Discussion in 'X-Men: Days of Future Past' started by Angamb, Nov 27, 2012.
This is the fans' opinions.
But what does Singer want?
First of, from what Singer has said, he's not shoehorning anyone in. If you have a plot purpose, you're there. If you're not, you're not.
Two, Leech was terrible.
Three, his powers are of absolutely no use in this plot.
Four, ain't no general public clamouring for the return of Leech.
And finally, the grand return of Wolverine, Storm, Rogue, Iceman, Shadowcat, Colossus... and Leech. One of these things does not belong.
So far it doesn't look like Singer wants Leech, and I hope it stays that way.
I like it that you like my mutant wallpaper phrase...
But I don't really agree with you, to be honest.
There were gaps and leaps between X2 and X3 that weren't entirely very natural. Nightcrawler vanished, a new president was elected, a Dept of Mutant Affairs was operational (and yet Scott was still upset over Jean, so it can't have been that long since the end of X2). We can make up our own theories, but there was no explanation. Your theory won't be the same as my theory, so those fan theories aren't THE explanation for what happened.
As for Multiple Man and Juggernaut, we have to assume they were captured again. Multiple Man was surrounded by troops with guns, Juggernaut was knocked unconscious (maybe even into a coma) on Alcatraz after banging his head on the wall. There was no explanation, but assuming they were imprisoned again is pretty logical.
As for Banshee, Havok and Emma, it is a real shame they will be written out, perhaps with no explanation (and perhaps there WILL be an explanation).
I liked that they had introduced Banshee and Havok, though it messed with the timeline and went against Xavier saying Storm, Jean and Scott were among his first students. But at least it felt like they were trying to expand the movieverse a bit by adding in Banshee and Havok.
Banshee and Havok are definitely significant in the comics mythos. The first team consisted of Scott, Jean, Beast, Iceman and Angel. Then Havok and Polaris were added, to make a team of seven. And then the X-Men were revived in 1975 with a new international roster of Storm, Colossus, Thunderbird, Sunfire, Banshee, Wolverine and Nightcrawler, whose first mission was to rescue the previous seven X-Men. (Banshee had once fought the original five X-Men so he was not entirely new). Those are all significant in X-Men history. Other characters have come and gone since then, including Rogue and Psylocke being added, and also Emma Frost.
Banshee and Havok are big parts of the X-Men mythos, and so is Emma Frost (as villain and X-Men member).
Yes, the big-screen version is different, and in many ways it's far more muddled and random because characters are chosen in a way that isn't at all respectful of the original material. They are picked for interesting powers or some other reason. These background characters end up being frustrating for the fans.
Take a look at Avengers and the Dark Knight films. Avengers introduced Maria Hill and gave Hawkeye an expanded role from his cameo in Thor. That was it. They didn't throw in other comic book Avengers as filler, background cameos or cannon fodder. Same with the Dark Knight saga - we didn't get Riddler or Penguin cameos.
It's a shame to just jettison Havok, Banshee and Emma, and even Azazel considering his parental link to Nightcrawler. It's beginning to feel like very little thought is given to the choice of secondary characters. They aren't made to be meaningful.
Same with some of the more key characters such as Storm - it's a wonder she has made it into more than one movie without suddenly disappearing with no explanation. Don't you remember how the studio wanted Cyclops to have died off-screen between X2 and X3? And how it was rumoured that either the studio (or Singer, according to some accounts) wanted to omit Storm from X3 with no explanation?
Omitting Banshee and Havok and Emma is part of the same thinking that also saw Cyclops die in the first 15 minutes of X3 and has turned Storm into a special effect and little else.
Seriously, squandering these characters has to stop. Or we'll never get beyond Xavier, Magneto and Wolverine. Is that what you really want? Nothing more than Xavier, Magneto, Wolverine and some mutant wallpaper?
cant agree more with Xmaniac
the secondary characters treatment is really pathetic and frustrating.
And to know that the only characters from FC returning are four characters already used in the original trilogy is such a poor and inspired decision.
Yeah, will be great to see how those relationships evolve, but the x-men universe is much bigger than those four characters and Wolverine.
Im sure DOFP will be a great movie, but this is the very first dissapointment to me regarding this new Fox era, and Im afraid this wont be the last
"Don't be so sure..."
Im not negative, but I wont be surprised if we dont even get comics costumes on the future, and Wolverine steals the show again, probably as the traveler.
If that ends being the case, I will thank Bryan for all the awesome decisions
i suppose you could say to keep havok and banshee being part of the Xmen still after 10 years it would mean they were Xaviers first students and the first Xmen which is a big continuity issue
while you could say they did it already with first class but thing if once you start to open a can of worms should you keep opening it or close it before they get out
i still think bryan has a plan here, i don't think its favoritism as bryan was going to direct First class originally and also he seems happy with what vaughn did with it
QFT. You would think 13 years later and 7 films in they would have learned their lessons. It's incredibly frustrating. You can't build up and expand a universe if you're dropping characters after one use.
You've mentioned a number of times now that Synch and Sunspot were supposed to appear in FC but were cut. Were they planned to play villains there as well?
I really can't say I agree with that. Between Psylocke and Multiple Man (and Spyke, who I'm indifferent about TBO) in X3 and a supposed cameo by Gambit with the Brotherhood that was rightfully left on the cutting room floor, them turning these heroes into bad guys is
However it looks like that was all in X3 so hopefully Singer sees the error in such thinking.
There are ways around it than just jettisoning characters and hoping the fans will forgive and the mainstream audience will forget.
Singer chose the characters for First Class, as far as we are led to believe. Why did he contradict his own films? Did he seriously think fans wouldn't remember? And the mainstream audience is starting to notice. I have heard friends (who aren't uber-geeks like me) grumbling about how First Class doesn't match up the other movies (where we see Xavier walking at the end of Origins and the start of X3).
If Scott, Jean and Storm are added as young students in DoFP, and Banshee and Havok are still there, that would still make Scott, Jean and Storm 'some of my first students.' I agree Havok doesn't really have interesting powers (he's just another energy blaster) and devoting time to the sibling relationship with Scott would eat up a lot of the film, but Banshee has a power we haven't seen before (apart from daughter Siryn shrieking like a burglar alarm in X2).
I'd like to think we at least get an explanation for the absence of Banshee and Havok, so we at least feel there is a single saga being told not a set of separate stories.
This 'pick and mix' filmmaking doesn't work in the long run because we get background characters popping in and out of the franchise.
It goes right back to X1. I would rather it have started with Xavier recruiting his first team, but given the fragile state of superhero movies at the time and the need to go for the most popular characters, it was right to choose Jean, Cyclops, Storm and Wolverine, but I would not have mentioned that Jean, Scott and Storm were 'some of the first students'. Too specific, it restrains later storytelling, as they have found out to their cost.
Rogue suited the plot so she was fine too. I can understand why Beast was cut because of the cost of make-up/effects - and back then (12 years ago) we probably wouldn't have had a very good Beast at all because of the technology and budget available. I would have avoided Iceman because he was the wrong age for comic book canon, or at least I would have made him much older (similar age to Scott, Jean, Storm). Better to leave the possibility of a later origin film (similar to First Class) including Beast, Angel, Iceman and maybe Havok and Polaris.
What we have ended up with instead is a muddle. And with each film the writers/producers/director face the unholy choice of either trying to build upon the muddle of the previous film (creating a bigger muddle) or totally ignoring parts of the previous film because it's no longer workable (which still creates a muddle).
I'm sure DoFP will be a very good movie. But it's the franchise as a whole they should think about.
I'm sure there will be parts of DoFP, as with all the previous X-movies, where we are expected to forget parts of the previous movies, pretend things never happened or come up with our own explanations. That's the nature of this series. Unfortunately.
remember that vaughn had a part in the script also and not only did he only care about X1 and X2 but we don't know what role he had in creating these characters
to be fair when singer made the first Xmen movie these comic book movies were not popular and there was a big chance it would have been one film only deal and i think singer made it to be a one film only thing
there will always be lose connections here, i mean what if emma frost isn't in this so they can make an effort to connect it to Origins
obviously the age of the character is abit odd here but lose connections like i said
Please, no. What's done is done. The less connected to X-Men Origins, the better. Besides, 13 years and 6 films later, it's a little late to try to suddenly tie everything together.
well singer has said he isn't ignoring any of the films, and recently he said he had watched all the films over
so who knows if that includes origins... most likely but hmm
There is a difference between not contradicting the films and going out of one's way to tie them together. First Class has already done the ignoring. There is no need to now try to go back and tie Emma Frost in First Class to Kayla's sister, Emma, in X-Men Origins.
I can understand being upset about dropping Havok and Banshee without explanation (I really do think DOFP will make it clear that it was just a case of people moving on), but the X2 to transition X3 is a weak comparison.
There's nothing similar in terms of the changes.
So Nightcrawler was dropped? Him joining the team and him not joining the team are both two logical outcomes.
There was a new president? Presidents changing are also a natural occurrence.
A Department of Mutant Affairs was created. Why is an explanation needed for this?
And we can't keep using the Avengers as this sort of holy grail movie that we must all compare too. (On a side note, I thought the movie was good when it came out, but honestly it's pretty fluffy and disposable.) Marvel used a different strategy since many of the characters are iconic enough to have their own movies (except for Wolverine, X-Men characters are not). They had MANY movies to set up ONE move with only 6 or 7 main characters. And they've only made ONE Avengers movie. We don't even know what the next phase will be like.
As for the rumors about X3... I did hear about talk of having Scott die off-screen. But in the end, it didn't happen that way so you have no argument there. I also never heard of them dropping Storm. The studio DEFINITELY wanted her in and even wanted to shoehorn in a romance between her and Logan.
Anyways, back to Havok and Banshee. I'm a huge X-Men fan (both comics and movies) and I don't have any problem with them not returning for the next movie. I really can't say who's opinion of casual moviegoers is correct, but I don't see them mulling over things like this either. The reason fanboys have such a bad reputation is exactly something like this. Caring too much (to the point of obsession) about the details that are not truly significant.
As for squandering characters... I think the Banshee and Havok characters were fortunate enough to be in even one movie. This is actually exactly like the comics. The B-characters join, but the A-list characters always come back to shine.
there is no need, but i suppose it depends if its part of singers plan to fix s***
we may expect a prequel comic before the films release to explain certain things
I think X-Men fans have been far more tolerant and supportive than you give them/us credit for. Many of us are still here, still on these forums and still being excited about DoFP despite dips in quality like X3 and Origins and the many other questionable decisions taken along the way.
Avengers is not a holy grail but it did do a few things right. Not cluttering up the movie with cameos/fodder. Not having one person dominate at the expense of everyone else. Not creating love triangles that were in favour of a dominating character.
I feel certain that they had planned NO explanation for the absence of the key characters Banshee, Havok and Emma and that they hoped no one would care or remember and those who did would be expected to write it off as being due to the passage of time. I also feel pretty sure that those making the movie don't like this debate over the confirmed absence of Banshee, because they hoped no one would bring it up or dwell on it. They were relying on us not being bothered about it. Is it good filmmaking to rely on people not really caring? I would say not.
You only have to see the comment sections online - where the hardcore fanboys want Marvel to have the rights back - to realise that there are frustrations. If there were no such comments being made, then your points might be valid.
Considering the absence of Sabretooth and Toad were explained (as an aside, yes, but explained nonetheless) by Stryker in X2, I don't know why you're "feel[ing] certain" about that.
There's an obvious joke here which I'm not even gonna touch
Because the 11-year gap would allow them to dismiss absences as due to the passage of time.
Indeed. And I knew it myself as soon as I wrote that sentence.
I don't get it.
Even with today's budget and technology, he looked like ****.