X-Continuity: the X-Men Movie Timeline website finally fixing all mistakes!

[WebLurker]

I mean, basically.

Fox rehashed the same Magneto/Xavier beats ad nauseam...

.

I would argue that it didn't get old until Apocalypse, or at least that was the point that the movie offered nothing new to that thread.

Besides of the fourteen movies made to date/slated to be released, seven of them (the three Wolverine movies, the three Deadpool ones, and New Mutants). In other words, Magneto/Xavier only happened in half the series and the highest concentration was early on, not so much now.

...and did a Hollywoodified Wolverine ad nauseam...

You say that like it's a bad thing. Besides, he wasn't in/a major role in every single one, anyways and they were moving beyond him.

...and whatever that was that was supposed to be Mystique.

You lost me.

They barely touched the X-Men lore, and butchered what they did.

There is a ton of completely unexplored terrain to cover at this point.

The X-Men movies made as many changes as the MCU and other series have to their source material. It's no different then any other book adapted to film.

Spider-Man is a relatively simple franchise in comparison to X-Men, and both the old Raimi movies and the newer MCU/Sony ones have been exploring it well. I look forward to a new approach to the X-Men that actually respects the canon and isn't afraid of the more fantastic and sci-fi elements that Fox was.

Simpler? Don't think that's a defendable position in a post-Spider-Verse world. And, like noted before, the MCU does not "respect canon," as we've seen when they adapt their stuff. Will Marvel Studios make good movies? Hope so, but better they make a good movie then slavishly be exactly like the comics to a T.

[Mutant 77]

.

The X-Men movies made as many changes as the MCU and other series have to their source material. It's no different then any other book adapted to film.

Undeniable. I love your insight.

[Theleviathan]

If you watch X3 without the "X-Men comic book fan eyes", it's undoubtely a bleak and exciting superhero movie with some impressive and brilliant sequences. The screenplay was also very good, despite they killed Cyclops and gave the Phoenix not much screentime.
'Origins' suffered from production issues and even some minor FX issues, but it's a fun and entertaining superhero movie, very close to the source Wolverine solo comic book in its early stages.

There are several masterpieces in the X-Men movie franchise and nobody can't deny that.

They wrote a purported Phoenix story and Phoenix was barely in the movie. It was bad. Even the producers told us to "forget about it" and laughed about how bad it is. The current producer of Dark Phoenix apologized for it. You're welcome to like it, but even the people that made it think it's a bad movie. I'll say that again - the people who MADE THE MOVIE laughed about how bad it was and apologized. This is a fact.

The X-men franchise maybe had one masterpiece (Logan) and even that one has plenty of flaws. But it was really good for what it tried to be. So was Deadpool. Masterpiece? Eh, depends on your definition.

[WebLurker]

Undeniable. I love your insight.

Thanks.

10char

[Mutant 77]

They wrote a purported Phoenix story and Phoenix was barely in the movie. It was bad. Even the producers told us to "forget about it" and laughed about how bad it is. The current producer of Dark Phoenix apologized for it. You're welcome to like it, but even the people that made it think it's a bad movie. I'll say that again - the people who MADE THE MOVIE laughed about how bad it was and apologized. This is a fact.

They don't think it's bad. It's not a "FACT" at all. They just know that the Dark Phoenix character was reduced to a mere "idea"/concept thrown into the mix. Anyway, the movie is very good. It's well written, it's well directed and features impressive and emotional sequences. It's fluid, and finally we see the X-Men united and working as a team. They just reduced the Dark Phoenix "story". Yes, it's a big mistake, but not for the average movie go-er who doesn't read X-Men comic books like us.

They just said "forget about it", because DOFP deleted it. Don't make revisionism.

[WebLurker]

They don't think it's bad. It's not a "FACT" at all. They just know that the Dark Phoenix character was reduced to a mere "idea"/concept thrown into the mix. Anyway, the movie is very good. It's well written, it's well directed and features impressive and emotional sequences. It's fluid, and finally we see the X-Men united and working as a team. They just reduced the Dark Phoenix "story". Yes, it's a big mistake, but not for the average movie go-er who doesn't read X-Men comic books like us.

They just said "forget about it", because DOFP deleted it. Don't make revisionism.

I don't think it was "good," per say, but I did find it more watchable then not. That said, mashing up both the Phoenix story (and better that be all Jean then some alien entity, IMHO) and the Cure story was one of the problems; the former didn't have room to breathe and really had no point in regards to the other story.

[Theleviathan]

They don't think it's bad. It's not a "FACT" at all. They just know that the Dark Phoenix character was reduced to a mere "idea"/concept thrown into the mix. Anyway, the movie is very good. It's well written, it's well directed and features impressive and emotional sequences. It's fluid, and finally we see the X-Men united and working as a team. They just reduced the Dark Phoenix "story". Yes, it's a big mistake, but not for the average movie go-er who doesn't read X-Men comic books like us.

They just said "forget about it", because DOFP deleted it. Don't make revisionism.

Lauren Shuler Donner, the producer who helped Twentieth Century Fox snap up the film rights to the X-Men characters 23 years ago, is the first to admit that her very financially lucrative franchise has had a few creative rough patches. “Just forget about X-3. And the first Wolverine [Origins]? Forget about that too,” she laughingly said during a red-carpet interview in 2014.

Nope, it's a bad movie. Reviewers, movie-goers, every data point all indicate the same thing. Again, you are confusing your personal feelings for it with the overwhelming opinion.

I like bad movies too. I enjoyed the hell out of Sharknado, I won't lie. But it was still a bad movie. X3 was also a bad movie. Entertaining, maybe, but bad.

[Mutant 77]

Lauren Shuler Donner, the producer who helped Twentieth Century Fox snap up the film rights to the X-Men characters 23 years ago, is the first to admit that her very financially lucrative franchise has had a few creative rough patches. “Just forget about X-3. And the first Wolverine [Origins]? Forget about that too,” she laughingly said during a red-carpet interview in 2014.

Nope, it's a bad movie. Reviewers, movie-goers, every data point all indicate the same thing. Again, you are confusing your personal feelings for it with the overwhelming opinion.

1- She was laughing at the continuity. She knows even "First Class" and DOFP have continuity issues with those two movies. So she is laughing. She didn't say they were bad movies.

2- Data point? X3 was a huge hit all around the globe and more successful than X1 and X2 at that point. Most people changed their opinion about it after some time. It's a very good movie which committed a huge mistake by combining two unrelated storylines and not focusing too much on either of them. Said that, it's still a very good/great superhero movie.

[Theleviathan]

1- She was laughing at the continuity. She knows even "First Class" and DOFP have continuity issues with those two movies. So she is laughing. She didn't say they were bad movies.

2- Data point? X3 was a huge hit all around the globe and more successful than X1 and X2 at that point. Most people changed their opinion about it after some time. It's a very good movie which committed a huge mistake by combining two unrelated storylines and not focusing too much on either of them. Said that, it's still a very good/great superhero movie.

She laughed at it as a "creative mispatch". You don't tell people to forget about good movies you made. It's really that simple. I've never heard an actor or filmmaker ask fans to "forget" about something good they made.

But, you just admitted the movie's whole plot was a "huge mistake", so you agree....you just aren't honest with yourself about it. It's a poorly made movie that found a way to be entertaining for many, including you. I would say I'm mildly entertained by the movie, but more in the MST3K kind of way.

[Mutant 77]

I've never heard an actor or filmmaker ask fans to "forget" about something good they made.

But, you just admitted the movie's whole plot was a "huge mistake", so you agree....you just aren't honest with yourself about it. It's a poorly made movie that found a way to be entertaining for many, including you. I would say I'm mildly entertained by the movie, but more in the MST3K kind of way.

I'm honest. It's a bleak and brilliant movie. Yes, the plot subject was somehow misguided, because they combined two different storylines into a single movie, but the screenplay is fluid, intriguing and well written ANYWAY. So no, I don't agree with you.

Plenty of actors and producers asked people to "forget" something just because they must market the NEW product as "better". It's just business, you know. She didn't say anything bad about the movie.

[WebLurker]

1- She was laughing at the continuity. She knows even "First Class" and DOFP have continuity issues with those two movies. So she is laughing. She didn't say they were bad movies.

My understanding was that it was more or less both the poor quality and the inconstancies.

2- Data point? X3 was a huge hit all around the globe and more successful than X1 and X2 at that point.

Good box office performance doesn't always indicate the quality. Heck, the best reviewed Transformers movie is also the one that made the least money, while the most profitable one was also considered an incredibly bad movie. You also have those cult classics, like Princess Bride, that didn't do very well the first time around but find their place after the fact. Or any other variation. If anything, there's a better case that X3 did so well because of X2 having a good reception then the box office proving that X3 was popular.

Most people changed their opinion about it after some time.

Really? Most of the online chatter I've seen seems to confirm that it's still considered a turkey through and through, just that it's so old that most people really don't need to spend that much energy hating it.

It's a very good movie which committed a huge mistake by combining two unrelated storylines and not focusing too much on either of them. Said that, it's still a very good/great superhero movie.

)
That mistake is the main I think that it's not a good movie (weak character work would be a secondary point, IMHO). Neither plot is really fleshed out enough leaving promising scenes (like when the X-Men debate the ethics of the cure and Beast and the President's discussion regarding weaponizing the cure) kinda hanging. There's no real thematic through line. Take Spider-Man 3, another superhero movie with a similar reputation; that one does have a common theme to everything, with the characters having a story arc reflecting that.

I mean, I find X3 has its entertainment value and do like seeing it in conjunction with the rest, but I don't think there's a good case that it's some unfairly judged movie. I can sympathize with feeling that the "bad" movie didn't deserve its branding (I will defend Spider-Man 3 as a "good" movie with flaws), but I don't think this's one of them. (Honestly, I think that I enjoy the first Wolverine movie more then X3; the simpler plot is a bit more engaging and I think it has a better cast, Kelsey Grammar and Ellen Page aside.)

[Mutant 77]

My understanding was that it was more or less both the poor quality and the inconstancies.

Good box office performance doesn't always indicate the quality.

Really? Most of the online chatter I've seen seems to confirm that it's still considered a turkey through and through,

That mistake is the main I think that it's not a good movie

1- No, she was referring to the continuity. Anyone else's conjecture is "fan fiction".

2- I know. Said that, X3 resonated well with general audience. And it was a hit. Fanboys started thrashing the movie only after months since its release and helped create this crazy "bad reputation", totally undeserved.

3- General audience and movie-goers liked it AT THE TIME. The bad hype kicked in after some months/years, following the fanboys' desperate campaign against it.

4- The movie is well written. No theme is really that much "fleshed out" in any of the first 3 X-Men movies, in truth.

[WebLurker]

1- No, she was referring to the continuity. Anyone else's conjecture is "fan fiction".

Guess I'd need to re-read the statement, since I'm pretty darn sure that most people involved with the series have indicated that X3 is one of the movies considered to be a disappointment.

2- I know. Said that, X3 resonated well with general audience. And it was a hit. Fanboys started thrashing the movie only after months since its release and helped create this crazy "bad reputation", totally undeserved.

3- General audience and movie-goers liked it AT THE TIME. The bad hype kicked in after some months/years, following the fanboys' desperate campaign against it.

"Only months" isn't "at the time?" I will concede that the movie wasn't on my radar back then, but I was pretty sure it was received as a turkey out of the gate. Also, I'd want more context to determine if the drop in opinion was truly because of a campaign or just because a shift in opinion once the honeymoon period was over.

4- The movie is well written. No theme is really that much "fleshed out" in any of the first 3 X-Men movies, in truth.

Fair enough if you think so, but I can't agree (and I did take classes on this stuff in college, for what it may or may not be worth). I mean, the two plot threads (Jean controlling her powers and the ethics of how to deal with a walking bomb vs. the cure question) really have nothing to do with each other, not to mention that the former is constantly forgotten to let the latter take center stage. As far as anything being "fleshed out" in any of the movies, I did think Magneto's story worked pretty well in the first film and that the second one also did pretty well with Stryker. That said, I will concede that I think Logan and Days of Future Past did themes better then the rest.

[yogaflame]

It was ridiculous to introduce the cure in the same movie as Dark Phoenix. If there is a battlefield littered with cure syringes, and they actually use it to cure Magneto in that same battle, why did Jean have to get stabbed in the gut and die when they could have just taken her powers away?(Which was the original ending of the DPS to begin with, the Shi'Ar would have lobotomized Jean to take away her powers.)

[WebLurker]

It was ridiculous to introduce the cure in the same movie as Dark Phoenix. If there is a battlefield littered with cure syringes, and they actually use it to cure Magneto in that same battle, why did Jean have to get stabbed in the gut and die when they could have just taken her powers away?(Which was the original ending of the DPS to begin with, the Shi'Ar would have lobotomized Jean to take away her powers.)

Yeah, they should've had an explanation for that, even if it was just "the Thanos tornado she was generating kept destroying the needles before they could be used."