X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)
Options
Comments
-
Boycotting all Fox movies that have anything to do with Marvel Characters. Fox destroyed Xmen, Fantastic Four and Spiderman no need to mention Wolverine smh.
smh ima say it again first class was dope, its all about the director and his "vision".
-
You guys really killed the enthusiasm I had for this movie. I was pretty excited after watching the clip at comic con then you guys had to go a day remind me how bad synger and fox have been
Truth be told B the movies haven't been that bad. These ? are exaggerating, I been watching all them ? and I think their dope movies, they won't get anybody any oscars or anything but still solid flicks.
Like I been saying these fools want everything to be perfect like the comics and that ? impossible. It's a movie not a comic B. -
sony have spiderman, not fox.Boycotting all Fox movies that have anything to do with Marvel Characters. Fox destroyed Xmen, Fantastic Four and Spiderman no need to mention Wolverine smh.
-
At the end of the day, ima see this ? . And I dont see much of an issue with the designs of the Sentinels. Or the designs of the X-Men in general. Outside of Magneto being an old ass ? there isnt much for me to complain about cause I know that this (and the rest of them) isnt a Marvel made movie anyways.
-
You guys really killed the enthusiasm I had for this movie. I was pretty excited after watching the clip at comic con then you guys had to go a day remind me how bad synger and fox have been
Truth be told B the movies haven't been that bad. These ? are exaggerating, I been watching all them ? and I think their dope movies, they won't get anybody any oscars or anything but still solid flicks.
Like I been saying these fools want everything to be perfect like the comics and that ? impossible. It's a movie not a comic B.
I don't have big problems with the first two or first class just the last few movies singer made weren't great -
Bruh, it's just the principalities, the avengers was a comic book movie, x-men was some ? someone wrote out they're ass without no knowledge whatsoever of the x-men. Nolan, Whedon and Snyder actually took the time to speak to comic book writers, read a book, even watch a tv show and adapt a movie off of that albeit, not everything correlated perfectly, we respect it for what it is. They made comic book movies. I'd even go ahead and say Marc Webb took more facts from the comic about Peter. I didn't like the amazing spiderman too much (decent, not that great) cause it was just too boring and the lizard looked like a cgi goombi off the mario bros movie (mario bros was a good movie) but I'd definitely give it, it's respect because it stuck as close to the source as possible, Peter Parker wasn't shooting webs out his wrist, he created a web system to catch criminals. Hopefully Venom won't be some 150 lb 6 ft weakling and they'll actually use a decent size Eddie Brock looking dude like Armie Hammer, Charlie Hunnam from Pacific Rim or Rob Kazinsky from True Blood (Dude that plays wurlow).
-
If I hated adaptations there would be so many movies I would dislike it's not even funny. A History of Violence, The Crow, The Silence of the Lambs, The Shining, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Batman amongst hundreds of others. These are all movies I've always loved despite them changing a crapload of shallow facts from their source material which I also love.
They did what any good adaptation SHOULD do. They retained themes and the spirit of their source pretty damn well while presenting the familiar stories in brand new ways. They didn't feel like cheap TV movies with sloppy narratives and non-existent character development like the X-Men flicks. They felt like windows to whole new worlds like a competent movie should.
X-Men is mainly about 2 things a team based family dynamic and overcoming discrimination. I never felt that was covered well or convincingly by any of these boring ass X-Men movies. Matter of fact the only human that felt like a threat to the mutants at all so far was Stryker in X2. Senator Kelly in the movies was a ? joke.
I don't convincingly feel like the mutants could walk out and get pelted by tomatoes just for being who they are because the world building in these movies has been freaking terrible. We hardly get any idea of how society is in these movies because they spend so much screen time showcasing Wolverine's problems or Magneto's speeches they can't even cover that ground competently. So when they try to show that "humans hate muties" it feels shoehorned in and very disingenuous. Like it's something that was added at the last minute and not something the movies were built around as they should've been.
The actual X-Men are reduced to glorified cameos in the movies outside of Wolverine which further throws any convincing world building out the window. So so much for that team based family dynamic being done justice. It doesn't even exist. They get no real development and are reduced to having 10 minutes of screen time at most.
Which hinders any emotional resonance or effect because they're just stock characters you don't even care for. They're there to fulfill whatever role Singer needed them to in order to highlight the importance of the almighty Wolverine more. They're not there to be engaging characters in their own right. I'm talking about Cyclops, Iceman, Jean Grey, Storm and Colossus here. Nevermind the rest of team that gets even LESS screen time.
Some of those people are ORIGINAL X-Men and get relegated to unimportant and ineffective roles in all 3 movies I saw. While Storm and Colossus are just straight up jokes when in the comics they're some of the deepest and most appealing characters in the X-Men lore. A lot more interesting than Wolverine IMO. I felt more for Nightcrawler in X2 than I ever did for Iceman, Jean Grey, Cyclops or Storm in any of the 3 movies they appeared in.
That's pretty sad especially since Jean and Cyclops are the anchors of the X-Men universe. Yet Cyclops and Jean died and I didn't even give a ? . That's pretty criminal if you ask me, it just shows how incompetent they were in doing justice to any of the team members. You don't even care about anything that happens to them cause they're highly underdeveloped and feel like complete strangers to the audience despite having appeared in 3 freaking movies.
In 3 movies the only characters to get any real development were Wolverine, Magneto and Nightcrawler. One of them isn't even in the movies anymore and the other 2 are nowhere as interesting as their comic book counterparts. I consider that a fail. The fact that better comic book adaptations have come since (like Sour pointed out) and even before makes them even more of a joke.
I do think Bryan Singer half steps compared to other comic book movie directors. The only thing Bryan Singer knew about the X-Men was the animated series. He admitted it himself and he didn't even do a good job of cribbing from there cause the cartoon was a more adequate adaptation than any of the movies.
He also admitted that Superman The Movie of all things was more influential to his X-Men movies than any X-Men comic book was. Yet he didn't retain any of the best elements from that movie (mainly the world building) either so you don't even see the influence. I see the influence that movie had on say Raimi's first Spider-Man and Batman Begins for example because of that reason.
Then when he went and made a Superman movie again the only thing he knew was STM and didn't bother learning about anything else about Superman's then 60 plus year history. The guy doesn't even bother to do proper research and it doesn't do his movies any favors.
Even Tim Burton who isn't even a comic book fan just like Singer was well versed in the 1940's Batman comics, The Dark Knight Returns and The Killing Joke before making his first Batman movie and the influences of that on the movie is as clear as day.
He was a responsible enough director to realize he's taking on a property that was around before he was born and will be around after he dies and he did his proper research. Can't say the same about Singer and I can't blame Brett Ratner either cause despite his hackish ways he was just adhering to the blueprint that Singer had already set up.
The man didn't even do proper research for Valkyrie and in the end the movie felt like a ? comedy sketch. So it's not something just limited to his comic book adaptations either.
-
This thread has depressed me lol still waiting on a trailer though maybe it'll be better.
-
I honestly think if you enjoyed these movies in any capacity you'll also enjoy the new one cause it's just more of the same. For someone like me who tried to watch X-Men: First Class due to the internet hype and got really bored before the halfway mark it will have no allure. I turned that movie off before it even got past the 2nd act and re-read the first 13 issues of All-New X-Men instead. I give up on this franchise until Marvel Studios gets their mitts on the film rights.
That movie is supposedly "the best one" and it wasn't even better than X2 from what I saw. I still think that's the best out of the bunch sadly and that was 10 years ago. When so many people told me X2 was much better than the painfully average first movie I gave it a shot because I kept an open mind. Specifically my dad who isn't even a comic book fan but was through the moon about his love for X2. Something I never saw from him again till Batman Begins. You know what? back then in 2003 watching it on DVD to my 19 year old eyes it still wasn’t the X-Men movie I had hoped for but they were right it was a better movie than the mediocre original. I even went to a free screening of X-Men: The Last Stand (which ended up being a mistake) because of any goodwill that was left over from X2 3 years before.
I’ll give credit where it’s due the Nightcrawler opening and the invasion of the Xavier school invasion were far more memorable moments than anything in the original. They felt more imaginative and X-Men like. Seeing Wolverine on the run with some students & Halle Berry gave it more of a team feel than anything the original could ever hope to achieve and overall the movie had a tighter script even if it had a lot of parts that dragged.
But that’s the thing the moments that did drag dragged pretty hard. It was still pretty unbalanced, despite some good points. It still felt like a school play set in an industrial environment. It still felt “small” and generic & when I tried to see it again recently and I realized that it also aged pretty bad and seems pretty dated only 10 years later. Yet that’s still the best the series has had to offer to date and that’s pretty sad.
That’s pretty much why I’ve just given up on this franchise as it exists today. It really is a case of the emperor not having any clothes. These movies just aren't for me at all. -
I think the biggest problem is there's no gambit ? those herbs cyclops and wolverine fighting over the same chick we need gambit to show them the way
-
Wasn't Gambit in X-Men Origins: Wolverine?
I never saw it so I don't really know but I remember people making a big deal about that. -
Wasn't Gambit in X-Men Origins: Wolverine?
I never saw it so I don't really know but I remember people making a big deal about that.
He was for a few minutes -
I respectfully disagree. There is simply too many angles to cover. X-Men has way too many personalities and stories to cover in 6 hours of film time so they picked somewhat important storylines and emphasized those. Considering they had every intention of doing Wolverine spin-off movies of course they highlighted him more than others but they did put some emphasis on the team aspect as well.
Wolverine being a maverick with only pieces of his memory intact, Jean & Scott's love story, Prof X and Magneto's differening philosophies on mutant human relations, Wolverine Scott Jean love triangle, Beast trying to be an intermediary between humans amd mutants, Jean losing control of herself and her powers (a different manifestation of it), humans trying to persecute mutants all these angles appear in those movies. I mean damn bruh what more could you want? I wouldn't say they are done to perfection but it shows that dude tapped into the material some when making the flick. You simply not giving him enough credit. He did butcher some characters too, the most egregious of which was the Juggernaut an Sabretooth but for the most part he did okay.
I didnt care for Origins and I think First Class was cool.
@Broddie what did you think of the anime adaptation of the X-Men? -
Raging Raven wrote: »Off topic, I was just re-watching the super bowl on Blu Ray and i can not help but wonder how many TDs the Ravens would have scored if not for the blackout.
? a Raven.I never expect direct translations but damn give me something as compelling as what I’ve seen in the comic books at least. Take the last X-Men movie for instance and why I couldn't even finish it. I’ve seen much better and more interesting uses of Sebastian Shaw and Magneto that are far more compelling than “you tortured me during the holocaust and now I’ll get my revenge”.
Word. Despite being the consummate fanboy and wanting the characters to be in uniform and true to character, I am open to different interpretations and original stories. This is why Bruce Timm and 'em are the GOAT with the DC properties in this regard. They were able to take story arcs in the comics, put they're own twist on it, while maintaining the feel, themes, and over integrity of the source material and to his credit, Nolan pulled this off in The Dark Knight, and for the most part in The Dark Knight Rises. Though Broddie would disagree, I felt MoS had the feel and the themes of Superman.Even if we look at something like Burton’s version of Batman we have The Joker using giant balloons to poison Gotham City and running around killing people with quails to the neck and frying them up with joybuzzers. It’s as crazy and loony as anything the character does in the comic books. Sebastian Shaw is a master of manipulation and physical combat. To see him reduced to a sneering ? mad scientist was kinda painful in it’s blandness.
Wolverine as presented in these movies is way too neutered for me to ever find interesting. I’ll take the alcoholic loner who has no problem with chopping off a limb or two during a fight over this amalgamation of Wolverine’s most shallow elements with some of comic book Cyclops’ demeanor, relationships (with Jean and Xavier especially) and leadership skils.Jackman’s Cyclerine has never impressed me.
) ? said, "Cyclernine."Especially since he always ends up getting his ass handed to him by everybody he fights. “The best at what he does” he certainly is not. It will always be wishful thinking and sound like a broken record on my part because there will be no stopping Fox with exploiting this property but the day Marvel Studios gets the movie rights to X-Men back is the day the general public will finally see an X-Men movie that really lives up to the concept’s potential.
I've been on this broad for a minute and this literally the best thread I ever read. Like the Supreme Court Justices do when offering a concurring opinion, I'm going agree for different set of reasons. First, a historical perspective.
Since it's inception Spider-Man has been the franchise and he's arguably Marvel's most well known, popular, and valuable character. Next, I would say that The Avengers, (and their various members,) were second, with the Fantastic Four rounding out the top three. For the first fifteen years of X-Men there was no Wolverine, Storm, Nightcrawler, Colossus, or Banshee. Now for the interesting trivia part, X-Men was an ass book, so ass that it damn near got cancelled which was the reason why the original roster was switch out to begin with, it was a desperation move to save the title and boost sales. In Wolverine's case he was introduced in this book:
and he was suppose to be a villain. It's easy for the novice to the "X-Men," mythos to think that it's about Logan and the mutants around him, but that's not the case, far from it. Wolverine really didn't become the breakout mutant to around this issue:
Which is twelve years from his debut on the team in X-Men 94. In those years, Lein Wein and mostly Chris Claremont, (with some input from John Bryne,) gave everybody equal time. As I stated earlier, before Wolverine became the most popular mutant, if everything it was Cyclops' book, Jeannie's books, and then Ororo's book. Hell, Claremont and Bryne didn't even like Wolverine, they were trying to set things up for Kurt to be the breakout star of the book.
It' painfully obvious that Singer's ? ass has no ? to give in regards to source material and doesn't respect the property. How do you movie with characters based on another medium, and you yourself not only don't read the source material, but you forbid the actors that are working for to do so also? Sounds to me like this ? guzller is using our beloved mutants as a pay check and it sounds like (from what Broddie said,) this all of this ? 's research (Bryan Singer's,) consists of is reading a synopsis of a story arch on Wikipedia, then consulting The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe, to figure out what characters he's going to use. Also, it isn't about Fox having the movie rights per se, it's about finding the right script and director that will bring an accurate version of these characters to the big screen. -
I respectfully disagree. There is simply too many angles to cover. X-Men has way too many personalities and stories to cover in 6 hours of film time
That’s BS. Many competent writers and directors could make an ensemble of 6 or 7 people work with every character getting properly fleshed out and having an equally important presence. It works in Robert Altman movies, Tarantino movies, it worked in The Big Chill hell it works in one hour episodes of countless TV shows. The source material for X-Men movies has had single one shot issues (meaning not part of a long story arc) where we get to know 5 or 6 characters much better in 22 pages than we did in 6 hours of film. Just peep the Byrne/Claremont run Rex was referring to in this thread for examples.
It’s about making the screen time for the characters count and have substance. Not just making them glorified cameos. It’s about finding balance, something the X-Men movies greatly struggle with.Considering they had every intention of doing Wolverine spin-off movies of course they highlighted him more than others.
Actually the fact that they knew Wolverine would get solo movies makes it even more insulting that the trilogy revolved around him. He was going to get his chance to really shine for 2 hours in other movies anyway. I understand why they made him the central character in the first movie even if I would’ve executed things differently. He was the gateway for the general audience to get to know the movie X-Men and this world but there was no real reason for that to be carried onto the sequels.Wolverine being a maverick with only pieces of his memory intact, Jean & Scott's love story, Prof X and Magneto's differening philosophies on mutant human relations, Wolverine Scott Jean love triangle, Beast trying to be an intermediary between humans amd mutants, Jean losing control of herself and her powers (a different manifestation of it), humans trying to persecute mutants all these angles appear in those movies.
Yes but it was all handled superficially. Did you really care about Xavier and Magneto’s different philosophies? I didn’t because there was nothing to really highlight how different and effective those ideals even were. It was like they just included it for the sake of saying it was included but the context of it all didn’t make it seem effective just forced, Again that goes back to incompetent world building. I did not feel one bit that either was fighting for mutant rights because humans were just indifferent to mutants in these movies outside of Senator Kelly and William Stryker from what we were shown. The humans vs mutants dynamic felt forced and disingenuous because it felt like an after thought. Seems like the only humans who had an issue with mutants were ones in positions of authority and not the regular laymen on the street. Something that even the cartoons accurately depicted.
Jean & Scott’s love story? Again all we gathered was that Scott cared about her because he said “stay away from my girl” and showed concerned for her in 2 or 3 scenes. We didn’t know why he was concerned for her though because we were never shown why because in the end they were complete strangers to us. Neither of them was fleshed out and ended up being stock characters.
We knew about as much about them when we first saw them as we did when we last saw them across the span of 3MOVIES. It was just more superficial nonsense and the sad part is you don’t need 60 minutes to even develop that. In 10 minutes of screen time you could effectively highlight why they’re so important to each other and why their love is so important.
As it was in the movies we couldn’t have cared less and most people rooted for Wolverine to get some ass because they were at least invested in that character. Not conflict presented to the audience in regards to the love triangle or anything. Instead of thinking both “well Scott would be good for her because” and “Logan would be good for her because” creating a conflict in the audiences minds because they could validly argue for both scenarios the audience was left thinking “Logan is good for her cause he’s the only interesting male character on the team”. Which is just wrong.
For that same reason the Phoenix story is ineffective. Why should I care about a force corrupting the soul of a woman I don’t even really know? They have Wolverine crying when he kills her and I guess because he has tears and was the central character of the movie we’re supposed to feel bad too despite having 0 investment in the Jean Grey character in any of those movies.I mean damn bruh what more could you want?
Balanced filmmaking period. I didn’t care for First Class but from the parts that I did see I give Vaughn credit in at least balancing an ensemble much better than Singer ever did. That ? made the audience care about Mystique of all characters because he prioritized her presence as much as he did Xavier’s and Magneto’s. That’s how it’s done.@Broddie what did you think of the anime adaptation of the X-Men?
Never seen it. Up until this post I didn’t even know it existed.
-
-
Show really nothing
-
"what have you been doing for the past 50 years?"
turned the video off after that -
error
-
You guys really killed the enthusiasm I had for this movie. I was pretty excited after watching the clip at comic con then you guys had to go a day remind me how bad synger and fox have been
Truth be told B the movies haven't been that bad. These ? are exaggerating, I been watching all them ? and I think their dope movies, they won't get anybody any oscars or anything but still solid flicks.
Like I been saying these fools want everything to be perfect like the comics and that ? impossible. It's a movie not a comic B.
it's called nerd rage son! RAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -
Lamilton3000 wrote: »You guys really killed the enthusiasm I had for this movie. I was pretty excited after watching the clip at comic con then you guys had to go a day remind me how bad synger and fox have been
Truth be told B the movies haven't been that bad. These ? are exaggerating, I been watching all them ? and I think their dope movies, they won't get anybody any oscars or anything but still solid flicks.
Like I been saying these fools want everything to be perfect like the comics and that ? impossible. It's a movie not a comic B.
it's called nerd rage son! RAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dude I just watched X-3 and i don't get he complaints, I can't judge ? off what I want it to be only by what it is.
That huge fight scene at the end was dope ? . Magneto chucking cars and Pyro lighting them on fire, Jean committing indescriminate mass ownage of both humans and mutants.
I just ? with it. I can't hate it, ? I tried. No point in getting all extra with it, all I want is a good flick and it is *shrugs*. -
Lamilton3000 wrote: »You guys really killed the enthusiasm I had for this movie. I was pretty excited after watching the clip at comic con then you guys had to go a day remind me how bad synger and fox have been
Truth be told B the movies haven't been that bad. These ? are exaggerating, I been watching all them ? and I think their dope movies, they won't get anybody any oscars or anything but still solid flicks.
Like I been saying these fools want everything to be perfect like the comics and that ? impossible. It's a movie not a comic B.
it's called nerd rage son! RAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dude I just watched X-3 and i don't get he complaints, I can't judge ? off what I want it to be only by what it is.
That huge fight scene at the end was dope ? . Magneto chucking cars and Pyro lighting them on fire, Jean committing indescriminate mass ownage of both humans and mutants.
I just ? with it. I can't hate it, ? I tried. No point in getting all extra with it, all I want is a good flick and it is *shrugs*.
That's because y'all have no foreknowledge of the "X-Men. The Dark Phoenix Saga had a two year build up in the comics. That included Jeannie accepting the Phoenix Force to save her friends, manipulation on the part of Sebastian Shaw in an attempt to get Jeannie to become the "Black Queen" of the Inner Circle of the Hellfire Club. Jeannie and Scott sharing a mental bonding to consummate their relationship mental level to where they were sharing thoughts and feelings with each mentally. Xavier putting mental blocks in Jeannie's mind to her telepathy and telekinetic powers in check. The X-Men's journey to the Shi'ar Empire in order for the Jeannie to stand trial for the destruction of an ENTIRE "SOLAR SYSTEM!" (Second only in trilleness to Thanos' killing off half the universe to impress Death,) and Jeannie's death at the end of the "Dark Phoenix Saga." Those are just the main plotlines, there are a lot of secondary story lines going on too. Such as Thunderbird's insecurity and need to compete with Wolverine which caused his ? to be killed. As I said earlier, Xavier having to readjust his training methods to be more compatible with adults. Wolverine beginning hard to get along with and danger to his teammates, Nightcrawler becoming secure enough to walk around in his natural form, and tumultuous relationship between Scott and Logan, then Logan finally accepting Scott leadership and respecting him as a man at the end of the Proteus Saga.
These are all themes and story arches if properly handled could have made the X-Men franchise the Star Wars of this generation and had Bryan Singer mentioned in the same vain with Lucus and Cameron, but this ? didn't even take time out to read the ? source material. As I began with, when you go back and read the stories that movies were based on, you'll see that what a less than half assed job Singer did on the project, especially X 3. The cold part about is, this is the same dude that gave us Usual Suspects and we know that he has the ability to tell a dope ass story, it's just that concerning the X-Men, he's choosing not to. -
Singer didn't do X3 though.
Ya'll so quick to hate on the directors for not following the comics that you don't even know who you're hating on. -
I don't hate these movies for not following the comics. I hate them because I think they're very mediocre movies and I don't settle for that kind of ? like other movie viewers do. I have standards. This is also why I vote with my dollars and just skip them altogether. As a movie goer I have the right to do that.
Like I said in another post I can't blame Ratner even though he is a ? director in his own right because he was just adhering to the blueprint set up by Bryan Singer. I guess on a superficial level he was better with the action but action without any real weight behind it is just boring as ? to me. It's the same reason I never liked The Matrix Reloaded. -
Maximus Rex wrote: »this is the same dude that gave us Usual Suspects and we know that he has the ability to tell a dope ass story, it's just that concerning the X-Men, he's choosing not to.[/b]
That movie was always overrated as hell to me. It'd be one I'd nominate in your overrated classics thread. Most of it is boring as hell with some average ass performances outside of Byrne and Spacey though Del Toro had his moments. The best part of that movie is it's awesome ending. Bryan Singer just has a very sterile and muted style of filmmaking that never really resonates with me at all.
http://youtu.be/TXxVzeCDPX0
