ROTTEN TOMATOES: Critical Consensus: "X-Men: The Last Stand" On Shaky Ground Comments

Critical Consensus: "X-Men: The Last Stand" On Shaky Ground

by Tim Ryan | May 25, 2006

Summary

We've only got one wide release this week, but it's a biggie: "X-Men: The Last Stand." Brett Ratner is at the helm, virtually all the principle characters are back, and some major plot developments are in store for X-fans. Do the critics say "X" marks the spot, or do they feel this one wasn't built to "Last?" Back to Article

(21-40 of 80 posts) | Reply

SozeStrangelove writes:
on May 25 2006 10:06 PM

In reply to this comment (#836626)
[b]. . .[/b]
. . .Gambit? Are you serious? Gambit?!? i mean, come on! There are way better characters in the comics.

(Reply to this)

lovelykeira writes:
on May 25 2006 10:13 PM

56% really isn't that bad. I can hardly wait, I'm going with a whole bunch of people tomorrow night. And I know tons of people that really want to see this, so I'm sure it's going to do very well. I hope it beats the shit of The Da Vinci Code which is definitely one of the worst films of the year.

(Reply to this)

Dacritic4 writes:
on May 25 2006 11:14 PM

That movie was great just as good as the first two and maybe even better. It definately had the most action and was entertaining as hell.... it's definately a must see movie with great special effects and great acting....

(Reply to this)

The Paki Don writes:
on May 26 2006 01:54 AM

[b]After all is said and done...[/b]
I think, you also need to take into consideration that fans of the movie might get a lot more out of the movie than the critics necessarily will, and I feel that critics are important, because they do come with their opinion and try to justify it properly. One thing I'll always respect critics for is that they are not affected by how big a movie is or how much money is put into it. They try to judge it after what the movie has to offer.

I think X3 will still be a satisfactory experience and looking at the "bad reviews", they're not bad, they're just not good enough to be marked good. The complaints are that some people don't have enough screentime or there's too much action and too little depth. I think/hope that fans will find the depth that critics seem to be missing out on.

(Reply to this)

DanSmith writes:
on May 26 2006 02:12 AM

i just got back from a midnight showing, and i thought it was pretty good.
i hated the ending though.

(Reply to this)

CenoBiteMe2000 writes:
on May 26 2006 02:14 AM

[b]The Ecchs Men[/b]
Can't be any worse than Daredevil. Even the 80s F4 pilot was better!

(Reply to this)

randolphval writes:
on May 26 2006 04:46 AM

[b]NO WAY!!![/b]
people wont care if the critics will dumb it because almost everyone who have seen it, have liked it!!!
ANd still this movie might end up almost 300M in domestic gross alone!!!

(Reply to this)

darth_nevets writes:
on May 26 2006 05:42 AM

In reply to this comment (#836640)
Caught midnight show. Didn't like it all that much. The idea that an inferior sequel could outgross the superb X2 in a WEAKENED market, since the end of 2004, with more competition, Cars/Supes/da vnici, is improbable.

(Reply to this)

aknddon3 writes:
on May 26 2006 06:10 AM

Who cares if Bryan Singer is not doing this movie, after seeing how he turned Superman Gay and made him the least threatening superhero of all time i am happy he could not ruin another superhero, screw Singer.

(Reply to this)

puablo writes:
on May 26 2006 07:04 AM

In reply to this comment (#836634)
[b]Gambit[/b]
You are very much in the minority. All I hear and read, from friends and posts online (as well as my own wants) is "Where's Gambit? We want Gambit! Gambit Gambit Gambit!"

Most people want to see Gambit because they equate X-Men with the great cartoon series of the early 1990s, where Gambit was a lead character, and undeniably the favorite of many if not most viewers. Arguably more than Wolverine!

(Reply to this)

synergyred writes:
on May 26 2006 07:23 AM

Damn I'm so worried about this one...

(Reply to this)

tommyl120882 writes:
on May 26 2006 07:46 AM

[b]gambit part 2[/b]
Since puablo brings it up (I was going to leave it alone), that misguided missile of a comment attacking Gambit is laughable. Nearly as laughable as the movie exec. who thought no one would notice if they cut the best character from the comic series from the films. Even if Gambit isn't your favorite, I emplore a good explanation for his absence.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 26 2006 09:08 AM

I'm a Spiderman fan myself, but I gotta tell you, Gambit's absence from these movies makes no sense to me. He isn't as vital as, say, Professor X, but still an awesome character. And someone who can make bombs at will??? How would that NOT be totally awesome on screen?

(Reply to this)

Elixir writes:
on May 26 2006 02:17 PM

the movie stunk. Ratner and Rothman ruined the series.

good job guys give yourselfs a round of applause !

(Reply to this)

puablo writes:
on May 26 2006 02:54 PM

I would have loved to have seen Gambit's effects on screen. A guy I know claims he heard somewhere that Gambit was nixed because he was too similar to Cyclops. I have never heard such a thing myself and it makes no sense whatsoever, so you can take that with less than a grain of salt.

I agree with the earlier comment that an X-Men fan is going to treat this movie far differently than the average movie watcher. So much like last week, where more people in the public arena seemed to have liked The DaVinci Code than the reviewers did, it is equally plausible that X-Fans will like X3 a great deal, despite the ever-plummeting tomatometer. I just hope I enjoy it.

(Reply to this)

loner_xtreme writes:
on May 26 2006 05:37 PM

[b]it wasn't bad at all...[/b]
...i've watched the first two. so i know how to 'criticize' on the formality of the x-men series.

X3 was pleasing. i enjoyed it a lot. it's true that it doesn't quite capture the heart of the previous two (the seriousness). mostly relying on one liners. but hey. it's a comic book movie.

either they had too many things going on...or they could've extended the time with those things. an hour and 45 minutes is the minimum...they could've added more.

ii liked how it ended though. it makes you wonder.....

many shockers IMO. i didn't expect a lot of things to happend in X3.

it's NOT the best movie of the year....but it's certainly a good way to 'end' the trilogy.

(Reply to this)

hellhole writes:
on May 26 2006 06:12 PM

I am actually a little surprised that this film is doing as well as it is for the critics. The first two were flawed, but were pretty well-received, and won Bryan Singer a fair amount of acclaim. Coming onboard, Brett Ratner had a lot of obstacles to overcome--his newness to an already-established franchise, matching the general tone of the previous films, the notable handicap of being Brett Ratner, and most of all, the overwhelming expectations of the fans.

This may not be the best X-Men movie, but it may very well turn out to be the best thing Brett Ratner has ever done. Considering his previous work, I expected the film to get reamed by critics for matching the style of the predecessors, but not the substance. And while that appears that this is an issue, it doesn't look like it's as significant as I anticipated.

(Reply to this)

hellhole writes:
on May 26 2006 06:18 PM

In reply to this comment (#836642)
"Who cares if Bryan Singer is not doing this movie, after seeing how he turned Superman Gay and made him the least threatening superhero of all time i am happy he could not ruin another superhero, screw Singer."

Uh... Singer has already made two X-Men films, both of which were well-done. Exactly which member could he have ruined if he had made yet another one?

As for anything having to do with Superman, you have obviously seen the movie, or you wouldn't be making any claims about it, right? I would like to know where you saw it, because I would certainly enjoy an advance screening. Tool.

(Reply to this)

Elixir writes:
on May 26 2006 06:59 PM

its sad to see people making comments like "its just a comic book movie anyways". too many people are makign excuses for this movie, way too many. the movie stunk, in a week i'm sure everyone will agree.

(Reply to this)

aknddon3 writes:
on May 26 2006 08:48 PM

In reply to this comment (#836651)
You do not need to see the movie to know that Superman looks like a little queer, Tool.

(Reply to this)