God I hate this movie, A mutant whose powers is to nullify other mutants powers??? REALLY.. FREAKING REALLY?!?! First they say its "EVOLUTION" then ALL OF A SUDDEN they can DE-EVOLUTIONIZE them back to being "normal" homo sapiens??? HECK WHY STOP THERE?!?! Why not DE-EVOLUTIONIZE all of humanity back to primitive APES?!?!

CHEAPEST COP OUT EVER!!!

Avoid this movie at all costs. Or better just forget it EVER existed!

People complain about Jean dying, but that's actually the only reason I've rated this movie an 8. I love it when movies succesfully make me feel something.

It has some ok action but the story is really bad.

Just like Spider-Man 3 this film suffers from not taking the ball and running with it after a solid second film that left many possibilities. Instead you have Cyclops killed off for no good reason other than Fox was mad at him for doing Superman Returns.
Xavier dies but is alive and well in a twin body in the credits that was conveniently around in case he needed it I guess. Days of Future Past never gave a better answer to how he was back unfortunately.
Days of the Future Past tried to clean up the mess this film made but while raising too many new questions.

Not as good as the first two parts but a lot of action and a plot that gets never boring!

The highlight of this trilogy is undoubtedly Hugh Jackman.

This isn’t a complete failure by any stretch and there are flashes here that work really well. The inclusion of two potential storylines - the mutant cure and the return of Jean Grey - into one film was a huge mistake with both elements essentially needing their own film to work and each needing room to breathe to focus on the impact on the characters. Instead the film barrels from one scene to the next without pausing and moments that should be significant are brushed aside in the rush to reach the end. It’s no surprise that the scenes that work the best are those with the established older characters from the previous films given those are the ones the audience is invested in, notwithstanding the effort on the part of the filmmakers to introduce a younger cast here, a mistake they would return to again in future films. It’s watchable and fun in places, but the overriding feeling is one of huge potential wasted.

Might have been my favorite movie of the three. Not sure why it doesn't have a higher score to be honest. The characters were amazing and well executed. Plenty of excellent lines and pulling on heart strings.

Not my favorite for sure.

Worst of the franchise. Brett, you've ruined it

Better than its reputation. The first entire hour is a good movie honestly, I was enjoying myself until the climax. The final battle is a complete mess lol. And I think is the main reason this movie has a bad reputaiton. And I hate that the X-Men were fighting to *protect* the cure, as an autistic person I thought the cure had allegorical implications so that part of it felt bad.

That said, despite the first one having a WAY better reputation, I actually like this one just as much.

Cons other than the climax and the unfortunate implications: "Psylocke" (The character in this movie has nothing to do with Psylocke) is wasted. Angel is wasted. What happens with Cyclops sucks. No Nightcrawler sucks.

X-Men: The Last Stand is a fun and exciting film that delivers a high-adrenaline adventure. In this concluding chapter of the original trilogy, Wothington Labs develops a mutant cure which leads Magneto to launch a full-scale attack against them; meanwhile, the death of Jean Grey awakens the Phoenix, who rises to seek vengeance upon Professor Xavier. Director Brett Ratner raises the stakes and packs the film with nonstop action; from the opening training session in the Danger Room to the climactic battle between the X-Men and the Brotherhood. And this ambitiousness extends to the storytelling as well, as it’s not afraid to take risks and delve into dark themes. Truly X-cellent, X-Men: The Last Stand is a thrilling action film that nicely closes out the first phase of the X-Men cinematic franchise.

This is the weakest of the X-Men trilogy, but it isn't as bad as Brett Ratner haters say it is. I'm not a Ratner fan myself, but the strong character lineup here supersedes the relatively weak story.

The director also brings the action, big effects moments, and lots of explosions. And what else really are superheroes movies about?

It's the third in the series and the third best of the X-Men series, but it's absolutely watchable.

Overall this film was rushed confusing and completely forgettable. This movie was really the first In the X-MEN series to show the films weaknesses. The first was an ok starting point and X2 was a very competent and enjoyable movie that built off the first in every way. X-Men last stand fails in almost every aspect. Even after watching the terrible X-Men origins Wolverine I have to say this is my least favorite film in the entire franchise.

I'm surprised to see a big drop in average rating for this.

I enjoyed 'X-Men: The Last Stand' to be honest. Taking a quick look at some other reviews and it seems to main gripe is how it treats certain characters from the comics, which is fair enough for sure but that doesn't come into play for me as I'm not a comic reader.

I can only judge it as a film and as one I found it suitably entertaining. Hugh Jackman remains the top dog, though at the beginning the way Wolverine acts felt off to me - though that quickly went away. I would've liked if they found a spot for Nightcrawler (Alan Cumming), though one of his replacements in Beast (Kelsey Grammer) went down well with me.

From what I read I can understand other people's complaints with this, especially with the aforementioned iffy character treatment, but I gotta be honest and say that I found it to be a good enough watch - even if it is comparatively the weakest entry of the original trilogy.

/copied directly from my Letterboxd review\