MovieChat Forums > PussyMonster > Replies
PussyMonster's Replies
Jean is not the protagonist of X-Men: The Last Stand though. She was a side-villain like Deadpool was in X-Men Origins: Wolverine.
Worst of all, The Last Stand's depiction of Jean's mental health is objectively ableist. I mean, Jean suddenly becomes evil for no real reason. It just says that she is evil simply because she is mentally ill, which is at best problematic and at worst harmful.
Yeah. I too thought it was going to be a bitter sweet ending.
Why would a prequel origin story be the endgame of the X-Men? The XCU is getting another movie with the upcoming Deadpool/Wolverine movie. So it would have been pointless to do.
What's your source?
Well, the upcoming Deadpool/Wolverine movie has proven my point. Many reviewers claimed it was the finale of the X-Men universe (the Rotten Tomatoes consensus literally says this), despite Sebastian Stan stating that it was possible for Hugh Jackman to return as Wolverine. He said this right Disney bought 20th Century from Fox and it was widely reported on too. Here is the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGd-N6FGdZ0
So yeah. Some reviewers' takes weren't exactly..."legit".
It made over 2 billion dollars.
Who said it is a reboot? Because so far, it doesn't look like there is going be one.
<blockquote>Highs done after this.</blockquote>
He recently suggested that he might not be.
Why? The Deadpool series is extremely popular. That makes no sense business-wise.
<blockquote>They meant it was the finale of the X-Men produced by 20th Century Fox.</blockquote>
New Mutants was released after it. Plus reviewers like Movie Bob were literally saying that the X-Men franchise was dead and claimed that Marvel was going to soon reboot.
Obviously. People seem to forgot that Marvel Studios was business.
Sorry it took me two years to reply. This is what Roger Ebert (aka the most famous film critic of all time) said:
"If a director is clearly trying to make a particular kind of movie, and his audiences are looking for a particular kind of movie, part of my job is judging how close he came to achieving his purpose."
In other words: You judge a horror movie based on how scary it is or an action movie based on how exciting the action scenes are, etc. This is what I am talking about.
Criticism is literally defined as the analysis of the merits and faults of a work, after all.
Vague.
Yeah, should have left out the action part. But have you seen scary movie?
You said that you judge movies if they have a “good story, good action, good characters etc”. Do you think those standards to films like “Scary Movie”?
There is no general standard to judge a film, as Ebert Roger had been saying for years. You judge based on what they were trying to be and whether or not they are successful in their endeavors.
So by arbitrary standard?
So what criteria do you use to judge them?
That movie was a different genre. So you can’t compare them. No offense, but do you judge movies by merits/faults or your personal preferences?
Why are you comparing this to other movies of different genres?