Verrrry curious to see the numbers it does this weekend.
*** X-MEN / DEADPOOL (FOX-OWNED MARVEL) ***
53,152 Views |
450 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by MaroonStain
Honestly don't think RT is worth referencing anymore.tv1113 said:
I have a feeling that this is one of those movies that is cool to hate on. I'm sure it isn't great but 23% on RT? That is approaching the rating of one truly horrendous movie. I'm pretty sure it is just highly mediocre with a few head scratching moments.
RT has the annoying habit of doing this many times where people hop on either a positive or negative bandwagon and drastically raise or lower the score to where it isn't reliable. I have a feeling this will be one of those movies where the audience score is at least above 60-70% and will be significantly different from the critics.
I always take X-Men hate with a huge grain of salt. And I take RT ratings with a gigantic grain of salt. They both just tell you how well the studios are controlling discussion, not whether it's a good movie. I expect slightly above average mediocrity from this film, but I'll have to see it for myselftv1113 said:
I have a feeling that this is one of those movies that is cool to hate on. I'm sure it isn't great but 23% on RT? That is approaching the rating of one truly horrendous movie. I'm pretty sure it is just highly mediocre with a few head scratching moments.
RT has the annoying habit of doing this many times where people hop on either a positive or negative bandwagon and drastically raise or lower the score to where it isn't reliable. I have a feeling this will be one of those movies where the audience score is at least above 60-70% and will be significantly different from the critics.
Dammit....nope, not gonna get sucked in...Brian Earl Spilner said:
That was so much better than I expected.
Granted, I had fairly low expectations, but I do think it's in the middle tier of the X-Men series at worst. Above X3 and Apocalypse for sure.
The action scenes were pretty good.
And a few minutes into the movie I noticed how much better the score sounded than usual. Had no idea it was Hans Zimmer until the credits.
I'd say it's worth a watch if you're on the fence.
I wonder if they regret this bit of trash talking now.
One of the reasons me and my buddy have been excited about it regardless of the negative reviews.Brian Earl Spilner said:
Had no idea it was Hans Zimmer until the credits.
I'd say it's worth a watch if you're on the fence.
Glad to hear some good things about it. I honestly couldn't see how there's anyway that it could be worse than Last Stand or Wolverine: Origins (which is what RT would have you believe at the moment).
This image reminds me again of why AoA was so bad:Civen said:
I wonder if they regret this bit of trash talking now.
They put Jubilee in the movie.
F-ing Jubilee.
I'll stand up for Jubilee. She has a purpose, even if she just annoyed every cartoon fan in the 90s. But she didn't have a purpose in that movie, and was essentially an extended cameo. (Also without a purpose: Archangel, Psylocke, Mystique, Beast, Havok.)
I thought that line about the 3rd always being the worst was bad the moment they said it, because this movie was clearly on pace to be worse than First Class or DoFP. They thought they were being cheeky, but ended up just being ironic.
Anyway, regarding Dark Phoenix - it may not even open #1 this week. Depends how well Secret Life of Pets 2 does. I think DP will be #1, but neither film is expected to do that well.
I wouldn't be surprised, a week from now, if Men In Black is #1 and Aladdin is back up to #2. Dark Phoenix will not have legs at all.
I thought that line about the 3rd always being the worst was bad the moment they said it, because this movie was clearly on pace to be worse than First Class or DoFP. They thought they were being cheeky, but ended up just being ironic.
Anyway, regarding Dark Phoenix - it may not even open #1 this week. Depends how well Secret Life of Pets 2 does. I think DP will be #1, but neither film is expected to do that well.
I wouldn't be surprised, a week from now, if Men In Black is #1 and Aladdin is back up to #2. Dark Phoenix will not have legs at all.
Yeah I'm pretty sure Pets 2 will beat it.
One thing that bothers me about this series is the wonky ages. I constantly had to remind myself that Mystique and Beast and pretty much Charles Xaviers' age, right? Yet they look no older than Jean's generation of students.
Not to mention Jean herself looks no older than she did in Apocalypse, which took place a decade ago.
One thing that bothers me about this series is the wonky ages. I constantly had to remind myself that Mystique and Beast and pretty much Charles Xaviers' age, right? Yet they look no older than Jean's generation of students.
Not to mention Jean herself looks no older than she did in Apocalypse, which took place a decade ago.
The age thing is just so bad, it's comical now.
First Class took place in 1962. Days of Future Past in 1973. Apocalypse in 1983 and now Dark Phoenix in 1992. So, thirty years have elapsed in the franchise.
James McAvoy's Xavier and Michael Fassbender's Magneto have only aged the eight years between the filming of First Class and Dark Phoenix, when their characters should be 30 years older. Sophie Turner's Jean Grey hasn't aged hardly at all, even though 10 years is supposed to have passed (she was supposed to be 16 in Apocalypse and now 25.....sure).
The actor playing Quicksilver still looks the same, even though we "met" him 20 years prior to the events in Dark Phoenix.
The only character I'll give a pass to is Jennifer Lawrence's Mystique. In the comics, she can make herself look the same age even over the course of decades because she's a shape-shifter.
But the rest of the cast is just lazy on the part of the filmmakers. It's truly like they don't give a sh*t.
First Class took place in 1962. Days of Future Past in 1973. Apocalypse in 1983 and now Dark Phoenix in 1992. So, thirty years have elapsed in the franchise.
James McAvoy's Xavier and Michael Fassbender's Magneto have only aged the eight years between the filming of First Class and Dark Phoenix, when their characters should be 30 years older. Sophie Turner's Jean Grey hasn't aged hardly at all, even though 10 years is supposed to have passed (she was supposed to be 16 in Apocalypse and now 25.....sure).
The actor playing Quicksilver still looks the same, even though we "met" him 20 years prior to the events in Dark Phoenix.
The only character I'll give a pass to is Jennifer Lawrence's Mystique. In the comics, she can make herself look the same age even over the course of decades because she's a shape-shifter.
But the rest of the cast is just lazy on the part of the filmmakers. It's truly like they don't give a sh*t.
So they age like comic book characters in comic books.
The age thing is sooo dumb/funny. It's just so comically bad, to the point of it being hilarious.
The first X-Men came out in 2000, but took place a few years into the future. To be generous, let's say it was 2005 - five years into the future - which would put it 13 years after the events of Dark Phoenix. That means Magento has to go from this...
... to this...
... in just 13 years. We need THAT movie. The Logan-esque Magneto movie that is apparently so bleak and intense that Magneto suddenly ages twice as fast as any human being.
The first X-Men came out in 2000, but took place a few years into the future. To be generous, let's say it was 2005 - five years into the future - which would put it 13 years after the events of Dark Phoenix. That means Magento has to go from this...
... to this...
... in just 13 years. We need THAT movie. The Logan-esque Magneto movie that is apparently so bleak and intense that Magneto suddenly ages twice as fast as any human being.
i guess they didn't have access to the marvel aging/de-aging tech yet for this one.
They could've at least given Magneto greying hair and maybe a salt and pepper beard.
To put it in perspective: in Avengers Endgame, to illustrate that five years had passed, they gave Stark a little grey in his hair and showed Black Widow's hair progress from blonde back to red. And that was just to make sure the audience realized that time had passed.
Thirty years have supposed to have transpired from First Class to Dark Phoenix, and they didn't do a GD thing for any of the characters, beyond the actor's natural aging during the filming.
Thirty years have supposed to have transpired from First Class to Dark Phoenix, and they didn't do a GD thing for any of the characters, beyond the actor's natural aging during the filming.
GiveEmHellBill said:
To put it in perspective: in Avengers Endgame, to illustrate that five years had passed, they gave Stark a little grey in his hair and showed Black Widow's hair progress from blonde back to red. And that was just to make sure the audience realized that time had passed.
Thirty years have supposed to have transpired from First Class to Dark Phoenix, and they didn't do a GD thing for any of the characters, beyond the actor's natural aging during the filming.
FWIW, mutants age slowly in the comics.
That doesn't justify anything.
I don't think I can recall a greater example of "studio loyalty" than the way internet fans blandly accept anything Marvel Studios does and reflexively bash anything Fox does with the X-Men. Endgame was an entertaining spectacle and something of a sentimental journey, but I hope no one is pretending it was great storytelling.
I notice this more with the Marvel/DC fanboys. Like you can only like one or the other.
i love x men, but i'd be jumping up and down if the story arc from this cycle of x men was half as satisfying as how they ended the cycle for the MCU.Social Media Influencer said:
I don't think I can recall a greater example of "studio loyalty" than the way internet fans blandly accept anything Marvel Studios does and reflexively bash anything Fox does with the X-Men. Endgame was an entertaining spectacle and something of a sentimental journey, but I hope no one is pretending it was great storytelling.
"great storytelling" or no.
That's a random subject change
It's not.
I had a thought in early 2016, as 3 comic book films from 3 different studios were about to be released, that I think proved to be mostly true and is still mostly true today:
The MCU had Civil War, which was the 13th film in a long series. It had themes and characters that had been built up over time. It was the 5th appearance of Captain America and the 6th of Iron Man, with many supporting characters that had been in successful films already. It was widely celebrated.
The DCEU had BvS, which was the 2nd film in a new shared universe. It was fast-tracking films and ideas to get in on the billions that Marvel was making, turning its Superman sequel into a Batman showdown (decent idea, I thought) while also introducing Wonder Woman, Flash, Cyborg and Aquaman (terrible idea, I thought). Some really enjoyed it but it was undeniably a controversial film. But it was also laying its groundwork for the new era of comic book universes.
Fox had X-Men: Apocalypse, which was largely ignored. It made 27% less than its predecessor in the box office. It followed the template the franchise created in 2000, by including as many mutants as you possibly could and hoping that the fans would appreciate their appearance, whether they were wasted or not. Where Civil War and BvS dealt with superhero collateral damage, Apocalypse cranked it up to new levels by having Magneto seemingly destroy Sydney and walking away scot free in the end.
Fast forward a few years and I think things have continued along those paths. The MCU, by and large, has stuck to a plan and built to it over time, culminating in the #2 highest-grossing film of all time. DC rushed to a team-up film that made the least amount of money in the franchise, at the time, to meet executive bonus deadlines. Things seem to be looking up as the studio is meddling less, but it remains to be seen. The attempts to connect the universe have met with varying levels of success.
But Fox, it feels like, keeps on making films from the early 2000s. Dark Phoenix is the sequel that nobody asked for to a movie that nobody liked. It's literally a story we've already seen within the same franchise. It's a film that had to re-shoot its entire third-act because another movie beat them to the punch, and also all these characters have been bought so now it's also a farewell film.
I loved Days of Future Past. I liked it so much that I turned around and saw it again that same night with another group of friends. But this franchise (aside from Logan and Deadpool) has been so left in the dust by the 13 MCU films that have come out since that for most people, these are characters that haven't been thought about since they saw Apocalypse and said "that kinda sucked." And as someone who grew up watching the 90s cartoons and collecting trading cards - that kinda sucks.
But it'll be over soon, and in 6 years we'll have casting rumors and announcements for the new Wolverine, Cyclops, etc., and they'll wisely forego telling the Phoenix story a third time.
The MCU had Civil War, which was the 13th film in a long series. It had themes and characters that had been built up over time. It was the 5th appearance of Captain America and the 6th of Iron Man, with many supporting characters that had been in successful films already. It was widely celebrated.
The DCEU had BvS, which was the 2nd film in a new shared universe. It was fast-tracking films and ideas to get in on the billions that Marvel was making, turning its Superman sequel into a Batman showdown (decent idea, I thought) while also introducing Wonder Woman, Flash, Cyborg and Aquaman (terrible idea, I thought). Some really enjoyed it but it was undeniably a controversial film. But it was also laying its groundwork for the new era of comic book universes.
Fox had X-Men: Apocalypse, which was largely ignored. It made 27% less than its predecessor in the box office. It followed the template the franchise created in 2000, by including as many mutants as you possibly could and hoping that the fans would appreciate their appearance, whether they were wasted or not. Where Civil War and BvS dealt with superhero collateral damage, Apocalypse cranked it up to new levels by having Magneto seemingly destroy Sydney and walking away scot free in the end.
Fast forward a few years and I think things have continued along those paths. The MCU, by and large, has stuck to a plan and built to it over time, culminating in the #2 highest-grossing film of all time. DC rushed to a team-up film that made the least amount of money in the franchise, at the time, to meet executive bonus deadlines. Things seem to be looking up as the studio is meddling less, but it remains to be seen. The attempts to connect the universe have met with varying levels of success.
But Fox, it feels like, keeps on making films from the early 2000s. Dark Phoenix is the sequel that nobody asked for to a movie that nobody liked. It's literally a story we've already seen within the same franchise. It's a film that had to re-shoot its entire third-act because another movie beat them to the punch, and also all these characters have been bought so now it's also a farewell film.
I loved Days of Future Past. I liked it so much that I turned around and saw it again that same night with another group of friends. But this franchise (aside from Logan and Deadpool) has been so left in the dust by the 13 MCU films that have come out since that for most people, these are characters that haven't been thought about since they saw Apocalypse and said "that kinda sucked." And as someone who grew up watching the 90s cartoons and collecting trading cards - that kinda sucks.
But it'll be over soon, and in 6 years we'll have casting rumors and announcements for the new Wolverine, Cyclops, etc., and they'll wisely forego telling the Phoenix story a third time.
It feels to me like Marvel Studios had fans of the source material involved, and they were able to build up a longterm storyline. Singer and whoever else at Fox seemed more interested in casting big names for a SciFi/action movie than trying to adapt a longterm saga. If we had a time machine and went back and looked at the casting decisions for all of these movies without seeing any of them, I certainly would have expected the X-Men movies to be bigger and scratched my head at some of the Marvel choices.
By focusing on casting and celebrity power so much, we end up with Mystique and Magneto becoming central characters and binding the sequels a little bit. The only analogy I can think of is to imagine if Jeremy Renner suddenly blew up in other movies and Marvel decided to make Hawkeye Capatain America's childhood friend instead of Bucky. Or if they had Ant-Man lecturing Cap the way Mystique lectures Charles. It's tricky when there's an existing fanbase that already has defined ideas of the characters.
I also think Singer followed the Brooding Batman model a little too closely and didn't understand how to make an ensemble movie fun for the audience.
Cliff's: I think Fox/Singer generally made safer choices that didn't pay off as well.
By focusing on casting and celebrity power so much, we end up with Mystique and Magneto becoming central characters and binding the sequels a little bit. The only analogy I can think of is to imagine if Jeremy Renner suddenly blew up in other movies and Marvel decided to make Hawkeye Capatain America's childhood friend instead of Bucky. Or if they had Ant-Man lecturing Cap the way Mystique lectures Charles. It's tricky when there's an existing fanbase that already has defined ideas of the characters.
I also think Singer followed the Brooding Batman model a little too closely and didn't understand how to make an ensemble movie fun for the audience.
Cliff's: I think Fox/Singer generally made safer choices that didn't pay off as well.
dave94
Joined:
Jan 4, 2005
Posts:
4,838
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Very good points. And to be fair, the MCU wouldn't exist without the old X-Men films. But Apocalypse seemed like it was still the old X-Men films - too embarrassed of the source material to have accurate costumes or characters without massive changes. Like you couldn't have a comics-faithful Apocalypse in an Apocalypse film, in a world where Rocket and Groot are beloved characters. The game changed, but the main X films didn't.
Even as excited as I was for that very first one, I remember seeing the black costumes and thinking, "oh crap, are they trying to be...realistic?"Quote:
too embarrassed of the source material to have accurate costumes or characters without massive changes.
You're right, the X-Men deserve some credit for making comic book movies a popular commercial idea and helping to usher the MCU. I do think they get judged a little harshly and unnecessarily compared to the MCU films. I'm pretty sure I'm the only person on the entire internet who actually enjoyed some of Apocalypse. I'm not optimistic about the future for X-Men films, so I hope this one is at least somewhere on the level of Days of Future Past.
jeffk
Joined:
Oct 31, 2006
Posts:
46,121
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This thread has taught me that I can make a 2 hour movie about my dog, and Spilner would probably watch it.
It was not great. I like the x men so I was entertained but it's definitely a couple steps below MCU.
The plot of the movie is basically Frozen with mutants.
The plot of the movie is basically Frozen with mutants.
Only if your dog is named Luke or Logan.Bruce Almighty said:
This thread has taught me that I can make a 2 hour movie about my dog, and Spilner would probably watch it.
My dog's name is Arya.
~$33 million opening. About half of Apocalypse. Will likely finish with less than $100 million domestically. Yikes..
rhutton125 said:
~$33 million opening. About half of Apocalypse. Will likely finish with less than $100 million domestically. Yikes..
Featured Stories
See All
73:04
8h ago
6.0k
Learned, Loved, Loathed: Texas A&M 38, New Mexico State 3
by Olin Buchanan
No. 15 A&M's hot start more than enough to run away from NMSU, 38-3
by Olin Buchanan
6:45
8h ago
1.2k
Malone scores 24 as A&M bounces back vs. Northwestern State
by Luke Evangelist
19:50
2d ago
6.7k
Donors can now earn priority points by giving to Texas Aggies United
by Texas Aggies United
H.E. Pennypacker
So A&M is in first place and Auburn is in 13th place
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
6
@coopercuffe
So A&M is in first place and Auburn is in 13th place
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
5