Official First Class News & Speculation Thread: Class Two

[Alexei Belyakov]

Originally Posted by The Original Bamfer

They can't totally wipe it away. Its too soon. They can create a movie that does not connect to it. But there is proof that they are ignoring certain aspects of it. Vaughn's referenced it in interviews, and both Vaughn and Singer know how disappointed most fans were with the last two movies. There are nods in this film that seem to say, "yeah, we didn't really care for those movies either." But, like I said, they can't totally dismiss 'The Last Stand' as there are some fans who want to keep it in the same continuity. That's why they didn't use Angel. That's why Singer and Vaughn are tip-toeing around the continuity errors... they're not really errors, they're just trying to take the franchise back to the quality that Singer had left it. But they acknowledge that some people like 'The Last Stand'. Not enough to get in the way of them making a great film, though.

This I can agree with. They can ignore it secretly, just not right out in the open by recasting notable characters (Angel).

Originally Posted by The Original Bamfer

And Beast looks way better than Grammer did.

I guess you like Cassaday's Beast - which reminds me too much of Bova (and looks more like something The High Evolutionary created). Its just not Beast for me.

[Project862006]

looking at the x3 pic he is way too obvious he is basically blue kelsey grammar rather than beast

[marvelrobbins]

I have huge X-Men comics collection but Marvel ever since Joe Q took over as Editor In Chief and the run of Grant Morrison marvel slowly lost me as reader.
So I know the comic X-Men.They are tiptoaing around contunity questions.It seems they are treating X-Men and X2 as esssential X-Men.Just like with terminator films they treat first two films as holy.I see plenty of reasons to suggest they are Ignoring the last stand as well as Wolverine.The trailer defently hints at this because the beast design does not fit as younger version of last stand Beast.Moira mactaggert Is another thing.And if first class has Xavier crippled and he and magneto going their own ways then game over you can't view First Class as prequel to Last Stand.There are way too many references to that opening In The Last Stand to just fastforward over It.

Plus removing the Last stand gives them more room to do a post X2 X-Men film.And are that many people really want the Last Stand In contunity.Inless they are willing to do a reedited cut of last Stand too many errors for It to fit with first class.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by The Original Bamfer

Be thankful I'm not going to comment on the bolded (and very arrogant) statement in the quote above. Though I will reiterate, tsk tsk. You assume I'm judging this all based off of the teaser trailer, when there's a great possibility I know a lot more about this film.

Why is there a "great possibility" that you know more about this film? Because "bosef" is feeding you information privately?

And why shouldn't i wag my metaphorical finger at you with what you assumed to be an arrogant statement? Just because you are a mod does not mean you are beyond reproach. Whoever you are - member, mod, God, modGod, Godmod, animal, vegetable or mineral - your views will be there to be commented on.

They are ignoring certain aspects of 'The Last Stand'. Charles is paralyzed in 1962 and has his falling out with Magneto, yet twenty-some years later in 'The Last Stand', he's walking with his friend Erik to meet a young Jean Grey. Moira is around her late twenties in 1962. Yet some forty-some years later in 'The Last Stand', she is most definitely not in her early seventies.

I think we have all grasped that some story elements do not line up with the existing films.

My issue is with 'explanations' of the reason for that.

You use an argument that if they were ignoring 'The Last Stand', they'd use Warren. No. They're making small continuity changes that allow the fans of Singers films who were disappointed with the most recent films to retcon the latter two films out of the continuity. However, these continuity changes are minor enough that if you do enjoy 'The Last Stand', you can watch 'First Class' all the way through to 'The Last Stand'.

There are multiple continuity changes. Even it seems between First Class and Singer's X1 and X2, where we have seen Shaw and a human Beast; where Magneto appeared to be making his first big move and Xavier and the X-Men were totally unprepared. And it's also possible this film will ignore the lines spoken in X1 that Xavier met Magneto when he was 17, or that Magneto first saw the Statue of Liberty in 1949 (implying he was among those who arrived at Ellis Island after the war).

It's probably possible to line up all the details, and offer explanations, but also quite restrictive.

Granted, you may be a bit frustrated as there are some clear continuity changes. But there should be because 'Wolverine' and 'The Last Stand' were trash.

Your view of course. We wouldn't want any arrogance, would we?

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by The Original Bamfer

They can't totally wipe it away. Its too soon. They can create a movie that does not connect to it. But there is proof that they are ignoring certain aspects of it. Vaughn's referenced it in interviews, and both Vaughn and Singer know how disappointed most fans were with the last two movies. There are nods in this film that seem to say, "yeah, we didn't really care for those movies either." But, like I said, they can't totally dismiss 'The Last Stand' as there are some fans who want to keep it in the same continuity. That's why they didn't use Angel. That's why Singer and Vaughn are tip-toeing around the continuity errors... they're not really errors, they're just trying to take the franchise back to the quality that Singer had left it. But they acknowledge that some people like 'The Last Stand'. Not enough to get in the way of them making a great film, though.

I don't think it's a case of acknowledging that 'some people' like TLS. It's the fact that TLS was released not very long ago (much more recently than X1 and X2) and that it clearly exists within big-screen continuity, as there was a quadrilogy box set of all four films. The general public doesn't obsess like we do on here, but they remember the film was released and the basics of what happened.

I'm not a crazy hater of TLS - i think it did some good things and had a visceral energy and comic book adventure feel that I found enjoyable and exciting, despite the obvious misjudgements like curing Rogue. But I'm not bothered if Singer and Vaughn want to steer things back to the way Singer had envisioned things. (Oddly though, it was Vaughn who wrote the opening scene of TLS in which Xavier and Magneto meet Jean). If they choose to ignore or contradict elements of TLS and Wolverine, I'm not concerned. If it goes back to Marvel and gets a total reboot, then I'm not concerned either.

What I didn't like was YOUR arrogance in implying that anyone who likes TLS or Wolverine has poor taste or is a lover of bad movies. That's not on.

The problem with these continuity changes is that they are now adding up to a massive distortion, which is why many hardcore fans are wanting the rights to go back to Marvel and for a more comic-accurate reboot to take place. Read the responses on CBM to every single news/gossip report about First Class to see the frustrations that exist in some sectors.

And Beast looks way better than Grammer did.

He looks more bestial, yes. But a little too Cat Beast for my liking. I still thought Grammer did a great job though - and it's hard to be super-agile when you are actually that much of a hulking brute (the comic book art can make him look much more acrobatic than is possible for someone that shape). Hoult is skinnier so may be able to move more fluidly. But the look is taking me a bit of getting used to.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Here's a better comparison



For me, the guy up top is Beast. He's the Beast I grew up reading (in the 80s) and the Beast that we all love and remember from the show. While I'm sure today's teens probably don't remember the Classic version of the character, I still doubt they're more familiar with Cassaday's take on him.

Classic Beast emanated wisdom and amiability even with his monstruous physique and ferocious qualities. Vaughn's Beast just looks scary.

Either way, we should get a poll here going.

[protocida]

[IMG]http://www.**************.com/images/users/uploads/10616/Xavier_revised.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://www.**************.com/images/users/uploads/10616/Magneto_revised.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://www.**************.com/images/users/uploads/10616/Havok_revised.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://www.**************.com/images/users/uploads/10616/beast_revised.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://www.**************.com/images/users/uploads/10616/Mystique_revised.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://www.**************.com/images/users/uploads/10616/Shaw_revised.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://www.**************.com/images/users/uploads/10616/Emma_revised.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://www.**************.com/images/users/uploads/10616/Azazel_revised.jpg[/IMG]

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by Alexei Belyakov

Here's a better comparison



For me, the guy up top is Beast. He's the Beast I grew up reading (in the 80s) and the Beast that we all love and remember from the show. While I'm sure today's teens probably don't remember the Classic version of the character, I still doubt they're more familiar with Cassaday's take on him.

Classic Beast emanated wisdom and amiability even with his monstruous physique and ferocious qualities. Vaughn's Beast just looks scary.

Either way, we should get a poll here going.

In all honesty, I can't say which is better. Especially with seeing so little of the Vaughn version - we saw a line-up photo with Beast right at the back with an Afro hairdo, then we saw a different look in the teaser that seems more feline. It could be that the entire film sells Hoult's version to me successfully, but that i still feel that Kelsey did the much older Beast well.

It's a difficult look to translate to live-action film. My favourite screen Beast is probably the one in the 90s animated series!

But I'm not going to scratch out the Kelsey Grammer version even if Hoult's portrayal works great within First Class, because i thought Kelsey's depiction worked great in TLS.

[craigdbfan]

I love them both. Why can't people see the greatness in both of them?

Here are there comic/cartoon equivalents.



Ratner despite all the hate he gets did get this part right for some X-Men fans. I love the 90's cartoon and its a clear homage. I liked it and still do.



Now Vaughn is doing a brilliant interpretation of the current look Beast has which IMO is also an incredible look. In the movie they nailed it.

[The Original Bamfer]

Originally Posted by X-Maniac

Why is there a "great possibility" that you know more about this film? Because "bosef" is feeding you information privately?

And why shouldn't i wag my metaphorical finger at you with what you assumed to be an arrogant statement? Just because you are a mod does not mean you are beyond reproach. Whoever you are - member, mod, God, modGod, Godmod, animal, vegetable or mineral - your views will be there to be commented on.

Bosef has nothing to do with this.

You have no right to "wag your metaphorical finger" at me because you based your disappointment on an assumption. It's obvious this film is more aligned with the Singer films. That makes me a fanboy? And what's wrong with me being excited? Am I not allowed to dislike 'The Last Stand'? It's all my opinion, and you were ridiculing me because you disagreed with it and called it "fanboyism". That has nothing to do with my status here on the forum, it has to do with my right as a person like every other person here. We all have opinions and they are neither incorrect or correct.

Also, I've never implied that those who like 'Wolverine' or 'The Last Stand' have poor taste, I just think they're fairly bad X-Men movies. That's my opinion. I have nothing ill to say against those who do like said films.

Now, I'd appreciate if you'd lighten your tone a bit. Thanks.

[X-Maniac]

Originally Posted by The Original Bamfer

Bosef has nothing to do with this.

You have no right to "wag your metaphorical finger" at me because you based your disappointment on an assumption. It's obvious this film is more aligned with the Singer films. That makes me a fanboy? And what's wrong with me being excited? Am I not allowed to dislike 'The Last Stand'? It's all my opinion, and you were ridiculing me because you disagreed with it and called it "fanboyism". That has nothing to do with my status here on the forum, it has to do with my right as a person like every other person here. We all have opinions and they are neither incorrect or correct.

What i meant by fanboyish was that you seemed to be trying to validate your view as fact. As in 'Singer/Vaughn are throwing out TLS, therefore they hate TLS, therefore I'm right to hate TLS because it's being disregarded.' That seemed to be what you were doing, and it is typical of people on fan forums.

Since TLS and Wolverine weren't made by Singer (though Vaughn had some involvement in TLS), then it's reasonable that Singer would be staying closer to his own thoughts and his own films, although it's difficult to assess the extent of that from a teaser. It's obvious that Singer was brought back to return the franchise to a more even keel (I even made it known officially that this was something that needed to happen) so let's hope he and Vaughn achieve that.

[chaseter]

Why people won't step out of a crumbling house and into a spiffy new one I will never understand. It's nice in here. It doesn't smell either.

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by JP

I think First Class Beast looks like something that could very well exist in the real world. You say "Coppola's Dracula" or "something that belongs in a zoo" and I fail to see how either statement is anything other than a compliment.

TLS Beast looks like Kelsey Grammer in blue make-up. He also moved like Kelsey Grammer in blue make up.

This is what I was going to say. Beast isn't just a normal looking man with blue skin, long blue hair & a long blue beard. His facial features should indicate some relevance to his codename "Beast", not "Blue-hairy-man".

[Figs]

edit

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by Alexei Belyakov

For me, the guy up top is Beast. He's the Beast I grew up reading (in the 80s) and the Beast that we all love and remember from the show. While I'm sure today's teens probably don't remember the Classic version of the character, I still doubt they're more familiar with Cassaday's take on him.

Classic Beast emanated wisdom and amiability even with his monstruous physique and ferocious qualities. Vaughn's Beast just looks scary.

Either way, we should get a poll here going.

Yeah, TLS Beast did exhibit the wisdom & amiability you were looking for but I believe at the expense of any monstrous physical/ferocious qualities. He was just a big blue, dignified, super-intelligent nice guy!

TLS Beast looks fine in a suit like in the 1st pic you posted above. It's the action shots or in the X-uniform where he still just looks like a guy, not a beast!

[craigdbfan]

But thats the point. Its based on the 90's humanoid looking Beast from the cartoon series.

[Saint]

I prefer the updated design (both in the comics and the film); I think the contrast between the visceral appearance and his learned personality is more interesting than more human looking features.

Of course, regardless of which version one prefers, I think the First Class version is just better make-up work regardless; his skin actually looks naturally coloured, whereas TLS just looks painted blue.

[S. Grundy]

Originally Posted by craigdbfan

But thats the point. Its based on the 90's humanoid looking Beast from the cartoon series.

Facially maybe, physically that Beast still had the ape like qualities. I guess making some sort of suit for Grammer to wear would have cost too much, or they just didn't give a ****.

[craigdbfan]

Well I find both great.

He did do some ape like poses kind of in the end fight in Last Stand.

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by craigdbfan

But thats the point. Its based on the 90's humanoid looking Beast from the cartoon series.

That Beast went around bare chested half the time so you were in no doubt that he was a beast. KG's you could only see the face & for example they replaced fur with hair & bestial teeth with standard human teeth. There is nothing in his look that makes him look beastly!

[Hellion]

Originally Posted by craigdbfan

But thats the point. Its based on the 90's humanoid looking Beast from the cartoon series.

My Childhood...

So far I like both versions, there both there own interpretations based on different era(s)/versions of Beast......I say we're lucky there attempting the different looks of the character....I would have never thought we'd get both on film...

[PsyJ]

I like the way both versions look.

[craigdbfan]

Originally Posted by Saint

I prefer the updated design (both in the comics and the film); I think the contrast between the visceral appearance and his learned personality is more interesting than more human looking features.

Of course, regardless of which version one prefers, I think the First Class version is just better make-up work regardless; his skin actually looks naturally coloured, whereas TLS just looks painted blue.

Both succeeded in what they were trying to do IMO.

Originally Posted by Hellion

My Childhood...

So far I like both versions, there both there own interpretations based on different era(s)/versions of Beast......I say we're lucky there attempting the different looks of the character....I would have never thought we'd get both on film...

Thats exactly what I'm saying man.

[chaseter]

Originally Posted by craigdbfan

But thats the point. Its based on the 90's humanoid looking Beast from the cartoon series.

That hair is just pure unadulterated sex.

[craigdbfan]

It really is.