Days of Future Lounge

[Hawkingbird]

Originally Posted by blueserenity

I wouldn't worry too much about it. Singer may be trying (too) hard to make this movie very much his own but I really can't see him dropping 50% of the current X-Men team. If Charles is going to be in a dark place, as hinted at by McAvoy in his recent interview, I really can't see Alex or Sean being all "We're gettin' real tired of your s***, Mr Xavier" and leaving him. Nor can I see Charles being self-absorbed enough to send them away like he did with Moira. They're his first students and unless this movie jumps more than 10 years in the future (which Singer would be monumentally stupid to do), Havok and Banshee are safe .

Similarly, I'd venture that most, if not all, of the Brotherhood members will be back. Definitely Emma. Probably Azazel. And the latter not because he "needs to get Mystique pregnant" (or, as some of our truly classy board members have so candidly suggested, "get her pregnant by rape"), because I really don't think they need to or should touch upon Nightcrawler's origins in the movies.

First of all, I don't like the idea that Mystique, particularly this Mystique, needs a man to define her. If she gets rejected by Magneto I don't want to see her just run to another man's arms for comfort. I'd like to think she can be a stronger female character than that, especially at this juncture.

Second, I can't believe that she would just abandon her son. She's not entirely heartless. If she forgot about him, I can't see Charles being so heartless that he would make her forget about him. Emma might be behind it but it seems like so much time dedicated to such a workaround is a waste. The simple solution is to keep on as though Nightcrawler is NOT Mystique's son. It'd upset the die-hard fanboys for sure, but nothing in these movies should ever be done JUST for the sake of appeasing them. General audiences would not notice the change or the absence of this family relationship, just as general audiences didn't notice or care that this Erik doesn't have children.

Sorry Hawkingbird, went on a bit of a tangent there. TL;DR I'm sure both actors will be back to reprise their X-Men roles

Your reasoning has given me hope Although, as a die hard fan, I do want Mystique to be Nightcrawler's mother.

[Angamb]

I think they should hint at a Mystique and Azazel connection, not neccesarily on this sequel, but at least on the last one.

They dont need to SHOW Mystique pregnant or both of them having sex, just suggest they have/had something and fans would join the pieces easily.

If this series had more than three movies, I think they could easily adress the issue with more care and screentime, but if they dont want to do it, at least to suggest it.

But to have Mystique and Azazel on the same time period and to avoid the Nightcrawler connection is too big of a stupid decision, I think.

and about Banshee and Havok not confirmed yet, Im not worried, they are under contract, so Fox doesnt need to confirm them at all. They will be there, and in the highly unlikely case they wont, we'll have a x-men team on the 60's in any case, so we dont need to worry.

To drop half of the FC cast on the sequel would be one of the most stupid decisions of superhero franchises, so Im sure Bryan wont do that.

[blueserenity]

Originally Posted by Angamb

I think they should hint at a Mystique and Azazel connection, not neccesarily on this sequel, but at least on the last one.

They dont need to SHOW Mystique pregnant or both of them having sex, just suggest they have/had something and fans would join the pieces easily.

If this series had more than three movies, I think they could easily adress the issue with more care and screentime, but if they dont want to do it, at least to suggest it.

But to have Mystique and Azazel on the same time period and to avoid the Nightcrawler connection is too big of a stupid decision, I think.

and about Banshee and Havok not confirmed yet, Im not worried, they are under contract, so Fox doesnt need to confirm them at all. They will be there, and in the highly unlikely case they wont, we'll have a x-men team on the 60's in any case, so we dont need to worry.

To drop half of the FC cast on the sequel would be one of the most stupid decisions of superhero franchises, so Im sure Bryan wont do that.

See I don't think they need to hint at anything with Mystique/Azazel. There is way too much to cover and FIX without dealing with who Nightcrawler's parents are. If they're meant to be his parents, then they've got to address why Mystique had exactly one "meh" interaction with him in X2. And "she's a heartless woman" doesn't cut it because it outright isn't true. The ONLY thing I would accept was that her memory of him was wiped out completely (and Erik's would have to have been as well, and probably Charles'). Which is such lazy, lazy, LAAAAAAAAZY storytelling. They've got such a clusterfrig of continuity issues to fix in DOFP since they unfortunately decided XMFC was a prequel rather than a reboot. I don't see how adding a needless one is going to help them. We've got only got 4 hours to fix everything and keep it fresh and interesting. If they're going to drop things from the comics in order to accommodate the quality of the films, the Nightcrawler's-parents thing is a perfect candidate. It would take up so much more explanation than what is worth. Having two characters onscreen at the same time who hooked up once in the comics doesn't necessarily mean they're in the movies together because Nightcrawler. They both do serve other purposes as individual characters.

[marvelrobbins]

Your making a bad assumation.First Class,Original films,and Wolverine solo films aren't different series they are all part of same series.

All the first Class actors had multifilms In their contracts.It Is only a question of who they want to come.

Bryan SInger's tweets may have spilled that main focus of DOFP will be on Xavier,Magneto,Mystique,and Beast of First Class past and Xavier,Magneto,and Wolverine In future.

This probally means time traveler will eather be
1:Xavier switching mind with younger self
2:WOlverine switching mind with younger boned clawed self
3:Wolverine physically traveling back In time

Of course If Anna Paquin or less Likely ELlen Page Is next announced as being In film I could be wrong.

It's unlikely that Bryan would tweet every single actor In film.Most likely the ones to watch for bryan to possable tweet are Rose Byrne,January Jones,and Jason Flemying
from First Class,Halle Berry,Anna Paquin,Rebecca Romijn,and possibly James Marsden and Famke Janssen from X-Men and X2 and less likely but still a possibilty Ellen Page
from Last Stand(If any actor cast In a nonsinger X-Men film Is In film It would be Ellen)

If James or Famke or both are included In Bryan Tweet since It's very unlikely Bryan would announce a cameo at end of film we are looking at 2 possibiltys

1utright Ignoring the Last Stand
2;Days of future Past Is straight up prequel and time travel preventing the event which leads to sentinles In Dark future leads to original trilogy

2 would allow for bryan's connecting dots between films comments and also would allow him to use James and Famke In film.

It will be Intresting to see If Fox bring DOFP to COmic Con this summer or will they let first look at DOFP be In post credit scene of The Wolverine.

[marvelrobbins]

Originally Posted by blueserenity

See I don't think they need to hint at anything with Mystique/Azazel. There is way too much to cover and FIX without dealing with who Nightcrawler's parents are. If they're meant to be his parents, then they've got to address why Mystique had exactly one "meh" interaction with him in X2. And "she's a heartless woman" doesn't cut it because it outright isn't true. The ONLY thing I would accept was that her memory of him was wiped out completely (and Erik's would have to have been as well, and probably Charles'). Which is such lazy, lazy, LAAAAAAAAZY storytelling. They've got such a clusterfrig of continuity issues to fix in DOFP since they unfortunately decided XMFC was a prequel rather than a reboot. I don't see how adding a needless one is going to help them. We've got only got 4 hours to fix everything and keep it fresh and interesting. If they're going to drop things from the comics in order to accommodate the quality of the films, the Nightcrawler's-parents thing is a perfect candidate. It would take up so much more explanation than what is worth. Having two characters onscreen at the same time who hooked up once in the comics doesn't necessarily mean they're in the movies together because Nightcrawler. They both do serve other purposes as individual characters.

Why would Mystique since she abanded Nightcrawler mention to him she's his mother In X2.In comics It took years for that revelation to come.

And there was plenty to say First Class was prequel and not reboot.People who wanted reboot take certin quotes from Matthew Vaughn but Ignore other things.Never once on DVD/Bluray special features Is reboot mentioned.Clips from trilogy are seen.The entire marketing was based on telling back story of Xavier and Magneto.Vaughn Is like J.J. Abrams.He can say things at different times depending on who he Is talking to.

If first Class was reboot It would have been different film with more recquonable characters.You wouldn't

Recreate opening scene from X-men
Keep Mystique makeup consent to trilogy
Have magnto's powers sound effects be same as earlier films
Keep sound of Mystique morphing be consented with other films
Make Magnto's tatoo number look like fresher version from X-Men/Last Stand
Have cerebro helmet look like protype of X-Men/X2 cerebro
Xavier and Magnto working together when first X-Men come together Is taken from Trilogy not comics
Have Hugh Jackman cameo as Wolverine
Have Jennifer Lawrence brifly morphy Into Rebecca Romijn
Have Jet that appears as ealry version of jet from trilogy
the Magneto and Mystique relationship which calls back the trilogy not the comics
have sequence of Xavier using cerebro very copy of first X-Men
Have CIA agent as father of William Stryker.WHich further helps build up stryker as main antihuman In films which wasn't how It was In Comics
Put James Mcavoy In suit and wheelcahir at end which copy of suit and wheelchair Patrick stewert used In tirlogy
Put mIchael fassbender In outfit at end which Is similar to Ian Mckellan's outfit but adds a more comic book helmet.

A reboot avoids compassions or copy of films they are now saying never happened.That Is what a reboot means.Of course someone should tell the producers of James Bond films that.

If first Class was reboot there wouldn't be any more wolverine films.They would put wolverine In first Class or sequel.

[Angamb]

Originally Posted by blueserenity

See I don't think they need to hint at anything with Mystique/Azazel. There is way too much to cover and FIX without dealing with who Nightcrawler's parents are. If they're meant to be his parents, then they've got to address why Mystique had exactly one "meh" interaction with him in X2. And "she's a heartless woman" doesn't cut it because it outright isn't true. The ONLY thing I would accept was that her memory of him was wiped out completely (and Erik's would have to have been as well, and probably Charles'). Which is such lazy, lazy, LAAAAAAAAZY storytelling. They've got such a clusterfrig of continuity issues to fix in DOFP since they unfortunately decided XMFC was a prequel rather than a reboot. I don't see how adding a needless one is going to help them. We've got only got 4 hours to fix everything and keep it fresh and interesting. If they're going to drop things from the comics in order to accommodate the quality of the films, the Nightcrawler's-parents thing is a perfect candidate. It would take up so much more explanation than what is worth. Having two characters onscreen at the same time who hooked up once in the comics doesn't necessarily mean they're in the movies together because Nightcrawler. They both do serve other purposes as individual characters.

as everything else, it all depends of how much time the writers and director want to spend on each subplot. Not all the elements from the comics or the movie plots need a whole arc on each sequel.

So as Ive commented, we dont need something explicit. A little nod would be more than enough to me.

And about Raven's reaction to Kurt on X2, it was just their very first meeting, and a short one, just because Raven didnt show some interest in him doesnt mean he isnt his son. Its Mystique who we're talking about. On the very first metting with her son she wouldnt say: 'ey, how are u?... are u married? how has Life treat you all these years?... would u like to have another meeting one of these days? Id like to learn more from you"

Each fan can interpret some event or characters in different ways. Just because the previous directors didnt make obvious one thing doesnt mean it cant be adress later in this still alive franchise.

A similar case is Syrin appearing on X2 and now Banshee on FC on the 60's. Just because Singer didnt use Sean's name on X2 doesnt mean she isnt his daughter. All this stuff are subtle nods that can be explored/suggest/expanded later in the franchise, in case the creative team wants to.

And again, even if they dont adress this type of stuff ever, each fan will decide if they want to connect things or not.

[X-Maniac]

I don't think the Mystique/Azazel/Nightcrawler thing will ever be stated explicitly at all.

It's not Bryan's style to be so 'obvious'.

He tends to leave it at hints and subtext, like whether Sabretooth remembered Wolverine in X1 and whether Deathstryke remembered Wolverine in X2.

I'd be very surprised if the birth of Nightcrawler became a plot point.

As fans, these things are what we want, but in the 2-hour space of a film, there just isn't time for it. If it doesn't relate directly to the main plot, it would probably be left out.

[Angamb]

if they broke the trilogy limit, they could adress it someway for sure, but Im afraid they wont do a fourth movie with the same cast, although this Days of future sequel will be the fourth movie to the returning actors from Original trilogy.

So who knows

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by X-Maniac

I don't think the Mystique/Azazel/Nightcrawler thing will ever be stated explicitly at all.

It's not Bryan's style to be so 'obvious'.

He tends to leave it at hints and subtext, like whether Sabretooth remembered Wolverine in X1 and whether Deathstryke remembered Wolverine in X2.

I'd be very surprised if the birth of Nightcrawler became a plot point.

As fans, these things are what we want, but in the 2-hour space of a film, there just isn't time for it. If it doesn't relate directly to the main plot, it would probably be left out.

I'd probably agree with them on this kind of thing.

[Hawkingbird]

They don't have to explain the Azazil/Mystique issue in this film. Hopefully, if DOFP is a success, they'll be able to hopefully nod to it.
But I agree, there's other continuity issues that desperately need to be fixed. Some with time travel, others with a bit (or allot) of elaboration.

[Mrs Vimes]

I could totally see the original!Mystique and Azazel hooking up. I have more trouble imagining the young!Mystique doing so though, even if she becomes a harder character in the sequel(s).

[EnDz0n3]

I'm ok with them not making Mystique and Azazel Nightcrawler's parents.

Even the comic book fans didn't like Azazel as a character. I think he was created by Chuck Austen and there have been many a character ruined by that writer. Making Nightcrawler's dad Satan certainly did not win him any favors.

[Mako]

Am I the only one that still want to see Singer's version of Gambit?

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by Mrs Vimes

I could totally see the original!Mystique and Azazel hooking up. I have more trouble imagining the young!Mystique doing so though, even if she becomes a harder character in the sequel(s).

Would be intense!!

[Mrs Vimes]

Oh yeah I bet they would enjoy each other enormously

[EnDz0n3]

Originally Posted by Mako

Am I the only one that still want to see Singer's version of Gambit?

I think the closest we got was for X2 with stunt double (?) James Bamford and it wasn't gonna be anything big. Might have been a shot from the back IIRC.

As big a fan I am of Gambit (and my fandom of the character has definitely diminished over the years) I don't think I'm clamouring for another Gambit appearance. But I wouldn't be opposed to seeing what Singer can do with the character.

[NanaT]

I think there are other characters that haven't even appeared in the movies yet that need to be introduced.

[Hawkingbird]

Originally Posted by Mako

Am I the only one that still want to see Singer's version of Gambit?

No more multiple movie character appearances it's just messing the continuity up further.

[psylockolussus]

Originally Posted by Iceman

An X-Men ongoing TV series with film production standards would be unbelievable, won't happen though.

It could be very expensive and people would expect new characters to show up every week. But its possible though it would be very challenging for the producers of the show to make the show better than the X-Men movies.

[Hawkingbird]

Did anybody see Macavoy on the Graham Norton Show last night? I fell asleep

[The Infernal]

I did. He was really funny with Quentin Tarantino and Alan Davies. It will still be on BBC Iplayer if you haven't recorded it. Just go to their website and check the Iplayer.

No mention of X-men though, but still a great show.

[Duran Man]

This week the show is supposed to have Nicholas Hoult on.

[Hawkingbird]

I am watching that!

[The Infernal]

Plus it has Denzel Washington and Bill Bailey. That should be an interesting mix.

[Hawkingbird]

Huolt will be talking about his new film, I just hope Graham mentions something X-Men.