The SuperHeroHype Forums

The SuperHeroHype Forums (http://forums.superherohype.com/index.php)
-   X-Men: Days of Future Past (http://forums.superherohype.com/forumdisplay.php?f=489)
-   -   No Cyclops; Reaction Thread (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=340845)

Spider-Kid 08-23-2010 11:06 AM

No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Shame how they replaced Cyclops with Havok, we could've seen a really good portrayal of him in the movie.

psyonic 08-23-2010 11:32 AM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Where is the I don't care option? Because I don't care .. there is a reason why they're not in FC.

flavio_lebeau 08-23-2010 11:50 AM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
At first i was sad. But then I lol'd.

It makes no sense to have him in the 60s...so I guess they chose to tell the story from that point.

They would neverscrap the entire main script just so they could feature Cyclops. "No no no no, lets make it starting on the 80s, because we have to have Cyclops and Jean"

And even then, if they featured Cyclops' origin im sure people would complain it wasn't canon with XO Wolverine.

Basically, haters gon hate.

It's no wonder only Mystique and Beast from the trilogy are around. They're the only characters who seem plausible to be alive and in action during the 60s. Its not a vendetta against Cyke especifically.

Tbh I'm sadder about the lack of Storm. But that's life.

Spider-Kid 08-23-2010 11:54 AM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by flavio_lebeau (Post 18795412)
At first i was sad. But then I lol'd.

It makes no sense to have him in the 60s...so I guess they chose to tell the story from that point.

They would neverscrap the entire main script just so they could feature Cyclops. "No no no no, lets make it starting on the 80s, because we have to have Cyclops and Jean"

And even then, if they featured Cyclops' origin im sure people would complain it wasn't canon with XO Wolverine.

Basically, haters gon hate.

Yes, true.

SuperT 08-23-2010 12:21 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
I could care less for two reasons:

A) The movie is placed in the 60's so his character doesn't fit at all age wise.

B) Cyclops has always been my least favorite X-Men. Dull/boring, too boy scoutish, devoid of any interesting history/backstory or personality (my opinion). Too me, Cykes was always defined/characterized by the women he was with (Jean, Emma, Dazzler whoever) and never by anything on his own accord.

I would eventually like to see him in a sequel of course because he's the leader but of course I'm not upset he isn't in this movie. I think this was solely needs to focuse on Prof. X and Magneto's first endeavours and not bringing in too many major characters backstorys at this time.

Blackman 08-23-2010 12:23 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
I dont see how people who are disappointed that Cyke isnt in it are haters:huh:

CyclopsSummers 08-23-2010 01:00 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by flavio_lebeau (Post 18795412)

It makes no sense to have him in the 60s..



No sense to have Cyke Jean, also Beast and Havok in this 1st Class

Cyclops Jean will born in 70. Alex must be younger! Hank must be a kid in 60's, not a teenager!

So if we see Havok in X-men trilogy, we'll have an old man :doh:


Why not a 1st Class who focus on young x-team Scott Jean Hank Ororo :cmad:
They decided to make a movie who tells about young Xavier and Erik. Producers are to weak. This movie will s****cks!

spider-neil 08-23-2010 01:01 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperT (Post 18795558)
I could care less for two reasons:

A) The movie is placed in the 60's so his character doesn't fit at all age wise.

yet havok, scott's YOUNGER BROTHER, does?

:huh: :doh:

huzzah 08-23-2010 01:09 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Dont care as the filmverse setting is in the 60s

Optimus_Prime_ 08-23-2010 01:12 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
How the hell are they doing Havok without Scott Summers in the movie? That makes literally no sense whatsoever. Nevermind the fact that it's a huge plot point in both their storyarcs, nevermind the fact that this'll make Havok 20 years!?! Scott's senior. What is Havok gonna be? Scott's father? Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised at this point.

Let's see, what else can we b*tch about? How 'bout Xavier having hair. Must have been before Superboy created that horrible lab accident that left him bald. Oh wait? Wrong character? Xavier was ALWAYS bald you say...no, can't be. *Checks massive comic collection*. Oh wait, he's never had hair, in ANY appearance. Wow. Did the people at FOX even bother picking up a comic. Hey, I got a though, let's try to resemble the comics just a wee bit. You know, instead of patching together elements and names like some stupid X-Men version of a mad-lib.

I mean c'mon guys, if you had even typed the name "Azreal" into a google search you would've seen how much animosity people have to that character.

Wait, I get it, you're trying to f*** with us. This is like the PunkED version of the Avengers franchise Marvel is building. You put out a movie once every few years and see how NOT like the comics you can make it, then Ashton Kutcher is gonna show up and be like "CYKE!!!! Y'alls been PUNKeD! LOLZ".

TheFuture 08-23-2010 01:16 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
I don't like the decision from the point of view that I was hoping for a reboot.

But within the continuity of X1-Wolverine, you really can't argue with the decision, it makes sense at the end of the day.

SuperT 08-23-2010 01:18 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by spider-neil (Post 18795751)
yet havok, scott's YOUNGER BROTHER, does?

:huh: :doh:

There's never even been a mention of Cyclops even having a younger brother in the movie-verse so they can pretty much do whatever they want with the character. Making him older is so at the bottom of things to complain about, not mention we have no clue what they are doing with the character to begin with.

Most of the general movie going audience don't know nor care about the age change.

I can't get why people can't separate the comics and the movies as too seperate entities. The movies shouldn't be bound by the comics or the comics bound by the movies. As long as they keep sort of a general template or jumping off point - who cares.

If it's just going to be a complete adaptions of the comics panel by panel whats the point in making the movie to begin with?!

TheFuture 08-23-2010 01:27 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Re: Havok and Cyclops, I don't mind Havok being older. I mean, how did people feel in regards to Mystique and Nightcrawler in X2? Mystique is his mother in the comics after all no? I don't remember people going crazy of this.

huzzah 08-23-2010 01:31 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperT (Post 18795841)
There's never even been a mention of Cyclops even having a younger brother in the movie-verse so they can pretty much do whatever they want with the character. Making him older is so at the bottom of things to complain about, not mention we have no clue what they are doing with the character to begin with.

Most of the general movie going audience don't know nor care about the age change.

I can't get why people can't separate the comics and the movies as too seperate entities. The movies shouldn't be bound by the comics or the comics bound by the movies. As long as they keep sort of a general template or jumping off point - who cares.

If it's just going to be a complete adaptions of the comics panel by panel whats the point in making the movie to begin with?!

Then what is the purpose of having Havock in this movie? Why dont they just pick another random mutant that no one has ever heard of? We dont know Havock other than being Scott's younger brother. He's never been his dad, uncle, great grand-uncle, somebody totally unrelated...always brother. So being First Class why did the writers feel it necesssary to re-write a characters history?

Optimus_Prime_ 08-23-2010 01:31 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheFuture (Post 18795876)
Re: Havok and Cyclops, I don't mind Havok being older. I mean, how did people feel in regards to Mystique and Nightcrawler in X2? Mystique is his mother in the comics after all no? I don't remember people going crazy of this.

1) She could've been. The movies were pretty quiet on her past until the third installment, and in that film there was more legitimate criticisms to be made.

2) There was a lot of fan uproar. I mean many X-Men fans are displeased with the overall treatment of the franchise since day one. Lack of costumes, lack of respect the comics, lack of use of characters, and an overly narrow focus on Wolverine.

TheFuture 08-23-2010 01:45 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_ (Post 18795899)
1) She could've been. The movies were pretty quiet on her past until the third installment, and in that film there was more legitimate criticisms to be made.

2) There was a lot of fan uproar. I mean many X-Men fans are displeased with the overall treatment of the franchise since day one. Lack of costumes, lack of respect the comics, lack of use of characters, and an overly narrow focus on Wolverine.

D'oh, I forgot about Mystique being ageless. :o

flavio_lebeau 08-23-2010 01:54 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_ (Post 18795899)

2) There was a lot of fan uproar. I mean many X-Men fans are displeased with the overall treatment of the franchise since day one. Lack of costumes, lack of respect the comics, lack of use of characters, and an overly narrow focus on Wolverine.

And this will never change. There are people who criticize The Dark Knight for God's sake. Some people will never be pleased, no matter how the movies go.

The truth is the X-Men movies, despite having lots of changes, were pleasing the majority of fans (like TDK or Begins or the Spiderman movies), until the 3rd movie.

They will never please some fans. There is and will always be something to complain, even if it's something as vain as a contact lens color, or how someone's hair isn't red enough. There is no perfect film, there will never be a good enough X-Men film for some people.

flavio_lebeau 08-23-2010 01:55 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackman (Post 18795570)
I dont see how people who are disappointed that Cyke isnt in it are haters:huh:

It wasn't meant to be taken excatly as written.

Optimus_Prime_ 08-23-2010 02:04 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheFuture (Post 18795984)
D'oh, I forgot about Mystique being ageless. :o

Also, Azreal, Nightcrawler's father is in this movie with Mystique...so...it's quite possible that will happen.

Optimus_Prime_ 08-23-2010 02:06 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by huzzah (Post 18795896)
Then what is the purpose of having Havock in this movie? Why dont they just pick another random mutant that no one has ever heard of? We dont know Havock other than being Scott's younger brother. He's never been his dad, uncle, great grand-uncle, somebody totally unrelated...always brother. So being First Class why did the writers feel it necesssary to re-write a characters history?

Exactly. Why bother using someone if their story doesn't fit within the movie? Wolverine did the same damn stupid thing. Just randomly put in a bunch of characters that didn't make sense in the plot and what we got was a mess.

JP 08-23-2010 02:12 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
This makes no sense.

No one complains about Jean Grey. No one complains about Iceman. No one complains about Angel.
Yet Cyclops is apparently the only one done an injustice.

Why is no one complaining about Jean? Because Jean had an entire trilogy based around her.

Why isn't anyone complaining about Angel and Iceman? Because continuity shows that they just can't appear in this film. That's acceptable.

Ok, but why is the fact that Cyclops is too young to appear in this film unacceptable? Why is Cyclops the only original five member somehow being given an injustice?

The fact that some people either want Cyclops rapidly aged just to show up in the 60's, or have the story sacrificed just to move it to the 80's all for the one sole purpose of including Cyclops is so preposterous.

SuperT 08-23-2010 02:17 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
How do you know his story doesn't fit into the movie? Have you guys already read the script?

The bottom line is this - no one here has any clue what the storyline is or what's happening in this movie other then the vague descriptions we've been given by Vaugh, Singer, and other people on production.

We have absolutely no clue what characters actually are appearing in the movie and what characters aren't, how each character is being written or portrayed, or how their being woven into the already existing universe.

So all this talk about "So and so not being in it makes no sense" or "This guy can't be it because this and this happened in the comics" - especially moreso about characters that have never even been introduced in the movies in the first place, is rubbish.

Maybe I'm different from people here and just don't make assumptions based just on face value. But hey, this is a comic book movie that what would it be without people disecting every little, minute detail or complaning about something.

TheShah 08-23-2010 02:17 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
I think it has a lot to do with the gratuitious cameo by Cyclop in the WOLVERINE film.

Made sense to take out a character that's been overly used in 4 movies, with no real developement or priority in any.

MoPlaYa 08-23-2010 02:17 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
I understand why Cyclops,Storm and Jean arent in this movie with it taking place in the 60`s but i dont like them having Havok in this movie since he is suppose to be Scott`s younger brother and now they wont even be bothers ... I think they could have picked another mutant instead of Havok.

SuperT 08-23-2010 02:20 PM

Re: No Cyclops; Reaction Thread
 
Quote:

but i dont like them having Havok in this movie since he is suppose to be Scott`s younger brother and now they wont even be bothers
Huh? Who said they weren't going to be related in the movie? Singer specifically says that Havok is Scott's brother.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com, A property of CraveOnline, a divison of AtomicOnline, LLC © 2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.