Support NeoGAF

[catashtrophe]

At this point, after seeing Spider-man in Civil War. I just want all of Marvel's characters to come back to Marvel.

No

Some of the great comic book movies based on Marvel comics haven't even come from Marvel studios and one thing about Marvel films is the villains are the definition of trash outside of Loki.

 

[deadlast]

I expected this movie to suck. I was never excited about the trailers.

 

[anaron]

At this point, after seeing Spider-man in Civil War. I just want all of Marvel's characters to come back to Marvel.

so they can stop using all the awesome, more obscure stories and characters?

No thanks.

 

[Shaanyboi]

At this point, after seeing Spider-man in Civil War. I just want all of Marvel's characters to come back to Marvel.

Not relying on the tried and true characters is what makes the MCU exciting. People got fucking hyped about characters like Ant-Man and Black Panther. Imagine how much longer it'd take to get there if they were also making X-Men movies etc.

 

[Callibretto]

In a couple years they will do house of m storyline and reboot the whole thing again.

I wonder who own that particular storyarc, Marvel or Fox. I've only hear about rights over characters and not over story arc.

House of M is pretty much a Marvel event that affect everyone. But the catalyst is mutant, Scarlet Witch who is actually in MCU and not X-men movies. Lol

 

[neojubei]

so they can stop using all the awesome, more obscure stories and characters?

No thanks.

Huh? The winter soldier had Batroc the Leaper and he is an obscure character in comics

 

[IndoAssassin]

At this point, after seeing Spider-man in Civil War. I just want all of Marvel's characters to come back to Marvel.

Marvel should just get Old Man Logan back, so we can get a proper OML movie.

 

[theWB27]

Huh? The winter soldier had Batroc the Leaper and he is an obscure character in comics

That's the point the poster you quoted was making.

Said it before that this movie didn't really look so hot. Seemed off from the very first trailer. Still gonna see it though.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Man, even the positive reviews sound underwhelmed.

Not a great sign.

Maybe the whole X-Men premise has run out of steam and is in need of a completely fresh take. I mean, we have had six mainline movies in 15 years, as well as a number of spin-offs (four, I think?).

I really liked First Class, but felt like Days of Future Past was pretty overrated. I liked the story better when it focused on Xavier and Magneto, and Mystique and Wolverine were not central to the plot.

 

[clay_ghost]

In a couple years they will do house of m storyline and reboot the whole thing again.

I wonder who own that particular storyarc, Marvel or Fox. I've only hear about rights over characters and not over story arc.

House of M is pretty much a Marvel event that affect everyone. But the catalyst is mutant, Scarlet Witch who is actually in MCU and not X-men movies. Lol

They will link it to the MCU and announce that the MCU so far it the world remarked into a one without mutants. The movie will end with a reboot of both MCU and Fox Marvel. Fox will make a deal just like Sony and give Marvel creative control while funding the movies while Marvel got to get everything back into MCU.

/Dream

 

[Count of Monte Sawed-Off]

These reviews...

This kind of looks like something out of a Mortal Kombat movie.

I've been re-watching the movies ready for Apocalypse and X2 is still amazing and far from corny.

Great Tier
X2
DOFP

Good Tier
FC
The Wolverine
X1

Ass Tier
X3
Origins

This I agree with, except I still haven't seen the Wolverine.

 

[Slayven]

I'll try to answer as best as I can.

I don't think Singer's X-men movies are completely bereft of what's core to the comics but there are definitely areas where they are sorely lacking - not as films but as an adaptation. Singer gets a lot of stuff right though. His casting is usually pretty good, he incorporates franchise staples like Cerebro and the school very well, everyone's powers work as they should more or less, he keeps the central conflict on point, and he understands Xavier and Magneto. That last point is probably his greatest strength in terms of adapting the source material.

Where he falls short though are some of the more intimate aspects of the X-men. While all the pieces are there, most of the relationships are a superficial facsimile at best, especially in his first two movies. That's because the first two movies use Logan as the POV character and primary protagonist without ever really establishing his role among the X-men. He's still an outsider in X1 and X2, a loner who plays by his own rules. What Singer fails to establish is a sense of family and belonging the X-men are meant to represent. Logan never really becomes part of that family in either of the first X-men movies. This would be fine if Logan weren't the center point to both those films but unfortunately that's how they're constructed. The result is this constant outside looking in perspective which makes the sense of teamwork and unity that's core to the franchise notably absent. There was nothing inherently wrong with making Logan the central protagonist but he never really makes him an X-man. Logan doesn't live at the mansion, he doesn't train with the X-men, and he fails to develop strong believable bonds with the other characters.

When you look at it that way, it's easy to see why so many of the relationships feel off. Logan continually creeps on Jean but why? He has like three conversations with her in X1 before leaving and about the same in X2 before she dies. And it's not like they develop any of their relationship off screen, we literally see everything that ever happens between them because the movies follow Logan so closely. So where does this deep seeded love for Jean come from? This problem extends to his relationship with Cyclops and Storm as well. He's supposed to be rivals with Cyclops but they should also develop a mutual respect between one another and a bond over their love of Jean. That never happens and instead they never go beyond merely hating each other. Logan and Storm's relationship is even worse considering it's basically nonexistent despite their history of being incredibly close in the comics.

So Logan is the center of these movies and yet his relationships with everyone are shallow at best. Everything about them is told to the viewer instead of shown or developed on screen. And with such a strong emphasis on Logan the outsider, Singer spends most of his energy making sure Logan looks badass instead of developing any kind of group dynamic either on or off the battlefield. So Storm, Cyclops, and Jean all get their moments to show off their powers but never as a coordinated team because that doesn't work when Logan fights alone all the time. Instead what you mostly get from them are these brief snippets of special effects in lieu of compelling action sequences. The vast majority of the standout action in X1 and X2 is centered around Logan fighting by his lonesome.

I want to reiterate here that most of this doesn't make for a bad movie if you're willing to focus solely on Logan like Singer wants you to. But if you care at all about doing the other characters justice, you're sore out of luck. To make matters worse, Singer also liked to throw in popular characters as glorified cameos or just shells of their actual comicbook counterparts. Seeing Colossus in X2 for something like five seconds was such a cocktease. Kitty Pryde is in X1 sorta kinda not really. Lady Deathstrike is a major villain in X2 but shares no similarities with her comicbook character apart from her claws. That just stings because the movies can't even get the core relationships right but still flaunts these other beloved characters in front of you. The major exception is Xavier and Magneto whose relationship is pretty damn good. I thought Singer nailed their dynamic in all his films.

I hope that helped illustrate how these movies feel a little hollow. Again, not necessarily as films but definitely as X-men movies. I should also point out that a lot of these problems were much improved in DoFP - mostly because of the decreased focus on Logan and the use of Xavier and Magneto to drive the story forward.

Why can't you post like this more often?

 

[Sulik2]

Every bit of marketing for this movie had seemed off. No surprise is divisive and I disliked DoFP. Hopefully this gets singer off X-men again.

 

[Blade30]

I'll try to answer as best as I can.

I don't think Singer's X-men movies are completely bereft of what's core to the comics but there are definitely areas where they are sorely lacking - not as films but as an adaptation. Singer gets a lot of stuff right though. His casting is usually pretty good, he incorporates franchise staples like Cerebro and the school very well, everyone's powers work as they should more or less, he keeps the central conflict on point, and he understands Xavier and Magneto. That last point is probably his greatest strength in terms of adapting the source material.

Where he falls short though are some of the more intimate aspects of the X-men. While all the pieces are there, most of the relationships are a superficial facsimile at best, especially in his first two movies. That's because the first two movies use Logan as the POV character and primary protagonist without ever really establishing his role among the X-men. He's still an outsider in X1 and X2, a loner who plays by his own rules. What Singer fails to establish is a sense of family and belonging the X-men are meant to represent. Logan never really becomes part of that family in either of the first X-men movies. This would be fine if Logan weren't the center point to both those films but unfortunately that's how they're constructed. The result is this constant outside looking in perspective which makes the sense of teamwork and unity that's core to the franchise notably absent. There was nothing inherently wrong with making Logan the central protagonist but he never really makes him an X-man. Logan doesn't live at the mansion, he doesn't train with the X-men, and he fails to develop strong believable bonds with the other characters.

When you look at it that way, it's easy to see why so many of the relationships feel off. Logan continually creeps on Jean but why? He has like three conversations with her in X1 before leaving and about the same in X2 before she dies. And it's not like they develop any of their relationship off screen, we literally see everything that ever happens between them because the movies follow Logan so closely. So where does this deep seeded love for Jean come from? This problem extends to his relationship with Cyclops and Storm as well. He's supposed to be rivals with Cyclops but they should also develop a mutual respect between one another and a bond over their love of Jean. That never happens and instead they never go beyond merely hating each other. Logan and Storm's relationship is even worse considering it's basically nonexistent despite their history of being incredibly close in the comics.

So Logan is the center of these movies and yet his relationships with everyone are shallow at best. Everything about them is told to the viewer instead of shown or developed on screen. And with such a strong emphasis on Logan the outsider, Singer spends most of his energy making sure Logan looks badass instead of developing any kind of group dynamic either on or off the battlefield. So Storm, Cyclops, and Jean all get their moments to show off their powers but never as a coordinated team because that doesn't work when Logan fights alone all the time. Instead what you mostly get from them are these brief snippets of special effects in lieu of compelling action sequences. The vast majority of the standout action in X1 and X2 is centered around Logan fighting by his lonesome.

I want to reiterate here that most of this doesn't make for a bad movie if you're willing to focus solely on Logan like Singer wants you to. But if you care at all about doing the other characters justice, you're sore out of luck. To make matters worse, Singer also liked to throw in popular characters as glorified cameos or just shells of their actual comicbook counterparts. Seeing Colossus in X2 for something like five seconds was such a cocktease. Kitty Pryde is in X1 sorta kinda not really. Lady Deathstrike is a major villain in X2 but shares no similarities with her comicbook character apart from her claws. That just stings because the movies can't even get the core relationships right but still flaunts these other beloved characters in front of you. The major exception is Xavier and Magneto whose relationship is pretty damn good. I thought Singer nailed their dynamic in all his films.

I hope that helped illustrate how these movies feel a little hollow. Again, not necessarily as films but definitely as X-men movies. I should also point out that a lot of these problems were much improved in DoFP - mostly because of the decreased focus on Logan and the use of Xavier and Magneto to drive the story forward.

Yep good post. As much as I like/love the movies (minus two), they really feel less of team movie (except maybe for Fist Class) but more of Wolverine and his Sidekicks.

Funnily enough I haven't been really excited for this film unlike DoFP. Maybe it's because the trailers are mostly about world ending stuff.

 

[Slayven]

Wonder what this means for Gambit?

 

[Lebron]

I'll try to answer as best as I can.

I don't think Singer's X-men movies are completely bereft of what's core to the comics but there are definitely areas where they are sorely lacking - not as films but as an adaptation. Singer gets a lot of stuff right though. His casting is usually pretty good, he incorporates franchise staples like Cerebro and the school very well, everyone's powers work as they should more or less, he keeps the central conflict on point, and he understands Xavier and Magneto. That last point is probably his greatest strength in terms of adapting the source material.

Where he falls short though are some of the more intimate aspects of the X-men. While all the pieces are there, most of the relationships are a superficial facsimile at best, especially in his first two movies. That's because the first two movies use Logan as the POV character and primary protagonist without ever really establishing his role among the X-men. He's still an outsider in X1 and X2, a loner who plays by his own rules. What Singer fails to establish is a sense of family and belonging the X-men are meant to represent. Logan never really becomes part of that family in either of the first X-men movies. This would be fine if Logan weren't the center point to both those films but unfortunately that's how they're constructed. The result is this constant outside looking in perspective which makes the sense of teamwork and unity that's core to the franchise notably absent. There was nothing inherently wrong with making Logan the central protagonist but he never really makes him an X-man. Logan doesn't live at the mansion, he doesn't train with the X-men, and he fails to develop strong believable bonds with the other characters.

When you look at it that way, it's easy to see why so many of the relationships feel off. Logan continually creeps on Jean but why? He has like three conversations with her in X1 before leaving and about the same in X2 before she dies. And it's not like they develop any of their relationship off screen, we literally see everything that ever happens between them because the movies follow Logan so closely. So where does this deep seeded love for Jean come from? This problem extends to his relationship with Cyclops and Storm as well. He's supposed to be rivals with Cyclops but they should also develop a mutual respect between one another and a bond over their love of Jean. That never happens and instead they never go beyond merely hating each other. Logan and Storm's relationship is even worse considering it's basically nonexistent despite their history of being incredibly close in the comics.

So Logan is the center of these movies and yet his relationships with everyone are shallow at best. Everything about them is told to the viewer instead of shown or developed on screen. And with such a strong emphasis on Logan the outsider, Singer spends most of his energy making sure Logan looks badass instead of developing any kind of group dynamic either on or off the battlefield. So Storm, Cyclops, and Jean all get their moments to show off their powers but never as a coordinated team because that doesn't work when Logan fights alone all the time. Instead what you mostly get from them are these brief snippets of special effects in lieu of compelling action sequences. The vast majority of the standout action in X1 and X2 is centered around Logan fighting by his lonesome.

I want to reiterate here that most of this doesn't make for a bad movie if you're willing to focus solely on Logan like Singer wants you to. But if you care at all about doing the other characters justice, you're sore out of luck. To make matters worse, Singer also liked to throw in popular characters as glorified cameos or just shells of their actual comicbook counterparts. Seeing Colossus in X2 for something like five seconds was such a cocktease. Kitty Pryde is in X1 sorta kinda not really. Lady Deathstrike is a major villain in X2 but shares no similarities with her comicbook character apart from her claws. That just stings because the movies can't even get the core relationships right but still flaunts these other beloved characters in front of you. The major exception is Xavier and Magneto whose relationship is pretty damn good. I thought Singer nailed their dynamic in all his films.

I hope that helped illustrate how these movies feel a little hollow. Again, not necessarily as films but definitely as X-men movies. I should also point out that a lot of these problems were much improved in DoFP - mostly because of the decreased focus on Logan and the use of Xavier and Magneto to drive the story forward.

All that needs to be said. People get all offended when someone says X1 and X2 were poor X-Men films, but this is what most of us are saying. If you know the source material then you know they're poor mans X-Men films. Nicely written.

 

[G-Fex]

Wonder what this means for Gambit?

movies nobody wants for 900 alex

 

[ArtHands]

"X-Men: Apocalypse is almost as bad as Batman v Superman - review"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/20...-almost-as-bad-as-batman-v-superman---review/

This isn't good at all if it has the same quality as batman v superman

 

[duckroll]

When a reviewer says "almost as bad as BvS" I honestly don't know what I'm supposed to take from that. I mean, BvS fails in some pretty unique factors, which aren't generally applicable to other films, so it would be a weird comparison. I liked BvS despite it being super flawed and found the premise and tone very interesting. So would such a comparison be suggesting that there is something very interesting about the premise and tone of X-men Apocalypse too?

 

[Principate]

Wonder what this means for Gambit?

Probably still happening as a R rated single character focused films seem to be what Fox is going to pursue from now on because of Deadpools, success. Wolverine is already R rated.

The chance of a X Force becomes that much higher if this bombs commercially.

 

[neorej]

Wonder what this means for Gambit?

My guess: Fox is trying to find a director as enthusiastic about Gambit as Tim Miller was about Deadpool.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I liked BvS

 

[G-Fex]

perhaps it's as bleak and fucking depressing as BvS. Despite the silly m&m or internet isp ads showing otherwise.

 

[catashtrophe]

I want to see the Xmen go Cosmic

Pheonix saga in space, Xmen fighting Gladiator and the Imperials

Infact who is that fat green galactic TV show host, get the Xmen in that fighting people from other worlds haha.

lot of things they could do going forward

 

[Discotheque]

My guess: Fox is trying to find a director as enthusiastic about Gambit as Tim Miller was about Deadpool.

they already got a director for gambit
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0510731/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

action might be pretty cool going by his past work. director is definitely not gonna be enthusiastic about it though haha. maybe channing tatum will tho.

 

[Emerson's Essentia]

No

Some of the great comic book movies based on Marvel comics haven't even come from Marvel studios and one thing about Marvel films is the villains are the definition of trash outside of Loki.

Yes.

People are being myopic as hell, thinking that this will be a problem forever. Marvel has been completely open to any and all criticisms of their films and it's been a large part of their success. Civil War sees them turning the corner on the villain issue though they're not quite there yet.

 

[Castef]

Uh---oh.

Could it be worse that Batman V Superman?

 

[Principate]

they already got a director for gambit
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0510731/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

action might be pretty cool going by his past work. director is definitely not gonna be enthusiastic about it though haha. maybe channing tatum will tho.

I forgot about him, at least the director won't be the weak link in all this.

 

[Blader]

Simon Kinberg. IIRC the original planning was to have X2 scriptwriters do Apocalypse, but because DOFP was such a critical success they brought Kinberg back and put X2 team on the backseat.
DOFP was a fluke for him apparently.

we could've had the X2 folks?

Dougherty and Harris were busy with other projects, they were only ever going to help in breaking the story not actually writing the script.

 

[Slayven]

My guess: Fox is trying to find a director as enthusiastic about Gambit as Tim Miller was about Deadpool.

No one sane is euthusiastic for anything relating to gambit

Probably still happening as a R rated single character focused films seem to be what Fox is going to pursue from now on because of Deadpools, success. Wolverine is already R rated.

The chance of a X Force becomes that much higher if this bombs commercially.

So learning the wrong lessons

 

[Principate]

No one sane is euthusiastic for anything relating to gambit


So learning the wrong lessons

You said the same about Deadpool. Take the L and move on.

 

[neorej]

they already got a director for gambit
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0510731/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

action might be pretty cool going by his past work. director is definitely not gonna be enthusiastic about it though haha. maybe channing tatum will tho.

That's not fair. Channing Tatum is enthusiastic for not being in GI Joe anymore.

Forgot they got the Edge of Tomorrow-guy on board.


But how long have they been trying to get this movie off the ground now? Wasn't it supposed to release in the autumn?

 

[jackissocool]

oh shit, wasn't expecting this kind of reaction

Honestly this is exactly the vibe I've been getting from the trailers. Always thought it looked bland.

 

[Slayven]

You said the same about Deadpool. Take the L and move on.

I underestimated the public's reaction to Deadpool that I admit. But Gambit never had 1 % talent and stories Deadpool has had. 2016 and dude is still tragically 90s

 

[Renekton]

At this point, after seeing Spider-man in Civil War. I just want all of Marvel's characters to come back to Marvel.

I prefer they keep mutants away from MCU unless they drop the entire mutant persecution backdrop.

Otherwise it's a big can of plot worms.

 

[Effect]

I've been re-watching the movies ready for Apocalypse and X2 is still amazing and far from corny.

Great Tier
X2
DOFP

Good Tier
FC
The Wolverine
X1

Ass Tier
X3
Origins

It's crazy how well X-men 2 and even Spider-man 2 still hold up. I would actually put Blade 1 in with that group as well for films of that era that I would be willing to put up against any superhero film coming out today from either Marvel, WB, Sony, or Fox.

After BvS which I enjoyed a LOT. Enough to see multiple times I need to see X-men: Apocalypse myself. I rarely trusted film reviewers anyway but I took certain things into consideration but when things are hyperbolic or approach it that's when I shut them out completely.

Also the X-men going back to Marvel would be the worst thing. They don't have the time or resources to have that many balls in the air. Also you could kiss goodbye any serous themes with the X-men if they got them back. At least as serious as they honestly should be. The jokes, and I enjoy Marvel films, would be highly inappropriate. Even more so then they are now with some Marvel Studios films.

 

[duckroll]

With Doug Liman onboard you think we'll finally see Tom Cruise in a comic book movie?

 

[Sapiens]

So First Class still remains the best one.

Bring Vaughn Back (it'll never happen).

 

[Discotheque]

With Doug Liman onboard you think we'll finally see Tom Cruise in a comic book movie?

i dunno about that but somehow alex kurtzman (maximum scust) is trying to set up a Universal Monster film series with the likes of Depp, Cruise, Crowe and Jolie.

None of them except cruise are big BO draws anymore but I think screen presence wise even RDJ couldn't top that crew if he was among them. I wonder how the studio pulls it off, if they even get the chance.

 

[sixteen-bit]

Sounds like a winner, lol.

 

[Principate]

I underestimated the public's reaction to Deadpool that I admit. But Gambit never had 1 % talent and stories Deadpool has had. 2016 and dude is still tragically 90s

I honestly don't think that matters too much, I feel there's plenty of potential with a competant set of writers to gang/guild warfare in the streets of New Orleans with a smooth talking character that can blow things up.

It's not exactly a difficult sell for a movie with a decent actors and a well written plot you could come up with an entertaining movie. We're not talking about a Gambit in the Xmen doing his schtick, we're talking about a seedy rogue involved in urban warfare given a mutant lick of paint. Doug liman could certainly direct that competantly, all that remains is a decent writing crew and Tatum's acting

 

[Slayven]

I honestly don't think that matters too much, i feel there's plenty of potential with a competant set of writers to gang/guild warfare in the streets of New Orleans with a smooth talking character that can blow things up.

It's not exactly a difficult sell for a movie decent actors and a wll written plot and you can come up with an entertaining movie. We're not talking about a gambit in the Xmen doing his schtick,, we're talking about a seedy rogue involved in urban warfare given a mutant lick of paint.

I think you are putting why more thought into then the people behind it will.

 

[catashtrophe]

It's crazy how well X-men 2 and even Spider-man 2 still hold up. I would actually put Blade 1 in with that group as well for films of that era that I would be willing to put up against any superhero film coming out today from either Marvel, WB, Sony, or Fox.

After BvS which I enjoyed a LOT. Enough to see multiple times I need to see X-men: Apocalypse myself. I rarely trusted film reviewers anyway but I took certain things into consideration but when things are hyperbolic or approach it that's when I shut them out completely.

I was keeping the list as Xmen only but hell yeah Blade 1 is incredible and i'd put that against any comic book film and Blade 2 was really good as well.

I remember watching Blade 1 by complete accident, never saw any trailers and knew nothing about it and went to the cinema to watch something else, which ended up being sold out so we watched Blade 1 instead and that intro made my jaw drop and rest of the film was just amazing.

I'd put The Crow up there as well

 

[duckroll]

i dunno about that but somehow alex kurtzman (maximum scust) is trying to set up a Universal Monster film series with the likes of Depp, Cruise, Crowe and Jolie.

None of them except cruise are big BO draws anymore but I think screen presence wise even RDJ couldn't top that crew if he was among them. I wonder how the studio pulls it off, if they even get the chance.

I'm not sure we really want to think about the Universal Monsters Cinematic Universe. The entire concept seems insane to me, and if it actually takes off, the world is doomed.

 

[Tadale]

... I guess I'll still be seeing it.

 

[Principate]

I think you are putting why more thought into then the people behind it will.

Maybe which is why I'll wait for the trailers before I make any preliminary judgements on the execution of this.

 

[The Artisan]

oh shit, wasn't expecting this kind of reaction

neither was I...dofp was critically acclaimed, I expected something at least good.

 

[jmdajr]

hmmmmmm

 

[zeemumu]

And from the ashes of this movie, we'll build a better one!

 

[Nakho]

I'll try to answer as best as I can.

I don't think Singer's X-men movies are completely bereft of what's core to the comics but there are definitely areas where they are sorely lacking - not as films but as an adaptation. Singer gets a lot of stuff right though. His casting is usually pretty good, he incorporates franchise staples like Cerebro and the school very well, everyone's powers work as they should more or less, he keeps the central conflict on point, and he understands Xavier and Magneto. That last point is probably his greatest strength in terms of adapting the source material.

Where he falls short though are some of the more intimate aspects of the X-men. While all the pieces are there, most of the relationships are a superficial facsimile at best, especially in his first two movies. That's because the first two movies use Logan as the POV character and primary protagonist without ever really establishing his role among the X-men. He's still an outsider in X1 and X2, a loner who plays by his own rules. What Singer fails to establish is a sense of family and belonging the X-men are meant to represent. Logan never really becomes part of that family in either of the first X-men movies. This would be fine if Logan weren't the center point to both those films but unfortunately that's how they're constructed. The result is this constant outside looking in perspective which makes the sense of teamwork and unity that's core to the franchise notably absent. There was nothing inherently wrong with making Logan the central protagonist but he never really makes him an X-man. Logan doesn't live at the mansion, he doesn't train with the X-men, and he fails to develop strong believable bonds with the other characters.

When you look at it that way, it's easy to see why so many of the relationships feel off. Logan continually creeps on Jean but why? He has like three conversations with her in X1 before leaving and about the same in X2 before she dies. And it's not like they develop any of their relationship off screen, we literally see everything that ever happens between them because the movies follow Logan so closely. So where does this deep seeded love for Jean come from? This problem extends to his relationship with Cyclops and Storm as well. He's supposed to be rivals with Cyclops but they should also develop a mutual respect between one another and a bond over their love of Jean. That never happens and instead they never go beyond merely hating each other. Logan and Storm's relationship is even worse considering it's basically nonexistent despite their history of being incredibly close in the comics.

So Logan is the center of these movies and yet his relationships with everyone are shallow at best. Everything about them is told to the viewer instead of shown or developed on screen. And with such a strong emphasis on Logan the outsider, Singer spends most of his energy making sure Logan looks badass instead of developing any kind of group dynamic either on or off the battlefield. So Storm, Cyclops, and Jean all get their moments to show off their powers but never as a coordinated team because that doesn't work when Logan fights alone all the time. Instead what you mostly get from them are these brief snippets of special effects in lieu of compelling action sequences. The vast majority of the standout action in X1 and X2 is centered around Logan fighting by his lonesome.

I want to reiterate here that most of this doesn't make for a bad movie if you're willing to focus solely on Logan like Singer wants you to. But if you care at all about doing the other characters justice, you're sore out of luck. To make matters worse, Singer also liked to throw in popular characters as glorified cameos or just shells of their actual comicbook counterparts. Seeing Colossus in X2 for something like five seconds was such a cocktease. Kitty Pryde is in X1 sorta kinda not really. Lady Deathstrike is a major villain in X2 but shares no similarities with her comicbook character apart from her claws. That just stings because the movies can't even get the core relationships right but still flaunts these other beloved characters in front of you. The major exception is Xavier and Magneto whose relationship is pretty damn good. I thought Singer nailed their dynamic in all his films.

I hope that helped illustrate how these movies feel a little hollow. Again, not necessarily as films but definitely as X-men movies. I should also point out that a lot of these problems were much improved in DoFP - mostly because of the decreased focus on Logan and the use of Xavier and Magneto to drive the story forward.

Damn good post. That's what I come to GAF for.