Bryan Singer Directing X-Men: Days of Future Past - Part 2

[GuestStar2004]

what year is origins set in then?

[henzINNIT]

Loving the drama. Can't wait until people are done with the film over Wolverine's hair or the new X-suits.

Bring on the 70's and a new aesthetic.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by henzINNIT

Loving the drama. Can't wait until people are done with the film over Wolverine's hair or the new X-suits.

Bring on the 70's and a new aesthetic.

But not tooooo 70s, I hope. Flares were not a good look.

[JP]

Only thing I'll miss is Mystique's fabulous 60s hair flip.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by JP

Only thing I'll miss is Mystique's fabulous 60s hair flip.

She'll have a Farrah Fawcett do in this one

[henzINNIT]

Loving the sig JP. Quite a lineup. Must be the whitest cast ever though lol.

[SuperT]

Originally Posted by Alison Blaire

30 minutes of the original cast would be a real ****.It would be a waste.The eleven years post first class of no importance compared to this.

I think it's perfect that it seems like the returning X-Men actors won't be in that huge of a role. It would be nice to get short glimpses of the future throughout the film but still keep the spotlight on the First Class actors.

I mean, it is a First Class sequel.

[JP]

Originally Posted by henzINNIT

Loving the sig JP. Quite a lineup. Must be the whitest cast ever though lol.

HAHA! Yeah, even worse than First Class! They need to announce a Storm/Bishop stat.

[conan69]

[josh8]

Originally Posted by Loganbabe

I really don't see what one thing has to do with the other.

In the Batman franchise, there was a clear development of the main character in three films. It's not as if TDK ended with Batman being shot, with dramatic consequences, and in the next film years later it's like nothing happened. It's not as if Batman had a sister whom he adored who decided to join the dark side, and in the next film years later she's already one of his worst enemies and is trying to kill him, and we don't even know what exactly happened that caused that transition. It's not like secondary characters like Alfred and Gordon were dropped because the new film had no use for them.

If the next X-Men film jumps ten years ahead, all the dramatic events in First Class will have lost their meaning. We'll never get to see the transition and all the major changes that happened to the three main characters. I can't think of a worst scenario for a sequel. Was there a 10-year gap between X-Men and X2? No, we saw the main characters changing/evolving!

I just wish Fox was honest about dropping First Class and its universe for good, if they wanted so much to make a X4.

I think you're definitely being crazy clouded with bias here. You say there was clear development in the three Batman movies and do you know why you know that?? BECAUSE YOU SAW THE THE FILM AND ARE SAYING THAT NOW. DOFP hasn't even shot a single scene or released any plot info.

In TDK, the movie ended with Batman losing the love of his life. And the TDKR picks up 8 years after this life-altering event. It's exactly the same kind of situation. It's only one thing (Xavier has a few more major developments), but it's significant nonetheless.

And now FOX lied. WOW. Is it really their job to make the sequel exactly how you want it? They need to make sure they only continue the story right after the events of FC and nothing else? They are making DOFP. You're complaining even though IT IS A SEQUEL TO FC... it just happens to also be a continuation of X3.

[josh8]

There's this great movie that came out a long time ago. The main character went through all these ridiculous, traumatizing events. Then the sequel jumped around 15 years (OH NOES!!) into the future and boohoo we lost all this potential character development. I'll never ever watch that stupid sequel... what's it called again?








Oh right... TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY.

[Mrs Vimes]

Originally Posted by X-Maniac

But not tooooo 70s, I hope. Flares were not a good look.

Hey, flares are awesome

70s hair though... I thought that Argo was a great movie but man did that 70s hair look fugly or what.

[magneto23]

I'd love to see a new time period with a whole new feel/style to it. But my only concern, and its a big one, is that Singer/Kinberg will use this as the chance to write out some of the FC characters/actors. I can picture the cheap explanations already. I just don't want to see parts of FC made pointless. If some of them are just dropped like that it becomes "what was the point of those guys?". I hope they keep that cast intact and find roles (no matter how big/small) for those characters. Because for some of them to just be gone in DOFP that wouldn't feel right to me. I really don't see why they would need to recast Till and CLJ because of the 11 year difference. Is it that difficult to make actors in their early 20s appear as characters in their late 20s/pushing 30?

[georgec]

As long as there isn't a flying insect girl spitting fireballs out of her mouth, I'll be fine.

[def28]

Originally Posted by georgec

As long as there isn't a flying insect girl spitting fireballs out of her mouth, I'll be fine.

Haha. The FC battle match ups hopefully will be much stronger.

[psylockolussus]

Originally Posted by Project862006

how about Eddie Redmayne(31) & Charlie Hunnam(32) for older Banshee & Havok

I'm up for an older Banshee and Havok, I just hope they will give them more character development.

Originally Posted by Loganbabe

I'm so furious with the idea of jumping the story 10 years ahead I don't even know what to say.

Thanks so much for definitely screwing with Charles' personal development, Bryan Singer & writers. Thanks so much for burying First Class and the majority of its characters, Fox. I'm so done with this "sequel".

Watch the movie first before you jump on conclusion that the movie suck and is going to screw Charles' personal development.

[psylockolussus]

Originally Posted by Angamb

if this its true, I guess the plan since day one was that suggested prequel trilogy being set in the 60's, 70's, and 80's.

I dont understand why some studios feel soo limited with the concept of a trilogy, when with universes like X-men they could do 4 or even 5 movies with the same cast, like the FC one.

a 10 years jump would have been better for the third part, since we would have already two movies where young Charles, Eric, Mystique and Beast were developed perfectly. With the important transition each one needed. And from that point, they could have jumped a whole decade if want it. With the third part in the 70's and the fourth one on the 80's.

Some fans keep saying: They wont do fourth movies with the same cast.

But they clearly forget this is Hollywood, and the studios can do whatever they want with the right budget.

And this right sequel is just the prove, having Hugh Jackman playing Logan by the seventh time, Patrick the fifth time and Ian, Anna and Shawn the fourth time.

They could easily do a large series with the full FC cast, but I have the feeling they will limit theirselfs with just a trilogy.

Such a shame, having amazing actors like James McAvoy, Fassbender and Jennifer Lawrence.

If they cannot even have a direct X-Men 4 movie after Last Stand, what makes you think they will give the First Class cast a 4th movie and 5th movie.

Originally Posted by Duran Man

If they drop Banshee and Havok (which I hope they don't), and adding Cyclops, Jean, and Storm aren't options (which I hope they are), what's the team going to be made up of? Just Beast?

That seems to be the major concern for this. But I don't think it will be just Professor X and Beast. Even if there's already a couple of students at the Mansion, the 60s X-Men would feel so empty with just 2 people. I don't think Bryan Singer will do that.

[GREEN =w= DAY]

Originally Posted by josh8

There's this great movie that came out a long time ago. The main character went through all these ridiculous, traumatizing events. Then the sequel jumped around 15 years (OH NOES!!) into the future and boohoo we lost all this potential character development. I'll never ever watch that stupid sequel... what's it called again?








Oh right... TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY.

touche!

[GuestStar2004]

is say we can expect more from the first class team in this film then the originals so for any first class fans they won't have to worry i feel

[eddy]

Originally Posted by GuestStar2004

what year is origins set in then?

I think its set in the 80's.

[night0205]

Originally Posted by eddy

I think its set in the 80's.

Two views. Three Mile Island Meltdown Accident happened in 1979... but some people think they allowed a secret gov. stryker base to be put there after the accident for some reason...

I think 1979. Unit 2 at the Nuclear Power Plant was the biggest Nuclear meltdown in American history... I think Origins tried to say that Wolverine/Creed/Deadpool caused that meltdown. Sure it was re imagined, like first class re imagined the cuban missile crisis.

[Sawyer]

The actual time period that Origins take place in is about as clear as mud. They could not have made it more unclear.

[conan69]

Originally Posted by night0205

I think 1979. Unit 2 at the Nuclear Power Plant was the biggest Nuclear meltdown in American history... I think Origins tried to say that Wolverine/Creed/Deadpool caused that meltdown. Sure it was re imagined, like first class re imagined the cuban missile crisis.

Yup

[blueserenity]

Originally Posted by Loganbabe

I really don't see what one thing has to do with the other.

In the Batman franchise, there was a clear development of the main character in three films. It's not as if TDK ended with Batman being shot, with dramatic consequences, and in the next film years later it's like nothing happened. It's not as if Batman had a sister whom he adored who decided to join the dark side, and in the next film years later she's already one of his worst enemies and is trying to kill him, and we don't even know what exactly happened that caused that transition. It's not like secondary characters like Alfred and Gordon were dropped because the new film had no use for them.

If the next X-Men film jumps ten years ahead, all the dramatic events in First Class will have lost their meaning. We'll never get to see the transition and all the major changes that happened to the three main characters. I can't think of a worst scenario for a sequel. Was there a 10-year gap between X-Men and X2? No, we saw the main characters changing/evolving!

I just wish Fox was honest about dropping First Class and its universe for good, if they wanted so much to make a X4.

We've had our differences but I couldn't agree with you more. Settingthis 10 years later almost invalidates the events and character decisions in First Class. We will still in theory get character development (and ideally of the non-Wolverine variety). But the most interesting stuff will be lost and I imagine left to audiences to fill in the gaps. Bad form.

[marvelrobbins]

First Class was about the origin of Xavier and Magneto.Just as Bryan clearly
said First Class was clearly prequel he also mentioned this trilogy was Intended to jump decade In each Installment although DOnnor mentioned third film might stay In same decade as second film.

By end of first Class Xavier Is crippled and on path to seek out other mutants
to teach them and defend a world that hates and fears them.Magneto has helmet and has started bortherhood and on roard to wage war on Humans feeling they will do to mutants as Nazis did to his family.

They are now adapting one of top X-Men storylines ever.Some don't seem to
get that.

Just because only 4 of first Class actors have been confirmed doesn't mean more Isn't In film.The move to 1973 only raises possibilty of some recasts not that characters won't be back.What part of majority In 1973 do people not
understand.