Never the Third

God that was fast!

“Was X-Men 3 that bad?”
Not *that* bad, I think, but bad enough. Mainly due to some clumsy writing and the magnificent Famke Janssen being reduced to acting like a sulky, premenstrual supermodel. That said, the “de-aging” flashback intro was clever and the levitating house was fun. Oh, and Magneto’s one-man roadblock was pretty entertaining too. But it falls apart at the end.

And Vinnie fucking Jones.

“Was X-Men 3 that bad?”
Yes. Oh, god, yes…
And am I imagining things, or was there the most horrendous continuity error in it?

Julia,
I don’t know about continuity errors, but maybe that’s because Brett “bang ‘em out” Ratner somehow managed to flatten almost every dramatic moment. (Scott’s off-camera death springs to mind. It sort of gets forgotten about.) Given the scope of the original comic and the audience goodwill established by the first two films, that’s no small achievement.
And, yes, Vinnie fucking Jones…

“Day turns into night in about 2 seconds.”
Yup, that’s the one! Magneto rips the section of Golden Gate Bridge out (in broad daylight) to ride across to Alcatraz – when he arrives, it’s pitch black. Given that you can practically hit Alcatraz with a rock from the shore, you have to wonder why it apparantly took so long. Getting coffee to go…?
I can never figure out how they missed that in editing. Did they think no-one would notice? Did they not care if anyone did?
“(Scott’s off-camera death springs to mind. It’s sort of gets forgotten about.)”
The whole thing is sloppy, isn’t it? Pity, because I’ll probably watch them all again before I go see ‘Wolverine’ in May… *sigh*

Still funny…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYpyLzORfP0

There is a masochistic streak in me that makes me want to confess to everyone that I thought that Terminator 3 was the best of the trilogy.
No. Hold on. Nothing to do with masochism. We’re talking about justice here. It WAS the best of the three and I’m going to fight for that recognition.
(like anybody really cares)

Horace is clearly suffering from a bout of cinematic brain fever. Fortunately, we’re a forgiving crowd. Things could so easily have turned ugly.

T3 seemed like a solid movie. The story arc was intellectually satisfying, though the film fell a bit flat on hitting any emotional buttons. My theory as to why it isn’t recognized as being of the calibur of the first two films is that it doesn’t try to do anything really new. That and the ending is one of the best “fuck the audience” moments in film.
I feel it’s about as good as T1.

To show I am suffering from Brain Fever, I also think Matrix 2 was a fine, fine movie. It was essentially every thing I wished for in expanding the Matrix universe and setting up a denouement that would satisfy. What I hoped for in M3 was something like all the Humans realizing that they needed the machines and forming a pact with them of some kind. Or something. Not the horrendous vomit that was M3.
BTW, I *am* suffering from a nasty flu. That might explain the fever. But I liked T3 before my recent illness.

I disagree with the Indiana Jones meter. The third may not have been as good as the first, but it was far better than the second.

I do think that Candice is a thoroughly sensible woman.
Re: Indiana Jones 3. I couldn’t agree that it was better than the second. It was pretty good but marred by the presence of Sean Connery trying to play a lovable eccentric but only succeeding in making normally peacable men like me want to punch him on the nose. Also, the bit at the end with the Grail Knight was too earnest in tone for my taste.

“T3 seemed like a solid movie.”
Come on!
Did you like the whinny man hero?
When you watch a action movie you need to actually feel the character is worth rooting for. You want Sarah Connor to succeed. You want John to get a life.

I liked the ending of T3, but can’t remember much of what went before that. If the almost total annihilation of humanity is the best bit of a film, something’s probably wrong somewhere.

Sigh. I see how it is.
I’ll make one more effort:
T3 continues the series’ insistence on plausible explanations and logical consistency given their ground rules. That’s one reason to like T3.
As for John Connor being a whiny man-hero, he sure beats the pubescent pipsqueek from T2. His bride-to-be is the real hero of the movie, as the Terminator tells us. Connor is along for the ride. He’s severely messed-up, as anyone should be given the crazy shit he’s been through. In his mind, he’s got to live off the grid, never being allowed a normal life on the threat that some robot from the future will come to kill him. Oh, and he’s got the whole “savior of mankind” thing to shoulder as well. I think he does fine.
I think T3 is a thinking-man’s action movie. I’d be happy if all the action sequences were replaced with title cards saying “Action Scene Goes Here.” They were workman-like, not spectacular. But then again, I can’t think of many movies lately that have titillated with superb action sequences.
I love the ending of T3. I love John Connor’s reluctant steps into his role as leader of humanity’s fight against the machines. I love the homage to 60’s era bunkers. The ending is what redeems the film from being mediocre. As such, if you don’t dig the way it ends, you don’t dig the movie.
It’s not up to the standard of T2, but few movies are. I’d say T3 is a 6 or 7, while T2 is a 10. T1 is also a 6 or 7, but only in hindsight. At the time I first saw it it was a 9. Early 80’s films don’t age well.

Someone fetch a damp cloth. We need to cool Candice’s brain. Stat.
http://davidthompson.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451675669e20111689ceafb970c-pi