Discussion in 'X-Men: Dark Phoenix' started by Thread Manager, May 27, 2018.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]541007[/split]
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]540689[/split]
Other than villains...
Pretty much every X-Men film features at least one notable recast, with building disregard for continuity each time. I wonder if Dark Phoenix will break the rule.
Props to "The Wolverine" for achieving the impossible, telling a story within continuity with no recasts.
Lamar Johnson as the new Bishop?
They might not be a recast in this but Fox wins again by making Lilandra the Queen of the Skrulls. it sounds like a crazy fan fiction! Lmao! I don't know why they always give us something to complain about. Oh yes Kinberg!
And Dazzler is a party DJ instead of a popstar! How Paris Hilton of her!
What???!! This statement makes no sense. AT ALL. Singer was the director. All choices made in X-men Apocalypse or any other movie he directs are ultimately his final decision and approval as director. If something wasn't working in a film, he's responsible for fixing it. He has the power to change anything from story, character arcs, where an actor should stand or how they will move, in some cases what type of performance an actor should give for a particular scene, how characters should look, to production design, to visual effects style, to shot choices, has the final say as to how the shots look and how they should be blended together, how many takes to do of a particular scene or scenes, to what kind of film score a scene needs. That's the director's job.....both in pre-production, production and post-production. He's in charge of that. People need to educate themselves on film terminology and descriptors.
You can also blame his current diminished presence professionally to some of the decisions he's made in his personal life that seem to have spilled out into his professional life. Studios have to consider all these factors.
Young Jean, also Jean's mom and dad. The question is how "notable" their roles will be.
Apocalypse was hampered by studio demands to get the film out on its announced date. Had Singer and Kinberg been given another year, they probably could've put out a much better film.
Here's what we know:
* Singer pitched the film as a disaster film that explored mutant origins.
* The disaster part of the film isn't evident and mutant origins aren't explored at all.
* In the original Days of Future Past post-credits scene, Apocalypse took over Magneto's body to be his new vessel (like he tried to do to Stryfe).
* Singer and Kinberg axed the original post-credits scene after they realized it was moronic.
* Singer and Kinberg decided early on that the original cast wouldn't feature in any capacity because of difficulty coordinating production on Days of Future Past.
* The movie has a much smaller budget than Days of Future Past.
* Bryan Singer got the original X-Force cancelled for X-Men Apocalypse.
* Days of Future Past had an incredible marketing campaign, Apocalypse had a completely nonexistent campaign outside of a few things here-n-there.
* The film was originally written by Dougherty, Harris and Kinberg.
* Only Kinberg is credited as screenwriter.
* The original screenplay started with a giant battle on the Nile, the film also originally featured Ship/Graymalkin/Prof.
* The original screenplay explored the Beast-Mystique relationship more in depth.
* Singer had been off set at times for Apocalypse.
* Kinberg ghost-directed a bunch of scenes in Apocalypse.
* Kinberg rewrote the screenplay into the filming of the movie.
* There's like an hour's worth of deleted scenes.
I have to give Kinberg credit, with all of that he somehow came through as a producer and not only got the film done, but under budget enough for it to make its money back by 2.5x even if it did bad domestic. I also have to give him credit, he once again showed me why he's a bad screenwriter. We don't know which scenes he ghost directed, we don't even know if those scenes made it into the film.
I do agree with you, though. Singer was the director, making the movie was definitely has job. If he couldn't make it on time, he shouldn't have made it. Maybe he thought he owed LSD or something.
They have been developing Apocalypse since 2014... It wasn't rushed unlike X3.
Film makers creative freedom right there. they made Apocalypse the first mutant and if it wasn't for the fact that he is the comic character Apocalypse people probably would have appreciated the thought of discovering the first mutant who was worshipped as a god.
Days of future past had a very event filled marketing approach. they marketed so many characters, including 2 versions of the sentinels, time travel and alot of that was very over hyped by everyone as being the next avenger's type deal.
From what i hear there were more Jean and Scott scenes in the script but it was trimmed down because it clashed abit with the mass destruction tone they were trying to go for.
I don't think this one was ever revealed to be fact. more assumption based on the idea of well who else could it have been? 2nd unit? maybe
Screenwriters - and producers - must share some of the blame.
For instance, the Yukio character in Deadpool 2, who turns out to be the same Yukio as in The Wolverine except the writers didn't even know:
Director David Lietch may be ultimately responsible but he can't check every single thing.
So this goof in putting Yukio in Deadpool 2 without knowing she as in The Wolverine is also down to the screenwriters as they admit it was their choice, and I think it's also down to the producers/studio for not having a proper list that indicates whether a character has been used before.
Eh, I just figured they intended on reusing the character knowing that they could do her differently after the future was rewritten in DoFP. Whatever.
Soooo...this reddit summary....
Are you going to post it?
I have a feeling Singer didn't like the idea of directing X-Men Apocalypse as Prequel #3 instead of as X5, especially with (1) Jennifer Lawrence's Mystique as one of the main protagonists and also, (2) how does it make sense to put Jennifer Lawrence's white face up there for more than 50% of the movie when her character is usually blue? I would throw in a third point (3) why the hell is she back for a fourth film if she has repeatedly stated comicbooks are beneath her level of intellect ???
Both Singer and the fans wanted an X-Men #5 with Stewart, McKellen, Paquin, Marsden, Jackman, Page, etc. If I had my name put on a cheap rip-off of a film that I didn't agree with making and that seemed to have a lot of Jennifer Lawrence's stamp all over it, I would be pretty darn pissed. And I'm not sure where I saw this, but one of the actresses did state that Singer had not been on the set of XMen apoclaypse very often.
You don't need any more proof than his work then and his work now. Personal life should be put aside. Mozart liked to have his butt licked by his partners but we all still listen to his music and you can't deny the influence of classical music on popular music nowadays can you? Singer is practically one of the founding fathers of CBMs in the 2000s. What's J Lawrence?
I can't even name five characters after having recorded four Xmen films... I'd rather be in the Marvel Avenger films ? To me this translates to, I don't give a hoot about any of this, I just want all this money you're making from the comics. (insert stupid Jennifer Lawrence laugh)
Agreed and Ive been trying to give it the benefit of the doubt lol
I really dig the casting choices sometimes. I mean, Fassbender was great, the kid they got for Cyclops gets a lot of buzz, Oscar Isaac was huge and Jessica Chastain sounds like a very classy choice, but what is a good actor without a good script or a good director? Take Oscar Isaac's X-role as an example.
And postponing films after you've lost the one man you should have fought hard to hang on to (Singer), just makes it seem like they don't have something good coming.
these spoilers tho...
These rumors make people confused.
it seems like every person who went to watch these test sessions watched different versions of the same movie
So, I went scurrying off to find it.
I presume it's this one https://www.reddit.com/r/MarvelStudiosSpoilers/comments/8mmcw0/i_saw_dark_phoenix_in_feb/
The film sounds bad to be honest. Repeating parts of X3. Jean's costume is a coat? Storm doesn't get much to do. GTFO Kinberg
I don't think those spoilers sound all that bad tbh. Especially since we haven't seen the film to see how it works in screen.
Really it just sounds like the way the film has been described for a while now, more a drama then a comic book romp. Presumably in a similar tone to Logan.
I knew you'd come leaping in, so predictable.
To me, it does sound bad.
You'd think the last thing they'd want to do is remind anyone of X3 and yet it repeats several parts. Why didn't he have a read of the comics and get some fresh ideas for the screen.
Plus the motivation for the alien attack sounds crap and neither they nor Chastain's character are named anywhere in the movie. Best part of it is that Mystique bites the dust, praise the Lord for that. Should have happened in DoFP, as it made no sense for her to still be alive and at risk of allowing the dark future to happen.
Of course, it might still be watchable and those major reshoots could change the last part, but given the standard that's been set by Black Panther and Infinity War, I think it's going to be a dud and also get torn apart by critics and vocal fanboys.
What is wrong with you?
They dont sound good, if true.
Beast does what?