Days of Future Past 'X-men: DOFP' Official CAST Thread (announcements and discussion) - Part 2

[Mr.M]

^ Why does every single person who brings up this idea not realize one simple truth? Any creation of a ST'09-style alt timeline scenario will invalidate The Wolverine, which is not something FOX would let Singer do even if he wanted to.

The reason? It's not good business to release a movie - standalone though its story might be - have audiences pay to see said movie, then turn around a year later and say 'you remember that movie we released last year?' It happened in a completely different universe'.

There will obviously be two timelines involved. The question is, which one becomes invalidated, if any? You basically have three camps:

1. Fans that believe that the OT events will be invalidated such that Scott, Jean, and Professor will return in the corrected timeline for future sequels featuring these characters.

Evidence for: Singer's interview. The question was directed at TLS particularly. Singer said he will fix things, and these changes will make fans happy. We can only assume he was referring to the unfortunate circumstances we were left with after TLS.

Evidence against: Invalidating TLS while preserving X1 and X2 is mutually exclusive for the simple fact that everything in the trilogy led up to X3. It would also invalidate The Wolverine. It would completely undermine the franchise.

2. Fans that believe this is an alternate future following TLS.

Evidence for: It has been said this is an alternate future as is. Most of the returning characters are survivors from TLS. There are viable explanations to bring back Xavier and Magneto.

Evidence against: Not much. We know the trigger point is 1973. What happens between TLS and DoFP (Future timeline) is anyone's guess. Somehow, Sentinels surfaced and the mutant race is on the brink. There also seemed to be a greater sense of unity between humans and mutants at the end of TLS, so how did this future even come about?

3. Two concurrent timelines

Evidence for: If DoFP is an alternate universe, then the OT is as well. Nothing can be done to change the fates of these worlds as they are two separate universes. The only way this happens is to preserve the events of OT. So time travel would create two universes branching off from 1973 but both timelines still exist parallel to one another.

Evidence against: Paradoxes that make your head spin and are impossible to work around.

 

[marvelrobbins]

J.J. Abrams Trek was done because Star Trek Nemesis bombed and the
alternate reality/Prequel/reboot was only opotion since Abrams Isn't fan of
prequels to use Original Trek Characters.It's totally different case with X-men.

If they want to us time travel to remove elements from both Origins and
Last Stand while retaining X-Men and X2 and most of the Wolverine they can do that.Abrams Trek Is proof logic doesn't always fit.It depends on what filmakers
want to do.

Also notice all characters In future are ones that was In X-Men and X2.Ellen Page may have only been In Last Stand but Kitty was In both X-Men and X2.

The Wolverine may not make any direct reference to Last Stand.Even though
Famke Janssen's appearance may never have the reference that Wolverine
killed Phoenix In Last Stand.Simply she's dead and Wolverine has been missing/mourning her.The Wolverine Is more stand alone film.And I doudt very
much fox let James Mangold say all the other X-Men are dead or gone onscreen.Hell the X-Men may not even be mentioned onscreen.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

J.J. Abrams Trek was done because Star Trek Nemesis bombed and the
alternate reality/Prequel/reboot was only opotion since Abrams Isn't fan of
prequels to use Original Trek Characters.It's totally different case with X-men.

If they want to us time travel to remove elements from both Origins and
Last Stand while retaining X-Men and X2 and most of the Wolverine they can do that.Abrams Trek Is proof logic doesn't always fit.It depends on what filmakers
want to do.

Also notice all characters In future are ones that was In X-Men and X2.Ellen Page may have only been In Last Stand but Kitty was In both X-Men and X2.

The Wolverine may not make any direct reference to Last Stand.Even though
Famke Janssen's appearance may never have the reference that Wolverine
killed Phoenix In Last Stand.Simply she's dead and Wolverine has been missing/mourning her.The Wolverine Is more stand alone film.And I doudt very
much fox let James Mangold say all the other X-Men are dead or gone onscreen.Hell the X-Men may not even be mentioned onscreen.

Eh... The new star trek has nothing to do with nemesis. Its got everything to do with bringing back classic and beloved characters that lets face it... The original actors can no longer carry a film. Its taking something nostalgic, dusting it off, sexing it up, and polishing concepts and ideas for a modern (and smarter) audience

 

[SuperT]

Eh... The new star trek has nothing to do with nemesis. Its got everything to do with bringing back classic and beloved characters that lets face it... The original actors can no longer carry a film. Its taking something nostalgic, dusting it off, sexing it up, and polishing concepts and ideas for a modern (and smarter) audience

Exactly. Star Trek wasn't rebooted because Nemesis was bad, the new timeline was created to breath new life into the franchise and use new, updated versions of older, established, and well known characters.

 

[Mr.M]

The Wolverine may not make any direct reference to Last Stand.Even though
Famke Janssen's appearance may never have the reference that Wolverine
killed Phoenix In Last Stand.Simply she's dead and Wolverine has been missing/mourning her.The Wolverine Is more stand alone film.And I doudt very
much fox let James Mangold say all the other X-Men are dead or gone onscreen.Hell the X-Men may not even be mentioned onscreen.

Really? Famke's scenes have basically been a direct extension of we saw of her in Last Stand. Wolverine feels responsible for her death. That much is obvious. And nah, they aren't undoing X3 while preserving X1 and X2. You have the potential to undo X3 in a FC3 movie. Maybe Xavier doesn't go through with the mind blocks imposed on Jean. Maybe she learns to control it. Otherwise, there is pretty much nothing that can be done in 1973 to alter what culminates in the OT, unless you wipe the slate entirely clean. Scott and Jean are babies if that. I don't get what logic people are basing this on.

 

[GuestStar2004]

the wolverine is set after TLS the director as said so and its obvious from the trailer in the twisted dream that he killed her

 

[psylockolussus]

They aren't ignoring X3 and Origins and Bryan Singer already confirmed it and The Wolverine isn't ignoring X3. But that won't stop them for doing things that might contradict to the things that happened or was said in the previous films.

 

[Farren]

^ Why does every single person who brings up this idea not realize one simple truth? Any creation of a ST'09-style alt timeline scenario will invalidate The Wolverine, which is not something FOX would let Singer do even if he wanted to.

The reason? It's not good business to release a movie - standalone though its story might be - have audiences pay to see said movie, then turn around a year later and say 'you remember that movie we released last year?' It happened in a completely different universe'.

That's a good point, but I don't think its necessarily a deal breaker. What's more important is viability of the franchise moving forward. And I do think Fox would take my money, then next year tell me the movie I saw was in another timeline. This is Fox we are talking about.

Then again, since this is Fox we are talking about, they may not be smart and gutsy enough to take such an opportunity for a fresh start.

The presence of James Marsden already indicates that there is going to be some amount of change to the events of the franchise (unless he's shooting flashback scenes). Either TLS is going to be retconned, or there is going to be a new "corrected" timeline at the end of the DofP (or both).

 

[DigificWriter]

^ I again bring up something I said earlier: Marsden being spotted on a flight to Montreal does not automatically mean he was going there to film stuff for DoFP.

 

[Farren]

If you'd like to toss Marsden from the argument I'm perfectly fine with it.

 

[DigificWriter]

At this point, there's not enough evidence to say whether or not Marsden is going to be involved, so it would be better if he didn't enter the conversation insofar as DoFP is concerned.

I also don't think we can draw any definitive conclusions from filming schedules when it comes to how the story is going to play out.

 

[Farren]

I'm cool with that. Lord knows I've wasted enough time and speculation on Fox and Cyclops in the past.

 

[Angamb]

a little off-topic momment, but since this is DOFP Cast thread, I just wanted to mention the latest Benicio del Toro news for Guardians.

Im really shocked how Marvel and James Gunn are getting these type of actors for the movie, including of course Glenn Close.

This just made me remember our previous discussions about other x-men spin-offs... in the sense that... if Marvel can get these type of actors for a new property like Guardians, Im sure Fox could do the same with other x-men spin-offs.

At the end of the day, its all about a great director and great cast, so if Nolan can have a great hit with a new story like Inception, that none knew, but had an amazing cast, why cant Fox get a great director and cast for more movies?

now, psylockollusus will come to post the same comments he has been posting over and over, but this post was more oriented for other users

 

[Duran Man]

 

[JP]

Huh? X Men has a great cast and Singer and Vaughn are great directors.

 

[Snikt]

LOL. Exactly. I think the best thing about Marvel's productions AND their Co-Productions (FOX, Sony, etc.), is they all have strong casting.

Honestly, FOX's X-Men franchise has continuously had an amazing cast. They really do hire the best actors for the part...not just name actors.

Hugh Jackman was an unusual casting at the time; but the man IS Wolverine now.

Patick Stewart and James McAvoy as Prof. X are again great actors, not just famous ones.

Ian McKellen and Michael Fassbender as Magneto are brilliant in their roles.

Halle Berry; some could take her or leave her. Never really had a problem with her, but she is a great actress.

The list can go on and on; but the X-Men films have a great cast.

 

[Double B]

LOL. Exactly. I think the best thing about Marvel's productions AND their Co-Productions (FOX, Sony, etc.), is they all have strong casting.

Honestly, FOX's X-Men franchise has continuously had an amazing cast. They really do hire the best actors for the part...not just name actors.

Hugh Jackman was an unusual casting at the time; but the man IS Wolverine now.

Patick Stewart and James McAvoy as Prof. X are again great actors, not just famous ones.

Ian McKellen and Michael Fassbender as Magneto are brilliant in their roles.

Halle Berry; some could take her or leave her. Never really had a problem with her, but she is a great actress.

The list can go on and on; but the X-Men films have a great cast.

Exactly.

Lest we forget:

"3 #Oscars, 6 #GoldenGlobes, 1 #BAFTA, 2 #Emmys, 2 #Tonys, 5 #Oliviers, 1 #Ceaser - Now let's blow s**t up! #XMEN"

It's a phenomenal cast.

 

[josh8]

a little off-topic momment, but since this is DOFP Cast thread, I just wanted to mention the latest Benicio del Toro news for Guardians.

Im really shocked how Marvel and James Gunn are getting these type of actors for the movie, including of course Glenn Close.

This just made me remember our previous discussions about other x-men spin-offs... in the sense that... if Marvel can get these type of actors for a new property like Guardians, Im sure Fox could do the same with other x-men spin-offs.

At the end of the day, its all about a great director and great cast, so if Nolan can have a great hit with a new story like Inception, that none knew, but had an amazing cast, why cant Fox get a great director and cast for more movies?

It's not a Marvel/Disney or a Fox thing when it comes to signing high-caliber actors; it's whether the casting people can sell a project to said actors.

GotG on paper is actually probably easier to sell than a lot of comic book properties. It's not only part of a very financially successful line of movies, but it's perfectly as much a sci-fi fantasy adventure as it is a comic book movie. Actors have never had issues with taking part in fun sci-fi movies.

And in any case, it's been years now that non-Marvel/Disney comic book movies have been successfully able to attract real talent. Think of the casts of the X-Men movies, Batman movies, Sin City, Man of Steel, etc. Even the Green Lantern movie got Tim Robbins and Angela Bassett.

 

[Angamb]

definetly.

but to those who didnt understand my comment, read my post well, I was talkin about "spin-offs", not about the main series.

 

[Mulholland-Jr]

Guardians of the Galaxy doesn't exactly have the brand recognition that Iron Man or the Avengers does. Marvel is smart for getting a lot of A-listers to star in a pretty obscure title.

 

[psylockolussus]

a little off-topic momment, but since this is DOFP Cast thread, I just wanted to mention the latest Benicio del Toro news for Guardians.

Im really shocked how Marvel and James Gunn are getting these type of actors for the movie, including of course Glenn Close.

This just made me remember our previous discussions about other x-men spin-offs... in the sense that... if Marvel can get these type of actors for a new property like Guardians, Im sure Fox could do the same with other x-men spin-offs.

At the end of the day, its all about a great director and great cast, so if Nolan can have a great hit with a new story like Inception, that none knew, but had an amazing cast, why cant Fox get a great director and cast for more movies?

now, psylockollusus will come to post the same comments he has been posting over and over, but this post was more oriented for other users

LOL seriously? Casting a well-known or respected actor is nothing new especially for a summer movie. Even if those movies flopped, they still had a big actor attached to the movie.

 

[josh8]

definetly.

but to those who didnt understand my comment, read my post well, I was talkin about "spin-offs", not about the main series.

Ok, as usual, you're changing your original point of view so that you can avoid the people who are making good (but contrasting) points.

You mentioned X-Men spin-offs, but you specifically called GotG a "new property". I'm sure in your head you were thinking about spin-offs, but you should be able to see why there's a misunderstanding. But again, you say it's everyone else who is misunderstanding. You need to start taking some accountability!

 

[psylockolussus]

Yeah Guardians of the Galaxy is not even a spin-off. Its an upcoming movie or soon-to-be movie series that happens to share universe with the other Marvel Studio films.

And FOX already hired talented actors for their spin-offs aka Origins: Wolverine and First Class. It still didn't top the box-office numbers of the original trilogy.

 

[SterlingDee]

Exactly. Star Trek wasn't rebooted because Nemesis was bad, the new timeline was created to breath new life into the franchise and use new, updated versions of older, established, and well known characters.

Uh Star Trek was most definitely rebooted because Nemesis did terribly at the boxoffice and had a poor critical reception. The film only earned $67 million total worldwide on a budget of $60 million! The new timeline was created as a response to the disaster that was Nemesis - using established and beloved characters was the least risky way to reboot the series.

Really? Famke's scenes have basically been a direct extension of we saw of her in Last Stand. Wolverine feels responsible for her death.

Yup, they even clearly reference The Last Stand in the trailer. In his Jean dream, Wolverine realizes he's stabbed her in the stomach, just as he did in TLS.

 

[DigificWriter]

^ You're both correct and incorrect; Nemesis' failure at the box office, coupled with the cancellation of Enterprise, led to the Star Trek franchise going fallow, which led to Abrams being brought in to jump-start it, which led to doing a reboot.