they'd make an R-Rated movie with the X-Men universe.

[Watashi]

Definitely seeing this tomorrow. Looking forward to it.

Kinda wish they'd make an R-Rated movie with the X-Men universe.
Or a HBO series.

[Ezee E]

Or a HBO series.
A well-budgeted one at least.

Fox tried it with "Generation X" forever ago, and I hated it as a middle schooler. I can only imagin how bad it truly was.

[[ETM]]

There were too many X-men clones on TV already, and some are still to come. And none of them were any good, so it'll be a few years before anyone tries it again.

[Ezee E]

;350206']There were too many X-men clones on TV already, and some are still to come. And none of them were any good, so it'll be a few years before anyone tries it again.
I never did bother with Heroes or (:eek:) The Cape.

[Scar]

I never did bother with Heroes or (:eek:) The Cape.

Heroes season 1 was alright. I hear it goes downhill from there.

[Dukefrukem]

Heroes season 1 was alright. I hear it goes downhill from there.

Goes downhill is an understatement. It was on the express train to hell.

[TGM]

Heroes season 1 was alright. I hear it goes downhill from there.

It does, though it picks back up in the last season, only to end on a cliffhanger because it got canceled. :(

[Henry Gale]

You guys know about the show Misfits, right? Sorta fits the bill of a more grimy, unrestrained look at a group of people suddenly struck with superpowers. I haven't seen more than a few from the first season, but people seem to like it a lot. Pretty sure it even won the Best Drama BAFTA a few years back.

[number8]

I saw one episode of that. There's an old lady whose superpower is to turn into a hot teenage girl. She was having sex with a teenage boy when she suddenly turns back.

[[ETM]]

I saw one episode of that. There's an old lady whose superpower is to turn into a hot teenage girl. She was having sex with a teenage boy when she suddenly turns back.

That was hilarious. Another girl has the power to make anyone who touches her want to have sex with her. The trouble is - they want to do it REALLY BADLY, as in rip her into pieces badly. So she and her boyfriend (who also has powers) have "sex" by standing in front of each other and masturbating.:lol:

[Sxottlan]

So "only" $21M for Friday. Projected $50 - $55M for the weekend. Don't know if that was expected, but it feels on the low end.

Are people just not that into X-Men without Wolverine?

Even when he makes a profanity-laced cameo?

[DavidSeven]

I think they overestimated how much the general public cared about Professor Xavier and Magneto. People don't read the comics or buy the video games for those characters. Centering a movie around them and a gallery of B-teamers was definitely a misstep (from a marketing standpoint). It didn't need Wolverine, but it needed some combination of Cyclops, Gambit, Storm, Colossus, Rogue, etc. as centerpieces.

[Fezzik]

Really, really liked this, flaws and all.

It was so much better than X3 and X-Men Origins: Wolverine that the people who made those films should be ashamed of themselves.

The principles were great, especially Fassbender. I could see him becoming a star after this.

And whomever suggested he be the next Bond: Hell yes. Make this happen.

[Skitch]

Could someone reveal these awesome cameos? In a spoiler text so as not to ruin it for those with patience. :D

[TGM]

Could someone reveal these awesome cameos? In a spoiler text so as not to ruin it for those with patience. :D


When recruiting the mutants, Charles and Erik meet Wolverine in a bar. They introduce themselves, only for Wolverine to tell them to go fuck themselves.

Later on, Mystique transforms into an older version of herself for a brief moment, which they brought in Rebecca Romijn to reprise.

[Fezzik]

When recruiting the mutants, Charles and Erik meet Wolverine in a bar. They introduce themselves, only for Wolverine to tell them to go fuck themselves.

Later on, Mystique transforms into an older version of herself for a brief moment, which they brought in Rebecca Romijn to reprise.

There's also another in the cerebro scene:

As Xavier is looking for mutants in Cerebro, his vision stops on a young brown skinned girl with white hair.

[TGM]

I think they overestimated how much the general public cared about Professor Xavier and Magneto. People don't read the comics or buy the video games for those characters. Centering a movie around them and a gallery of B-teamers was definitely a misstep (from a marketing standpoint). It didn't need Wolverine, but it needed some combination of Cyclops, Gambit, Storm, Colossus, Rogue, etc. as centerpieces.


Then again, thinking about it, this movie didn't release with any kind of IMAX or 3D version with inflated ticket prices like every other big blockbuster these days, so that may have something to do with it not making as much as expected...

[Dukefrukem]

There's also another in the cerebro scene:

As Xavier is looking for mutants in Cerebro, his vision stops on a young brown skinned girl with white hair.

That's not really a cameo though. More like foreshadowing.

[Lazlo]

Gah, this was such a letdown. It was slow and portentous and repeated all the ideological arguments of the other movies. I know mutants dealing with humans hating them is the crux of the series but everything was such a retread. I saw someone somewhere comment about how do you set this in the 60s and not mention the civil rights movement? That at least would have been a different lens through which to examine the conflict, like with the gay angle in X2. Fassbender, Bacon, Hoult, and to a certain extent McAvoy are the only things that really stand out. And the only moment of real excitement and joy is the aforementioned cameo. Everything else is pretty leaden.

[eternity]

Starts off really well, then becomes another mediocre summer movie, and then in the last half hour it just becomes a total piece of shit. Hilariously so.

It's more Sucker Punch-y than Sucker Punch though, which is awesome and unexpected.

[Watashi]

It's more Sucker Punch-y than Sucker Punch though, which is awesome and unexpected.

This doesn't make any sense.

[eternity]

This doesn't make any sense.
Shit kind of just starts happening for no reason and it's so absolutely mind-numbing and stupid and yet satisfying. I absolutely HATED the last half of First Class, yet I had a blast watching it. Kind of like Sucker Punch, except I actually find some sort of merit in that movie's silly shenanigans for whatever reason.

[Dukefrukem]

Specifically? What's mind-numbing?

[number8]

Christ, Fassbender and Macavoy were really giving something the movie totally didn't deserve.

Oh, Matthew Vaughn. One day you'll make a good movie yet.

[number8]

I saw someone somewhere comment about how do you set this in the 60s and not mention the civil rights movement?

THIS. What the hell, man? Either that or the red scare paranoia. But no, it seems like it's set in the 60's for the sole purpose of injecting some ridiculous Watchmen-wannabe behind-the-scenes supervillainy dealings of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Fucking lame.

[EyesWideOpen]

And January Jones was terrible in this. Emma Frost is one of the most intriguing characters in all of X-Men lore and Jones played her like a mannequin.

[number8]

And January Jones was terrible in this.

Fixed that for you.

[EyesWideOpen]

Fixed that for you.

I've never seen Mad Men or anything else she's been in so I was assuming the best.

[Raiders]

She's really good on Mad Men in my opinion. Only thing I have seen her in.

Also, isn't this set in the 60s simply so that chronologically it can tie in to Singer's films? I don't think there is any other logic, though sad to hear they don't broach any social issue from such an important time period in American history.

[Dukefrukem]

I just found out January Jones is pregnant and she's not revealing who the father is... strange?

[Bosco B Thug]

Eh, I thought by the end it provides a good enough usefully-broad, comic-book moral tale on just how easy it is to incite belligerence in blustery govt. agencies. Yes it doesn't attempt social milieu, but hey.

Maybe I should finally watch Vaughn's other movies. I really dug the film's style: its embrace of campiness and color, and Vaughn's sense of overt theatricality. I feel he's very good at capturing brilliant and effervescent emotions. I'll admit this against my better judgment, that the training montage is a C+ series of effortlessly joyful, effervescent scenes.


And January Jones was terrible in this. Emma Frost is one of the most intriguing characters in all of X-Men lore and Jones played her like a mannequin. Yeah, she's not good. I haven't seen her in anything else, either, but I'm gathering no one thinks she's a super actress.

Yet, I loved Emma Frost, and again I give props to Vaughn for making her such a great, lively, memorable character and getting something of a performance out of Jones for it.

[DavidSeven]

It always seemed Mad Men did a good job of writing to her personality (equal parts innate child and ice queen). In terms of range, I thought she was regularly outclassed by her cast mates, but it was almost endearing when considering her character's place in that series. I never expected her to be any good in anything else.

I might see this tonight.

[Bosco B Thug]

It always seemed Mad Men did a good job of writing to her personality (equal parts innate child and ice queen). In terms of range, I thought she was regularly outclassed by her cast mates, but it was almost endearing when considering her character's place in that series. That sounds exactly the same way she excels in this film. (Except also the wardrobe, and her really kickass super powers.)

[number8]

Man, the more I think about this movie the more I dislike it.

[number8]

Heh. Imagine if Marvel Studios produced this. It'll probably have Sebastian Shaw as the Red Skull's protege and getting the idea of eliminating the inferior race from him.

[megladon8]

That was pretty great.

Heavily flawed, and that very last shot got some laughs from the crowd (including me), but the movie was fun and colourful.

The conversation between young Eric and Dr. Schmidt in his office was perhaps the best scene of the film.

The way the camera showed us the profile shot with the plain office, then turned to show a butchery was awesome. Very well done.


EDIT: Oh, and Michael Fassbender stole the show. Magneto rocked the hiz-house.


There were a few unintentionally funny moments that my friend and I had a good laugh at, as well.

[megladon8]

Shit kind of just starts happening for no reason and it's so absolutely mind-numbing and stupid and yet satisfying. I absolutely HATED the last half of First Class, yet I had a blast watching it. Kind of like Sucker Punch, except I actually find some sort of merit in that movie's silly shenanigans for whatever reason.


I don't remember anything that "just started happening".

[megladon8]

I'm very, very surprised that so few people here enjoyed this.

Michael Fassbender alone was just awesome.

[EyesWideOpen]

She's really good on Mad Men in my opinion. Only thing I have seen her in.

Also, isn't this set in the 60s simply so that chronologically it can tie in to Singer's films? I don't think there is any other logic, though sad to hear they don't broach any social issue from such an important time period in American history.

There are multiple points where it shows it doesn't fit in with the existing trilogy chronology so I don't think so.

[megladon8]

I thought it was trying to fit in with the trilogy, but disregarded Wolverine - since, you know, Wolverine completely disregarded the trilogy.

Man I just cannot get over how awesome Michael Fassbender was. He rocked.

[EyesWideOpen]

I thought it was trying to fit in with the trilogy, but disregarded Wolverine - since, you know, Wolverine completely disregarded the trilogy.

Man I just cannot get over how awesome Michael Fassbender was. He rocked.

If it was trying to fit in with the trilogy why did it show Erik and Charles seperating and Charles becoming paralyzed in the 60's when in the trilogy Charles is walking and still with Erik later on. Charles and Raven are shown to be basically brother/sister in First Class yet show no knowledge of this in the trilogy. Also Beast's appearance in First Class nullifies his appearance in X3.

The only thing that is even remotely connected to the original trilogy is the Romijn cameo and I think that was done more for humor then to provide a connecting arc.

[EyesWideOpen]

I saw someone somewhere comment about how do you set this in the 60s and not mention the civil rights movement?

Well to be fair out of the two people of color in the film they killed one off and had the other one be a traitorous stripper.

[megladon8]

If it was trying to fit in with the trilogy why did it show Erik and Charles seperating and Charles becoming paralyzed in the 60's when in the trilogy Charles is walking and still with Erik later on. Charles and Raven are shown to be basically brother/sister in First Class yet show no knowledge of this in the trilogy. Also Beast's appearance in First Class nullifies his appearance in X3.

The only thing that is even remotely connected to the original trilogy is the Romijn cameo and I think that was done more for humor then to provide a connecting arc.


You seem to be forgetting entirely about the opening scene. You know, the opening scene that is the opening scene from the first movie.

The continuity is pretty much non-existent, but it's definitely meant to be taken as a prequel to the other movies.


EDIT: And Matthew Vaughn said that it is meant to be part of the story of the other three films, despite the errors in continuity.

[EyesWideOpen]

You seem to be forgetting entirely about the opening scene. You know, the opening scene that is the opening scene from the first movie.

The continuity is pretty much non-existent, but it's definitely meant to be taken as a prequel to the other movies.

Yeah, it's a reboot. They took that start and decided to go off on their own not worrying about continuity. And I'm fine with that. I'd give First Class the same score I'd probably give the other three X-Men movies. All four are good but not great films that could have been more.

[megladon8]

:frustrated:

No, it's not a reboot.

It is a prequel to the other movies. Matthew Vaughn said so. The movie shows it. It is.

Regardless of the fact that the continuity is a freaking mess, it is a prequel.

[EyesWideOpen]

EDIT: And Matthew Vaughn said that it is meant to be part of the story of the other three films, despite the errors in continuity.

He's also said in interviews it's a reboot. So it sounds like the studio told him not to say "reboot" anymore and to say it was part of the existing story.

[EyesWideOpen]

Matthew Vaughn:

“My main goal was to make as good a film that could stand on its own two feet regardless of all the other films.” said Vaughn. “However I thought anything that worked in all the other movies, and I could have some fun with nodding towards, I would. But my main rule was, ‘You know what, we’re trying to reboot and start a whole new X-Men franchise’ and therefore, making a film work on its own two feet was far more important than trying to be referential to the prior movies.”

[megladon8]

Yes, restart the franchise with these characters as opposed to Storm, Cyclops, Wolverine, Jean Grey, etc.

It still takes place in that universe, in that world, in that timeline (however fractured and nonsensical it may be).

The opening scene with Magneto's origin in Nazi-occupied Poland wasn't a meta "this was their take, and we're using it as a jumping off point to change things". This wasn't J.J. Abrams' Star Trek. It's taking place before the other films.

I mean, even within the original trilogy there are huge inconsistencies and things that make no sense. Then Wolverine came and threw any attempt at continuity out the window...but it still was meant to be the origin of Wolverine, from Bryan Singer's films.


Hugh Jackman's Wolverine was even in the movie. Yes, it was a funny cameo, but it was acknowledging that he is out there, in this same universe.

[EyesWideOpen]

You got mad when I used the term reboot and then I produced where the director himself said it was a reboot and them looking to start fresh.

We're both right ok. It's a prequel and a reboot all in one. This argument is pretty silly anyways.

[megladon8]

Well to be fair out of the two people of color in the film they killed one off and had the other one be a traitorous stripper.


I chuckled when Kevin Bacon's Shaw broke into the facility to try to recruit the young mutants, and says:

"You could be enslaved..."

*cut to the only black guy there*

"...or you could live like kings."

[number8]

Look, it's both a prequel and a reboot because of Bryan Singer. He pretty much came in to this movie and decided that both X3 and Wolverine didnt exist since he wasn't involved with them.

[megladon8]

Look, it's both a prequel and a reboot because of Bryan Singer. He pretty much came in to this movie and decided that both X3 and Wolverine didnt exist since he wasn't involved with them.


Exactly.

My point is just that the footage from the first film and the two little cameos were not just fan service or whatever. It's meant to be part of that story and timeline.

[megladon8]

Oh, and similar to Thor, I got the feeling this was very heavily cut.

Hope we get to see a more complete version some day.

[Ezee E]

Meh. This could've benefitted from being longer too. Between all the subplots of each character, I felt like it was rushing itself, particularly the Beast/Mystique love story.

I wonder if it took parts of the Magneto script and put it in here. Either that or Fassbender just escalated his part of the story that much more. I wonder if that script is out somewhere.

The thing that I didn't like the most about this movie is that the acting is just pretty awful aside from Fassbender, McAvoy, and Lawrence (when with those two). Whether it be the stone approach from January Jones, the amateur acting from everyone else, and just an uneven Sebastian Shaw, it made the movie pretty cheesy in my mind. I really don't know why Sebastian was motivated to do what he was doing anyway, and how come he lost the German accent? Might as well have kept it after the rather good first scene with him using it.

[megladon8]

I think Shaw had been around for quite a long time. Learning languages and gaining and dropping accents is probably pretty easy for him.

I do agree the love story between Hank and Mystique was rushed, but not nearly as bad as that of Thor and Jane in Thor, where he's there for a day, they kind of crush on each other, he (and the audience) doesn't see her for a while, and then suddenly "OMG I CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT YOU I'LL BE SEARCHING FOR YOU!"

That was rushed.

And both films feel like they had a good half hour or so cut from them.

I mean, the shot in the trailer of Magneto making a soldier stab himself not only never appeared, but that whole scene was missing.

[BuffaloWilder]

Also:

"We can be the better men."
"We already are."

Where was that?

[TGM]

Also:

"We can be the better men."
"We already are."

Where was that?

That was in the movie. :\

[megladon8]

Yeah, that was in the movie.

[BuffaloWilder]

Huh. Must've missed it - oh, well.

Also, as bad a film as it might be overall, the fact that this ignores The Last Stand irks me, because it abolishes the best scene centered around the Xavier/Magneto relationship in the entirety of the trilogy, when that spikey Asian kid is trying to talk smack about Xavier, and Magneto just shuts him down with, "Charles Xavier did more for mutants than you will ever know. My single greatest regret is that he had to die for our dream to live."

That's a great scene.

Overall, however - this was a lot of fun. Perhaps not as amazing as all of the praise that's been heaped upon it has made it out to be, but there are a lot of great things about it. The style, the constant emotional and visceral energy that's always coursing beneath the surface, the use of four-color, the relationship between Erik and Charles, and the constant feeling of "wow, they actually did that." (in particular, with Shaw's final scene, without giving anything away) All of this is done so well and interwoven so beautifully that it more than makes up for any of it's faults.

Mainly, the biggest problem with it is the same thing that meg's been saying - it is far too compact and squared away for the one film, especially when there's so much else just beneath the surface trying to get out. While they're all sketched out pretty convincingly, it feels like there's something missing as far as the kids are concerned. We barely get anything about them, the entire time. And, there are a few too many moments that come off as unintentionally campy or corny (because a lot of the movie is trying to be this, it can be a little hard to sort out, but they do stand alone), like the final shot. That was ridiculous.

When we see Magneto standing there, in his modified sixties get-up, with the woman's felt coat and the khaki pants and that plasticated helmet - it looks like he made a costume out of thrift store materials, or something

Good stuff, though.

[Kiusagi]

Just got home from seeing this. Need to let it sink in a little, but overall I'd say I quite liked it. It's as simple as this: anytime McAvoy and Fassbender are on screen, it's awesome. When they aren't, it's not awesome. Maybe the script is just bad and I'm blinded by their performances.

Worst line: "We decided you should be Professor X and you should be Magneto."

[megladon8]

I also really liked:

"We're still working for the government. We're still G-Men."

"No...you're X-Men."

[number8]

Worst line: "We decided you should be Professor X and you should be Magneto."

The worst thing is that Erik and Xavier both reacted to that line with a "That's fucking retarded" face, and then both of them later adopted those names independently of each other for no goddamn reason.

[megladon8]

Sorry to all who disliked it so much, 'cause I had a freaking blast with it.

I might see it again.

[Henry Gale]

After X2, this is probably the only other movie in this disjointed franchise I would bother defending for the most part, but that doesn't mean I thought it was really good either.

The movie's biggest problem for me stems from its best stuff, all of which seems to come early on. The opening Magneto bits definitely got me excited for a movie that ended up never really continuing after a certain point. Those scenes are incredibly intense, are carried in such an amazingly dominant way by Fassbender's performance as Erik, and they also happen to feel like the scenes less dependent on the scale or budget of the rest of the movie (particularly its third act). Fassbender luckily manages to be that good throughout, and I definitely agree with those that say the moments the story just focuses on him and Xavier, the better the movie is for it, but it's also disappointing how those scenes end up occurring less and less over the course of its runtime.

I just think Vaughn directs everything aside from those performances (as well as most of its period production design) quite blandly. In Kick-Ass, I felt like he failed to shoot the action in a way that established any sort of exciting rhythm, a great sense of geography, or any other interesting ways of allowing the viewer to perceive fights and the way they unfolded. And here, I feel like he takes the same approach, whether that was intentional or not, with arguably more straightforward (or at least less chaotic or violent) action setpieces. The final battle just seems to allow every character to have one small moment where their power matters, all while they zip around in broad daylight above heavy CG'd backdrops of open water. It just felt a bit flat to me.

But I did like it despite all of its problems, and I guess that just comes from the sort of relief and surprise that this movie exists at all. For something that came together pretty quickly from a few different projects, that only started filming late last year, it's a slickly produced, well-thought out origin story with a lot of great things in it along the way. For all the scenes we get of Erik confronting his past and his attempts to hunt down the Nazis that killed his mother and experimented on him and imprisoned him, we also get scenes like the ones where the young mutants decide on each other's nicknames, followed five minutes later by Angel switching sides for reasons that are beyond me. Does it all come together perfectly? No. Does it at least have the right cogs in the machine to allow it to move along at an enjoyable pace? I'd say so.

The good is pretty great, and the bad is just kind of a shame, making the whole thing feel like a bit of a wasted oppurtunity despite still being pretty entertaining overall. Either way, an X-Men Origins: Magneto starring Fassbender that ended at a point where he makes peace with his past and then meets up with Xavier with the intention to then do good in the world could have been perfect. At least we get the first half hour of that movie here.

***

[Ezee E]

The worst thing is that Erik and Xavier both reacted to that line with a "That's fucking retarded" face, and then both of them later adopted those names independently of each other for no goddamn reason.
I wish Jennifer Lawrence had said that line with sarcasm, because that's the only way I saw it working. And yeah, their reactions made it even dumber that they would later take on the name.

[Ezee E]

Yeah, this isn't resonating well at all with me. And I'm really wanting to find that original Magneto script now. Just curious how that one would end.

I wonder if that's why there are four listed writers too?

[Dukefrukem]

I chuckled when Kevin Bacon's Shaw broke into the facility to try to recruit the young mutants, and says:

"You could be enslaved..."

*cut to the only black guy there*

"...or you could live like kings."

I laughed at this too.

[Henry Gale]

And I'm really wanting to find that original Magneto script now. Just curious how that one would end.

I wonder if that's why there are four listed writers too?

I think the way it went was that Fox was kicking around the idea of a First Class movie for a while, with the expectation that it would come after a Magneto movie, but maybe also because they weren't sure how their X-Men Origins brand was going to fly all on its own. Then at some point after Wolverine came out, Bryan Singer came back into things, and he ended up coming up with a story that merged those two potential projects, but I'm not sure he actually wrote a draft or anything. So then the heaviest lifting of that actual script seems like it was done by Miller and Stenz (who also did Thor and get half of the final credit on this), and then Jane Goldman and Matthew Vaughn basically changed it to their liking once he came on as director (ending up with the other half).

So, definitely a lot of what-if's you could imagine came and went throughout that whole process.

[number8]

Yeah, this isn't resonating well at all with me. And I'm really wanting to find that original Magneto script now. Just curious how that one would end.

I wonder if that's why there are four listed writers too?

Sheldon Turner is credited for story. He was the writer on Magneto, so I'm pretty sure that since that project was scrapped his script got absorbed into this.

[Bosco B Thug]

Well, I for one liked the nicknaming scene. It was cute, and someone had to come up with those names at some point. In that way, it's, um, deconstructivist pandering.

And everyone's acting as if the Xavier/Erik stuff is of such a separate piece from everything else. For me, everything was as campy/archetypal/fabulist/cheesy as everything else, and that's kinda why the film is so enjoyable.

Not to mention Xavier/Erik is highly rivaled in degree of dramatic prevalence by Xavier/Raven/Erik. As I've mentioned, her cheesy mutant angst is mostly inanely presented, but it easily beats out Erik's Holocaust revenge angst, and Vaughn really goes with the idea that she's just this normal girl plopped into an incredible tale and he never drops that aspect, giving her probably the film's most admirably, sometimes beautifully down-to-earth moments. Despite Lawrence being a bit of an over-performer (not a bad performance, though), Raven's presence definitely provided the bulk of the film's emotional grab. (Loved the early bar scenes where Raven's just sitting around, looking jealous.)

[megladon8]

Did anyone else love the scene near the beginning with the young Erik and Shaw (at that point "Dr. Schmidt")?

[Bosco B Thug]

Did anyone else love the scene near the beginning with the young Erik and Shaw (at that point "Dr. Schmidt")? It's a good scene. Shaw's a really campy villain, though. I agree with whoever criticized his anti-aging superpower and accent-dropping superbrain.

I loved the ending of that scene, when the camera pulls back through the glass doors as Shaw leads Erik into the lab. The first instance where I realized I was going to like Vaughn's grandiose, theatrical touch.

[megladon8]

I don't get the complaints about camp.

The movie is campy, cheesy, pulpy...but done quite well.

It's like the anti-Dark Knight.

[Bosco B Thug]

The movie is campy, cheesy, pulpy...but done quite well. Ja, I agree.

I mean, it has a mutant with dragonfly wings. No doubt the weakest character, but I got a lot of pleasure out of her battle sequence where she's filmed like a daytime mothman apparition.

[megladon8]

Ja, I agree.

I mean, it has a mutant with dragonfly wings. No doubt the weakest character, but I got a lot of pleasure out of her battle sequence where she's filmed like a daytime mothman apparition.


Yeah, and I thought the Banshee flying scenes were done beautifully. Convincing, effective, really made you feel like you were soaring right on the edge of losing control.

[DavidSeven]

This shit was stupid. This movie might have set some sort of record for longest unbroken stream of WTF-ness in a summer tentpole. I shudder to think how terrible this would have been without Fassbender and McAvoy selling it as hard as they did.

[megladon8]

This shit was stupid. This movie might have set some sort of record for longest unbroken stream of WTF-ness in a summer tentpole. I shudder to think how terrible this would have been without Fassbender and McAvoy selling it as hard as they did.


I would completely agree if you were talking about X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

[DavidSeven]

I would completely agree if you were talking about X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

I haven't seen it. I didn't see Last Stand either. Maybe that's why it's so easy for me to hate on this one. But seriously, did FOX butcher the crap out of this or are my suspicions confirmed that Vaughn doesn't know jack squat about storytelling? This was one of the worst edited major releases I've seen in a while.

[megladon8]

I haven't seen it. I didn't see Last Stand either. Maybe that's why it's so easy for me to hate on this one. But seriously, did FOX butcher the crap out of this or are my suspicions confirmed that Vaughn doesn't know jack squat about storytelling? This was one of the worst edited major releases I've seen in a while.


Fox edited the crap out of it.

Many scenes and shots from the trailers were completely omitted.

[DavidSeven]

Fox edited the crap out of it.

I can buy that. Every scene in the first 2/3 of this movie felt like it was meant to be two to three times longer.

[megladon8]

I can buy that. Every scene in the first 2/3 of this movie felt like it was meant to be two to three times longer.


And there were some great scenes.

[number8]

I'd blame Fox, too, but we're talking about Vaughn here, so I'm not going to absolve him, given his lame track record.

[Rowland]

I was lukewarm on the Singer X-Men movies, skipped the next two, and as for Vaughn, I liked both Stardust and Kick-Ass, but Layer Cake did nothing for me. My girlfriend wants to see this, especially since I've largely been avoiding the blockbuster releases this summer and she's in the mood for one, but I'm having a hard time giving a shit. I'd rather just wait for Super 8.

[Ezee E]

I haven't seen any arguments between Vaughn and the studios though. As mentioned though, it just feels rushed. Heck, even Erik's talk in the Argentina bar felt a little rushed. It seemed like it could have had that Inglorious Basterds drawn out feel for a moment.

[DavidSeven]

It would have required an incredible level of incompetence to create a story this fractured on purpose. But having also seen Layer Cake and Kick-Ass, I wouldn't put it past Vaughn.

Seriously, did it actually come across to anyone that they were positioning Byrne as a love interest for McAvoy before Fassbender made some throwaway comment about it toward the end of the film?

[Ezee E]

Another thing that was weird was how Xavier just dumped his charm immediately upon graduation.

[number8]

It seemed like it could have had that Inglorious Basterds drawn out feel for a moment.

Speaking of which, the convo in IB about his accent completely ruined his German-speaking scenes in this for me.

[Bosco B Thug]

It would have required an incredible level of incompetence to create a story this fractured on purpose. But having also seen Layer Cake and Kick-Ass, I wouldn't put it past Vaughn.

Seriously, did it actually come across to anyone that they were positioning Byrne as a love interest for McAvoy before Fassbender made some throwaway comment about it toward the end of the film? Screenplay deficits I won't argue (Byrne's character was highly unmemorable and yes, a budding relationship with Xavier was hardly noticeable until Fassbender's throwaway comment), but what exactly was so terribly fractured about the film?

In fact, no lie, but the film's shorthand approach to drama was another thing I found so charming about it while watching - it felt like an old 30s movie at times, where scenes are way too succinct yet communicate what they need to with a certain unabashed generosity. For instance, ending the Xavier-meets-Raven scene on little Raven's beatific smile (although I can't be the only one who wanted to smack preternaturally-avuncular little Xavier across the head...), or her just walking up to Beast upside down and saying right then and there, "You're amazing." It's such a breezy, poppy movie.

One thing I did find terrifically dumb was the youngsters' "partying" scene. Beast go-go dancing upside down and Angel flying about for no good reason looked so stupid.


Another thing that was weird was how Xavier just dumped his charm immediately upon graduation. Maybe I'm not sure what you mean, but why do you say that?

[Rowland]

So colorful and kitschy, in a good way... It's such a breezy, poppy movie.Pretty much.

[Rowland]

Maybe I should finally watch Vaughn's other movies. I really dug the film's style: its embrace of campiness and color, and Vaughn's sense of overt theatricality. I feel he's very good at capturing brilliant and effervescent emotions. Vaughn is overrated in some circles (AICN/CHUD/etc.) and underrated in others (Slant/RS/etc.), but I really dug his work in Kick-Ass and the unfairly ignored Stardust, neither of which are great but certainly superior pop entertainments. His touch accounts for much of my positive response here, since I was immediately relieved that this didn't come across as another functionally directed for-hire superhero blockbuster.

[Bosco B Thug]

:pritch:

[Ezee E]

I like Kick-Ass, and remember digging Layer Cake a lot too.

[eternity]

The film going from script to screen in 8 months mixed with Fox notoriously tinkering with its blockbusters lead me to believe that this film-by-committee is the way it is for just that reason. I've liked every Vaughn film up to this point...but god, this movie blows. So much. The first half is just fine, but...it gets even below Wolverine status in the final scenes.

[DavidSeven]

Yeah, I can't be convinced that the barely-cohesive and truncated feel of the story is anything but the product of laziness, haste and/or studio intervention. No way this was an intentional stylistic device, but if it actually worked for you (and I can buy that), then fair enough.

[Bosco B Thug]

Yeah, I can't be convinced that the barely-cohesive and truncated feel of the story is anything but the product of laziness, haste and/or studio intervention. No way this was an intentional stylistic device, but if it actually worked for you (and I can buy that), then fair enough.
Well, I've been talking my head off about this movie for no particularly good reason, when it's certainly not some new masterwork, so before people start to think I'm keeping it in mind for my 2011 top ten list or something, I better keep talking: less do I think that it's an "intentional stylistic device," as I imagine the silly and lazy little script was handed to Vaughn and co. and they simply made it work, with an admiringly yes-intentional grasp of narrative and dramatic zest. And until more lengthy and specific points are made against it, my defense of the film will remain as flowery-spoken and barely-convincing as I imagine it has presently been.

[lovejuice]

Oh boy. Watching it today. I'm more looking forward to the conversation than the actual movie.

[Skitch]

I'm so pumped to see this, that I'm gonna wait a week or two till the crowds ease. I have a knack for bad crowd attraction.

[Morris Schæffer]

Going tonight. I'm still quite excited.

[lovejuice]

I'm on the fence. On the surface, it's a fun movie with some inspiring performances. McAvoy and Fassbender have chemistry. The action scenes are great especially when Bacon and his gang stomps the lab.

Yet it exposes the illogical of the X-Men universe that I have so many problems with, namely, that mutants will be feared and hated by humanity. Some X-men movies sell this point better than the others. But it's hard to imagine humans turn against this first-discovered-never-heard-before entity.

[KubrickLoveChild]

I was never a big X-Men fan, but I went and saw it anyway. I thought the story was amazing and very interesting, but the acting, special effects, soundtrack etc. completely turned me off from the movie. It may just be me, but I think it would be way too easy to make a spoof movie out of this.

[megladon8]

This is #218 in the IMDb top 250?

Puh-leeze.

[DavidSeven]

This is #218 in the IMDb top 250?

Puh-leeze.

Hyped up new movies make it on the list all of the time. Even the crappy ones can get a 200-250 placement for a couple months. It's definitely not staying there.

[Pop Trash]

Hyped up new movies make it on the list all of the time. Even the crappy ones can get a 200-250 placement for a couple months. It's definitely not staying there.

Damn overcaffeinated teenagers with their internets.

[megladon8]

Hyped up new movies make it on the list all of the time. Even the crappy ones can get a 200-250 placement for a couple months. It's definitely not staying there.


I know this, I'm not stating surprise.

It's just a "gimme a break" scenario.

I liked it, but c'mon. It's nowhere near that good.

[number8]

The IMDB 250 list itself isn't good.

I mean, on the list, First Class is between Pirates of the Caribbean and the JJ Abrams Star Trek.

[number8]

Groan.


Director Matthew Vaughn has talked of a possible sequel. "I thought it would be fun to open with the Kennedy assassination, and we reveal that the magic bullet was controlled by Magneto," he said. "That would explain the physics of it, and we see that he's pissed off because Kennedy took all the credit for saving the world and mutants weren't even mentioned."

[Ezee E]

I would've thought Kennedy would be for mutant rights though.

[Scar]

Groan.

http://www.demotivationalposters.org/image/demotivational-poster/0903/epic-face-palm-face-palm-demotivational-poster-1236742013.jpg

[DavidSeven]

Honestly, it's like Matthew Vaughn is an IMDB poster with a movie camera. I see no evidence of intelligent life.

[Watashi]

But I thought the Comedian killed JFK...

[Stay Puft]

"That would explain the physics of it."

LOL

Another sequel idea: Magneto caused the twin towers to collapse.

[number8]

Another sequel idea: Magneto caused the twin towers to collapse.

What? But it was Juggernaut who did it.

http://www.uncannyxmen.net/images/spotlight/juggernaut16.jpg

http://i37.tinypic.com/21b6t4x.jpg

[Robby P]

Wow, this was bad. I mean, it was really bad. The critical praise that was heaped on this movie befuddles me.

[Chac Mool]

Honestly, it's like Matthew Vaughn is an IMDB poster with a movie camera. I see no evidence of intelligent life.

Every single film of his that I've seen has had "intelligent life" -- he may be commercially-minded, but he's leagues above most directors working in comparable genres.

Honestly, I'm not sure how your statement computes -- do you really feel there's "no intelligence" in Layer Cake, Stardust, Kick-Ass and X-Men: First Class (full disclosure: haven't seen the latter)?

[DavidSeven]

do you really feel there's "no intelligence" in Layer Cake ... Kick-Ass and X-Men: First Class?

Pretty much.

Though the comment had more to do with Vaughn's asinine idea that Magneto be involved in the Kennedy assassination at the time it was made.

[Pop Trash]

Kick-Ass is dumb.

[Henry Gale]

This is better than Kick-Ass, no question, but I definitely feel like a better version of this same movie could have been made. I could easily throw out X-Men Origins: Magneto as a possibility, but really, how well would that have gone over, and who's to say that Fassbender (or McAvoy) would have been brought in for it either. The best of the acting group make this movie as good as it can be, but the material still seems half-baked and front-loaded at best, and the rest of it... I guess I'm just indifferent to.

A month or so later, this movie still finds ways of having its good and less-good sides battle it out in my mind. Ultimately I'd still say it was worth the effort, but man, it could have been so much better. The people that seem to be calling this seemingly unquestionally "the best X-men movie" confuse me to no end. I think it just helps that it's chronologically come after the two worst entries, and that some of what's in this movie is just enjoyable enough on its surface.

[Morris Schæffer]

Kick-ass worked much, much better for me. That movie was far out, not quite coloring within the boundaries, wild, crazy, violent, fresh, but still earnest enough to ge me engaged. First Class, though absolutely a worthy x-men flick, a retread at best because it adheres to what Hollywood seems to have been doing the past couple of years ad infinitum. Retread, reboot, regurgitate. Kick-Ass, I thought, actually advances the genre of comic book movies. I consider it similar to The Dark Knight.

[Pop Trash]

This was OK, but I just don't think Matthew Vaughn is much of a director. It's not nearly as braincell killing as Kick-Ass, but still, not very good. It's hard to put my finger on it, but tonally everything has to be underlined and in capital letters. No nuance or grace notes at all.

I get the feeling that Singer and co's treatment was probably really interesting with the Holocaust, Nazis, and the Cuban Missile Crises being woven in, but the dialogue, haphazard editing, and Vaughn's cheeseball directing kind of sinks it. Fassbinder still rules of course. I felt bad for January Jones since I rather like her icequeen housewife style on Mad Men, but she is just a mannequin here.

[eternity]

Kick-Ass is fine. The source material sucks, but the movie does what it can.

First Class, I feel, is truly abysmal. The script and most of the performances are dreadful and it's just painful to sit through.

[Irish]

Sorry to all who disliked it so much, 'cause I had a freaking blast with it.

I might see it again.

^ This. I got a huge kick out of this movie.

From what I've seen the last couple of pages, I'd also have to agree with everyone's criticisms (middling performances outside the leads, lack of subtlety, etc). But hell it's a comic book movie and considering some of the other turns in this franchise, this was a spectacular outing. (I wish X3 had been this much fun).

Thought the second act was a touch too long, and Shaw's character and the whole missle crisis plot feels irrelevant about half way through, because we all know Magneto goes bad and that's what we want to see.

Still, this is one of the rare times I want to see a sequel.

[Dukefrukem]

So this was the new movie on HBO this week and I can't believe how terrible my second viewing was. For some reason the acting on the second time through was completely transparent and I was unable to see this during my first viewing. The only thing I liked about this was Michael Fassbender (I loved the scene where he's turning the satellite dish). I suppose Bacon was an OK villain.

Hank McCoy as Beast looks and sounds terrible, just bad casting. Rose Byrne as the FBI or CIA agent... bad. The finale is super bad yet somehow I enjoyed this.

[Morris Schæffer]

Definitely a prequel that hits all the expected, uninspired marks as far as some of the story is concerned, precisely what I'm not hoping for in nine days time when I will get to see Prometheus. Still a fun movie with good lead actors.

[Dukefrukem]

Definitely a prequel that hits all the expected, uninspired marks as far as some of the story is concerned, precisely what I'm not hoping for in nine days time when I will get to see Prometheus. Still a fun movie with good lead actors.

Holy shit. I'm buying another midnight screening.

[Morris Schæffer]

Holy shit. I'm buying another midnight screening.

Uhm, it opens may 30th in Belgium. That's Belgium, Europe. :lol:

[Dukefrukem]

Uhm, it opens may 30th in Belgium. That's Belgium, Europe. :lol:

Yeh and it opens here in the US on June 1st... two days later... What's so funny?

[megladon8]

Weird, Jen and I threw this one on last night, too.

Fassbender steals the show, which would have been fairly mediocre without the likes of him, and to a lesser extent, McAvoy, Lawrence and Bacon.

Still love the scene in the Argentinian bar.

[Morris Schæffer]

Yeh and it opens here in the US on June 1st... two days later... What's so funny?

Your reaction made it sound like you thought I was American and that you had no idea there was a way to see it that early in the US seeing as it officially opens June 8th.