With a different director and lacklustre writing, it isn't quite the same

Rating: 5/10 (23 April 2008)

Like "X2", I saw this third installment in the "X-Men" trilogy on the silver screen. Back in 2006, I was very impressed with "X-Men: The Last Stand", and couldn't understand all the criticism! However, watching it again on the small screen, I sort of wondered why I liked it so much in the theatre. When I saw it on the big screen, I hadn't seen either of its predecessors too recently, whereas when I saw it again on the small screen, I had just seen both "X-Men" and "X2" again, and could see that this third film wasn't quite the same, and not in a good way. This could be why I could then understand why it's widely considered a disappointment.
A "cure" for mutation has been invented, which can turn mutants into part of the rest of the human population. This provokes an uproar among the mutants, as some want to be "cured" (including Rogue, as she wants to be able to touch people without hurting them), while many others strongly object to the new potion and to the belief that their special X-Factor gene is a disease. When Magneto learns about this, and obviously objects, he forms an army of fellow mutants called the Brotherhood and plans to start a war against non-mutated humans! Professor Charles Xavier and most of his X-Men also object to this new "cure" for their powers, but with their hope for peace between mutants and the rest of humanity, they obviously don't support the Brotherhood's plans, so they must once again fight against him and his mutants! For Xavier's side, it doesn't help that Jean Gray, who was lost in the last mission, has been resurrected, but is now controlled by the power of the Phoenix, making her evil and extremely powerful! With this demon inside her, she joins Magneto's side!
When I saw this in the theatre, I didn't know it had a different director than the previous two efforts. However, I am now aware of the fact that "X-Men" and "X2" were directed by Bryan Singer, and "X-Men: The Last Stand" was directed by Brett Ratner, apparently so Singer could direct "Superman Returns" instead. I haven't seen any of Ratner's other films, but he doesn't seem to be as well-liked as Singer, and judging by this film, I think I can understand. The first major action scene takes place too early in the film, and the action sequences sometimes seem like Power Rangers ones, though they never get so bad that they're funny. The sex scene involving Jean and Logan is also lame. If Ratner wasn't involved in the writing for this movie, then I guess he isn't entirely responsible for its low quality, so I don't know exactly how much of this is his fault. The writing is also a tad disorganized, throwing in some characters who aren't in the first two films without properly introducing them, such as Hank McCoy. The story also certainly isn't as touching or deep as the first two sometimes are, or at least the second.
Fortunately, the film isn't all bad. There are some fairly tense moments, especially towards the end. Still, even 6/10 is not quite the same as the 8 I gave 2000's "X-Men", and the 9 I gave "X2". I think the best parts come around the end, and the film isn't usually that entertaining. So, the first sequel turned out to be superior to the original, which doesn't usually seem to happen with sequels, but sometimes does, and then the third installment turned out to be significantly inferior to the previous two. If you ask me, the same happened with "Spider-Man", another popular recent comic book movie trilogy. Well, "Spider-Man 4" has apparently been confirmed, and an "X-Men" prequel called "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" is also in the works, so let's hope they both show an improvement after "X-Men: The Last Stand" and "Spider-Man 3".