X2 (2003) (1 Viewer)

[Paul_Sjordal]

I don't think the film Mystique is using her powers to make herself look younger. She made the direct point to Nightcrawler that they (mutants) should not have to hide their appearance just to fit in with other humans. If she truly believes this (surely she does, because of her extremist beliefs), there is no way she'd use her powers to make herself look younger or to wear clothes.

Mystique's comment was in reference to human-mutant matters, not old-young matters. She's still subject to the same vanity as anyone else. She's old enough to have a son serving in the U.S. Senate. Trust me, she can't possibly look that good unless she's using her powers.

Lastly, she doesn't have any extremist views. In fact I don't think she has any political views at all. She doesn't believe in Magnus' crusade any more than she believes in Xavier's teachings. She is following her own agenda and is slowly driving herself mad in her attempt to bend the future. But that's another story.

 

[Paul Case]

Mystique's comment was in reference to human-mutant matters, not old-young matters. She's still subject to the same vanity as anyone else. She's old enough to have a son serving in the U.S. Senate. Trust me, she can't possibly look that good unless she's using her powers.

You are making the mistake of transposing the comic book version of the character onto the movie version of the character. Like it or not, they are two distinct entities. Until Mystique mentions having a son serving in the Senate in the movies, you can't assume that she is old enough to have one. Within the continuity of the films alone, we have no idea how old Mystique might be.

 

[John Doran]

And it's still not inaccurate to the character. The movie Logan is not yet at the point where he can remember things like ninjas, samurai, oni, yakuza, Japan, etc. You have a character who has studied martial arts but doesn't remember studying martial arts. I thought the fight coreography in the movies did a good job of conveying that.

except that martial arts skill is a matter of procedural, NOT declarative memory. that is to say, being able to perform feats of martial-arts skill is a matter of performance rather than one of recalling factual information. it's muscle-memory. which means that amnesia of the sort suffered by logan would have no effect at all on his ability to fight.

logan would find himself in the same situation as jason bourne in the bourne identity - effortlessly kicking ass without knowing how he knew how to kick ass so effortlessly.

 

[Stephen_L]

Having watched the DVD now a few times, I think I've found the one element I enjoyed most about the film. It's Nightcrawler. I'm not learned in X-Men lore so the character was entirely new to me. His entrance in the White House attack was spectacular. That tour de force was matched by his incredible rescue of Rogue (I actually cheered 'Yeah!' in the theater when he made that midair snatch) But more importantly, it was refreshing to see this frightening-looking character not be tainted with the bitterness that most of the other mutants carry. I enjoyed seeing a character so forgiving of the human frailty of prejudice and distrust, one so religiously devout. If I have one wish for X-3, its that Nightcrawler will return.

 

[Sean Laughter]

Mystique's comment was in reference to human-mutant matters, not old-young matters. She's still subject to the same vanity as anyone else. She's old enough to have a son serving in the U.S. Senate. Trust me, she can't possibly look that good unless she's using her powers.

Lastly, she doesn't have any extremist views. In fact I don't think she has any political views at all. She doesn't believe in Magnus' crusade any more than she believes in Xavier's teachings. She is following her own agenda and is slowly driving herself mad in her attempt to bend the future. But that's another story.

Maybe I'm just confused, but a few posts above you rave about how much better Rogue's character is in the movie than in the comic, hence readily admitting that the characters are widely different. Yet you insist on trying to analyze "movie Mystique's" behavior in light of "comic Mystique's" background when its rather obvious the two characters are VERY different.

 

[JonZ]

Rogue in the comics was a interesting character AT FIRST.

She kicked ass,but became boring after being with XMen for a while.

 

[Paul_Sjordal]

Maybe I'm just confused, but a few posts above you rave about how much better Rogue's character is in the movie than in the comic, hence readily admitting that the characters are widely different. Yet you insist on trying to analyze "movie Mystique's" behavior in light of "comic Mystique's" background when its rather obvious the two characters are VERY different.

Change is only good if the change in question is an improvement (e.g. the movie Rogue). The comic book Raven is much more interesting than the movie Raven.

 

[Nick Totoro]

Color me confused...

Now... this is just how I see it, but the movie Rogue has thus far only served to lead to a few scenes (the fight in the train station and the end scene of the first movie) or serve as eye candy (relative... she doesn't do much for me) in either movie. How do you perceive that as being better than the comic book version of her character? I'm not busting cazzis here... just genuinely curious.

Nick

 

[Paul_Sjordal]

Now... this is just how I see it, but the movie Rogue has thus far only served to lead to a few scenes (the fight in the train station and the end scene of the first movie) or serve as eye candy (relative... she doesn't do much for me) in either movie. How do you perceive that as being better than the comic book version of her character? I'm not busting cazzis here... just genuinely curious.

It's not that the movie Rogue is so much better, but that the comic book Rogue is worse. Like I said, Neo-itis. Too hard for the writers to manufacture a believable threat, which makes for less compelling suspense/conflict.

 

[Andy Sheets]

The other problem with Rogue in the comics is that nothing has ever really been done with her problems with touching people. It's long been used as an excuse to have her whine about herself, and that gets really old. That the movie actually allowed her to progress to the point where she could kiss Bobby was to me one of the nicest little bits included. It's more than has been done with Rogue in about 20 years of comic book appearances.

 

[John Doran]

It's not that the movie Rogue is so much better, but that the comic book Rogue is worse. Like I said, Neo-itis. Too hard for the writers to manufacture a believable threat, which makes for less compelling suspense/conflict.

it may be too hard for bad writers to write her into compelling storylines, but it's just not true that it's too hard to do in general.

i mean, how many believable threats has superman faced? or the martian manhunter? lots.

a superhero is only as good as the writer.....

 

[Nick Totoro]

I think I understand now. She's not a terribly exciting character in the comics, either, IMHO. I always felt she was kind of window dressing... the same way she serves the movies, but in the movies she has no powers at all other than her absorbing ability. She at least has the former Ms Marvel's powers in the comics from a power-sucking gone awry...

I don't even know what the deal is now. I haven't seriously followed the X-Men in comics in almost ten years. Come to think of it, the last time I really follwed them religiously was around the time Nathaniel/Cable was born and a powerless Storm fought and beat Cyclops for leadership of the X-Men.

Two movies and still no Danger Room...

Nick

 

[Paul_Sjordal]

but in the movies she has no powers at all other than her absorbing ability.

And that's what makes the movie Rogue better.

Oh, and they're working on the Danger Room. In fact they had a couple of sequences story boarded for X2, but it didn't make it into the movie.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Nick,
Join the club. The early/mid-90's glut killed the Marvel Mutants for me, forever. Which is why I love the films...their essence, distilled. No ridiculous throwaway, no power escalation to the nth degree (I knew Claremont was back, and he seems to have brought all of his negatives to the table).

I expect DP in X3...if they waste that opportunity, then what's the point of the film.

Take care,
Chuck

 

[Dome Vongvises]

Personally, I find both versions of Rogue sexy. But I'll take the movie one anyday.

 

[Nick Totoro]

You know what, Chuck... it must have gotten really bad based on the things I've read here just in this thread. I'm 30 now and spent a lot of time in my teens and early 20's scouring down the Byrne/Claremont issues as kind of my "Holy Grail" of all that is X-Men...

The first I got was #137 of Uncanny, the death of Phoenix. The whole DP storyline was written and portrayed so well in the comics, IMHO. What people are saying now about CC is kind of painful to hear because it makes me feel like he has really slipped hard in terms of creativity. You always expect Byrne to be bitter over something, but I guess it has gotten to his former teammate as well...

I just remember being a kid and anxiously awaiting every issues. The movies brought that feeling back to me. I didnt connect with it the same way, because that was a freaking long time ago, but I do feel a little twinge of it when I think about it.

Nick

 

[Andy Sheets]

The first I got was #137 of Uncanny, the death of Phoenix. The whole DP storyline was written and portrayed so well in the comics, IMHO. What people are saying now about CC is kind of painful to hear because it makes me feel like he has really slipped hard in terms of creativity.

I've often felt that the biggest problem with Claremont is that as his stature as the "savior of the X-Men" increased, fewer and fewer people were willing to stand up to him and force him to rein in his excesses. Not enough people telling him that yet another story about how stupendously great and perfect Storm is isn't such a good idea, or how he ought to not repeat his favorite expressions in his scripting so often, or that he simply doesn't write the X-Men as characters you can relate to anymore because he keeps powering them up every chance he gets. He still has a good idea or two that leak out from time to time, but for the most part his writing veers very close to self-parody these days.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I would assume you are completely correct. No doubt the Byrne/Claremont run, evidenced in Days of Future Past and the excellent DP storyline, are the pinnacle of the X-Men history. Like you, Nick, the day I got my #137 was a big day for me.

But Claremont was not subtle, nor was he fair. The only man who stood a chance in his books was Wolverine...the rest were merely pulp for the saintly women that saved the world through their purity and power. Storm is the best example. A great character, with true goodness, turned into an unrealistic paragon of humanity.

I do love the movies, and how they FEEL like the best of his stories.

his favorite expressions in his scripting...

"No quarter was given, no quarter was asked..."

Every third issue it seemed.

Take care,
Chuck

 

[John Doran]

my main memory of claremont at the nadir of his run was that there always seemed to be more words than picture on each page, you know?

 

[JonZ]

"Personally, I find both versions of Rogue sexy"

Rogue wasnt supposed to be sexy. Actually she was intentionally drawn ugly at first.She had short greased back hair and wore too much makeup.

Its the only online pics I could find



http://www.geocities.com/Area51/5484/GGAA10.JPG