|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 27, 2020 22:41:35 GMT
Yes.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 19, 2020 21:57:49 GMT
You have been reported, Dazzie.
Bad language is not good, tiny bully.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 19, 2020 21:55:43 GMT
And Xavier, Magneto, Cyclops, Jean, Mystique, Beast...Tell me why did you steal this thread? Was it to intentionally look like a dumb arse? If so congrats you succeeded.
We can fix it, b-polar ass. We can make it together. For this wonderful, unique franchise that the MCU will never match in terms of quality.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 19, 2020 21:00:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 19, 2020 20:48:14 GMT
Thank you for taking the time to come up with this. Finally we know Jubilee's screentime. This small detail was bugging me for years. I can finally move on with life. I was wondering, can you do a count on these films to see how many times the color blue appears on screen in the original trilogy versus the other films not including First Class, Deadpool 2 or New Mutants and then report your findings here? ![](https://s26.postimg.cc/qna0tqd21/misc1.gif) Whats funny is I was going to joke that yeah like Martin Brundle - Martinfly actually counted this himself, but no it's his math alright, Logan the character with his own trilogy and the most focused on character in every movie he's got a starring role in has just 67 minutes of screen time according to him ![](https://s26.postimg.cc/tek3suwt5/laugh.gif) ![](https://s26.postimg.cc/tek3suwt5/laugh.gif) pretty sure Logan has more screen time in The Wolverine alone than that, what a chump and he thinks people should take anything he says with any sort of authority. ![](https://s26.postimg.cc/tek3suwt5/laugh.gif) ![](https://s26.postimg.cc/tek3suwt5/laugh.gif) ![](https://s26.postimg.cc/tek3suwt5/laugh.gif) You little paranoid, b-polar, psycho kid, I was talking about the main X-Men movies.OVERALL: X-1 Logan / Wolverine <30:30> X2Logan / Wolverine <28> X-3Logan / Wolverine <22:45> Origins James Howlett / Logan / Wolverine <50:30> FCLogan <:15> The WolverineLogan / Wolverine <74:30> DOFPLogan / Wolverine <27:45> ApocalypseLogan / Weapon X <2:30> LoganLogan / Wolverine <65:15> Deadpool 2Logan / Wolverine <:30>
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 17, 2020 14:36:45 GMT
but James Dean wasn't playing a ninja who beats the shit out of people. Michael Dudikoff did.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 16, 2020 17:00:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 14, 2020 22:50:40 GMT
The exact screentimes for the main characters of the X-Men movie franchise:
(previous additions were wrong, I recalculated the numbers)
Professor X – 2h 40m Magneto – 2h 4m 45s Wolverine – 5h 2m (including the 3 solo movies) Cyclops – 47m 15s + Havok – 15m 45s (The Summers Family) Storm – 44m 5s Jean Grey/Phoenix – 1h 30m 30s Beast – 1h 1m Mystique – 1h 22m
Nightcrawler – 23m 15s Rogue – 29m 15s + The Rogue Cut footage (11 minutes?) Colossus = 20m 30s (including the Deadpool universe) Iceman = 19m 45s Quicksilver – 17m 30s
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 14, 2020 21:55:40 GMT
The Amazing Spider-Man - X-Men: First Class - Man of Steel - Batman Begin - Star Wars: The Force Awakens Which is your favourite? 'The Amazing Spider-Man' is better than Spider-Man 2 and 3. First Class is a masterpiece. Man of Steel is a masterpiece. Batman Begins is a good movie, and a good prequel to the greatest movie in history. The Force Awakens is garbage.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 14, 2020 0:07:14 GMT
Tell me.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 14, 2020 0:04:53 GMT
No. Let's try. It's a fantastic movie for sure. How do you know that? It looks and feels as a fantastic movie. I could be wrong... let's see.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 13, 2020 23:46:44 GMT
Jesus. Just put it on streaming and let it die already. No. Let's try. It's a fantastic movie for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 13, 2020 0:36:26 GMT
Arguably, before Apocalypse and X-Factor, Angel was the only lame and useless X-Man in history. I wouldn't exactly call him lame myself but, your opinion is probably the new norm amongst NEW X-Men fans. I'm a fan since 1986.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 12, 2020 17:34:14 GMT
Great post. I agree with you A LOT. The cinematic version was 1 million of times better and more meaningful than the comic book counterpart. They took a lame bidimensional nineties villain and turned him into a Cronenberguesque sci-fi character. 10/10. I can't follow you there as far as Apocalypse's depiction in the film except to say that Isaacs is a talented actor. As for his comic book counterpart, he did at least help the then stagnating Warren Warrithington character move into the 90s as Archangel. Apocalypse's, kidnapping, torture, mutilation, and indoctrination of Angel are trauma-inducing even when reading it today. Arguably, before Apocalypse and X-Factor, Angel was the only lame and useless X-Man in history.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 12, 2020 14:20:43 GMT
For a not hyperhyped Disney-produced MCU comic book movie, that is truly tremendous. Must be nice living in that paralel universe that you live in. The one where this crap is actually a great movie, Oscar Isacs deserves an Oscar and the movie is a tremendous success Must be nice living in that parallel (TWO "L") universe that you live in. The one where some crappy MCU movies are good movies, and better than this quintessential X-Men movie.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 12, 2020 14:19:16 GMT
I never really understood the appeal of the character. Apocalypses' personality, motivation, and strategies were all done better with earlier X-Men villains. His ascendence to badass-of-the-minute status during the 90s always seemed like a regression in the genre to me. Why would any character created during that era need to have the first letter of their name emblazoned on their belt? When I look at Apocalypse, all I see is a novel powerset and lazy and clichéd biblical references. No disrespect to anyone who thinks he's the bee's knees, though, it takes all kinds. Great post. I agree with you A LOT. The cinematic version was 1 million of times better and more meaningful than the comic book counterpart. They took a lame bidimensional nineties villain and turned him into a Cronenberguesque sci-fi character. 10/10.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 10, 2020 0:07:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 9, 2020 23:19:57 GMT
Talk about major denial and X-Men withdrawal because the MCU has now acquired the rights. Hell yes.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 9, 2020 23:19:10 GMT
That's just the icing on the cake. BUDGET: $178,000,000 BOX OFFICE: $542,537,546 For a comic book movie that's not what tremendous success means. What's next: record breaking Shazam? For a not hyperhyped Disney-produced MCU comic book movie, that is truly tremendous.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 9, 2020 13:15:09 GMT
A general rule of thumb if you have to use tv, rentals, and dvd sales as evidence of a movie's success it wasn't one. That's just the icing on the cake. BUDGET: $178,000,000 BOX OFFICE: $542,537,546
|
|