Actors from original trilogy on First Class sequel with Days of Future Past

[psylockolussus]

Originally Posted by spideyboy_1111

But that's just it... Some characters dont need further developed because they've already had it. Some still need it.

The harry potter films had a massive cast and not everyone got fleshed out. Some need it others don't

Thats Harry Potter and those movies had to follow the story of the books. Just because Harry Potter did it (putting aside a lot of characters), doesn't mean X-Men should do it too.

[ThePowerCosmic]

Originally Posted by psylockolussus

They don't even have to address it. It would just make things complicated if they do that mother and son thing.

They've already introduced Azazel and it would be a waste not to go the mother and son route for Mystique and Nightcrawler. It would be interesting to see how Nightcrawler reacts knowing his mother is sided with the enemy.

[spideyboy_1111]

Originally Posted by psylockolussus

Thats Harry Potter and those movies had to follow the story of the books. Just because Harry Potter did it (putting aside a lot of characters), doesn't mean X-Men should do it too.

you mean like the X-men COMIC BOOKS that have probably 100x's the amount of harry potter characters and often juggle them all (it just all depends on story like everything else).

and.. keep in mind, Harry Potter also washed alot of characters to the side as well.. but they did it well enough to keep a good story flowing. That's all these films have to do too.

[Hawkingbird]

Just noticed Patrick is taller than Macavoy!


I've been thinking about actors I want back. So far I am more than happy with the ones currently on. I also want:
Banshee
Havock
Nightcrawler
Storm
Cyclops
Beast (future, aswell as past)

[psylockolussus]

Originally Posted by spideyboy_1111

you mean like the X-men COMIC BOOKS that have probably 100x's the amount of harry potter characters and often juggle them all (it just all depends on story like everything else).

Well if you look at the crossover issues of Marvel comic books. They always bring a lot of characters and most of them doesn't even have a line, they are merely added for action and so the situation would look very epic and thats one of my problems with the comics of Marvel. And I don't want that to happen in the movies too.

Originally Posted by ThePowerCosmic

They've already introduced Azazel and it would be a waste not to go the mother and son route for Mystique and Nightcrawler. It would be interesting to see how Nightcrawler reacts knowing his mother is sided with the enemy.

Nightcrawler already met Mystique in X2 and it seemed like Mystique didn't know him at all. Even if they explained their mother/son situation very well, that would still take focus from the actual plot of the movie.

[ThePowerCosmic]

Originally Posted by psylockolussus

Well if you look at the crossover issues of Marvel comic books. They always bring a lot of characters and most of them doesn't even have a line, they are merely added for action and so the situation would look very epic and thats one of my problems with the comics of Marvel. And I don't want that to happen in the movies too.



Nightcrawler already met Mystique in X2 and it seemed like Mystique didn't know him at all. Even if they explained their mother/son situation very well, that would still take focus from the actual plot of the movie.

I don't know if it seemed like she didn't know him at all. Maybe she just couldn't look her son in the eyes for long. Perhaps he reminds her of Azazel? Maybe she's just had guilt for years about abandoning him. She does kind of take a deep breath when he goes to her, like he's a problem for her because of the memories he brings.

There's a lot of ways that scene could be interpreted for now. I'd like to think of Mystique's reply to Nightcrawler's question as "motherly advice". He really seemed intrigued by her answer... possibly even inspired. Here's the scene. It ends too fast so we don't get to see Nightcrawler's tail swirl behind him after Mystique walks off.

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[ThePowerCosmic]

BTW, anyone remember this deleted scene of Beast quoting Shakespeare in The Last Stand?

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

****ing hilarious. Look how Bobby's freaked out like "WTF?" at 0:47 and Storm's not even facing Beast's direction... like she's silently laughing at him as she stares at her other teammates in disbelief. It didn't even seem like his speech made an impact on Bobby or the other kids. It's like Bobby just stared at Beast when he was done like, "Yeeeeah... Anyways, we're in."

I want Beast and have some truly intellectual scenes in DoFP. I know Singer can deliver that without making it seem ridiculous like Ratner did.

[spideyboy_1111]

Originally Posted by psylockolussus

Well if you look at the crossover issues of Marvel comic books. They always bring a lot of characters and most of them doesn't even have a line, they are merely added for action and so the situation would look very epic and thats one of my problems with the comics of Marvel. And I don't want that to happen in the movies too.

Not every X-men needs to play a major part. This is a PRIME oppurtunity to cameo many X-men, a time where they really don't even need much development (the future ones that is)

[Angamb]

recently I realized that the best scenario for this righ sequel would be 5 x-men on the past and 5 x-men on the future.

This way it would be pretty similar to original trilogy, but this time, 5 x-men are on a timeline and the other 5 on a different one.

we dont need more than 5 x-men in the future, specially if some would appear just 5 seconds.

Its better to have 5 x-men being develop nicely than 7 x-men with two or three with no line and Wolverine with 30 minutes of screentime for himself.

No thanks

[Matt Mortem]

BTW if they're gonna have a future Colossus, I nominate this guy:

Oleg Taktarov from Predators

[Angamb]

cant see the pic

copy the direct link and use the image icon on this board to paste it

[Matt Mortem]

Originally Posted by Angamb

cant see the pic

copy the direct link and use the image icon on this board to paste it

[psylockolussus]

Originally Posted by spideyboy_1111

Not every X-men needs to play a major part. This is a PRIME oppurtunity to cameo many X-men, a time where they really don't even need much development (the future ones that is)

This could be the perfect opportunity to put all the characters from the 1st six movies but that wouldn't make the film any better. The reason why The Avengers worked so well to the comic-book fans because everyone of them were given the right amount of screentime. Marvel Studios just didn't pile those superheroes for action or just for the sake of having them in a movie together.

But with you, you are actually saying that its okay that they pile this movie with a lot of characters without giving most of them character development, you basically just want to see all of them in the film together. It doesn't matter if they have story or not and I don't think thats right.

[Angamb]

there is a problem with that site, it seems. maybe they dont want other sites to post their images.

post the link to the site, or in any case, save the pic on your computer and then upload it on a shareimages site.

this works: http://postimage.org/

[Matt Mortem]

Here:

[Angamb]

mmm, thats older than what I expected hehe

seems fine... but for a 50 years old Peter.

Id preffer Cudmore instead of a new actors. just for the continuity feel. Just give him two or three lines and it would be fine

[Matt Mortem]

I never like Cudmore as Colossus. He seemed like too much of a derp for me. I also hate how they did him in X3. Making him a guy in a rubber suit was a no-go for me. They couldn't ever leave the camera on him long enough to make an impact.

[Angamb]

even if he isnt a big actor, his cameo on X2 was perfect and Bryan was able to give him a simple line that showed that he cares about the young students and wanted to help Logan.

That was a good way of showing he has a voice too and has intentions regarding that current situation.

Ratner didnt care about the character. but we all know Singer isnt Ratner, so he would give Daniel at least two lines to show he is a good character/mutant and has a friendhisp with the others.

a good writer and director can write just one great line and it could be better development than a whole movie using that character with no lines. so that's the issue.

give him two or three good lines, a great action moment, and thats it. Perfect role for this sequel.

[Matt Mortem]

Originally Posted by Angamb

even if he isnt a big actor, his cameo on X2 was perfect and Bryan was able to give him a simple line that showed that he cares about the young students and wanted to help Logan.

That was a good way of showing he has a voice too and has intentions regarding that current situation.

Ratner didnt care about the character. but we all know Singer isnt Ratner, so he would give Daniel at least two lines to show he is a good character/mutant and has a friendhisp with the others.

a good writer and director can write just one great line and it could be better development than a whole movie using that character with no lines. so that's the issue.

give him two or three good lines, a great action moment, and thats it. Perfect role for this sequel.

That's a good point. X2 Colossus was great, but X3 just left me sour on so much of it.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by spideyboy_1111

Not every X-men needs to play a major part. This is a PRIME oppurtunity to cameo many X-men, a time where they really don't even need much development (the future ones that is)

The problem with that way of thinking is that you risk a repeat of The Last Stand, in which there were minor roles from Multiple Man, Juggernaut, Psylocke, Callisto, Arclight, various members of the Morlocks, and even Angel wasn't much more than a shockingly wasted cameo role.

If we look at Avengers, there weren't loads of cameo roles with Ant-Man, Vision, etc, popping up in the background. And if we look at the Dark Knight Rises, none of those escaped prisoners appeared to be Riddler, Penguin, etc.

The two X-Men movies with the most background characters are the ones that are least liked: X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine. While there may have been bigger issues than cameo roles, the fans seem to feel characters were stuffed into the film to get people to see the movie rather than because they really fitted the story.

Too many cameos in DoFP will ruin it.

[spideyboy_1111]

Originally Posted by X-Maniac

The problem with that way of thinking is that you risk a repeat of The Last Stand, in which there were minor roles from Multiple Man, Juggernaut, Psylocke, Callisto, Arclight, various members of the Morlocks, and even Angel wasn't much more than a shockingly wasted cameo role.

If we look at Avengers, there weren't loads of cameo roles with Ant-Man, Vision, etc, popping up in the background. And if we look at the Dark Knight Rises, none of those escaped prisoners appeared to be Riddler, Penguin, etc.

The two X-Men movies with the most background characters are the ones that are least liked: X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine. While there may have been bigger issues than cameo roles, the fans seem to feel characters were stuffed into the film to get people to see the movie rather than because they really fitted the story.

Too many cameos in DoFP will ruin it.

some characters need it... massive fan favorites with major history need it (like Psylocke) Multiple Man really did not.. it's just takes a sensible story.. a good writting.

Don't "push" characters into voids you need to fill (like Psylocke) let them at least make sense. The GA will just think they're cool mutants.. while the fans will go HELL YES! (if there role makes sense)


you just have to fit them logically into the story.

[spideyboy_1111]

Originally Posted by psylockolussus

This could be the perfect opportunity to put all the characters from the 1st six movies but that wouldn't make the film any better. The reason why The Avengers worked so well to the comic-book fans because everyone of them were given the right amount of screentime. Marvel Studios just didn't pile those superheroes for action or just for the sake of having them in a movie together.

But with you, you are actually saying that its okay that they pile this movie with a lot of characters without giving most of them character development, you basically just want to see all of them in the film together. It doesn't matter if they have story or not and I don't think thats right.

... again it's not the cast size that makes the writing suck, it's the time spent and the script and way they are used. The X-men movies have imo been all about the script and very little about the cast.. and thus have been handled pretty poorly. The writers outline a script with the key players.. then shove everyone else into a void they need to fill to get the key players from point A to B. You don't have to do that... only choose cameos and characters that fit, not ones that are forced.

it's quite obvious they went "well we want to include ______ so lets force him in there even though it makes no sense what so ever"

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by ThePowerCosmic

I don't know if it seemed like she didn't know him at all. Maybe she just couldn't look her son in the eyes for long. Perhaps he reminds her of Azazel? Maybe she's just had guilt for years about abandoning him. She does kind of take a deep breath when he goes to her, like he's a problem for her because of the memories he brings.

There's a lot of ways that scene could be interpreted for now. I'd like to think of Mystique's reply to Nightcrawler's question as "motherly advice". He really seemed intrigued by her answer... possibly even inspired. Here's the scene. It ends too fast so we don't get to see Nightcrawler's tail swirl behind him after Mystique walks off.

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

I like that interpretation a lot. I'm not sure what Singer intended to portray, but your reading of that scene does appear to fit.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by spideyboy_1111

some characters need it... massive fan favorites with major history need it (like Psylocke) Multiple Man really did not.. it's just takes a sensible story.. a good writting.

Don't "push" characters into voids you need to fill (like Psylocke) let them at least make sense. The GA will just think they're cool mutants.. while the fans will go HELL YES! (if there role makes sense)


you just have to fit them logically into the story.

The Psylocke role was supposed to be larger, with an action scene where she fired her psi-blades during a laboratory raid, but it was cut so the character's involvement diminished.

Multiple Man ended up having more of a significant role than Psylocke in the end!

I think they need to be careful with cameos. In many cases, it's the cameo roles that causes trouble in the long term - the Beast cameo in X2, the Storm and possible Cyclops cameos in the Cerebro sequence in First Class.

If they really are trying to build a more structured franchise, they need to be careful who they choose to include as cameos in DoFP.

[Filmboy]

Originally Posted by psylockolussus

So they should just bring all the characters back? No. One of the criticisms of the last X-Men movie wasthe character development for smaller characters. Having too many characters is not a good idea because a lot of them would just be set aside.



They don't even have to address it. It would just make things complicated if they do that mother and son thing.

Yeah, they didn't even bother to address the fact that mystique is Rogue's foster mother in X1.


Mystique is really a bad mother, she abandon her baby son, throwing him into the river, pretending to adopt Rogue when she is actually making use of Rogue all along to carry out her crimes.

How did Raven who was so good and decent in First Class become so bad and evil ....??