GuestStar2004
Avenger
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2004
- Messages
- 23,861
- Reaction score
- 1,723
- Points
- 103
It was apocalyptic, no pun intended.
Then why say it? its still not clever!
Xenforo Cloud upgraded our forum to XenForo version 2.3.4. This update has created styling issues to our current templates.
Starting January 9th, site maintenance is ongoing until further notice, but please report any other issues you may experience so we can look into.
We apologize for the inconvenience.
It was apocalyptic, no pun intended.
Aren't they rebooting the franchise?
I heard that the Xmen may finally be coming to the MCU. That may be the reason that the Inhumans got pushed back to an unknown date.
Lets all pray!
No, none of this is true.
What do you make of this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aa0KO597JzE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf3c12ASl_E
The effort required to make that look natural pretty much ensures the pun was intended.It was apocalyptic, no pun intended.
What do you make of this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aa0KO597JzE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf3c12ASl_E
Those were some great discussions that raised valid points and covered many of the frustations people have with the X-Men series.
I can't watch when they begin by saying "I feel like the X-Men have been rebooted so many times already". Despite it's flaws X-Men has the longest running continuity of all the superhero franchises. Hugh Jackman has played the Wolverine character for 17 years. Continuity errors and retcons are not the same as a reboot.
You can make an argument that the franchise was "reset" with DoFP but the original films still lead up to those events and are still part of the established film universe. It's not the same as the resets that have occurred with Batman or Spider-Man.
I feel that Xmen especially has threats that can't be solved in one movie. Someone like Apocalypse needs 2 and I dream of a Phoenix Saga having 3 movies. I feel XA suffered because everything was done so fast.
Apocalypse needs two movies? He is a mid-level villian in the comics who has been defeated by characters like Cyclops and Jean without Phoenix Force. And has only been a villian for the X-Men on two occasions.
He has only really had one good story and this film was based on that. It was pretty short and was featured in the spin-off X-Men series X-Factor instead of the main series.
Apocalypse isn't very central to the X-Men. He was just overhyped in other media lik X-Men: Evolution which build him up for three seasons, made him more powerful than his comic counterpart, and made him final villian.
Except for his simplistic plans, those things were fault of the filmmakers. His overall appearance was being mocked (an appearance Singer wanted), writing scenes like "Leaaarniiinngg", his voice went through multiple versions in trailers.... he was dead on arrival.Ironically, for all the talk of Apocalypse needing two movies, I think the character had too much screentime in XM:A.
Focusing on Apocalypse highlighted the weaknesses - his simplistic plans, the questionable make-up, the hammy dialogue...
Funny how you're dragging X-Men: Evolution as not being legit enough a source as comics yet when people defend Magneto and Storm being horsemen in the movie they bring up X-Men: Evolution.Apocalypse isn't very central to the X-Men. He was just overhyped in other media lik X-Men: Evolution which build him up for three seasons, made him more powerful than his comic counterpart, and made him final villian.
Funny how you're dragging X-Men: Evolution as not being legit enough a source as comics yet when people defend Magneto and Storm being horsemen in the movie they bring up X-Men: Evolution.
Not to mention Oscar Isaac himself mentioned X-Men: Evolution Apocalypse as one of the inspirations for the movie look of Apocalypse who you defend all the time.
Apocalypse also was very popular for TAS in which he had many episodes and where the filmmakers seemed to even take the "from the ashes of the world we'll build a better one" line from.
But it's no surprise that you're cherrypicking what sources need to be taken into account.
I just finished watching the film with commentary from Singer and Kinberg. It made me appreciate the film a little more.
I do find the film to be a little cheesy and a step down from its predecessor, but I think it's a decent enough X-Men film and not XMO:W bad.
I agree! What things about the film do appreciate more now? I haven't listened to the commentary.I just finished watching the film with commentary from Singer and Kinberg. It made me appreciate the film a little more.
I do find the film to be a little cheesy and a step down from its predecessor, but I think it's a decent enough X-Men film and not XMO:W bad.
Getting rid of Mystique and Erik would have been my first move, as that could have allowed characters like Storm, Psylocke, Archangel, Scotty and Kurt to get a bigger role. I would have removed Jubilee also as she doesn't need to be introduced along with Kurt, Jean, Scott, Warren, Betsy in the same movie. No Peter and Moira too. Have Xavier and Beast scout around the globe, save Kurt in that circus or cage match and when they meet Storm in Cairo, they accidentally found Apocalypse's tomb instead of Moira randomly waking up Apocalypse from a long nap. While Archangel could have been the star horseman. I'd have d listers as the other horsemen.