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

[MoPlaYa]

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.

Great post!!!!

 

[Loganbabe]

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.

Just quoting this, but you should copy and paste your entire post on every comics forum there is!
It's a pity that the bias against the film is spreading fast and furious just because of a joke and some blunt words.

 

[X-Maniac]

It's a pity that the bias against the film is spreading fast and furious just because of a joke and some blunt words.

Well, yes and no...

Filmmakers have to be careful and respectful when adapting material, especially something iconic and with a long history. The basic stories of the X-Men characters aren't that contradictory; any fan knows the accepted versions of backstories etc.

It's a fine line to tread. If you mash up the material too much, it is going to enrage the fans for sure.

The only things about this movie that are bugging me are the inclusion of Angel Salvadore and Havok. There are choices that would have been closer to the comic books.

If you deviate from source too much, then subsequent films have to follow that and you end up with more and more deviation, so it goes further away from being accurate and respectful.

I think studios should be aware of this. Especially studios that have licensed the rights to characters they did not create. Marvel appears to take more care with its characters, as it created them in the first place. Having screen rights is not carte blanche to do what the hell you like.

I'm not among the haters of this film, but I think words of warning need to be spoken to make sure X-Men lore is respected and properly treated.

 

[huzzah]

Just quoting this, but you should copy and paste your entire post on every comics forum there is!
It's a pity that the bias against the film is spreading fast and furious just because of a joke and some blunt words.

Then Mr Vaughn should be positive rather than resorting to 'alleged' jokes.

 

[Loganbabe]

I don't think he should be positive, he should just go and do his job the best way he can. Vaughn never pretended to play the part of the nice and benevolent director who'll listen to the fanboys and do whatever he can to please them. That's not how Vaughn is, and I don't expect him to change. Yes, he sounds too arrogant and vain at times, and maybe his irony doesn't look so well on print. I remember he was rather blunt when there was some (alleged) conflict regarding McAvoy and the British Film Council (James being pro-Film Council, Vaughn against it), when he said "James is still in the film...just". A lot of people felt distressed by his words, but I just had to laugh, because I knew he was joking. And I'm a big McAvoy fan.

Some fans need to get off their high horses. The fans are incredibly important to the whole process, and it's obvious that Vaughn knows it. I don't think that any director in his right mind would take on a project thinking "Oh man, I hate the X-Men fanboys so much, I wanna do this film just to enrage them, mwhuahahaha!" But films are made not just to please the fanboys, but to please a whole audience who barely knows a thing about the X-Men. That's the reality that some don't seem to get. Even comics aren't written exclusively to please the fanboy - at least, I expect that the author is allowed to express his view on that universe too, and feel satisfied and confident that he's doing the best for him/herself as well.

If the fanboy thinks that the film isn't following his particular vision, and therefore it sucks, just don't watch it. It's simple, really. He still has the beloved comics, and all the history behind it, to put on a pedestal. It's not the end of the world. What I don't get is the notion that Vaughn was hired by Fox on a mission to destroy everything that is sacred in the X-men universe...

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

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.

I dont think anyof those decisions were down to Vaughn, Kinberg and Penn even said just after the movie came out they wrote that into the script because the studio didnt want Cyclops in the movie at all, not to mention they said many times the script changed on a daily basis, so very little of X3 actually ended up being from what I can see, and IMO it was a terrible movie.

Kick-Ass was great so in all honesty Vaughn is one of the few reasons I am looking forward to this.

 

[echostation]

he recently said Twilight girls will love it, sorry but I dont' want to see any kind of Twilight related ******** in this film as in over emo angst, make it slick, snappy and 60s and a hell of an entertainer and we'll have a winner..

 

[JP]

I don't think there's been an X-Men (or Spider-Man) film yet that didn't have teenage angst.

 

[BMM]

I don't think there's ever been a movie with teenagers in it that doesn't have teen angst.

 

[DACrowe]

Well, yes and no...

Filmmakers have to be careful and respectful when adapting material, especially something iconic and with a long history. The basic stories of the X-Men characters aren't that contradictory; any fan knows the accepted versions of backstories etc.

It's a fine line to tread. If you mash up the material too much, it is going to enrage the fans for sure.

The only things about this movie that are bugging me are the inclusion of Angel Salvadore and Havok. There are choices that would have been closer to the comic books.

If you deviate from source too much, then subsequent films have to follow that and you end up with more and more deviation, so it goes further away from being accurate and respectful.

I think studios should be aware of this. Especially studios that have licensed the rights to characters they did not create. Marvel appears to take more care with its characters, as it created them in the first place. Having screen rights is not carte blanche to do what the hell you like.

I'm not among the haters of this film, but I think words of warning need to be spoken to make sure X-Men lore is respected and properly treated.

I've seen comics where no matter how furious Xavier was at Sinister, Magneto, whoever he would not let his team kill them. I've seen issues (Grant Morrison's I believe) where he would fry a newbie villain in their first issue and get a pat on the back from the team.

I've seen Cyclops and Jean have a son, who they send to the future because he is dying so he can save himself in an alternate universe (let that sink in) and then she dies and Scott jumps into Emma's bed and that's that.

I've seen Gambit be disowned by the X-Men and Rogue countless times. They found out he worked for Sinister during the Massacre thingy and leave him (kind of to die) in the Artic, but accept him with open arms later. He and Rogue are soul mates and then Remy makes a deal with Apocalypse (what?!?!) and turns into a blue monster and Rogue moves on two issues later. After the shock value of him being a blue monster they write it out and act like his betrayal (again) never happened.


Here's the best example: Peter Parker's daughter. Baby May is taken from the hospital the night of her birth by Norman Osborn. Is she alive, is she dead? For several years they don't try to answer it and Peter and MJ are shacking up like teenagers in Miami or wherever acting like they didn't lose a child. And then he randomly (because it fits the story) begins desperately looking for her at the end of a volume run and find Aunt May. Then he quits looking for her all together. Once every few years he talks about her like she died, but shows more concern over losing a job than a daughter, even though he never had any closure. Other issues he regrets never giving MJ kids. Did May even exist to some Marvel writers? Then some jackass (coughQuesadacough) comes along with the brilliant idea of having MJ get erased by getting Peter to make a deal with a devil-like character. What kind of bull **** is that? And Peter and MJ act like they are losing each other but never question if this erases their daughter from the existence, because they don't act like they have a daughter. Now MJ and May never happened...unless you read Marvel's other title, The Amazing Spider-Girl, which features a happy marriage with a teenage May "Mayday" Parker who has been with her parents since a short kidnapping at birth and is in a happy family. There's also another title called Ultimate Spider-Man where Peter and MJ are in high school dating, even though in the original stories they didn't know each other in high school.


Does that make any sense? No. So trying to get a clear view of a character's experiences becomes nearly impossible. So try to understand the character and the basics of that character, not which dimension they are in and if they're still effected from half of them being Skrulls for the last ten years of continuity or something like that.

 

[DACrowe]

Then Mr Vaughn should be positive rather than resorting to 'alleged' jokes.

Matthew Vaughn makes some movies that are very sardonic and have the tone of a smartass (Stardust and Kick-Ass). I think it is just in his nature to make that kind of remark. The Twilight thing was a throwaway line at the bottom of the article. Fans needs to have a sense of humor.

 

[Nightmare]

Based off Kick-Ass, im optomistic about this film. I have faith it won't suck.

 

[Project862006]

he recently said Twilight girls will love it, sorry but I dont' want to see any kind of Twilight related ******** in this film as in over emo angst, make it slick, snappy and 60s and a hell of an entertainer and we'll have a winner..

Then WTF Was This

 

[Nightmare]

That's rogue and bobby!

 

[Project862006]

touche

 

[echostation]

The above is crap I never liked in the original films in the first place...

 

[Project862006]

well all the comics and animated series had tons of teen romance

it nothing new

 

[Silvermoth]

Romance and drama existed in the X-men long before Twilight. Indeed it's one of the staples of the franchise.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

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.

I don't disagree with this. In fact, I rather agree with it, which is why the changes from the comics don't bother me so much in the movies, and I enjoy X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine just as much as X-Men and X-Men United. Translate the foundation of these characters, who they are, what they are all about, how they relate to each other, and how they interact with the world they live in, and I'm happy, and will be accepting of it if you change the details.

However, you don't have to be an egotistical prick about it and call out the fans saying they're wrong (even if they are).

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I don't disagree with this. In fact, I rather agree with it, which is why the changes from the comics don't bother me so much in the movies, and I enjoy X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine just as much as X-Men and X-Men United. Translate the foundation of these characters, who they are, what they are all about, how they relate to each other, and how they interact with the world they live in, and I'm happy, and will be accepting of it if you change the details.

However, you don't have to be an egotistical prick about it and call out the fans saying they're wrong (even if they are).

To be honest Nell I wouldnt say he was calling fans wrong (even if, especially in this instance, they are I agree), I believe he was just pointing out that you cant please everyone when there has been so many different stories over the years and so many differing opinions about them over the years. I actually found it a very genuine response.

 

[Mulholland-Jr]

Pyro was the epitome of angst in X2... they even gave him his own dramatic music!

[YT]ehz_yJSIHf0[/YT]



That's SOOOOOOO Kurt Cobain-esque!

 

[Silvermoth]

Pyro was the epitome of angst in X2... they even gave him his own dramatic music!

[YT]ehz_yJSIHf0[/YT]



That's SOOOOOOO Kurt Cobain-esque!

I wonder whatever happened to Aaron Stanford. He just kind of went away.

 

[x-alias]

I wonder whatever happened to Aaron Stanford. He just kind of went away.

He's currently on Nikita, which is actually a really cool series!

 

[JP]

Yeah, he's on Nikita.

 

[xmangambit]

Gambit and Rogue not Bobby and Rogue! Instant fail!