The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **Dragavon** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:14 am

Beast wrote:What I recently read on it was Toad was actually suppose to fight Nightcrawler in the second movie, but due to Ray's schedule, he was unable to be there for the shoot. >.< That pissed me off cause that would have been so freakin' awesome! And i did like how they did Stryker in that movie. If I remember, i really think the second one was my fave out of the three. xD

And I agree, both magneto and Charles were perfectly cast. xD

Damn that would have been awesome! Toad vs. Kurt. Actrobatics and tongue vs tail? What the fuck did Ray Park have to do that was more important than that? Work on Ecks vs Sever? :smt011

by **Jack Burton** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:31 am

All I'm saying is X-Men while still good is not as good compared to what followed. When X-Men came out people gave it more credit than it deserved because it wasn't the giant pile of crap many of us expected. It's pretty weak compared to something like the Incredible Hulk which while not the strongest Marvel movie is still good.

X2 on the other hand is a freaking amazing movie.

by **Baskerville Holmes** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:36 am

X-Men is good for the fact that it showed the potential of what a good mainstream comic book movie should be. If it had been terrible or had tanked, who knows what that would have meant for Spider-Man.

It's not as good as it's immediate sequel, though. Not even close. And it doesn't hold up quite as well, but it's got moments.

by **Greg** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:51 am

Love the first X-Men movie. I do recall when it came out there was quite some backlash against it and people saying it sucked. When I saw it, I loved it. Till this day I like it a lot. I did notice though, there was a time where I preferred this over the sequel despite the sequel being a much better flick.

by **AaronW** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:52 am

X-Men is good, so is X2, and quite frankly so is X3. X3 could have been a lot better if it had stuck to one main storyline but I had a lot of fun watching it. Not high art but then neither were any of the X flicks really. Solid superhero movies.

by **chap22** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:00 am

The Wand of Gamelon wrote:It's not as good as it's immediate sequel, though. Not even close. And it doesn't hold up quite as well, but it's got moments.

indeed. Magneto firing the gun at the cop and stopping the bullet almost immediately is fucking cool no matter how any times you see it. several other cool moments throughout too.

by **John Q.** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:07 am

I like the first movie overall, i just didn't like the mutant machine.

But X2 is way, way better.

by **Apache Chef** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:24 am

jsalwen wrote:Both men were perfectly cast.

I always thought McKellan's Magneto came across as a feeble old man. It makes sense if in 2000 you are trying to tie his origin into Nazi concentration camps, but it's never a feeling I got from his character in the comics. Maybe it was the crappy rubber helmet they gave him, but he never appeared very threatening in the movies.

I think I would have preferred Terrance Stamp at the time. The way he looked in the Phantom Menace and The Limey (which came out the year before X-Men) is how I always pictured Magneto looking in real life.

by **Baskerville Holmes** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:25 am

Though I like McKellan's Magneto, I always thought Sean Bean would have been great in the role.

by **Greg** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:27 am

Wow. For me, McKellen was Magneto.

by **Apache Chef** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:01 am

Greg wrote:Wow. For me, McKellen was Magneto.

I'm not saying he did a bad job. He just felt too geriatric to me.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:03 am

Apache Chef wrote:I always thought McKellan's Magneto came across as a feeble old man. It makes sense if in 2000 you are trying to tie his origin into Nazi concentration camps, but it's never a feeling I got from his character in the comics. Maybe it was the crappy rubber helmet they gave him, but he never appeared very threatening in the movies.

I think I would have preferred Terrance Stamp at the time. The way he looked in the Phantom Menace and The Limey (which came out the year before X-Men) is how I always pictured Magneto looking in real life.

I can see that from the first film, but Mags takes apart his prison with a little ball of metal!

I think part of the problem is X3. I get the feeling Singer had a Xavier/Magneto showdown in the works, which was not done. When you look at the 3 'X' movies, the X-men never fought a fully powered Magneto.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:08 am

The Wand of Gamelon wrote:X-Men is good for the fact that it showed the potential of what a good mainstream comic book movie should be. If it had been terrible or had tanked, who knows what that would have meant for Spider-Man.

It's not as good as it's immediate sequel, though. Not even close. And it doesn't hold up quite as well, but it's got moments.

I disagree (obviously). X-Men and X2 belong in the pantheon of best comic films of all time.

It wasn't just good because it showed what comic films were capable of, it's a great comic film.

When you think of how impenetrable X-men mythology is, what Singer accomplished is amazing. He managed to concentrate on a small group of characters and flesh them out and tell a coherent story.