First Class Sequel - July 18, 2014

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by RachelDawes

Okay, but are they refusing to watch any more X-Men movies? Like I said, creating a DOFP saga sounds like a lot of work to fix continuity issues that aren't even preventing people from tickets anyway.

No, as far as I know, they are not boycotting the franchise.

But it's the first time I've heard 'mainstream' viewers being exasperated over continuity.

I view XFC like I view the Batman Schumacher films: presumably supposed to be part of the same continuity but with details being different. Harvey Dent was black in the Burton series but white in the Schumacher series, for example.

That's one way to see it, I suppose.

I just hope those making these films don't get too carried away with making changes that they assume the public will not notice, or won't care about. It seems a dangerous way to approach such massive endeavours.

I'm hoping Vaughn at least keeps his own films consistent with each other.

I'd like to think of this franchise as one saga, like Twilight or Harry Potter or Game of Thrones (even though those are single-author book series), but that seems unlikely. I just don't want some random, head-scratching WTF decision to end up on the screen.

[marvelrobbins]

Sometimes you have to give them flexabilty.As I have said many franchises and TV shows have taken Liberties to what was said In Dialogue about past.The Xavier was 17
when he met Magneto Is one.The so called Emma In wolverine had no telphatic powers and was Silverfox's sister.It's very easy way to reconcile this.This wasn't really Emma
frost.For an old school fan like myself emma Frost Is a telepath.I don't care If she has morrison's second mutation(which that entire Idea I hated but that's a different discussion) and I can buy the explanation Xavier put Image of himself walking In minds of Cyclops and other escapes from Stryker.That explanation doesn't fit the Last Stand
because noone was watching Xavier come out of car.And Magneto with him Is also a problem.Plus Last Stand version of Beast doesn't fit first Class' beast.They made a lot of
effort to match Mystique.The Last Stand made no attempt with beast to fit the X2 Beast easter egg so you really can't use that against First Class.The Last Stand Ignored the beast easter egg.The Avengers Itself kinda Ignored the tony Stark Cameo In the Incredible Hulk and the Thor post credit scene.

Days of future Past can help determine once and for all do filmakers consider The Last Stand still In cannon.If any Last Stand actors are among the fuutre scenes that settles it(although they might pull a Casino Royale and get Ellen Page as Shadowcat and Ignore the Last Stand) but It would change things possable only for future films.First Class should still be seen as prequel.A post Days of future Past film can Introduce Cyclops and Jean without worrying about their past scenes In Wolverine and Last Stand.Gambit could show up.Blob could become part of brotherhood.Banshee,Havok,Beast,and Emma don't have to disappear.A deadpool film wouldn't have to worry about Wolverine version.

My adivce always has been to view First Class as prequel to Just X-Men and X2.It would be easier If I had to Include one of Wolverine or Last Stand In film cannon to place wolverine.Last Stand Is more problematic to fit with First Class.

[Zink]

Originally Posted by X-Maniac

This wasn't directed at me, but don't you think that your thinking is flawed?

Basically, you are saying 'do what you like with these films because no one really cares.'

Is that the right attitude to take with a franchise? I'd argue it is not.

Some minor issues are forgivable, but it is still expected that any franchise, series or saga has a plan for its stories and characters.

Where does your thinking begin and end? Would you then be okay if Wolverine appeared in the next film as a 10-year-old? Or if Beast was not blue and furry, with no explanation? Where is the defining line for what is noticeable and acceptable?

I would say that it's impossible to decide where such a line should be drawn, so it's best to ensure consistency and continuity as much as possible.

It would be nice to enjoy these films as a single saga. There seems little chance of seamless all-night movie marathons - either at cinemas or in the living room - if the films are all made as individual projects that have no regard to any of the others.

Continuity and consistency is one reason why fans and audiences love the Marvel Studios movies and the Nolan Batman films. Why shouldn't the X-Men get a similar treatment?

I'll counter a question with a question -- did you READ my post?

Show me where I say "do with these films as you wish no one cares". I'm a huge, self-professed X-Men geek. The continuity bothers me to an extent. I was even annoyed Cyclops' blasts were flammable in "Wolverine". How minor is that? The difference between the other poster, and I is: I am not naïve enough to believe the general population cares as much about this stuff as I do.

In a perfect world, X-Men would be treated with the dignity, and as you mentioned -- we would have a seamless franchise without so many discrepancies. The problem is Batman has one director. X-Men has four.

Furthermore, one 30 second flashback of Xavier walking in a 6 year-old movie is in NO WAY COMPARABLE to Wolverine being a 10 year-old boy, or Beast receiving a sex change operation. Your comparisons reek of ridiculous fanboy dramatization.

[Hawkingbird]

Originally Posted by Zink

I'm not the one incapable of seeing beyond my own narrow opinion.

Yes, you're a nerd. Got it. Congrats. And continuity bugs you. Whoopty doo. It bugs me, too. Most of my friends, family, and acquaintances don't care about tiny background issues. They just don't. Kids, teenagers, and families go to these movies. Do you REALLY think they care AS MUCH as you do?

No, they don't. So stop superimposing your sense of frustration on others. MOST PEOPLE DO NOT CARE. At all.

Maybe the people you know don't, but those I know do.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by Zink

I'll counter a question with a question -- did you READ my post?

Show me where I say "do with these films as you wish no one cares".

Well, what you said was: "MOST PEOPLE DO NOT CARE. At all."

That seems close enough to what I was saying. Essentially, you are saying that because most people don't care, this stuff doesn't matter. So that gives free reign to filmmakers to base their decisions on the fact that "most people don't care". And that means they stop bothering about any of the details. It's a slippery slope.

I'm a huge, self-professed X-Men geek. The continuity bothers me to an extent. I was even annoyed Cyclops' blasts were flammable in "Wolverine". How minor is that? The difference between the other poster, and I is: I am not naïve enough to believe the general population cares as much about this stuff as I do.

In a perfect world, X-Men would be treated with the dignity, and as you mentioned -- we would have a seamless franchise without so many discrepancies. The problem is Batman has one director. X-Men has four.

Furthermore, one 30 second flashback of Xavier walking in a 6 year-old movie is in NO WAY COMPARABLE to Wolverine being a 10 year-old boy, or Beast receiving a sex change operation. Your comparisons reek of ridiculous fanboy dramatization.

In my experience - and this is with non-geek office colleagues and friends - people are starting to notice that things do not join up.

Standards are now pretty high, due largely to The Dark Knight saga and the Marvel Studios movies. They are either consistent or close to the comics. The X-Men series is in danger of being neither of those things.

I've noticed - and put up with - inconsistencies in the X-Men films for years. I've even justified many of them on here. Some small things are to be expected, and even recasting can be excused and accepted. But there is a cumulative effect - all these things in total are adding up to a series with a jumbled timeline and many inconsistencies.

My point is that there should be some overall planning, even if different directors are brought in. And that with standards being high because of those other franchises, it would be a good idea to be as consistent as possible.

The X-Men films have got away with it so far, though some casual fans are noticing things. I'm just giving a plea for some care and caution.

[blueserenity]

Originally Posted by Zink

I'll counter a question with a question -- did you READ my post?

Show me where I say "do with these films as you wish no one cares". I'm a huge, self-professed X-Men geek. The continuity bothers me to an extent. I was even annoyed Cyclops' blasts were flammable in "Wolverine". How minor is that? The difference between the other poster, and I is: I am not naïve enough to believe the general population cares as much about this stuff as I do.

In a perfect world, X-Men would be treated with the dignity, and as you mentioned -- we would have a seamless franchise without so many discrepancies. The problem is Batman has one director. X-Men has four.

Furthermore, one 30 second flashback of Xavier walking in a 6 year-old movie is in NO WAY COMPARABLE to Wolverine being a 10 year-old boy, or Beast receiving a sex change operation. Your comparisons reek of ridiculous fanboy dramatization.

I think you're right in saying that the general audience doesn't care as much as you do, but wrong to say that they haven't noticed the inconsistencies or that they don't bother them. As well-loved as it was, people DID notice the inconsistencies. Usually it was just one thing like "Wasn't Xavier walking in X-Men 3?" or "is the diamond girl in this one the same as in Wolverine?", or even just "was this supposed to be a prequel or a reboot because I couldn't tell". Everyone I spoke to was unclear, at least, on the latter part. And these weren't nerds or geeks, they were just people who enjoyed the older X-Men movies.

With any luck XMFC2 will establish itself firmly as its own trilogy with no relation to the older movies.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by blueserenity

With any luck XMFC2 will establish itself firmly as its own trilogy with no relation to the older movies.

Internal consistency - within the First Class films - is probably the best we can hope for, to be honest...

[BH/HHH]

Originally Posted by marvelrobbins

Sometimes you have to give them flexabilty.As I have said many franchises and TV shows have taken Liberties to what was said In Dialogue about past.The Xavier was 17
when he met Magneto Is one.The so called Emma In wolverine had no telphatic powers and was Silverfox's sister.It's very easy way to reconcile this.This wasn't really Emma
frost.For an old school fan like myself emma Frost Is a telepath.I don't care If she has morrison's second mutation(which that entire Idea I hated but that's a different discussion) and I can buy the explanation Xavier put Image of himself walking In minds of Cyclops and other escapes from Stryker.That explanation doesn't fit the Last Stand
because noone was watching Xavier come out of car.And Magneto with him Is also a problem.Plus Last Stand version of Beast doesn't fit first Class' beast.They made a lot of
effort to match Mystique.The Last Stand made no attempt with beast to fit the X2 Beast easter egg so you really can't use that against First Class.The Last Stand Ignored the beast easter egg.The Avengers Itself kinda Ignored the tony Stark Cameo In the Incredible Hulk and the Thor post credit scene.

Days of future Past can help determine once and for all do filmakers consider The Last Stand still In cannon.If any Last Stand actors are among the fuutre scenes that settles it(although they might pull a Casino Royale and get Ellen Page as Shadowcat and Ignore the Last Stand) but It would change things possable only for future films.First Class should still be seen as prequel.A post Days of future Past film can Introduce Cyclops and Jean without worrying about their past scenes In Wolverine and Last Stand.Gambit could show up.Blob could become part of brotherhood.Banshee,Havok,Beast,and Emma don't have to disappear.A deadpool film wouldn't have to worry about Wolverine version.

My adivce always has been to view First Class as prequel to Just X-Men and X2.It would be easier If I had to Include one of Wolverine or Last Stand In film cannon to place wolverine.Last Stand Is more problematic to fit with First Class.

I agree that FC is a prequel to the first 2 X-Films but that still leaves a few plot holes as you rightly stated i.e. Human Hank cameo in X2 and Xavier saying he was 17 when he met Magneto which may be right but they both appear far older.

As for the ending of TIH been ignored it wasn't. Joon Favereau stated that I'm 2 is set before TIH and that endinng fits in perfectly with his consultant role that he gets given at the end of IM2.

And yeah they pretty much did ignore the Thor post credit sequence.

[danoyse]

Originally Posted by Zink

I'll counter a question with a question -- did you READ my post?

Did you read mine?

Originally Posted by danoyse

We would care if you toned down the attitude. Play nice, please.

Show me where I say "do with these films as you wish no one cares". I'm a huge, self-professed X-Men geek. The continuity bothers me to an extent. I was even annoyed Cyclops' blasts were flammable in "Wolverine". How minor is that? The difference between the other poster, and I is: I am not naïve enough to believe the general population cares as much about this stuff as I do.

In a perfect world, X-Men would be treated with the dignity, and as you mentioned -- we would have a seamless franchise without so many discrepancies. The problem is Batman has one director. X-Men has four.

Furthermore, one 30 second flashback of Xavier walking in a 6 year-old movie is in NO WAY COMPARABLE to Wolverine being a 10 year-old boy, or Beast receiving a sex change operation. Your comparisons reek of ridiculous fanboy dramatization.

Try being a little less obnoxious when you debate, please. You're not getting off to a great start here.

[The Guard]

As far as issues of continuity go...

They require some thought, but they don't neccessarily have to become inconsistencies.

Wolverine not knowing who Sabertooth is can be chalked up to Logan's amnesia, which is why he doesn't know who he is, where he came from, and about his past in X-MEN.

Human Hank's cameo in X2 could easily be:
-Hank using an image inducer
-Hank, having taken a formula to make himself human, which originally worked, but morphed him from the more Beastlike McCoy into what we see in X3

Cyclops not remembering Wolverine at the mansion after he rescued him in WOLVERINE? Given what the young X-Men went through, it's entirely possibly the kids were mindwiped by Xavier. We know he was doing stuff like that back then.

Young Emma Frost in WOLVERINE could easily be someone taking a family name from an older character (FIRST CLASS Emma). Emma Frost Jr, in other words. Emma's egotistical enough to name a child after herself. The child, if Emma has her in the next few years of FIRST CLASS continuity, would be young enough to be in her mid to late teens during the events of WOLVERINE, which is what she appears to be. It's a change from the mythos, but we've seen plenty of that in the X-Men franchise thus far.

The big sticking point for most fans seems to be Xavier and Charles at the beginning of X3.

The only thing I can think of to change/retcon that, as part of DAYS OF FUTURE PAST, Fassbender's Magneto goes back in time and undoes what happened on the beach, thereby not paralyzing Charles. There are still reasons for them to go their seperate ways ideologywise, except that now Charles can take a more active role, and it would then make sense in X3 continuity as well.

IF...DOFP is First Class, you could have Ian McKellan's older Magneto regretful of what he did to Charles, and Fassbender's Magneto, who feels much the same way, using the time travel tech. Everyone thinks he's done something horrible, but he's going back to undo what he did to Charles.

Of course, that raises the question of why didn't he go back and stop WWII, etc, but it is what it is.

And I can see Magneto doing that, feeling guilty enough over what he has done to take that opportunity if it presented itself. It's a bit much storywise, but so is the idea of Charles being able to walk in X3 and not in FIRST CLASS.

If you're going to introduce time travel, it shouldn't be just a plot device. They should go there. They could also introduce the idea of different timelines, sort of blur the lines a bit when it comes to continuity errors.

[Zarex]

The big sticking point for most fans seems to be Xavier and Charles at the beginning of X3.

Though we see Charles walking at the beginning of the film, it may not have been under his own power. One advantage to having a master of magnetism as an ally is that Eric could have manipulated braces on Charles legs to mimic a bipedal stride. Charles would likely have been uncomfortable with his handicap - as we saw in First Class, Charles is all about blending in with "normal" humans - and asked Eric to cover for him while they met with Jean.

In general, the major benefit of a Future Past movie involving either bodily or mind time travel is that a change in the time stream will clear the deck for future stories that are inconsistent with the initial trilogy. And hopefully it will address Xavier's horrific decision to mess with Jean's mind.

[Loganbabe]

Originally Posted by Zarex

Charles would likely have been uncomfortable with his handicap - as we saw in First Class, Charles is all about blending in with "normal" humans - and asked Eric to cover for him while they met with Jean.

What you're saying makes no sense.

Firstly, Charles wasn't all about "blending in with normal humans". I don't even know what is that you're calling "normal" - Charles wouldn't like to "blend" with humans with physical or mental limitations?
Charles wasn't about "blending" - he talked about integration and peaceful coexistence, which are totally differen things. Yes, he looked "normal" - but so did Erik, Alex, Sean, Shaw, Emma etc. Charles wasn't the only one with the "privilege" of looking like a common person, so he shouldn't take universal blame for that. And people tend to forget he wasn't the one who taught Raven to look "normal" - she was the one doing it when they first met. She knew she wouldn't survive otherwise.

Secondly, there's a very complicated thing called "spinal cord injury", that in Charles case means a complete paralysis from the waist down. So, walking and pretending to be "normal" aren't just things that he fancies as in "Oh Erik, help me here, I want to walk and look like a common person!". His injury was a life-changing one, meaning a huge trauma, lots of physical pain/issues and an utter and probably permanent sense of loss - something we won't see addressed in the sequel, by the way things are going.

Anyway, it isn't just Charles being "uncomfortable with his handicap". It's much, much more than this. You wouldn't say that Erik just felt "uncomfortable" with what happened to him on the concentration camp.

[Zarex]

Originally Posted by Loganbabe

What you're saying makes no sense.

Firstly, Charles wasn't all about "blending in with normal humans". I don't even know what is that you're calling "normal" - Charles wouldn't like to "blend" with humans with physical or mental limitations?
Charles wasn't about "blending" - he talked about integration and peaceful coexistence, which are totally differen things. Yes, he looked "normal" - but so did Erik, Alex, Sean, Shaw, Emma etc. Charles wasn't the only one with the "privilege" of looking like a common person, so he shouldn't take universal blame for that. And people tend to forget he wasn't the one who taught Raven to look "normal" - she was the one doing it when they first met. She knew she wouldn't survive otherwise.

Secondly, there's a very complicated thing called "spinal cord injury", that in Charles case means a complete paralysis from the waist down. So, walking and pretending to be "normal" aren't just things that he fancies as in "Oh Erik, help me here, I want to walk and look like a common person!". His injury was a life-changing one, meaning a huge trauma, lots of physical pain/issues and an utter and probably permanent sense of loss - something we won't see addressed in the sequel, by the way things are going.

Anyway, it isn't just Charles being "uncomfortable with his handicap". It's much, much more than this. You wouldn't say that Erik just felt "uncomfortable" with what happened to him on the concentration camp.

In First Class Eric was much more comfortable with Rogue's natural form than Charles, which ended up with Rogue leaving her wounded "brother" to join with Eric's more confrontational squad. The Eric / Charles clash has been compared often to the Malcolm X / MLK divide, with the former striving for separation and the latter assimilation. This is consistent with both the comics and the original trilogy in which Eric aligns himself with those who cannot assimilate, such as Toad and Sabretooth, due to their appearances.

Is it a stretch to suggest that Charles will struggle adjusting to his handicap? No, in fact the director suggested as much in discussing potential sequels. Is it then a stretch to suggest that Charles may want to appear be able to walk when interviewing a powerful new student? Perhaps, but it does explain why Xavier may have been mobile long after his injury in the beginning of X3.

I can assure you I understand what a "spinal cord injury" is - there's no need to take offense. I was merely trying to explain a continuity error in a prior film with what I thought was a reasonable explanation.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by Zarex

The big sticking point for most fans seems to be Xavier and Charles at the beginning of X3.

Though we see Charles walking at the beginning of the film, it may not have been under his own power. One advantage to having a master of magnetism as an ally is that Eric could have manipulated braces on Charles legs to mimic a bipedal stride. Charles would likely have been uncomfortable with his handicap - as we saw in First Class, Charles is all about blending in with "normal" humans - and asked Eric to cover for him while they met with Jean.

In general, the major benefit of a Future Past movie involving either bodily or mind time travel is that a change in the time stream will clear the deck for future stories that are inconsistent with the initial trilogy. And hopefully it will address Xavier's horrific decision to mess with Jean's mind.

There was a comic book tale in which Magneto used nanites/nanobots (controlled by his magnetic powers) inside Xavier to enable Charles to walk again. But that science may seem too far advanced for the scene set 20 years prior to X3.

We do however see Magneto extracting tiny bits of iron from the prison guard's blood in X2. So it's not a stretch that he might have done something like that, but in reverse, to Charles - put in tiny controllable nanobots as some sort of experimental procedure (for whatever motive, good or bad) but the technology was unstable and didn't work in the long term.

[Snikt]

Originally Posted by X-Maniac

There was a comic book tale in which Magneto used nanites/nanobots (controlled by his magnetic powers) inside Xavier to enable Charles to walk again. But that science may seem too far advanced for the scene set 20 years prior to X3.

We do however see Magneto extracting tiny bits of iron from the prison guard's blood in X2. So it's not a stretch that he might have done something like that, but in reverse, to Charles - put in tiny controllable nanobots as some sort of experimental procedure (for whatever motive, good or bad) but the technology was unstable and didn't work in the long term.

I always felt it was a bad joke in the comics . Poor Prof. X...he loses his legs, gets them back, loses them again and gets them back.

I know it's happened quite a few times in the comics. The most known one to me, his body was cloned and his mind was tranfered to that body.

I believe it was due to his first body was infected by the Brood?

[henzINNIT]

I think the easiest way to justify the pre-credit sequence in X3 is to assume what we're seeing isn't necessarily the true events, but fragments from Jean's altered mentality. Xavier did some superficial fix-ups while he was fiddling with her mind.

... Or, just forget about TLS. It sucks anyway.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by Snikt

I always felt it was a bad joke in the comics . Poor Prof. X...he loses his legs, gets them back, loses them again and gets them back.

I know it's happened quite a few times in the comics. The most known one to me, his body was cloned and his mind was tranfered to that body.

I believe it was due to his first body was infected by the Brood?

Such are the requirements of comics requiring an issue every month.

Jean has died more times than I care to remember - I seem to recall an amusing article somewhere on comic book deaths where they counted she had died 20 times. I'll try to find the link.

[blueserenity]

Originally Posted by X-Maniac

Such are the requirements of comics requiring an issue every month.

Jean has died more times than I care to remember - I seem to recall an amusing article somewhere on comic book deaths where they counted she had died 20 times. I'll try to find the link.

She should be played by Sean Bean...

(sorry, lame joke, couldn't resist)

[Mrs Vimes]

Hah hah Sean Bean sure dies a lot!

[Loganbabe]

Originally Posted by Zarex

In First Class Eric was much more comfortable with Rogue's natural form than Charles, which ended up with Rogue leaving her wounded "brother" to join with Eric's more confrontational squad.

I think you are talking about Raven, not Rogue.
And Charles was perfectly comfortable with Raven's natural form. She was blue around him all the time at home, as we could see in one of the first scenes of FC. But he certainly worried about her showing her true form in public. She worried too, because she disguised her form since she was a child.
Charles had no problems whatsoever with the so-called "strangeness" of other mutants. This is why he was all smiling and saying "Splendid!" when he saw Hank's feet. You're talking as if he rejected mutants who didn't look "human", which would make him a bigot.

Is it a stretch to suggest that Charles will struggle adjusting to his handicap? No, in fact the director suggested as much in discussing potential sequels.

Vaughn didn't suggest this in any of the interviews I read, because he isn't really interested in Charles. He simply said that he would have to find another nemesis to fight Magneto, since Charles would be in a wheelchair (= useless). But both McAvoy and Fassbender talked about it in interviews, how they wanted to see Charles' struggle and his transformation into Professor X.
And of course it would be a struggle for him to adapt to his new condition. Unfortunately First Class ended with Charles making jokes about going bald, which took away the focus from his tragedy. If Erik's tragedies are taken serioulsy, why Charles' should be taken so flippantly? The drama contained in that scene he found out he couldn't feel his legs was completely dissipated when we see Charles already adjusted to life in a wheelchair and making silly jokes.

Is it then a stretch to suggest that Charles may want to appear be able to walk when interviewing a powerful new student? Perhaps, but it does explain why Xavier may have been mobile long after his injury in the beginning of X3.

I'm not really worried about continuity in this case; I don't care that Charles was able to walk in X3. The only think I care about is to see Charles' issues being addressed as seriously as Erik's, and not turn his injury into the butt of a joke. "See, now he's in a wheelchair...now he's walking...oh no now he's in a wheelchair again!".
And when you say that Charles would like to look "normal" to impress a powerful student, you're suggesting he's weak because of his physical limitations, and I don't buy it. I'm not Vaughn to think that Charles is generally useless.

I can assure you I understand what a "spinal cord injury" is - there's no need to take offense. I was merely trying to explain a continuity error in a prior film with what I thought was a reasonable explanation.

So if you understand the seriousness of his condition, you also understand that it's not simply a case of "faking" he could walk. If his brain can't connect with his legs he will never be able to walk on his own volition. He would simply be controlled by Magneto like a robot. This is the last thing I want for Charles.

[Hawkingbird]

Guys, do remember that Charles has re/un gained his ability to walk numerous times. I expect that in the movies coming they'll probably give some attempt to explain at least a few of the continuity errors.

[Majik1387]

So not quite sure if this is the right place to post this, but these are my thoughts.

After some thinking, as much as I hate Days of Future Past and the time jumping X-Men stories(save for Age of Apocalypse), I kind of got to give a lot of credit to Fox for having the balls to try and go for the DoFP kind of story. I mean it truly can be the way they tie in all of the good stuff of all of their X-Movies, whilst discounting the bad, and ridding every plot hole. I mean if Fox pulls this off, while being able to continue each sub-X-Men movie series(First Class sequel, Wolvie 2 and on, and even an X4), they can really churn out something amazing.

[Hawkingbird]

Is it actually confirmed that they're doing this though?

[Angamb]

not yet

[Hawkingbird]

I'm not sure if I want it to happen yet...