-
[QUOTE=Midvillian1322;4430995]Those things are in the the comics your right. But only because they are actually in the comics. Not because someone who read them wrote they're own fan fiction.[/QUOTE]
So I'm just using the comic book parameters to "fix" these [B]comic book-based [/B]movies LMAO. And it works, it's proper and legit. Within the rules established by the (DOFP) movie ON-SCREEN, if you're willing to "buy" the concept of a serum that makes Xavier walk again but inhibits his powers, it's not a stretch to think to an IMPROVED, upgraded version that makes him walk AND use his powers at the same time.
-
[QUOTE=BatKeaton;4431197]So I'm just using the comic book parameters to "fix" these [B]comic book-based [/B]movies LMAO. And it works, it's proper and legit. Within the rules established by the (DOFP) movie ON-SCREEN, if you're willing to "buy" the concept of a serum that makes Xavier walk again but inhibits his powers, it's not a stretch to think to an IMPROVED, upgraded version that makes him walk AND use his powers at the same time.[/QUOTE]
And then what he just stops using that serum because reason?
Exactly "Fixing" them, yet you say they're nothing wrong with the continuity? Your using Comic logic to write XCU fan fiction. Not even normal fan fiction, you have to use a bunch of cliche comic excuse to make it work(Clones, and unreliable characters)
-
[QUOTE=Midvillian1322;4431238]Exactly "Fixing" them, yet you say they're nothing wrong with the continuity? Your using Comic logic to write XCU fan fiction. )[/QUOTE]
Super-exposition in movies sucks a lot. I love movies which leave room for some imagination and brain...
Said that, relax guys. LOL
-
[QUOTE=The Shape;4428981]Naw, in both the comic and the film the primal force(it’s never called the Phoenix Force in neither version) is suppose to be like a drug and affect her behavior. It doesn’t have a mind of its own. So it’s all on Jean, though the film presented Mystique’s death as more of an accident.[/QUOTE]
I see what you are saying, but didn't interpret things exactly that cut and dry in the comics. Jean was certainly a willing party in that she gave in to the temptation of the dark side rather than fighting it. But the keynote of that whole relationship was the struggle between good and bad. In other words, Jean never became a bad guy full on, but she could have had she not decided to kill herself.
In the movie, a very similar ending happened. Jean realized that she was the one who lost control when faced with this big overwhelming force inside of her. She made mistakes when letting it become an expression of her own childhood trauma. Anger at Charles, too. But ultimately rather than allow herself to go full on villain, she chose to end herself.
Or something like that. The ending of DP and what exactly became of Jean was a tad vague.
-
[QUOTE=Jokerz79;4425530]Sad fact is you and many fans put more thought into wait was done in these films than the filmmakers for these films.[/QUOTE]
And here is the interview I was talking.
[quote]
Another fresh update in Dark Phoenix that lends to Jean's agency is the absence of Wolverine, the only one who managed to kill Jean in The Last Stand. Kinberg claims that it was a blessing in disguise that Hugh Jackman's character could not possibly be a part of Dark Phoenix after what transpired in Days of Future Past and Logan. "I didn't want a man to be the end of Jean's story. We finally have a female protagonist and this movie is about empowered women. I didn't want a man to be the person to make the final decision for her. I wanted her to make that decision. I didn't want Scott or Charles or Erik or someone else is in control of Jean's destiny. [B]I wanted her to be in control of her own destiny," says Kinberg.[/B]
[/quote]
[url]https://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/x-men-makers-on-why-they-revisited-dark-phoenix-storyline-and-how-franchise-finale-furthers-the-us-vs-them-conflict-6752851.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Scott Taylor;4432076]
Or something like that. The ending of DP and what exactly became of Jean was a tad vague.[/QUOTE]
It’s basically the same ending as X2. Becomes a fiery bird and comes back human.
-
[video=youtube_share;mIbGVfWx5Yo]https://youtu.be/mIbGVfWx5Yo[/video]
Just thought it was a fun addition.
-
So once again, most of these fox movies are now on their last leg. I want to kindly point out that despite most of the fox movies becoming collateral damage because of the Disney buyout. Ford v Ferrari and Rocketman landed on its feet, not only are they artistically well received by critics, they made their budget back. Why am I bringing these films up? to show dark phoenix had a serious director and writer's problem, it had no chance to be good.
The directors of rocket man and ford v Ferrari, Made and wrote some of the strongest xmen films in the series. they were talented and their talents shined in other films. its time Kinberg admits he is hack who should never have directed any xmen film instead of blaming the Disney buy out and push back for the failure of dark phoenix. he should ask himself why James Mangold and Michael Vaughn still had success with their own post fox-Disney merger films and he didn't.
-
[QUOTE=Beaddle;4738651]So once again, most of these fox movies are now on their last leg. I want to kindly point out that despite most of the fox movies becoming collateral damage because of the Disney buyout. Ford v Ferrari and Rocketman landed on its feet, not only are they artistically well received by critics, they made their budget back. Why am I bringing these films up? to show dark phoenix had a serious director and writer's problem, it had no chance to be good.
The directors of rocket man and ford v Ferrari, Made and wrote some of the strongest xmen films in the series. they were talented and their talents shined in other films. its time Kinberg admits he is hack who should never have directed any xmen film instead of blaming the Disney buy out and push back for the failure of dark phoenix. he should ask himself why James Mangold and Michael Vaughn still had success with their own post fox-Disney merger films and he didn't.[/QUOTE]
More than one thing can be true at the same time. All the Disney stuff and the rescheduling certainly didn't help DP, and Kinberg may not be as good of a storyteller or director as he thinks. They're not mutually exclusive.
-
Finally saw it. Hmm...I don't hate it, I can actually see myself watching it again. Great score, which (correct me I'm wrong) didn't use any of the cues or leitmotifs from the previous movies. So (again if I'm right) was strong on its own merits.
Two problems with the movie. One huh, one meh what can you do. First: I get in the comics Charles had his a-hole manipulative moments, but it felt...weird here. Can't quite put my finger on it.
Second: Vuk. Hmm...well we needed a bad guy that can challenge Dark Phoenix and...this is what we got. If I look at it from the angle AND ONLY THAT ANGLE she works. If I don't, though...kinda falls apart. Cool you want to resurrect your people with the Phoenix Force, got it, what else is there to you? Nothing? Oh ok. Standard alien that thinks humans are beneath them? Alrighty then.
-
I finally recently saw it, too -- on Blu-Ray. It's hard to do an adaptation of such a famous comic story that will please the fans because by the time most fans read the story, it was already legendary, so it had that weight behind it.
That said, I agree that it doesn't compare to the comic because Kinberg made several mistakes due to the cast he was working with. He had to shoehorn in Magneto and Mystique who had no part in the original story -- even Beast was in the comic only as a guest star, not a main cast member. They took focus off where it needed to be -- on the love between Scott Summers and Jean Grey.
All of the action and pyrotechnics would have been fine if the romance between Scott and Jean were front and center, but it was sidelined in favor of Beast wanting revenge for Mystique's death. Dark Phoenix is not about Hank and Raven. It's about Scott and Jean and how Jean's transformation into Phoenix and then losing control to become Dark Phoenix turned their love story into a tragedy.
Also, I felt that the acting from Sophie Turner needed to be turned up a few notches. I know that today actors feel that underplaying makes things cooler or more portentous, but all that whispering and ending every exchange between characters with a drop-the-mic moment seems silly and unrealistic to me. Only when Scott said "I'll fuckin' kill you" did I feel that an actor displayed something of a relatable and appropriate-to-the-situation emotion.
I agree with those who said this should have been two movies. Part 1: Phoenix, Part 2: Dark Phoenix. It would have given the story some room to breathe and for the romance between Scott and Jean to feel like it mattered. Then, fall of Jean Grey in Part 2 would have had the same weight behind it that the comics did.
-
Another major problem was that they simply should have made a few movies with Jean and Scott in the center before they throw Dark Phönix at us. But that would have been impossible with the main trio sucking up movie time for one. But that has always been one of the major problems of the franchise.
-
[quote]All of the action and pyrotechnics would have been fine if the romance between Scott and Jean were front and center, but it was sidelined in favor of Beast wanting revenge for Mystique's death. Dark Phoenix is not about Hank and Raven. It's about Scott and Jean and how Jean's transformation into Phoenix and then losing control to become Dark Phoenix turned their love story into a tragedy.
[/quote]
Wait, what? The relationship between Charles-Jean was the one that went front and center. (Given that Scott/Jean were non-existent in the books I understand that direction) They made it a Father-Daughter story instead of a love story.
-
[QUOTE=titanfan;4750768]Wait, what? The relationship between Charles-Jean was the one that went front and center. (Given that Scott/Jean were non-existent in the books I understand that direction) They made it a Father-Daughter story instead of a love story.[/QUOTE]
I agree that there was a Charles-Jean relationship explored in the movie in addition to Hank's revenge plot, but I don't care about either.
That's not what the Dark Phoenix Saga is about. I don't get the comment that Scott/Jean were "non-existent in the books." That's not true at all. The Scott-Jean relationship was front-and-center in the Claremont/Byrne/Cockrum stories. It was Jean seeing Scott "killed" by Mastermind during the Hellfire Club part that freed her from Mastermind's mental control and triggered her transformation into Dark Phoenix in the first place. It was their love that allowed her to stay alive when piloting the shuttle back to Earth in Uncanny 100-101, and it was their love that made her decide to commit suicide rather than fall irrevocably into the Dark Phoenix persona forever.
THAT should have been the emotional center of the Dark Phoenix film, not Jean-Xavier or Beast-Mystique. The Phoenix-Dark Phoenix saga is a story of starcrossed lovers.
-
[QUOTE=lowfyr;4749910]Another major problem was that they simply should have made a few movies with Jean and Scott in the center before they throw Dark Phönix at us. But that would have been impossible with the main trio sucking up movie time for one. But that has always been one of the major problems of the franchise.[/QUOTE]
Scott never got a chance to be a real character.
-
I haven't seen this yet but curious - I know it bombed in theaters, but where would you guys rank this movie with the rest of the franchise?