|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on Nov 28, 2019 23:39:51 GMT
Damn, "X-Men" was truly a great movie, and it definitely paved the way to the new era of superhero movies.
The fight between Wolverine and Sabretooth was terrific. Great cinematography, great coreography, great direction. You can see how this movie worked as template for everything that came after.
And hell, the whole Mutant-Machine sequence was beautiful.
|
|
|
Post by bud47 on Nov 28, 2019 23:49:03 GMT
Aging badly and doesn't hold up. But it still helped pave the way, so it deserves credit.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on Nov 28, 2019 23:50:49 GMT
Aging badly and doesn't hold up. Your opinion.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Nov 28, 2019 23:52:06 GMT
Aging badly and doesn't hold up. But it still helped pave the way, so it deserves credit. Biggest reason why I like Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy better.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Nov 29, 2019 0:58:25 GMT
Damn, "X-Men" was truly a great movie, and it definitely paved the way to the new era of superhero movies. The fight between Wolverine and Sabretooth was terrific. Great cinematography, great coreography, great direction. You can see how this movie worked as template for everything that came after. And hell, the whole Mutant-Machine sequence was beautiful. I'd give Blade and The Matrix way more credit than X-men. Without those movies I don't think there would be an X-men as it is.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Nov 29, 2019 1:24:59 GMT
Damn, "X-Men" was truly a great movie, and it definitely paved the way to the new era of superhero movies. The fight between Wolverine and Sabretooth was terrific. Great cinematography, great coreography, great direction. You can see how this movie worked as template for everything that came after. And hell, the whole Mutant-Machine sequence was beautiful. I guess you're entitled to your own opinion, but if that's your idea of what great action choreography is then you have a pretty low bar for action choreography.
|
|
|
Post by bud47 on Nov 29, 2019 1:31:13 GMT
Aging badly and doesn't hold up. Your opinion. No shit. What else did you think it was? Fact and opinion. Learn the difference.
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Nov 29, 2019 3:56:03 GMT
Aging badly and doesn't hold up. But it still helped pave the way, so it deserves credit. it does hold up. The current superhero movies feels that have aged more due to their animated effects. This was in 2000 this is a 2019 film Its denial at this point to claim X-Men 1 has aged more. X-Men 1, you can see the actors. Endgame you can't really see anyone as the CGI is too animated. Endgame does not look like a film with humanbeings. If MCU X-men looks like Endgame, it will face a lot of mockery.
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Nov 29, 2019 4:01:55 GMT
Damn, "X-Men" was truly a great movie, and it definitely paved the way to the new era of superhero movies. The fight between Wolverine and Sabretooth was terrific. Great cinematography, great coreography, great direction. You can see how this movie worked as template for everything that came after. And hell, the whole Mutant-Machine sequence was beautiful. I'd give Blade and The Matrix way more credit than X-men. Because X-men movies make MCU look even more childish than they already are. I give the credit to X-Men first and Spiderman second. During that time, it was good to be in superhero marvel movies. Now some of their actors want distance from MCU. This is how MCU fans lash out.Have you MCU fans noticed that the X-men and Spiderman movies of the 2000s are far more respected and remembered than these MCU movies?
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Nov 29, 2019 4:08:33 GMT
Damn, "X-Men" was truly a great movie, and it definitely paved the way to the new era of superhero movies. The fight between Wolverine and Sabretooth was terrific. Great cinematography, great coreography, great direction. You can see how this movie worked as template for everything that came after. And hell, the whole Mutant-Machine sequence was beautiful. It rightfully paved way, more importantly for mature comic book films. A lot of MCU fans hate to admit it and don't want to give that credit because it means they also have to admit MCU kids rubbish. I like the cinematography, its like a Nolan movie. Looks really realistic. it was good to watch a superhero movies where there is no big mass CGI sequence fights that goes on forever. Wish MCU would learn. it could make their films look less theme parky. While I prefer Spiderman 1 to X-Men 1, I can't help but think of what William Dafoe says is wrong with comic movies in 2019 like Endgame. he says its too loud and noisy. Watching x-men 1 proves Dafoe's point.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Nov 29, 2019 4:09:49 GMT
Aging badly and doesn't hold up. But it still helped pave the way, so it deserves credit. it does hold up. The current superhero movies feels that have aged more due to their animated effects. This was in 2000 this is a 2019 film Its denial at this point to claim X-Men 1 has aged more. X-Men 1, you can see the actors. Endgame you can't really see anyone as the CGI is too animated. Endgame does not look like a film with humanbeings. If MCU X-men looks like Endgame, it will face a lot of mockery. This is a false equivalence as Endgame NEEDED that much CGI for final battle.
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Nov 29, 2019 4:16:00 GMT
it does hold up. The current superhero movies feels that have aged more due to their animated effects. This was in 2000 this is a 2019 film Its denial at this point to claim X-Men 1 has aged more. X-Men 1, you can see the actors. Endgame you can't really see anyone as the CGI is too animated. Endgame does not look like a film with humanbeings. If MCU X-men looks like Endgame, it will face a lot of mockery. This is a false equivalence as Endgame NEEDED that much CGI for final battle. I really wish it was a false sequence but its not. Endgame looks really bad. endgame would have been better if it was a pixar film instead at least we know its good animation. here is another shot , this looks like a video game. x-men 1 that was 20 years ago looks less blury.
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Nov 29, 2019 4:18:39 GMT
The mutant machine sequences scene >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> massive destruction porn cgi superhero battles.
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Nov 29, 2019 4:25:40 GMT
The mutant machine sequence scene >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Huge massive destruction porn cgi superhero battles. X-Men 1 and Spiderman 1 were masterpieces marvel comic movies. they avoided everything that seems to make MCU movies stink today.I understand why the villainsactors in these films William Dafoe and Ian Mckellen say they will never be in today's marvel films.
|
|
|
Post by bud47 on Nov 29, 2019 4:47:12 GMT
Fucking hell thenolan, how many responses do we need from you on this subject?
X-Men looks like a cheap made-for-tv sci-film by today's standard. X2 is a much better film and even it is showing it's age. Can't beat time. Eventually, the MCU films will be dated as well.
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Nov 29, 2019 4:58:47 GMT
Fucking hell thenolan, how many responses do we need from you on this subject? X-Men looks like a cheap made-for-tv sci-film by today's standard. X2 is a much better film and even it is showing it's age. Can't beat time. Eventually, the MCU films will be dated as well. It would be easy to believe you but as you can see, you are just talking from your MCU ass. You are not showing any proof of it I think today's standard look really cheap and I am not just talking I am showing videos as proof. Today's standard is bringing a lot of hate to superhero theme park cinema, so that proves you are wrong. If X-Men 1 looks cheap, what do you call this? How can you say that looks better than this, You are in serious denial. Ever since Scorsese destroyed Marvel. there has been this awakening in the world that has made everyone to go back to the comic movies of 15-20 years ago to see where MCU has gone wrong. I commend you though for fighting hard for MCU by being so in denial of the better films like X-Men 1 Today's comic films like Avengers will be better as cheap TV quality films than looking fully animated.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Nov 29, 2019 6:10:35 GMT
Fucking hell thenolan, how many responses do we need from you on this subject? X-Men looks like a cheap made-for-tv sci-film by today's standard. X2 is a much better film and even it is showing it's age. Can't beat time. Eventually, the MCU films will be dated as well. It would be easy to believe you but as you can see, you are just talking from your MCU ass. You are not showing any proof of it I think today's standard look really cheap and I am not just talking I am showing videos as proof. Today's standard is bringing a lot of hate to superhero theme park cinema, so that proves you are wrong. If X-Men 1 looks cheap, what do you call this? How can you say that looks better than this, You are in serious denial. Ever since Scorsese destroyed Marvel. there has been this awakening in the world that has made everyone to go back to the comic movies of 15-20 years ago to see where MCU has gone wrong. I commend you though for fighting hard for MCU by being so in denial of the better films like X-Men 1 Today's comic films like Avengers will be better as cheap TV quality films than looking fully animated. You know that these modern movies are made with detail in mind of 2K and 4K level Ultra HD right? not 720 "HD", this reduction in resolution blurs the content because there is SO much detail going on that the lower resolution cannot convey it all so it blends and blurs together, older films weren't like this, as HD wasn't even a common viable thing, seeing as SD was the norm until the later 2000's, so much so that showsl ike My Name Is Earl during this time added easter eggs in some episodes just for HD viewers, such as notes saying "HD Rules, SD Blows" and such stuff in background set pieces that looked blank or blurred in SD but read clear as day in HD, that's all that is which you are bitching about, the detail is washed out in the inferior low "HD" resolution.
Which for the record doesn't hurt those older films as they were shot to translate well between the cinema and SD TV which was 480p, so the 720 resolution isn't washing anything out of it, this is why the likes of DC-Fan and likely yourself who watch or torrent low quality cam footage of the films moan about how bad they look, because you aren't seeing the real quality of the visuals.
All this being said the fight scene in X1 isn't impressive now, it was back in the day but the choreography is limited as is the action, it had cool stuff for back then, Logan doing the spin around and landing back on the statue and cutting off the end piece due to his claws cutting so deep was cool, but it's low rent now, X1 though without a doubt helped push the genre forward, but it's really a 3 strike combo, Blade saved the genre, X-Men hyped the genre and Spider-Man cemented the genre, without Blade then X-Men could have be slashed with their relatively already low budget, let alone marketing, without X-Men Sony may not have been inclined to find a way to move forward as they did with Spidey and without Spidey shocking the world with it's success then we may never have gotten that first boom of CBM's or Marvel getting the nuts to risk the company on making their own films, same as you cannot discount the importance of Superman or Batman from the 70's & 80's giving studios that initial idea that hey cbm's can make some fucking money, who knew?but with that being said the effects from all those years ago are aging worse and worse, though the amount of more practical effects in X-Men compared to Spidey leave it aging better imo, Spidey's CGI started aging badly like 7-8 years ago, X-Men's only now starting to show some cracks.
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Nov 29, 2019 6:23:42 GMT
It would be easy to believe you but as you can see, you are just talking from your MCU ass. You are not showing any proof of it I think today's standard look really cheap and I am not just talking I am showing videos as proof. Today's standard is bringing a lot of hate to superhero theme park cinema, so that proves you are wrong. If X-Men 1 looks cheap, what do you call this? How can you say that looks better than this, You are in serious denial. Ever since Scorsese destroyed Marvel. there has been this awakening in the world that has made everyone to go back to the comic movies of 15-20 years ago to see where MCU has gone wrong. I commend you though for fighting hard for MCU by being so in denial of the better films like X-Men 1 Today's comic films like Avengers will be better as cheap TV quality films than looking fully animated. You know that these modern movies are made with detail in mind of 2K and 4K level Ultra HD right? not 720 "HD", this reduction in resolution blurs the content because there is SO much detail going on that the lower resolution cannot convey it all so it blends and blurs together, older films weren't like this, as HD wasn't even a common viable thing, seeing as SD was the norm until the later 2000's, so much so that showsl ike My Name Is Earl during this time added easter eggs in some episodes just for HD viewers, such as notes saying "HD Rules, SD Blows" and such stuff in background set pieces that looked blank or blurred in SD but read clear as day in HD, that's all that is which you are bitching about, the detail is washed out in the inferior low "HD" resolution.
Which for the record doesn't hurt those older films as they were shot to translate well between the cinema and SD TV which was 480p, so the 720 resolution isn't washing anything out of it, this is why the likes of DC-Fan and likely yourself who watch or torrent low quality cam footage of the films moan about how bad they look, because you aren't seeing the real quality of the visuals.
All this being said the fight scene in X1 isn't impressive now, it was back in the day but the choreography is limited as is the action, it had cool stuff for back then, Logan doing the spin around and landing back on the statue and cutting off the end piece due to his claws cutting so deep was cool, but it's low rent now, X1 though without a doubt helped push the genre forward, but it's really a 3 strike combo, Blade saved the genre, X-Men hyped the genre and Spider-Man cemented the genre, without Blade then X-Men could have be slashed with their relatively already low budget, let alone marketing, without X-Men Sony may not have been inclined to find a way to move forward as they did with Spidey and without Spidey shocking the world with it's success then we may never have gotten that first boom of CBM's or Marvel getting the nuts to risk the company on making their own films, same as you cannot discount the importance of Superman or Batman from the 70's & 80's giving studios that initial idea that hey cbm's can make some fucking money, who knew?but with that being said the effects from all those years ago are aging worse and worse, though the amount of more practical effects in X-Men compared to Spidey leave it aging better imo, Spidey's CGI started aging badly like 7-8 years ago, X-Men's only now starting to show some cracks.
The action is limited.Cool. 15-20 years ago, superhero films cared more about story than action. I already prefer x-men 1 after not seeing it in many years because it has less action. I am an adult, I don't need cgi in my face every 5 minutes to enjoy a movie. Seriously arguing 2k, 3k and HD. Look at the YouTube clips. I noticed most old comic films have no HD to click on. mcu does and they still look bad. this is awful in spite of the format. Disney probably said from the get go that they wanted endgame to look animated as the movies is meant for kids. Nothing in X-Men 1 looks this bad. Blade was marketed more as a vampire film, he helped the genre a lot, it was X-Men that made the genre more of a legit type of superhero cinema that did not feel you were in a theme park. Spiderman cemented the blockbuster appeal of comic movies. What is certain now though is whatever good Blade, X-MEN or Spiderman did has been mostly destroyed by MCU.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Nov 29, 2019 6:23:50 GMT
It would be easy to believe you but as you can see, you are just talking from your MCU ass. You are not showing any proof of it I think today's standard look really cheap and I am not just talking I am showing videos as proof. Today's standard is bringing a lot of hate to superhero theme park cinema, so that proves you are wrong. If X-Men 1 looks cheap, what do you call this? How can you say that looks better than this, You are in serious denial. Ever since Scorsese destroyed Marvel. there has been this awakening in the world that has made everyone to go back to the comic movies of 15-20 years ago to see where MCU has gone wrong. I commend you though for fighting hard for MCU by being so in denial of the better films like X-Men 1 Today's comic films like Avengers will be better as cheap TV quality films than looking fully animated. You know that these modern movies are made with detail in mind of 2K and 4K level Ultra HD right? not 720 "HD", this reduction in resolution blurs the content because there is SO much detail going on that the lower resolution cannot convey it all so it blends and blurs together, older films weren't like this, as HD wasn't even a common viable thing, seeing as SD was the norm until the later 2000's, so much so that showsl ike My Name Is Earl during this time added easter eggs in some episodes just for HD viewers, such as notes saying "HD Rules, SD Blows" and such stuff in background set pieces that looked blank or blurred in SD but read clear as day in HD, that's all that is which you are bitching about, the detail is washed out in the inferior low "HD" resolution.
Which for the record doesn't hurt those older films as they were shot to translate well between the cinema and SD TV which was 480p, so the 720 resolution isn't washing anything out of it, this is why the likes of DC-Fan and likely yourself who watch or torrent low quality cam footage of the films moan about how bad they look, because you aren't seeing the real quality of the visuals.
All this being said the fight scene in X1 isn't impressive now, it was back in the day but the choreography is limited as is the action, it had cool stuff for back then, Logan doing the spin around and landing back on the statue and cutting off the end piece due to his claws cutting so deep was cool, but it's low rent now, X1 though without a doubt helped push the genre forward, but it's really a 3 strike combo, Blade saved the genre, X-Men hyped the genre and Spider-Man cemented the genre, without Blade then X-Men could have be slashed with their relatively already low budget, let alone marketing, without X-Men Sony may not have been inclined to find a way to move forward as they did with Spidey and without Spidey shocking the world with it's success then we may never have gotten that first boom of CBM's or Marvel getting the nuts to risk the company on making their own films, same as you cannot discount the importance of Superman or Batman from the 70's & 80's giving studios that initial idea that hey cbm's can make some fucking money, who knew?but with that being said the effects from all those years ago are aging worse and worse, though the amount of more practical effects in X-Men compared to Spidey leave it aging better imo, Spidey's CGI started aging badly like 7-8 years ago, X-Men's only now starting to show some cracks.
I would still say that action scenes in Spider-Man is aging better than action scenes in X-Men, which looks incredibly stiff by today's standards.
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Nov 29, 2019 6:28:13 GMT
You know that these modern movies are made with detail in mind of 2K and 4K level Ultra HD right? not 720 "HD", this reduction in resolution blurs the content because there is SO much detail going on that the lower resolution cannot convey it all so it blends and blurs together, older films weren't like this, as HD wasn't even a common viable thing, seeing as SD was the norm until the later 2000's, so much so that showsl ike My Name Is Earl during this time added easter eggs in some episodes just for HD viewers, such as notes saying "HD Rules, SD Blows" and such stuff in background set pieces that looked blank or blurred in SD but read clear as day in HD, that's all that is which you are bitching about, the detail is washed out in the inferior low "HD" resolution.
Which for the record doesn't hurt those older films as they were shot to translate well between the cinema and SD TV which was 480p, so the 720 resolution isn't washing anything out of it, this is why the likes of DC-Fan and likely yourself who watch or torrent low quality cam footage of the films moan about how bad they look, because you aren't seeing the real quality of the visuals.
All this being said the fight scene in X1 isn't impressive now, it was back in the day but the choreography is limited as is the action, it had cool stuff for back then, Logan doing the spin around and landing back on the statue and cutting off the end piece due to his claws cutting so deep was cool, but it's low rent now, X1 though without a doubt helped push the genre forward, but it's really a 3 strike combo, Blade saved the genre, X-Men hyped the genre and Spider-Man cemented the genre, without Blade then X-Men could have be slashed with their relatively already low budget, let alone marketing, without X-Men Sony may not have been inclined to find a way to move forward as they did with Spidey and without Spidey shocking the world with it's success then we may never have gotten that first boom of CBM's or Marvel getting the nuts to risk the company on making their own films, same as you cannot discount the importance of Superman or Batman from the 70's & 80's giving studios that initial idea that hey cbm's can make some fucking money, who knew?but with that being said the effects from all those years ago are aging worse and worse, though the amount of more practical effects in X-Men compared to Spidey leave it aging better imo, Spidey's CGI started aging badly like 7-8 years ago, X-Men's only now starting to show some cracks.
I would still say that action scenes in Spider-Man is aging better than action scenes in X-Men, which looks incredibly stiff by today's standards. We all can both say the action scenes of spiderman and xmen are aging better than today marvel films. Spiderman 2 Far from home x-men 1 scene FFH is like a theme park
|
|