The Se7en minutes

[ToM]

SPOILERS BELOW



Seven Minutes.

I've been waiting to say word one on what sort of expectations I have for this movie till I saw enough of the material. Yes, I know it was a rushed job, and there's been a great amount of anxiety over that. But the first one was also a rushed job. Although the time scale hurt many things that would've made it a much better film, it worked and gave us some great characters created from scratch. So, I've lived in hopes, and that's really the only way any human being can live at all in the first place.

The symmetry here is something I really appreciated. In the original film, Scott was the school teacher sticking it out training the younger mutants, adopting the responsibilities. Wolverine, he was walking out the door clad in his leather jacket, a bag slung over his shoulder off to Alkali Lake in the Rockies. In the first moments of the seven minute clip we're given a classic Greek reversal. Scott, throwing off his sense of responsibility is confronted on this by Wolverine. Like in the original where Wolverine reacts angrily to Scott placing a hand on him, here Scott reacts in the same way to Wolverine's hand of friendship. Then? Leaving Wolverine behind to administer students, Scott, clad in his leather jacket and bag slung over his shoulder, ride out by motorcycle to Alkali Lake in the Rockies.

This is perfect. The men who were so different have found the same place, meet each other's anger and hurt at even the same location, Alkali Lake. It's a shame these two characters won't have more time together given this, because it's intensely interesting.

Again, symmetry, in the plot. In the original, Magneto planned to turn normal human beings into mutants against their will. In this, a reversal, normal human beings plan to turn mutants into normal humans against their will. Like with Scott and Wolverine, this wraps up nicely the original, and the ending chapters. And it even brings Rogue into things well enough.

In the first picture, in a deleted scene, Rogue asks Storm if the professor could "cure" her. Storm tells her no. And now, in this film, that sequence is reversed and revisited. Now it's the Professor who says yes to her new inquiry, a cure is to be had. and instantly, cutting him off, Storm repeats that there isn't a cure.

All these details wrap up so well, are so meshed with what came before, it settles the matter of if this tracks with the rest of the series easily. It looks that it will. And any previous blathering in phony script reviews or phony claims of screenings that it's a enormous departure from series continuity are naked now for what they are.

Not everything worked for me so well. They took a huge chance with The Beast. In the earlier film, Nightcrawler was the freakish "monster" character, blue, having a tail, pointed ears and so on. Yet, because he existed as a sort of carnival character, because he existed in his posture and manner as freakish, alien, it worked. However, The Beast standing in an office, speaking with structured eloquence...wearing a suit? It seems like something that fell off stage during a presentation of Babes In Toyland! And his exchanges with Wolverine sound like something that would air on Saturday morning cartoons. This character disrupts the very series tone of the conversation being had about what the plot is, and that could disrupt how credible the plot, the core, of the movie stands.

Magneto's voice rising up in disagreement with the presenter at the Mutant summit made my heart skip a beat. And his bold movement to the stage, the way he talked over the presenter with a turn of the head, all very dramatic. It's interesting to see Magneto, this powerful figure, as just another mutant among mutants, standing within a community of differing perspectives and opinions and winning his argument. In the earlier films, he had followers who he'd already converted, and then he had X-Men, who disagreed. And who remained unswayed. Seeing him in his community, that was exciting.

I really loved how when the Mutants challenged him over not having a mark, he showed the numbers on his arms the Nazis gave him. McKellen made each line spun gold so pure, you felt like you were there, not just watching it (at least that's how I felt).

Warren Worthington escaping his cure, all very real emotion and tension there.

Oh, and there was action too. This is why, in spite of everything Singer did with this series, it was just time for him to go. The first film promised action sequences that never came. In the final moments he had characters, members of a super-team explaning, or excusing why they couldn't use their powers! And then, the huge ginal battle amounts to the most powerful characters sending a man with knives off to fight an old man too tired to even stand up.

In X2, what arrived by way of super-battles? Well, Cyclops was beat up and finished off in two seconds, he and Jean shot force feilds and ray-beams at each other for two seconds. Then, Wolverine fought his female counterpart (in an awesome thrown down). That was it. Singer refused to put Storm in the air, held back on so much. Here, we get a look at how dynamic Storm could always've been! That sight of her spinning around, throwing lightning, eyes blazing, teeth gritted, now she really seems like an elemental force!

Kitty grabbing The Juggernaut by the legs, dragging him through the floor, then rising above to gloat was fantastic! It was cool, it surprised me visually, made me bark a sort of delighted laugh. You know, like when you're surprised by something unexpected and really "neat"? Yeah, like that.

Jean Grey. Whoa. I'd say she looked like she looked like she was about to go medieval, but she looked like she was about to go BIBLICAL TEN COMMANDMENTS on somebody! I really loved the sequence where, across this sea of debris and flame, she and Logan look to each other. Her hair flowing, backlit by flame, eyes pitch black with reflected fire, she's far more primal and deadly than he. And after two films playing up how feral and dangerous Wolverine is, just that instant between them made me feel the power of this new character in Jean.

Hey, all the soldiers and their weapons being scattered like tickertape by some unseen force was pretty spectacular. That's what nearly all of this was. And hey, when they get The Beast into uniform and in action, who knows how he'll come off?

When I take this stuff along with the material from the trailer? That stuff with Jean and Wolverine ("....KILL ME!") I get a really great feeling about this movie. This is a winner. Now, granted, it opens the night of the prom, but even losing a chunk of the teen audience for Friday, I'm betting this film pulls in at least eighty-five million the opening weekend. MI:3 hasn't pulled them in, and people are hungry for the summer movie season to start. Me? I'm ready to see it now!

ToM

[Marvel Master 1]

Who is that DUDE throwing the Knives at Wolverine?????????

[easy D]

:roll:

You know what?

It ain't pulling in 85 mill on opening weekend.

Maybe 50-60, but not 85. I don't think the box-office cold streak would be snapped by X-Men: The Last Stand.

But I'll wait and see how The Da Vinci Code would open before I can say for sure.

[Pod]

Dammit...Okay, I'm not reading ToM's post but I will just say this movie looks alot different from the other two. And that I'll still see it but maybe it won't do great in the box office.

[Jakerman]

Living in hope for X3 despite your concerns? No such love for DC movies from you ToM. Batman Begins, Superman Returns, and now even Wonder Woman, you've bashed before seeing one second of footage. I just find it interesting.

[ToM]

Jakerman, X-Men is an established fature film property with a winning cast that's grown huge in popularity over time. McKellen and Stewart were born to play these roles. You could give them gum wrappers to read and it'd come out like The Declaration of Independence. Jackman is always fun in his role, he knows it that well. Did you see the material from this with Famke? Shiver me timbers!

Given how well the series was built up in the first two, it's hard not to get the third one "right" given they're using a script that came out of the original creative team.

Now, as for Bret Ratnet, he's no John Huston. But he did sell Red Dragon, and the Rush Hour pictures are good for laughs and action. And that's the winning point in most measure from X2. When we had action that is.

As for Batman And Superman? Gimmee a break! With X3 we've had two teasers, each solid, an awesome trailer that knocked everybody's socks off (notice I didn't even say anything about those) a load of tv spots....and now, finally, with this seven minutes, I've had enough to say this looks really good. Superman Returns? Everything about it that they released was awful. All the things we suspected about what they were doing with the story, all the leaks, turned out to be true.

With X3, look at what they're sourcing, The Pheonix Saga, the holy grail of comics stories. And as with the earlier films, they're pulling in and consolidating some of the best plots and themes from the comics into one film. What they're doing with Superman Returns is consolidating the previous movies (material from all four no matter what Singer's said with a straight face) into a single movie. And then he's dropped the misplaced daddy plot right in the middle of all that! I mean, it's horrible!

The thing about Batman Begins for me was the way they were just going back and digging up the grave of the '89 film, doing it all over again when they promised a whole new direction. Oh, and they promised the rubber suit was gone. They lied. I wanted a Batman that was going to be for the new millennium, a new design, one that could stand up next to the Spider-Man threads.

I also didn't like the whole way they were imitating the Marvel "brand" instead of taking their own flavor to things. Imitation over innovation doesn't sit well with me.

But Jakerman, go back and look at what I said about the seven minutes of Batman Begins that aired during Smallville (copying the X2 sneak peek I might add). I perked up a bit with it and even started saying it could make more money than I earlier thought (I'd said around $160 million).

In the case of both Batman Begins and Superman Returns we're seeing inverted creative progress. It's not the forward thinking we've had with the X-Men films, or Spider-Man (the third installment of which I'll remind you I've not been very generous towards). These two movies are films thinking backwards, going back to "get" something, a retro feel, not standing up and leading the genre into the new millennium.

Look at what Nolan actually said Jakerman, he said that Batman Begins was the sort of movie you'd see in 1979 or 1980, the kind of movie they'd not made in forever. Look at what Singer is doing with Superman! He's also going back to that period, actually 1978-1980 for his feel, his "vision." You know what they say, "Life's just too short not to live in the past." No, wait, that's not what they say, is it? Man, I'm living in the new millennium, this is THE FUTURE! I want movies to build on the lessons from twentieth century theater, and move on from there, not go creatively running to the past! These X-Men films were forwards motion.

By running backwards like this Singer is all but saying, I have nowhere new to take the audience. But you know, seeing what happened with Batman, it really indicates to me a studio mentality about these projects. They don't want new versions, they want those old films all over again. And they don't understand creatively what's been being used in this genre at Sony or Fox, so they just seek to imitate their content. It's all been weak. So, with what they released, and what was leaked out, it wasn't difficult to count them out.

But I don't want to go all X-Men VS Superman Returns in here, because these two films are so far apart in release dates (and one a family picture) that they're not even competing. What's the point? I hate what Singer's done to Superman Returns, but I'd rather have him over there than on the third X-Men. Like I said, he built it, did a lot of great things, it was just time for him to leave.

ToM

[norrinraad]

Even though he just couldn't resist getting his little knock against DC into the X-Men board :roll: this is one instance where I really hope ToM is right. I love these X-Men movies and I'd hate to see the franchise end. I'm really holding out hope for this third instalment to be great. I definitely concur that, from what we've seen so far, the promotional materials have been outstanding. I'd love to see an X4. Hell, I'd love to see an X15 :D but one thing at a time.

It's a little optimistic to think that this movie is going to open with Star Wars or Spider-Man numbers, but it should be just fine in terms of Fox meeting their financial goals. As long as it does around $200 million in North America alone, we should have plenty more rich creamy mutant goodness to look forward to. As the two big C2Fs opening this summer, I'm going to be rooting equally for both X3 and SR.

Take that, Johnny Depp! :P

[Bigkid]

I haven't seen these "7 minutes" that everyone's talking about I don't intend to. I think I will just wait and go to the movies come the 26th, that's the only thing to do. I HAVE been seeing loads of commercial spots for it, but it's usually when I'm out with friends either in a bar or a favorite eating spot, and they are playing the commercials. I'm usually focused on my meal or with my friends, so I don't have any comments one way or another to make on these minutes. I'll just wait for the damn thing to come out in another 2 weeks or so! :lol:

[ToM]

Hey Norrin, this film won't open with Star Wards or Spider-Man numbers, that's true. But remember (and Jakerman you might not have recalled this) the last X-Men film opened with a little more than eighty-five million at the box office. That's huge. And, it's much larger than the incredible fifty-seven million dollar opening of the original X-Men. In other words, this franchise has been building it's audience (and Fox has been really clever in the way they've continued to promote the series TO the box office over the periods in between, that's what brought it about).

What brings people normally into a sequel is the proceeding film. If it really excited them, and they felt there was more to visit in that material, they'll swim miles to the box office if needs be. X2 was far more deserving of the large take than it's originator. Yeah, the public will welcome this oen I think in a big way (although the opening night is prom night).

BTW Norrin, I didn't get a dig in on DC here, Jarkerman brought that up. And he's wrong. I wanted many, many months to say anything about Superman Returns one way or another till I felt really sure about the thing. Other regulars in that forum were kicking it in the teeth for months before I said a word. That's also true of Batman Begins (waited till long after we knew what the costuming choices were, the direction of the story, creative direction themes and so on). I never even bothered with Constantine or Catwoman, or even V For Vendetta at all (till V came up in the Superman forum). And it ain't like I just bash DC creative choices, Jakerman knows that from me beating Spider-Mna 3 about the neck and head soundly (even smacking the second one around which is an obscenely popular movie).

All these things said, POTC is going to bury X3 in the sand in terms of box office, no doubt. But the good news for X3, unlike some other movies this summer, it's not going to sink or swim based on a single actor or character. It's a whole cast of interesting creations, and if one come soff a little poorly (like say, in some scenes The Beast is cartoonish, clownishly executed) it won't damage the film enough to tank the fun (and box office). I'm predicting well upwards of $200 million.

ToM

[DarrenJSeeley]

Now, as for Bret Ratner, he's no John Huston. But he did sell Red Dragon, and the Rush Hour pictures are good for laughs and action.

I liked 'Family Man', and I'm sure I'll like X3...but you gave your opinion on 'Red Dragon' and I'll give mine:

'Red Dragon' was a heap of dirt. Michael Mann's "Manhunter', based on the same Thomas Harris novel, was the better film...

BTW, I do not encourage watching seven minute clips of any film; the trailer (s) are enough for me. I don't like spoiling things for myself anymore than I need to. I also note that X3's running time is about a hour and a half, give or take. While less time won't hurt for more screenings, I think this is a huge miscalculation. If Fox is promoting this film as epic and spectacle, it needs to be two solid hours.
You can crap on X2 all you want, at least it took time for the story.
X2 was two hours and fifteen minutes, give or take....yet it still took in good chunks of change at the box office and well recieved by everyone.

That also explains a bit of the Superman nitpicks- and, I'm sorry, there's nothing wrong with the trailer (aside from the one CGI shot-you know the one)- but I don't think Superman will rival X3's take...it will be close but no cigar.

If X3 didn't give away so much of the farm, I would have said, $70-80 mil opening weekend domestic (US). Now I'm saying, sadly $50 to 60 mil opening weekend. Hopefully I'll be wrong and it will be bigger than that. When I heard about the seven minute clip my heart sank. I refuse to see it. I want to see "it" with the rest of the film. I don't mean one or two (edited) minutes with Logan and a Sentienel, I mean seven minutes. Give me a deleted scene. Give me Omega Red footage and say 'this was good, but for time, Red couldn't make the cut' and that's alright. But I tend to dislike studio executives when they have to spoon feed the audience. It just turns me off.

I'll see the film (and I'll see Superman Returns as well) but don't expect me to be influenced by seven minute spoilers.

[Jakerman]

I DO know how well X2 did ToM. I like the X-Men movies. I, like you, was a little worried with the changing directors and ending up with Rattner, but he seems to be doing a good job. I think X3 will be just as good if not better than the first two. You do bring up a good point though that you have been pretty hard on the Spiderman movies, not just DC movies. So maybe you don't just hate DC, maybe you're just hard to please. :wink:

[Bigkid]

I liked DARRENJSEELY'S comments on this topic. I particularly liked the fact that he points out that the last X film was give or take 2 hours & 15 minutes.......more than enough time to develope the storyline & the characters. One reason that I think they are only going with making the film an hour & a half (give or take), is that they want to be able to bring in more people for more screenings. So by virtue of cutting down on time, that might be the way they actually DO hit the seventy to eighty mil mark in the opening weekend. But, ultimately, it's going to be how well people take to the storyline that gets them in to the theaters. I believe, however, that the really RABID fans of the X books are the ones who are going to be coming back to the multiplexes maybe multiple times in one day (perhaps they'll stay in the movie house & wait for it to begin again). In this way, they won't be paying TWICE, but you do know that they'll be getting more at the concession stand.........which REALLY is what movie owners are hoping gets sold even MORE so than tickets.......popcorn & soda! :wink:

[ToM]

BigKid, I have to say, you're right about the running time and why it's set at what it is. Also, I have to go with what Dareen said about the why (and Norrin, you can chock this up to a new concern for how good a film this is going to be after all).

You see, when a studio makes a film to run at around two hours, and then cuts it all the way down to an hour and a half? Often that's a sign of studio insecurity about the picture. See, when they worry about how strongly the film is going to hold an audience, about how well it'll be able to compete against other films (summer is tough for competition of course) they shave the running time down. That way, they can have it run more times during the day, have more showings than other films, and have more chances to catch up at the box office (or recoup). If you've got a stink bomb of a movie, you wanna make the most money fast and sleazy before the bad word of mouth kills the picture. More showings allow that to happen.

Another thing it can do is slow down the tapering off of box office. It can turn a sixty percent drop in ticket sales in the second week to just a fifty percent loss from the first week.

The fact that the prior film was over two hours and the following picture is less really is troubling. Yeah, that could suggest studio cold feet. However, the first film Fox discovered great confidence in during the production, moved it from a Christmas release to a summer release, took all kinds of production time away. And, as a result, a film that was to be longer clocked in at around an hour and a half. There just wasn't enough time to finish so much of what they'd wanted to do. We all know the tiny window for production this film had. Could amount to the same thing.

But, if they've had to do all kinds of wonky cuts for this running time, it could leave the picture with sections making little sense. That's a real worry for me. They could've gotten a really great movie cooking, and blown it because of what time didn't allow for, or was forced to be cut out.

ToM

[WonderWomanGoddess]

WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO SPOILER ALERTS! Did I just miss the damn spoiler alert or what? have some courtesy!

[norrinraad]

BigKid, I have to say, you're right about the running time and why it's set at what it is. Also, I have to go with what Dareen said about the why (and Norrin, you can chock this up to a new concern for how good a film this is going to be after all).

Actually ToM, I'm not really concerend with the box office at all. It's more the quality that I'm wondering about. Like you said, this film is not going to have the same uphill battle for its dollars as some other films will this summer. I would assume that if you liked the first two X-Men, you will most likely be interested in seeing this one too. However, I have revised my box office forecast. I don't think this film is going to top $200 million domestically. Don't get me wrong, I would like to see that happen, and I certainly wouldn't begrudge the film its box office take. However, I'm thinking more along the lines of what Fantastic Four did last summer, between $150 to 160 million in North America. That is very solid box office, especially in the current climate. Those numbers should be enough to satisfy Fox and guarantee a sequel at some point down the road.

[ToM]

Well, with the running time being what it is, I think it'll rise over two hundred million. Plus, unlike FF. and some of the others, Jackman and Berry are very popular, and, with this series, very popular with audiences. And the marketing for this film has been top notch and consistant. And the material last Friday, combined with the airing of X2 on broadcast tv with still more? Yeah, this tactic works well for Fox.

Now, the box office is way down. Audiences skipped on MI:3 and Poseidon. But what tends to happen is they can only hold off so long with the summer season, then a movie hits that they really want to see, and that film explodes in ticket sales. X3 is really just around the corner now. With M1:3 and Posideon as duds, well, there's nearly a perfectly clear path. And aftera dry spell, what also happens pretty regularly is that once the first weekend does huge, and people start talking about a movie, it brings swarms in for a time. I could see X3 with around a hundred million within a week and a half.

Still, the quality of the film worries me because of this slicing of running time. The first X-Men has scenes that never made it in that it desperately needed (in particular, the Cerebro sequence between Xavier and Jean). Hope that doesn't happen this time.

As for sequels, it's unlikely we won't see one in a couple of years. Why? The buzz is that Fox wanted to make more, but Marvel didn't want to rent the characters out anymore. And that's because of their Paramount deal. The rights to these characters will have reverted back to Marvel and they can make these films themselves, release them through Paramount, and take the lion's share of merchandising money, release cash, television and cable runs, DVD sales, you name it. Considering X-Men as a film series generated a billion dollars worldwide in just two pictures? Well, you can see why Marvel will want to plunk down to bring them back to the screen.

When they get all these characters back in their pocket, with this theatrical deal, animation, DVDs and so on, they'll be an Almost-Disney. Their survival into this century will be assured. Too much rides on them to run them off the screen.

ToM

[Essex]

X3 is really just around the corner now. With M1:3 and Posideon as duds, well, there's nearly a perfectly clear path.

Not exactly. The Da Vinci Code will, without a doubt, be huge. Let's hope moviegoers are willing to pay to see two big movies two weekends in a row.

Still, the quality of the film worries me because of this slicing of running time. The first X-Men has scenes that never made it in that it desperately needed (in particular, the Cerebro sequence between Xavier and Jean). Hope that doesn't happen this time.


Well, Ratner has specifically stated that NO scenes ended up on the cutting room floor. Assuming he's not unecessarily lying, everything that was written will be in the movie. A fairly short running time says nothing about quality. Why would it? Lots of great movies are under two hours.

As for sequels, what exactly makes something a sequel? We've got three possible spin-offs on the horizon, so maybe there WON'T be a movie called X-Men 4. But Fox has clearly stated the franchise will live on no matter what. Wolverine, Magneto, the young X-Men. All of these are being developed.

[Bigkid]

Maybe the reason for the shorter running time also is, because they feel that everything they had to say in THIS one has been captured perfectly and dosen't need to be said anymore than that. Essex is right: Ratner has stated that nothing has been cut that they feel is unecessary. Granted, there's a LOT that they are supposedly putting into this flick (more new mutants, The Dark Phoenix storyline, etc.) but they apparently are saying that they are making it work. I, for one, think that it's running time seems fine. But I'll just have to wait & see until next weekend, won't I??? 8)

[Essex]

Maybe the reason for the shorter running time also is, because they feel that everything they had to say in THIS one has been captured perfectly and dosen't need to be said anymore than that. Essex is right: Ratner has stated that nothing has been cut that they feel is unecessary. Granted, there's a LOT that they are supposedly putting into this flick (more new mutants, The Dark Phoenix storyline, etc.) but they apparently are saying that they are making it work. I, for one, think that it's running time seems fine. But I'll just have to wait & see until next weekend, won't I??? 8)

Exactly, Bigkid. I also think everyone is forgeting that X2 was a LONG movie. X3 is by no means a "short" movie. 1:45 is basically the average length for a movie like this.

[Bigkid]

PLUS........ you just KNOW that people will be salivating for MORE, anyway! An hour & 45 minutes IS a nice length of running time, yes. It will probably be one of those breathless thrill rides that everyone loves to be on, like at an amusement park. So people will want to go on the ride again......and just WON'T be able to wait for the next X film! That's why I think it's going to be interesting to see if this goes to an "X-4". But let's save that for another thread........this one is entitled, "The 7 minutes." :)

[ToM]

Oh yeah. Davinci Code. Opening weekend for that was $77 million. Now, that's less than what X2 did ($85 million) but it'll be enough to put a dent in X3. Da Vinci seems critic proof, so the drop off next weekend might be less than fifty percent. The pattern for summer flick for the last few years has been that the audience jumps on one flick the first weekend, then pounces on the following film the next, not so much returning to a certain movie over and oever again (like in the days of E.T. and Raiders of The Lost Ark) But Da Vinci is sort of an event in the past couple of years, so I doubt that'll be so much the case here.

The good news is that X3 is targeting a slightly different audience with more people thirty years old and younger. More thirty years and older folks who skip on X3 the first weekend for Da Vinci in it' s second weekend may move to the Marvel film in it's second as well. The demos are distinct enough that it could still do the eighty million plus.

And like you said Essex, lots of great films are under two hours. The difference is when you have a film that needs two hours to really get what it's advertised, and it gives you a shorter running time. Besides, you pay eight bucks today, you want a movie length movie, not a rental length movie, know what I mean?

I just hope the one hour and forty five minutes isn't them counting an hour and a half plus fifteen minutes of credits! lol!
ToM

[Bigkid]

Take also into account that it's going to open on a Memorial Day Weekend. With the shorter running time.....with more people expected because of a 4 day weekend...... and being that this is a flick that maybe parents might be able to take their children to see (maybe not as young as 7, but certainly around 10 or 11), they can REALLY do a great job numbers wise. I don't know if it's going to approach the 80+ mark or better, but I think they, at the very LEAST, have a good shot at doing so. 8)

[Pod]

This Friday!!! Woo!!! :D :D :D

Come on!!! We gatta go wild for these movies!!! :twisted: