X-Men: Days of Future Past

Well, it's certainly less awkward than "X-Men: First Class 2"

Can someone who knows more about the comics explain how this could possibly work? From what I know about Days of Future Past, it sounds fairly Wolverine-centric, whereas one of my favourite things about First Class was that it was the only X-movie so far not to revolve around Wolverine.

I don't really like that they're trying to draw in the other films and re-establish continuity, as things already don't line up and I'd really prefer a full reboot. And there's a lot of buzz about this one being more "epic". The last time they tried to do "epic" we got X3, which Kinberg was also involved in writing, so that doesn't make me confident about the quality of this one.

And I suspect fans will be truly furious if they screw this up, given that Phoenix and Days of Future Past are two of the most popular and well-known storylines, and the movies have already managed to ruin the Phoenix one.

It was way more Kitty Pryde centric to be honest. Wolverine's involvement was mainly to get disintegrated.

Completely unrelated to the potential main plot, but part of me really the film to seemingly set up Mystique and Azazael only for Raven to hook up with Destiny in the third act.

edited 2nd Aug '12 6:27:59 PM by BorneAgain

I love me some Kitty Pryde.

edited 2nd Aug '12 7:26:14 PM by Saturn

Concept=Cool.

Tying it in with the crappy trilogy=Not cool.

If they just use actors from the trilogy for the future scenes that would be fine, as long as they exclude Hugh Jackman. Although aside from Jackman, Ian Mc Kellen and Romijn is there anyone they'd actually want to use? Bearing in mind keeping Xavier alive would miss the point of the story that's being adapted.

Using the trilogy films as the future that needs to be averted is the worst direction I can see this film going in.

Am I a good man or a bad man?

Crappy trilogy? Hmm. Trilogy that kept the studio executives that gave the go-ahead for it in gold lined swimming pools, possibly.

Jackman was okay in whatever bits of the films I have watched over the years. The only problem I had with him in the role is that he went with the decision not to wear the yellow spandex suit. Which is heresy.

Ah yes. I'd forgoten that the amount of money a film makes is directly proportional to it's quality.

X2 was a decent film but inferior to X-Men First Class. The first film only did so because it was the first superhero film in a decade which wasn't incredibly campy. They couldn't get away with making that film in today's superhero saturated summer season and make much of a profit.

They seem to have realised the quality of the previous film in a series has an impact on the amount of money the next installment makes.

Linking First Class with films people barely remember isn't going to improve sales for this film. Using big name actors like Ian Mc Kellen or Halle Berry might, but there's no point using nobodys like James Marsden because absolutly no one will care. Unless you seriously think the Dark Knight would have sold more by replacing Heath Ledger with Jack Nicholson.

As for Hugh Jackman; I think he's a decent actor. But I'd rather Wolverine not be in this film, especialy the generic anti hero that Jackman's being playing.

Am I a good man or a bad man?

http://www.letsbefriendsagain.com/2012/07/27/sentinel-mk-69/

I'm curious to see what they will do with the Sentinels, given that despite looking cool, using giant humanoid death robots to hunt mutants makes no freaking sense whatsoever on an engineering, economical and political standpoint.

In a world where assassination-robots actually exist, the idea that a humanoid shape is the best one to use does come across as more ridiculous.

Human shaped and 10 feet tall. Not to mention purple.

If they were changed from autonomous robots to Power Armor it might make more sense.

^^ Not really all that nonsensical when compared to the 90s cartoon's 50 foot robots.

edited 5th Aug '12 5:00:03 AM by Nohbody

All your safe space are belong to Trump

They were the same size in the cartoon as they were usually in the comics.

I think including or excluding the Sentinels from a future past adaption is on the same level as using Mystique's Brotherhood or Senator Kelly. They occupy crucial roles in the storyline but as long as there's something adequatly fits that role they can be replaced.

If they do use the name Sentinel I wouldn't mind it belonging to some more practical machinery. I wouldn't want the Sentinels to be too sleek and modern though, it doesn't fit the name.

I hope Destiny is used in this film as this is the only X-Men film plot that would really fit into.

Am I a good man or a bad man?

For some reason I always expected one of the live action films to simplify things and turn the Sentinels into just one humanoid sized robot character who was just really badass and good at capturing mutants.

Sentinels as a concept run on Rule of Cool. Do they make a lot of sense all things considered? Eh, no, but who cares? Rule of Cool!

They were the same size in the cartoon as they were usually in the comics.

Ah, I didn't know that. I've never been that interested in following the comics lines. With the shows and movies, there's little to no cost, and being a cheap bastard as I am that has a lot of merit.

All your safe space are belong to Trump

Getting snippy about someone mentioning that a film series has made a hell of a lot of money is neither big nor clever. I made no mention of X-Men trilogy being good films - I haven't watched them. The reason why is the same reason I avoided Titanic, Avatar and the last two Nolan Batman films - a severe case of hype aversion.

All of the above have made tons of other people's cash, however, and Hollywood has paid attention.

"Snippy"? Maybe. I think it matches the tone of your initial post. *

I was hoping that the executives would realise that First Class made them a lot less money than the previous X-films did, which is a given, but also that people were put off it by the bad quality of the previous films. The fact that they are apparently continuing down the First Class direction indicates the latter might have sunk in. If Fox insist on holding on to the X film license but don't quality control the films they will end up with an outright comercial flop by the end of the decade.

Am I a good man or a bad man?

Why would anyone avoid a movie just because lots of people like it? The fact that people like it is not going to make it any worse than it otherwise was.

Home of CBR Rumbles-in-Exile: rumbles.fr.yuku.com

Wasn't there a Sentinel in the Danger Room in X3?

They do have medals for almost, and they're called silver!

Popularity doesn't cause bad quality, but if your opinion of the public is low enough, then it's not much of a stretch to conclude that popularity is a sign of poor quality.

I'm more of the opinion that there's no correlation at all between popularity and quality.

So basically, one would do it because they are an elitist hipster. That's kind of what I thought.

Home of CBR Rumbles-in-Exile: rumbles.fr.yuku.com

Well, one very good reason is when everyone else won't shut up about the movie in question. You get sick of it before you even see it.

I mostly liked First Class 'cause it invalidates Origins: Wolverine, my least favorite in the series.

They do have medals for almost, and they're called silver!