Days of Future Past "Director's Cut": The Official Matthew Vaughn Thread

[Dr.Negative]

I disagree with deaths head 2 comments regarding superhero standards.

I regard X-Men & Blade as the original super hero movies that set the standards for superhero movies going forward. Before these we had what Schumacher's Batman & Low budget marvel attempts on Captain America and Fantastic Four although Fantastic Four never got released.

2000 forward and having X-Men & Blade raise the bar on superhero movies. I then regard Daredevil, X2 & The Punisher as maintaining that bar with X2 doing the rare thing of surpassing the first movie in regards to its structure and being well recieved.

after that we went on a dull period of not so great marvel movies that really just left people feeling disappointed. However i would to state that Fox''s Fantastic Four was an excellent film, even the next installment was good. But what you got to remember is that with the Fantastic Four this movie wasnt really targeting the same audiance X-Men and the other movies were, Fantastic Four was made as a family movie so when alot of fans got annoyed by the way this movie was. I feel its unjustifed, especially when Spiderman had alot of people sticking up for it.

But besides this, the only thing that came out good during this period was Batman Begins.

It wasnt until Iron Man and Incredible Hulk did they start to realise what the formula they used for X2, Daredevil, Blade is what they needed going forward so what you got was a reboot that was done incredibly well with Edward Norton and Iron Man which took over the role Blade had as top solo superhero favorite to watch.

Then we have Dark Knight and i also think Punisher War Journal needs to be mentioned because it was an awsome film, its just a shame Thomas Jane didnt play The Punisher in it.

But out of this, i dont consider Spiderman ever being a standard setting... Mostly because i feel Spiderman 1 was not that far off being a power ranger episode, Spiderman 2 was just totally unreleastic storyline, Im sorry but with Spiderman 2, all i see is if you made the exact same spiderman movie but movie 1 had no budget and movie 2 had a massive budget, that is what spiderman 2 is. Then there is Spiderman 3 which what was they on LSD or something? Terrible

But hopefully the reboot will be ok.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Vaughn is making excuses to justify his butchering of the source material, and taking shots at the fans in the process? And people wonder why I hate Vaughn so much. This is X-Men 3 all over again. People don't understand how lucky we are that he walked off that movie. most of the garbage we got in that film was due to him. Luckily once his influence was gone, rather and co. were able to salvage what they could, otherwise that movie would have been a trainwreck. There are some things about this new movie that interest me, but overall I don't trust Vaughn and never have. I think this is gonna be the worst one yet. First X-Men film that I may end up not liking.

 

[JP]

Lolololol.

 

[psyonic]

Vaughn is making excuses to justify his butchering of the source material, and taking shots at the fans in the process? And people wonder why I hate Vaughn so much. This is X-Men 3 all over again. People don't understand how lucky we are that he walked off that movie. most of the garbage we got in that film was due to him. Luckily once his influence was gone, rather and co. were able to salvage what they could, otherwise that movie would have been a trainwreck. There are some things about this new movie that interest me, but overall I don't trust Vaughn and never have. I think this is gonna be the worst one yet. First X-Men film that I may end up not liking.

I don't know if you're serious or not .. but X3 was pretty bad, I'm sure Vaughn would have done a better job, judging from the storyboards and script review before Ratner signed up.

 

[JP]

Oy, maybe we shouldn't have this discussion a 78th time.

 

[psyonic]

Oy, maybe we shouldn't have this discussion a 78th time.

Well, I don't know if he is being serious or not ..

 

[JP]

He is.

 

[Electrix]

I mean think about recent history in the comics, Charles Xavier set up the x-men because he was brainwashed by sinister since birth which was unrevealed until recently. Or should we look at the fact that Charles Xavier had a twin sister all his life he didnt know about but effected his life throughout the years.

Well, I for one will be outraged if Vaughn doesn't include BOTH of these story-lines in X-Men: First Class. Who does he think he is butchering the source material? How dare he alter things slightly so that they make sense!

Boycott!!!!!!11one!!!

 

[psyonic]

Well, I for one will be outraged if Vaughn doesn't include BOTH of these story-lines in X-Men: First Class. Who does he think he is butchering the source material? How dare he alter things slightly so that they make sense!

Boycott!!!!!!11one!!!

I personally love Cassandra Nova, she was a real threat to mutants .. Glenn Close should play her hahaha ..

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I don't know if you're serious or not .. but X3 was pretty bad, I'm sure Vaughn would have done a better job, judging from the storyboards and script review before Ratner signed up.

I'm dead serious, and X-Men 3 wasn't "pretty bad", it was pretty damn solid that gets unfairly ridiculed because of 2 deaths and a curing that shouldn't have happened, 2 of those things happening under •Vaughn's• watch. And what good script review are you talking about??? Vaughn's script got absolutely ripped apart in reviews. That review was Vaughn's script and got blasted in the AICN review, as well as by fans internet wide. Ratner came into a no win situation, receiving a pos script from an egotistical pos director that was more concerned with springboarding his career into a list status than making a movie that was accurate to the source material. Ratner salvaged as much as he could and we got a lot of classic X-Men moments in the movie and did a lot of things better than singer could have imagined (and I love singers movies).

What storyboards? The epic fail danger room sequence that gave iceman regeneration powers that would make the t-1000 from t2 blush??? Or do you mean the idea of wolverine running around Alcatraz with leech in a backpack? Vaughn's ideas for x3 were trash and he's the reason for the things that suck about x3, and this interview with him just shows he hasn't changed.

 

[Figs]

In all fairness Nell...you liked Wolverine Origins and that movie was pretty fail. I don't see how you can give someone hell for not being entirely accurate to the source material, especially when all of the films, not just Wolverine, heavily deviated from the source.

It's thinking like this that reminds me of my stupid sisters. They still to this day say that X-men 1 & 2 are in fact not X-men movies, but fake pieces of ****. It's that stupid fanboy thinking that if something is changed, no matter how small, the movie isn't going to be good.

Personally I love that Vaughn is calling out whiney nitpicking fanboys. Most of the time they cry about every little detail and as he said, the source material(for a lot of other comics as well) is so messed up it's not even funny. All I want is a good movie, I don't care if Magneto's helmet isn't entirely purple, or that Havok is in this but not Cyclops.

 

[x-alias]

IAnd what good script review are you talking about??? Vaughn's script got absolutely ripped apart in reviews. That review was Vaughn's script and got blasted in the AICN review, as well as by fans internet wide....Vaughn's ideas for x3 were trash and he's the reason for the things that suck about x3

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know Vaughn had nothing to do with the script for X3 (nor did Ratner). That was all Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn. And, it was Vaughn who was responsible for, in my opinion, one of the most spot-on casting choices in the franchise: Kelsey Grammer as Beast.

 

[JP]

Kelsey Grammer was 100% Vaughn.

 

[Matt.S99]

And one of the only redeeming parts of X3!

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

In all fairness Nell...you liked Wolverine Origins and that movie was pretty fail. I don't see how you can give someone hell for not being entirely accurate to the source material, especially when all of the films, not just Wolverine, heavily deviated from the source.

It's thinking like this that reminds me of my stupid sisters. They still to this day say that X-men 1 & 2 are in fact not X-men movies, but fake pieces of ****. It's that stupid fanboy thinking that if something is changed, no matter how small, the movie isn't going to be good.

Personally I love that Vaughn is calling out whiney nitpicking fanboys. Most of the time they cry about every little detail and as he said, the source material(for a lot of other comics as well) is so messed up it's not even funny. All I want is a good movie, I don't care if Magneto's helmet isn't entirely purple, or that Havok is in this but not Cyclops.

Um, if I like all the X-Men movies despite their differences, than how am I giving hell to Vaughn simply for making changes?

I'm giving him hell for the changes he made - changes like killing Cyclops, and killing Xavier, that spit in the face of the essence of the X-Men lore. I don't care about changes like the original team being slightly changed (I.E. Storm being OG, and not Iceman or Angel), I don't care about Lady Deathstrike and Juggernaut being mutants instead of a cyborg and a magical crystal enhanced human. I don't care about Rogue focusing more on her original emo personality than her more popular Southern Belle personality. I don't care about Mystique not being Nightcrawler's mother, I don't care about Rogue being romantically involved with Iceman instead of Gambit. Those things aren't the essence of the source.

Cyclops being ALIVE and a major factor in the Phoenix Saga IS part of the essence of the source. There are elements of the movie's version of the Phoenix Saga that I can live with because I feel it is still in line with the characters (I.E. Jean never returns her love, Logan WOULD kill Jean, and it was the connection between Scott and Jean that brought her back from the void). Rogue choosing to take the cure IS against the essence of the character. Those are the kinds of changes that I have a problem with. Those, on top with utterly ridiculous ideas from Vaughn, are why I hate him for the X-Men movies so badly.

And now this movie is going to take a bunch of relatively unknown characters (Azreal? Angel Salvadore?) and turn them into Xavier's original team, instead of Cyclops, Jean, Beast... not a fan of those changes. I will have to wait until I see it to change my mind on that.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know Vaughn had nothing to do with the script for X3 (nor did Ratner). That was all Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn. And, it was Vaughn who was responsible for, in my opinion, one of the most spot-on casting choices in the franchise: Kelsey Grammer as Beast.

The script that was reviewed was the "7-day script" that was written by Kinberg and Penn with massive influence and input from Matthew Vaughn.

And yes, I give him credit for Kelsey Grammar as Beast. That was great casting.

He also gave us Vinnie Jones as Juggernaut. Just sayin'...

 

[JP]

Vaughn is responsible for Rogue taking the cure? Even though Ratner filmed an alternate version where she DOESN'T take it, but chose the former because he wanted her to be able to **** Iceman, essentially.



And LOL at the idea of Vaughn being responsible for Cyclops death. That was a studio decision from day 1.

 

[Iceman]

It's thinking like this that reminds me of my stupid sisters. They still to this day say that X-men 1 & 2 are in fact not X-men movies, but fake pieces of ****. It's that stupid fanboy thinking that if something is changed, no matter how small, the movie isn't going to be good.

On the plus side your "stupid" sisters are into X-Men. Can't be that bad! t:

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Vaughn is responsible for Rogue taking the cure? Even though Ratner filmed an alternate version where she DOESN'T take it, but chose the former because he wanted her to be able to **** Iceman, essentially.



And LOL at the idea of Vaughn being responsible for Cyclops death. That was a studio decision from day 1.

In an earlier post I talked about Vaughn being responsible for 2 out of 3 of those decisions. Rogue's curing was the one he wasn't responsible for. The deaths of Cyclops and Xavier he was responsible for.

I listed Rogue's curing because it was one of those changes (regardless of who was responsible, which was more along the lines of Tom Rothman than anyone else I believe) that completely goes against the essence of the source. That one wasn't Vaughn, no.

 

[Project862006]

cyclops death was defiantly the studio

 

[JP]

In an earlier post I talked about Vaughn being responsible for 2 out of 3 of those decisions. Rogue's curing was the one he wasn't responsible for. The deaths of Cyclops and Xavier he was responsible for.

I listed Rogue's curing because it was one of those changes (regardless of who was responsible, which was more along the lines of Tom Rothman than anyone else I believe) that completely goes against the essence of the source. That one wasn't Vaughn, no.

But Xavier's death was a genius concept. And if it was done right it could have been brilliant, but like most of the film, Ratner dropped the ball. I have absolutely no doubt that if Vaughn had stayed on board the film would have been better. The script was so fluid during production and things were obviously changing by the minute. We don't know what effect Vaughn's continued involvement would have had on the script. But, I do know that with Ratners involvement he completely retooled the third act, added nothing but cornball cheese and one liners and took out any heart Vaughn attempted to add. There is so much promise in scenes like Xavier's death, or Mystique's curing. Both scenes are hindered by Ratner's "NEXT SCENE" style, and generic approach.

The speech Dave gives in Kick-Ass after getting beat up has 10x the heart and emotion than anything in X-Men: the last Stand. And this is why Vaughn is the perfect director for this film.

 

[x-alias]

The script that was reviewed was the "7-day script" that was written by Kinberg and Penn with massive influence and input from Matthew Vaughn.

And yes, I give him credit for Kelsey Grammar as Beast. That was great casting.

He also gave us Vinnie Jones as Juggernaut. Just sayin'...

I'm not sure how "massive" Vaughn's influence really was since I, as most people around here, seem to agree that the most massive influence on the script came from the studio.

Obviously I cannot speak for Vaughn. I can only speak based on his films and what I have read or seen from him in interviews. That being said, it seems to me that Vaughn simply will not make a film that he doesn't believe in. I find it reasonable to assume that he walked from X3 because of studio influence on the script and too much studio interference in general. It's likely that he realized X3 wasn't going to be his movie, just like the finished product wasn't really Ratner's.

The difference with Ratner, Kinberg, and Penn (again in my opinion) is that they didn't mind being told what to do.

I am not an X3 hater. In fact, there are many scenes and performances in the film that I truly love. That being said, it could have (and should have) been better. Do I think that Vaughn could have made it so? Absolutely.

 

[Figs]

And now this movie is going to take a bunch of relatively unknown characters (Azreal? Angel Salvadore?) and turn them into Xavier's original team, instead of Cyclops, Jean, Beast... not a fan of those changes. I will have to wait until I see it to change my mind on that.

I feel for you when it comes to characters like Azreal and Angel Salvadore. I am so behind in the comics that I've never even heard of them. I probably have the issues they're in, but just need to find the time to read a mass amount of my comics. Been putting it off for too long.

Other than that, I'm actually excited for this film. I really think it's going to make up for Wolverine and X3. If it doesn't, well then I truly think it's time the rights went back to Marvel.

On the plus side your "stupid" sisters are into X-Men. Can't be that bad! t:

Yeah, but they are the uber-fanboy type. As I said before, they expect the movies to be almost exactly like the comics or else. Mainly it's because X-men is their favorite.

 

[DACrowe]

double

 

[DACrowe]

If this movie has the feel of the Sean Connery Bond movies (early Connery like From Russia With Love and Goldfinger, maybe even Thunderball...but not hte later ones) and that early '60s Beatlesmania meets Mad Men punch...Im going to love it. Vaughn knows how to execute style like nobody's business.

AS for the recent complaints from the frank interview.

1) Vaughn is a very blunt and to-the-point man. Some may mistake frankness for disdain, but that is just how his words read. In a taped interview he comes off far more affable.

2) The Twilight thing was a joke.

3) He didn't diss the fans...he spoke the truth. The comics are way, way too convoluted to try to adapt entirely faithfully. Comic books are very cyclical in nature which leads to things like:

-How many times has Jean Grey died and come back to life?
-How many times has Magneto sworn off evil to work with the X-Men?
-How many times has Magneto died?
-How many times as Wolverine worked simultaneously on three X-teams and the Avengers?
-How many times has Peter Parker quit being Spider-Man and did something seemingly permanent to destroy his costume?
-How many times has Peter moved on with his life only to lose his new job and end up doing at the Daily Bugle doing what he was doing in high school?
-How many times has Peter lost the girl (they just erased MJ from continuity)?
-How many times has Batman gotten a new Robin after the last one ended in bitterness or tragedy?
-How many times has the Joker seemingly died, only to return?

What fanboys call continuity is mind-boggingly repetitive and comic book writers are always finding cheats to hit the reset button to get back to Formula A, causing the continuity to become very confusing, convoluted and soap operaish as they go along (Superboy punced the timeline, Norman put a dead lookalike in the coffin after he healed himself from death, the dead Pheonex Jean was a clone/replica, etc.).

A filmmaker should focus on adapting the tone, style and characters that make the source material work. Not 50 years of stories that contradict and retcon each other to maintain a status quo that would be maddening on film.