Dark Phoenix Phoenix must be destroyed!" The Official Lilandra Thread

[I Am The Knight]

If you have to retcon things left and right that still means that the continuity is f***ed

 

[Frankeh]

Retcons are only a problem or a "bad thing" when people want to have something to whine about.

They're a problem because they demonstrate indecisiveness and lack of planning.

They're not a problem only to those who wish to turn a blind eye to the flaws of this franchise.

 

[marvelrobbins]

problem here is in last stand bil duke's character was never called onscreen or in credits as boliver trask.same thing with emma frost.

there is no way of telling when events of origins take place so saying it took place in 1985 is assumination.even prologue of last stand is not specific dated it set 20 years before last stand and then 10 years before.

x-men is hardly first franchise to make retcons.i can list several from star trek-the franchise that is most coparable to X-men.

 

[DigificWriter]

Star Trek, Marvel, and DC have retconned the holy hell out of themselves more times than I can possibly count, and yet you don't see or hear people whining about it or writing click-bait articles about how f-ed up their continuities are.

You know why? Because most of the people who are fans of those properties don't see retcons as a problem, and rightfully so.

 

[X-Maniac]

Even if Mangold didn't initially know that Caliban was already in Apocalypse, it's not actually an example of discontinuity or grounds to assume that FOX would blatantly ignore the stated deaths of characters.

“It’s a funny, messy story of how so often these things are not as coordinated as everyone thinks,” director James Mangold told us at a recent press event for 20th Century Fox. “I actually had written him into our movie, and they didn’t know [he was] in Apocalypse, and then they kind of wrote it in their movie, and they cast someone in their movie and I had not seen it and was working away on mine.”

So it was lack of co-ordination.

Doesn't this franchise deserve some co-ordination?

Why does it lurch from one film to another with directors paying no regard to other instalments in the series?

Why isn't there a franchise bible, or at least a database that writers/directors can search to see if characters are being used already?

There's now a ridiculous number of your so-called 'retcons'... it's very messy and leaves fans having to come up with their own theories and explanations.

Two Trasks, two Calibans, two Emmas with diamond skin (I say two Emma Frosts), two Psylockes, two Angels, two Sabretooths, two Deadpools, etc... Can't you see why fans of these films get exasperated at the lack of planning, the re-doing of characters justified only by your cry of 'it's a retcon.' It's not good enough really.

 

[DigificWriter]

Ryan Reynolds was allowed to "redo" Deadpool because he's a fan of the character, didn't like what was done the first time, and has the creative clout to get the producers of the X-verse to buy into his ideas. That's not a lack of planning or coordination, it's a corporate/narrative decision, and it actually doesn't do anything whatsoever when it comes to continuity.

The Sabertooth, Caliban, Angel, and Psylocke,situations are a case of the same character being played by different actors, which, again, doesn't do anything whatsoever when it comes to continuity.

The Moira, Trask, and Emma things are a case of the producers choosing to reuse characters, but, again, do not actually have any effect whatsoever when it comes to continuity, particularly since one of said instances is a retcon.

In comparison to Star Trek, DC, and Marvel, the amount of actual retcons that have been introduced into the X-verse is infinitesimal, being able to be counted on one hand.

 

[Zarex]

In comparison to Star Trek, DC, and Marvel, the amount of actual retcons that have been introduced into the X-verse is infinitesimal, being able to be counted on one hand.

You're comparing a 10 film series to a) a TV-Movie universe launched in the 1960s with hundreds of episodes and over a dozen films, and b) two comic book universes with thousands of stories stretching back before WWII. NOT THE SAME THING.

Some continuity errors are inevitable given a longtime series - look at Spider-Man Homecoming (A Marvel Studios film with a Marvel Studios intro) and its changing MCU time line. Or the complete lack of continuity between Marvel films and the Netflix shows. But we should encourage those responsible to do better rather than ignoring the Colossus in the room.

 

[2kt09]

You're comparing a 10 film series to a) a TV-Movie universe launched in the 1960s with hundreds of episodes and over a dozen films, and b) two comic book universes with thousands of stories stretching back before WWII. NOT THE SAME THING.

Pretty sure Digi was just talking about the movies.

 

[Mad Ones]

There are three options that you can engage this franchise with:
1) You can deny continuity errors and find ways to make this chaotic universe work into some continuity.
2) You can believe and accept there are continuity errors and not care and still enjoy the movies.
3) You can hate on everything because continuity is more important than quality.

But really, who cares which one you pick?

 

[Zarex]

Pretty sure Digi was just talking about the movies.

If he's comparing the retcons in the X-Men series to the MCU, DCEU and either the original or Kelvin Star Trek series his point doesn't make a lick of sense.

 

[EnDz0n3]

the amount of actual retcons that have been introduced into the X-verse is infinitesimal, being able to be counted on one hand.

I'd be interested to hear what five (or less) things he counts as "actual retcons."

 

[X-Maniac]

There are three options that you can engage this franchise with:
1) You can deny continuity errors and find ways to make this chaotic universe work into some continuity.
2) You can believe and accept there are continuity errors and not care and still enjoy the movies.
3) You can hate on everything because continuity is more important than quality.

But really, who cares which one you pick?

None of the above in my case! I have become frustrated with the growing number of continuity decisions that don't create a smooth flow between the movies. Ardent fans can sit here and come up with all these theories, but the more mainstream viewer will be far more confused. And I have heard mainstream film fans complaining about contradictions in the X-Men film series.

It's true to say that these things are not continuity 'errors' if they are deliberate choices - but if they are done with no awareness of the previous character/scenario, surely it is indeed an error. Retcons need to be conscious choices to be retcons, otherwise it's a goof.

Thankfully, some of these re-done characters are an improvement, notably Deadpool, Psylocke (though she was still undeveloped) and Trask, as well as Moira and Colossus (both better developed). Caliban was more comic-accurate in the Logan version. For the new Angel, it was hardly worth adding him to X:Men: Apocalypse because he was not really given enough development.

 

[Lip]

How hard is it for people to understand that?

The Moira example is simply people refusing to use common sense, logic, and critical thinking in order to find an explanation and instead choosing to hold it up as a problem simply for the sake of having something to complain about and criticize the X-franchise for.

Also, while it might be "easier" to sit here and criticize the X-franchise for "continuity errors" when half the things that are being criticized are not in fact examples of "f-ed up continuity", doing so is totally disingenuous and smacks strongly of "alternative facts".

First of all it's not really up to me to determine how you should interpret the franchise, so I apologize for that.

But I hope you understand that it's OK to acknowledge the mistakes a franchise/movie/book/saga/author/etc makes, and by doing that it doesn't make you less of a fan or appreciative of the work. Being a fan of something doesn't mean seeing it as flawless and closing your eyes for any mistake or bad thing.

I still see as crystal clear all the continuity errors among many other huge mistakes and I don't think DoFP or Logan, for instance, are any less great movies because of that.

 

[DigificWriter]

I'm more than willing to criticize the X-franchise when criticism is warranted; what I refuse to do is to call elements of the franchise "problems" or "continuity errors" when they're neither of those things.

The X-franchise has not been perfect, but it is not even remotely close to being the "trainwreck" of "narrative and continuity" that it is constantly accused of being.

 

[Silvermoth]

I think when it has a low point it's pretty low but my gosh at its best it has had moments far superior to any marvel movie.

 

[DigificWriter]

I'd be interested to hear what five (or less) things he counts as "actual retcons."

- Bill Duke's TLS character being Trask

- Sabertooth's backstory

- The circumstances surrounding the creation of Cerebro

- Mystique's backstory

- The age at which Charles and Erik met

That's exactly 5.

 

[psylockolussus]

Star Trek, Marvel, and DC have retconned the holy hell out of themselves more times than I can possibly count, and yet you don't see or hear people whining about it or writing click-bait articles about how f-ed up their continuities are.

You know why? Because most of the people who are fans of those properties don't see retcons as a problem, and rightfully so.

You are speaking for yourself not the public.

 

[EnDz0n3]

Logan's actions in DoFP only undid events that had happened AFTER 1973

And both Bolivar Trask and Moira were born before 73.

Actually Jubilee, Psylocke and Angel too, because they are not only 10 years old in Apocalypse.

Cosigned.

And to say that a retcon isn't an actual problem and that it doesn't count as a continuity error belies the actual definition of the word retCON.

It's amazing that fans make up any number of excuses to justify an error when I'd be willing to bet the Fox head honchos, Singer et al would be the first to admit this franchise is riddled with bad continuity.

 

[Lip]

It's amazing that fans make up any number of excuses to justify an error when I'd be willing to bet the Fox head honchos, Singer et al would be the first to admit this franchise is riddled with bad continuity.

I could swear that Singer, Donner or Kinberg had already admitted that.

 

[Silvermoth]

I don't want to dwell on it too much because we will need to get back to discussing lilandra soon but another error is that havok and cyclops are brothers although they look the same age and havok was in the '60s and cyclops is in the '80s

 

[Lip]

One of the reasons I currently despise this creative team. They couldn't care less about any other relationship that is not with Eric or Charles.

 

[Mr. Peanut]

I don't want to dwell on it too much because we will need to get back to discussing lilandra soon but another error is that havok and cyclops are brothers although they look the same age and havok was in the '60s and cyclops is in the '80s

The age difference is not an error. I personally have a sister 19 years younger than me. It's uncommon but not unheard of.

 

[X-Maniac]

- Bill Duke's TLS character being Trask

- Sabertooth's backstory

- The circumstances surrounding the creation of Cerebro

- Mystique's backstory

- The age at which Charles and Erik met

That's exactly 5.

What about how/when they came to be called the X-Men?

At the end of First Class, Xavier describes the team as just G-Men and Moira says 'you're X-Men'.

Then, in X-Men: Apocalypse, Raven tells the new team: "We called ourselves the X-Men."

There's another retcon to add to your list.

 

[DigificWriter]

What about how/when they came to be called the X-Men?

At the end of First Class, Xavier describes the team as just G-Men and Moira says 'you're X-Men'.

Then, in X-Men: Apocalypse, Raven tells the new team: "We called ourselves the X-Men."

There's another retcon to add to your list.

No, it's not; it's a paraphrasation.

 

[X-Maniac]

No, it's not; it's a paraphrasation.

No it's not; it's a retcon (or possibly even a continuity ERROR).

At the end of X-Men: First Class, when Moira light-heartedly suggests Xavier and his remaining students are X-Men, Mystique had already departed with Magneto (on the beach in Cuba). Mystique had no knowledge of the conversation between Xavier and Moira.

It's quite clear that the notion of this earlier team calling themselves X-Men was introduced in X-Men: Apocalypse to give Mystique some status as a senior and more veteran member of said team, paving the way for her position as leader at the end of the movie. It also fed the audience the phrase X-Men so it didn't have to be reinvented and explained later in the movie.

If Kinberg was aware of the scene in First Class, it's a retcon. If he forgot about that scene existing, it's a continuity error.

Mystique cannot be paraphrasing something she knew nothing about, using a term that only Moira and Xavier had mentioned in private, casual conversation before Moira's wind was wiped of the memories.