Yes, I know, the movie isn't going to be out for another two weeks, but with the latest trailer and more information coming out about it, I have to admit I'm a bit torn here.
The pros: Good director, decent screenplay writer. The special effects look fairly spot on for a summer blockbuster. Iconic X-Men characters making their appearance on the big screen for the first time.
The cons: Here's where my fanboy rage wants to take over. How far off the original storyline are they going to run with this movie? Mystique as an X-man? A girl with insect wings as Angel? Shouldn't she go by a different name and be in the Avengers movie? I'm glad to see other characters like Banshee and Moira MacTaggert making an appearance, but this seems like a can of mixed nuts to me. Havok, but no Cyclops? Why is Emma Frost being remade to replace Iceman?
So what about the rest of you X-Men fans? Are you going to give the movie a shot? I'm leaning heavily towards waiting for the DVD release and giving the theater a bye.
When you think of it, Hollywood's take on X-Men cannon is ok. I think you are comparing it to the original X-Men, when I think hollywood's purpose is to go back a little further into un-cannonized territory.
If you think about it, most of the characters were X-BOOK leaders. Emma with the new mutants, Moira with Excalibur, Erik with the Brotherhood and Charles with the X-Men of course.
They really cant really use Cyclops as he came later (with a folically challenged older xavier :)). They are the older types, not "gifted youngsters" anymore.
So why not Havok in his younger years way before X-Factor too?
the insect winged girl.... No clue. Would be ok as some weirdo first to become a Morlock-type, or hell even Wasp from the avengers as a mutant (instead of the Scarlet Witch).
Im kind of excited for this one. BTw, the movie Cyclops sucked anyway imho. :)
|
My guess about the replacement of Angel and Iceman is that since they already placed them in X2 and X3, and casting them as kids no less, has made it fairly impossible for them to have roles in this one, set decades before X1, likely before either of them were even born.
As for Emma Frost, Im a little toen on that as well, as I was pretty sure she had a cameo in the Wolverine movie right near the ending. Havent watched the movie in awhile, but IF it was her(the blonde girl with no bra who turns into diamonds and blocks some bullets), then that ought to create continuity issues in this X-Universe the movies are creating.
+1 to movie Cyclops sucking.
My beef is with the person claimed to be the Beast...who DID NOT start out blue & fuzzy. He was very simian-looking but normally folicled genius. He didn't get fuzzy until later, and he did it to himself, playimg with a mutational formula he'd devloped.
Yeah, I'm an x-men grognard.
Yes, I know, the movie isn't going to be out for another two weeks, but with the latest trailer and more information coming out about it, I have to admit I'm a bit torn here.
The pros: Good director, decent screenplay writer. The special effects look fairly spot on for a summer blockbuster. Iconic X-Men characters making their appearance on the big screen for the first time.
The cons: Here's where my fanboy rage wants to take over. How far off the original storyline are they going to run with this movie? Mystique as an X-man? A girl with insect wings as Angel? Shouldn't she go by a different name and be in the Avengers movie? I'm glad to see other characters like Banshee and Moira MacTaggert making an appearance, but this seems like a can of mixed nuts to me. Havok, but no Cyclops? Why is Emma Frost being remade to replace Iceman?
So what about the rest of you X-Men fans? Are you going to give the movie a shot? I'm leaning heavily towards waiting for the DVD release and giving the theater a bye.
Incest girl Angel is from Morrison's run on X-Men in 2002-2003. She's a snotty "street tough" Latina in the comics and takes the name of Angel since the original Angel was now Archangel.
Emma frost is turning into her diamond form, which was another addition of Morrison's on his run back in 2002. Pretty much a bunch of mutants had a "second mutation" this gave The White Queen a diamond form, turned Beast into a giant cat, and gave (I believe) Archangel healing blood.
My guess about the replacement of Angel and Iceman is that since they already placed them in X2 and X3, and casting them as kids no less, has made it fairly impossible for them to have roles in this one, set decades before X1, likely before either of them were even born.
As for Emma Frost, Im a little toen on that as well, as I was pretty sure she had a cameo in the Wolverine movie right near the ending. Havent watched the movie in awhile, but IF it was her(the blonde girl with no bra who turns into diamonds and blocks some bullets), then that ought to create continuity issues in this X-Universe the movies are creating.
+1 to movie Cyclops sucking.
i always thought that was supposed to be Diamond Lil. my bad.
|
A girl with insect wings as Angel? Shouldn't she go by a different name and be in the Avengers movie?Just as a FYI, Angel Salvadore is not the same character as Angel (Warren Worthington III). This is as much true in the comics as it is in the film, though none of the rest of the character's backstory from the comic seems to fit with the film regardless.
Why is Emma Frost being remade to replace Iceman?
Are you talking about her turning herself into diamond? Because she's been doing that for awhile now.
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
My beef is with the person claimed to be the Beast...who DID NOT start out blue & fuzzy. He was very simian-looking but normally folicled genius. He didn't get fuzzy until later, and he did it to himself, playimg with a mutational formula he'd devloped.
Yeah, I'm an x-men grognard.
Given that one of the trailers shows the simian big-footed Beast turning into the blue-furred Beast, I don't see the problem here.
I should add that I stopped collecting comic books some years ago. My Uncanny X-men full run only goes from #118-#349 (and all other spin off titles in that time period).
Never knew emma to turn into a diamond.
My beef is with the person claimed to be the Beast...who DID NOT start out blue & fuzzy. He was very simian-looking but normally folicled genius. He didn't get fuzzy until later, and he did it to himself, playimg with a mutational formula he'd devloped.
Yeah, I'm an x-men grognard.
Given that one of the trailers shows the simian big-footed Beast turning into the blue-furred Beast, I don't see the problem here.
Oh. I hadn't seen that one. If so, I withdraw my complaint. ;-)
|
They'll never get the comics 'right,' and that's fine, since 'right' has been changed on an annual basis for the last forty years, as new writers show up and change stuff willy-nilly.
Spider-Man added organic web-shooters. Iron Man moved his originl from Vietnam to Afghanistan. X-Men had an 'original team' of two original X-Men, two 'all-new, all-different' X-Men, and Rogue, kinda/sorta.
As long as the movie is fun, I'm not terribly concerned with accuracy, since anything that's 'accurate' this year, will change next year anyway.
Wolverine was a speedster that wore gloves with claws on them, in his first fight against the Hulk & Wendigo, and his creators considered making him an evolved wolverine, one of the High Evolutionary's New Men / Knights of Wundagore. Nightcrawler was meant to be an actual demon, in a Legion of Super-Heroes spin-off title, then he was a mutant, then possibly the son of Mystique & Destiny, then he was part demon again as a son of Azazel, then the demon turned out to be a mutant...
I just want the movie not to suck. It's impossible for them to 'get it right.'
I read somewhere that Cockrum originally created Nightcrawler for DC and he was supposed to be a Legionnaire.
http://www.nightscrawlers.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=944
Though I read about it years ago in Wizard magazine iirc
Edit* should have read Set's post fully :)
No Gambit, Rogue, or Nightcrawler = very little interest.
But wait. . .
The pros: Good director. . .Oh, they got a good director this time. Yah!!!
Final verdict, maybe. 20%ish interest. And from a comics fan.
Matthew Vaughn, who directed Stardust, Layer Cake, and Kick Ass. He also produced Snatch and Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels.
Are you talking about her turning herself into diamond? Because she's been doing that for awhile now.
Is that what she's doing? Looks like ice to me... Anyway, I had to give up collecting comics when they were starting to get as pricey as Dragon and Dungeon magazines. Just couldn't afford the habit any more. Last I saw, she was a telepath.
|
This movie looks awesome. That's all I care about.
I gave up on superhero movies following cannon a long time ago, otherwise I would have pissed off that the 2002 Maguire/Dunst Spider-Man movie wasn't set in the 60's with everyone wearing varsity jackets...
Plus, the comic book X-Men canon is so messed up that even if they wanted to do a good old start from the start 60's/70's X-Men movie, they wouldn't be able to untangle the comic book canon mess.
This movie looks awesome. That's all I care about.
I gave up on superhero movie following cannon a long time ago, otherwise I would have pissed off that the 2002 Maguire/Dunst Spider-Man movie wasn't set in the 60's with everyone wearing varsity jackets...
Plus, the comic book X-Men canon is so messed up that even if they wanted to do a good old start from the start 60's/70's X-Men movie, they wouldn't be able to untangle the comic book canon mess.
Yeah, I'm not saying that everything has to be exactly as portrayed in the comics--there has to be room for some artistic interpretation. Still, sometimes it's like when you see a movie based on a book you love, only to have the movie bear almost no resemblance to the story you know. (Every movie incarnation of I Am Legend comes to mind for me.) There are just some things that I have to look at and ask "Why do it that way?"
They could have done a "reboot" like they're doing with Spider-Man. After X3, I think cutting ties with that particular franchise would be a smart move.
|
|
They could have done a "reboot" like they're doing with Spider-Man. After X3, I think cutting ties with that particular franchise would be a smart move.
About the Spider-Man reboot: will they do the "ultimate" spider-man story or are they really doing a reboot and showing a nerd kid inventing web-shooters?
My beef is with the person claimed to be the Beast...who DID NOT start out blue & fuzzy. He was very simian-looking but normally folicled genius. He didn't get fuzzy until later, and he did it to himself, playimg with a mutational formula he'd devloped.
Yeah, I'm an x-men grognard.
About the Spider-Man reboot: will they do the "ultimate" spider-man story or are they really doing a reboot and showing a nerd kid inventing web-shooters?
Not sure. There hasn't been a lot released on the movie itself. IMDb doesn't have much more than the cast and crew listings.
I just glad it's not another Wolverine (featuring the X-Men) movie.
Something like this?My beef is with the person claimed to be the Beast...who DID NOT start out blue & fuzzy. He was very simian-looking but normally folicled genius. He didn't get fuzzy until later, and he did it to himself, playimg with a mutational formula he'd devloped.
Yeah, I'm an x-men grognard.
Cool.
Yep, though I remember him a somewhat more simian in form, looks like they got that part right, if a little earlier than in old canon.
And, no I hadn't seen that bit when I first posted.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
They could have done a "reboot" like they're doing with Spider-Man. After X3, I think cutting ties with that particular franchise would be a smart move.About the Spider-Man reboot: will they do the "ultimate" spider-man story or are they really doing a reboot and showing a nerd kid inventing web-shooters?
Spinoff online's posted photos of what look like mechanical webshooters.
As to XMFC: I'm cautiously excited. I don't mind so much the mixing of characters (Alex clearly isn't Scott's brother, Raven's really *much* older, Azrael sucked in the comics) I've come to accept that the movies are like the 'Ultimate Comics' concept but executed much better.
(aside: I think DC does it best by putting their cartoons 'officially' in the DCAU, albiet at different speeds. (Earth 12 seems to be 'Batman Beyond', Earth 16 is Young Justice, Earth 21 is 'The New Frontier' etc.)
I thought I posted somewhere my idea for an X-Men 4 in the same continuity.
Here's where my fanboy rage wants to take over. How far off the original storyline are they going to run with this movie? Mystique as an X-man?
As others have said in this thread, you can't expect the movies to follow the comics' continuity. But I would hope, at least, that the movie could follow the MOVIE series' continuity. And I have a hard time accepting that, in the movie series' continuity, Mystique was an X-man. I don't know why I have a hard time accepting it, but I do.
I read a lot of X-Men comics from the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, but very little of it in the 90s or 21st century. And I have a hard time accepting Emma Frost turning into diamond. (I'm glad someone mentioned that, though. I was wondering what the deal was in the Wolverine movie.)
Anyway, I was unimpressed with the Wolverine movie, and had no interest in the "First Class" movie. I wasn't even going to post into this thread...
...until...
...I saw Taliesin Hoyle's post in this thread, and watched the preview showing the Beast.
Holy spit.
NOW I'm interested.
The Beast was always, with the possible exception of Professor X himself, my favorite X-Man. And I can't imagine a better portrayal of the Beast than the one that trailer showed.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
As others have said in this thread, you can't expect the movies to follow the comics' continuity. But I would hope, at least, that the movie could follow the MOVIE series' continuity. And I have a hard time accepting that, in the movie series' continuity, Mystique was an X-man. I don't know why I have a hard time accepting it, but I do.
I find this statement strange. It's clear in the movies that Raven and Eric have history together. Why would it be such a stretch that she was a 'proto-X-man' and when Eric left, she went with him?
(Now, if they ignore X-3, no complaints here.
I wasn't even going to post into this thread...
...until...
...I saw Taliesin Hoyle's post in this thread, and watched the preview showing the Beast.
Oh my stars and garters!
Yeah, Beast is awesome.
I don't know why, but all my favorite X-Men are blue: Beast, Nightcrawler and Shadowcat (Kitty Pryde wasn't always blue, but she was when I first met her).
I wasn't even going to post into this thread...
...until...
...I saw Taliesin Hoyle's post in this thread, and watched the preview showing the Beast.
Oh my stars and garters!
Yeah, Beast is awesome.
I don't know why, but all my favorite X-Men are blue: Beast, Nightcrawler and Shadowcat (Kitty Pryde wasn't always blue, but she was when I first met her).
When did Kitty Pride turn blue?
When did Kitty Pride turn blue?
I know her costume is blue. Does that count?
Third one down. I'm probably dating myself.
Third one down. I'm probably dating myself.
Yep, that's the one I was thinking of.
My beef is with the person claimed to be the Beast...who DID NOT start out blue & fuzzy. He was very simian-looking but normally folicled genius. He didn't get fuzzy until later, and he did it to himself, playimg with a mutational formula he'd devloped.
Yeah, I'm an x-men grognard.
it could depend on what continuity you're operating in. Doesn't Marvel have about 3 different continuities for everyone whether it's Standard, Ultimate, or whatever?
With that many, what's a fourth?
snicker...good point.
Third one down. I'm probably dating myself.Yep, that's the one I was thinking of.
Aah...The sexy ninja outfit.
Okay, I saw more of those trailers, and I take back what I said. I CAN accept that Mystique attended Xavier's school, especially when Magneto was working there. Two days ago, I had no intention of seeing this movie. Now, those trailers REALLY make me want to see this movie! I don't feel any of those "Grognard's Misgivings."
Oh, I have a couple of nits to pick. I don't know if I can accept that actor as Xavier. And didn't the Wolverine movie imply that Emma Frost hadn't discovered the school yet? But all in all, I feel more excited about this movie than I have about any movie in YEARS. Now I feel like I MUST get it, when it comes out on DVD.
My biggest problem with this movie is Beast being turned blue and furry during it, when on one of the first 2 movies, a non-furry Hank McCoy was being interviewed on TV. I understand not following the comics, but c'mon, follow your friggin' established continuity at least! Yes, I realize, I'm nit-picking, but those kinds of things really annoy me.
So what about the rest of you X-Men fans? Are you going to give the movie a shot? I'm leaning heavily towards waiting for the DVD release and giving the theater a bye.
I collected X-men 130 on through to issue 290 or so, and read back through some bound editions of the earlier stuff. Looked in a few times after that, but mostly to follow wolverine.
Reboot of the whole thing is all good to me. Fiction is fiction. As long as they stay true to the spirit I'm cool. This is just the way it is with comics.
If I get the change to hit a theater I most surely will.
My biggest problem with this movie is Beast being turned blue and furry during it, when on one of the first 2 movies, a non-furry Hank McCoy was being interviewed on TV. I understand not following the comics, but c'mon, follow your friggin' established continuity at least! Yes, I realize, I'm nit-picking, but those kinds of things really annoy me.
Well... Hank had scientific expertise in mutation, he originally looked human, just kind of brutish. His own self experimentation caused him to express his mutation further and grow blue fur.
That said, it doesn't seem unreasonable that the movies could play around with this idea in reverse and tuck your nit-pickery up nice and tight.
He looks cooler with blue fur, so I have no problem with them going for the all out beast look in the movie.
My beef is with the person claimed to be the Beast...who DID NOT start out blue & fuzzy. He was very simian-looking but normally folicled genius. He didn't get fuzzy until later, and he did it to himself, playimg with a mutational formula he'd devloped.
Yeah, I'm an x-men grognard.
Given that one of the trailers shows the simian big-footed Beast turning into the blue-furred Beast, I don't see the problem here.
There you go.
That said, it doesn't seem unreasonable that the movies could play around with this idea in reverse and tuck your nit-pickery up nice and tight.
Yeah, why not? After all, the Beast switched back to human-looking for a while in X-Factor comics, so why not in the movies' continuity as well?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
That said, it doesn't seem unreasonable that the movies could play around with this idea in reverse and tuck your nit-pickery up nice and tight.Yeah, why not? After all, the Beast switched back to human-looking for a while in X-Factor comics, so why not in the movies' continuity as well?
Two words... Image inducer.
I saw this trailer in the theater today and I don't know what all you naysayers are saying nay about: it looks awesome.
And, yeah, there's been so many ridiculous twists and turns to X-Men canon that I'll give them carte blanche to do pretty much whatever they want, as long as it's cool.
For example, the Cuban Missile Crisis.
|
Aah...The sexy ninja outfit.Third one down. I'm probably dating myself.Yep, that's the one I was thinking of.
It's the one she wore for the longest period of time, pretty much the entire time she went by the codename Shadowcat.
And, yeah, there's been so many ridiculous twists and turns to X-Men canon that I'll give them carte blanche to do pretty much whatever they want, as long as it's cool.
This. By god, this. I think X-Men "canon" is probably the most fractured and inconsistent fictional "canon" in existence.