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

[psylockolussus]

Actually it was just "xmen : the last stand" X3 was never part of the official title. It was just referenced in image (x with wolvies claws) an was essentially the codename for it. Unlike "X2: Xmen united"'s title.

Thats what I said.

I said they named X3 "X-Men: the Last Stand".

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Thats what I said.

I said they named X3 "X-Men: the Last Stand".

Ah sorry i miss read

 

[psylockolussus]

But you're under the assumption the 70s arnt going to be a major focus. Its not a flashback.

This film could mostly take place in the 70s (like X-men origins) which was also the 70s and considered a prequel .

This film is just as much a prequel to the OT as it is a sequel to it.

Since when I didn't say the 70s cast won't get the major focus. I already said in the past the Wolverine, Professor X and Magneto would get the most focus in the film.

And DOFP can't be a prequel if they are time travellers from the present period (from the main/original series), travelling to the past to change things/history. Thats not a prequel. A prequel film is merely showing things that already happened in the past.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Since when I didn't say the 70s cast won't get the major focus. I already said in the past the Wolverine, Professor X and Magneto would get the most focus in the film.

And DOFP can't be a prequel if they are time travellers from the present period (from the main/original series), travelling to the past to change things/history. Thats not a prequel. A prequel film is merely showing things that already happened in the past.

Ah but the past is never 100% changed... Some things will still repeat. Before anything is even "changed" we will be watching events and happenings that happened post X1. Thus its still a prequel . It can't be a sequel to a prequel (and still be set before the ot in a timeline) without it still being a prequel too.

Also we really don't know how singer will handle time travel. Literally everything that happens might STILL lead them to the events of X1. Time travel can be tricky

 

[psylockolussus]

How can a film be a prequel if some of the scenes are already set in the present? Like I said in the other page, X1/X2/X3 also had scenes set in the past so should we call them a prequel film too? No. Thats the same thing with DOFP.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

How can a film be a prequel if some of the scenes are already set in the present? Like I said in the other page, X1/X2/X3 also had scenes set in the past but should we call them a prequel film too? No. Thats the same thing with DOFP.

Because those are brief scenes. Not a majority (or even half) of the film. Like we know Dofp will be.

The Dofp future setting could be an alternate future that never actually happened because when we watch the OT the events of Dofp fiIm could actually have already happened. If that makes sense....

 

[JP]

How can a film be a prequel if some of the scenes are already set in the present? Like I said in the other page, X1/X2/X3 also had scenes set in the past so should we call them a prequel film too? No. Thats the same thing with DOFP.

So you're saying the First Class actors/characters are going to be reduced to a quick opening credit flashback?

 

[psylockolussus]

So you're saying the First Class actors/characters are going to be reduced to a quick opening credit flashback?

No, but their scenes before the future/present-day X-Men go to the 1973 should be considered as "flashbacks" simply because the scenes set in 1973 already happened in the past.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

So you're saying the First Class actors/characters are going to be reduced to a quick opening credit flashback?

Lol i know right? So if we only see the OT cast in the beginning of the film for 10min and the rest of the film is set in the past showing us past events that happened before the OT its suddenly only a sequel just because the way the film opened? Lol

 

[spideyboy_1111]

No, but their scenes before the future/present-day X-Men go to the 1973 should be considered as "flashbacks" simply because the scenes set in 1973 already happened in the past.

We don't even know if there's an actual physical time traveler yet... its pretty apparent singer isn't retelling the exact same story from the books

Honestly this would have been a fantastic reason to keep Emma frost or bring in Destiny. Either destiny already knows about the future events... Or xavier of the future could have given Emma frost a vision

 

[JP]

No, but their scenes before the future/present-day X-Men go to the 1973 should be considered as "flashbacks" simply because the scenes set in 1973 already happened in the past.

if we go by your argument then the film can't possibly be a sequel either.

 

[psylockolussus]

This is kinda hard to explain but to simplify what I'm trying to say is

1973 (before the future/present day X-Men time-travel to 1973) = flashbacks

Scenes set in the future/present time = present time

1973 (when the future/present day X-Men finally time traveled to 1973) = it cannot be considered as a flashback scene anymore or scenes that already happened in the past because just by the fact that the people from the future traveled to the past is already changing the history and possibly opening to an alternate timeline, well unless OT Professor X and OT Magneto did meet the future X-Men in 1973.

if we go by your argument then the film can't possibly be a sequel either.

It is set after the events of X3. So it can be considered as a sequel to X3.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

This is kinda hard to explain but to simplify what I'm trying to say is

1973 (before the future/present day X-Men time-travel to 1973) = flashbacks

Scenes set in the future/present time = present time

1973 (when the future/present day X-Men finally time traveled to 1973) = it cannot be considered as a flashback anymore or scenes that already happened in the past because just by the fact that the people from the future traveled to the past is already changing the history and possibly opening to an alternate timeline, well unless OT Professor X and OT Magneto did meet the future X-Men in 1973.

The past is still the past though even if its altered. You're right that its no longer a flashback but the 70s is always still the past. And still treating the future date.

I know what you're saying. But its still just as much a prequel as it is sequel

 

[psylockolussus]

Whatever, we are only gonna know this once we see the film. For now, its all speculation.

And for me, the past is NOT the past anymore, when there's people from the future/present changing things.

So when Wolverine and the other X-Men are in 1973 trying to change things, I would view it as the present but just in a different time period.

 

[JP]

Yeah, I don't get it. It can't be considered a prequel because it has future scenes, but it CAN be considered a sequel despite also focusing on the past?

This logic is not sound.

 

[Sawyer]

I'm not strictly a meat-eater because I had a salad once, but I AM a vegetarian because that salad was really ****ing good.


What's not sound about that logic?

 

[mkilban2]

my brain hurts.. time travel sux

but salads are yummy

 

[TWayneP]

Yeah, I don't get it. It can't be considered a prequel because it has future scenes, but it CAN be considered a sequel despite also focusing on the past?

This logic is not sound.

Haha indeed. When dealing with time travel, logic will never be sound. There basically is no logic because its an endless loop no matter what. If you go back in time to change events, you've had to go back in time millions of times before that for all of eternity...

I agree with spideyboy though. Yea technically the events of x1, 2 and 3 should happen after DOFP, it's messed up, but that's time travel logic for ya. If you start to think about it too deeply, it really messes with ya haha. I'd have a hard time explaining why DOFP is a prequel just as much a sequel.

It's a sequel about prequel-goings-on... Or is it the other way around, heh.

 

[BMM]

About that article: Singer also said he wasn't going to be ignoring any of the existing films.

I don't think that proves anything. One could just as easily say that in order to fix a problem you have to acknowledge it exists first.

When you add in the fact that, because The Wolverine is set after TLS, any 'undoing' of TLS' events would also alter or invalidate the events of that movie as well, and that's not going to happen.

I don't buy this argument, especially in light of Bryan Singer's involvement. Singer has shown a willingness to alter or invalidate elements that don't work before. He did it to Superman 3 and 4 with Superman Returns, and he did it to X-Men Origins with First Class. I see no reason why he won't do it to The Wolverine with Days of Future Past, especially now that the storyline provides a basis for it and can help square away any potential misgivings the studio may have with the franchise, rather than simply connect the dots. We'll see.

 

[def28]

When dealing with time travel, logic will never be sound.

Pretty much

 

[EnDz0n3]

Lol yea i don't want anything of that. Kinda just wish they called jean an omega mutant.

The class system she probably did make up due to her tracking abilities. Maybe she can feel their power levels

It would have been hilarious if one of the minions had a confused look on their face when she said all that Class Levels. Or even Magneto asking WTF she was talking about.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

He's dead. Face the facts. They gave him a tombstone at the end of the movie - that the writers, director and studio telling you that they intended for him to be dead.

The whole Phoenix plot hinges on him being dead - it makes her a dangerous person whose powers must be stopped.

Agreed. Scott definitely and unquestionably died in X3. Want proof?

Xavier told Jean at her parent's home that she "killed the man you loved because you couldn't control your powers". If Scott had somehow survived, Xavier would've known about it via his own psi powers, not to mention a search with Cerebro would've confirmed his whereabouts.

Scott Summers died in X3. No qualms about it. The question is, how do they bring him back and undo the stupidity?

 

[DigificWriter]

This is what I have to say to psylockollusses with regards to this 'prequel/sequel' business: in the words of Inigo Montoya, "you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

I had previously been convinced that First Class invalidated Origins: Wolverine, but in light of multiple developments since then, have changed my mind. There's actually nothing in FC that does anything whatsoever to O:W, and I don't believe that Singer will do anything in DoFP to invalidate The Last Stand and/or The Wolverine. Things that are currently seen as inconsistencies - such as Xavier having the use of his legs - can be addressed without invalidating anything from the existing films, and things like the Cure being reversed and Xavier returning from the dead are things that were actually seeded by TLS itself and therefore would not count as invalidating that film.

I've seen nothing whatsoever to convince me that whatever 'fixes' Singer chooses to make will in any way alter the composition of the X-Franchise, despite what some fans might want.

IOW, I firmly remain convinced that all of the movies that currently comprise the franchise - FC, X-Men, X2, TLS, O:W, and the as-yet-unreleased TW - will still comprise the franchise when the events of DoFP are completed.

 

[Majik1387]

Agreed. Scott definitely and unquestionably died in X3. Want proof?

Xavier told Jean at her parent's home that she "killed the man you loved because you couldn't control your powers". If Scott had somehow survived, Xavier would've known about it via his own psi powers, not to mention a search with Cerebro would've confirmed his whereabouts.

Scott Summers died in X3. No qualms about it. The question is, how do they bring him back and undo the stupidity?

Xavier lies all the time and keeps things hidden.

But undoing the stupidity can be done in a number of ways, it's more of a which way will they do it.

 

[DigificWriter]

I've said this before, but just because you disagree with Scott's death doesn't make it "stupidity", and I wish people would stop villifying creative decisions just because they disagree with said decisions. It's incredibly childish and petty.