How Does X-Men: First Class Differ From The Comics?

I loved the movie, overall. I was only really bothered by the horrible child actor that played Magneto. Also, I didn't mind Beast being skinny as hell, but his facial prosthetics looked plain awful. Did you see when he was smiling while flying the jet?

xmen first class, xavier is a young chap lots of hair can walk.

xmen origins wolverine which takes place 10-15 years later, xavier is old man in wheel chair

xmen 3 - flashback xavier and magneto visit jean grey (charles, why you not have wheelchair????)

FUCK YOU HOLLYWOOD!!!

Wasn't Professor X always bald and in a wheelchair in the comics? James McAvoy should've shaved his head! And the timeline doesn't add up. Cyclops should be an X-Man before Havok, and Warren Worthington should be there before the other Angel. And Mystique was never an X-Man, so they took a major liberty on the source material there.

I know that I'm on a site full of comic purists, but if you ignore everything the comics said (alternate universe people), then the movie was actually really good. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and my friends did too. Yes there were bad parts, though in my opinion, very few. Forget about Lucifer, forget about Genesis, forget about the Summers family, forget about Nightcrawler, forget about absolutely everything from the comics and you'll enjoy it.

These comic movies are not adaptations. They are separate stand alone stories. I never watch a comic movie, especially a Marvel comic movie, expecting it to be a perfect adaptation of the comic. I learned awhile back if you think that way you're going to be thoroughly disappointed. So just go in with an open mind and enjoy the movie for what it is. X-Men: First Class was great btw. Probably the best X-men movie so far.

What do they call it comics in which they added thing that haven't been previously establish like what they're doing here? Alibiing?

I have read a lot about X-Men: First Class and the two upcoming movies, that would finally get a link with the other three. My only fear is that I am a big fan of Havok, and as far as I've read, he one of the possibilities is that he is going to be Scott's dad and not his brother,so they could chronologically be linked, but this is just one of the numerous possibilities, what I doubt that would happen, cause it would be very strange to Scott being son to Havok and probably Polaris...

More like, "How does X-Men: First Class NOT differ from the comics?"

Not a prequel...........If it's a prequel explain this.....Emma Frost being in origins (and Banshee is there as well younger no one ever mentions that one) , the opening to X3 where Charles and Eric go see Jean Grey in what is very much the early 90's, and unless Storm, Cyclops and Jean show up in the next movie, explain how they are not present in the first class seeing how they said in X1 they were his some of his first students..........Just explain in a logical cohesive manner without me stretching my imagination to comic level because if i do that then i will make my reasons i will like then go to see the next  movie only to be disappointed.

I don't understand why everyone is so gaga over this movie. Even looking past all the inaccuracies (which the average movie goer wouldn't know about and I'm fine with that) I didn't think it was good as a movie. Especially when it came to the scene where Shaw tries to get Erik to use his powers (Did anyone else immediately think of the god awful Vader reveal in Revenge of the Sith?) If I went in not knowing about the x-men, it probably would have been a 3 star movie at best, but it was tough to look past the changes and knocked it down to a one star for me. Still don't understand why critics are comparing it to the dark knight.

I honestly thought halfway through this movie is boring.. the it played out well and I liked it a lot.
 But see we all at Fallen Comics liked it and we can't wait to see the next ones.
 
I honestly think with the Xmen movies as the comics .. there has never been a set story.. everytime they invent a new xmen story there are new character or alternate styles of the previous characters. 
 
Get over it people.. you are all getting old with the stories played out. If nothing new and fresh comes around we are just going to see Charles Xavier die in different time periods 17000 more times and Storm will fall in love with Dracula. You all have to remember one thing that I will say again and again... "There has never in existence been a set timeline or storyline in the Xmen universe." .. do i need to repeat it again? "There has never in existence been a set timeline or storyline in the Xmen universe." lol 
 
Good movie! well thats my opinion!

This movie was great, I would totally read a movie-based First Class comic.

So there was a lot of talk about this being a prequel rather than a reboot. Does anyone else think that is the intent? Because as all ready has been pointed out this seems like quite a ways to go back if your starting the series over.

In basis, the Marvel movies are more Ultimate marvel than 616 (traditional Marvel) universe.  Either way, I liked First Class more than I thought I would.

Comic writers take liberties with these characters on a regular basis, so hollywierd is merely following suit.

xmen first class, xavier is a young chap lots of hair can walk.

xmen origins wolverine which takes place 10-15 years later, xavier is old man in wheel chair

xmen 3 - flashback xavier and magneto visit jean grey (charles, why you not have wheelchair????)

FUCK YOU HOLLYWOOD!!!

this movie kinda sucked to me 

Mytique acted like a whinny horny teen, Magneto acted like a child most the movie(letting his anger get the best of him), Emma Frost was boring and Darwin dying almost made me walk out. A few good things were Shaw and the way they used him, Riptide, Azarel, and Shaw destroying the compound was fun to watch, but in all the most memorable part was Logan's cameo.  The movie was descent if you completely ignore everything that happened in the comics. It was a been drawn out at some parts but for a reboot it was ok(don't care what they say this was a reboot, it didn't even follow the other rebooted X-Men movies). Hopefully if they do make a sequel they will improve on it, I just pray to God they don't try to change the comic i fit the movie.

Someone should tie the writers and directors up and FORCE THEM TO READ X-men First Class

I think it's interesting when people say, "i don't understand people are complaining about this movie."  When you have to separate a movie from what it was based on, it fails.  The best example of this was Batman and Robin, the worst batman movie to ever come out.  nipple suits and a funny batman, batgirl Alfred's niece??... wth!....Comic fans can generally forgive the inaccuracy in comic movies if the movie is done well, but when a movie has gone too far off the track it just isn't right trying to brand the movie for something it's not.  Dark Knight was an awesome movie, is it 100% accurate to batman no, but they came up with a story and made it believable for the characters. They have done an amazing job in casting the film, and the caliber of acting especially in Dark Knight was brilliant.
In the case of x-men they have never gotten it right, the most amazing things to come out of the x-men series was seeing Stewart Patrick as Professor X, and James Marsden as Cyclops, the rest of all of the other movies could have been recast and we wouldn't have known the difference. The Studio doesn't have to pick a wide range of cast members to fit into one story, core group of x-men, they go on a mission, they fight get capture, they breakout beat the bad guys they fly the blackbird home.  Sounds simple enough, but somehow it can't be done.  Any x-men one-shot can tell and entire story in less than 50 pages with some pages with just scenery and sound effects.  So please for those people who say they can't do a comic book and translate it into a movie that's complete bull. Scott Pilgrim was several little comic, Kick Ass also, and the director of Kick Ass directed first class if i'm not mistaken.  They only had minor changes to the story but it was believable to the movie.
I personally don't care if they come out with 2,3,4,5 more x-men movies, i know they won't get it right no matter what, and it's a shame i've been waiting for these movies to come out since the 80's.  I feel like i'm watching rise of the silver surfer FF4m and just seeing Galactus and a cloud of purple smoke for the first time.................

@rarecheshire said:

The guy who played Magneto was awesome. Emma Frost's actress wasn't as good as I hoped.

Agreed, casting Fassbender was inspired. January Jones as Emma was sad. Really the only real sore spot for the film for me.

I love how whenever an X-men film is released, no matter how good it is, fan boys line up to whine how butt hurt they feel. Why would anyone reasonable adult expect a movie to be an adaption. If the Watchman movie showed anything, it is being a slave to the source material does not translate into a good movie.

It was an excellent movie, enjoy it for what it is. After all, even if they did make sink with cannon which one would they pick? There so many inconsistencies and alternative threads in the comics themselves you would never make any purist happy.

If anyone says Thor was better than XMen First Class it will confirm to me that the world is full of idiots. First Class makes Thor even more embarrassing as a movie, and Thor already owned embarrassment as a concept. First Class was very good. Not great but a very solid very good. Thor, however, was high camp cow poo.

***SPOILER-ISH*** 
 
I thought the movie was great, and the stuff they told about Magneto was cool and even made sense for the character, but it's not a direction I would have gone in, were it up to me.  It kind of muddies his characterization to say that his personal philosophy lines up with that of a former Nazi, since he's hated Nazis and was a branded Jew.  However, considering his "any means necessary" methods of conquering or killing Homo Sapiens, it lines up just fine for them to have said that.  I don't like it personally, but it works.

I think it's interesting when people say, "i don't understand people are complaining about this movie."  When you have to separate a movie from what it was based on, it fails.    

@Sultan Gris:
cbishop : point of order - Schmidt (Shaw) is not a Nazi. Schmidt (Shaw) uses the second and third person when talking about the Nazi's, never the first person. Also, during one of the CIA briefings, it is mentioned he was a friend of the Nazi's, not that he was a Nazi. 
As for Erik Lensharr, he has always been a National Socialist (Nazi) in his personal philosophy. His nation (mutants, homo superior) are the natural masters of homo sapiens because of breeding alone. Just like the Aryan Race (get it - race) are superior to all other ethnic groups because of breeding alone. Like Hitler, Magneto believes regular humans should be ruled by and provide slave labor to mutants. Like Hitler, Magneto has a following based on the cult of HIS personality. Without him, the Brotherhood would always disband, because his was the binding force that kept the brotherhood together. Whereas Xavier's students believed in the dream of Mutants and Homo Sapiens living together for the betterment of all. Whenever Xavier was captured, kidnapped or messing with aliens (sometime gone for months at a time), the X-men continued to fight the good fight, pursuing the dream. (at least that's how things were in the 60s, 70s and 80s)
 
Ugh, library computer's giving me grief.  This is why I said it was still a good story, but not where I would have gone with it.  I can see that Magneto's philosophy lines up with Nazi beliefs somewhat, but if there's anything the man hates more than Homo Sapiens in general, it's Nazis in particular.  I just think the story should have left the viewer to draw their own comparisons to Magneto's beliefs and Nazi beliefs, rather than having him say he agrees with them... or even a friend of theirs.  It muddies his characterization too much.

@blacharrt said:

I think it's interesting when people say, "i don't understand people are complaining about this movie."  When you have to separate a movie from what it was based on, it fails.    

I strongly disagree. An adaptation needs to suit the new format and should not slavishly adhere to the original. If people want the original, they should just read/watch/listen to the original. I point to incredible, yet "unfaithful" adaptations such as Blade Runner and Children of Men as evidence of that. What's important with an adaptation is the answer to the question "Is it good?" not "Is it the same?"

I really don't get how comic book fans want to see the exact same characters in the exact same circumstances and scenarios as the book. This is an adaptation, and a very good one, which is rare. It has few to do with the x-men books, but is a very good movie. Much more than we could say about Wolverine, which just took a character, ruined it by making it made it pg-13, and shoe-horned a bunch of other characters... ugh, Gambit... what's his appeal?
 
Anyway, this was a very good film. Especially after what Fox has made us used to all this years.

@blacharrt: See, and I guess the difference is, I don't think you need a strong reason to make changes in an adaptation. Not unless you're changing the core concept of a character, which I define very narrowly.

@fodigg said:

@blacharrt: See, and I guess the difference is, I don't think you need a strong reason to make changes in an adaptation. Not unless you're changing the core concept of a character, which I define very narrowly.

Then i will ask you this, why did the studio take the time to buy the rights to these already well known characters, to turn the comic into a movie? As with a lot of films today, they probably just didn't feel like having to actually think of new concept for a story that people will actually like. I believe like with any comicbook turned movie, they wanted to captialize on the fanbase already there, and build on it to make even more money.  It spares them the real hard task of coming up with characters, because they already have a baseline to go from. That's when the distortion begins to take place. Casting is easy you just get people that kind of look like the characters already made up, and the director well that could be anyone, they don't even have to have prior knowledge of the character at all.  It's an easy cash cow, come up with new toys, games, monopoly etc. So what is there to adapt to film? Hell x-men has already been a tv show, and the tv show however different from the comics, has done some of the characters justice of course i'm referring to the 90's show.  In 30 minutes you can get a complete story, without losing the sense of who and what the xmen are about.  So i'm suppose to believe that a 30 minute cartoon can get it right but a 2 hour film can't?

@blacharrt said:

@fodigg said:

@blacharrt: See, and I guess the difference is, I don't think you need a strong reason to make changes in an adaptation. Not unless you're changing the core concept of a character, which I define very narrowly.

Then i will ask you this, why did the studio take the time to buy the rights to these already well known characters, to turn the comic into a movie? As with a lot of films today, they probably just didn't feel like having to actually think of new concept for a story that people will actually like. I believe like with any comicbook turned movie, they wanted to captialize on the fanbase already there, and build on it to make even more money.  It spares them the real hard task of coming up with characters, because they already have a baseline to go from. That's when the distortion begins to take place. Casting is easy you just get people that kind of look like the characters already made up, and the director well that could be anyone, they don't even have to have prior knowledge of the character at all.  It's an easy cash cow, come up with new toys, games, monopoly etc. So what is there to adapt to film? Hell x-men has already been a tv show, and the tv show however different from the comics, has done some of the characters justice of course i'm referring to the 90's show.  In 30 minutes you can get a complete story, without losing the sense of who and what the xmen are about.  So i'm suppose to believe that a 30 minute cartoon can get it right but a 2 hour film can't?

And that's a very fair question. Why buy something if you're going to change it? But you already have your answer: built-in fanbase. You act like that's a bad thing, but if it weren't the case, we would never get ANY adaptations. So if you believe it's evil I hope you at least see that it's a necessary evil to get these films in the first place.  But once the decision has been made to go with a property, it's really up to the creative team to come up with a quality interpretation of that property. However close or far that falls from the original, I think as long as it holds the core concept of the original work it's a "legitimate" adaptation, and I think as long as it's entertaining it's a good movie. I think we're only disagreeing in where we draw the line on legitimacy. You've said you're more forgiving of good movies, which is a sensible stance, but I do feel that you hold expectations of keeping to the original that are too high to begin with. Adaptations will have to shift, and it doesn't really matter if they do (IMO) as long as they hold the core concept, which I believe that XMFC did.

You mention "core concepts" and that is very important.  And it would be great if they actually kept that in mind.when making these films.  But the x-men characters are apart of that core concept. the first 3 x-men films were only there to buildup to the wolverine origin story, anyone who watched those films knew that going into it. The rest of the cast more or less were just extras, the second and third movies were blatantly about just wolverine, and they built a plot around him.  The main concept of x-men was tolerance, diversity, friendship/family, teamwork, and equality. The members of the teams embodied those principles, and in a times when those concepts weren't popular, they were reflective of our society as whole and how our society should be.  Mutants are clearly the outcast.  But we agree on a lot of things so again you are right about that, but i don't think my standard are too high, as i mention the cartoons particularly the one from the 90's got it right, but I love the new japanese anime version of the x-men as well, Storm and Emma are different then in the comics but it works with the japanese culture and the story they present.  i think for the films it's the opposite people have lowered the bar, with four previous disappointments they just want a good story at this point, doesn't matter if the characters don't fit.  i think they should have just made the magneto origins story like planned, in a way people see first class as that anyway.  We all know he was never with the first class team as any kind of mentor, and we know these characters presented were either not born or not in the situations presented with exception of Darwin, Moira, Sean, Charles, and Magneto who were around at the time. It's okay to tweak where there can and needs to be at a point.  Unless it's animated the x-men or comic, i just won't be seeing anymore movies. Everyone else is free to spend there hard earn-ed recession dollars on whatever they like, i'm just feel i don't need to buy into the x-men movie brand anymore.

@fodigg: exactly!

James Mcavoy is the worst part, but this whole movie sucks.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Not-My-Xavier/155443301261000

A list of what's similar to the comics would be shorter than what's different.