5/10
X-travagant but lacks the sharpness of the previous films!
31 May 2006
My one line summary pretty much sums up my thoughts about the third film in the X-Men series and while the effects are better than ever before there is something missing. The previous installments had a sharp, witty intelligence to the dialog that made the characters seem extremely well rounded and interesting. The witty dialog didn't seem like one-liners in the first films. They seemed a natural consequence of the characters' relationships with each others but as the characters didn't have the same edge in the third film it came off much more like one-liners. Especially some of Beast's dialog. Not to say that it didn't always work, it did, but it seemed much more synthetic and that really is a shame. In my opinion Brett Radner was the wrong man to direct the movie and Simon Kinberg (Mr. and Mrs. Smith) was definitely the wrong man to write the movie.

Some of the characters did work. Wolverine was still pretty interesting but I'm saddened that they didn't follow up on his sub-story from the previous movies. In the previous movies his character was largely about finding out about his mysterious past. This thread was dropped completely in this movie making him much more of a team player which is not really what his character is about. Wolverine is a loner and you don't change that. Hugh Jackman's portrayal is relatively faithful but I still prefer his performance in X2. Halle Berry's character has been enhanced dramatically, something I can't really go into without spoiling the movie, but her character seems hollow somehow and while Berry goes through the motions there really isn't a lot of substance in her character. Kelsey Grammar is very good as Beast and is a satisfactory substitute to Nightcrawler and in this role Grammar proves that he has dramatic talent as well as comedic. The best performance belongs to Ian McKellen who does a lot with his character which was actually quite poorly scripted. Other characters have been reduced dramatically. Cyclops is an excellent example. He is only in the film for about 5 minutes and that is just not enough for a character who was a major character in the previous films. Other examples are Rogue and Mystique. All in all the character development is inadequate and if not for the saving graces of Ian McKellen and Hugh Jackman I could have been tempted to say that the acting was below average in a series that has previously been known for excellent performances.

The effects are of course stellar. Some of the best effects I have ever seen and it is in the effects that the true saving grace for this film is found. In every scene there is some form of effect and fortunately they are all perfectly done. Storm's powers in particular seem more credible than ever before and her status as a semi-goddess is more justifiable. Fortunately the action is very well choreographed as well allowing for some very interesting and innovative fight sequences easily on par with anything from the previous films in the X-Men saga. The only negative thing that can be said about the fight sequences is that because we don't care for the characters to the same degree as in the previous films its a little harder to get emotionally involved in the fights. However, I do believe that the third X-Men film deserves recognition because of the effects and I'm tempted to say that the effects have become a leading character in this film.

Overall X-Men: The Last Stand doesn't seem nearly as polished as the previous films but in terms of entertainment value the film is on a very high level and the only reason I give the film a small 7 instead of a 6 is because of the excellent effects. It is hard not to feel a slight sting of disappointment though but I think I'll get past it and at least the X-Men series has come to a close with a bang that will surely make it one of the most financially successful films of the year.

7/10
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed