There are some people for whom “the movie made money” is some twisted counter-argument to “the movie was awful.” Let me be clear that as far as I’m concerned, the two are not mutually exclusive, but apparently Brett Ratner thinks so.
In an interview this week at Starpulse, Ratner (director of X-Men: The Last Stand) attempts to rebut critics of his terrible, terrible film on the grounds that it made buckets of money. “Mine outgrossed the other two by far. Mine was the one that made the most narrative sense,” he told the interviewer, all the while pointing out that comic book fans who hated the movie from the outset and complain about it to this day were the ones lined up outside of cinemas on opening weekend.
It may be a fair point–and he makes a fair and hilarious point about fans who complained he had killed Professor X (“He died in five different comic books!” Ratner says)–but this is what I have to say about the next cinematic travesty that comes down the pipes: Don’t go see it.
If you have people like this, who are going not only to bastardize the source material but who are then going to rationalize that by saying, “hey, look, it made money,” what you have to do it STOP GIVING THEM MONEY. When something comes along that will CLEARLY suck (and it was clear from the trailer that X-Men: The Last Stand would), just don’t go see the stupid thing. I know there’s a certain school of thought that “other, better comic book movies won’t get made if we don’t support the big-budget travesties like this one,” but isn’t it better to have fewer, better films than more, shabbier ones?
October 13th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
I love X-MEN: THE LAST STAND – far more than I enjoy the first X-MEN movie, which *I* felt bastardized the source material – with Magneto and his evil mutant making machine. Also, Sabretooth and Toad were completely useless in that film. Keep in mind, I also cut several of the trailers for the first film and saw quite a bit of the pre-roll footage – so my take on it is likely far, far more different than yours. I went into X-MEN: THE LAST STAND fresh – and was totally stoked about the whole film from start to finish.
October 13th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
I liked it fine. Sure killing Cyclops and Xavier was a little jarring, but I liked it better than Wolverine Origins.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Well, that makes you a weirdo.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
“I know there’s a certain school of thought that “other, better comic book movies won’t get made if we don’t support the big-budget travesties like this one,” but isn’t it better to have fewer, better films than more, shabbier ones?”
that school of thought is just wrong. how many bad chick flicks are made and do poorly, and yet chick flicks continue to be made? how many bombs has nicole kidman starred in and yet she continues to be cast? and if it is the case that a few bad “comic” (what this really means is super hero movies, btw) will cause the film industry to turn it’s back on the genre, then it’s their loss, since there’s obviously an audience for good films (of any kind).
and i didn’t hate x3 as much as many, and certainly not as much as superman returns. that flick makes me so angry that it sucked. i just realized the other day that in the first 45 minutes of iron man, he bangs some hot babe and kicks ass against a terrorist camp. in the first 45 minutes of superman returns, he saves a plane and acts like a pussy.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
I agree! X-Men: The Last Stand was a decent movie. Not as good as X2, but definetly better than X-Men. And remember…Brian Singer left to make Superman Returns, so if you didn’t like X3, blame him for leaving to make that terrible movie!!!
October 13th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
I don’t necessarily agree with Ratner, but I don’t disagree with him either. I dont think the hate for his movie has anything to do with him, but rather the fact that he’s is he is, he’s fun to hate, and he took over for Brian Singer. Sometimes, it simply becomes a movement to bash something. Indy 4, X3, Star Wars prequels, etc. It’s the cool thing to do, even though people swear it’s their own opinion. It wasn’t any more or less crappily executed than the other two.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Every single movie ever made is better than Wolverine. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
I also liked X-MEN: THE LAST STAND. It’s entirely possible that the reason X-MEN: THE LAST STAND made a bunchy of money is because a bunch of people liked it.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
It’s a great argument that applies to comics as well. If you complain about it, don’t buy any future ones. That is, unless complaining gives you some kind of perverse measure of control in an otherwise miserable life. Then, by all means, give em your hard earned money.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
you will see these _all_. you will like some, or a few, or most, or none. but you will see these all. most of you will pay to see them. and so they will make money. and more will be made. you will complain about some after having paid for them. and more will be made anyway. that’s the nature of geek-tertainment. it’s almost enough that they just make them to make you show up. will they all do dark knight numbers? no. iron man numbers? no. spider-man? those go beyond geekdom. but straight genre fare? it’ll do well enough to do more. because you will go see them. complaining part of the fun. it’s like bitching about your sports team’s owner’s decisions; it’s part of the “fun” of the package. Russ is right — don’t go if you think it’ll suck. But you won’t. seriously. imagine you didn’t go see wolverine. unpossible!
(and no, _I_ don’t go see them. any of them. sometimes I pay for the dvds (iron man) or see them on a plane (watchmen)), but for the most part, I’m out of the movie-going game since the last star wars movie. but if I wasn’t, all of the above “you’s” would be “we’s”).
October 13th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
I feel I should point out that SUPERMAN RETURNS, as well as many other recent films, certainly falls into the “Just assume it’s as bad as it looks and don’t go” category. I’m not giving Singer a bye at all!
October 13th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
I’m proud to say i’ve never bothered with the Last Stand. Wish i could say the same about W:O, ugh.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
…and speaking of voting with your wallets, if anyone here hasn’t seen Zombieland yet you should get on down to Ye Old Movieplex and nut up!
October 13th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Russ, old buddy, great advice, and I wish history didn’t prove that people simply won’t listen to it!
I found a list of comic-based movies once a year or so agon, and I’d seen less than 50% of them (and the percentile’s going down with every straight-to-DVD animated effort). Reviews (fan and pro), commercials, and creative talent involved have convinced me that my cash is better spent elsewhere. Perhaps, one day, preferably on Netflix Instant where I don’t have to waste a DVD turn, I’ll give these films a chance (since I’m already paying for Netflix, regardless of what I watch), but probably not.
Also, I kinda liked SUPERMAN RETURNS, despite its flaws. The plot could’ve used some tweaking, but I found Superman’s struggle to fit back into his old life very effective, and the action scenes were among my favorite in superhero movie history. Routh did a good job. Lois as miscast, but I thought it a valiant effort to provide an atypical Superman. It was worth the money (since I saw it twice theatrically, which I nearly never do – the second time in IMAX). My soft spot for Superman may have made me more susceptible to his plight than other fans, however. I see that costume and I immediately care, whether I want to or not. And the film is about fifteen minutes too long, no getting around that.
X-MEN 3 was a big letdown, as was X-MEN 1. But I had fair hopes for the first based on trailers and such, and enjoyed the second enough to give the third a chance to impress (despite not having very high expectations, honestly). It didn’t (even based on my minimal hopes). I passed on WOLVERINE totally based on reviews and previews.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Russ, you’re speaking to a population of people who have collected X-Men (or Batman, or whatever) for YEARS when they hated the current direction, because… well, because they JUST HAD TO. They couldn’t withstand the impulse to pick it up, and they had to keep their collections complete.
And you’re asking them to stop going to the movies based on properties they haven’t enjoyed for years, yet keep buying?
Not gonna happen.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
X3 was HORRIBLE… I saw it once in the theatre, and then swore I wouldn’t buy the DVD. I ended up getting it used at a sidewalk sale though, on my daughter’s pleading, for $3.99 or something like that. We watched it less than once. We tried to watch it, and shut off halfway through when she admitted “OK Dad, you were right. It is bad.” So I managed to pawn it off at a used store and broke even on the deal.
But as bad as X3 is (and Russ’ advice is dead-on), it was a freakin’ masterpiece compared to Superman Returns. I’m sorry, but what were Singer, the writers, and the studio thinking? It was practically a remake of the (then) nearly 30 year old Donner movie, a movie that simply hasn’t aged well at all. Then they decided to selectively follow the continuity of Superman 2 (another movie that has aged as well as cheese sitting out in the sun). On the one hand, Kal knocked up Lois. OTOH, Kal leaves Earth to investigate the remains of a dead planet. After telling the President he WOULDN’T leave again. He had to have left mere days or weeks or making that promise, because he didn’t know Lois was pregnant!! See he’s Superman, so even with the smallest of changes to Lois’ physiology, and he should’ve known it! Did it even occur to him he might get her pregnant? What a dolt.
So the guy leaves for the most specious of reasons, for five years. But Clark’s gone for the same length of time (as if the glasses were such a great disguise). And they return around the same time. Hmmm… Apparently everyone in Metropolis is as brain-dead as Kal.
Then we have Luthor let out of jail because Supes left. WTF? Well, whatever… He’s out, and everyone knows it. Plus he married the rich old lady and surely this put Luthor in the public eye. ESPECIALLY after she died. But does Supes keep tabs on his greatest enemy, even after the massive power outage and the museum break-in that involved the theft of a GREEN ROCK?? Nope, he’s too busy moping over Lois (wisely) getting on with her life and playing Super-stalker. Nice. First impregnate a woman and split, then become a stalker. What a role model.
Then we’ve got Lex up to pretty much the same stunt he tired pulling in the Donner movie. Those real estate scams sure make for thrilling movies! Why try to make Luthor more like the ruthless, powerful military-industrialist businessman he’d been in the comics for *two decades* at that point? No, better to keep him as a jokey, street-level crook. Because that’s really a challenge for Superman. Wait, when you dumb Supes down as much as Singer & Co. did, that kind of common criminal IS a threat. That’s just sad. I can forgive that in 1978, but on the 21st century, with the kind of technologies available to filmmakers, there’s just no excuse for not making Superman movie that’s a truly epic, cosmic adventure with super-powered threats that are on Kal-El’s level. Luthor probably shouldn’t have even been the main villain in the movie.
And there were other problems still… Casting a Lois who looked all of about 15 years old, for one. So… If this is a sequel to the first one (or two?) Supes movies, why is Lois looking much younger than she appeared in those movies? Even when we use our imaginations, there’s no getting around that she simply wasn’t believable as a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist. Of course, taking her CHILD along while deciding to snoop around Luthor’s place was just another example of the stupidity that afflicted every character in the movie.
Then we get Supes getting taken down by kryptonite yet again (yawn), getting his ass kicked (by Kumar no less) after being depowered (double yawn), and someone else having to rescue his hide (triple yawn). That’s followed by an interminable wait while Supes is lying in a hospital bed. Honestly. He recovers, and the big Super act to make audiences cheer? He lifts a rock. A really, really, really big rock, but a rock nonetheless. I’m not sure that that the earth he lifted could really have shielded that much kryptonite, but… OK, I’ll acept that one. What I won’t accept is who was honestly going to buy a piece of Luthor’s “beachfront property.” It was all green rock. Woo-hoo! Vacation time! Who’s up for some volleyball?
Finally, Luthor ends up on a tiny little island, with the woman who SHOULD have been cast as Lois. Supes never brings him in. Supes never throws a punch, no nothing really. The scene with the plane was cool, but they did that in 1978 too. And poor Cyclops never knows the kid isn’t his or that Lois has basically lied to him. He was the only sympathetic character in the movie.
All this, and I never even really talked much about The Kid. Having Supes with a child really sucked, no question, but compared to everything else I described Superbrat was the LEAST of that movie’s problems.
Sorry for ranting… I just think SR was one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. With all respect to Michael, that film was at least 30 minutes too long. Maybe more. Many comic fans wanted something bigger and better, older viewers saw this film once before in 1978, and younger viewers weren’t going to be as familiar with the old movies and were likely bored. Who was this movie supposed to appeal to?
October 13th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
To Irv:
The thing about “crappy chick flicks are keep being made” is that chick flicks are cheaper to make. Pay the cast/crew/etc, find a location, shoot, done. With big budget movies like the super hero genre, like I said… “big budget.” Lots of special effects, lots of stunt men, more elaborate costumes, etc. I’ve never heard of a “big budget chick flick” but there are plenty of big budget action movies. Greater risks require greater rewards to justify them.
BUT I’m not advocating watching bad action films. But a decline in profit on super hero movies probably will cause studios and producers take less risks with them.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Irv said: “i just realized the other day that in the first 45 minutes of iron man, he bangs some hot babe and kicks ass against a terrorist camp. in the first 45 minutes of superman returns, he saves a plane and acts like a pussy.”
QFT!
Thanks Irv, for summing up how much SR sucked… And doing it in far fewer words than I did!
October 13th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
One last thing (I swear)… It’s unfair of me to say Lois basically lied to her husband. She, somehow, didn’t seem to know that the kid was Kal’s until his powers developed. How quick did she shack up with Cyclops after Supes left?
OK, fine, but it makes Kal’s erasing Lois’ memory (a dumb moment in Superman 2, BTW, right up there with the giant cellophane “S”), while not stopping to consider she might be pregnant, all the more creepy.
@ Joe: “BUT I’m not advocating watching bad action films. But a decline in profit on super hero movies probably will cause studios and producers take less risks with them.”
Perhaps, films like Batman Begins, The Dark Knight and Iron Men (and hell, I’ll even throw in the first two Spidey and first two X-Men movies too) should show studios that well-made, thoughtful, even challenging, films that are (mostly) faithful to the characters will be a hit with audiences.
Sure, X3 and Spidey 3 sucked and still made big money. But much of that was opening weekend when anticipation was high. I’m guessing they weren’t as popular on DVD, and those franchises have a lot of work to do to win the fans back for the next installments.
October 14th, 2009 at 6:37 am
I’ve tried to like X3 (Colossus was the big draw for me) but the fact that it was so far removed emotionally from X2,in my opinion, that I just can’t enjoy it. It seemed like they wanted to shock us (Xavier/Cyclops death) or just cram as many new mutants into it. It robbed Jean of any real sacrifice that the original Death of Phoenix had because it seemed that the Dark Phoenix personality was the default Jean. Never mind the weakling that it made Cyclops to be.
October 14th, 2009 at 7:01 am
Hey, Shaun,
I don’t planning to make a debate of the subject, but since you clearly spent a while writing that post (!), I’ll give a brief response.
For what it’s worth, I don’t look at SR as a sequel to Donner’s films in such a literal sense. My sense was that Lois and Superman had some relationship, he left without realizing she was pregnant. It doesn’t necessarily equate to the relationship depicted in Superman II, even if everyone assumed it was the same. I think Singer called the movie a spiritual sequel. As I was hoping for a non-sequel, I tended to think of RETURNS as its own animal.
Also, I’m not sure that Richard didn’t know the kid wasn’t his. It’s never explicitly stated, nor does Lois ever say that Richard is definitively the father, except to Luthor whom she’d readily lie to in order to protect her son. There’s nothing in the film to verify one way or another, but I assumed all along that Lois knew the truth long before the piano incident.
Hospital scene, way, way too long. Agreed 100%.
Lois was miscast, as I stated above. The plot was fairly thin and derivative. I had no problems with the big rock or the Kryptonite; it’s a Superman film. I thought his rescue by Lois and Richard played effectively into the theme of his feeling of isolation, reminding him that these people really care for him as much as he cares for them. They took a far bigger risk than he did, and it turned the tables on the traditional Superman-rescues-Lois sequences from earlier in the film.
(And he may have gone after Lex after the film ended, it really wasn’t important to the theme at that point.)
Now, you see the film the way you do. That’s cool. RETURNS is not the Superman film I’d've made myself, but I dug it for what it was. That’s all.
January 17th, 2011 at 8:39 pm
What is Nicole next movie?