As far as X2's logical fallacies, I wondered if he had even watched the movie. He was wrong about so many plot details, I sincerely doubt that he had. But when you are looking for realism in a comic book movie (fercryinoutloud), then your ability to suspend disbelief and be an effective critic comes into question.
But when it comes to dramas and the like, I do value Ebert's opinion, but prefer Medved's...JFK
Here is the offended paragraph. It was the last one in the review. His comments are only about 2 or 3 sentences worth.
"Other possibilities are left for future installments. There's a romance in the movie between Rogue and Iceman, but it doesn't exploit the possibilities of love between mutants with incompatible powers. How inconvenient if during sex your partner was accidentally teleported, frozen, slashed, etc. Does Cyclops wear his dark glasses to bed? "X2: X-Men United" lacks a beginning, a middle and an end, and exists more as a self-renewing loop. In that it is faithful to comic books themselves, which month after month and year after year seem frozen in the same fictional universe. Yes, there are comics in which the characters age and their worlds change, but the X-Men seem likely to continue forever, demonstrating their superpowers in one showcase scene after another. Perhaps in the next generation a mutant will appear named Scribbler, who can write a better screenplay for them."
My point is that all movies are filled with illogicalities, even (or especially) dramas. Pointing them out is not necessarily a criticism, but more of an observation.