Why did Fox have to make 5 films for X-Men???

  • 0 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Spectacular_Iceman (47 posts) - - Show Bio

Now that there has already been 5 films for X-Men - Not to mention the upcoming "The Wolverine" movie - there is NO way for Marvel to take back X-Men's rights and put them in the Marvel Cinematic universe now that the Avengers has been made and released (Just saw it yesterday)... But, to keep fans hopes up, Nick Fury does mention in the Avengers that "There is too much POWER out there" - and that he can't control all of it (Referencing mutants, ya know?) - And, Kevin Feige has said that there is a possibility for Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch to be in an Avengers sequel - Screw that, there's NO point now, everyone loves Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, and if they reboot X-Men for the cinematic universe and replace the actor, people will get pissed... Damn you Fox...

#2 Posted by NlGHTCRAWLER (2887 posts) - - Show Bio

No, this is a good thing. The Avengers is almost too much without having to involve mutants into the equation.

#3 Posted by Blood1991 (8098 posts) - - Show Bio

Fox got paid and is gonna get paid. I'm against them making X-Men films and think they butchered every character in their films. As for adding mutants into the mix I agree that it would just make things a mess and non comic fans would just be confused.

#4 Posted by HammerTron (430 posts) - - Show Bio

This will give the Avengers and other characters a chance to shine.

#5 Posted by papad1992 (6811 posts) - - Show Bio

@Blood1991 said:

Fox got paid and is gonna get paid. I'm against them making X-Men films and think they butchered every character in their films. As for adding mutants into the mix I agree that it would just make things a mess and non comic fans would just be confused.

AGREED. But seeing Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch on the big screen would be amazing!!

#6 Edited by cattlebattle (12275 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't want the X-Men in the cinematic universe....because its been kind of unimpressive thus far (haven't seen Avengers yet)
 
I like Fox's more probable, X-Men world, with more subtle effects and more story. I have no need to see the X-Men fly around and blow stuff up in a 20 minute, CGI filled battle.
 
@Blood1991 said:

 I'm against them making X-Men films and think they butchered every character in their films.


Who did they butcher exactly....You know, they do make subtle changes to almost every comic character that appears on screen. Its not like Cyclops was a jacked up, cape wearing, hispanic guy who controlled solar energy....I think butchered is a bit of an exaggeration
#7 Posted by PhoenixoftheTides (3274 posts) - - Show Bio

@Blood1991: I don't think non-comics fans would care about the distinction. All they would know is that more super heroes and super villains showed up. In terms of execution, if a mutant character was asked where they got their powers, they would just say they were born with it and that would separate them from a character like Captain America or Iron Man.

#8 Posted by Iamlovewithin500 (1028 posts) - - Show Bio
@NlGHTCRAWLER said:

No, this is a good thing. The Avengers is almost too much without having to involve mutants into the equation.

Agreed 
 
 
@Blood1991 said:

Fox got paid and is gonna get paid. I'm against them making X-Men films and think they butchered every character in their films. As for adding mutants into the mix I agree that it would just make things a mess and non comic fans would just be confused.

No Marvel gets some of residuals too. People fail to realize that without Fox and Sony,and the original X-men films,there would be NO Marvel studios.The X-men films and the first Spiderman films opened the doors to a new age of superhero films. Also why cram the X-universe in with the Avengerverse or the rest of the Marvel movie verse? 
 
 
The X-men have always been separate, or should i say distant in a sense..well  for the most part, including now.That's why the term "X-ghettos" are used , because compared to the rest of the MU,Mutants are isolated and discriminated  against. 
We as fans could take the context of our own ideas and just simply say that maybe they do exist in the same universe. Just because we don't see Hugh Jackman and Robert Downy Jr interacting or passing each other down the street as their respective characters does not necessarily mean that we cant be open with our imaginations. (: 
 
 because Hugh as Wolvie deals with mutants threats and does his thing with the X-men.while in the Marvel movieverse  Ironman does his thing.  
 
The X-men films (and in the comics)  have always taken  deeper more realistic undertones,such as racism, equality issues etc.The X-men movieverse has a much more realistic feel to it,where as the Marvel cinematicverse/Avengers is more light hearted and  action packed. 
 
 
BTW can you really be that biased and say they butchered every character? 
 
Patrick Stewart as Charles was absolutely brilliant,and was the perfect choice IMO..
 
Hugh IS Wolverine, despite the height issues,he has Wolverine pretty much down packed. 
 
James Mardsen was a pretty decent Cyke,he just got screwed over with Screen time. 
 
Famkee was a stunning Jean Grey(Yeah they kinda  messed up Dark Phoenix..
 
Kelsey Grammar as Beast was another spot on choice. 
 
I could go on and on,but you get the point.
#9 Posted by Blood1991 (8098 posts) - - Show Bio

@Iamlovewithin500: What about Rouge? Storm? Kitty? Angel? They just disappointed me is all and while some characters had good actor fits I don't think the character showed through. just my opinion

@PhoenixoftheTides: I'm not sure, but It does add a bit of baggage to the logic of the entire Universe like Why are the Avengers the only ones here? The Fantastic Four are like three blocks away.

@cattlebattle: Perhaps a bit over dramatic, but its just my opinion and there were a lot of flaws in characters and in the plot imo

#10 Posted by SlackerGuy (20 posts) - - Show Bio

I just wish Sony would stop shitting all over spider-man's head every 3 years and let the property go back to Marvel. It would be so cool just to see him make a cameo in the avengers.

#11 Posted by Iamlovewithin500 (1028 posts) - - Show Bio
@Blood1991:  

What about Rouge? Storm? Kitty? Angel? They just disappointed me is all and while some characters had good actor fits I don't think the character showed through. just my opinion

 
Well Yeah they royally screwed Rogue over,but remember she was still pretty young too. Younger than her 616 self. 
 
Over time i could have seen Paquin evolve into a more sexy mature Rogue. Anna Paquin even expressed interest in portraying a sexier and southern belle sassy Rogue.I mean honestly she could have grown into the Ms. Marvel persona too,maybe in between X3 and if they make another X-men film(main trilogy)  she might have super strength and flight.(?) 
 
They changed Kitty actress SEVERAL times,but in the end they got it right. Ellen Page was cute as a button,and to be 20 something she still looks like a kid.teen..lol 
 
The guy who played Angel was gorgeous,can't remember  his name....but he had the looks.The only thing though,is that they brought him in too late 
 
But hey who knows, honestly right now it doesn't seem like Fox is letting go nay time soon.They were just talking about X-4 leading to X5.The Actors/Actresses are still at a decent age to continue playing the characters from the main trilogy(Most are in their early 40's some are still in their 20's.
 
For now I'm content with X-movieverse they have built,the only ones I really hate is Wolverine,and it wasn't in continuity with the other films.X-3 was bad,but not as bad as Wolvie.All the other X-movies such has X-men,X2,First Class have been phenomenal for me.
#12 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

Why did they make five? Because 4 of them were amazing! The one that wasn't was X-men: First Class.

Online
#13 Posted by RogueOracle (242 posts) - - Show Bio

I would like to see them do more one-shot films, focusing on different characters and focussing on a much smaller cast.

#14 Posted by cattlebattle (12275 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheCannon said:

Why did they make five? Because 4 of them were amazing! The one that wasn't was X-men: First Class.

What???? I'll admit, X3 wasn't as bad as some make it out to be.....but the Wolverine solo movie was just terrible....I mean an adamantium bullet...erases his memory!? Who wrote this stuff?
 
First Class was excellent IMO
#15 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon said:

Why did they make five? Because 4 of them were amazing! The one that wasn't was X-men: First Class.

I hope you're joking.

#16 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

Why did they make five? Because 4 of them were amazing! The one that wasn't was X-men: First Class.

I hope you're joking.

I am not.

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

Why did they make five? Because 4 of them were amazing! The one that wasn't was X-men: First Class.

What???? I'll admit, X3 wasn't as bad as some make it out to be.....but the Wolverine solo movie was just terrible....I mean an adamantium bullet...erases his memory!? Who wrote this stuff? First Class was excellent IMO

The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Online
#17 Posted by cattlebattle (12275 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheCannon said:



The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Are you trolling?? explain this please
#18 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Are you trolling?? explain this please

First Class > X-Men 2 > X-Men > Last Stand > Wolverine: Origins.

#19 Posted by BlackArmor (6121 posts) - - Show Bio

Fox X-movies (other than X1 and 2) = Unwatchable

#20 Posted by cattlebattle (12275 posts) - - Show Bio
@John Valentine said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Are you trolling?? explain this please

First Class > X-Men 2 > X-Men > Last Stand > Wolverine: Origins.

I would change X-men 2 at the top and tie X-Men 1 and First Class probably, I have sentimentality for the first X-men film. Some continuity issues bothered me in First Class... 
 
#21 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle said:

@John Valentine said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Are you trolling?? explain this please

First Class > X-Men 2 > X-Men > Last Stand > Wolverine: Origins.

I would change X-men 2 at the top and tie X-Men 1 and First Class probably, I have sentimentality for the first X-men film. Some continuity issues bothered me in First Class...

That was one of my issues with First Class. Along with most actors (Michael Fassbender was an exception) being horrible, not true at all to the comics, ect.

@John Valentine said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Are you trolling?? explain this please

First Class > X-Men 2 > X-Men > Last Stand > Wolverine: Origins.

No. It's Last Stand > X2: X-men United > X-men Origins: Wolverine/X-men (it's a tie) > Nothing > nothing > nothing > First Class

Online
#22 Posted by cattlebattle (12275 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

@John Valentine said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Are you trolling?? explain this please

First Class > X-Men 2 > X-Men > Last Stand > Wolverine: Origins.

I would change X-men 2 at the top and tie X-Men 1 and First Class probably, I have sentimentality for the first X-men film. Some continuity issues bothered me in First Class...

That was one of my issues with First Class. Along with most actors (Michael Fassbender was an exception) being horrible, not true at all to the comics, ect.


First Class was fairly true to the comics, the X-Men have decades of extremely convoluted history to go on, so changes are expected. Even if you don't appreciate the portrayals....you have to appreciate the cinematography,  dialogue,story etc...just a well executed film.
#23 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon said:

@John Valentine said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Are you trolling?? explain this please

First Class > X-Men 2 > X-Men > Last Stand > Wolverine: Origins.

No. It's Last Stand > X2: X-men United > X-men Origins: Wolverine/X-men (it's a tie) > Nothing > nothing > nothing > First Class

Last Stand was an absolute abomination of a film that ruined the work of the first two films. Just no.

You can't cite continuity issues as a problem for you if you liked Wolverine: Origins and Last Stand. Guess what? Storm wasn't an original X-Man. Angel certainly joined before her.

Wolverine Origins is a massive joke. Hugh Jackman's Wolverine is good, though I'm not a fan of the humour that's employed with him; he was the only decent part of Wolverine Origins.

#24 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

@John Valentine said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Are you trolling?? explain this please

First Class > X-Men 2 > X-Men > Last Stand > Wolverine: Origins.

I would change X-men 2 at the top and tie X-Men 1 and First Class probably, I have sentimentality for the first X-men film. Some continuity issues bothered me in First Class...

That was one of my issues with First Class. Along with most actors (Michael Fassbender was an exception) being horrible, not true at all to the comics, ect.

First Class was fairly true to the comics, the X-Men have decades of extremely convoluted history to go on, so changes are expected. Even if you don't appreciate the portrayals....you have to appreciate the cinematography, dialogue,story etc...just a well executed film.

It wan't true to the comics at all. Not fairly true, not true at all. Banshee, Mystique, Havok, ect were not on the original roster. And I didn't like the dialogue. I didn't beleive it when I heard it, it didn't sound like a real conversation. The main idea for the story was okay, but it was done wrong. The romance of the movie made no sense. Plus, as pervious mentioned, all of the continuity errors. I could go on for hous naming them, but I don't feel like typing them. It was just an overrated movie.

Online
#25 Posted by cattlebattle (12275 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheCannon said:


It wan't true to the comics at all. Not fairly true, not true at all. Banshee, Mystique, Havok, ect were not on the original roster. And I didn't like the dialogue. I didn't beleive it when I heard it, it didn't sound like a real conversation. The main idea for the story was okay, but it was done wrong. The romance of the movie made no sense. Plus, as pervious mentioned, all of the continuity errors. I could go on for hous naming them, but I don't feel like typing them. It was just an overrated movie.

So what, Black Widow and Hawkeye weren't original Avengers. Batman wasn't trained by Ra's Al Ghul...I could go on...in fact, they didn't even go by the X-men as a team name officially in the movie... 
 
Like I said, fairly true, true enough where it needed to be..
 
The fact that those characters not being original X-Men argument holds no water anyways.....its an alternate universe, like the Ultimate, or Age of Apocalypse...where int the world does it say it has to be accurate to the comics????
#26 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

@John Valentine said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

The Wolverine movie was amazing! And X-men: First Class is overrated.

Are you trolling?? explain this please

First Class > X-Men 2 > X-Men > Last Stand > Wolverine: Origins.

No. It's Last Stand > X2: X-men United > X-men Origins: Wolverine/X-men (it's a tie) > Nothing > nothing > nothing > First Class

Last Stand was an absolute abomination of a film that ruined the work of the first two films. Just no.

You can't cite continuity issues as a problem for you if you liked Wolverine: Origins and Last Stand. Guess what? Storm wasn't an original X-Man. Angel certainly joined before her.

Wolverine Origins is a massive joke. Hugh Jackman's Wolverine is good, though I'm not a fan of the humour that's employed with him; he was the only decent part of Wolverine Origins.

Thhe Last Stand was the best of the X-men movies. The only bad part about it was Juggernaut, but I can work past that and look at the amazing plot, the great actors, and everything else great about it.

I don't mind if certain things are changed from the comics, but not every little detail. That was my problem with First Class. And when I say continuity, I'm refering to the other movies. Not the comics.

No. The Wolverine movie was amazing. A good plot, it explained things from the other X-men movies. And there were more good actors in Wolverine than Hugh Jackman. I'm not familiar with their names, but the guy that played Sabertooth, Willaim Stryker, and I thought whoever did Gambit was amazing. Not as good as Jackman, but still amazing.

Online
#27 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon said:

It wan't true to the comics at all. Not fairly true, not true at all. Banshee, Mystique, Havok, ect were not on the original roster. And I didn't like the dialogue. I didn't beleive it when I heard it, it didn't sound like a real conversation. The main idea for the story was okay, but it was done wrong. The romance of the movie made no sense. Plus, as pervious mentioned, all of the continuity errors. I could go on for hous naming them, but I don't feel like typing them. It was just an overrated movie.

Come off it.

  • Storm wasn't an original X-Man, as implied by the first film. She certainly wasn't an X-Man before Angel or Iceman.
  • Senator Kelly was never forcefully made into a mutant.
  • Pyro was never in Magneto's brotherhood, nor was he an X-Man.
  • Sabretooth is not Wolverine's brother.

Etc. Arguing adherence to comics is a moot point when discussing other media.

First Class is a lot better in terms of relevance to the X-Mythos than all of the other films put together, regardless of any small continuity errors.

As if Storm saying the stuff she does in any of the X-Men films sounds like real conversation.....

Romance between Beast and Mystique not making sense? The romance worked perfectly fine. Both were afflicted with outwardly obvious mutant powers and found common ground and attraction because of it.

#28 Posted by AweSam (7066 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine said:

First Class > X-Men 2 > X-Men > Last Stand > Wolverine: Origins.

Agreed.

#29 Posted by StarKiller809 (1214 posts) - - Show Bio

I think that this is a good thing. Avengers was good but I think it had a different tone. Plus, if you put the two together, the only reason to have them together would be for a crossover; and I think it was amazing to get a good Avengers movie, I wouldn't try Avengers and the X-Men.  
 
If you did put the two together, I think it would be easy to get the actors for Disney. I'm not sure if anyone of them has a Fox contract or something... 
 
Anyway, keep them separate. 

#30 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

It wan't true to the comics at all. Not fairly true, not true at all. Banshee, Mystique, Havok, ect were not on the original roster. And I didn't like the dialogue. I didn't beleive it when I heard it, it didn't sound like a real conversation. The main idea for the story was okay, but it was done wrong. The romance of the movie made no sense. Plus, as pervious mentioned, all of the continuity errors. I could go on for hous naming them, but I don't feel like typing them. It was just an overrated movie.

So what, Black Widow and Hawkeye weren't original Avengers. Batman wasn't trained by Ra's Al Ghul...I could go on...in fact, they didn't even go by the X-men as a team name officially in the movie... Like I said, fairly true, true enough where it needed to be.. The fact that those characters not being original X-Men argument holds no water anyways.....its an alternate universe, like the Ultimate, or Age of Apocalypse...where int the world does it say it has to be accurate to the comics????

I don't mind changing things slightly for the movies. They had Hulk in the Avengers, which I liked. I didn't mind Widow or Hawkeye on the team either. And I hated Batman Begins, so no comment on the Ra's stuff. And First Class was not true at ALL. The X-men never knew of the Hellfire Club until the Dark Phoenix Saga, not before Xavier and Magneto became enemies (or however you want to put it). And it always means Doom when they take things from the Ultimate Universe. Look at the FF movies.

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

It wan't true to the comics at all. Not fairly true, not true at all. Banshee, Mystique, Havok, ect were not on the original roster. And I didn't like the dialogue. I didn't beleive it when I heard it, it didn't sound like a real conversation. The main idea for the story was okay, but it was done wrong. The romance of the movie made no sense. Plus, as pervious mentioned, all of the continuity errors. I could go on for hous naming them, but I don't feel like typing them. It was just an overrated movie.

Come off it.

  • Storm wasn't an original X-Man, as implied by the first film. She certainly wasn't an X-Man before Angel or Iceman.
  • Senator Kelly was never forcefully made into a mutant.
  • Pyro was never in Magneto's brotherhood, nor was he an X-Man.
  • Sabretooth is not Wolverine's brother.

Etc. Arguing adherence to comics is a moot point when discussing other media.

First Class is a lot better in terms of relevance to the X-Mythos than all of the other films put together, regardless of any small continuity errors.

As if Storm saying the stuff she does in any of the X-Men films sounds like real conversation.....

Romance between Beast and Mystique not making sense? The romance worked perfectly fine. Both were afflicted with outwardly obvious mutant powers and found common ground and attraction because of it.

I don't mind changing things slightly from comics. Storm an original X-man makes sense, since you can't do an X-men movie withot her. I did not like the Kelly stuff. They should of kept him around so they could do the Sentinels. I'd rather see Pyro than some of the other mutants in the Bortherhood, so they made the right move there. The Sabertooth stuff bothered me a little, but I could get past that.

Ignoring the moot point stuff.

Small continuity errors? There were probably hundreds. If you gave me 3 hours, I could have them all for you.

Ignoring Storm, because most of her stuff sounded real (once you take out the Toad struck by lightning thing)

They couldn't even keep Mystique with one person in the movie. They tried to work in some stuff with her and Magneto and Xavier in there too. It just didn't work.

Online
#31 Posted by GothamRed (2561 posts) - - Show Bio

they made 5 so that they don't lose the license back to marvel

#32 Posted by cattlebattle (12275 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

It wan't true to the comics at all. Not fairly true, not true at all. Banshee, Mystique, Havok, ect were not on the original roster. And I didn't like the dialogue. I didn't beleive it when I heard it, it didn't sound like a real conversation. The main idea for the story was okay, but it was done wrong. The romance of the movie made no sense. Plus, as pervious mentioned, all of the continuity errors. I could go on for hous naming them, but I don't feel like typing them. It was just an overrated movie.

So what, Black Widow and Hawkeye weren't original Avengers. Batman wasn't trained by Ra's Al Ghul...I could go on...in fact, they didn't even go by the X-men as a team name officially in the movie... Like I said, fairly true, true enough where it needed to be.. The fact that those characters not being original X-Men argument holds no water anyways.....its an alternate universe, like the Ultimate, or Age of Apocalypse...where int the world does it say it has to be accurate to the comics????

I don't mind changing things slightly for the movies. They had Hulk in the Avengers, which I liked. I didn't mind Widow or Hawkeye on the team either. And I hated Batman Begins, so no comment on the Ra's stuff. And First Class was not true at ALL. The X-men never knew of the Hellfire Club until the Dark Phoenix Saga, not before Xavier and Magneto became enemies (or however you want to put it). And it always means Doom when they take things from the Ultimate Universe. Look at the FF movies.


Ok, I am starting to question your logic here....because A character didn't meet B character until a certain time in the comic you don't like First Class..but think Wolverine was better....Wolverine meets Cyclops and other mutants when they were kids for christs sake...
 
The X-Men films were primarily around before the Ultimate Universe and I didn't say they took any ideas from it...I am just saying the movies are taking place in an alternate Universe...like the Ultimate X-Men
 
 
So your argument goes like this??? "I hated First Class because its not like the comics" 
 
but.....You like Wolverine because it wasn't like the comics??  but thats ok???
 
No offense man, but your argument makes no sense
#33 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon said:

Thhe Last Stand was the best of the X-men movies. The only bad part about it was Juggernaut, but I can work past that and look at the amazing plot, the great actors, and everything else great about it.

I don't mind if certain things are changed from the comics, but not every little detail. That was my problem with First Class. And when I say continuity, I'm refering to the other movies. Not the comics.

No. The Wolverine movie was amazing. A good plot, it explained things from the other X-men movies. And there were more good actors in Wolverine than Hugh Jackman. I'm not familiar with their names, but the guy that played Sabertooth, Willaim Stryker, and I thought whoever did Gambit was amazing. Not as good as Jackman, but still amazing.

  • They killed off Cyclops with absolutely no point. Nothing became of his death. No emotional resonance.
  • Storm did basically nothing.
  • They killed off Xavier - one of the best aspects of the trilogy. What a waste of Patrick Stewart's talents. I suppose I can reconcile
  • Angel, Colossus and Rogue were completely wasted as characters. Rogue was de-powered.
  • The only character with any valid focus was Wolverine.
  • It was a complete change of tone from the first two films. Different thematically and creatively. Discrepancy in continuity between them alone. Where was Nightcrawler? POOR SHOW.
  • Dark Phoenix was a wasted villain. The film focused on two plots and ended up watering them both down.

Etc etc.

The film was a terribly wasted opportunity on Fox's part that failed to live up to the promise of the first two excellent films. Any X-Fan, fan of the first two films, or just a lover of good films should not like X-3.

There was no plot in Wolverine: Origins. It was just a mash of random action scenes. It explained things from X-2, barely.

Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan as Xavier and Magneto respectively, in the first three films. Enough said.

The other actors in Wolverine: Origins cannot be compared to them. The guy who played Stryker in X-2 was way better than the guy who played him in Wolverine. Gambit barely had a roll at all.

#34 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon said:

Small continuity errors? There were probably hundreds. If you gave me 3 hours, I could have them all for you.

Ignoring Storm, because most of her stuff sounded real (once you take out the Toad struck by lightning thing)

They couldn't even keep Mystique with one person in the movie. They tried to work in some stuff with her and Magneto and Xavier in there too. It just didn't work.

You have as much time as you want to list them. There were about as many significant ones as between the original three films and Wolverine: Origins.

They couldn't make certain members because they had to try and keep it largely within the continuity of the first few films. The biggest continuity breach was Charles still being able to walk at the beginning of X-3, but most people hate X-3 so much that they just forget about it. It's also worth nothing that the First Class break-up of Charles and Magneto's friendship is more reflective of the comics.

It showed her transition throughout the movie and at the end displayed how the different sides, of both Erik and Charles, had formed. She went from loving a man who could only see her as a sister and admire her as an object of beauty when she was in human form, to a liking a man who liked her reciprocally but was unhappy with his form also, to a man who encouraged her to embrace her status as a mutant. Progression.

The history of Magneto and his characterization as a man with nothing left to lose/ Nazi-hunter was superb. It was a nice, fresh look at both younger versions of Xavier and Magneto and seeing how they became who they did.

Shaw was a compelling villain too. The film was more mature, darker and dealt with the core themes of the X-Men to a much better degree than the other films.

#35 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

It wan't true to the comics at all. Not fairly true, not true at all. Banshee, Mystique, Havok, ect were not on the original roster. And I didn't like the dialogue. I didn't beleive it when I heard it, it didn't sound like a real conversation. The main idea for the story was okay, but it was done wrong. The romance of the movie made no sense. Plus, as pervious mentioned, all of the continuity errors. I could go on for hous naming them, but I don't feel like typing them. It was just an overrated movie.

So what, Black Widow and Hawkeye weren't original Avengers. Batman wasn't trained by Ra's Al Ghul...I could go on...in fact, they didn't even go by the X-men as a team name officially in the movie... Like I said, fairly true, true enough where it needed to be.. The fact that those characters not being original X-Men argument holds no water anyways.....its an alternate universe, like the Ultimate, or Age of Apocalypse...where int the world does it say it has to be accurate to the comics????

I don't mind changing things slightly for the movies. They had Hulk in the Avengers, which I liked. I didn't mind Widow or Hawkeye on the team either. And I hated Batman Begins, so no comment on the Ra's stuff. And First Class was not true at ALL. The X-men never knew of the Hellfire Club until the Dark Phoenix Saga, not before Xavier and Magneto became enemies (or however you want to put it). And it always means Doom when they take things from the Ultimate Universe. Look at the FF movies.

Ok, I am starting to question your logic here....because A character didn't meet B character until a certain time in the comic you don't like First Class..but think Wolverine was better....Wolverine meets Cyclops and other mutants when they were kids for christs sake... The X-Men films were primarily around before the Ultimate Universe and I didn't say they took any ideas from it...I am just saying the movies are taking place in an alternate Universe...like the Ultimate X-Men So your argument goes like this??? "I hated First Class because its not like the comics" but.....You like Wolverine because it wasn't like the comics?? but thats ok??? No offense man, but your argument makes no sense

No, I am saying one of the reasonis I didn't like first Class was because it was completly different from the comics. That is only one reason. I would probably take so long putting every reason that you would think I never responded.

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

Thhe Last Stand was the best of the X-men movies. The only bad part about it was Juggernaut, but I can work past that and look at the amazing plot, the great actors, and everything else great about it.

I don't mind if certain things are changed from the comics, but not every little detail. That was my problem with First Class. And when I say continuity, I'm refering to the other movies. Not the comics.

No. The Wolverine movie was amazing. A good plot, it explained things from the other X-men movies. And there were more good actors in Wolverine than Hugh Jackman. I'm not familiar with their names, but the guy that played Sabertooth, Willaim Stryker, and I thought whoever did Gambit was amazing. Not as good as Jackman, but still amazing.

  • They killed off Cyclops with absolutely no point. Nothing became of his death. No emotional resonance.
  • Storm did basically nothing.
  • They killed off Xavier - one of the best aspects of the trilogy. What a waste of Patrick Stewart's talents. I suppose I can reconcile
  • Angel, Colossus and Rogue were completely wasted as characters. Rogue was de-powered.
  • The only character with any valid focus was Wolverine.
  • It was a complete change of tone from the first two films. Different thematically and creatively. Discrepancy in continuity between them alone. Where was Nightcrawler? POOR SHOW.
  • Dark Phoenix was a wasted villain. The film focused on two plots and ended up watering them both down.

Etc etc.

The film was a terribly wasted opportunity on Fox's part that failed to live up to the promise of the first two excellent films. Any X-Fan, fan of the first two films, or just a lover of good films should not like X-3.

There was no plot in Wolverine: Origins. It was just a mash of random action scenes. It explained things from X-2, barely.

Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan as Xavier and Magneto respectively, in the first three films. Enough said.

The other actors in Wolverine: Origins cannot be compared to them. The guy who played Stryker in X-2 was way better than the guy who played him in Wolverine. Gambit barely had a roll at all.

Cyclops death was suppose to push what was going on with Jean. Define "basically nothing" and I'll respond. The creators of the movie (their names escape me) said that it was for an emotional part of the movie and for the team, like the death of Spock (I think that's his name) in one of the Star Trek movies. Colossus, yes, he was. Angel was used decently. They could of done a little better, but he was pretty good. Rogue was done good in the movie, and anyone with half a brain knows the cure wasn't permanate. You're forgetting Jean. Magneto, Storm, ect. No continuity errors in the movie. Nightcrawler's absence is explained in X: the Offical Game. Dark Phoenix was done well. Not how I would of done it, but done well.

I am a huge X-men fan, and X: the LAst Stand is one of my favorite movies.

Did you even see Wolverine? You're saying there's no plot.

It you're going to say that, you have to say Nuff said. You can't say enough said, it has to be nuff said. And I'm not sure if you're saying they're bad or good, but they were some of the best parts of the series.

I agree with the Stryker thing, but whoever played him in Wolverine did a ood job for a Young Stryker. And they couldn't of had the final battle of the movie without Gambit. Gambit was one of the best parts of the movie. At least we knew who he was, not a nobody like the teleporting guy.

Online
#36 Posted by cattlebattle (12275 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:


No, I am saying one of the reasonis I didn't like first Class was because it was completly different from the comics. That is only one reason. I would probably take so long putting every reason that you would think I never responded.


So...your saying you don't like First Class because its nothing like the comics??
 
Neither is Wolverine or X3...yet you think those movies are great??
 
I don't get it
#37 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

It wan't true to the comics at all. Not fairly true, not true at all. Banshee, Mystique, Havok, ect were not on the original roster. And I didn't like the dialogue. I didn't beleive it when I heard it, it didn't sound like a real conversation. The main idea for the story was okay, but it was done wrong. The romance of the movie made no sense. Plus, as pervious mentioned, all of the continuity errors. I could go on for hous naming them, but I don't feel like typing them. It was just an overrated movie.

So what, Black Widow and Hawkeye weren't original Avengers. Batman wasn't trained by Ra's Al Ghul...I could go on...in fact, they didn't even go by the X-men as a team name officially in the movie... Like I said, fairly true, true enough where it needed to be.. The fact that those characters not being original X-Men argument holds no water anyways.....its an alternate universe, like the Ultimate, or Age of Apocalypse...where int the world does it say it has to be accurate to the comics????

I don't mind changing things slightly for the movies. They had Hulk in the Avengers, which I liked. I didn't mind Widow or Hawkeye on the team either. And I hated Batman Begins, so no comment on the Ra's stuff. And First Class was not true at ALL. The X-men never knew of the Hellfire Club until the Dark Phoenix Saga, not before Xavier and Magneto became enemies (or however you want to put it). And it always means Doom when they take things from the Ultimate Universe. Look at the FF movies.

Ok, I am starting to question your logic here....because A character didn't meet B character until a certain time in the comic you don't like First Class..but think Wolverine was better....Wolverine meets Cyclops and other mutants when they were kids for christs sake... The X-Men films were primarily around before the Ultimate Universe and I didn't say they took any ideas from it...I am just saying the movies are taking place in an alternate Universe...like the Ultimate X-Men So your argument goes like this??? "I hated First Class because its not like the comics" but.....You like Wolverine because it wasn't like the comics?? but thats ok??? No offense man, but your argument makes no sense

No, I am saying one of the reasonis I didn't like first Class was because it was completly different from the comics. That is only one reason. I would probably take so long putting every reason that you would think I never responded.

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

Thhe Last Stand was the best of the X-men movies. The only bad part about it was Juggernaut, but I can work past that and look at the amazing plot, the great actors, and everything else great about it.

I don't mind if certain things are changed from the comics, but not every little detail. That was my problem with First Class. And when I say continuity, I'm refering to the other movies. Not the comics.

No. The Wolverine movie was amazing. A good plot, it explained things from the other X-men movies. And there were more good actors in Wolverine than Hugh Jackman. I'm not familiar with their names, but the guy that played Sabertooth, Willaim Stryker, and I thought whoever did Gambit was amazing. Not as good as Jackman, but still amazing.

  • They killed off Cyclops with absolutely no point. Nothing became of his death. No emotional resonance.
  • Storm did basically nothing.
  • They killed off Xavier - one of the best aspects of the trilogy. What a waste of Patrick Stewart's talents. I suppose I can reconcile
  • Angel, Colossus and Rogue were completely wasted as characters. Rogue was de-powered.
  • The only character with any valid focus was Wolverine.
  • It was a complete change of tone from the first two films. Different thematically and creatively. Discrepancy in continuity between them alone. Where was Nightcrawler? POOR SHOW.
  • Dark Phoenix was a wasted villain. The film focused on two plots and ended up watering them both down.

Etc etc.

The film was a terribly wasted opportunity on Fox's part that failed to live up to the promise of the first two excellent films. Any X-Fan, fan of the first two films, or just a lover of good films should not like X-3.

There was no plot in Wolverine: Origins. It was just a mash of random action scenes. It explained things from X-2, barely.

Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan as Xavier and Magneto respectively, in the first three films. Enough said.

The other actors in Wolverine: Origins cannot be compared to them. The guy who played Stryker in X-2 was way better than the guy who played him in Wolverine. Gambit barely had a roll at all.

Cyclops death was suppose to push what was going on with Jean. Define "basically nothing" and I'll respond. The creators of the movie (their names escape me) said that it was for an emotional part of the movie and for the team, like the death of Spock (I think that's his name) in one of the Star Trek movies. Colossus, yes, he was. Angel was used decently. They could of done a little better, but he was pretty good. Rogue was done good in the movie, and anyone with half a brain knows the cure wasn't permanate. You're forgetting Jean. Magneto, Storm, ect. No continuity errors in the movie. Nightcrawler's absence is explained in X: the Offical Game. Dark Phoenix was done well. Not how I would of done it, but done well.

I am a huge X-men fan, and X: the LAst Stand is one of my favorite movies.

Did you even see Wolverine? You're saying there's no plot.

It you're going to say that, you have to say Nuff said. You can't say enough said, it has to be nuff said. And I'm not sure if you're saying they're bad or good, but they were some of the best parts of the series.

I agree with the Stryker thing, but whoever played him in Wolverine did a ood job for a Young Stryker. And they couldn't of had the final battle of the movie without Gambit. Gambit was one of the best parts of the movie. At least we knew who he was, not a nobody like the teleporting guy.

  • More like a massive "F@ck you" from Fox to Bryan Singer, the director of the first two films. It was hardly emotional. Her roll, like Cyclops', was greatly reduced.
  • Angel had like five minutes screen time in the movie. He was not used decently. He was bland and lacked any sense of character. Poorly cast.
  • Anyone with "half a brain" would not use "would of", "permanate" or "done good".
  • Jean was neither good, nor bad. Though they rush the Dark Phoenix plot and just seemed to cram it in for the hell of it.

No, I'm commenting for the fun of it.... Yes, I have seen Wolverine. The plot was thin, at best, certainly not on the level of what X-Men 2 and First Class try to do thematically.

Their performances are far superior to anyone else's in the franchise bar maybe Fassbender and McAvoy in First Class. They portray the characters as they are shown in the comics. Hallie Berry's Storm is no way near as assertive as Storm should be. Hugh Jackman's Wolverine is not grumpy enough. Iceman was dull.

If you liked Wolverine you'd know who John Wraith was. They ruined Deadpool too. Completely forgot about that.

#38 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

Small continuity errors? There were probably hundreds. If you gave me 3 hours, I could have them all for you.

Ignoring Storm, because most of her stuff sounded real (once you take out the Toad struck by lightning thing)

They couldn't even keep Mystique with one person in the movie. They tried to work in some stuff with her and Magneto and Xavier in there too. It just didn't work.

You have as much time as you want to list them. There were about as many significant ones as between the original three films and Wolverine: Origins.

They couldn't make certain members because they had to try and keep it largely within the continuity of the first few films. The biggest continuity breach was Charles still being able to walk at the beginning of X-3, but most people hate X-3 so much that they just forget about it. It's also worth nothing that the First Class break-up of Charles and Magneto's friendship is more reflective of the comics.

It showed her transition throughout the movie and at the end displayed how the different sides, of both Erik and Charles, had formed. She went from loving a man who could only see her as a sister and admire her as an object of beauty when she was in human form, to a liking a man who liked her reciprocally but was unhappy with his form also, to a man who encouraged her to embrace her status as a mutant. Progression.

The history of Magneto and his characterization as a man with nothing left to lose/ Nazi-hunter was superb. It was a nice, fresh look at both younger versions of Xavier and Magneto and seeing how they became who they did.

Shaw was a compelling villain too. The film was more mature, darker and dealt with the core themes of the X-Men to a much better degree than the other films.

  • Xavier had his hair when he couldn't walk, while in the Last Stand and Wolverine, he was walking with no hair.
  • Magneto's different costume at the end of First Class compared to the rest of the series.
  • There was already an Emma Frost in Wolverine.
  • Beast didn't have his fur in X2 (you can see him on TV towards the end)
  • The Brotherhood roster was too different from X-men and First Class. The group in X-men was said to be Magneto's first.
  • In X-men, they said Magneto helped build Cerebro. In First Class, Beast made it alone.
  • First Class is set in the 60s. Meanwhile, there is a cameo of Storm. That means she would have to be in her 40s by the time X-men came.
  • Moria Mactraggart (or however you spell her name) appeared in the Last Stand. She looked to be in her 30s or 40s there. In First Class, she looked to be in her 20s. That means she would be in her 80s be the time X-men roled around.
  • Sebastian Stan cameo at the end of X2. I'm not even going to explain what's wrong with that.
  • In X-men, Xavier said that Cyclops, Jean, and Storm were his first students. Well, there was a team of X-men in the 60s, and there had to be new recruits made since then besides those three.
  • How could beast look like he has only aged 10 years over a course of 40?

Do I really need to go on?

Online
#39 Posted by Lokheit (492 posts) - - Show Bio

I think from the 5 movies, only 1 and 2 are "watchable".

Excluding the fact that they completly destroyed every character (seriously, in most cases they could've invented the character name and powers and do a movie on a brand new universe and the story would make sense, the names were here just to atract comic fans and disappoint them), the films, as proper films, were horrible.

Only the 2 first ones are at least watchable. The rest are complete crap as films.

X3 tries to introduce too many characters and ends up doing cero character development for trying too much, not to mention the inexplicable deaths without repercursions and a lot of non senses.

Wolverine was bad too, good action but bad film and with big holes in the plot. When I saw it, what I though was: "ok, this was the excuse for recently named sexiest man Hugh Jackman to show his naked body without being called a perv".

And First Class? First Class was a total joke. The hole idea of the film was the evolution of Xavier and Erik and how they ended up being who they were. But instead of showing any development, Erik kills Shaw (AKA Mr Sinister with Bishop powers) and suddenly in a blink, he is a mutant supremacist without any development on that part except 1 or 2 loose phrases in the whole film. I was like: "what...? really? now he suddenly stopped hating nazis to hate humankind? really?". Also that film not only doesn't respect the comic books, but also the saga continuity as all of them are supposed to be part of the same universe and still they ignore what was said in other films.

After watching the Avengers, a GREAT film with great dialogues and action (and I'm still trying to remember a better action scene than the one showing every avenger battle against Skrulls/Chitauri, showing all of them doing combos with each other), and as a X-Men fanboy, I couldn't stop wondering how a Marvel Studios (and with Bryan Singer out of the project and enjailed 400000000000 miles away from where they produce it) X-Men film would look like, and I was sad because I know Fox gets rights extensions everytime they make an X-Men film and they have at least 2 more coming...

A firend of mine is a Spider-Man fanboy and is in the same situation than me. He has told me that he won't watch the new Spidey film because he doesn't want to be disappointed again.

The rights stuff goes as far as Marvel Studios using the name of a Skrull Clan because they can't pronounce the word "Skrull" on their films...

#40 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

It wan't true to the comics at all. Not fairly true, not true at all. Banshee, Mystique, Havok, ect were not on the original roster. And I didn't like the dialogue. I didn't beleive it when I heard it, it didn't sound like a real conversation. The main idea for the story was okay, but it was done wrong. The romance of the movie made no sense. Plus, as pervious mentioned, all of the continuity errors. I could go on for hous naming them, but I don't feel like typing them. It was just an overrated movie.

So what, Black Widow and Hawkeye weren't original Avengers. Batman wasn't trained by Ra's Al Ghul...I could go on...in fact, they didn't even go by the X-men as a team name officially in the movie... Like I said, fairly true, true enough where it needed to be.. The fact that those characters not being original X-Men argument holds no water anyways.....its an alternate universe, like the Ultimate, or Age of Apocalypse...where int the world does it say it has to be accurate to the comics????

I don't mind changing things slightly for the movies. They had Hulk in the Avengers, which I liked. I didn't mind Widow or Hawkeye on the team either. And I hated Batman Begins, so no comment on the Ra's stuff. And First Class was not true at ALL. The X-men never knew of the Hellfire Club until the Dark Phoenix Saga, not before Xavier and Magneto became enemies (or however you want to put it). And it always means Doom when they take things from the Ultimate Universe. Look at the FF movies.

Ok, I am starting to question your logic here....because A character didn't meet B character until a certain time in the comic you don't like First Class..but think Wolverine was better....Wolverine meets Cyclops and other mutants when they were kids for christs sake... The X-Men films were primarily around before the Ultimate Universe and I didn't say they took any ideas from it...I am just saying the movies are taking place in an alternate Universe...like the Ultimate X-Men So your argument goes like this??? "I hated First Class because its not like the comics" but.....You like Wolverine because it wasn't like the comics?? but thats ok??? No offense man, but your argument makes no sense

No, I am saying one of the reasonis I didn't like first Class was because it was completly different from the comics. That is only one reason. I would probably take so long putting every reason that you would think I never responded.

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

Thhe Last Stand was the best of the X-men movies. The only bad part about it was Juggernaut, but I can work past that and look at the amazing plot, the great actors, and everything else great about it.

I don't mind if certain things are changed from the comics, but not every little detail. That was my problem with First Class. And when I say continuity, I'm refering to the other movies. Not the comics.

No. The Wolverine movie was amazing. A good plot, it explained things from the other X-men movies. And there were more good actors in Wolverine than Hugh Jackman. I'm not familiar with their names, but the guy that played Sabertooth, Willaim Stryker, and I thought whoever did Gambit was amazing. Not as good as Jackman, but still amazing.

  • They killed off Cyclops with absolutely no point. Nothing became of his death. No emotional resonance.
  • Storm did basically nothing.
  • They killed off Xavier - one of the best aspects of the trilogy. What a waste of Patrick Stewart's talents. I suppose I can reconcile
  • Angel, Colossus and Rogue were completely wasted as characters. Rogue was de-powered.
  • The only character with any valid focus was Wolverine.
  • It was a complete change of tone from the first two films. Different thematically and creatively. Discrepancy in continuity between them alone. Where was Nightcrawler? POOR SHOW.
  • Dark Phoenix was a wasted villain. The film focused on two plots and ended up watering them both down.

Etc etc.

The film was a terribly wasted opportunity on Fox's part that failed to live up to the promise of the first two excellent films. Any X-Fan, fan of the first two films, or just a lover of good films should not like X-3.

There was no plot in Wolverine: Origins. It was just a mash of random action scenes. It explained things from X-2, barely.

Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan as Xavier and Magneto respectively, in the first three films. Enough said.

The other actors in Wolverine: Origins cannot be compared to them. The guy who played Stryker in X-2 was way better than the guy who played him in Wolverine. Gambit barely had a roll at all.

Cyclops death was suppose to push what was going on with Jean. Define "basically nothing" and I'll respond. The creators of the movie (their names escape me) said that it was for an emotional part of the movie and for the team, like the death of Spock (I think that's his name) in one of the Star Trek movies. Colossus, yes, he was. Angel was used decently. They could of done a little better, but he was pretty good. Rogue was done good in the movie, and anyone with half a brain knows the cure wasn't permanate. You're forgetting Jean. Magneto, Storm, ect. No continuity errors in the movie. Nightcrawler's absence is explained in X: the Offical Game. Dark Phoenix was done well. Not how I would of done it, but done well.

I am a huge X-men fan, and X: the LAst Stand is one of my favorite movies.

Did you even see Wolverine? You're saying there's no plot.

It you're going to say that, you have to say Nuff said. You can't say enough said, it has to be nuff said. And I'm not sure if you're saying they're bad or good, but they were some of the best parts of the series.

I agree with the Stryker thing, but whoever played him in Wolverine did a ood job for a Young Stryker. And they couldn't of had the final battle of the movie without Gambit. Gambit was one of the best parts of the movie. At least we knew who he was, not a nobody like the teleporting guy.

  • More like a massive "F@ck you" from Fox to Bryan Singer, the director of the first two films. It was hardly emotional. Her roll, like Cyclops', was greatly reduced.
  • Angel had like five minutes screen time in the movie. He was not used decently. He was bland and lacked any sense of character. Poorly cast.
  • Anyone with "half a brain" would not use "would of", "permanate" or "done good".
  • Jean was neither good, nor bad. Though they rush the Dark Phoenix plot and just seemed to cram it in for the hell of it.

No, I'm commenting for the fun of it.... Yes, I have seen Wolverine. The plot was thin, at best, certainly not on the level of what X-Men 2 and First Class try to do thematically.

Their performances are far superior to anyone else's in the franchise bar maybe Fassbender and McAvoy in First Class. They portray the characters as they are shown in the comics. Hallie Berry's Storm is no way near as assertive as Storm should be. Hugh Jackman's Wolverine is not grumpy enough. Iceman was dull.

If you liked Wolverine you'd know who John Wraith was. They ruined Deadpool too. Completely forgot about that.

It was suppose to be emotional. I don't write movies, so I don't know how emotional it's suppose to be, I'm just explaining it to you. Angel had more than five minutes. Ignoring the half a brain comment. It is the greatest X-men story line of all time. They had to use it. Would you rather of had them take three movies to introduce the Shi'ar and the Phoenix foce first?

First Class didn't compare at all to Wolverine. And I doubt it will compare to the sequel either.

The only good actor in First Class was Fassbender. He is the only reason to watch the movie. And the Wolverine cameo. It didn't live up to the standards set by the previous movie's casts.

The Deadpool thing sets it up for the Deadpool spin-off.

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

No, I am saying one of the reasonis I didn't like first Class was because it was completly different from the comics. That is only one reason. I would probably take so long putting every reason that you would think I never responded.

So...your saying you don't like First Class because its nothing like the comics?? Neither is Wolverine or X3...yet you think those movies are great?? I don't get it

I'm saying that is one reason I don't like it. There is also the bad script, continuity errors, bad acting, ect.

Online
#41 Posted by BiteMe-Fanboy (7118 posts) - - Show Bio

Huh. Never thought I would see a heated debate about how Wolverine Origins was good... I thought everyone agreed it sucked.

#42 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon said:

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

Small continuity errors? There were probably hundreds. If you gave me 3 hours, I could have them all for you.

Ignoring Storm, because most of her stuff sounded real (once you take out the Toad struck by lightning thing)

They couldn't even keep Mystique with one person in the movie. They tried to work in some stuff with her and Magneto and Xavier in there too. It just didn't work.

You have as much time as you want to list them. There were about as many significant ones as between the original three films and Wolverine: Origins.

They couldn't make certain members because they had to try and keep it largely within the continuity of the first few films. The biggest continuity breach was Charles still being able to walk at the beginning of X-3, but most people hate X-3 so much that they just forget about it. It's also worth nothing that the First Class break-up of Charles and Magneto's friendship is more reflective of the comics.

It showed her transition throughout the movie and at the end displayed how the different sides, of both Erik and Charles, had formed. She went from loving a man who could only see her as a sister and admire her as an object of beauty when she was in human form, to a liking a man who liked her reciprocally but was unhappy with his form also, to a man who encouraged her to embrace her status as a mutant. Progression.

The history of Magneto and his characterization as a man with nothing left to lose/ Nazi-hunter was superb. It was a nice, fresh look at both younger versions of Xavier and Magneto and seeing how they became who they did.

Shaw was a compelling villain too. The film was more mature, darker and dealt with the core themes of the X-Men to a much better degree than the other films.

  • Xavier had his hair when he couldn't walk, while in the Last Stand and Wolverine, he was walking with no hair.
  • Magneto's different costume at the end of First Class compared to the rest of the series.
  • There was already an Emma Frost in Wolverine.
  • Beast didn't have his fur in X2 (you can see him on TV towards the end)
  • The Brotherhood roster was too different from X-men and First Class. The group in X-men was said to be Magneto's first.
  • In X-men, they said Magneto helped build Cerebro. In First Class, Beast made it alone.
  • First Class is set in the 60s. Meanwhile, there is a cameo of Storm. That means she would have to be in her 40s by the time X-men came.
  • Moria Mactraggart (or however you spell her name) appeared in the Last Stand. She looked to be in her 30s or 40s there. In First Class, she looked to be in her 20s. That means she would be in her 80s be the time X-men roled around.
  • Sebastian Stan cameo at the end of X2. I'm not even going to explain what's wrong with that.
  • In X-men, Xavier said that Cyclops, Jean, and Storm were his first students. Well, there was a team of X-men in the 60s, and there had to be new recruits made since then besides those three.
  • How could beast look like he has only aged 10 years over a course of 40?

Do I really need to go on?

  • Forgot how important hair was to the plot.
  • As though a costume wouldn't change in thirty years....
  • That supposed Emma Frost was his love interest's sister.
  • Well that's also a breach between Unite and Last Stand.
  • Ororo's also a teenager in the prison in Wolverine Origins.
  • Xavier's been known to lie about previous teams of X-Men
  • Beast has a healing factor. In several

None of these points are really essential to the plot and could be explained easily. The only one that matters is the Charles/Xavier relationship at the beginning of X3.

#43 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

Small continuity errors? There were probably hundreds. If you gave me 3 hours, I could have them all for you.

Ignoring Storm, because most of her stuff sounded real (once you take out the Toad struck by lightning thing)

They couldn't even keep Mystique with one person in the movie. They tried to work in some stuff with her and Magneto and Xavier in there too. It just didn't work.

You have as much time as you want to list them. There were about as many significant ones as between the original three films and Wolverine: Origins.

They couldn't make certain members because they had to try and keep it largely within the continuity of the first few films. The biggest continuity breach was Charles still being able to walk at the beginning of X-3, but most people hate X-3 so much that they just forget about it. It's also worth nothing that the First Class break-up of Charles and Magneto's friendship is more reflective of the comics.

It showed her transition throughout the movie and at the end displayed how the different sides, of both Erik and Charles, had formed. She went from loving a man who could only see her as a sister and admire her as an object of beauty when she was in human form, to a liking a man who liked her reciprocally but was unhappy with his form also, to a man who encouraged her to embrace her status as a mutant. Progression.

The history of Magneto and his characterization as a man with nothing left to lose/ Nazi-hunter was superb. It was a nice, fresh look at both younger versions of Xavier and Magneto and seeing how they became who they did.

Shaw was a compelling villain too. The film was more mature, darker and dealt with the core themes of the X-Men to a much better degree than the other films.

  • Xavier had his hair when he couldn't walk, while in the Last Stand and Wolverine, he was walking with no hair.
  • Magneto's different costume at the end of First Class compared to the rest of the series.
  • There was already an Emma Frost in Wolverine.
  • Beast didn't have his fur in X2 (you can see him on TV towards the end)
  • The Brotherhood roster was too different from X-men and First Class. The group in X-men was said to be Magneto's first.
  • In X-men, they said Magneto helped build Cerebro. In First Class, Beast made it alone.
  • First Class is set in the 60s. Meanwhile, there is a cameo of Storm. That means she would have to be in her 40s by the time X-men came.
  • Moria Mactraggart (or however you spell her name) appeared in the Last Stand. She looked to be in her 30s or 40s there. In First Class, she looked to be in her 20s. That means she would be in her 80s be the time X-men roled around.
  • Sebastian Stan cameo at the end of X2. I'm not even going to explain what's wrong with that.
  • In X-men, Xavier said that Cyclops, Jean, and Storm were his first students. Well, there was a team of X-men in the 60s, and there had to be new recruits made since then besides those three.
  • How could beast look like he has only aged 10 years over a course of 40?

Do I really need to go on?

  • Forgot how important hair was to the plot.
  • As though a costume wouldn't change in thirty years....
  • That supposed Emma Frost was his love interest's sister.
  • Well that's also a breach between Unite and Last Stand.
  • Ororo's also a teenager in the prison in Wolverine Origins.
  • Xavier's been known to lie about previous teams of X-Men
  • Beast has a healing factor. In several

None of these points are really essential to the plot and could be explained easily. The only one that matters is the Charles/Xavier relationship at the beginning of X3.

  • It's still a continuity issue.
  • No explination to the change?
  • It was still suppose to be Emma Frost.
  • Nothing could of happened betwen that gap (one year, two years? They never give a set timeline in these movies)
  • Storm as a teenager in Wolverine made sense. I can beleive that if you're a teenager in the 80s, you can be an adult in your 30s in the 2000s.
  • How about mentioning that in a movie? Maybe a quick mention to Banshee?
  • That I will give you. I wasn't thinking there.
Online
#44 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon said:

It was suppose to be emotional. I don't write movies, so I don't know how emotional it's suppose to be, I'm just explaining it to you. Angel had more than five minutes. Ignoring the half a brain comment. It is the greatest X-men story line of all time. They had to use it. Would you rather of had them take three movies to introduce the Shi'ar and the Phoenix foce first?

First Class didn't compare at all to Wolverine. And I doubt it will compare to the sequel either.

The only good actor in First Class was Fassbender. He is the only reason to watch the movie. And the Wolverine cameo. It didn't live up to the standards set by the previous movie's casts.

The Deadpool thing sets it up for the Deadpool spin-off.

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

No, I am saying one of the reasonis I didn't like first Class was because it was completly different from the comics. That is only one reason. I would probably take so long putting every reason that you would think I never responded.

So...your saying you don't like First Class because its nothing like the comics?? Neither is Wolverine or X3...yet you think those movies are great?? I don't get it

I'm saying that is one reason I don't like it. There is also the bad script, continuity errors, bad acting, ect.

  • They did it no justice and gave us a butchered mess. No. They could have focused on the DPS, keeping it on Earth, and not spread out what they were trying to do, plot was, too thin.
  • Unsubstantiated statement. Cool.
  • Hallie Berry was a rubbish Storm, Shawn Ashmore was a rubbish Bobby, Angel was rubbish etc etc.
  • Yep, a mute version of the "Merc with a Mouth", without the powers he has in the comics who was seemingly killed at the end of Origins. Great starting point. Fox has also said they're ignoring his role in Origins. Even Fox acknowledges that was an error.

In summary, if you like explosions and Hugh Jackman's naked body, you'll love a Wolverine film. Guess that's what you like. Cool.

#45 Posted by cattlebattle (12275 posts) - - Show Bio
@Lokheit said:


Excluding the fact that they completly destroyed every character (seriously, in most cases they could've invented the character name and powers and do a movie on a brand new universe and the story would make sense, the names were here just to atract comic fans and disappoint them), the films, as proper films, were horrible.


Why do people always say stuff like that...they didn't "destroy" anything, its not like Cyclops was a built, afro sporting, cape wearing guy with Superman powers...sure they are not exactly like their comic counterpart...but neither is RDJs Iron Man portrayal...destroyed is a bit exaggerant
 
@Lokheit said:

After watching the Avengers, a GREAT film with great dialogues and action (and I'm still trying to remember a better action scene than the one showing every avenger battle against Skrulls/Chitauri, showing all of them doing combos with each other), and as a X-Men fanboy, I couldn't stop wondering how a Marvel Studios (and with Bryan Singer out of the project and enjailed 400000000000 miles away from where they produce it) X-Men film would look like, and I was sad because I know Fox gets rights extensions everytime they make an X-Men film and they have at least 2 more coming...


Well, to each his own, I would prefer that the X-Men movies stay character and story driven as opposed to bunch of action and CGI, if Marvel Studios made an X-Men film I completely believe they would make a special effect soaked mundane film
#46 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon

You're picking on points that really don't matter to the films, seriously. You're nitpicking for the hell of it when there as many discrepancies between the first two films and Last Stand/Origins as there are between all of them and First Class.

#47 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

It was suppose to be emotional. I don't write movies, so I don't know how emotional it's suppose to be, I'm just explaining it to you. Angel had more than five minutes. Ignoring the half a brain comment. It is the greatest X-men story line of all time. They had to use it. Would you rather of had them take three movies to introduce the Shi'ar and the Phoenix foce first?

First Class didn't compare at all to Wolverine. And I doubt it will compare to the sequel either.

The only good actor in First Class was Fassbender. He is the only reason to watch the movie. And the Wolverine cameo. It didn't live up to the standards set by the previous movie's casts.

The Deadpool thing sets it up for the Deadpool spin-off.

@cattlebattle said:

@TheCannon said:

@cattlebattle said:

No, I am saying one of the reasonis I didn't like first Class was because it was completly different from the comics. That is only one reason. I would probably take so long putting every reason that you would think I never responded.

So...your saying you don't like First Class because its nothing like the comics?? Neither is Wolverine or X3...yet you think those movies are great?? I don't get it

I'm saying that is one reason I don't like it. There is also the bad script, continuity errors, bad acting, ect.

  • They did it no justice and gave us a butchered mess. No. They could have focused on the DPS, keeping it on Earth, and not spread out what they were trying to do, plot was, too thin.
  • Unsubstantiated statement. Cool.
  • Hallie Berry was a rubbish Storm, Shawn Ashmore was a rubbish Bobby, Angel was rubbish etc etc.
  • Yep, a mute version of the "Merc with a Mouth", without the powers he has in the comics who was seemingly killed at the end of Origins. Great starting point. Fox has also said they're ignoring his role in Origins. Even Fox acknowledges that was an error.

In summary, if you like explosions and Hugh Jackman's naked body, you'll love a Wolverine film. Guess that's what you like. Cool.

  • I don't know what you're refering to.
  • Again, don't know what you're refering to.
  • Hally Berry did a great job as Storm. Much better than Catwoman.
  • Deadpool survived Origins. I'm geussing you don't watch the credits?
  • No on the Hugh Jackman naked thing. I like the good script, good actors, and good plot.
Online
#48 Edited by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle said:

@Lokheit said:

Excluding the fact that they completly destroyed every character (seriously, in most cases they could've invented the character name and powers and do a movie on a brand new universe and the story would make sense, the names were here just to atract comic fans and disappoint them), the films, as proper films, were horrible.

Why do people always say stuff like that...they didn't "destroy" anything, its not like Cyclops was a built, afro sporting, cape wearing guy with Superman powers...sure they are not exactly like their comic counterpart...but neither is RDJs Iron Man portrayal...destroyed is a bit exaggerant

@Lokheit said:

After watching the Avengers, a GREAT film with great dialogues and action (and I'm still trying to remember a better action scene than the one showing every avenger battle against Skrulls/Chitauri, showing all of them doing combos with each other), and as a X-Men fanboy, I couldn't stop wondering how a Marvel Studios (and with Bryan Singer out of the project and enjailed 400000000000 miles away from where they produce it) X-Men film would look like, and I was sad because I know Fox gets rights extensions everytime they make an X-Men film and they have at least 2 more coming...

Well, to each his own, I would prefer that the X-Men movies stay character and story driven as opposed to bunch of action and CGI, if Marvel Studios made an X-Men film I completely believe they would make a special effect soaked mundane film

I agree. I also had no problem with X-Men First Class' characterisation of Magneto.

Killing Shaw was his goal all along. The guy headed a Nazi camp, tortured him, shot his mother in from of him etc. Loved the countdown and the use Shaw's own coin to kill him. Magneto's hunted Nazis in the comics.

He doesn't suddenly become a mass murderer. He, as a victim of minority persecution, decides to fight for his own kind after an attempt at to kill him (yet again) is made by the US Government. Why would he ally himself with humans when all they've ever done is try to kill him, even after he's offered his support? Why would he remain in a position that allows people to harm him and his people again when he now has the power to stop it? This is reactive.

His own sense of survival and power probably add to his belief of mutant-kind's superiority over humanity, as well as seeing the darkest aspects of humanity's capabilities time and time again.

#49 Posted by John Valentine (16270 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheCannon said:

  • No on the Hugh Jackman naked thing. I like the good script, good actors, and good plot.

No, I left the cinema as soon as the film had ended.

You're on about "good script, good actors and good plot" but you simply can't substantiate it. You do realise that X-3 and Wolverine Origins are generally disliked for a very good reason?

Have fun watching The Wolverine.

#50 Posted by TheCannon (16071 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine said:

@TheCannon said:

  • No on the Hugh Jackman naked thing. I like the good script, good actors, and good plot.

No, I left the cinema as soon as the film had ended.

You're on about "good script, good actors and good plot" but you simply can't substantiate it. You do realise that X-3 and Wolverine Origins are generally disliked for a very good reason?

Have fun watching The Wolverine.

  • You're nuts. You should know Marvel liked post credits stuff. There was an important scene to set up the sequel in Japan.
  • I'm entitled to my own opinion. You are the one who started asking me how can I like it? If people want to dislike it, that's fine. This is a free country, they can like and hate what they want.
  • I will. I just wish they had Gambit return. Hopefully he will.
Online

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.