jason44143's forum posts

#1 Posted by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio

i apologize for the rant, but as mostly everyone that i know do not love comics as much as i do, my only means to vent is on this site.

i read a bunch of reviews this one included about this film, and they all were giving such positive remarks that it made me change my mind of how bad this movie would be. So i went to go see it, and i really wish i had saved the money and just downloaded it. Though it wasnt terrible it was a three star film at best.

once again bryan singer has shown he can direct a decent movie but knows absolutely nothing about the characters.

heres the good

1.) good story. flowed well some plot holes here or there but overall good.

2.) the acting, xavier, magneto, mystique and wolverine were great. young magneto once again completely stole the show from old magneto.

3.) quicksilver was cool. Lets not go overboard like most people have been though. It was a cool scene but nothing we havent seen time and time again since the matrix was made


1.) i understand the way it worked in the story sending wolverine to the past. but it was just unnecessary. it was the prime opportunity to use bishop. introduce another cool character to keep fans interested instead of just cameos, which, im sorry, thats really all he was. Heres what you do. You introduce a mutant that can send people back to the past. they pick bishop. thats it, no other explanation needed. dont overcomplicate it. just for the sake of overcomplicating it.

2.) wolverine (cashcow) could still be in it. I love wolverine, hes one of my favorite characters ever i want to see as much of him as i can but he just doesnt have to be the guy to go to the past. he was alive back then and in the future, you can still write him in through the entire movie without making him the central character to keep the plot moving. i want to see another character be a centerpiece. i should add another character besides wolverine, xavier, or magneto. its been done, we get it, theyre awesome.

3.) why does bishop need to have a gun plugged into him? i always liked the idea that, hes not always charged so when hes not he has a gun to fight with. Not i need this gun to discharge all the power i absorbed. i mean was he born with said gun in hand? *SIDENOTE - the way he died, ok just pull the trigger thats all the power your absorbing going away right there, now you dont explode.*

4.) the sentinels from the past looked so much cooler than the future ones. i was so dissappointed when i saw the future sentinels. i know theyre supposed to look like mystique but they looked awful.

5.) they dont need mystiques powers to be a threat. the whole story could have been just to stop an assassination that would lead to the sentinel program being ok'ed causing a desolate future of the mutants being virtually exterminated by thousands of sentinels. ONCE AGAIN DONT OVERCOMPLICATE IT!


1.) first why, why, why did they even use kitty pryde as the time traveling power person. i know there saying her powers evolved to that point , but really how does becoming intangible correlate with the space time continuum? they could have just created an original character and it would have made more sense. *SIDENOTE- so if the sentinels came while she was doing the whole wolverine in past thing. why didnt she just stop send someone back again and say hey this wolverine in the past thing will be interrupted on this day so dont do it at that time. *

2.) they ruined beast. this goes back to my comment about singer's understanding of the characters. turning beast into a guy that can just turn his power on and off goes against everything beast was. he turned himself into the blue creature because he wanted so desperately not to become it, he used a serum that actually accelerated his mutation when he was trying to rid himself of it. you would think he may have learned his lesson from that and just learned to accept himself for who he was. in fact thats what makes his character great, because he does do that. Turning him into some sort of hulk creature is not who beast is. its about looking past his beastly exterior to realize hes not a brute but an intellectual genius

3.) ok i know im picking apart a "scifi" plot here, but how exactly does mystiques powers correlate to sentinels assimilating powers of other mutants? last time i checked she could only shapeshift into people not take on their powers. this again goes into bryan singer knowing nothing about the characters hes working with.

4.) wolverine apparently cant drown. didnt know a mutant healing ability also makes you grow gills which is just about the only way he could have survived being under water for 10-20 minutes there

5.) so mystique takes wolverine as stryker in the end, this leads to all sorts of huh? so how does the real stryker get him? does he even care about him? was mystique the one that gave him his adamantium?

6.) people keep telling me that this movie made all the good things from the franchise's past movies valid and the bad things null. but i was left completely confused over it. maybe i missed something. did x3 even happen? i mean lord knows i hope it didnt but cyclops is there, jeans there. how?

7.) The useless cameos. wow, i dont think ive seen so much money wasted on completely useless cameos. heres a list of people that were overpaid because their part could not have been completely excluded and it would have been the same movie - anna paquin; rogue, halle berry; storm, shawn ashmore; iceman, Daniel Cudmore; colossus, Adan Canto; sunspot, BooBoo Stewart; warpath, Lucas Till; havok, Evan Jonigkeit; toad, Famke Jansen; Jean, James Marsden; cyclops. THATS 10 PEOPLE JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD!!!

8.) Halle Berry. When x-men first came out in 2000 halle berry was by far the best person to play storm. she had the look and the acting chops. i think we all thought she was the quintessential storrm at casting. now weve seen her, and 14 yrs have gone by. though she may be a good actress for other things, action movies are not for her. she can not pull them off. in 14 yrs you cant tell me they couldnt have found another qualified actress to play storm and one who could do a good performance for the money they wanted to pay, instead of overpaying halle to get nothing out of it.

9.) Look i know im being a harsh critic but my feelings are this, if a 40 minute cartoon (x-men tas) can depict this story with its own spin on it better than a multimillion dollar movie than somethings wrong.

and finally...

10.) the Apocalypse after credits scene. Ugh the not understanding the characters your using thing again. If that was supposed to be Apocalypse, since when can he telekinetically move objects. I know he has a ton of powers but i dont remember that as one. I really hope that scrawny guy isnt the one theyve chosen to play apocalypse. And where are the marks on his face, i always liked that unique look about him. not his grey skin.

please dont ruin age of apocalypse too. Quit destroying all the x-stories i love.

#2 Posted by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio

@cobramorph: thank you. i thought i was the only one on this site that could not stand morrisons writing. i really cant believe how much love he gets. I think snyder's batman run obliterated anything he ever wrote

#3 Edited by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio

i love them both. But i think i favor batman beyond over JLU. Have you seen Return Of The Joker? However if it was Justice League before it turned to JLU then my vote would go with Justice League. I also have a little bit of resentment towards JLU for ruining batman beyond. A somewhat clone of Bruce? It ruined the originality of Terry. Come on Bruce Timm, its a cartoon you dont have to explain why two people with red hair can have black haired kids. Why couldnt you leave well enough alone.

#4 Posted by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio
@mega_spidey01 said:

The villain should be Omega Red for Wolverine 3 .

Is there even any doubt that he'd be the next villain. I mean of all the CLASSIC wolverine villains that havent been seen, hes pretty much the only one left.

I too would love to see him in a movie but there is nothing that these wolverine or x-men movies have shown me thus far, that have proven to me that they will do him any justice.

It really sucks too, cause i've really liked the majority of their casting decisions. Jackman has been a great wolvie, and i never would have thought to cast him from the get go. Plus he loves the character so much that he willingly will play the part as long as they or anyone else want him too, regardless of how bad the movies are, he just loves being wolverine. Its just the awful writers and the horrible studio that just want to pump out crap movies without putting the thought needed to put into them.

#5 Posted by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio


It has to be Lex. Brainiac really isn't different from Zod in the grand scheme of things (alien invader threatening the world). Lex is a different villain in that he would challenge Superman intellectually and politically at a time in which he really needs to establish his legitimacy. We could still get a power suit slugfest in the end, but Lex as the main villain, killing Superman's public credibility while using smaller villains like Metallo to try and duke it out w/ Superman would make perfect sense.

This is exactly what i was thinking. Id love to see any other villain than Lex in the next movie but i just feel he makes the most sense

#6 Edited by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio

@aquahawk: Maybe...

Man of Steel 2: Braniac attacks Earth a couple of years after Superman has defeated Zod and helped the people in many ways since then. The attack triggers the U.S. government to ask him to destroy the invader, but Superman still feels remorse about what happened with Zod and tries to find a way to stop Braniac without destroying it. Superman, with difficulty, is able to defeat Braniac but causes the government to turn against him due to his refusal to destroy Braniac.

Man of Steel 3: Lex Luthor steps in and sways the government to believe that Superman is subject to destroying them all at any time after the events of the second film. He persuades them to work on a project that will create a creature that can destroy Superman called Doomsday.

I'm not downing your idea, but the reason this probably wouldnt work is 1.) We all need to give up on wanting to see Doomsday in a live action movie, seriously if they ever used him it wouldnt even be a good storyline. the some of the best parts of that story were the other heroes trying to take up the mantle after his death making you actually feel as though the guy died and isnt coming back, that cant happen in a 2 hour film. Metallo, Bizzaro, or Parasite would be a much more likely character for the idea you presented. 2.) After what happened in this Man of Steel there is no need for another attack from anyone to make the government mistrustful of superman. As far as the world knows kryptonians are freaking powerful and theres no way of stopping them. all we have is supermans word to rely on that he wont turn against us. But actions speak louder than words and this superman cant say he refuses to kill.

Pretty much I think you have the right ideas but that you should switch Man of Steel 3 with Man of Steel 2.


It has to be Lex. Brainiac really isn't different from Zod in the grand scheme of things (alien invader threatening the world). Lex is a different villain in that he would challenge Superman intellectually and politically at a time in which he really needs to establish his legitimacy. We could still get a power suit slugfest in the end, but Lex as the main villain, killing Superman's public credibility while using smaller villains like Metallo to try and duke it out w/ Superman would make perfect sense.

#7 Posted by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio

at first when i saw this i thought oh great another thanos story that really doesnt help me understand or even care about this character. then i saw jonathon hickman was writing it and now i want to buy every issue of it! way to pick a good writer on a story that will help people understand the character before the next avengers movie comes out, marvel!

#8 Posted by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio

@ Darkus_99

k4tzm4n is right you need to give this show a chance. I grew up watching the 80's turtles, and i watched the 2003 turtles. I loved the 2003 turtles because of how they targeted the young adult market. But after watching this i have to say i really like this show too, it brings a good amount of the seriousness that the 2003 cartoon had and mixes it with the light heartedness, and comedic side that the 87 turtles had. It really seems overall like you took the 2003 and 87 turtles and blended both worlds together. you have your mutagenic enhanced enemies, and your normal people/ninja enemies. Theres the kraang, and baxter stockman. They are creating a whole rogues gallery that isnt soley based on who shredder sends after the turtles that day. this is a much watch show for any turtle fan.

#9 Posted by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

@dangallant984 said:

what are you basing that on?

The fact that it would totally destroy the continuity of the MCU? Anyway if this actually ever happens then feel free to say "I told you so" but it's highly unlikely now Fox are putting together there own shared universe with Mark Millar at the helm.

yeah i understand thinking it would destroy the MCU, i think that too. it would just create way too much chaos with so many characters to have to keep in everyones minds. but why not exclude them from the current MCU. they can have their own continuity and dont need to be involved in whatever marvels doing with the avengers. theyre a team of superheroes on their own they can have their own seperate continuity/franchise, and if they wanted they could make several solo movies, as youve already seen with the wolverine movie/s. I might be alone on this but ive always felt that x-men should be a comic in its own world, no crossover stories, just x-books, theres no need for all the other marvel characters to be involved in their stories. i appreciate the crossover stories really, but to me they arent the stories i go to to define what x-men really is.

#10 Posted by jason44143 (25 posts) - - Show Bio

ok i really dont want either. i know jim carrey does have the acting chops, but if it really is for the raccoon i think sandlers voice does actually work better. i mean listen to him speak close your eyes and cant you see that voice coming from a little woodland creature? but honestly i really hope that neither are in it. its already hard enough for me to take this movie seriously already. and a bad cast would just kill any chance of me watching this film