Apocalypse These Timelines Are So Confusing. Continuity Errors.

[ApophènX]

It doesn't have to follow the rules of reality, but it should have a functioning internal logic of its own, espeically as a piece of a larger whole. There's only so much a fan can ignore before the house of cards collapses. Your mileage will vary, but the franchise is a laughing stock to some and has been for a while for others. It's a shame it continues to alienate people. As you said, its more coherent thematically, so it's a shame the series can't strive to be both.

Maybe not bad continuity. Definitely bad story-telling. The scene promised a lot. It was the chosen symbol of a fresh start and a changed timeline.

If we could go back 2 years and ask, do you really think anyone would expect the next film to pick up on this thread with Logan in captivity as if nothing had happened?

it as a really clear internal functioning logic to me. It's what i try to explain the most with my post here. What i'ms saying is most are not really looking for it. because people prefer to tear apart what they don't understand.

Who cares about this scene in the end of DoFP, it is both a reference to X and has a meaning of his own. It fits the on going theme of the trilogy. They promised nothing, still getting back to subjectivity. i'm sorry if you had great hopes but it should not keep you from enjoying what they did here.

In a way they surprised you. but i understand most people don't like cyclical story telling since we lived in a really forward era, and have a line representation of time. They still give a weapon x moment and a conclusion to Logan ark's that echoes X1, it's ot nothing and clearly not non-coherent.

 

[henzINNIT]

it as a really clear internal functioning logic to me. It's what i try to explain the most with my post here. What i'ms saying is most are not really looking for it. because people prefer to tear apart what they don't understand.

Who cares about this scene in the end of DoFP, it is both a reference to X and has a meaning of his own. It fits the on going theme of the trilogy. They promised nothing, still getting back to subjectivity. i'm sorry if you had great hopes but it should not keep you from enjoying what they did here.

In a way they surprised you. but i understand most people don't like cyclical story telling since we lived in a really forward era, and have a line representation of time. They still give a weapon x moment and a conclusion to Logan ark's that echoes X1, it's ot nothing and clearly not non-coherent.

I respectfully disagree. You've made some interesting comparisons and analysis but that doesn't nullify the holes that have plagued the franchise for years. Thematic parrallels are great but you still have Emma Frost as a grown woman in the 60's and a teen in the 80's (or countless other examples).

 

[Kanon]

The fact that we are going to such mental gymnastics as inserting hypothetical time travellers to try and make sense of the continuity (and failing at that), speaks lenghts of the reasons the franchise makes a fraction of the BO of lesser know properties.

And we are fans, we love to make hypothesis about the plot, and even so, we ourselves are tired and giving up on this mess of continuity. Imagine a regular joe trying to piece this together

 

[Mutant 77]

The fact that we are going to such mental gymnastics as inserting hypothetical time travellers to try and make sense of the continuity (and failing at that), speaks lenghts of the reasons the franchise makes a fraction of the BO of lesser know properties.

And we are fans, we love to make hypothesis about the plot, and even so, we ourselves are tired and giving up on this mess of continuity. Imagine a regular joe trying to piece this together

I know where you're coming from...

 

[ApophènX]

I respectfully disagree. You've made some interesting comparisons and analysis but that doesn't nullify the holes that have plagued the franchise for years. Thematic parrallels are great but you still have Emma Frost as a grown woman in the 60's and a teen (or countless other examples).

Those are not relevant in terms of meaning. What is great in a movie is not what he shows, even if it is important and mostly the manner to show it, but what he shows not. What is convey with clues and action (the way the elements in the films interract). What is not always told, the underling structur that support where they want to take you.

Emma frost had no purpose. She was there to show the bad guy in FC doesn't give a **** about woman. Other than that She is an irrelevant details to me. Now i agree those details can make a world much more rich and coherent for a fan. I still think the movie was highly coherent and they focused their attentions on other details that had more depth for the story told here. It is a movie and it will never be as dense as the comic or a tv shows wich could maybe fit more the family aspect of the x-men. Here we have a cinematic experience with a message, what to ask more you know, a coeherent vision. But as i told you we focus differently, may not look coherent to you, does for me.

@Kanon: honestly i'm a regular joe, i catched the movie i missed, rewatched the OT which i saw as a kid before watching XMA and it didn't felt messy to me, not at all. because i have my own manner of looking at it maybe, but it felt pretty coherent.

What was interesting to me about time travel was the depth and emotional complexity they get out of it. And this is what drive DoFP and XMA, finish to start. The time travel allow to have parallels beetwen two trilogy giving a message by the story and by the manner to tell it. They give an amazing feeling of re-construction and correction of the mistakes from the past and the future. This blurrs limits, it shadows the bounderies. Re-arranging emotional structure in this way is very powerfull for me.

 

[StormC]

The fact that we are going to such mental gymnastics as inserting hypothetical time travellers to try and make sense of the continuity (and failing at that), speaks lenghts of the reasons the franchise makes a fraction of the BO of lesser know properties.

And we are fans, we love to make hypothesis about the plot, and even so, we ourselves are tired and giving up on this mess of continuity. Imagine a regular joe trying to piece this together

I feel like regular joes aren't really gonna care that much. Dedicated fans are gonna rewatch the movies and pick all this stuff up, but most of the GA probably doesn't remember/notice as much unless they're... well, dedicated fans.

 

[Frankeh]

I feel like regular joes aren't really gonna care that much.

But it could be argued regular joes aren't as invested in this franchise precisely because the continuity is all over the place.

 

[Kanon]

I feel like regular joes aren't really gonna care that much. Dedicated fans are gonna rewatch the movies and pick all this stuff up, but most of the GA probably doesn't remember/notice as much unless they're... well, dedicated fans.

But it could be argued regular joes aren't as invested in this franchise precisely because the continuity is all over the place.

I think it doesn't take much to make some basic questions like why Mystique was a villain trying to kill Xavier with a smile on her face, and now is like her half sister. And nitpick is the name of the game nowadays, people love to point "errors" in movies, and X-Men is giving them an easy target.

 

[Flint Marko]

I think there are a number of reasons why this franchise has really failed to capture the audience's attention in ways other superhero franchises have. The continuity certainly doesn't help, but I don't think it's the main reason.

 

[henzINNIT]

I think continuity is a by-product of the main reason. The franchise has struggled to capture attention because of its chronic lack of forward momentum. X-Men and X2 built toward something. TLS on the other hand created a ton of narrative dead-ends, and the following films have simply been sticking things together with varying levels of success. All these plot holes are the scars of a wounded series.

First Class earned enough good will to move forward successfully. As much as I love the film, DOFP stunted that progression again by re-establishing the original cast and muddying the water. Moving forward from there in either direction was bound to alienate someone. I've spoken to lots of "casual" fans and none of them know what is going on.

 

[marvelrobbins]

I think continuity is a by-product of the main reason. The franchise has struggled to capture attention because of its chronic lack of forward momentum. X-Men and X2 built toward something. TLS on the other hand created a ton of narrative dead-ends, and the following films have simply been sticking things together with varying levels of success. All these plot holes are the scars of a wounded series.

First Class earned enough good will to move forward successfully. As much as I love the film, DOFP stunted that progression again by re-establishing the original cast and muddying the water. Moving forward from there in either direction was bound to alienate someone. I've spoken to lots of "casual" fans and none of them know what is going on.

first class was heavily promated at time as showing the back story of xavier and magneto.it had hugh jackman in cameo reprising as wolverine.it even had a shot by shot recreation of begining of first X-men.it was known at the time jackman would be back in another wolverine film.

DOFP erased original trilogy from continuity.back in 2014 i warned people
that wasn't good for fans of original trilogy.

the idea first class was so great and original cast such a burden isn't born out by any evidance.Except for 5 minute cameo where jackman says nothing apocalypse is all new cast.and box office doesn't bore that out.last stand made ton of money even though critics didn't like that film eather and liked it on audences at RT is lower than apocalypse.74% of audences liked apocalyse compared to 62% who liked Last stand.

I know there is tendacy for people now to bash all X-men films except for First Class and deadpool but facts are facts.

Apocalypse is not a prequel to original trilogy.It is sequel to First Class and
1973 parts of DOFP.

 

[iacobusleo]

I think continuity is a by-product of the main reason. The franchise has struggled to capture attention because of its chronic lack of forward momentum. X-Men and X2 built toward something. TLS on the other hand created a ton of narrative dead-ends, and the following films have simply been sticking things together with varying levels of success. All these plot holes are the scars of a wounded series.

First Class earned enough good will to move forward successfully. As much as I love the film, DOFP stunted that progression again by re-establishing the original cast and muddying the water. Moving forward from there in either direction was bound to alienate someone. I've spoken to lots of "casual" fans and none of them know what is going on.

I agree about the plot holes being the scars of a wounded series, but honestly where are all these casual fans who are confused about what's going on coming from?

I've shared my love of the movies with a number of people and 'continuity issues' has rarely come up. They seem pretty accepting of stuff like 'Xavier transferred his consciousness into a twin' or 'Wolverine regains his adamantium off-screen (indeed many forgot he lost his adamantium in The Wolverine)', ESPECIALLY in a movie franchise that skips decades at a time when telling its stories.

Casual audiences tend to remember the broad strokes. For example, my friend recently said that all she remembered from Origins: Wolverine is that Wolverine and Sabretooth were brothers, and that Wolverine got his memories wiped by an adamantium bullet. She does not know or care there are two Emma Frosts (or indeed, that there is even such a character in the franchise).

The broad strokes of the X-movies still hold up relatively well. It's in the details where things fall apart, and the details is where the internet geeks' and dedicated fans' expertise lie, so of course the continuity is a laughing stock on those type of websites (which to be fair has made up a significant percentage of the Internet). But I've yet to find a casual fan who has had any problems with it outside the Internet, specifically since they only tend to watch these movies once, maybe twice at most.

 

[henzINNIT]

first class was heavily promated at time as showing the back story of xavier and magneto.it had hugh jackman in cameo reprising as wolverine.it even had a shot by shot recreation of begining of first X-men.it was known at the time jackman would be back in another wolverine film.

DOFP erased original trilogy from continuity.back in 2014 i warned people
that wasn't good for fans of original trilogy.

the idea first class was so great and original cast such a burden isn't born out by any evidance.Except for 5 minute cameo where jackman says nothing apocalypse is all new cast.and box office doesn't bore that out.last stand made ton of money even though critics didn't like that film eather and liked it on audences at RT is lower than apocalypse.74% of audences liked apocalyse compared to 62% who liked Last stand.

I know there is tendacy for people now to bash all X-men films except for First Class and deadpool but facts are facts.

Apocalypse is not a prequel to original trilogy.It is sequel to First Class and
1973 parts of DOFP.

You mis-understood me. The OT cast in DOFP were not a burden. Quite the opposite in fact. The problem was that people liked them, were happy to see them return, and would therefore be disappointed when they didn't again. First Class could have had a nice little run with the cast it assembled, but most of them were jettisoned for DOFP.

Apocalypse was technically a 3rd part, but in many ways it was another reboot as it had to introduce a new cast and once again distance itself from the originals.

I agree about the plot holes being the scars of a wounded series, but honestly where are all these casual fans who are confused about what's going on coming from?

I've shared my love of the movies with a number of people and 'continuity issues' has rarely come up. They seem pretty accepting of stuff like 'Xavier transferred his consciousness into a twin' or 'Wolverine regains his adamantium off-screen (indeed many forgot he lost his adamantium in The Wolverine)', ESPECIALLY in a movie franchise that skips decades at a time when telling its stories.

Casual audiences tend to remember the broad strokes. For example, my friend recently said that all she remembered from Origins: Wolverine is that Wolverine and Sabretooth were brothers, and that Wolverine got his memories wiped by an adamantium bullet. She does not know or care there are two Emma Frosts (or indeed, that there is even such a character in the franchise).

The broad strokes of the X-movies still hold up relatively well. It's in the details where things fall apart, and the details is where the internet geeks' and dedicated fans' expertise lie, so of course the continuity is a laughing stock on those type of websites (which to be fair has made up a significant percentage of the Internet). But I've yet to find a casual fan who has had any problems with it outside the Internet, specifically since they only tend to watch these movies once, maybe twice at most.

I agree for the most part. A vast majority of things that bug me will be shrugged off or not even noticed by a lot of people.

Alternatively, we're getting to a stage where the franchise is so convoluted and self-referencing that you need to know a fair bit to appreciate it. So you're either so casual you're missing out, or you're so invested that you're getting annoyed.

The questions I was asked most by random people were "is this in the past again?", "are they time travelling again?" and of course "is Wolverine in it?". Maybe it's anecdotal, but I get the feeling that the GA are going to start needing a map to plot this franchise out. I fear the broad strokes fans are going to become more and more confused when major differences start cropping up because they don't fully appreciate the effects of the DOFP clean slate.

 

[iacobusleo]

You mis-understood me. The OT cast in DOFP were not a burden. Quite the opposite in fact. The problem was that people liked them, were happy to see them return, and would therefore be disappointed when they didn't again. First Class could have had a nice little run with the cast it assembled, but most of them were jettisoned for DOFP.

Apocalypse was technically a 3rd part, but in many ways it was another reboot as it had to introduce a new cast and once again distance itself from the originals.

With Apocalypse, we have now a solid trilogy of quasi-reboots/set up in the same franchise (X1, FC and Apocalypse). That's too much I think, but understandable considering the circumstances. Only FC manages to be both a reboot/set up of the new team AND tell a complete story in its own right, both X1 and Apocalypse are obviously just introductions with no real pay off.

This is why I'm very puzzled why people are calling for a reboot yet AGAIN. When are we ever going to delve into the psychology of characters not named Wolverine (and ever since FC and DOFP did wonders with them, Xavier, Magneto and Mystique) and expand on them? We are left in a position where we can just jump straight in and explore the new characters by the next movie (and these new characters do not have the baggage of the previous trilogies), why throw that away?

I agree for the most part. A vast majority of things that bug me will be shrugged off or not even noticed by a lot of people.

Alternatively, we're getting to a stage where the franchise is so convoluted and self-referencing that you need to know a fair bit to appreciate it. So you're either so casual you're missing out, or you're so invested that you're getting annoyed.

The questions I was asked most by random people were "is this in the past again?", "are they time travelling again?" and of course "is Wolverine in it?". Maybe it's anecdotal, but I get the feeling that the GA are going to start needing a map to plot this franchise out. I fear the broad strokes fans are going to become more and more confused when major differences start cropping up because they don't fully appreciate the effects of the DOFP clean slate.

And this is I think why the box office for this franchise seems to be reaching its ceiling. With the MCU, they pump out origin stories every few years with a brand new character as a way to introduce new viewers to their world. The X-Men does not have the luxury of having so many movies with brand new characters (yet). It is in effect one giant story that spans decades and two different timelines. It has actually become the most niche and geeky of the comic book franchises. XD

While I do agree with you, I don't think things are as dire because Apocalypse' greatest sin was that its an origin movie and a rehash yet again, so depending on how things are pulled off the next trilogy can dissociate itself from the previous movies (as long it does not start crashing into the 2000s and recasting major characters who are supposed to be the same age as in the OT, i.e. a recast for Rogue in the 2000s).

And in my experience the casual fans seem the most happiest with the franchise regardless of plot holes, provided the movie is entertaining enough (hell The Wolverine is the most self-contained and least problematic continuity-wise story of the bunch but is dismissed by a lot of my friends as the worst because it's slow and boring; alternatively TLS and Origins:Wolverine despite all its faults seem to be perceived positively by my friends simply because they are not boring).

It's hard to determine how a truly fresh viewer would perceive Apocalypse though considering the people I've watched with have a basic knowledge of the X-Men status quo (Jean is the most powerful X-Man, Xavier and Magneto are frenemies, Mystique used to be evil but now she's good). It would be interesting to let Apocalypse be the first X-Men movie somebody has ever watched and see whether they understand what's going on.

 

[dax]

actually it is. Watching or having knowledge of the events of Origins is NOT required material to watch or understand any of the films. Most of the stuff you mentioned is pretty generic, minor and frankly inconsequential. Specific plot points and characters dont pop up. Its not like say ignoring X3, which would make DOFP very confusing. There are stuff in Origins that would make latter films confusing bc it is inconsistent but the actual major stuff is not referenced. Ignoring Origins has no impact on The Wolverine, FC or DOFP.

But it has impact on Apocalypse because it showed Wolverine and Cyclops going through the same events as they did in Origins. So again, it's not that simple to ignore the film when another film is repeating the events of Origins. If Wolverine wasn't in First Class, then yes it would be easy to ignore Origins since that movie has nothing to do with him but he's there. If the Wolverine left out Kayla's voiceover and DOFP hadn't showed any clips of Origins, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

2- Not a proof.

If Origins was really set in 1979, then neither Stryker nor his staff would want to step foot on Three Mile Island. None of them would've survived the radiation that's still surrounding the island.

I'm not sure about the "2002" picture. The picture was taken a few years before?

I'm not sure if X2 is even set in 2004. According to Cyclops, the movie is set 1 month after X1 which showed an overhead shot of the World Trade Center and those towers were destroyed by the September 11th attacks in 2001. Plus, when Pyro turns on the radio, we hear *NSYNC singing "Bye Bye Bye" and the song was released on January 11, 2000 so that would imply that both X1 and X2 are set in 2000.

 

[GuestStar2004]

With Apocalypse, we have now a solid trilogy of quasi-reboots/set up in the same franchise (X1, FC and Apocalypse). That's too much I think, but understandable considering the circumstances. Only FC manages to be both a reboot/set up of the new team AND tell a complete story in its own right, both X1 and Apocalypse are obviously just introductions with no real pay off.

Thing about the MCU is that is everyone seeing all these movies? did everyone who see civil war watch ant man? there is most definitely continuity between all the films that need you to have watched them all and while the films are there to watch if you wanna catch up its pretty clear that more people went to see civil war for the gimmick hype rather then wanting to see the next part of each individual story for certain characters

 

[Havok83]

Thing about the MCU is that is everyone seeing all these movies? did everyone who see civil war watch ant man? there is most definitely continuity between all the films that need you to have watched them all and while the films are there to watch if you wanna catch up its pretty clear that more people went to see civil war for the gimmick hype rather then wanting to see the next part of each individual story for certain characters

You do not need to watch all the MCU films. Ant-Man was not required material for CW. No everyone is not watching all the films bc its not necessary. For CW speficially, the previous 2 Captain America films and Age of Ultron are really all thats needed and Id venture to say most who saw it did at least watch AoU

 

[ApophènX]

With Apocalypse, we have now a solid trilogy of quasi-reboots/set up in the same franchise (X1, FC and Apocalypse). That's too much I think, but understandable considering the circumstances. Only FC manages to be both a reboot/set up of the new team AND tell a complete story in its own right, both X1 and Apocalypse are obviously just introductions with no real pay off

I disagree. I don't know what you call real pay off but the movie has the birth of Magneto and Professor X and close the ark of them, Mystique and Wolverine. Quicksilver also. It clearly serve as an introduction but is also reconstruction of X3, of the house, of consoliding the family. It follow the logic of DoFP that time repeat itself with ripples changing and give the feeling of both new and old. Like in FC we end with a creator/father figure being dismissed. It clearly can be a closure to both trilogy.

I think it was bold to make a movie that is both closure and restart. In a franchise where they do not follow the rules of time this was clearly misleading and manny people found the movie messy, but that's what he does, it's supposes to be Apocalypse. In all this mess, still very coherent in the basements, we assist to a clarification, a enlightning. In the end everything is clear, has been cleared. And it support the Proffesor and his X-Men state of mind. Confidence in the foudation, in both past and futur.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Off-screen, there are other mutants jumping around in time (like Cable or someone) changing the timeline.

Maybe Superboy Prime was punching reality again! [BLACKOUT]Wrong universe, I know![/BLACKOUT]

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Apocalypse is not a prequel to original trilogy. It is sequel to First Class and 1973 parts of DOFP.

Exactly!

 

[Mutant 77]

FIRST CLASS was a soft reboot, so some timeline alteration happened long time before 1962 and originated FIRST CLASS and DAYS OF FUTURE PAST.

There are three timelines... so far. Cable will mess with time again.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Cable messing with time is gonna make having an X23 spin off tricky

At this point i don't feel there is any point trying to figure out the timeline because its likely to just get harder as the films progress.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

At this point i don't feel there is any point trying to figure out the timeline because its likely to just get harder as the films progress.

I think that's frustratingly true. After hours of head-scratching you could finally get to a place where the pieces fit at least pretty well - only for something else to come along and blow the whole thing out of the water. I'm kinda in two minds on it. I find it fascinating as a mental exercise to try to make order of things like this - but the flipside is that all your hard work suddenly gets wiped out by something from left field!

 

[Mutant 77]

I think that's frustratingly true. After hours of head-scratching you could finally get to a place where the pieces fit at least pretty well - only for something else to come along and blow the whole thing out of the water. I'm kinda in two minds on it. I find it fascinating as a mental exercise to try to make order of things like this - but the flipside is that all your hard work suddenly gets wiped out by something from left field!

I'm ready to accomodate the next three movies and Logan for "X-CONTINUITY". I will try my best. Promise.

 

[Mutant 77]

But it has impact on Apocalypse because it showed Wolverine and Cyclops going through the same events as they did in Origins. So again, it's not that simple to ignore the film when another film is repeating the events of Origins. If Wolverine wasn't in First Class, then yes it would be easy to ignore Origins since that movie has nothing to do with him but he's there. If the Wolverine left out Kayla's voiceover and DOFP hadn't showed any clips of Origins, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.


If Origins was really set in 1979, then neither Stryker nor his staff would want to step foot on Three Mile Island. None of them would've survived the radiation that's still surrounding the island.



I'm not sure if X2 is even set in 2004. According to Cyclops, the movie is set 1 month after X1 which showed an overhead shot of the World Trade Center and those towers were destroyed by the September 11th attacks in 2001. Plus, when Pyro turns on the radio, we hear *NSYNC singing "Bye Bye Bye" and the song was released on January 11, 2000 so that would imply that both X1 and X2 are set in 2000.

1- 1983. We can assume the "3 Miles Island Incident" which happened in the X-Men universe was vastly different from its counterpart in ours anyway.

2- 1 month? Cyclops did mention Jean's powers were oscillating, just that. He didn't say just ONE MONTH passed by since X1.
Again, we're dealing with an alternate dimension. The towers never crumbled down.