View Full Version : X-men
July 22nd, 2000, 11:56 AM
I don't know if X-men really fits into the catagories of either science-fiction or fantasy, but I thought that the movie was really cool. I was reading a newpaper article about it and it said that the movie industry was getting interested in doing more fantasy based stuff since the technology to do the special effects is there more then it used to be. I think that would be cool although I don't know about movies based on books, they never turn out like you want them and it seems to me that script writers always think that they can follow the story closly to the book and then come up with a better ending completely different from the book. Anyway I definetly recomend X-men to anyone who hasn't seen it.
September 26th, 2000, 07:52 AM
Everything about that movie was great. All the actors could not have been better casted...I mean, could Dougray Scott really have played Logan? I think not. Hugh Jackman was born for that role! Every person they casted was fabulous for the role they played, and I have to give huge judos to the crew that worked on it. Great special effects were everything one would expect from a superhero movie. But what I loved the best is that you didn't have to be like me, a long-time fan of the comics AND tv show to know what the hell they were talking about. The characters and their abilities were really well explained, making the film easy to understand even for someone who has never read any of the comics at all. The movie really makes itself an instant favorite, and I cannot wait until the week before Thanksgiving....that's when the video comes out...I am getting thios one ASAP!
November 2nd, 2000, 07:49 PM
I didn't like the way Jubilee's character was fused with Rouge's. Otherwise it was a gread movie.
The Beast is my favorite. So's Colosuss. I hope they'll be in the next movie . . .
December 16th, 2000, 05:28 PM
"I was reading a newpaper article about it and it said that the movie industry was getting interested in doing more fantasy based stuff since the technology to do the special effects is there more then it used to be."
This is good news, in general, but I wish they would just make more GOOD fantasy. I would not like to sit through something like Dungeons and Dragons again.
"I think that would be cool although I don't know about movies based on books, they never turn out like you want them and it seems to me that script writers always think that they can follow the story closly to the book and then come up with a better ending completely different from the book."
This is almost always true, Ravenlock, but I am optimistic about Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings movies breaking this rule. I was so glad when I heard he was making three movies, and not just jaming everything into one.
June 14th, 2001, 03:26 AM
i love the film. Hugh Jackman is a sex god, completely agree with who ever it was that said he was born to play Logan. Am i the only one who thinks Rogue and Logan should get together in the sequel?
June 19th, 2001, 10:18 PM
Well, don't mean to burst the proverbial bubble, but from this critic's standpoint, X-Men was very lacking. The only characters that I thought were appropriate were Ian McKellan as Magneto, Patrick Stewart as Prof. X, and Halle Berry as Storm. I was horrified that Anna Paquin was cast as Rogue! Seriously, I was! And the script just ran off to no avail! Now, don't get me wrong, I love the X-Men, but I can get extreme in my criticism. And, sorry folks, but I hated Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. I do admit though...he IS a sex-god, no doubt, but I think a man with a bit more bulk (say the ULTIMATE sex-god Russel Crowe) would have fit the bill nicely.
June 21st, 2001, 02:14 AM
ah! ah! blastfemy! how dare you say Hugh Jackman is not the most gorgeous man in the history of mankind. While i agree Russell Crowe is very nice, he just cant compare to the animal magnetism Hugh has. I demand a written apology now!
and he was born for that role!
June 21st, 2001, 03:13 AM
I still haven't come to like these modern fx-heavy flicks, but I guess I liked that one, though.
I disagree with the casting for Logan. That actor was some 10 years too young, a foot too tall, and a foot too narrow.
They should have cast Glenn Danzig.
June 21st, 2001, 03:30 AM
They should have cast Glenn Danzig ABSOLUTELY!!! Danzig would have been perfect.
I will say I was surprised at how well Jackman did, though.
June 22nd, 2001, 12:40 AM
thank you very much, now if anyone else bad mouths Hugh Jackman i wil be forced to take legal action!
he was perfect and OK so i dont really know who Glenn Danzig is but i'm sure he wouldn't have made as good a Logan as him!
now you all know my weakness, please dont use it against me!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.