For me, the only parts of X2 I liked were the white house scene, the Cyclops fight, the colossus scene, and any random scene Kelly hu was in. otherwise, meh.
that's the thing that annoys me most about Cyclops, tbh. I love the visor. The optic blast effect. I love the costume design and the coat. they just ****ed up everything else.
I don't think marsden was a particularly good choice, tbh, but it wasn't just him; the script was crap, and the one scene he was supposed to get (a lengthened fight scene with lady deathstrike) wasn't even shot.
Who personally would you have thought would've been a good actor to play Cyclops? I thought Marsden suited the role just fine. It was just the script that failed him.
And I didn't know a lengthy fight between Cyke and Deathstrike was in the screenplay. I remember watching the movie and thinking ......damn he went down fast.
__________________
Last edited by the ninjak on Mar 26th, 2013 at 06:32 PM
I think all the actors in the movie are perfectly chosen for their characters. No one can do better than what they did in the film. The beast is perfect, sexy mystique, the sweet jean grey to phoenix is just genius, from Wolverine to Prof. X to Magneto.. like every one to mention amazing cast! Btw, I also thought the first few films focus on Wolverine until I saw a young Professor and His friend Magneto. Then comes the immortal Wolverine movie! love'em all!
If you are complaining that the films are too Wolverine centric - they are just reflecting the comics. Wolverine has dominated the X-titles for decades, now. Cyclops is a great character, but not great enough to carry his own series (or multiple series.) This is an old argument.
__________________
"I'm not smart so much as I am not dumb." - Harlan Ellison
Wolverine hasn't dominated the team books nearly as much as you're saying. In fact, plenty of them have worked perfectly fine with either Wolverine in small roles, or no Wolverine at all.
Cyclops is arguably as centric to the X-Men as Wolverine is, and his representation in the movies was insulting at best in terms of writing and screen time.
From Wikipedia - "...Wolverine was typical of the many tough, anti-authority, antiheroes that emerged in American popular culture after the Vietnam War. His willingness to use deadly force and his brooding nature became standard characteristics for comic book anti-heroes by the end of the 1980s. As a result, the character became a fan favorite of the increasingly popular X-Men franchise. Wolverine has been featured in his own solo comic since 1988 and has been a main character in most X-Men adaptations, including animated television series, video games, and the live-action 20th Century Fox X-Men film series, in which he is portrayed by Hugh Jackman. In May 2008, Wolverine was ranked #1 out of Wizard magazine's Top 200 Comic Book Characters of All Time, and was ranked as the 4th Greatest Comic Book Character by Empire magazine in July 2008. On their list of the 100 Greatest Fictional Characters, Fandomania.com ranked Wolverine at #21. In May 2011, Wolverine was ranked 4th on IGN's Top 100 Comic Book Heroes."
I know you're a Cyclops fan, Pr, and writers like Grant Morrison and Joss Whedon have asserted his leadership status in the comics and given him his due, but you know they've never published 'Cyclops And The X-Men.' Marvel has milked Logan's popularity for decades, and he guest stars in as many titles as Spider Man and Deadpool do.
__________________
"I'm not smart so much as I am not dumb." - Harlan Ellison
I'm not speaking about his appearances outside of X-Men books, or in having his own series. He's always had that, and fair play to him.
I'm talking about central X-Men books. The Uncanny's, the adjectiveless, the astonishing and the like. Cyclops has always had as much if not more focus on him, as Logan has had. Cyclops, Jean and Logan were the X-Men's holy trinity for years. And even with them ruining Cyclops' character in recent years, he's still front and centre in most of the central X-Men titles.
The X-Men movies were maybe representative of how Wolverine is treated in Marvel at large, but they aren't accurate to the main X-Men books themselves, which were almost always ensemble pieces.
I've been told I look like Wolverine in the face when my hair was longer.
I'll never forget Captain Picard's speech on human evolution:
So true.
__________________ "Compounding these trickster aspects, the Joker ethos is verbally explicated as such by his psychiatrist, who describes his madness as "super-sanity." Where "sanity" previously suggested acquiescence with cultural codes, the addition of "super" implies that this common "sanity" has been replaced by a superior form, in which perception and processing are completely ungoverned and unconstrained"
Last edited by KillaKassara on Oct 24th, 2013 at 06:54 AM
I feel as if the movies are more represenitive of Claremont's X-Men team from the 80's rather than any of the more current teams. Back then, Wolverine was gaining a pretty large following and Cyclops and Jean were phased out because most of the readers found them to be boring. You're right about them being the X-Men's holy trinity though. At least up until the Dark Phoenix Saga. Then I think the holy trinity became Wolverine, Storm and... Kitty I guess?
Besides, Fox rightly guessed that more people would pay to see a movie about Wolverine than any other character thay had the rights to. The bottom line always comes down to making money. I don't blame them for killing Cyclops off in the third movie either. Marsden jumped ship to go ruin Superman with his buddy Singer. Shooting time was very limited due to scheduling conflicts and I think they just wanted to stick it to Marsden for joining the competition. Wasn't like Cyclops would have made the movie any more enjoyable anyway. They would have misused him just like they did in the previous movies.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 24th, 2013 12:36 AM
