The Avengers vs X-Men: Days of Future Past

[Lord]

It wasn't liked by "the audience" .... it score 56% rotten.

And what did i say? Your average Joe doesn't vote in those sites, the people who do so are those that care more about moviemaking, why do you think the movies still make so much money? It's definitely not because half the audience disliked it, Transformers is also one of the most liked film pages on Facebook, which means that the 15-25 demographic doesn't find it all that bad. People need to stop confusing film scores with the opinion of the general public, most of them don't care about going to the internet and vote, that's a different type of public.

 

[The Endless]

Being the brother of Thor is not a valid argument. What related to the story specifically in Avengers makes it important that Loki is the villain?

The thing with the Thor films is, they are basically Loki's story too. The first Thor is both Thor and Loki's "origin" story if you will. It's the point where they both separated, chose their paths. Thor into heroism, Loki into villainy. I think in a way Thor has been done a bit of a disservice. I like Hemsworth but he's had the weakest material so far.

Using Loki made narrative sense to the Avengers story though. It gives a reason for Thor to be on Earth, looking for his brother Loki and bringing him home. Lokis motivations are to seek out a throne in place of Asgard. Who views humanity as beneath him. Wants to rule as a benevolent God.

Why use just some other guy instead of Loki?

 

[tek]

enjoyed both but the buzz for me was so much greater in watching the avengers and the individual character movies leading up to it was so better mapped out. DOFP felt a little flat in comparison mainly because the original cast was so underutilized and I dont care nearly as much about the new cast. they should have utilized the orginal xmen cast so much better over the years. a real waste

 

[lee1983dixon]

I can see how one could see it as hollow given it doesn't really matter who the villain is, what his plan is of even who the heroes are to some degree. Simplistic is the word I'd use because I do think the film has heart, but if someone sees it as hollow I can't really argue against them because it is a fairly one note movie that lacks substance.

Who was the first opponent the Avengers ever faced...?

It does matter. 'Thor' built up to it, developed the character so well and created a buzz about not just one character but two, the stage was always set and there would only have been one villain in The Avengers. That and the fact that, and this is not just my opinion, Loki is quite possible the best received performance of any comic book character ever made (within the MCU), given the context of his supposed supporting role and, in your opinion, irrelevance.

I don't even see how you can make this point. It called for a cunning, cerebral trickster to challenge the Avengers. Not a

Spoiler

maniacle robot

or a

Spoiler

mad titan

requiring an origin in the film that wasn't easily achievable using the character set (Iron Man, Thor, Cap, Hulk).

Are you honestly saying [insert villain here] into The Avengers film and you get the same outcome? Really?

I think a lot of people sat down and watched The Avengers with their popcorn and wikipedia at their fingertips, granted, but that doesn't mean there is no depth or emotion to it.

To re-affirm also, I enjoyed DOFP so much I saw it twice in one week, but up for Best Drama at the Oscars (or anywhere else) it will not be I promise you. That view is being massively overplayed in my opinion.

 

[Lord]

I don't think anyone is saying DoFP will be up to Best Drama at the oscars, even The Dark Knight wasn't worthy of winning that years IMAO (Slumdog was better). What people are defending is that it was on the whole more emotional than Avengers, and arguably a better film than most of the blockbusters we get every year.

 

[lee1983dixon]

I just think that the extent that everyone is making out how amazing DOFP was dramatically is wide of the mark. I thought it entirely predictable to be honest, don't think McAvoy was as amazing as people make out either - although admittedly i'm slightly biased on that as I don't like the casting.

Other than Fassbender and Jackman (simply for the enjoyment of Wolverine in anything), I saw no truly stand-out performances in this. Characters in X Men film are always more diluted due to the sheer amount of them sharing the story/screen time.

When I look at Avengers, I see one bad or forgettable performance (Renner, truly awful Hawkeye). The others I think all stand up well in the context of the film.

X Men, you have Fassbender and Jackman, maybe Lawrence but I do subscribe to that opinion (forget who said it) that her X Men performances are not some of her best, maybe McAvoy but not for me. I challenge anyone to name a single member of the cast from the 'future' portion that had a memorable and relevant role in this film.

Back to the 'Loki could be any villain' theory - you could substitute anyone outside of the above mentioned with anyone else in the X Men roster (except maybe Kitty, but even that one is ambiguous...) with no disruption to this film.

I enjoyed Trask, because it was Tyrion Lannister in a moustache, with less sarcastic quips.

 

[lee1983dixon]

And the downplaying of Bishop's role in the whole thing is criminal.

 

[DA_Champion]

And the downplaying of Bishop's role in the whole thing is criminal.

Why? His role was minor in the movie.

I don't even know what his power is.

 

[DA_Champion]

A big problem with DoFP is that it didn't have any convincing character arcs.

Future mutants - no arc to speak of;
Wolverine - no arc to speak of;
Young Magneto - no arc to speak of;
Bolivar Trask - no arc to speak of;
Young Mystique - wants to kill trask, young Xavier nags her, she still wants to kill Trask, Xavier keeps nagging her, then she no longer wants to kill Trask once the plot demands it;
Young Xavier - Convinced by Wolverine to try and fight back, is half-assing it, then gets communication with his future self, this completes his character arc and he's full on hero past that point;

 

[lee1983dixon]

Why? His role was minor in the movie.

I don't even know what his power is.

Was in reference to the story that it is based on from the comic books, apologies for the confusion, but my issue is exactly that - his role in the movie was minor and it should not have been.

The decision was made simply to make Wolverine a main part of the film, which I see the reasoning for, but don't agree with.

 

[DA_Champion]

I'd actually like to see an X-Men film in the old timeline as a prequel to DoFP.

Looking back on DoFP, I feel like it supplanted two superior movies that could have been:
- The prequel I'm referring to;
- A proper sequel to First Class, involving the Kennedy assassination;

 

[lee1983dixon]

I personally am of the belief that DOFP was basically Singer playing with all of his favourite toys again.

Great idea, and as i've said the future/past and time travel elements were executed well and easy to understand, but I agree, a sequel to FC would have been much more preferential to me - we go from Magneto beginning a life of villainy to him having been captured, just like that!

The parts in DOFP where they allude to the capture of Magneto, how Mystique deals with that and has clearly gone further off the rails, and Xavier's fall into depression and reliance on 'drugs' just make me feel like i've missed a lot of the story that would bridge the two (FC and DOFP). That makes me sad all day.

 

[Rock Sexton]

And what did i say? Your average Joe doesn't vote in those sites, the people who do so are those that care more about moviemaking, why do you think the movies still make so much money? It's definitely not because half the audience disliked it, Transformers is also one of the most liked film pages on Facebook, which means that the 15-25 demographic doesn't find it all that bad. People need to stop confusing film scores with the opinion of the general public, most of them don't care about going to the internet and vote, that's a different type of public.

Facebook IS on the internet chief.

 

[Rock Sexton]

The thing with the Thor films is, they are basically Loki's story too. The first Thor is both Thor and Loki's "origin" story if you will. It's the point where they both separated, chose their paths. Thor into heroism, Loki into villainy. I think in a way Thor has been done a bit of a disservice. I like Hemsworth but he's had the weakest material so far.

Using Loki made narrative sense to the Avengers story though. It gives a reason for Thor to be on Earth, looking for his brother Loki and bringing him home. Lokis motivations are to seek out a throne in place of Asgard. Who views humanity as beneath him. Wants to rule as a benevolent God.

Why use just some other guy instead of Loki?

It's beyond that though ...... who else was going to cause the internal problems between the heroes than the God of Mischief? That's right up his sleeve and fits his persona ...... at the same time it also makes the story personal.

Why? His role was minor in the movie.

I don't even know what his power is.

LOL, I thought the same thing as I was watching the movie.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Was in reference to the story that it is based on from the comic books, apologies for the confusion, but my issue is exactly that - his role in the movie was minor and it should not have been.

The decision was made simply to make Wolverine a main part of the film, which I see the reasoning for, but don't agree with.

Bishop wasn't even in the comic book Days of Future Past. Heck, he wasn't even created until a decade later.

 

[Lord]

Facebook IS on the internet chief.

But Facebook's much more mainstream than rotten tomatoes, really, at most, people i know will know what IMDB is, the general public may have a facebook account to keep in touch with others, while with Rotten Tomatoes, the average Joe won't care about rating a film, a person either likes it or disliked it, most don't really give in depth ratings like people in Rotten Tomatoes do.

If RT was "law" or gave a sence of what the general reaction is like, then all Michael Bay movies would flop, while truly good films would be the blockbusters.

 

[DrCosmic]

I'd actually like to see an X-Men film in the old timeline as a prequel to DoFP.

Looking back on DoFP, I feel like it supplanted two superior movies that could have been:
- The prequel I'm referring to;
- A proper sequel to First Class, involving the Kennedy assassination;

I think that all goes together in one film. What happened in the early 60s, with the Kennedy Assassination and that fallout, Vietnam heating up, the tail end of the classical civil rights movement - y'know, that thing that kinda inspired the core subtext of the X-Men. (Imagine Xavier sitting down with MLK to talk shop. Craziness.) And it would have followed immediately after First Class' story. Conscription heats up not too long after Kennedy's death and you can end the movie on that note... so when we meet Xavier destitute and studentless, there's nothing missing. Mystique could separate from Magneto, all that sounds like one film to me.

There are a number of untapped X-Men villains, but Exodus and his acolytes would have been a really cool way to have a sort of proto-Brotherhood as Magneto learns how to be that guy. Mr. Sinister and the Savage Land could have made for an awesome set of setpieces too though.

Then lead into DOFP, which serves to cap the First Class trilogy AND to set up whatever they want to do with X-Men 4. Call it X-Men: Second Class. Awesomeness. It's really too bad Avengers pushed all these guys to fast track their crossovers. A little breathing room could have made them much more epic.

Was in reference to the story that it is based on from the comic books, apologies for the confusion, but my issue is exactly that - his role in the movie was minor and it should not have been.

The decision was made simply to make Wolverine a main part of the film, which I see the reasoning for, but don't agree with.

Agreed. The way Bishop was handled was absurd. You've got the time traveling guy in a time travel movie and people don't even learn what his power is. Shame.

 

[Rock Sexton]

But Facebook's much more mainstream than rotten tomatoes, really, at most, people i know will know what IMDB is, the general public may have a facebook account to keep in touch with others, while with Rotten Tomatoes, the average Joe won't care about rating a film, a person either likes it or disliked it, most don't really give in depth ratings like people in Rotten Tomatoes do.

If RT was "law" or gave a sence of what the general reaction is like, then all Michael Bay movies would flop, while truly good films would be the blockbusters.

If Facebook was "The Law" then you'd be giving The Avengers more praise .... I mean after all they have over 11 MILLION LIKES. Transformers: Dark of the Moon only had slightly over 1 million.

I'm awaiting your contradictory response.

 

[metaphysician]

You know, something that occurred to me. Whatever the flaws of the franchise, I don't think you could have done Days of Future Past without the messy, often bad, always confusing continuity of the X-Men movies.

 

[lee1983dixon]

Bishop wasn't even in the comic book Days of Future Past. Heck, he wasn't even created until a decade later.

Granted, but of all of the X Men in the film, which one is a time traveller in the comic books...?

If you read on, I say that I understand the reasoning, Wolverine is a familiar character who most people like and it was the only way to get Jackman top billing, which he deserves.

But you have four options: Bishop, the actual time traveller; Wolverine to appease the public; Xavier as alluded to in the story; or Kitty Pride herself, staying true to the comic for DOFP but disrupting the 70's timeline (she wasn't even born at this time per Singer's timeline...).

My point is, I like Bishop and thought his character and storyline were underplayed greatly, and highlights the poor usage of the 'future' mutants in the storytelling other than to try and make it 'look' fresh with the new characters, and give some screen time to Singer's old pals.

Again, apologies for not being entirely thorough.

 

[lee1983dixon]

Agreed. The way Bishop was handled was absurd. You've got the time traveling guy in a time travel movie and people don't even learn what his power is. Shame.

This is exactly what I'm getting at, damn shame

 

[Lord]

If Facebook was "The Law" then you'd be giving The Avengers more praise .... I mean after all they have over 11 MILLION LIKES. Transformers: Dark of the Moon only had slightly over 1 million.

I'm awaiting your contradictory or flimsy response.

The main Transformers film page has some 31 million likes

https://www.facebook.com/transformersmovie?fref=ts

More than any Marvel film page. Being in the 15-20s demographic myself, i see more yound people liking these types of movies more than superhero ones, which is a genre that is ignored by many that don't like the genre, Avatar and Titanic are some of the latest films to actually get an equal record all around the world.

No place really is the "law", cold truth are ticket sales and box office grossing, which shows how many people went to see a certain film, Transformers 3 was already the 3rd in that film series, most of the people who went to see it liked the film. Internet usually tries to make the views of the GA more similar to critical reception, but that is never really the case.

i've already given you plenty of facts, yet you keep insisting that the GA votes on sites like Rotten Tomatoes, but that's simply not true, the people that go there are the ones that care about ratings, most of the public doesn't, hell, they'll just respond to you saying "what matters to me is if i liked it, cevery person has his opinion". Maybe all the people you hang out with go criticise every aspect of a movie and rate it in Rotten Tomatoes, but that's now the reality, otherwise, you wouldn't have TF3 making all the bank it did, or being so popular in the social media mostly used by people in their 14-20s as Facebook is.

 

[Rock Sexton]

The main Transformers film page has some 31 million likes

https://www.facebook.com/transformersmovie?fref=ts

More than any Marvel film page. Being in the 15-20s demographic myself, i see more yound people liking these types of movies more than superhero ones, which is a genre that is ignored by many that don't like the genre, Avatar and Titanic are some of the latest films to actually get an equal record all around the world.

No place really is the "law", cold truth are ticket sales and box office grossing, which shows how many people went to see a certain film, Transformers 3 was already the 3rd in that film series, most of the people who went to see it liked the film. Internet usually tries to make the views of the GA more similar to critical reception, but that is never really the case.

i've already given you plenty of facts, yet you keep insisting that the GA votes on sites like Rotten Tomatoes, but that's simply not true, the people that go there are the ones that care about ratings, most of the public doesn't, hell, they'll just respond to you saying "what matters to me is if i liked it, cevery person has his opinion". Maybe all the people you hang out with go criticise every aspect of a movie and rate it in Rotten Tomatoes, but that's now the reality, otherwise, you wouldn't have TF3 making all the bank it did, or being so popular in the social media mostly used by people in their 14-20s as Facebook is.

I'm not talking about the entire trilogy ..... you brought up T3 as a direct comparison to The Avengers movie and here is their "likes" total:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Transformers-Dark-of-the-Moon/162971073727950

You keep changing the parameters of the argument out of convenience .... your insinuation that Rotten Tomatoes or any other site that ranks movies is simply for ranking nerds is unfounded and nothing more than anecdotal.

 

[Lord]

I'm not talking about the entire trilogy ..... you brought up T3 as a direct comparison to The Avengers movie and here is their "likes" total:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Transformers-Dark-of-the-Moon/162971073727950

You keep changing the parameters of the argument out of convenience .... your insinuation that Rotten Tomatoes or any other site that ranks movies is simply for ranking nerds is unfounded and nothing more than anecdotal.

What? When i brought up Facebook likes i wasn't talking about Transformers 3, newsflash, people who put like in film series rarely give them only to a singular movie, they usualy put it in the first page that pops up about Transformers and make it a day, most don't even remember the subtitles, just "transformers 3" or "the new transformers movie". That page gives news to the entire film series, why should someone go like the singular film pages if they already get the same information and more from the main one? The Harry Potter page is the exact same thing, some of the singular film pages have more than 1 million likes with the exeption of Deathly Hollows.

It's not my fault that you only consider the singular pages, i myself only like the film series pages of franchises, i don't go put my like on Spider-Man 2 if i already have it on the main page, the only exception is the MCU one because it's not official and each character pretty much represents a single franchise each.

Facebook also offers a worldwide view, rotten tomatoes is mostly used by english speaking countries, also, the usual people use Facebook, the ones that go to Rotten Tomatoes are those that like to judge and evaluate movies. There are even fans that inflate the results in Rotten Tomatoes to have their favorite films scored higher or the ones they dislike with a passion to get low scores, with RT they can make a point about reception in that way, while with Facebook, i've never seen anyone bring the likes of a page before.

I myself am part of the 15-25 demographic, and i can assure you that most people don't give a crap about movie scoring, in fact, when they like a movie they go all out and say it deserves a 10, they don't think too deeply about film problems as long as they're entertained. Also, from what i see in people around my age, the facebook likes is very damn close to general perception inside this demographic.

By your logic, then Transformers 4 should logicaly not even gross 1 billion, you actually think it won't?

 

[Rock Sexton]

What? When i brought up Facebook likes i wasn't talking about Transformers 3, newsflash, people who put like in film series rarely give them only to a singular movie, they usualy put it in the first page that pops up about Transformers and make it a day, most don't even remember the subtitles, just "transformers 3" or "the new transformers movie". That page gives news to the entire film series, why should someone go like the singular film pages if they already get the same information and more from the main one? The Harry Potter page is the exact same thing, some of the singular film pages have more than 1 million likes with the exeption of Deathly Hollows.

It's not my fault that you only consider the singular pages, i myself only like the film series pages of franchises, i don't go put my like on Spider-Man 2 if i already have it on the main page, the only exception is the MCU one because it's not official and each character pretty much represents a single franchise each.

Facebook also offers a worldwide view, rotten tomatoes is mostly used by english speaking countries, also, the usual people use Facebook, the ones that go to Rotten Tomatoes are those that like to judge and evaluate movies. There are even fans that inflate the results in Rotten Tomatoes to have their favorite films scored higher or the ones they dislike with a passion to get low scores, with RT they can make a point about reception in that way, while with Facebook, i've never seen anyone bring the likes of a page before.

I myself am part of the 15-25 demographic, and i can assure you that most people don't give a crap about movie scoring, in fact, when they like a movie they go all out and say it deserves a 10, they don't think too deeply about film problems as long as they're entertained. Also, from what i see in people around my age, the facebook likes is very damn close to general perception inside this demographic.

By your logic, then Transformers 4 should logicaly not even gross 1 billion, you actually think it won't?

You're changing the subject again. This conversation isn't about Transformer movies generating a billion dollars. You made the following comment:

Transformers 3 only made around 350 million less than Avengers, are you telling me that can't be called a hollow film, even though the vocal minority in the internet hates it with a passion.

You attempted to draw a parallel that does not support the idea that The Avengers is a hollow movie and it was entirely based on money ..... except for the fact that across the board - from internet nerd to critic to the public - it is a movie that is loved. The obscure minority you're a part of is not the same as the vocal minority internet which hates Transformers.

Your personal experience about how far you're willing to go on Facebook in order to show your support for a movie is irrelevant to the conversation. You do not speak for the the masses. If anything you're demonstrating how one can't get a true idea of what the public thinks about a singular film from Facebook if they're too lazy to click like for the actual movie they saw. But again this is just suggestive on your point, not proven. You even suggest some wild scheme of people manipulating RT ratings, which of course is baseless.