marvelrobbins
Avenger
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2004
- Messages
- 18,410
- Reaction score
- 7
- Points
- 31
Wolverine was head of the ensamble In X2 but out of all X-Men films this one felt the most like an ensemble piece.
It's relevant to the questions Singer answered and is relevant to the topic of this thread. If you do not want to participate in the conversation, don't participate. But you have no authority to tell people what "****" they can or can't talk about.
That'd be really nice. I mean, they've already contradicted a lot from 'The Last Stand'. If they openly admit to booting that film, they could even use Juggernaut and make him a real badass. Callisto, too, if they wanted to do the Morlocks, though I don't recall them ever actually calling her by name in the film. Her powers were completely different and she looked nothing like the character, so they could probably use Callisto again anyway. Same with Psylocke.

This wasn't addressed at me, but I will say that you do appear to have a rather desperate need for X3 to be ignored.
The thing is that what happened DID happen. Singer DID move on from the franchise to SR, Vaughn WAS hired then left, Ratner WAS then hired, the movie WAS made, it DID come out on DVD, then Blu-ray, then on Quadrilogy box set. All that can't be undone.
Also, what happened at the start of X3 with non-disabled Xavier and Magneto meeting Jean was not inherently wrong or bad and it was not - at the time - contradicting anything. Nor was the inclusion of Moira MacTaggert. Also, what happened with non-disabled Xavier meeting the escaped mutant kids in Wolverine was not inherently wrong or bad, nor was the inclusion of Emma Frost. Those were not flaws. In fact, the end of XMOW was intended to lead in to the Josh Schwartz version of First Class (which, ironically, would have been closer to the First Class comic and more in continuity).
Singer and co are choosing to break continuity in a few places because it suits the story they want to tell, not because the depiction of non-disabled Xavier in X3 and XMOW was so dreadful or because including Moira in X3 was so dreadful.
The time setting of 1962 determines the ages of the characters chosen. Singer wants to use the Hellfire Club, therefore his Emma is going to be different because she will be around in 1962. Singer/Vaughn/whoever are choosing to violate continuity over things like Emma Frost because they want to have Emma Frost and the Hellfire Club in spite of it being in the 60s.
Singer said himself that storytelling choices would mean some 'concessions' would be made.
I think you are trying to project your dislike of X3 on to the filmmakers. I also think they are just making their choices based on what fits the story they want to tell, because they appear also to be going against some things that were established in Singer's own films.
I'm not bothered about continuity any more. in fact, I've given up on it because the franchise has now become what i previously called a patchwork quilt with many things that don't entirely fit. That's a shame but it's what happens when a franchise isn't mapped out from the beginning and when several different writers and directors all have a go at it.

That's funny. You sure like to tell people what they can or cannot talk about. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks so.
No, that's not what you are supposed to do, because, as far as I'm concerned, this is not a dictatorship.

my question was
"What made you choose Emma Frost to play a part in "X-Men: First Class"? Overall, what do you think of her character in the movie? "
I wish i had put my name instead of annoymus - mind you i did ask 3 questions to bryan and this one got answered.
Im happy mostly because thats now Bryan Singer, Brett Ratner & Gavin Hood i have managed to get a response back regarding the X-men movies. Mind you Brett's was more wordy on e-mail.
No, that's not what you are supposed to do, because, as far as I'm concerned, this is not a dictatorship.
See how my username is red? That means I'm supposed to tell people what they can or can not talk about.
I'm a moderator. I moderate discussions. I keep them on course. I tell people that they can talk about a range of topics as long as it pertains to the thread topic. If people stray too far off-topic, I, like every other moderator and administrator here, will tell posters that they must get back on-topic. This has been one of many duties fulfilled by moderators throughout the years.
With that explained, let us get back on-topic.

This is an awful lot of animosity over such a small detail. What exactly will this movie contradict from The Last Stand, anyway? That Chuck & Erik both walked into Jean's house when she was 12?
*YAWN*
See how my username is red? That means I'm supposed to tell people what they can or can not talk about.
Too bad that's not what you're doing right now. What you are doing is shoving you "badge" to the face of everyone that disagrees with your views.I'm a moderator. I moderate discussions. I keep them on course. I tell people that they can talk about a range of topics as long as it pertains to the thread topic. If people stray too far off-topic, I, like every other moderator and administrator here, will tell posters that they must get back on-topic. This has been one of many duties fulfilled by moderators throughout the years.
With that explained, let us get back on-topic.
This is an awful lot of animosity over such a small detail. What exactly will this movie contradict from The Last Stand, anyway? That Chuck & Erik both walked into Jean's house when she was 12?
*YAWN*
This is an awful lot of animosity over such a small detail. What exactly will this movie contradict from The Last Stand, anyway? That Chuck & Erik both walked into Jean's house when she was 12?
*YAWN*
Correct!*YAWN*
t: It was all a dream anyway!Wow your username is red, big deal. There are much friendlier moderators in this forum that don't boss people around. You're not supposed to tell people what they can or cannot say especially if they're not breaking any rules. You can't tell people they can't say something just because you don't agree with them.

Too bad that's not what you're doing right now. What you are doing is shoving you "badge" to the face of everyone that disagrees with your views.
Xavier being crippled In first class and then walking around when he finds jean at beging of Last stand Is a lot more than minor detail.Xavier Is one of most Important characters In the series.Plus that scene Influences a lot of what happens later.
It actually affects the entire Dark Phoenix storyline of 'The Last Stand'. If Erik hadn't been with Charles to meet Jean, he likely wouldn't know the amazing potential Jean had, therefor he'd probably be a lot less likely to have any motive to manipulate her, which means she probably wouldn't have killed Charles and he would have been able to reinstall the mental blocks and the anticlimactic Alcatraz destruction and Jean's second death probably never would have happened![/breathes]
Unlike you, I don't pretend to know what Bryan Singer and Matthew Vaughn think. All I know is I want to forget 'The Last Stand', and 'First Class' is certainly accommodating that. Now if you'd please stop trying to analyze me, I'd appreciate it. Psychology doesn't suit you too well.![]()



It actually affects the entire Dark Phoenix storyline of 'The Last Stand'. If Erik hadn't been with Charles to meet Jean, he likely wouldn't know the amazing potential Jean had, therefor he'd probably be a lot less likely to have any motive to manipulate her, which means she probably wouldn't have killed Charles and he would have been able to reinstall the mental blocks and the anticlimactic Alcatraz destruction and Jean's second death probably never would have happened![/breathes]