X-Men: A New Thread

[Tiny Poster]

http://blog.newsarama.com/2011/02/10/first-x-men-first-class-trailer-arrives/

First peeps!

[Small Man Big Horse]

I'm not a huge fan of the series at all, but the fact that Matthew Vaughn is attached to it gives me hope that it'll be more interesting than the bogstandard superhero movie. I quite like the cast as well, even James McAvoy, who I want to hate[nb]I don't know why. There's just something about him that annoys me.[/nb], looks quite good in this.

[VegaLA]

I only saw XMen last stand this past weekend and it did nothing for me.
I'm right in thinking its the weakest of the 3?

I hope this new one picks it back up again, looks like we are spoiled for Superhero movies for the next two Summers.

[Dead kate moss]

I'm right in thinking its the weakest of the 3?

Anyone claiming otherwise would be as stupid and cunty as some dappy tart saying Godfather 3 was their favourite.

[Famous Mortimer]

There's an advert for a dating service I'd like "I like old movies, like X Men 3 (it's my favourite of the trilogy)" while some hipster douchebag looks across appreciatively.

[SavageHedgehog]

I don't get it. Is it common among hipsters to state a fondness for X3? If so I must be hanging around only the least hip parts of the internet.

It probably was the weakest of the trilogy, none of them are particularly clear in my meomory (though I'd say X2 was the best one), but I'd hardly say the first two were in a different league altogether. On the other hand, I would say X3 was in a different league altogether from Hugh Jackman's Origin or whatever it was called. Frankly Mr. Rat did a good enough job of keeping the feel of the previous film that it reinforced my feeling that Bryan Singer is essentially a journeyman who has being awarded an auteur-level reputation on the basis of precisely one truly special film, now made almost two decades ago. Particularly seeing as X3 came out at the same time as Superman Returns, which was no better and a lot less fun.

I hope SMBH or anyone else here doesn't get offended if I say I feel much the same way about Matthew Vaughn. His films are entetaining and he has no misses in his oeuvre so far, but I see no special magic in them. I don't think I could point to anything and say "that just so Matthew Vaughn!" Isn't he beloved by the AICN crowd mostly for nearly directing X3 and The Wolfman, and because they think those films would have been "geeky cool awesome" or whatever if he'd made them?

The trailer? The Kennedy stuff is a nice touch, otherwise meh

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

First the worst, second the best, third the one with the hairy Beast.

Can't say I'm greatly fussed about this, but I've no reason to think it will be bad. Fassbender and McAvoy are both good actors and Vaughn is a decent enough director

[Feralkid]

I don't get it. Is it common among hipsters to state a fondness for X3? If so I must be hanging around only the least hip parts of the internet.

It probably was the weakest of the trilogy, none of them are particularly clear in my meomory (though I'd say X2 was the best one), but I'd hardly say the first two were in a different league altogether. On the other hand, I would say X3 was in a different league altogether from Hugh Jackman's Origin or whatever it was called. Frankly Mr. Rat did a good enough job of keeping the feel of the previous film that it reinforced my feeling that Bryan Singer is essentially a journeyman who has being awarded an auteur-level reputation on the basis of precisely one truly special film, now made almost two decades ago. Particularly seeing as X3 came out at the same time as Superman Returns, which was no better and a lot less fun.

I couldn't agree more.  Singer's work is so very dreary: visuals drained of colour, under-whelming action sequences and, excluding the work of ringers like Sirs Ian and Patrick - the acting is often horribly misjudged.   Flawed as it is I much, much prefer X-Men 3 to Singer's films.  None of them are brilliant and X3 has some terribly by the numbers scripting but Ratner's film does at least have a zippy pace and a sense of pulpy fun about it.  And yes, Superman Returns is so woeful I doubt X3 would have benefitted from Singer's involvement.

Vaughn, while no auteur or visionary is at least a reliable set of hands and certainly a step up from Ratner.   

[The Region Legion]

This looks like complete shit to me.

[Nik Drou]

It seems an odd decision to have this as a prequel to the existing series of films (with a trailer that makes the link very explicit) rather than a straight reboot, as it's pretty exhausted as a franchise by now (with the possible exception of Wolverine) and the average cinemagoer can't remember what happened in any of them.  Not only that, but there doesn't appear to be a rich enough mythology in the movie canon to really justify the kind of resonance and irony this new film is attempting to employ.  What does it really matter how Charles met Erik, or where he got his helmet from, or how he loses the use of his legs?  In this iteration, Magneto is basically just a terrorist who continually fails to make any kind of impact on mutant/human relations, as he is consistently thwarted by the X-Men before anything too damaging really happens.  Do mutants become outlawed?  Is there any progress in how mutants are seen by people?  Is there an all-out mutant war?  How about large mutant subcultures?  Genosha-like mutant-populated countries or cities? Widespread destruction?  Nope.  In fact, the only real change in the trilogy's overall status quo comes in part three, where

Spoiler alert

mutants can now voluntarily be 'cured'

[close]

, a development that none of the principle characters are responsible for. 

Anyhow, it at least gives me a good reason to post this ridiculous deleted scene from X-Men 3.

X-Men 3 - Deleted Scene (Beast recites Sheakspeare)

[madhair60]

Looking forward to this.  Enjoyed all three main X-Men movies, especially X2, and liked Last Stand a lot more than I should have.  Didn't mind Origins, either; perfectly good fun.