Sequels X-Men Sequel - Part 5

[GuestStar2004]

It literally took one movie for Charles to become Professor X and have an X-Men team and Erik to become Magneto, the mutant supremacist with a formed Brotherhood. It was called X-Men: First Class.

But what happened by DOFP for Xavier and magneto?

And yet you want to force on people three movies for Cyclops to develop one of his known character traits?

Not to mention, I've been told many times there is no rushing in Dark Phoenix, everything can get done in one movie. Yet, now the narrative is no need to rush Cyclops' leadership, it can be spread to three movies?

There are ways to tell that story and keep cyclops leadership growing.

if thats the direction they want to go of course, i doubt the idea is for all the characters to be in their final forms by Dark Phoenix personally.

Heck even Mangold takes away from wolverine for his movies so he has to struggle to get to where he is going.

 

[EnDz0n3]

As far as I'm concerned Beast hasn't had any development since First Class, so I'd rather Cyclops not suffer that fate, but that's something I won't get into with you, because we already have our set ideas on that.

Yea I found it rather bizarre when Hoult's Beast was used an example as a blue print for how Cyclops' role should be developed. Has TheGuard not seen *this* Beast?

But what happened by DOFP for Xavier and magneto?

You mean how they keep flip flopping and don't seem to know what to do with the characters? Magneto especially.

I'll repost the quote from that mashable article I put up earlier:

The ten-year jumps between First Class, Days of Future Past, and Apocalypse turn out to be a lazy way to soft-reboot the series, so that each installment can hand-wave away whatever happened in the last installment and go about rehashing the same plot points all over again. The team needs to be rounded up again to fight some greater evil. Charles is so sure there is still good in Erik, only to be proven wrong. Et cetera, et cetera, rinse and repeat.

 

[2kt09]

I'll repost the quote from that mashable article I put up earlier:

The ten-year jumps between First Class, Days of Future Past, and Apocalypse turn out to be a lazy way to soft-reboot the series, so that each installment can hand-wave away whatever happened in the last installment and go about rehashing the same plot points all over again. The team needs to be rounded up again to fight some greater evil. Charles is so sure there is still good in Erik, only to be proven wrong. Et cetera, et cetera, rinse and repeat.

I remember disregarding this because I know she's talking about the prequel X-Men movies in regard to decade jumps, but then the rest I'm being reminded of what anyone else notices with any trilogy ever, particularly superhero trilogies.

The decade jumps at the very least, work to craft more distinct looking and feeling films even though they can still be recognized as being part of the same franchise. That's genuinely a unique aspect to this trilogy.

 

[def28]

The decade jumps are pointless and frustrating especially from a character stand point now. As it either kills out it's cast or puts them in completely minimal roles . That's not good for development, and since about 90% of the complaints about this series are regarding development and wasting characters, it's pretty legit. It worked for First Class and played for a DOFP crossover but now they are doing just cause and to get them in the present. The Mags and Charles stuff is obviously redundant and was a common complaint as well. Magneto could do anything and still go back to the X-Men. We've seen this done so much over the past 17 years that people are desynsitized and there's no more emotional impact.

But yeah, decade jumping is getting frustrating. GOTG and Deadpool pander to certain decades they don't need to jump into a specific decade to do so. Apocalypse used the 80s horribly and it felt completely forced to be there. If they had something to validate the time setting to back this up like say Logans story, that's cool. But it's pointless now and it's charm is gone.

 

[The Guard]

That's besides my point. They grew into those roles in one movie, but GuestStar thinks making Cyclops a leader in the next movie is just resorting to comics, and it doesn't make him interesting, and I don't and won't agree.

They grew into one type of role in a single film. Those roles and their feelings about them evolved. They did not remain static in that role throughout the franchise.

I don't think that's what he's saying at all. I think he's saying that he wants Cyclops to earn the position of leader...he doesn't just want Cyclops to BE the leader because that's how it is in the comics.

But to me, developing Cyclops as a leader is not an excuse for Mystique field leading. I want to see him in the role I associate him with just like I want to see X-Men be X-Men not in the process of being X-Men, they can be developed just fine already being at that point as they have been in their long comic history.

They are mutually exclusive concepts.

I think you just don't like the idea of Mystique as a field leader, period.

As far as I'm concerned Beast hasn't had any development since First Class, so I'd rather Cyclops not suffer that fate, but that's something I won't get into with you, because we already have our set ideas on that.

Beast has clearly had some development since FIRST CLASS.

 

[The Guard]

Yea I found it rather bizarre when Hoult's Beast was used an example as a blue print for how Cyclops' role should be developed. Has TheGuard not seen *this* Beast?

The Beast, who in three films, has evolved from student, to caretaker, to teacher? Yes, yes I have.

And I'm pretty sure I said "similar to". Not "as a strict blueprint for how it should be handled".

You mean how they keep flip flopping and don't seem to know what to do with the characters? Magneto especially.

Are you familiar with the X-Men and their history as characters?

Flip flopping is what these characters DO. As circumstances for mutants change, their feelings about their roles in the world evolve and their approaches change and evolve as well. Literally ALL of the major characters have either led a team, left the team, turned evil, gone off on their own, returned to the team...quit, started their own team...

ESPECIALLY Magneto. Have you seen that character's history in the comics?

 

[EnDz0n3]

The Beast, who in three films, has evolved from student, to caretaker, to teacher? Yes, yes I have.

You're gonna struggle to find people to back you on this one. Hoult's Beast is one of the most notoriously underdeveloped characters in this franchise.

Are you familiar with the X-Men and their history as characters?

Flip flopping is what these characters DO. As circumstances for mutants change, their feelings about their roles in the world evolve and their approaches change and evolve as well. Literally ALL of the major characters have either led a team, left the team, turned evil, gone off on their own, returned to the team...quit, started their own team...

ESPECIALLY Magneto. Have you seen that character's history in the comics?

Not everything from the comics has to be adapted. I'm sure you guys have used this defense before. Next thing you'll tell me this franchise is perfect because it has bad continuity. Just like the comics...

What's more, it can be argued that their flip flopping in the filmverse is not natural character evolution. Again, they don't seem to know what to do with the characters, they have all that development in the previous movie only to essentially regress the next movie to start over again. It's as if the filmmakers are acutely aware that the first time they didn't quite do it correctly.

Which goes back to the original point...perhaps it's time for Magneto (and Mystique) to sit this one out. Xavier has been guilty of this as well, but I personally think McAvoy's Xavier is essential for the next movie.

 

[The Guard]

I didn't say Beast had a ton of development. I said he had some.

Which characters have not had a natural evolution?

 

[BeholdMe]

You're gonna struggle to find people to back you on this one. Hoult's Beast is one of the most notoriously underdeveloped characters in this franchise.

Not everything from the comics has to be adapted. I'm sure you guys have used this defense before. Next thing you'll tell me this franchise is perfect because it has bad continuity. Just like the comics...

What's more, it can be argued that their flip flopping in the filmverse is not natural character evolution. Again, they don't seem to know what to do with the characters, they have all that development in the previous movie only to essentially regress the next movie to start over again. It's as if the filmmakers are acutely aware that the first time they didn't quite do it correctly.

Which goes back to the original point...perhaps it's time for Magneto (and Mystique) to sit this one out. Xavier has been guilty of this as well, but I personally think McAvoy's Xavier is essential for the next movie.

Out of the FC I do feel Hoult is the least developed at times I feel he is an afterthought in the swamp of McAvoy, Fassbender and Lawrence. He does a little something movie by movie but not much at all.
I know what the Guard means saying in the comics the villains have flip flopped quite a bit but that over multiple comics not movie by movie. Also if they choose that to follow in the comics then they really should follow the characteristics of the characters they are using rather then making them mute or a background character. The personalities need to stand out in the cast from each character. Cyclops doesnt have to start off the movie as the leader but ill be happy with him or Storm working towards that goal and showing them grow which I really hope they do because movie by movie they drop the ball with certain characters. I dont want carbon copies of these people, they need to nail it to make it work.

 

[EnDz0n3]

I didn't say Beast had a ton of development. I said he had some.

So you want Cyclops to be like that?

Which characters have not had a natural evolution?

This has been brought up ad nauseum.

JLaw for one, who was Mutant and Proud Mystique at the end of one movie only to keep reverting to JLaw every chance she got.

It's as if they the script wants to remind us The Highest Paid Actress in the WorldTM is playing her.

 

[The Guard]

Out of the FC I do feel Hoult is the least developed at times I feel he is an afterthought in the swamp of McAvoy, Fassbender and Lawrence. He does a little something movie by movie but not much at all.
I know what the Guard means saying in the comics the villains have flip flopped quite a bit but that over multiple comics not movie by movie. Also if they choose that to follow in the comics then they really should follow the characteristics of the characters they are using rather then making them mute or a background character. The personalities need to stand out in the cast from each character. Cyclops doesnt have to start off the movie as the leader but ill be happy with him or Storm working towards that goal and showing them grow which I really hope they do because movie by movie they drop the ball with certain characters. I dont want carbon copies of these people, they need to nail it to make it work.

The "flip flopping" complaint is a tad overblown. Magneto has been out for mutant survival and supremacy since Day One. Mystique has, with his influence, been for mutant survival and freedom. Which flip flopping is so heinous, exactly?

 

[The Guard]

So you want Cyclops to be like that?

Be like what?

JLaw for one, who was Mutant and Proud Mystique at the end of one movie only to keep reverting to JLaw every chance she got.

Since it became a driving point of her character at the end of First Class, she has pretty much never wavered in her fight for mutant rights.

You are confusing the real world reasons JLaw doesn't want to be painted blue with Mystiques character motivations. Mystiques feelings about mutants have not changed drastically since the end of First Class. Her approach to fighting for mutant freedom has, to a point.

 

[EnDz0n3]

UJ

Be like what?

So you want Cyclops to be like a minor character with minimal development per film. Like you said Beast didn't have a ton of development. He had some.

Since it became a driving point of her character at the end of First Class, she has pretty much never wavered in her fight for mutant rights.

You are confusing the real world reasons JLaw doesn't want to be painted blue with Mystiques character motivations. Mystiques feelings about mutants have not changed drastically since the end of First Class. Her approach to fighting for mutant freedom has, to a point.

I'm tired of talking about Mystique. My bad, for bringing her up.

 

[Jordacar]

Now I'm anxious to see them get DPX over with so that we can get closer to the full reboot, whatever form that takes (I'd prefer TV honestly).

 

[Phoenix_Flare]

Honestly for me if Magneto and Mystique are included I probably won't be so quick to see this movie simply because why wait to explain the Quicksilver and father dynamic after it was set up two movies ago and went nowhere. JLaw's Mystique bores me actually, like the OT Raven had so much edge and mystery and I feel like she was shoe horned into Apocalypse like "oh let's give Raven something to do oh yeah let's have her go back to the mansion she could care less about and the brother she hasn't seen in forever!" If the writers can't give these two characters something else to do outside of their FC relationship then I'm going to scream! Its as if Fox is scared to go with new villains they keep sticking to the formula and won't step outside of the box. Could you imagine if Marvel put Iron Man in every movie because he has to the supporting hero and he's responsible for the MCU even though he doesn't add to the plot? I like the X-Men movies but it's time for new blood and something fresh.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Now I'm anxious to see them get DPX over with so that we can get closer to the full reboot, whatever form that takes (I'd prefer TV honestly).

You think with all these other spin offs and shows they will make a full reboot anytime soon?

Its as if Fox is scared to go with new villains they keep sticking to the formula

To be fair we have had other villains, stryker, shaw, trask, apocalypse.

 

[Phoenix_Flare]

You think with all these other spin offs and shows they will make a full reboot anytime soon?



To be fair we have had other villains, stryker, shaw, trask, apocalypse.

I agree but we haven't seen those characters appear in 6 movies either and/or they are horribly developed. There was no reason to include Stryker in Apocalypse, his character didn't add anything to the plot nor did he care about Apocalypse. Now it would have added to his character if him and his soldiers would've aided them in stopping Apocalypse. We have yet to see humans and mutants working together to stop a threat (TLS does not count those soldiers stood in the background and First Class did it but I want it on a grander scale)

All I'm saying is it's time for new blood, no more of this I'm a villain then allies and then villains again with Erik and Raven, yes I know it works in the comic format but this is cinema and I think a lot of us are getting bored with that. Give us some pure authentic villains: Sinister, Marauders, Friends of humanity, Bastion, reintroduce a new Hellfire Club, etc if Magneto is back then give us a true Brotherhood of evil mutants

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

You are confusing the real world reasons JLaw doesn't want to be painted blue with Mystiques character motivations.

If it wasn't for those real world reasons then this wouldn't be happening in the first place.

 

[GuestStar2004]

We have yet to see humans and mutants working together to stop a threat (TLS does not count those soldiers stood in the background and First Class did it but I want it on a grander scale)

What about moira?

If it wasn't for those real world reasons then this wouldn't be happening in the first place.

But whose to say that?

With these last 3 films i remember for DOFP people went nuts that hoults wasn't in beast make up, i mean people hated it and it wasn't resolved by the end so it was pretty much there to make him hank again.

Same with Mcavoy i remember every movie people expected him to be bald and every time he wasn't people made a fuss and some even assumed mcavoy just wouldn't shave his head of the role.

Now obviously looking at Mystiques role in apocalypse chances are she wouldn't have been in make up all that much anyway because if they were planning on doing that whole she is recognised and the world is more accepting of mutants thing then she probably wouldn't be walking around signing autographs.

Course you could say that whole concept was created just for jlaw but that does undermine the creative minds of this franchise when they have already made decisions in the past all by themselves that people tend to complain about and they didn't need Jlaw to do that.

 

[2kt09]

I agree but we haven't seen those characters appear in 6 movies either and/or they are horribly developed. There was no reason to include Stryker in Apocalypse, his character didn't add anything to the plot nor did he care about Apocalypse. Now it would have added to his character if him and his soldiers would've aided them in stopping Apocalypse. We have yet to see humans and mutants working together to stop a threat (TLS does not count those soldiers stood in the background and First Class did it but I want it on a grander scale)

He was the first responder to the global disarmament. He captured the mutants + Rose Byrne after the mansion blew up to find out Xavier's (and obviously Apocalypse's whereabouts) since these guys just so happen to be in the thick of major events. I find Stryker and his men helping them harder to believe than Magneto temporarily joining the fray (and he's killed plenty). If MacTaggart has her own mutant protection dept/force, that's fine.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

But whose to say that?

Lawrence for publicly saying she's doesn't like wearing it

 

[The Guard]

So you want Cyclops to be like a minor character with minimal development per film. Like you said Beast didn't have a ton of development. He had some.

No. And I never said I wanted the exact same process for Cyclops. He already had more development in APOCALYPSE than Beast did. He's a more important character in this iteration of the franchise, I don't think we need to be worried about that so much.

 

[The Guard]

If it wasn't for those real world reasons then this wouldn't be happening in the first place.

Which is all well and good, but that has next to nothing to do with the actual character and her motivations within the films. Whether you like that the actual reason it happened or not, the reason she is "human" in appearance still makes sense within the context of the film.

The character within the films still has legitimate, developed reasons for doing things, and hasn't suddenly started "flip flopping" with regard to her motivations. She has had a gradually evolving change in her mindset about the human/mutant conflict and her role in it.

Unless character development, which people are clamoring for, and whining about the lack of, is now considered "flip flopping", even though her base motivations have not changed drastically.

It was stated earlier than Mystique is an example of "flip flopping", but that is just not correct. Mystique's actual motivations revolve around her desire to fight for mutants, and that has not changed since midway through FIRST CLASS.

Mystique's "Mutant and proud" at the end of FIRST CLASS was never just about "looking like a mutant". It was Mystique declaring her intent to fight for mutants at all costs, and she continues to do so for two more films, even going out on her own to do so after her friends/allies are captured/killed and Magneto is imprisoned.

Mystique herself, as a character, is essentially about "blending in" and "stealth". Not only is it her key mutant ability, but she clearly learns the value of stealth as she continues her work in the world. But when the character appears human in this franchise, the character appears human for that reason; stealth.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

Unless character development, which people are clamoring for, and whining about the lack of

I don't think anyone alive is clamoring for Mystique character development

 

[The Guard]

There was no reason to include Stryker in Apocalypse, his character didn't add anything to the plot nor did he care about Apocalypse.

He cares about mutant threats to national security. There was a clear one.

His character's actions allowed the younger X-Men to see what kinds of human/government threats there are in the world.

When writers decided that the younger X-Men needed to be captured/imprisoned, it made perfect sense to use Stryker, rather than some random government stooge.

Now it would have added to his character if him and his soldiers would've aided them in stopping Apocalypse. We have yet to see humans and mutants working together to stop a threat (TLS does not count those soldiers stood in the background and First Class did it but I want it on a grander scale)

The whole point of mutants fighting to protect humans is that mutants have such fantastic powers that humans would be screwed without the good mutants. Xavier says as much in X-MEN, and that's what THE LAST STAND's attempt by humans to stop Magneto was indicative of.