Senator Kelly or The Kelly Family.

[JustABill]

Rewatching X-Men and X2 the past two days I got to thinking about Bruce Davison's Senator Kelly. The character is pretty prominent in moving the plot of mutant hatred forward in the first two films until his death by Magneto's machine.

Wouldn't this film and it's possible sequels be the perfect place to explain the origins of this character? Maybe a young Kelly could show up in First Class alongside an older father whose also a staunch mutant hater? A father could be killed in an attack by mutants?

I think explaining this character's origins and why he is the way he is in the movieverse could lead to some very good, interesting and powerful scenes.

Have we heard anything about the intent to use the character in this film from Singer or Vaughan? He even would fit in the 60's backdrop and I'm fairly sure he'd be old enough to be present in some form.

[JP]

I feel like he'd be suckin on his mamas tit around the time of this film.

[JustABill]

If he were to be Bruce Davison's age, and he's never specified age wise in the original he'd be 54 at the time of the Magneto's machine.

So I think it could work.

[JP]

Then he'd be about 13/14 in 1963. Which is actually confusing to me. How old are Xavier and Erik supposed to be?

EDIT: Nevermind, I did the math. It works out if they're about 65.

[JustABill]

Is it confirmed 63 is the year in the 60's this is set in?

[JP]

Singer said JFK was president.

[JustABill]

Ah. Hmmm. So it could anywhere from 61 to 63 realistically. Or did he comment that they'd dealing with his assassination?

Anyways, I think it could be to see Senator Kelly grow into the man he was in X-Men.

[Wolverine1988]

So what Magneto and Prof X are in the mid to late 20's in this?

[Project862006]

late 20's

[Squidboy]

If Kelly should be involved in these films, I don't think his background should be all too sympathy-driven. It's a good enough idea, but all indications of the character were that he was simply a bigot who hated mutants. He got his small redemption by the end of X-MEN, and it showed that the only reason he had such strong beliefs against mutants was because he never actually took the time to ever really consider their plight, so it wouldn't really be necessary to have him be a huge part of a sequel. I would however like to see his rise to fame, to sync up with the first movie. So anti-mutant sentiments should lead to an anti-mutant government at some point.

[Spider-Fan83]

edit:^ looks like you beat me too it...
(I was just thinking the same thing)

Though, I wouldn’t mind a young Mr. Kelly (or even the Kelly family) being referenced too…

I don’t know how I feel about the idea of his father being killed by a mutant,or anything along those lines that would justify his hate for mutant… I mean, he was suppose to be more of less a bad guy (and though by the end he some what learned the error of his ways… but, at that point it was too late) I think giving him a reason to hate mutants (other then his misguided bigotry… and fear of what he doesn’t under stand) would make him to much of a sympathetic character…imo

[Squidboy]

Plus, we already had Stryker hating mutants because his son was one. Oh, and his son caused his wife to kill herself as well. There was that.

[Spider-Fan83]

ok, so, here's another thought….

what if him father was a mutant… and maybe because of times, and prejudice against mutants happening, he thought it was best to leave his family to protect them…. or maybe, Something like his mom kick him out after finding he was mutant, then lied to her son about him being takin away (or killed) by mutants…

[Squidboy]

It's cutting it awful close to Graydon Creed's story, and if that's the route they wanted to take, they might as well use that character if they wanted to adapt it.

[Deaths Head II]

Here's what I'm thinking. Senator Kelly was a friend of the Hellfire Club in the comics and he was there when the X-Men first fought the Hellfire Club. The Hellfire Club was able to frame the X-Men for viciously attacking their home without provocation while Kelly was there. I think we should have something similar where the X-Men mess up the Hellfire Club's house and all the young Kelly sees is mutants beating up apparently innocent people.

[Squidboy]

See, that would be a good connection - I looked up Kelly on Wikipedia earlier and didn't realize he was introduced so late into the X-Men franchise, and as a guest of a Hellfire party, so it'd make perfect sense for him to have ties in that respect, but I'd want to avoid anything too personal that would sway his mind about mutants. I know if people with superpowers killed my family, I'd take that hatred to my deathbed, with no chance of having mutants sway my mind in the eleventh hour. So I could see your scenario working out, Deaths Head.

[JP]

Just feels like unnecessary pandering.

[Squidboy]

Originally Posted by JP

Just feels like unnecessary pandering.

If that was the mission statement from the start, we wouldn't have had a Wolverine movie at all. Yeah, putting Kelly in one of these movies is only really going to serve the purpose of pleasing a few fans here and there, but that's what the movies have been doing lately, even if there's just the random cameo thrown in to get fanboys to jump in their seat.

[Deaths Head II]

Originally Posted by JP

Just feels like unnecessary pandering.

It's not absolutely necessary, but it would be a subtle way to tie things together. And Singer is able to give subtle development and depth.

[Wolverine1988]

Originally Posted by Squidboy

If that was the mission statement from the start, we wouldn't have had a Wolverine movie at all. Yeah, putting Kelly in one of these movies is only really going to serve the purpose of pleasing a few fans here and there, but that's what the movies have been doing lately, even if there's just the random cameo thrown in to get fanboys to jump in their seat.

I was under the impression that most people were sick of the "Random Cameo" that plaqued x3 and even worst the Wolverine movie.And i agree it got to be pretty stupid.

[BMM]

I would be fine with Senator Kelly not being in this. I don't like when movies try to tie everything together so soon.

[Deaths Head II]

With something so minor I don't think it matters if they tie it together too quickly. In fact in the sequels I'd rather they get into Kelly being a douchebag so a cameo like that would be better utilized in this film.

[Squidboy]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1988

I was under the impression that most people were sick of the "Random Cameo" that plaqued x3 and even worst the Wolverine movie.And i agree it got to be pretty stupid.

Yeah, I was saying that all the cameos thrown in was just to appease the fans, and throwing Kelly in for no reason would be just that. If it made absolute sense to the story and was pulled off without contradicting what we've seen later on, then go for it, but I don't think it should be done 'just because it can be done'. Give everything a rhyme and a reason, or just leave it on the cutting room floor.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by Squidboy

Yeah, I was saying that all the cameos thrown in was just to appease the fans, and throwing Kelly in for no reason would be just that. If it made absolute sense to the story and was pulled off without contradicting what we've seen later on, then go for it, but I don't think it should be done 'just because it can be done'. Give everything a rhyme and a reason, or just leave it on the cutting room floor.

Once more, I agree. No forcing it into the story for the sake of it. It has to feel....silly trendy word coming...organic.

[Schlosser85]

I'd just as soon not see Kelly. He was a fairly minor character who fulfilled his purpose in X-Men 1, and throwing him into First Class just to be throwing him in would risk taking up time and attention that could be spent on more important characters, the same mistake (among others) that Wolverine and to a lesser extent X-Men 3 made.