Apocalypse X-Men Apocalypse News and Discussion

[psylockolussus]

Not to me.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

With time-travel, everything changes.

Everyone born since timeline B is created is a different person than they were in timeline A. The genetics would be different, as would their experiences, both of which are what makes someone who they are. They got the same actors to portray the ones who received little visible change for the sake of practicality. And in a universe with so many recasts/retcons, I don't see the problem with the opposite scenario -- casting the same actor for the moments where the person should look slightly/completely different.

They can keep what they want, and discard what they don't. Contrived and coincidental? Yes. Worth it? Yes.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Not only that there are factors such as gender, for the films, the x gene.

Theres no telling if you delayed your birthdate or make a wayfor your parents to make a baby earlier that it would still be you. To make it simple, imo stick with the ages that were established in timeline A.

Because 1:They want to move forward completly Ignoring everything In
Timeline A and 2:Putting the original cast back In new future was them
trying to have it both ways

 

[marvelrobbins]

With time-travel, everything changes.

Everyone in timeline B is a different person than in timeline A. The genetics would be different, as would their experiences, both of which are what makes someone who they are. They got the same actors to portray the ones who received little visible change for the sake of practicality. And in a universe with so many recasts/retcons, I don't see the problem with the opposite scenario -- casting the same actor for the moments where the person should look slightly/completely different.

Let's make this all very simple going Into Apocalypse and anything that followes
these are what Is In contunity

the DOFP post credit scene of Apocalypse

First Class

The 1973 events of DOFP from wolverine waking up In bed with women to
Mysique as stryker finding wolverine

the new future wolverine wakes up In showing where X-Men will be In 50 years.

Hugh jackman will still be playing wolverine

If,and this Is a big If,they want to do more In new future then other OT actors used In new future ending of DOFP could return.The question Is will
they.

The X-Men films Is now a FC+Hugh jackman+whoever Is cast In future franchise now.

 

[kasjan]

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
What would make Worthinghton senior to make baby earlier? If he would make sex with different woman, then this baby would it be still Warren (mutant)?

 

[Great Mind(s)]

Is Angel going to be 10 in Apocalypse? Because he would have to have been born before DOFP to be a teen/young adult. And he will not be the same character. Sperm die and new sperm are created, this would be a different seed than the one that spawned Angel of X3. But we could say his father carries the bird wing X-gene and named his kid Warren regardless.

 

[Link]

Well, i wasn't overly fond of the X3 Angel so i wouldn't mind seeing a new actor as Archangel in Apocalypse. Still hopefully they won't do this because that would result in more continuity errors.

 

[kasjan]

All those ideas (like Apocalypse in Erik body) comes from Kinberg, when Singer will start his job , fortunately he will again rewrite Kinberg's mistakes.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Who caressss about continuity. If ignoring when Eric and Charles met yielded one of the best X-Men movies, I say they can ignore whatever the hell they want as long as the story is worth it.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Kinberg has basicly said they aren't going to abide by ages In OT.It's more than just speculation now.

So those who want archangel In Apocalypse you may get your wish.

It confirms my fears from moment we first got word they would be erasing
OT through timeline.

Well if you go with OT and wolverine films are erased there aren't any COntunity errors.

 

[GuestStar2004]

So has he actually said we could see angel in the 80s?

 

[marvelrobbins]

So has he actually said we could see angel in the 80s?

He said In new timeline characters may have been born earlier.

That Immedetly opens door for angel In Apocalypse if they choice.However
I don't he mentioned that for no reason.

Hell they could stick Blink In Apocalypse if they chooce to.Kinberg once mentioned characters from Age of apocalypse being In film and drawing a lot from AoA.That Is how many became aware of Blink.

 

[Great Mind(s)]

That really makes no sense on a number of levels.

 

[marvelrobbins]

That really makes no sense on a number of levels.

I didn't say it does.Or that I like it but that's what Kinberg and his characters may be born earlier in "new Timeline" comments may be hinting at.

It may be turning out more like Nutrek than some thought.

 

[Great Mind(s)]

I'm just saying for Kinberg, it makes no sense. If Angel would be a teenager or something with Jean and Scott in Apocalypse, he'd have to be born before 1973, ie before the timeline changes. And obviously, it doesn't really make sense that someone could be born earlier because they wouldn't be the same person.

They should just friggin do another movie set in the OT time with Ben Foster reprising his role, he's a real good actor. They could introduce a young child Angel in Apocalypse and maybe have a cliffhanger ending where the kid gets captured. We never saw Angel at the end of DOFP, so he could already be Archangel somewhere in the OT timeline.

 

[GuestStar2004]

having just watched the video i will say i personally don't think angel will be in apocalypse, after all kinberg does say just before he talks about the age thing that there has been many different horsemen in the comics and that seems to come first and foremost when the idea of angel pops up

but i do believe the thing about ages being changed abit

 

[def28]

The only character that would require age changing is Angel though.

Everyone else was at the end of DOFP, or wouldn't require a drastic change. I guess maybe Jubilee?

I am shocked many X-Men fans here are more concerned with continuity in X3 as opposed to seeing one of the original 5 and the main Horsmen. X3 is done the producers said forget about it. Just what everyone wanted. They will nitpick what they want if it works in their storytelling.

 

[psylockolussus]

I'm just saying for Kinberg, it makes no sense. If Angel would be a teenager or something with Jean and Scott in Apocalypse, he'd have to be born before 1973, ie before the timeline changes. And obviously, it doesn't really make sense that someone could be born earlier because they wouldn't be the same person.

They should just friggin do another movie set in the OT time with Ben Foster reprising his role, he's a real good actor. They could introduce a young child Angel in Apocalypse and maybe have a cliffhanger ending where the kid gets captured. We never saw Angel at the end of DOFP, so he could already be Archangel somewhere in the OT timeline.

Agreed let Ben Foster comeback as Angel.

And why is Archangel so important to be introduced inthis film that they need to disregard the age of the Angel thaatwe saw in X3? Because he was a horseman in the comics? Even if hes one of the horsemen in this film that wouldnt have an impact to the X-Men like it did in the comics. .

Personally Id rather seeWolverine as the horseman, let Kurt join the team and throw in cameos for Bobby, Warren, Kitty, Pete as kids or babies being turn over to the XMansion.

Also they could use Polaris, Sunfire, Dazzler in Apocalypse instead of using Angel.

 

[psylockolussus]

Who caressss about continuity. If ignoring when Eric and Charles met yielded one of the best X-Men movies, I say they can ignore whatever the hell they want as long as the story is worth it.

Thats different though and its not like Angel is the only option to be a horseman of Apocalyse. And its not like they cant have new horsemen in the other movies.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Because of time travel In DOFP everything In trilogy and the wolverine solo films are out the window. Kinberg's comments do nothing to say these are wrong thoughts.

They could prove this wrong but so far they have done nothing to challenge this In their comments.

And it's not just Last Stand and origins that you need to forget about.

 

[MarvelU]

I am fine with Angel in 1980, but still doesn't mean we will see him. I can't wait to see who they choose for the 4 horsemen.

 

[GuestStar2004]

It's cool that they already know who will be the horsemen though, wolverine being likely one

 

[BMM]

Ben Foster has always been my least favorite casting choice of the franchise, so the possibility of recasting Angel is fine by me.

 

[DC Batman]

Yep, exactly. I already find it a little hard to believe that Kitty, Bobby, etc. are still themselves in the future-- different birth dates are even more of a stretch.

Lol this series is quite a mess, but I really enjoyed Days of Future Past, First Class, The Wolverine, and X-men 1 and 2. I guess we all just have to accept the major changes that will happen in Apocalypse.

 

[marvelrobbins]

After the WB Panel Apocalypse as well as Cap 3 will have something to go upagainst with
Elements takes from the Dark Knight returns In BVS and a better than expected Wonder woman outfit.