Days of Future Past "First Class" does what "X-Men (2000)" couldn't do.

[ciscostudent561]

Huh???! The story line and action scenes in x1 are reasons why I never watch it

 

[Lord]

It had a good storyline for its time, the action scennes, not so much, but they were watchable and some times actually entertaining, that Storm line was terrible but i think the film was pretty good.
I think it was a good way to start the universe but they had a lot of budget problems, that's why they didn't use blob and Beast.
I still enjoy watching x-1 because it's actually a good movie.
I think the film was still better than X-3 and Wolverine, and i hope First Class doesn't become a full reboot, i like it as it is, an half prequel half reboot, where the events of x-1 and 2 happen in the future but some things said like Charles and Erik having met when they were 18 being different.
It keeps continuity but lets the writers taking certain liberties to make the film better.

 

[ThanosOfTitans]

ThanosOfTitans, not to call you out or anything, but reading through the posts, I see that you are making too big a deal about the cast members' salaries. In the end, their salaries did not make a significant impact on the film's budget. Even then, with the film's date being moved up five to six months ahead of schedule and a studio that had little faith in the film to actually give it a generous budget, the salaries of the cast is simply minuscule.

By the way, here's just a random thought since we're all talking about X-Men and stuff. Even though most don't really consider this fact, X-Men is very well one of the most significant films in the history of modern cinema. Plagued production or not, it was a success both financially and critically. Without this film, the last decade of cinema and pop culture as we know it would have been completely different.

Your opinion is welcome. Your first paragraph is your perception of things. I have my perception. Neither of us have hard facts. If budget was an issue as some claim, the selection of actors wasn't the most budget friendly decision (my opinion).

Your second paragraph...I never disputed any of those things. LOL That doesn't change the fact that the film is very underwhelming to me. As I've communicated many times...I appreciate X1 for what it's perceived to have done for the genre...that still doesn't make it a good movie to me. I still love the X-Men and I'll still welcome any X-Men movies that may come along.

 

[ThanosOfTitans]

Huh???! The story line and action scenes in x1 are reasons why I never watch it

This is the same way I feel...I love the X-Men...but I've only watched X1 maybe 3 times total...it's really just painful for me to watch. But I can appreciate it for what it is...and appreciate that others love X1.

 

[spider13]

I like the third film more then the first one.

 

[Call Me Darkman]

Without X-Men, Spider-Man wouldn't have been what we all know it as today

How is that true? The script never changed. The cast never changed. The director never changed. Sony simply gave Sam Raimi more money for the action scenes. That's all. If "X-Men" had flopped, we would have just gotten a "Spider-Man" with toned down action scenes. Which wouldn't be a problem. Sam Raimi did fine with the "Evil Dead" series, "Darkman," and "The Quick and the Dead." Raimi doesn't need $100 million to give us impressive action scenes. That's more than you can say for Bryan Singer.

 

[Angamb]

I dont want to compare Matthew with Singer, becuase as some have said we are in a totally different situation right now.

The only thing Im sure is if Matthew do a sequel to First Class, with Scott and Jean, it could be the best x-men movie to date.

I really cant wait for that day.

Hopefully in 3 years only!!

 

[Call Me Darkman]

Scott and Jean? That's assuming the sequel takes place in the `80s. Which is quite the jump.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Scott and Jean? That's assuming the sequel takes place in the `80s. Which is quite the jump.

Or Vaughn absolutely disregards continuity, which is my biggest concern for a Vaughn directed sequel.

 

[ThanosOfTitans]

@ spider13, I agree...X3 is much better than X1.

How is that true? The script never changed. The cast never changed. The director never changed. Sony simply gave Sam Raimi more money for the action scenes. That's all. If "X-Men" had flopped, we would have just gotten a "Spider-Man" with toned down action scenes. Which wouldn't be a problem. Sam Raimi did fine with the "Evil Dead" series, "Darkman," and "The Quick and the Dead." Raimi doesn't need $100 million to give us impressive action scenes. That's more than you can say for Bryan Singer.

This is exactly how I feel...I'm not sure why everyone gives X1 credit for the comic book craze, but I just go with it.

I don't really try to dispute it...because it seems to just be accepted around these parts...it's kind of like some strange urban legend.

 

[bubbadoom]

I'm thinking casting Halle Berry, Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stuart couldn't have been budget friendly decisions? But I can definitely appreciate resource constraints.

You have to keep in mind that Proff X and Magneto were the only "name" actors in part 1 - it was this movie that made stars out of Berry and Jackman - they had done next to nothing at this point in their careers.

 

[bubbadoom]

first class was a bigger movie with more money and time to make it. if singer had the time and money he could have made the big summer 2 hour movie that we just got 11 years ago. to say that X-men failed is wrong, it succeed were it should have failed. the movie had so many things going against it, a small budget, short shooting schedule, rush to find actors, and a studio that had little faith in the movie.

While I know the budget was almost double, did X1 really have less time? They turned XMFC out in less than a year, shooting did not start till last Sept or Oct, and I know in Sept they were still kicking around Beast designs.

 

[ThanosOfTitans]

You have to keep in mind that Proff X and Magneto were the only "name" actors in part 1 - it was this movie that made stars out of Berry and Jackman - they had done next to nothing at this point in their careers.

Halle Berry may not have been a name in mainstream America...but among black audiences...she was probably one of the strongest young black actresses of that time...and the most recognizable young black actresses among black audiences...I will agree that X1, Swordfish and Monster's Ball...is really when her exposure to mainstream audiences really kicked off.

Fair enough, she wasn't a megastar with a huge salary for X1, but she def would have been more expensive than any other lesser known black actresses at the time.

 

[EnDz0n3]

It's not an exaggeration. Firstly, those films had rotted in development hell and various regimes of pre-production for years and years. None of those films you listed even started production until after X-Men had been released and became a success. In another world, had X-Men failed and bombed at the box office, those other films either wouldn't have started actual production or would have went forward into production later on with much smaller budgets and little faith from the studios.

X-Men and it's success was the factor that propelled the superhero film genre into what it is now. Without X-Men, Spider-Man wouldn't have been what we all know it as today and so on and so forth. If you got transported to a world where X-Men had failed, whatever Spider-Man film that would have came out however many years later wouldn't be the same one that came out in 2002.

X-men:

The cast from this film had very low notoriaty, anyone saying otherwise, or that the cast commanded a majority of the budget needs a history lesson...

Halle Berry: biggest film with American audiences pre-2000, The Flinstones, (Domestic Gross, $130MM) in a small supporting role. Bigger black, female actresses at time: Vanessa Williams, Holly Robinson Pete, Angela Bassett, more.

Hugh Jackman: biggest film with American audiences pre-2000, None. Unless you count the Oklahoma musical TV movie. Other leading male actors more famous at the time? Throw a stone in Hollywood...you'd hit one.

Patrick Stewart: biggest film with American audiences pre-2000, Star Trek: Insurrection (Domestic Gross: $70MM). Other choices....none.

James Marsden: biggest film with American audiences pre-2000, Disturbing Behavior (Domestic Gross: $15MM).

Tyler Mane: biggest film with American audiences pre-2000, None. Known for WCW wrestling.

Anna Paquin: biggest film with American audiences pre-2000, Fly Away Home (Domestic Gross: $25MM), super brief role in She's All That (Domestic Gross: $65MM).

Famke Janssen: biggest films with American audiences pre-2000: James Bond: GoldenEye (Domestic Gross: $106 MM) and supporting roles in The Faculty (Domestic Gross: $40MM), and House on Haunted Hill (DG $40MM).

Ian McKellen: biggest films with American audiences pre-2000, Last Action Hero (Domestic Gross: $50MM). Oscar Nominated for Gods and Monsters in 1998, the film made a WHOLE $6 million...

Rebecca Romijn-Stamos: biggest film with American audiences pre-2000, None. Model. Cameo in film Dirty Work.

Ray Park was a supporting actor in Star Wars- Episode I: The Phantom Menace in 1999, but it was a non-speaking role and 99% of audiences would be hard pressed to tell you the actor of Darth Maul's name in the year 2000, or that he and the actor playing Toad were one-in-the-same....


Point being!

Only TWO of these actors had been IN films grossing over $100 million at the time X-men was being made. And those two (Halle Berry and Famke Janssen) were supporting/eye candy roles. Not one of these actors had carried a summer blockbuster before. Stewart was the closest with his Star Trek roles, but those films were never terribly successful, averaging around 40-70 million dollars in domestic sales.


Long story short, the cast in X-men was a gamble and a bunch of no-namers. There could have been a VERY expensive cast.... Some rumors:

- Sarah Michelle Gellar or Christina Ricci as Rogue.
- Angela Basset as Storm.
- James Caveizel was cast as Cyclops but dropped out (also not expensive at the time)
- Vince Vaughn was interested and coming off of the success of The Lost World: Jurassic Park....
- Ed Norton was also in the running for Summers according to AICN back in 99.
- Lucy Lawless of Xena fame was considered for Jean Grey.
- Terrance Stamp and Christopher Lee were considered for Magneto (Stamp famous as General Zod), but McKellen was a friend of Singer's after staring in Apt Pupil.



History lesson complete, hope you learned something. Stop saying Halle, Patrick and Hugh could command big salaries or had clout, that's ridiculous...the FACTS don't lie.


-R

I find it pretty unfair to deride a film that was pretty much responsible for the CBM boom Hollywood has been riding the past 11 years.

Fox had zero faith in the movie.
Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry and to an extent Patrick Stewart were not What they became after the success of X1.
audiences were burned out by CBM after the horrendous bat films.

X1 got people interested in the medium again and to basically go, "oh they couldve made more of an effort." is kind of shady.

Awesome posts!

LOL Storms line to Toad is still probably the worst line I've ever witness in a comic book movie ever...that line is pure failure.

And to answer the topic/thread starter and the Storm line:
Although I appreciate Vaughn's ability to show us backstories to some of our beloved characters, I found a lot of scenes and lines and transitions in XMFC very cringe-worthy and *almost* on par with the Storm line. Vaughn is able to juggle multiple characters at a time and he is very capable of getting the best out of SOME of his actors but over-all I found Vaughn's directorial skills, in this movie at least, nothing spectacular.

 

[ThanosOfTitans]

Awesome posts!



And to answer the topic/thread starter and the Storm line:
Although I appreciate Vaughn's ability to show us backstories to some of our beloved characters, I found a lot of scenes and lines and transitions in XMFC very cringe-worthy and *almost* on part with the Storm line. Over-all I found Vaughn's directorial skills, in this movie at least, kind of amateurish.

Very informative post. lol I still stand by the fact that these actors were probably paid more than lesser known actors/actresses would have been paid.

And I appreciate whoever took the time to compile the quoted data...but let's think about few things....

Brandon Routh was the lead in Superman Returns...how much did that film gross domestically? Has he become a major megastar in the industry? Is the industry jumping hand over foot to get Routh into movies? Oh, and how about his big Superman sequel? Well...that's strange

Halle Berry was paid over 10 million to lead in Catwoman, correct? How much did that make domestically?

And I agree with you. XMFC had very awkward moments as well. Storm's line from X1 still takes the cake though...it's just painfully bad.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Or Vaughn absolutely disregards continuity, which is my biggest concern for a Vaughn directed sequel.

If there Is a sequel,and this Is a very big If,and Vaughn returns to direct
Cyclops and Jean aren't going to be In it.Vaughn wants to use mostly the
First Class cast with one major addattion with possibilty of doing a flashforward with Patrick Stewart and ian Mckellan.

People keep forgetting Vaughn keeps mentioning doing his take on James Bond
with X-men.

If you recon X-Men.X2(and possibly The Last Stand) as taking place In the early 1990's you could bring Cyclops and Jean In a mid to late 1970's set
sequel.There would be pressure to cast popular teen starts as Cyclops and
Jean.And you would have a smaller budget than what First Class had.

And If there Is a first Class sequel It's not out of the question that Singer would direct It.

 

[c-saw]

People keep forgetting Vaughn keeps mentioning doing his take on James Bond
with X-men.

And he did that already. He wouldn't do it in the sequel.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

If there Is a sequel,and this Is a very big If,and Vaughn returns to direct
Cyclops and Jean aren't going to be In it.Vaughn wants to use mostly the
First Class cast with one major addattion with possibilty of doing a flashforward with Patrick Stewart and ian Mckellan.

People keep forgetting Vaughn keeps mentioning doing his take on James Bond
with X-men.

If you recon X-Men.X2(and possibly The Last Stand) as taking place In the early 1990's you could bring Cyclops and Jean In a mid to late 1970's set
sequel.There would be pressure to cast popular teen starts as Cyclops and
Jean.And you would have a smaller budget than what First Class had.

And If there Is a first Class sequel It's not out of the question that Singer would direct It.

I hope you're right. Cyclops and jean are really the only characters I foresee causing huge continuity issues. If its more of the same characters, then it probably won't cause much contradiction. Just a story that doesn't directly tie in with the trilogy. Its own thing. But still exists in that world. That kind of sequel im okay with.

as much as id love to see Scott, jean, and ororo in the early days, its already been established that they aren't the first class. I dont need to see them recruited. I can fill in the blanks myself.

But if were gonna get more focus on banshee and havok, and have a team of havok, banshee and beast? Im cool with that. Maybe the new character can be a young storm.

 

[marvelrobbins]

This may all be a moot talk with First Class' underperforming Box Office but If Spies from
Fox were on here I would recomand setting sequel In Early 1970's.You can get away with keeping the Same cast.Introduce Polaris.Magneto was nearly 30 In main part of First Class.Devolp havok and banshee some more.Bring back Moira.Leave Cyclops,Jean,and Storm for a possable final third film set In Early 1980's.In that film the only Characters used from First Class should be Xavier,Magneto,Beast,Mystique and possibly Emma and Moira maade to look older if Not recast.

Introducing Cyclops and Jean means once and for all they will have to decide are they outright Ignoring Wolverine and Last Stand or not.maybe they will just do a new Xavier finding Jean to reconn the opening scene but keep most of the film In Cannon.

 

[Robin91939]

You were correct In all but one respect Star Trek First Contact was most successful Star Trek film In the 90 Million range.Patrick Steward was case of fan casting Since the early 90's many fans wanted him as Xavier.SciFi audences knew who he was many in Geeral audence didn't.Halle Berry was famous but not a Box office draw.Although truthfully she never became one.Her box office hits have been X-Men Films and Die
Another Day.

I agree. Stewart was the HUGE fan favorite and the only person most could see as Professor X. But still to the GA he was Picard and only a Star Trek guy, and yeah, those films were generally only popular with the genre audience.

X-men was the brand and the box office draw. This was the movie that made Halle Berry a big name (her Oscars made her respected) and made Hugh Jackman a star with BO clout. Coupled with The Lord of the Rings films it made Ian McKellen a bankable name (he was already respected) and brought a new level of iconography to Patrick Stewart.

But yeah, the X-MEN name was the original box office draw. I'm actually glad that was the case....imagine if an A-list star took on the role of Logan....no way the films would have worked as well as they did. Jackman stepped into the role and WAS Wolverine....that was the effect they wanted and got.

Singer PAVED the way for other comic book films and for X-men: First Class... he should get much more props than he gets. As well as Fox, they ****ed up the end of the trilogy, but they did take a huge gamble and gave a visionary, smart director a chance at their huge franchise....that took balls in 2000.

-R

 

[EnDz0n3]

Brandon Routh was the lead in Superman Returns...how much did that film gross domestically? Has he become a major megastar in the industry? Is the industry jumping hand over foot to get Routh into movies? Oh, and how about his big Superman sequel? Well...that's strange

Halle Berry was paid over 10 million to lead in Catwoman, correct? How much did that make domestically?

This very well might all be true but it still does not change the fact that Halle, Hugh and Patrick were not mega stars before that first X-men film and thus were not paid as such.

And even if they were, what does that do with the success of that first X-men movie, it was still a blockbuster and was well received by critics and fans alike at that time.

 

[blinkinrogue]

I do agree that Xmen did revitalize the genre, i think it's undeniable, and it certainly helped studios' confidence in films like spidey, hulk, etc. and no people did not watch it for halle berry or whoever, they watched it because it's the X-MEN, nuff said.

 

[spider13]

I can't wait for a first class sequal but like i said this is the first x men anything I have really liked.

 

[Warhammer]

Your opinion is welcome. Your first paragraph is your perception of things. I have my perception. Neither of us have hard facts. If budget was an issue as some claim, the selection of actors wasn't the most budget friendly decision (my opinion).

Your second paragraph...I never disputed any of those things. LOL That doesn't change the fact that the film is very underwhelming to me. As I've communicated many times...I appreciate X1 for what it's perceived to have done for the genre...that still doesn't make it a good movie to me. I still love the X-Men and I'll still welcome any X-Men movies that may come along.

Naw brother, it wasn't meant to be directed at you. It was just something that popped in my head while reading through the thread.

How is that true? The script never changed. The cast never changed. The director never changed. Sony simply gave Sam Raimi more money for the action scenes. That's all. If "X-Men" had flopped, we would have just gotten a "Spider-Man" with toned down action scenes. Which wouldn't be a problem. Sam Raimi did fine with the "Evil Dead" series, "Darkman," and "The Quick and the Dead." Raimi doesn't need $100 million to give us impressive action scenes. That's more than you can say for Bryan Singer.

No man, it wouldn't have just ended up being the same movie with toned down action scenes. The script would have been a little different because the studio, having less faith in the product, would exert more control and gave Raimi less freedom. The script and direction would not have been exactly the same. Also, you do know that the huge appeal of Spider-Man was the special effects right? Without the budget that the studio later gave Raimi as well as their faith in the product, the movie would not have been the same. The story itself was hardly cerebral or groundbreaking. It was a summer blockbuster after all.

 

[Warhammer]

Awesome posts!

Thank you, man.