X-Men 2

In the context of comic book adaptations, this is definitely one of the more successful endeavors, but it is also a common commercial product that did not convince me with what it had to offer. The first two films Singer directed have greater ambitions and strive for a certain depth of thought at least in their genre than, for example, Hood's purely popcorn teenage flick X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Although I gave it 4 stars, I admit that I have never been a fan of similar mainstream comics about superheroes and mutants. This kind of fairy tale for grown-ups simply tires me. In terms of acting, it is solid, and the direction cannot be denied high professionalism, but the script seemed somewhat chatty and diluted to me. Overall impression: 60%. (07/02/2010)

X-Men 2 is, together with The Crow and Batman Returns, the best comic book adaptation ever. An extremely skilful mix of psychology and action, an interesting and smart story, dialogue that doesn't drag, great visual effects and last but not least excellent actors. I ate it hook, line and sinker, and I hope Singer still enjoys doing this and that we can expect a long, pleasant franchise. Carry on. (09/19/2003)

Brian Singer proves that even a movie based on a comic book can contain some psychological undertones. If you add precise directing, well-chosen cast, lots of ideas and an ingenious action sequence. In addition, they have the advantage that the movie worked even without any of the above, unlike most other popcorn movies recently. At last a picture that proves the rule that a sequel can be considerably better than its forerunner. (07/03/2007)

I appreciate how intelligently and innovatively Singer has approached this comic book material, yet X-Men 2 drags at times more than the viewer would expect when surrounded by so many amazing characters with even more amazing mutant abilities. On the one hand, a lot of the chatter is fine (I would carve in stone everything Wolverine says), on the other hand, it weakens the film as an ambitious blockbuster, whose enormous potential is, after all, clearly demonstrated by the director in the last hour. The special effects are better than in the first one, as well as the villain's storyline and the performances, only the psychology, although it gets much more space, doesn't give the impression of being very refined... 80% (12/23/2012)

Better than the first part after all, but still not quite up to par. The running time has increased, along with the wannabe profound speeches that ultimately fade away a bit emptily in the quick conclusion. Wolverine's internal conflict, on the other hand, is captivating, and the other characters are quite interesting as well. Fortunately, Bryan Singer delivers another smart comic book adaptation and manages to combine flashy popcorn action and a relatively engaging plot more than decently. The visual effects are among the best that can currently be seen, and if it weren't for the already mentioned slightly excessive runtime, I would be very satisfied. As it is, it's just a solid above-average film with a few minor flaws, but it's still worth watching. Compared to Daredevil or Spiderman, it clearly comes out on top. (05/29/2006)