Critical Consensus: "X-Men: The Last Stand" On Shaky Ground

Summary

We've only got one wide release this week, but it's a biggie: "X-Men: The Last Stand." Brett Ratner is at the helm, virtually all the principle characters are back, and some major plot developments are in store for X-fans. Do the critics say "X" marks the spot, or do they feel this one wasn't built to "Last?" Back to Article

Comments

South_park300

First Last

"go to hell brett"


you're a goob

May 27 - 06:59 PM

samsamsam

sam gosper

[b]hit and missed the mark[/b]
without a doubt best action out of the 3 films. Best story to work with as well. It's downfalls are mainly character development, i mean angel got built up hard then dismissed like kitty pride and colossus. Cyclops was just !@#$ ridiculous and unacceptable, typical result due to james marsden filming superman and having little time on the project. I believe the vibe of the previous films flowed through which i commend brett ratner for achieving, if key characters were developed more and not so rushed this would have definitely beaten x2 as the action and direction was top notch. All the bad guys had no development, the only charachters with development were wolverine, storm, magneto and a bit of xavier. There's your reason for the flaw. Oh, Vinnie jones was just crap as the juggernaut.

May 27 - 08:37 PM

Paul_Is_Drunk

Paul Andersen

Cyclops got screwed in X-Men 2 also.

He gets captured in the first act and returns late in the third. The sad part is if you check the deleted scenes on the DVD there is actually a good action scene with him they cut out. (Probably because it was confusing).

Still... gimme the tactical genius laser cannon!

(I know, I know... it's not a laser. It's a kinetic blast. Whatever).

May 27 - 09:23 PM

Mr. Shizzle

Darminous Hang

[b]Entertaining[/b]
The problem with X-men is that it would make a way better TV series (or a set of mini-series) than a movie. Still, the film series is entertaining and does a well enough job of balancing character development and action, even X3. For these types of movies, the only reason for character development is so that there is a purpose for all the action.

X3 was strange as it seemed like a TV series strung together especially at the end. I guess that just means that it wasn't grand enough, but then it could/probably would have gotten to point of absolute cheese. The only reason I say this is that, while the set ups for each movie seem to be getting more and more ambitious, but end up being weaker and weaker (visually). First movie: New York City. Second movie: First Mutants and then Humans (though the effect is less as it takes place at the weapon X facility in canada). This movie: Basically the same as the second, but only taking place somewhere you can probably tell from the commercials or from the reviews. If they do make a new one, it'll probably have apocalypse but it'll take place in a small pyramid in egypt. JK. Anyway, I think the producers realize that it is hard to keep this up, because with each movie they'll have to up the ante a bit and then if they wanted to make a movie focusing more on character with just a few sentinels (the first few episdes of the cartoon), then people will complain that it wasn't enough (as I have already begun to do).

Overall, I'm actually glad that they tried to do something different than from the comics.

May 27 - 10:58 PM

mpower88

Miklos Power

I think it's not about the effects and visuals as it is about the heart and soul of the movie - which effects every avenue and strings it all together, from script to acting, to direction and production and special effects, weaving them together as a whole. This movie is in tatters.

May 29 - 02:19 AM

Mr. Shizzle

Darminous Hang

i think that's what seperates surprises like the first pirates of the carribbean from the disasters like van helsing which start out decent enough and then have no staying power.

this movie just kind of falls in between. for what we were all expecting it's a dissappointment, but it was entertaining enough at times.

May 29 - 04:54 PM

suzakucarl

Jason Cue

[b]Don't let critics control your opinion!! This is a[/b]
I read so many critics and saw the tomatometer even before watching the film, and guess what? I still enjoyed the film!! It just proves that critics will never destroy a film's beauty. Critics are like temptations....ignore these because you have your own brain and own thoughts. Don't let these things control your way of thinking. Even if God is a critic, I will not let his opinion conquer me because I have my own opinion...

May 28 - 03:33 AM

IMAmoose24

Eric Schulze

I enjoyed the film too. Wasn't the greatest, but it was fun to watch. I thought that Beast & kitty were the best characters in the movie, & they were just introduced in this film. And to all who DIDN'T stay for after the credits, go and see the movie again and stay till after the credits. They're might be a little suprise that will either make you hate the movie more, or love it.

May 28 - 08:38 AM

Dave the Destroyer

Dave Hustava

....Does anybody else here think that all posters should preface their ranting and raving with an example of what they think are "GOOD" comic book movies and what are "BAD" comic book movies, just to be setting a sort of critical standard ?

Y'Know, so we can take a quick look at their "Preferences", and know beforehand if we're dealing with a discriminating, thoughtful objectivist - or just another drooling, unpleasable, literalist fanatic, the kind that will condemn an entire movie because, oh, say, a supporting character isn't wearing the same color socks as they were wearing in the first comic book panel that they ever appeared in ?

Or would that just be providing ammunition to the dogmatist geeks ? "You liked THAT movie ? You must be HOMO/STUPID/NOT A TRUE FAN/PUSSY/(or, worst of all) NOT A TOTALLY OBSSESSED WRETCHED LOSER LIKE ME!"

See, I don't let critics (amateur or otherwise) tell me what to like - I KNOW what I like, and I pay attention to critics with taste similar to mine, so's I'll have a general idea of what I may be getting into.

It's just an idea..........

May 28 - 09:47 AM

thecaptainsandman

Michael Sandman

[b]You all are sad...[/b]
Seriously, this movie was decent at the worst. I would say its the best out of the three. The first one was poorly funded and was a bit slowwwww at times. The second one was good, but the third flick had everything a film of this genre should have. It had some great shockers, cool special effects, and an ending begging for another film... If you don't think thats fine entertainment then where have you been. Oh did I mention it pleased both normal people and the comic book nerds.

May 28 - 12:12 PM

suggsmar

mark suggs

[b]on the ' listening to critics...[/b]
Okay, you can like a movie, you can hate a movie, and alot of that is dependent on ones one preference and opinion. But from a critical point of view, there are elements that strengthen and weaken a movie, dispite its catigory ( be it a horror, si-fi, comic book or otherwise). This movie had alot of flaws along those lines. When these elements and various story rules are broken, the movie becomes weaker. You might still like the movie, but it doesn't make the movie any stronger. So, when the introduce so many new characters without the benifit of time to develop them, it detracts from the movie. There are only three very little scenes dedicated to the 'Angel', to the point to where one wonders why he was in the movie to begin with. Just enough to get your eyes wide with desire, but not nearly enough to leave you fulfilled. Same thing with the Kitty, Iceman, rouge triangle. How can i care for a character such as kitty when there was no development devoted to her as a character. You might hate or love the movie, but these are flaws non-the-less.

another little point of confusing is why it took so long for someone to raise the question' where is scott'? you think when the rest of the x-men got to the lake, and found the glasses, someone whould have asked at that point.

I still liked to the movie, but reading the reviews let me know about these problems before hand, so i was prepared for them. But this is where you have to read reviews with a critical eye, and whether they give concrete reasons why the movie is flawed, rather than reasons why didn't like it personally. A good portion of the time, there are very good concrete reasons for a reviewers good or poor review of a movie beyond preferences.

May 28 - 02:47 PM

South_park300

First Last

not to be a goob myself(i have been known to be one):

"you think when the rest of the x-men got to the lake, and found the glasses, someone whould have asked at that point"

only wolvie and storm went to the lake, and only wolvie saw the glasses. im sure seeing jean still alive broke his concentration of scott. and after all, he hated scott.

i do agree with you points of not developing some of the new characters. at least they developed Beast, who was freakin cool in my opinion.
not the worst movie, not the best movie. but still a great action flick

May 28 - 06:41 PM

Ssillississ

Steve Mast

Great movie - best of the trilogy. It had some minor flaws but was a really fun movie to watch.

May 29 - 12:33 AM

monkeyska

Curtis Meacham

[b]Good ol' Propaganda film![/b]
What a difference a director can make!

The power and consistancy of both X-Men I & II were a testament to quality movie making. Bryan Singer's ability update the original story for film, while keeping the same message of equality and tolerance, made them terrific films to watch and enjoy.

Now, enters Brett Ratner... A director who's biggest movies are the RUSH HOUR franchise of films.

In X-MEN III: THE LAST STAND, you see a rushed story, shallow characters and all-too-early endings to many of the beloved characters in the comic story... The "hook" lines are poorly written, the editing is problematic and this wonderful cast of actors seems lifeless and uninterested in delivering their showcase lines (see: Magneto's "what have I done" line).

All of this is neatly wrapped with a heavy layer GRATUITOUS sexuality. The way the director leered at Mystique and the uneccesary Grey/Wolverine make-out scene, actually made me feel uncomfortable, and I've seen everything.

What's worse, is that Ratner has made the X-MEN into a propaganda piece for the right-wing agenda... which goes against EVERYTHING that the original comic stood for!

Here are some examples:

1. The introduction of "The Cure" led me to believe that, in the true X-MEN style, the story was going to support a modern-day social concept, like the current "Cure for Homosexuality" which seems to be filtering into the media. However, by the end of the film, the "heros" are joining the military in using the "Cure" against the attacking hoardes of Magneto's army, while defending the pharmaceutical company that manufactured it. This would've never happened in the original story!

2. Magneto's army is passed off as being a group of California-style, heavily tatooed and pierced, ultra-terrorists. On top of that, they meet in the woods, of what looks like the Santa Cruz mountains, to scheme their liberal agenda against the wonderful government and it's ultra-cool army with wicked night vision googles and plastic dart guns... rediculous!

3. There are several "Bush-isms" in this film, but they are all delivered by our beloved heros! Storm delivers the "Are you with us or against us" speach, three times in the film. Plus, the Beast delivers the "there's a time for diplomacy and a time for... (kicking butt)" speach.

4. The worst offense: FOX NEWS, proudly advertises their name in the TV news sequences! in the 2 previous movies, the news sequences had no affiliation or advertisements.

Now, I know that Brett Ratner grew up in Florida, and is a republican, but this has definitely gone too far... It's obvious that FOX has paid Ratner to make a good old propaganda film! Ratner has taken a story that is heavily laden with messages of equality and fairness and turn it around to suggest the need to back up the government and it's agenda, at any cost. This comes off as nothing more than a badly written GO ARMY commercial.

Plus, with the horrifying symbolism of flying car-bombs, used to evoke images of iraqi insurgents, this movie makes subtly a thing of the past.

I don't think this film should have been made... In fact, I think that Ratner should be brought up on war crimes... but hey, that's just the commie-pinko-lefty-clintonian-democrat film lover in me!

May 29 - 12:45 AM

mpower88

Miklos Power

[b]X-MEN 3 - "SABOTAGED"[/b]
I would bet the first director "left" because he realised that somebody at fox either overtly or for reasons unknown perhaps even to them had some kind of a perverse intention to thrwart the positive direction XMen was going in and could have gone by turning it into this travesty of a movie.

Phoenix, which could have been a fantastic 'angelic' 'etheric' mutant yes capable of harm but ultimately a highly benevolent being, gets turned into a sorrow, half baked, two bit exorcist wannabe satanic 'i can't handle my own power' empty boring character.

Wolverine is thrust into the spotlight where he does not belong, his interest and success as a character was because he was sidelined, and his ungrounded and confused nature means he is not a good leading character but is a great side character. Just because you like sugar with your coffee doesn't mean you want to change the formula and start having coffee with your sugar...

Grey/Phoenix! What is with the sex with wolverine I mean how LAME, and the belt coming un-done, that was just unbelieveable lame. A SAD attempt at a POP formula which as much as they might not understand it at fox executive offices, X-Men, in my opinion, until now, WAS NOT.

Magneto, at his most powerful and yet, thanks very much, made totally impotent.

Mystique, who could not be destroyed was stripped of her powers, LAME. As though they're saying "we can't think of anything new to do with this one, so we'll have her open a lock with her toes and then get her dumped by magneto. Again why do they feel the sad need to peddal the sexual "grandfather and grand daughter" sexual weirdness between magneto and mystique (and subsequent daggy betrayal).

Beast - totally awesome and very well done effects and excellently cast, the first right thing done on this film but in the conext it's like a cherry amongst a pile of vomit. Grammer is great in this role though thank god it made me stay to watch the film (although that may be a bad thing in the end it was for a good reason). Lets hope he reprises this role as he brought the only shred of dignity and character to this film.

Storm - the effects department went with Storm where they should have previously but not nearly far enough especially not for a finale. It was half baked again, although a step forward, and that's the best I can say about that. Halle Berry is the best in this film for this role but as many others have said, not the right casting choice in the beginning.

What was with cykes death? no body? am I wrong or is there not even a tomb stone. And what is with the tomb stones they went back to them like 10 damn times in the movie, showing that stupid flame burning.

Which brings me to xavier. Who should not have died like that. It was like they ripped the heart out of the whole xmen story and the great creative and inspirational energy and message that was present in the first two (not including the purile romance between grey and logan, which we could have done without). I think whoever made that film, or wrote it, or directed - it somewhere, perhaps in many places, somebody/people hate the x-men creative success of the first two films, the high it was on, particularly creatively, and for me it was like somebody put the best of x-men - yes a balding older man in a wheel chair, not an attractive young thing - but the most attractive element of x-men - it's heart and higher mind, xavier, and ripped him apart at an atomic level in that rediculous demonic episode which was just as purile and infantile as could possibly be imagined. And what message is it anyway - super power is ultimately evil??? how lame. Somebody there needs to study theolgy for two minutes before they go writing drivel like that down.

Why did they get RAT-ner to do the movie? WHY WHY WHY!???

The president was LAME! "We're going to war" oh great line.

The military was lame, and obviously OBVIOUSLY alcatraz was a set they chose because it was a CHEAP set for the finale location, so they could spend more budget on special effects and ultimatley save money. They took a 3 course meal and turned it into a big mac. It was too short. Rogue was HOPELESS why did they even bother putter her in them movie and then killing her off like that (mutant powers) - lame lame lame. Why doesn't wolverines adamantium disintegrate like the other parts of his body when he approaches phoenix at the end, and if she IS unbalanced and confused or partly sick/evil then where is the balancing force of good in her, what, it's just a minute and sectioned minority of her personality, the little quivering "gene" part? No, it would have to be 50% and therefore she might beable to go unbalanced but only for short periods of time and eventually she would neutralise her personality and regain control of her powers, as though the source of her powers are pure evil when that is not possible and makes no sense theologically or otherwise, it would have to at

May 29 - 02:17 AM

mpower88

Miklos Power

I think it's not about the effects and visuals as it is about the heart and soul of the movie - which effects every avenue and strings it all together, from script to acting, to direction and production and special effects, weaving them together as a whole. This movie is in tatters.

May 29 - 02:19 AM

Mr. Shizzle

Darminous Hang

i think that's what seperates surprises like the first pirates of the carribbean from the disasters like van helsing which start out decent enough and then have no staying power.

this movie just kind of falls in between. for what we were all expecting it's a dissappointment, but it was entertaining enough at times.

May 29 - 04:54 PM

SamanthaLJackson

Samantha Mares

[b]I hope the old director comes back.[/b]
The movie was kind of all over the place forgetting to explain new characters and confusing scenes.

It could of been a lot better, but it was still pretty good.

=)

May 29 - 08:16 AM

Mr. Shizzle

Darminous Hang

i think that's what seperates surprises like the first pirates of the carribbean from the disasters like van helsing which start out decent enough and then have no staying power.

this movie just kind of falls in between. for what we were all expecting it's a dissappointment, but it was entertaining enough at times.

May 29 - 04:54 PM

Merlin235

Merlin Ambrosius

The movie entertained me, but then again I'm not a real X-Men comic book fan. If I was, I would view this movie as a sin. Let's explore:
1) Cyclops dies....what is with that?
2) Professor X dies....again, what? (I know about the end scene, but who knows what THAT was supposed to mean...)
3) Phoenix storyline totally butchered.
4)Mystique 'healed'....what?
5)Beast is a politician, unlike in the comics where he is a scientist.
6) Rogue is 'healed'....what?
7) Magneto is 'healed'....ignoring the fact that at the end of the movie, he can ALMOST move a chess piece, which doesn't so much imply that he wasn't healed, but that he is now a puss.
8) WHERE THE HECK IS GAMBIT?
9) Too many bit characters, too little charachter development. Thanks for butchering Colossus, that's awesome.
10) Where are the Sentinals? Just a HUGE part of the comics that is omited.

Here is the best thing about X-Men III: Iceman finally, FINALLY, looks like Iceman. And for about two seconds.

May 30 - 10:20 AM

suggsmar

mark suggs

[b]to be fair...[/b]
as far as from a comic book crazy person point of view, i reallly don't have alot of problems about some of the stuff you site. I'm not complaining about excluding sentinals in the least ( visioually akward, what is this, sky captian and the world of tomorrow?) and in the real world that they have set up ( dangerroom excluded, wish they left it out) doesn't work. So the left out Gambit. Hey, like you said, can't introduce to many characters. If the depowering isn't permanant on Magneto, then it isn't on any mutant, so as for the rouge thing, it would make for quite an intesting story down the road..possibly.

May 31 - 06:55 PM

suggsmar

mark suggs

[b]to be fair...[/b]
as far as from a comic book crazy person point of view, i reallly don't have alot of problems about some of the stuff you site. I'm not complaining about excluding sentinals in the least ( visioually akward, what is this, sky captian and the world of tomorrow?) and in the real world that they have set up ( dangerroom excluded, wish they left it out) doesn't work. So the left out Gambit. Hey, like you said, can't introduce to many characters. If the depowering isn't permanant on Magneto, then it isn't on any mutant, so as for the rouge thing, it would make for quite an intesting story down the road..possibly.

May 31 - 06:55 PM

nraab807

Nathan Raab

nothing about this movie is believable.

how was there no tension at the end of the movie, just moments after phoenix OBLITERATES A WHOLE ARMY AND AN ISLAND?

not one major character dies during the whole series up until now, and then, all of a sudden, brett ratner decides to not only off three major characters, but heal three other major characters, and kill off a slew of mutant extras.

it's not a matter of poor movie-making at this point. it's a matter of having little or no vision for keeping the integrity of the original idea. the reason people read comic books is because of the story and the characters. the first two x-men films didn't have half the special effects that this film did, and they will stand out as the superior films because of it. Singer realizes the power of these, his characters, and is a good steward of the acting talents Fox has hired. Brett Ratner is just a hack.

Jun 1 - 11:23 AM

nraab807

Nathan Raab

[b]ratner may take your $7.50, but you can have your[/b]
this just isn't a good movie.

the dialogue is tantamount to a good game of "who-can-get-to-the-one-liner-first?"

the tension suddenly disappears in the end with no explanation whatsoever.

moments that should have held alot more sentiment, given that they've had two movies to develop and give importance to the characters, held none at all.

the movie makes no sense. at all.

special effects. whoopee...next time i want flashy visuals with hollow characters and retarded storylines, i'll rent and watch star wars episodes 1-3.

thanks.

Jun 1 - 11:31 AM

What's Hot On RT

Total Recall
Total Recall

Robert Rodriguez's 10 Best Movies

Ant-Man
Ant-Man

First pic of Marvel's Paul Rudd

Worst Summer Movies
Worst Summer Movies

We list the 60 worst since 1975

Scorecard 2014
Scorecard 2014

See where the summer movies rank

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile