Continuity

[Pauluz]

I'm glad we're getting a Wolverine movie, that's for sure. But one thing that bothers me is the continuity. Sabretooth is one example and the hair but I don't wanna talk about that right now. I'm talking about the Weapon X project. The scenes we saw in the trailer looked alot more flashy, colorful and techy than what we saw in the X-Men movies. I also hope that the markings on Logan's body remain. From the stuff we saw, what do you prefer; Singer's vision or Hood's?

[Legion]

Well I don't think they have to use the exact same set design in order to remain in continuity. I think it looks fine from what we've seen.

[chaseter]

How do you propose continuity for a prequel? As for direction, Singer is gone and we can't vouche for Hood as of yet because we haven't seen the movie.

[Pauluz]

Originally Posted by chaseter

How do you propose continuity for a prequel? As for direction, Singer is gone and we can't vouche for Hood as of yet because we haven't seen the movie.

The exact same Weapon X set as in the X-men movies for starters.

[chaseter]

Originally Posted by Pauluz

The exact same Weapon X set as in the X-men movies for starters.

Why would you want the exact same everything? I would rather this film be more true to the comics than true to Singer.

[The Original Bamfer]

Originally Posted by Pauluz

I'm glad we're getting a Wolverine movie, that's for sure. But one thing that bothers me is the continuity. Sabretooth is one example and the hair but I don't wanna talk about that right now. I'm talking about the Weapon X project. The scenes we saw in the trailer looked alot more flashy, colorful and techy than what we saw in the X-Men movies. I also hope that the markings on Logan's body remain. From the stuff we saw, what do you prefer; Singer's vision or Hood's?

If you're referring to the Weapon X seen in Logan's dreams and flashbacks, well, they're just that... dreams and flashbacks. And the Weapon X in present-day X2 was fairly aged which would explain the more "colorful" look in this film. As for most of the technology, well, one could assume that, after being destroyed, it would be removed.

[DOG LIPS]

Originally Posted by chaseter

Why would you want the exact same everything? I would rather this film be more true to the comics than true to Singer.

[flavio_lebeau]

So far, I prefer Singer's darker and more somber take on it. Let's see.

[TNC9852002]

Well, you don't need to be true to the comics in order to make a good or bad movie. At the end of the day, I just want a damn good movie. I couldn't care less about how well translated it is as long as all of the basics are there.

Some people get hung up too much on the details nowadays, which is ok for graphic novels and short stories, but not for something like this.

-TNC

[Retroman]

Originally Posted by Pauluz

I'm glad we're getting a Wolverine movie, that's for sure. But one thing that bothers me is the continuity. Sabretooth is one example and the hair but I don't wanna talk about that right now. I'm talking about the Weapon X project. The scenes we saw in the trailer looked alot more flashy, colorful and techy than what we saw in the X-Men movies. I also hope that the markings on Logan's body remain. From the stuff we saw, what do you prefer; Singer's vision or Hood's?

Yeah the hair bothers me too a little. I mean would it hurt to give Sabretooth a little blond highlights?

As for the Weapon X facility, well, it does look more modern and light than you'd expect. They have a director and production designer and with this being a prequel not a sequel they are bound to want to put his their own stamp on the look.

Originally Posted by Pauluz

The exact same Weapon X set as in the X-men movies for starters.

They probably didn't have that set anymore. The look of Weapon X in X1 and X2 is different.....

Originally Posted by chaseter

Why would you want the exact same everything? I would rather this film be more true to the comics than true to Singer.

True but i think you need to stay true to both while at same trying to make a good movie. One key element in this movie which is from Singer's time is Stryker.I think it's important that he'd have a role.

Other things established in the films such as Stryker's wife, Jason Stryker, Alkali Lake and (maybe at some point Yuriko Oyama) will hopefully feature.

[the a1ant]

My only continuity gripe is the bone claws thing. In X2 Stryker said "You were always an animal, Wolverine. I just gave you claws."

I can understand why they gave him the bone claws though.

[JP]

Originally Posted by the a1ant

My only continuity gripe is the bone claws thing. In X2 Stryker said "You were always an animal, Wolverine. I just gave you claws."

Yup. And also, bone claws just suck.

Originally Posted by Neto Magnus

btw isnt Stryker supposed to wear glasses and have a goatee?

25+ years after this movie will take place he will

[SNIKT1950]

Bone claws are awesome.

[Infinity9999x]

Originally Posted by TNC9852002

Well, you don't need to be true to the comics in order to make a good or bad movie. At the end of the day, I just want a damn good movie. I couldn't care less about how well translated it is as long as all of the basics are there.

Some people get hung up too much on the details nowadays, which is ok for graphic novels and short stories, but not for something like this.

-TNC

I know for me, when I say I want it "true to the comics" I'm talking more about being true to the spirit and characters of the comics.

For example, TDK wasn't true to many of the comics in the literal sense. Two Face had a very different origin then in the comics, but I still thought it was true to the character. Did he get scarred in a courtroom? No, but did the way he get scarred still carry as much emotional weight as the courtroom scene? I'd say yes, just in a different way. It still stayed true to the themes and core essence of the character, but did the finer details in a different way then in the comics.

That's really all I hope for in an adaptation, a faithful translation of the core themes of characters to screen, as long as a filmmaker does that, and produces a solid movie with a good story, I'm a happy fan.

[Infinity9999x]

Originally Posted by JP

Yup. And also, bone claws just suck.

I of course, disagree, but this isn't the thread for that.

And when Stryker said "I just gave you claws," I always took it as more of a symbolic meaning, in the sense that Stryker knew that Wolverine's always had that animalistic side in him, and he just went to measures to unleash it, thus giving him his "claws."

[SNIKT1950]

The Joker in The Dark Knight is basically a terrorist.

I consider Heath's Joker much much much more interesting than any comic book depiction of the character.

When movies change things I don't mind, because most of the time it works.

Except Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin.

[The Apocalypse]

Originally Posted by chaseter

Why would you want the exact same everything? I would rather this film be more true to the comics than true to Singer.

Couldn't have put it any better.

[JP]

Originally Posted by SNIKT1950

I consider Heath's Joker much much much more interesting than any comic book depiction of the character.

[Legion]

One thing that bothers me is that in the X films Wolverine has nightmares of the adamantium bonding, he remembers Stryker, but there is no mention of Silver Fox at all.

Like she was supposed to be the love of his life. A flash back to her death one of the times Jean died would have been perfect.

[The Apocalypse]

I just want to know how 'it tickles' when he gets shot down by a firing squad but when he gets shot in the head in X-2 he's out for like 5 min.

[JP]

Hahahaha.

[SNIKT1950]

I think Wolverine and Sabretooth were knocked out for a while after the execution.

They probably got thrown into some hole and got up right after.

The people that shot them must have been freaked out.

[DoctorJones]

Originally Posted by Legion

One thing that bothers me is that in the X films Wolverine has nightmares of the adamantium bonding, he remembers Stryker, but there is no mention of Silver Fox at all.

Like she was supposed to be the love of his life. A flash back to her death one of the times Jean died would have been perfect.

Maybe that's why they cast a redhead (is Lynn Collins a natural redhead? No matter, ok joke over, is she red in the film?).

Originally Posted by Neto Magnus

A: Its 15+ years.
B: A flashback in X2 already established Stryker with black hair, glasses and a goatee.
3: Welcome to the Hype.

I had kind of gotten the impression that Vietnam was involved in this film, Vietnam was longer than 15 years ago. Stryker seems to recruit Logan/Creed around the time of Vietnam becasue they killed a senior officer. That is the first time we see Stryker, he is wearing military uniform and has a clean shaven face.

I think Weapon X happens after Vietnam and Stryker is strictly government operations (Weapon X) so he decides to grow a beard out now that he's not in the eye of the military (most officers in the military keep their face shaven at most times).

Thanks for the welcome, Neto