lets post all the things from all 3 movies that don't matc hthe comicbooks!

[Elijya]

again - ADAPTATION, not translation

 

[GhostPoet]

I realize the movie universe is a whole separate entity, but they totally wiped out all of Wolverine's history...like how he meets Sabretooth and Deathstrike after joining the X-Men...and how it was hinted that he was "given" claws. But that's fairly minor I guess.

You are thinking from a comic perspective. You said it yourself...you realize it's a whole seperate entity...which means none of what you said happened. Infact, it's highly likely that Sabretooth was never a part of Weapon X to begin with. At least in this reality.

 

[Dr. Fate]

jean grey isn't a doctor
beast was never in the presidents cabinet
mystique isn't scaley and naked
iceman is too young
toad, plain and simple
senator kelly's death
deathstrike
stryker
rogue's hair
the original x-men
jason, stryker's son, aka the comicbooks mastermind
xjet instead of the blackbird
storm, jean and scott as teachers
rogue's powers
storm's powers minus her control of them in x3
cyclops' age compared to jean's
the way the phoenix was handled


well here are some i thought of to show people that the movies have never really mimicked the comics. if you can think of anymore post them.

this thread is also not a thread to complain in, but just to show how the first 2 movies, along with the 3rd, never was comicbook correct and many liberties were taken.

You forgot that Wolverine is a tall guy in the films but a short guy in the comics. You can actually tell he's taller than Cyclops in the films, even though in the comic books Cyclops stands head & shoulders above Wolverine.

But I guess that's a minor point...

 

[RaisingStorm]

Wolverine's story is pretty basic. Easier to translate to film and because he's the most popular of the X-men. So naturally they would choose him.

If they did an X-men movie that portrayed EVERYONE's favorite characters just like the comic...the movie would have to be 8 hours long at least. :P



This is why comic films will NEVER make everyone happy. Someone always wants "their" mutant to have the most screen time or be the best represented.

I dont mean for them to make it so complicated, like I said, the sortylines are fine, what I mean with them portraying the carachter more like the comics, I mean like for example, storm having more character, Cyclops more of a Capitain demeanor, and yhea, Rougues powers, that doesnt mean they have to go into detail on how they got their powers, they dont explain how storm was born here and then ended up being a pick pocket in Cairo, they dont explain Scot has a brother and that that his father comands the starjamers, they didnt go into detail on how they got to be, I am not asking for them to do that, of course it would be dumb to ask for that, all I am saying is that it wouldnt hurt to have a Storm with more character, Cyclops portraying real lidership, Rogue a bit more outgoing, a bit stronger and yhea, with her flight, I believe the characters can be portrayed better in the movies without compromising the storyline, at the end of the day, in X1 and X2 they gave wolverine a lot of backgrounding time, and the movie was not "wolverine featuring the X Men". all I am saying is they could have introduced the characters with theyr powers and stuff, and without having to explain where all came from. I know Where Rogue's powers came from, is just that I see that weak, scared little girl and I just dont see Rogue, just like in X3 with Quill.

 

[RaisingStorm]

You forgot that Wolverine is a tall guy in the films but a short guy in the comics. You can actually tell he's taller than Cyclops in the films, even though in the comic books Cyclops stands head & shoulders above Wolverine.

But I guess that's a minor point...

wow his heaight...lol, comparing to the fact that theres character with diferent personalities and even powers compared to their comic counterparts, Height is minimal, and besides, wolverine in the comic is always curving himself cause thats his fight stance, but he is as tall as Cyclops.

 

[The Batman]

thank you so much for this post. in making this thread i wanted all the "crybabies", "complainers", and " tempertantrum throwers" to be aware of just that. that they were inspired by the books, not copies. i'm really sick of going from thread to thread reading about stuff in x3 thats not like the books and that why it sucks. they were all like that. and yes the movie would have been very very lame if they were truthful to the books! i really loved your post .

And you people still fail to comprehend why others are mad about the changes

 

[Jan Irisi]

ADAPTATION...say it with me now.

 

[mathhater]

You are thinking from a comic perspective. You said it yourself...you realize it's a whole seperate entity...which means none of what you said happened. Infact, it's highly likely that Sabretooth was never a part of Weapon X to begin with. At least in this reality.

That's true...that was just the biggest alteration for me though...you go years and years with a certain mind set, (i.e. Wolverine/Sabretooth...lifelong enemies, terrific rivalry, interlocking history) and it gets turned all on it's head with "Sabretooth? (snicker)"

 

[The Batman]

I'm only glad that harry potter and LOTR fans arent willing to accpet their source material getting screwed over like most of you...

 

[Jan Irisi]

40 years of material vs. three LOTR books....hmmmm.....


40 years of material vs. 6 HP books....hmmmmm


How the hell do you keep 100% faithful to that much material? Material that has itself gone through changes, alterations, rewrites, retcons over the years? How is that done exactly?

 

[Elijya]

:: what am I gonna do? I don't have $200 million dollars to make a movie of my own, and I'm not gonna ***** and moan on the internet when it's not gonna change a thing

The comics are the comics, that will never change. The films are their own thing, and I'll just enjoy what I can from them, which is a decent amount

 

[The Batman]

40 years of material vs. three LOTR books....hmmmm.....


40 years of material vs. 6 HP books....hmmmmm


How the hell do you keep 100% faithful to that much material? Material that has itself gone through changes, alterations, rewrites, retcons over the years? How is that done exactly?

again, you and everyone else just dont get it....

 

[Elijya]

and vice versa, Batman, you don't get why we're ok with the film

 

[Jan Irisi]

again, you and everyone else just dont get it....

Then explain to me how you take over 40 years of "source material" with a cast of virtually thousands, "source material" that itself has been rewritten, rehashed, retconned, altered and revised and compress that much material into a two hour story in a completely different medium while staying "faithful". How do you do that? Explain that to me.

 

[RaisingStorm]

I Wll have to tell you guys, I read the 3 Lord of the rings books and the Hobbit prequel, I have read all of harry potter's books (I am still reading the half blood prince), I even read memoirs of a Geisha and saw the movie and they are all prety damn good adaptations, VERY faithfull to the books. I dont even think is very smart to bring that in since is obvious that books and comics, are only similar in the fact that they are writen literature, you have to read the story. Personally I am not asking for a movie version of the comics, all I am saying is that after 40 years of being used to my favorite characters, is hard for me to see them so changed, imagine they come out with a harry potter movie, and instead of being Harry is Harriet and is played by a girl...wouldnt you be like..."huh..isnt that suposed to be a boy??" well here I am not wondering how they could have explain that Rogue has powers, but I am wondering why she doesnt fly and have super strenght. I mean, I dont see anybody wondering how come Storm can control weather or how Scot became an X Men, they are just there, thats all I say, Rogue could have been just there without the need to explain the whole mis marvel thing, they could have said that that boyfriend of hers she put into a coma, was a mutant too and she didnt know it, and she ended up absorbing his powers and they manifested later or something. you guys keep getting it as if we want it to be just like the comics, at least personally I would like to see the characters more like themselves, thats it, the rest is fine to me, is just like when people complained that Storm didnt fly in X1 and X2, well thats part of her IN THE COMIC, they made her fly like Halle Berry said Textually LIKE SHE FLYES IN THE COMIC, yet they didnt compromise the storyline. get what I'm saying??

 

[The Batman]

Then explain to me how you take over 40 years of "source material" with a cast of virtually thousands, "source material" that itself has been rewritten, rehashed, retconned, altered and revised and compress that much material into a two hour story in a completely different medium while staying "faithful". How do you do that? Explain that to me.

You guys make it out to be some difficult task, when it has been done on film before....

 

[Jan Irisi]

You guys make it out to be some difficult task, when it has been done on film before....

Oh yes, with the untouchable Spider-man and now suddenly uber cool Batman.

Again, I ask, how do you take 40 years of "source material" and condence it into a two hour film?

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

My head is really about to explode.

 

[The Batman]

Oh yes, with the untouchable Spider-man and now suddenly uber cool Batman.

Again, I ask, how do you take 40 years of "source material" and condence it into a two hour film?

First of all, you're assuming most people want 40 years of source material in one movie. you're assuming people want to see the likes of the vanisher, mojo, Arcade, Erik the Red, and nimrod on screen.

Second of all, you're assuming that the characters have constantly changed within the span of 40 years. first off, five of the x-mens forty years were reprints. second of all, the essence of most of the characters are...essentially the same. so dont act like they've changed so much when....they havent, only in cotumes and art styles.

Third, you get the spirit of the character. Rogue, the southern belle, not the shy teen. Cyclops, strong, heroic leader, not a perceived dick. Iceman, a charming jokester, not some average teen. Again, no one's asking to see everything X-Men dumped onscreen, and if you thought that, you dont undserstand what people are asking for whatsoever

 

[MaleRogue]

ROGUE that was taking the cure...

 

[RaisingStorm]

Spiderman still can crawl walls, and batman still has a batmobil, just like storm can control weather and wolverine has claws, regardless of the situation, condiTions, storyline or anything, why couldnt Rogue fly, if wolverine has a healing factor like IN THE COMICS, and Jean Grey Becomes the Phoenix LIKE IN THE COMICS, and Spiderman crawls walls LIKE IN THE COMICS, why can Rogue Fly LIKE IN THE COMICS? is not like this movies are not doing some things LIKE IN THE COMICS. I SAID SOME THINGS, like alowing the main character to have their usual powers but...how do we and they (the movie producers) know their usual powers, BECAUSE OF THE COMICS.

 

[RaisingStorm]

First of all, you're assuming most people want 40 years of source material in one movie. you're assuming people want to see the likes of the vanisher, mojo, Arcade, Erik the Red, and nimrod on screen.

Second of all, you're assuming that the characters have constantly changed within the span of 40 years. first off, five of the x-mens forty years were reprints. second of all, the essence of most of the characters are...essentially the same. so dont act like they've changed so much when....they havent, only in cotumes and art styles.

Third, you get the spirit of the character. Rogue, the southern belle, not the shy teen. Cyclops, strong, heroic leader, not a perceived dick. Iceman, a charming jokester, not some average teen. Again, no one's asking to see everything X-Men dumped onscreen, and if you thought that, you dont undserstand what people are asking for whatsoever

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU

AMEN TO THAT!!!!!!!!
SOMEBODY FINALY GETS IT

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Third, you get the spirit of the character. Rogue, the southern belle, not the shy teen. Cyclops, strong, heroic leader, not a perceived dick. Iceman, a charming jokester, not some average teen. Again, no one's asking to see everything X-Men dumped onscreen, and if you thought that, you dont undserstand what people are asking for whatsoever

Rogue: Go pick up a comic book. Rogue was always a shy, scared girl, before her Miss Marvel powers. Even sometimes after that. In the comics, she kisses her boyfriend, puts him into a coma, and runs away. The only difference in the movies being that her boyfriend in the movies was named David, instead of Cody.

I have the issue when Rogue joins the X-Men. And guess what she's doing the whole issue? If you guesses "sassing it up", you were wrong. She spends the whole issue crying, because she's scared. Rogue in the movies is very accurate to Rogue in the comics. The sassed up Rogue from the 90's and the animated series put a difference perception in the eyes of many over the character of Rogue, and the true essence of who Rogue really is was lost in all the sass, flying, invulnerablility, and tank shot-puts.

Cyclops: Cyclops often comes off as a dick at times in the comic books. Why? Because the only person he truly opens up to is Jean, and to a lesser extent, the Professor. When it comes to the team, the X-Men, he doesn't play around, and he doesn't take ****. He takes it very seriously. Hmmm... am I noticing a similarity to the movies? WHY YES I AM! Just because we don't see Cyclops barking out stupid orders, and optic blasting Wolverine into place, doesn't mean the movie version was unfaithful. Again, it was very faithful.

Iceman: I'll give you Iceman. He wasn't nearly as playful and joking as he should have been. And I would have liked to have seen more of it. But at least in X-Men: The Last Stand, he evolves as a character a bit, going from the "average teen" in X2, to a bit more confident about himself, his powers, and his status with the X-Men, in X-Men: The Last Stand.

You got more complaints about how the movies were "unfaithful" to the comics? I got 3 words for you...

BRING IT ON!!!!

Because you're wrong.

 

[MaleRogue]

Rogue: Go pick up a comic book. Rogue was always a shy, scared girl, before her Miss Marvel powers. Even sometimes after that. In the comics, she kisses her boyfriend, puts him into a coma, and runs away. The only difference in the movies being that her boyfriend in the movies was named David, instead of Cody.

I have the issue when Rogue joins the X-Men. And guess what she's doing the whole issue? If you guesses "sassing it up", you were wrong. She spends the whole issue crying, because she's scared. Rogue in the movies is very accurate to Rogue in the comics. The sassed up Rogue from the 90's and the animated series put a difference perception in the eyes of many over the character of Rogue, and the true essence of who Rogue really is was lost in all the sass, flying, invulnerablility, and tank shot-puts.

Cyclops: Cyclops often comes off as a dick at times in the comic books. Why? Because the only person he truly opens up to is Jean, and to a lesser extent, the Professor. When it comes to the team, the X-Men, he doesn't play around, and he doesn't take ****. He takes it very seriously. Hmmm... am I noticing a similarity to the movies? WHY YES I AM! Just because we don't see Cyclops barking out stupid orders, and optic blasting Wolverine into place, doesn't mean the movie version was unfaithful. Again, it was very faithful.

Iceman: I'll give you Iceman. He wasn't nearly as playful and joking as he should have been. And I would have liked to have seen more of it. But at least in X-Men: The Last Stand, he evolves as a character a bit, going from the "average teen" in X2, to a bit more confident about himself, his powers, and his status with the X-Men, in X-Men: The Last Stand.

You got more complaints about how the movies were "unfaithful" to the comics? I got 3 words for you...

BRING IT ON!!!!

Because you're wrong.

YOU ARE SO RIGHT....
Rogue is that way in the movies and the comics...
Cyclops to...
Iceman....I really did not know him that much

 

[Black Panther]

Rogue: Go pick up a comic book. Rogue was always a shy, scared girl, before her Miss Marvel powers. Even sometimes after that. In the comics, she kisses her boyfriend, puts him into a coma, and runs away. The only difference in the movies being that her boyfriend in the movies was named David, instead of Cody.

I have the issue when Rogue joins the X-Men. And guess what she's doing the whole issue? If you guesses "sassing it up", you were wrong. She spends the whole issue crying, because she's scared. Rogue in the movies is very accurate to Rogue in the comics. The sassed up Rogue from the 90's and the animated series put a difference perception in the eyes of many over the character of Rogue, and the true essence of who Rogue really is was lost in all the sass, flying, invulnerablility, and tank shot-puts.

Cyclops: Cyclops often comes off as a dick at times in the comic books. Why? Because the only person he truly opens up to is Jean, and to a lesser extent, the Professor. When it comes to the team, the X-Men, he doesn't play around, and he doesn't take ****. He takes it very seriously. Hmmm... am I noticing a similarity to the movies? WHY YES I AM! Just because we don't see Cyclops barking out stupid orders, and optic blasting Wolverine into place, doesn't mean the movie version was unfaithful. Again, it was very faithful.

Iceman: I'll give you Iceman. He wasn't nearly as playful and joking as he should have been. And I would have liked to have seen more of it. But at least in X-Men: The Last Stand, he evolves as a character a bit, going from the "average teen" in X2, to a bit more confident about himself, his powers, and his status with the X-Men, in X-Men: The Last Stand.

You got more complaints about how the movies were "unfaithful" to the comics? I got 3 words for you...

BRING IT ON!!!!

Because you're wrong.

Dude, rock on. I agree 100%. The Batman is SO wrong.

WELL SAID.