• 72 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for deactivated-599f6ccbd15bb
Posted by deactivated-599f6ccbd15bb (630 posts) 2 years, 11 months ago

Poll: Do you like Bryan Singer doing the X-Men movies? (106 votes)

Yes 67%
No 35%
Avatar image for phoenixofthetides
#2 Posted by PhoenixoftheTides (4701 posts) - - Show Bio

I think he understands certain aspects of the team, but definitely needs to be reigned in and/or think better about how to translate these characters to the screen. Some of his lines and dialogue are real clunkers.

Avatar image for hopesummersforthefuture
#3 Posted by HopesummersFORtheFUTURE (9031 posts) - - Show Bio

no he made cyclops a joke and jean grey turns evil ugh......

Avatar image for invain
#4 Edited by Invain (5141 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes, he is the best writer/director that the X-Men films have had so far.

Avatar image for warrior100
#5 Posted by warrior100 (2163 posts) - - Show Bio

i would like to see a new Director direct the X-men.

Avatar image for hawk2916
#6 Edited by HAWK2916 (4814 posts) - - Show Bio

He's better than some but there are better directors out there. I guess as long as they keep making xmen movies its whatever

Avatar image for peterparkerjr
#7 Posted by PeterParkerJr (6767 posts) - - Show Bio

@invain said:

Yes, he is the best writer/director that the X-Men films have had so far.

Avatar image for imbroken
#8 Edited by Imbroken (191 posts) - - Show Bio

Better then Bret Ratner.

Avatar image for linsanel_doctor
#9 Edited by linsanel_Doctor (8630 posts) - - Show Bio

not bad

Avatar image for poisonfleur
#10 Posted by poisonfleur (4518 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes, but it could be a little more like the comics. I'm tired of seeing Jennifer Lawrence play herself. She wasn't even blue in the trailer...

Avatar image for deactivated-5a04a566e9ae3
#11 Posted by deactivated-5a04a566e9ae3 (12864 posts) - - Show Bio

I think he did a good job. Far from perfect, but still good.

Avatar image for draviex
#12 Posted by Draviex (78 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for makkyd
#13 Posted by MakkyD (6989 posts) - - Show Bio

Least he can't make 'Wolverine and Friends' anymore and might actually have to use the X-men.

Avatar image for imbroken
#14 Posted by Imbroken (191 posts) - - Show Bio

@makkyd: He was a writer on First Class. But yes, all of the ones he directed used Wolverine heavily.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a04a566e9ae3
#15 Posted by deactivated-5a04a566e9ae3 (12864 posts) - - Show Bio

@imbroken: @makkyd: Is the overuse of Wolverine really Brian Singer's fault? I mean, do you think FOX would have allowed Storm, a black woman, to be the lead? Or even Cyclops or Jean? No, they wanted tall, mysterious and handsome to be the face of the X-Men.

I think the major flaws of the X-Men films have more to do with shitty Hollywood conventions and out-of-touch executives dictating what should and shouldn't be.

Avatar image for youmessinwithme
#16 Posted by youmessinwithme (1700 posts) - - Show Bio

No not that any of the other X-men movies were good though they were all bad, But if I had to choose between letting brian singer direct the X-men or cutting my foot off I'd cut my foot off. The man is murdering my childhood.

Avatar image for imbroken
#17 Posted by Imbroken (191 posts) - - Show Bio

@sprior93: No, I don't think it is his fault. They were moving away from it in the last movie. X-Men, X2, and especially The Last Stand all focused on Wolverine more then Days of Future Past. In DoFP, Xavier and Magneto seemed to be equal stars. To me, Wolverine felt like a star in that, not the star. It also did more with the rest of the team then the previous movies.

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
#18 Posted by Ready_4_Madness (14803 posts) - - Show Bio

The Bryan Singer X-Men films are among the best in the genre.

Avatar image for heroup2112
#19 Posted by HeroUp2112 (18044 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't like the Wolverine wank any more than anyone else, but Singer has done some excellent work on these movies. X2 is one of my favorite comic movies ever, but yeah...time for some new blood I think.

Avatar image for selina_sublime
#20 Posted by Selina_Sublime (328 posts) - - Show Bio

No. Between the three films he's produced, very little has touched upon what makes the X-Men great to me. I am all for adaptations taking creative liberties, but these films don't satisfactorily redefine/reinvent iconic stories for the modern age nor are they faithful recreations.

I really enjoyed DoFP, but a large part of that was First Class setting the precedent with the anchoring dynamic of Fassbender's Magneto and McAvoy's Xavier. There could be so much more heart and such a larger world to build if the films were in more capable hands.

Avatar image for sinistersoul
#21 Posted by SinisterSoul (1285 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes. I also like his movies more then all of the MCU movies.

Avatar image for warrior100
#22 Posted by warrior100 (2163 posts) - - Show Bio

they're good, but they are too realistic and make harder to have a good villain without Magneto. Also i wish they would focus on characters, besides, Mystique, Magneto, beast and Charles Xaiver.

Avatar image for cattlebattle
#23 Posted by cattlebattle (17504 posts) - - Show Bio

They're fine. It's fine.

Avatar image for rabbitearsblog
#24 Posted by Rabbitearsblog (6701 posts) - - Show Bio

He's alright. He's pretty good with character dynamics, but with the exception of First Class and Days of Future Past, most of his films seem too centered on a few characters and I wish that he would give more focus on other characters like Colossus, Kitty Pryde, Nightcrawler and Juggernaut.

Avatar image for theamazingspidey
#25 Posted by TheAmazingSpidey (17414 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes. I'd love to see an X-Men film that is more like the comics someday, but he's made some of the best X-Men movies.

Avatar image for 4u2nv
#26 Posted by 4U2NV (165 posts) - - Show Bio

OH HELL NO

Avatar image for john_valentine
#27 Edited by John Valentine (16466 posts) - - Show Bio

no he made cyclops a joke and jean grey turns evil ugh......

That wasn't Bryan Singer, that was Brett Ratner.

Avatar image for call-me-sam
#28 Edited by call-me-sam (56 posts) - - Show Bio

Before the first movie was made around 98 or 99 there was a lot of excitement about the Possibilities. Who's going to direct it? I Remember saying to a Friend that I thought Luc Besson would be a good choice, I had seen Fifth Element not that long ago and it was so colorful and futuristic it kinda reminded me of X-Men. when I heard Singer was directing I thought it was an odd choice since he is not a visually gifted director.

X-Men(2000) imo is not a good adaptation. but I think some of the blame should go to Marvel's bland production. the only good thing about the movie is the sound and they didn't load it up with a bunch of crappy early 2000's Nu Metal bands like they did with every other Marvel movie at that time.

I've only ever seen the first three X-Men movies and I hated them. not only did they look nothing like the X-Men comics, but everyone was so out of character as well. they might actually be the movies with the worst casting choices ever in the history of film.

the only thing those movies have in common with the X-Men comics is the title.

Avatar image for galerion
#29 Posted by Galerion (390 posts) - - Show Bio

Before the first movie was made around 98 or 99 there was a lot of excitement about the Possibilities. Who's going to direct it? I Remember saying to a Friend that I thought Luc Besson would be a good choice, I had seen Fifth Element not that long ago and it was so colorful and futuristic it kinda reminded me of X-Men. when I heard Singer was directing I thought it was an odd choice since he is not a visually gifted director.

X-Men(2000) imo is not a good adaptation. but I think some of the blame should go to Marvel's bland production. the only good thing about the movie is the sound and they didn't load it up with a bunch of crappy early 2000's Nu Metal bands like they did with every other Marvel movie at that time.

I've only ever seen the first three X-Men movies and I hated them. not only did they look nothing like the X-Men comics, but everyone was so out of character as well. they might actually be the movies with the worst casting choices ever in the history of film.

the only thing those movies have in common with the X-Men comics is the title.

Marvel has nothing to do with these movies. They are made by Fox who owns the movie rights.

If Marvel would be making these movies they would actually make billions like the Avengers do.

When it comes to Singer well just say Im ready to see new blood. 16 years of him is enough.

Avatar image for cattlebattle
#30 Posted by cattlebattle (17504 posts) - - Show Bio


the only thing those movies have in common with the X-Men comics is the title.

Well this just simply isn't true.

Avatar image for poisonfleur
#31 Posted by poisonfleur (4518 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes but I don't think he understands the X-men's team dynamic..... He always focuses on Mystique or Wolverine-- like the rest of the characters aren't equally or more important...

Avatar image for darthphoenix
#32 Posted by darthphoenix (2345 posts) - - Show Bio

He was not faithful to the comics stories, even powersets. But hes pretty much ok, better tgan x3 director

Avatar image for jumpstart55
#33 Posted by jumpstart55 (11025 posts) - - Show Bio

He has an excellent track record with Comic films especially in terms of quality and story..Sp yea i think hes doing a great job, hes probably my favorite comic book director.

Avatar image for immolation
#34 Posted by Immolation (1955 posts) - - Show Bio

The X-Men movies are just as comic accurate as the MCU. The only thing they lacked is the comic accurate costumes.

Avatar image for call-me-sam
#35 Edited by call-me-sam (56 posts) - - Show Bio

@galerion: My bad, I thought it was produced by Marvel. but you're right the early 2000s Marvel movies were all produced by completely different people. it's funny they all kinda look similar.

Avatar image for rabumalal
#36 Posted by RabumAlal (4831 posts) - - Show Bio

First Class was the best. He's still riding on that.

Avatar image for Feartheliving
#37 Posted by FearTheLiving (8837 posts) - - Show Bio

I preferred Vaughn personally.

Avatar image for darkdetective27
#38 Posted by darkdetective27 (7953 posts) - - Show Bio

I really like the movies and think they are some of the best cbm.

Avatar image for call-me-sam
#39 Posted by call-me-sam (56 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle:

@call-me-sam said:

the only thing those movies have in common with the X-Men comics is the title.

Well this just simply isn't true.

I was just joking they do have similarities but they are not obvious or pronounced. in other words they're just too different from the source material. the casting of Hugh Jackman alone is a good example Wolverine is not a 6ft 4 strong silent type. the whole point of Logan's character is he is small but vicious.(Like a Wolverine) but he has reasons why he is so bad-tempered and vicious, like a tormented animal. and that's just one character, the rest are just as inaccurate.

Avatar image for curve
#40 Posted by Curve (765 posts) - - Show Bio

Some of these answers make me lol. Especially since he directed X2 AND DOFP.

Avatar image for amazing_webhead
#41 Posted by amazing_webhead (9694 posts) - - Show Bio

i didn't, but he's getting better

Avatar image for deactivated-5a04a566e9ae3
#42 Edited by deactivated-5a04a566e9ae3 (12864 posts) - - Show Bio

@call-me-sam:

I disagree. The movies combine the politically charged themes of the source material(social injustice, political/social change, isolation) with sci-fI action. What else is an X-Men movie supposed to be?

I'll admit the characterizations and aesthetic stray from the source material significantly, but I don't think that's inherently bad, especially when we've had interesting stories come from it.

Also, Wolverine being short and vicious is definitely not the 'whole point' of the character, and he's been portrayed as the strong silent type many times since his inception. Wolverine's reasons for being bad-tempered and vicious have been explored -- arguably too much -- in the movies.

Avatar image for cattlebattle
#43 Posted by cattlebattle (17504 posts) - - Show Bio


I was just joking they do have similarities but they are not obvious or pronounced. in other words they're just too different from the source material. the casting of Hugh Jackman alone is a good example Wolverine is not a 6ft 4 strong silent type. the whole point of Logan's character is he is small but vicious.(Like a Wolverine) but he has reasons why he is so bad-tempered and vicious, like a tormented animal. and that's just one character, the rest are just as inaccurate.

True. I myself have often had a problem with Wolverines casting...however, there is realistic factors you have to take into account.....like where they would find an actor that's 5'3 or whatever ridiculous height Wolverine is supposed to be. Or the fact that a lot of actors careers blew up during the franchise, so after the the first X-Men movie, when Jackman and Berry's respective careers went into overdrive, the studio heads at Fox weren't about to be like "Hey, now that you guys are huge box office draws, we are going to reduce your roles in favor of other characters because a small niche of comic books fans like other characters". I'll admit the movies aren't perfect, but they tend to have more depth, better acting, and Magneto alone is more interesting than nearly every character in the MCU in my opinion. They have also done interesting things with some characters and quite of a bit of material was cribbed from the films and incorporated into the comics....because they were good ideas.

Avatar image for call-me-sam
#44 Edited by call-me-sam (56 posts) - - Show Bio

@sprior93: Don't get me wrong I think if people like the movies that's totally fine. but for me characterizations and aesthetic is key to a comic book adaptation. so I couldn't enjoy them.

Wolverine being short, vicious, obnoxious and bad-tempered definitely is the 'whole point' of the character. he is basically an unpleasant nutcase but he is also very heroic that's the dynamic of the character and why we like him. also we know what he's been through in his life so we sympathiize with him.

In fact Jackman's character in the movies was more like Cyclops, Scott is the one who I would describe as a strong silent type of dude with a private pain not Logan.

Avatar image for call-me-sam
#45 Posted by call-me-sam (56 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle: Good point, most comic book adaptations take on a life of their own and become almost a separate franchise. studio executives don't care about comics they just want to make the most entertaining movie they can and I accept that these days, but when I originally watched the movies I had a big problem with it. but I still don't get why some insist that the movies are comic book accurate when they're clearly not. maybe it's because a lot of people were introduced to X-Men through the movies?

Avatar image for immolation
#46 Edited by Immolation (1955 posts) - - Show Bio

@call-me-sam said:

Wolverine being short, vicious, obnoxious and bad-tempered definitely is the 'whole point' of the character. he is basically an unpleasant nutcase but he is also very heroic that's the dynamic of the character and why we like him. also we know what he's been through in his life so we sympathiize with him.

In fact Jackman's character in the movies was more like Cyclops, Scott is the one who I would describe as a strong silent type of dude with a private pain not Logan.

No, Wolverine has been portrayed as the strong silent type many times in the comics. It is exactly how Claremont wrote him during the short time Wolverine lead the X-Men between Mutant Massacre and Fall of Mutants. More often then not, it is the way he has been portrayed in his solos as well.

In the Mutant Massacre storyline when Wolverine fights Sabretooth the first time, it talks about how Wolverine is now able to control the berserker within, thanks to Charles Xavier. We see a simular monologue in his famous battle with Hulk from The Incredible Hulk #340. He has not consistantly been portrayed as the rude, unpleasant, berserker since the 70's and early 80's.

Avatar image for call-me-sam
#47 Edited by call-me-sam (56 posts) - - Show Bio

@immolation: Sure during fall of the mutants he wanted to take off from time to time because of the stress of leadership. and he had his reflective moments here and there, but I wouldn't say he was silent would you? in fact he probably talked more than ever. usually arguments with people, he assumed the leader role but he was a tough verbal type leader kinda like a sports coach.

in Uncanny X-Men #211-213 the X-Men acknowledge that Logan is acting out of character and "Buggy" as Rogue puts it. when he sees the victims of the Mutant Massacre it brings back old memories and disturbs him. point being he is not his usual self during those issues.

as for the Claremont/Miller mini I'll take your word for it because I haven't read those issues in like 20 years.

My overall point is Logan is not this generic tall quiet handsome loner guy. he just isn't. he's a rough around the edges loud-mouth obnoxious macho arrogant dude who calls women darlin and makes fun of his friends.(of which he has many all over the world) in a good natured way. he has lots of personality but the movie version did not capture any of it.

Avatar image for life_without_progress
#48 Edited by Life_Without_Progress (23704 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes.

He needs to bring in the yellow & blue tight suits, tho. (although I'd be fine with the New X-Men comic designs)

Online
Avatar image for immolation
#49 Posted by Immolation (1955 posts) - - Show Bio

@immolation: Sure during fall of the mutants he wanted to take off from time to time because of the stress of leadership. and he had his reflective moments here and there, but I wouldn't say he was silent would you?

Yeah, he kind of was. He didn't talk very much at all during those issues, but we would often see his inner monologue and thoughts.

Uncanny X-Men #221
Uncanny X-Men #221

in Uncanny X-Men #211-213 the X-Men acknowledge that Logan is acting out of character and "Buggy" as Rogue puts it. when he sees the victims of the Mutant Massacre it brings back old memories and disturbs him. point being he is not himself during those issues.

I do not remember this. Uncanny X-Men #211 was the issue where they discovered the massacred Morlocks. Wolverine became really angry when they discovered all the dead, but that was it. In #212 Wolverine spent the issue in the tunnels, fought Sabretooth for the first time, and rescued the Morlocks' healer. Uncanny X-Men #213 was kind of a Psylocke focused issue that also featured Wolverine's first real battle with Sabretooth, with narration by Psylocke.

I do remember him getting kind of startled when he found Jean Grey's scent in #211, because she was supposed to be dead. Nothing really came of it, though. He was left mentally shaken(along with the rest of the X-Men) after their battle with Malice in #214. Then he really freaked when he found Jean Grey's scent a second time in #215. It was implied that his freak out was partly due to him still being mentally rattled from the battle with Malice, but he seemed to get over it by the end of #216.

he just isn't. he's a rough around the edges obnoxious macho arrogant dude who calls women darlin and makes fun of his friends.(of which he has many all over the world) he has lots of personality but the movie version did not.

I'm not trying to argue that he is the same in the movies, I'm just saying that aspects of his personality from the movies were in the comics. It is true that Wolverine is taller, more handsome, and less cultured in the movies, but I am mostly talking about personality.

Yes, he was usually(but not always) kind of obnoxious when written by Claremont, but he didn't stay that way up until 2000 when the first movie came out. In the 90's he was often written as the silent type in the comics, especially by Larry Hama. Hama and Fabian Nicieza both dialed back Logan's Obnoxious-ness in the 90's. The first two movies seemed to take more inspiration from the 90's comics and the animated series then they did the 80's comics.

Avatar image for galerion
#50 Edited by Galerion (390 posts) - - Show Bio

@call-me-sam said:

@galerion: My bad, I thought it was produced by Marvel. but you're right the early 2000s Marvel movies were all produced by completely different people. it's funny they all kinda look similar.

Nah. Spider-Man and Green Goblin actually wore costumes with color in 2002 unlike the X-Men who still don't even in 2016.