No Cyclops; Reaction Thread

[MoPlaYa]

So Scott will have brother that is 20yrs older than him....WOW!

[flavio_lebeau]

Originally Posted by MoPlaYa43

I understand why Cyclops,Storm and Jean arent in this movie with it taking place in the 60`s but i dont like them having Havok in this movie since he is suppose to be Scott`s younger brother and now they wont even be bothers ... I think they could have picked another mutant instead of Havok.

maybe I'm easily pleased, but I like his power and I love how it could be used in a movie.

The fact he will probably not be Scott's brother has absolutely no relevance to me. Family ties really aren't that important in a movie that favors action and plot, guys.

It's not a soap opera. Them being brothers wouldn't change anything in a movie where they're trying to save the world. Just like Nightcrawler not being Mystique's son didn't ruin X2. It didn't matter, at all. They were both still amazing characters in that movie.

[Optimus_Prime_]

My reaction to the film has nothing to do with Cyclops NOT being in it, and everything to do with Havok being included. It's really quite stupid to include Scott's younger brother in a movie that's twenty years older, and would've taken place long before Cyclops' birth.

[Optimus_Prime_]

My reaction to the film has nothing to do with Cyclops NOT being in it, and everything to do with Havok being included. It's really quite stupid to include Scott's younger brother in a movie that's twenty years older, and would've taken place long before Cyclops' birth.

[SuperT]

The bottom line is this - Does changing Havok from the younger brother to the older brother make any significant change to either of their backstorys or any major storyline?

The answer (as far as we know) - No.

[BMM]

Originally Posted by huzzah

Then what is the purpose of having Havock in this movie? Why dont they just pick another random mutant that no one has ever heard of? We dont know Havock other than being Scott's younger brother. He's never been his dad, uncle, great grand-uncle, somebody totally unrelated...always brother. So being First Class why did the writers feel it necesssary to re-write a characters history?

For the same reason every single film adaptation of a comic book has re-written a character's history.

[SuperT]

Originally Posted by BMM

For the same reason every single film adaptation of a comic book has re-written a character's history.

Exactly. Pretty much every comic book movie we've had up to now has rewritten their characters historys to fit the story/movie they're telling.

My opinion - good for them! Most, if not all these characters (X-Men and pretty much every other Marvel character out there) have history's that are so convoluted and confusing that they all would need their own solo movies to make any sense of them.

[JP]

Originally Posted by MoPlaYa43

So Scott will have brother that is 20yrs older than him....WOW!

Why is that hard to believe?

Havok may have been included as a direct tie in to Scott. Maybe the reason Havok joins up with Xavier is because he was separated from his baby brother and Xavier promises him that he'll help locate and find him. That would actually also explain how Xavier randomly shows up at the end of XMO.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by SuperT

The bottom line is this - Does changing Havok from the younger brother to the older brother make any significant change to either of their backstorys or any major storyline?

The answer (as far as we know) - No.

Well yeah. Have you read the comics? It changes just about their entire origin start to finish, and the dynamic between the two characters completely. Moreover this is a TWENTY YEAR difference! Set aside the fact that most families, even those with several children rarely ever have ones that are twenty plus years apart.

Not that it made any sense in Wolverine, but Scott's in high school by that point, meaning he's probably about 16 or 17 tops in 1979. In first class, set in the 1960s, were looking at potentially anywhere from age 2 or 3, to age not even born yet. The inclusion of Havok here is ridiculous. Other than to name drop a C-List character who comic fans would remember, and general audience members have no knowledge of, what's the rationale for this?

Why not use a character from pre-X-Men fiction. There are literally dozens to choose from.

[JP]

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

Well yeah. Have you read the comics? It changes just about their entire origin start to finish, and the dynamic between the two characters completely. Moreover this is a TWENTY YEAR difference! Set aside the fact that most families, even those with several children rarely ever have ones that are twenty plus years apart.

Not that it made any sense in Wolverine, but Scott's in high school by that point, meaning he's probably about 16 or 17 tops in 1979. In first class, set in the 1960s, were looking at potentially anywhere from age 2 or 3, to age not even born yet. The inclusion of Havok here is ridiculous. Other than to name drop a C-List character who comic fans would remember, and general audience members have no knowledge of, what's the rationale for this?

Why not use a character from pre-X-Men fiction. There are literally dozens to choose from.

Because like you, people would still complain. Pretty much every "young" character in this movie sans Beast, Mystique, and Banshee are getting complaints. It's a lose lose situation.

[TheShah]

To be honest, after the massacre that was XO: WOLVERINE, I'm glad that they're going with not so famous characters, with not so famous actors potraying them and a semi-unknown director.

That prevents them from filling the movie with unnecessary cameos of 'big names' and getting sidetracked with pandering to the audiences and focusing more on the core of the characters.
Despite how much of comic book canon they have to modify.

And to be fair, how much of comic canon has been retconned IN comic books themselves over the years, for people to be THIS pissed about a movie adaptation changing things?!

[BMM]

Not to add fuel to the fire, but perhaps people should prepare for the possibility that Cyclops and Havok may not even be related.

[huzzah]

Originally Posted by BMM

Not to add fuel to the fire, but perhaps people should prepare for the possibility that Cyclops and Havok may not even be related.

Well I'm sure there's very good explanation for this possibility...not that anyone has come up with a reason so far.

[psyonic]

There was no hint in X1 that Mystique is Rogue's foster mother.
There was no hint in X2 that Mystique is Nightcrawler's mother.
There was no hint in X3 that Juggernaut was Xavier's step brother.

Wolverine was too tall in the movies, Rogue was a teenager, Cyclops, Xavier and Jean died, Iceman and Angel are younger, Magneto is old, Mystique is naked, Colossus does not have a Russian accent, Callisto was not Caucasian, Juggernaut and Lady Deathstrike were made mutants ... and yet, we're still alive ..

[Blackman]

Gambit is older than Rogue and most of the other X-Men
Stryker wasnt a minister
Deathstrike doesnt have a vendetta against Wolverine and was a mindless thug

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by psyonic

There was no hint in X1 that Mystique is Rogue's foster mother.
There was no hint in X2 that Mystique is Nightcrawler's mother.
There was no hint in X3 that Juggernaut was Xavier's step brother.

Wolverine was too tall in the movies, Rogue was a teenager, Cyclops, Xavier and Jean died, Iceman and Angel are younger, Magneto is old, Mystique is naked, Colossus does not have a Russian accent, Callisto was not Caucasian, Juggernaut and Lady Deathstrike were made mutants ... and yet, we're still alive ..

These are no reason to continue this trend at all. If anything you're just proving how poorly FOX has handled the material. True, Iron Man made changes, but at least with IM it resembles the comics, and even the changes can be traced back to some comic book (Iron Man's ending, for example was basically a mish-mash of his first appearance with Iron Man #200).

Yes, we're all here, no one is stupid enough to think FOX could f*** up so bad it distorts the space-time continuum (knock on wood), but it would be nice to see someone treat X-Men the same way Marvel has treated their Avengers properties, or WB is treating Green Lantern.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by flavio_lebeau

maybe I'm easily pleased, but I like his power and I love how it could be used in a movie.

The fact he will probably not be Scott's brother has absolutely no relevance to me. Family ties really aren't that important in a movie that favors action and plot, guys.

It's not a soap opera. Them being brothers wouldn't change anything in a movie where they're trying to save the world. Just like Nightcrawler not being Mystique's son didn't ruin X2. It didn't matter, at all. They were both still amazing characters in that movie.

Okay, great, then why don't we call the next James Bond movie Batman. Clearly, their both about sauve middle aged gentlemen trying to save the world. Who cares whether Gordon isn't a cop, Alfred is a black mechanic, or Batman rides around on a unicycle? X-Men isn't about "saving the world", hell 2/3rds of their stories don't even involve world saving, it's about the characters in X-Men. If you're going to muck up the continuity this much, and misuse the characters to this extent...what's the point?

[the a1ant]

Singer has a specific story and time period in mind, and because of that I'm fine with Cyclops not appearing. You can tell he had this story in mind for a while, because it connects with many things he said years ago.

Still, I think Fox shot themselves in the foot with having Cyclops appear in "Wolverine". Everyone automatically assumed he would play a major role in "First Class" and finally get his time to shine. People aren't getting what was teased, and now they're understandably annoyed.

They should have changed the name of this film as soon as Singer came on-board with his idea. The original X-Men: First Class (by Josh Schwartz) was going to be what we all expected, but then everything changed...except the title.

[JP]

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

These are no reason to continue this trend at all. If anything you're just proving how poorly FOX has handled the material. True, Iron Man made changes, but at least with IM it resembles the comics, and even the changes can be traced back to some comic book (Iron Man's ending, for example was basically a mish-mash of his first appearance with Iron Man #200).

Yes, we're all here, no one is stupid enough to think FOX could f*** up so bad it distorts the space-time continuum (knock on wood), but it would be nice to see someone treat X-Men the same way Marvel has treated their Avengers properties, or WB is treating Green Lantern.

Jarvis is not a computer.
Nick Fury is not black.
S.H.E.I.L.D. didn't form The Avengers
Whiplash and Crimson Dynamo are two separate characters.
Hogan and Pepper were an item.


You can't bash certain changes and simply overlook others.

[Blackman]

Originally Posted by JP

Jarvis is not a computer.
Nick Fury is not black.
S.H.E.I.L.D. didn't form The Avengers
Whiplash and Crimson Dynamo are two separate characters.
Hogan and Pepper were an item.


You can't bash certain changes and simply overlook others.

Black Widow wasnt Russian
Tony wasn't an alcoholic

But I think you can overlook other things and bash others

[Project862006]

did'nt you know Marvel craps gold

and fans eat it all up

quite sad

[FaT_tONle]

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

How the hell are they doing Havok without Scott Summers in the movie? That makes literally no sense whatsoever. Nevermind the fact that it's a huge plot point in both their storyarcs, nevermind the fact that this'll make Havok 20 years!?! Scott's senior. What is Havok gonna be? Scott's father? Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised at this point.

What about this... Havok maybe playing a 16-17 year old... not impossible. Let's say he dies, so no worries about not being in the OT. The movie is set in 1965ish... or late 60's. Scott may be a baby. Maybe they will give them separate mothers. Any minor change is fair game. The time line can be set up accordingly. I just got to give credit to Fox for once in years for holding on to some of their chips and not blowing their load, unlike say Marvel, who is jamming pretty much every Avenger in cannon into the Avengers movie. So if the movie is a hit, no worries because then we are guaranteed a movie with the original team for sure, and the sequel will sell itself. If it flops, Disney will be waiting.

Originally Posted by JP

Why is that hard to believe?

Havok may have been included as a direct tie in to Scott. Maybe the reason Havok joins up with Xavier is because he was separated from his baby brother and Xavier promises him that he'll help locate and find him. That would actually also explain how Xavier randomly shows up at the end of XMO.

Yeah probably... I am thinking as a favor to Havoc, that will lead to the recruitment of Scott. Shouldn't happen for many years, but that shows Wolverine isn't completely being tossed. They are aware of when Wolverine took place and roughly how old Scott was.

[Octoberist]

I've always thought that Logan in X3 should have went through Scott's closet and wear his clothes. He stole his bike and his woman, so why not!

[Deaths Head II]

I was upset about Scott not being in this movie, but I've learn to accept it. One thing people aren't realizing about why people are upset over this is because First Class was advertised for a while as a movie about Cyclops, Jean and the early team. Sure Singer got a new script when he came on, but people still held out hope that Cyclops would still be a part of the movie. Especially since they were announcing young mutants to star in the film, including Cyclops' brother. It didn't seem like the concept of the film being about the First Class of mutants changed.

The revelation that the film was set in the 60s came just a few days ago, so people like me were disappointed. Sure it doesn't make sense for Scott to be alive in the 60s, but I was wondering why they were setting it in the 60s to begin with. That wasn't the concept they were talking about before. Yes, Cyclops being in the 60s makes as little sense as Angel and Iceman being part of the original team but it's just the fact that we were expecting Cyclops until now and just now got the revelation that it's taking place in the 60s and that Cyclops won't be in it.

Of course, now that the sudden disappointment is over, I'm fully willing to accept the decision and I'm starting to look forward to this movie yet again. The 60s setting will allow for an interesting story, and so will the relationship between Xavier and Magneto. My only hope is that Singer doesn't screw over the characters already in the movie, because I am actually a big fan of Havok and Banshee too. I don't know much about the actors they picked for those two and I don't have a lot of faith at the moment.

Originally Posted by JP

Why is that hard to believe?

Havok may have been included as a direct tie in to Scott. Maybe the reason Havok joins up with Xavier is because he was separated from his baby brother and Xavier promises him that he'll help locate and find him. That would actually also explain how Xavier randomly shows up at the end of XMO.

That actually would be interesting, though it begs the question why it took Xavier 20 years for him to try out Cerebro on Scott. Unless Magneto sabotages it at the end of this film and Xavier has to rebuild it. Or the early Cerebro doesn't have the range of the later Cerebro. Either way, I like the scenario. It also explains why Xavier specifically reached out to Scott in Wolverine.

[JP]

Originally Posted by Deaths Head II

That actually would be interesting, though it begs the question why it took Xavier 20 years for him to try out Cerebro on Scott. Unless Magneto sabotages it at the end of this film and Xavier has to rebuild it. Or the early Cerebro doesn't have the range of the later Cerebro. Either way, I like the scenario. It also explains why Xavier specifically reached out to Scott in Wolverine.

Yeah, 20 years is a bit of a stretch. Perhaps it took a while for Xavier to finally perfect it. Or, perhaps he just has alteration motives. I mean, he could have easily revealed Logan's past in 2 minutes, but chose not to.