You guys and your feelings are playing right into marvels hand. But good luck with that.
And FYI, Civil War was boring.
X-Men: Apocalypse' Review: It's A Franchise-Killing Disaster
- Thread starter keone
- Start date
And FYI, Civil War was boring.
I disagree - the foundation they started with was always limited - those characters weren't given room for growth - its the main reason the last 2 movies were unable to logically tie in all continuity.
If Singer and Goyer could actually write - they never would have focused on Singers man crush...
Kitty Pride would be on the team and Scott Summers would have been developed as hyper competent but polar opposite to develop Wolverine...
8 movies and not one film viewer can tell you any thing about Wolverine other than he has claws and a fettish for redheads- not his ethics or flaws or if he even has true leadership qualities - same goes for ALL the characters except Magneto - then X - and kinda Mystique
I'm not a writer but if Fox hired me - after DoFP- with all that dead wood... instead of Apocalypse - I would have rebooted it to the new XMen that debuted in the 70's- I would have the movie opening shot be: older McAvoy Professor X and Fassbender Magneto in makeup and prosthesis - in a dark room pleading / comforting /talking to a lady wearing a red dress and scarf who is crying and then hear her whisper "no more mutants" - fade out and have Magneto with heavy regret and pain in his voice narrate the time jump and forming of the new XMen in the 70s and eventually intro the Brotherhood including his kids (explained / revealed much later in the movie that he didn't know at the time they were his)
that is a GREAT F*CKING NOTE!!!!
Don't think Fox has Scarlet Witch....thank god. And no....giving them more characters to butcher is not the answer.
They should also do away with Mystique. She was good in the first set of movies, but now, because of the actress playing her, they are trying to push her to the front. Replace her with Iceman or give Jubilee a bigger role, hell, bring Rogue back.
She had a cameo in DOFP & was much younger than Quicksilver as well so they definitely would've butchered her character
Oh yeah....I forgot about that bullshit.
Fox has her if they want.
Yeah they do, which is why she and Quicksilver can't be recognized as mutants or Magneto's kids in the other Marvel universe.
yeah and my man just reminded me of the bullshit they did with her.
The X-Men franchise has plenty of characters for them to misuse. If we want to see Magneto play a bad father storyline, they can always use Polaris.
they have her - they just chose not to use her
yeah and my man just reminded me of the bullshit they did with her.
The X-Men franchise has plenty of characters for them to misuse. If we want to see Magneto play a bad father storyline, they can always use Polaris.
bad father? shit - they are idiots for not borrowing from Oedipus Rex...
If well written they would kill it - but now I think heads are going to roll cause this expensive movie won't come close to Deadpools boxoffice - hopefully they duplicate Sonys deal with Marvel
Last edited:
How great would it have been if Quicksilver was the reason or his redemption?
His other family was killed. If Magneto knew he had another real family out there..
Wouldn't that have been worth more and real tears not just some fake relationship he had with Mystique?
Mystique is the same character he shot and tried to kill multiple times in the last movies????
Really?
At least if Quicksilver was known to be his son.. of fuck it.
Quicksilver was the best part of the movie with his old looking ass.
And not the freaking running part either.
When he said "We don't know dude".
And then when he stole on APAC.
His other family was killed. If Magneto knew he had another real family out there..
Wouldn't that have been worth more and real tears not just some fake relationship he had with Mystique?
Mystique is the same character he shot and tried to kill multiple times in the last movies????
Really?
At least if Quicksilver was known to be his son.. of fuck it.
Quicksilver was the best part of the movie with his old looking ass.
And not the freaking running part either.
When he said "We don't know dude".
And then when he stole on APAC.
I would love to hear WHY they chose to do what they did.
probably a backroom deal
Marvel uses Scarlet while Fox uses QuickSilver
I thought this....but Marvel did use Quicksilver.
and killed him immediately
True....which made me rethink it. Either way....I'm glad Fox didnt butcher Scarlet Witch. They never even explicitly said the little girl was her.
these jews are throwing Jennifer Lawrence under the bus!!!!!Of Course There Were Plans for Even More Wolverine in X-Men Apocalypse
The X-Men movies just can’t quit Wolverine, it seems. Hugh Jackman’s take on the world’s most beloved Canadian (okay, maybe next to Justin Trudeau?) has managed to show up in every main X-Men movie, whether in a starring role or as a cameo. But it turns out his savage appearance in Apocalypse could’ve been even bigger.
Wolverine’s got a pretty meaty appearance in Apocalypse—we get to see Logan emerging as Weapon X, and go absolutely bonkers on a bunch of guards, before he hops off on his merry way (to go star in Wolverine 3, probably). But according to a new interview with Cinemablend, that wasn’t originally all Wolverine would’ve done in the movie. Simon Kinberg told the site that Wolverine was going to end up leading the next generation of X-Men into battle against Apocalypse as well:
There was always a notion that we wanted Wolverine to be in the movie. We wanted to find a way to feature him in the film, partly because Bryan [Singer] and I love Hugh [Jackman] so much. We love the character, obviously, and he’s such a huge part of the franchise. There were a lot of iterations of how Wolverine would enter and exit the movie. There was a version when he was going to come in at the midpoint of the film and be like the drill sergeant for the kids and take over as their leader. And we felt like that stepped on Jen’s role in the movie and becoming their leader.
As Kinberg says, instead the role was decreased significantly, in order to give Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique more of a starring role. Makes sense, considering the fact that Fox is paying the actress a considerable amount of cash to keep her appearing in X-Men films—and especially with Lawrence saying she’s made a deal with co-stars James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender for them to only return to the franchise if all three of them are involved. They have to make sure they keep her part major, even if it is a bit weird to have a version of the X-Men with Mystique at the helm.
But imagine what would’ve been if they went ahead with this.
How X-Men's Screenwriter Resolves The Wolverine Mystery From The End Of Days Of Future Past
At the end of X-Men: Days of Future Past, Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine once again finds himself going back into captivity – albeit with a new captor. While it looked like the person leading Logan’s extraction from the Potomac River was Josh Helman’s Major William Stryker, a flash of yellow in his eyes revealed that it was actually Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique in disguise. Given that the events of the film take place before Wolverine got his adamantium skeleton and metal claws, many fans watched this sequence and wondered how exactly the character would still wind up going through the Weapon X experiments. It turns out that the answer to that question, to use a less-than-scientific word, is destiny.
Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of sitting down with X-Men franchise producer and X-Men: Days of Future Past/Apocalypse screenwriter Simon Kinberg, and among the topics that I brought up was the path of Wolverine after the events of 1973. Borrowing a bit of scientific theory and dialogue from the last X-Men movie, Kinberg explained that the idea is that Wolverine was always going to end up in the Weapon X program despite all of the events that changed in his life due to time-travel antics. Said Kinberg,One of the things we talk about in Days of Future Past - there’s a scene where Hank/Beast talks about the immutability of time. Basically, you can change the way the future goes, but it finds its way back. So while we don’t show how, it found its way back to Wolverine being part of Weapon X and under the thumb of Stryker, that’s the idea.
This answer certainly functions as an answer for how Wolverine still winds up in Major Stryker’s Weapon X experiments, but it does kind of come across more as an excuse than an explanation. After all, if time works to repair itself after changes are made, then why did the time travel plan of X-Men: Days of Future Past actually work? On a long enough timeline, wouldn’t enough events occur to once again to lead to the rise of the Sentinels and the destruction of the world? It’s true that the X-Men franchise has never really been about hard science, but it would have been nice to have a better story come out of things than "it happens because it’s supposed to happen."
if the above was true then explain how they wrote Warren Worthington III ending up here:
At the end of X-Men: Days of Future Past, Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine once again finds himself going back into captivity – albeit with a new captor. While it looked like the person leading Logan’s extraction from the Potomac River was Josh Helman’s Major William Stryker, a flash of yellow in his eyes revealed that it was actually Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique in disguise. Given that the events of the film take place before Wolverine got his adamantium skeleton and metal claws, many fans watched this sequence and wondered how exactly the character would still wind up going through the Weapon X experiments. It turns out that the answer to that question, to use a less-than-scientific word, is destiny.
Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of sitting down with X-Men franchise producer and X-Men: Days of Future Past/Apocalypse screenwriter Simon Kinberg, and among the topics that I brought up was the path of Wolverine after the events of 1973. Borrowing a bit of scientific theory and dialogue from the last X-Men movie, Kinberg explained that the idea is that Wolverine was always going to end up in the Weapon X program despite all of the events that changed in his life due to time-travel antics. Said Kinberg,One of the things we talk about in Days of Future Past - there’s a scene where Hank/Beast talks about the immutability of time. Basically, you can change the way the future goes, but it finds its way back. So while we don’t show how, it found its way back to Wolverine being part of Weapon X and under the thumb of Stryker, that’s the idea.
This answer certainly functions as an answer for how Wolverine still winds up in Major Stryker’s Weapon X experiments, but it does kind of come across more as an excuse than an explanation. After all, if time works to repair itself after changes are made, then why did the time travel plan of X-Men: Days of Future Past actually work? On a long enough timeline, wouldn’t enough events occur to once again to lead to the rise of the Sentinels and the destruction of the world? It’s true that the X-Men franchise has never really been about hard science, but it would have been nice to have a better story come out of things than "it happens because it’s supposed to happen."
if the above was true then explain how they wrote Warren Worthington III ending up here:
High Jackson is such a fraud. Do you want to know one of the few good things about that movie? The fact that wolverine was in and out. And the truth is the ear holding scene was annoying.
X-Men: Apocalypse is what happens when a superhero franchise runs out of ideas
Just like Sony's stale Spider-Man series, the X-Men have seen better days.
Updated by Peter Suderman on May 30, 2016, 9:30 a.m. ET
Oscar Isaac as X-Men: Apocalypse's unfortunate title villain.20th Century Fox
To really understand X-Men: Apocalypse, you have look back to director Bryan Singer’s firstfilm about the team of superpowered mutants. Released 16 years ago this summer, X-Men wasthe first fully formed entry in the modern superhero movie canon, and it played a major role in launching the current comic book movie boom.
X-Men succeeded largely on the strength of its faithfulness to the tone and character of the comics. It boasted strong performances in the main roles, particularly from Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart as the leaders of dueling mutant factions, as well as from newcomerHugh Jackman, who delivered a career-making performance as the grizzled, tri-clawed mutant Wolverine.
Singer’s approach blended cleverly staged comic book action and soap opera-style character drama with an air of cultural inclusivity, casting the mutant heroes as all-purpose social outcasts struggling to gain acceptance in a world that demanded conformity. His 2003 sequel, X2,expanded and improved on these ideas with high-concept action and a deeply political sensibility; it's still one of the high points of superhero filmmaking.
Singer started work on a third X-Men film, but left before production began to direct Superman Returns, an elegant but ultimately unsuccessful attempt to revive the Superman franchise. He then tooled around in Hollywood for a few years, working on films like Valkyrie and Jack the Giant Slayer before returning to the X-Men franchise in 2014 with the widely praised Days of Future Past.
Singer, in other words, has been working on the X-Men franchise for the better part of two decades. And it’s finally starting to show.
Apocalypse is the sixth film in the main franchise and the ninth in the X-Men universe if you count solo outings from Wolverine and Deadpool; it's also the fourth one Singer has directed. And while it’s not quite an awful movie, it is a deeply tired one, in which the kinetic spark and social engagement that animated Singer’s previous entries has been entirely drained, replaced with a glum sense that everyone involved is merely going through their contractually obligated motions.
It’s a movie, then, that should serve as a warning to other filmmakers and studios as they pursue a strategy that bets heavily on superhero movies and other long-running film series: This is what happens when a franchise runs out of ideas.
Apocalypse squanders what should be a very strong cast
Almost every element of Apocalypsefeels like a wasted opportunity, but the characters and performances are probably the biggest disappointment. The movie manages to fail almost all of its cast members.
Oscar Isaac plays the title character, the movie’s main villain. He's one of the most promising and appealing young actors in Hollywood today, blessed with the skill to effortlessly switch between moody indie-film character parts and effortlessly charming leading-man roles. And yetApocalypse manages to make him both uninteresting and faintly ridiculous, dressing him up in goofy purple face paint and piling on prosthetics until he looks like a castoff from a Star Trek fan film. Worst of all, the movie disguises his voice, giving it a deep, computer-generated rumble — he sounds like he’s talking through a 1980s synthesizer.
But maybe that's fitting, since the character — an ancient mutant with vaguely defined, god-like powers and no discernible motivation whatsoever to explain his pursuit of world domination — feels more than a little like a bad prog-rock concept album figure come to life. He’s a cheesy villain, not a relatable character with a reason for his actions.
James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender, who have played the two mutant leaders in recent installments of the franchise, end up delivering flat, unconvincing performances.
Just about every player in the movie seems adrift: Returning supporting cast members like Nicholas Houltand Rose Byrne have almost nothing to do except deliver snippets of exposition, and the slew of new, young heroes are unmemorable at best, grating at worst.
Sophie Turner, for example, appears as a young Jean Grey, a role previously played by Famke Janssen. Turner is usually solid as Sansa Stark on HBO’sGame of Thrones, but here she comes across as both whiny and emotionally blank.
Tye Sheridan, who plays a teenage Scott Summers, seems entirely out of his element, and he has none of the preppy swagger that James Marsden brought to the role in the first three X-Men films. Ben Hardy, Alexandra Shipp, and Lana Condor as Angel, Storm, and Jubilee, meanwhile, fill out what looks to be a new, young team of X-Men, but barely make any impression at all.
The characters' and motives are largely missing and/or illogical
The problem for all of the characters is essentially the same: None of them have any basis for doing what they’re doing, which eventually turns out to be battling each other in a clunky, computer-generated finale that casually destroys a handful of major global metropolises. They’re just going through the motions of appearing in a superhero movie, because that’s what movie superheroes do, and superhero franchises have to go on forever.
Even Apocalypse’s best moments are weighed down by a sense of obligation and repetition. A cameo by one of the franchise’s most beloved characters delivers a bloody, violent kick, but doesn't offer anything new or interesting about said character. There's an elaborate, extended sequence showing off Quicksilver’s powers, but it doesn't inspire the same unexpected thrills as the similar sequence that wowed us inDays of Future Past. It’s entirely perfunctory.
Several older characters, including Grey and Summers, appear in the form of newly recast young actors via the magic of the complex time-travel related continuity reset at the end ofDays of Future Past. But the specifics of the how the new continuity works, and how all the different timelines fit together, are terribly unclear. They appear to have been worked out mostly to allow for the cheaper, younger cast to step in and take over.
Viewed this way, the motivations start to make more sense — not as narrative, but as franchise imperative.X-Men: Apocalypse’s story and characters only make sense as a series of business decisions. It’s less of a movie and more of a two-and-a-half-hour-long announcement of a new franchise marketing plan.
The movie only exists because the X-Men franchise must go on, at least in the studio's eyes
This is one of the big dangers for the extended franchise model of filmmaking — that characters and series will be kept alive not because there’s a story to tell, but because the franchise must be kept alive.
We’ve already seen this happen with Sony’s ho-hum efforts to reboot the Spider-Man series — leading to two competent but essentially repetitiveAmazing Spider-Man films that struggled to justify themselves. LikeX-Men: Apocalypse, they were franchise placeholders, existing only because some movie with Spider-Man in the title had to exist.
Industry leader Marvel has largely avoided this problem, in part byexpanding its universe to include a wider variety of characters, some of whom are not obvious bets for standalone movies, and in part by letting those characters play off of each other in ways that generate character-driven tension and conflict.
Indeed, one reason Spider-Man was so successful in Captain America: Civil War was that we got to see the character interacting with the larger cast of Marvel universe characters, playing his youthful sensibility off the older heroes. It wasn’t exactly a risky move, but it placed him in an environment we’d never seen him in before — in contrast to Sony’s dull reboots, which insisted on showing him in situations we’d seen so, somany times already.
Ultimately what these sorts of long-running, fantasy film franchises thrive on is a continual injection of fresh ideas, and a willingness to try new things. It’s not an accident that Marvel Comics has long referred to itself as the House of Ideas. Marvel’s films have their flaws, but they are stuffed, maybe even overstuffed, with ideas. Not all of those ideas work, but enough of them do. (This is part of what made Deadpool work as well.)
X-Men: Apocalypse, in contrast to both Marvel and Singer’s earlier X-films, is a by-the-numbers production with no ideas at all, just a dutiful sense that something like it has to exist. It's primarily an advertisement for the franchise’s future, and it’s not a promising one — especially given the recent news that Singer has been put in charge of expanding the X-Men franchise into an entire, Marvel-style universe of films. It’s clear at this point that Singer doesn’t have enough material for even one more X-Men movie, let alone an entire universe of them.
Just like Sony's stale Spider-Man series, the X-Men have seen better days.
Updated by Peter Suderman on May 30, 2016, 9:30 a.m. ET
Oscar Isaac as X-Men: Apocalypse's unfortunate title villain.20th Century Fox
To really understand X-Men: Apocalypse, you have look back to director Bryan Singer’s firstfilm about the team of superpowered mutants. Released 16 years ago this summer, X-Men wasthe first fully formed entry in the modern superhero movie canon, and it played a major role in launching the current comic book movie boom.
X-Men succeeded largely on the strength of its faithfulness to the tone and character of the comics. It boasted strong performances in the main roles, particularly from Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart as the leaders of dueling mutant factions, as well as from newcomerHugh Jackman, who delivered a career-making performance as the grizzled, tri-clawed mutant Wolverine.
Singer’s approach blended cleverly staged comic book action and soap opera-style character drama with an air of cultural inclusivity, casting the mutant heroes as all-purpose social outcasts struggling to gain acceptance in a world that demanded conformity. His 2003 sequel, X2,expanded and improved on these ideas with high-concept action and a deeply political sensibility; it's still one of the high points of superhero filmmaking.
Singer started work on a third X-Men film, but left before production began to direct Superman Returns, an elegant but ultimately unsuccessful attempt to revive the Superman franchise. He then tooled around in Hollywood for a few years, working on films like Valkyrie and Jack the Giant Slayer before returning to the X-Men franchise in 2014 with the widely praised Days of Future Past.
Singer, in other words, has been working on the X-Men franchise for the better part of two decades. And it’s finally starting to show.
Apocalypse is the sixth film in the main franchise and the ninth in the X-Men universe if you count solo outings from Wolverine and Deadpool; it's also the fourth one Singer has directed. And while it’s not quite an awful movie, it is a deeply tired one, in which the kinetic spark and social engagement that animated Singer’s previous entries has been entirely drained, replaced with a glum sense that everyone involved is merely going through their contractually obligated motions.
It’s a movie, then, that should serve as a warning to other filmmakers and studios as they pursue a strategy that bets heavily on superhero movies and other long-running film series: This is what happens when a franchise runs out of ideas.
Apocalypse squanders what should be a very strong cast
Almost every element of Apocalypsefeels like a wasted opportunity, but the characters and performances are probably the biggest disappointment. The movie manages to fail almost all of its cast members.
Oscar Isaac plays the title character, the movie’s main villain. He's one of the most promising and appealing young actors in Hollywood today, blessed with the skill to effortlessly switch between moody indie-film character parts and effortlessly charming leading-man roles. And yetApocalypse manages to make him both uninteresting and faintly ridiculous, dressing him up in goofy purple face paint and piling on prosthetics until he looks like a castoff from a Star Trek fan film. Worst of all, the movie disguises his voice, giving it a deep, computer-generated rumble — he sounds like he’s talking through a 1980s synthesizer.
But maybe that's fitting, since the character — an ancient mutant with vaguely defined, god-like powers and no discernible motivation whatsoever to explain his pursuit of world domination — feels more than a little like a bad prog-rock concept album figure come to life. He’s a cheesy villain, not a relatable character with a reason for his actions.
James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender, who have played the two mutant leaders in recent installments of the franchise, end up delivering flat, unconvincing performances.
Just about every player in the movie seems adrift: Returning supporting cast members like Nicholas Houltand Rose Byrne have almost nothing to do except deliver snippets of exposition, and the slew of new, young heroes are unmemorable at best, grating at worst.
Sophie Turner, for example, appears as a young Jean Grey, a role previously played by Famke Janssen. Turner is usually solid as Sansa Stark on HBO’sGame of Thrones, but here she comes across as both whiny and emotionally blank.
Tye Sheridan, who plays a teenage Scott Summers, seems entirely out of his element, and he has none of the preppy swagger that James Marsden brought to the role in the first three X-Men films. Ben Hardy, Alexandra Shipp, and Lana Condor as Angel, Storm, and Jubilee, meanwhile, fill out what looks to be a new, young team of X-Men, but barely make any impression at all.
The characters' and motives are largely missing and/or illogical
The problem for all of the characters is essentially the same: None of them have any basis for doing what they’re doing, which eventually turns out to be battling each other in a clunky, computer-generated finale that casually destroys a handful of major global metropolises. They’re just going through the motions of appearing in a superhero movie, because that’s what movie superheroes do, and superhero franchises have to go on forever.
Even Apocalypse’s best moments are weighed down by a sense of obligation and repetition. A cameo by one of the franchise’s most beloved characters delivers a bloody, violent kick, but doesn't offer anything new or interesting about said character. There's an elaborate, extended sequence showing off Quicksilver’s powers, but it doesn't inspire the same unexpected thrills as the similar sequence that wowed us inDays of Future Past. It’s entirely perfunctory.
Several older characters, including Grey and Summers, appear in the form of newly recast young actors via the magic of the complex time-travel related continuity reset at the end ofDays of Future Past. But the specifics of the how the new continuity works, and how all the different timelines fit together, are terribly unclear. They appear to have been worked out mostly to allow for the cheaper, younger cast to step in and take over.
Viewed this way, the motivations start to make more sense — not as narrative, but as franchise imperative.X-Men: Apocalypse’s story and characters only make sense as a series of business decisions. It’s less of a movie and more of a two-and-a-half-hour-long announcement of a new franchise marketing plan.
The movie only exists because the X-Men franchise must go on, at least in the studio's eyes
This is one of the big dangers for the extended franchise model of filmmaking — that characters and series will be kept alive not because there’s a story to tell, but because the franchise must be kept alive.
We’ve already seen this happen with Sony’s ho-hum efforts to reboot the Spider-Man series — leading to two competent but essentially repetitiveAmazing Spider-Man films that struggled to justify themselves. LikeX-Men: Apocalypse, they were franchise placeholders, existing only because some movie with Spider-Man in the title had to exist.
Industry leader Marvel has largely avoided this problem, in part byexpanding its universe to include a wider variety of characters, some of whom are not obvious bets for standalone movies, and in part by letting those characters play off of each other in ways that generate character-driven tension and conflict.
Indeed, one reason Spider-Man was so successful in Captain America: Civil War was that we got to see the character interacting with the larger cast of Marvel universe characters, playing his youthful sensibility off the older heroes. It wasn’t exactly a risky move, but it placed him in an environment we’d never seen him in before — in contrast to Sony’s dull reboots, which insisted on showing him in situations we’d seen so, somany times already.
Ultimately what these sorts of long-running, fantasy film franchises thrive on is a continual injection of fresh ideas, and a willingness to try new things. It’s not an accident that Marvel Comics has long referred to itself as the House of Ideas. Marvel’s films have their flaws, but they are stuffed, maybe even overstuffed, with ideas. Not all of those ideas work, but enough of them do. (This is part of what made Deadpool work as well.)
X-Men: Apocalypse, in contrast to both Marvel and Singer’s earlier X-films, is a by-the-numbers production with no ideas at all, just a dutiful sense that something like it has to exist. It's primarily an advertisement for the franchise’s future, and it’s not a promising one — especially given the recent news that Singer has been put in charge of expanding the X-Men franchise into an entire, Marvel-style universe of films. It’s clear at this point that Singer doesn’t have enough material for even one more X-Men movie, let alone an entire universe of them.
Man that's that bullshit I can't stand. I thought the excuse Zack Snyder gave for Superman not being able to hear his mom was bad but this here is even worseHow X-Men's Screenwriter Resolves The Wolverine Mystery From The End Of Days Of Future Past
At the end of X-Men: Days of Future Past, Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine once again finds himself going back into captivity – albeit with a new captor. While it looked like the person leading Logan’s extraction from the Potomac River was Josh Helman’s Major William Stryker, a flash of yellow in his eyes revealed that it was actually Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique in disguise. Given that the events of the film take place before Wolverine got his adamantium skeleton and metal claws, many fans watched this sequence and wondered how exactly the character would still wind up going through the Weapon X experiments. It turns out that the answer to that question, to use a less-than-scientific word, is destiny.
Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of sitting down with X-Men franchise producer and X-Men: Days of Future Past/Apocalypse screenwriter Simon Kinberg, and among the topics that I brought up was the path of Wolverine after the events of 1973. Borrowing a bit of scientific theory and dialogue from the last X-Men movie, Kinberg explained that the idea is that Wolverine was always going to end up in the Weapon X program despite all of the events that changed in his life due to time-travel antics. Said Kinberg,One of the things we talk about in Days of Future Past - there’s a scene where Hank/Beast talks about the immutability of time. Basically, you can change the way the future goes, but it finds its way back. So while we don’t show how, it found its way back to Wolverine being part of Weapon X and under the thumb of Stryker, that’s the idea.
This answer certainly functions as an answer for how Wolverine still winds up in Major Stryker’s Weapon X experiments, but it does kind of come across more as an excuse than an explanation. After all, if time works to repair itself after changes are made, then why did the time travel plan of X-Men: Days of Future Past actually work? On a long enough timeline, wouldn’t enough events occur to once again to lead to the rise of the Sentinels and the destruction of the world? It’s true that the X-Men franchise has never really been about hard science, but it would have been nice to have a better story come out of things than "it happens because it’s supposed to happen."
if the above was true then explain how they wrote Warren Worthington III ending up here:
They have her. She was in days of future past. In fact they have all mutants. In avengers she isn't classified as a mutant. They call her a miracle.
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/box-office-hits-misses-x-031035753.html
The follow-up to 2014’s timeline-twisting X-Men: Days of Future Past earned an estimated $80 million over long its opening weekend, giving it the 10th best historic premiere for the holiday weekend. The film’s U.S. debut brought its worldwide gross to $265.8 million after its strong opening overseas.
While the opening weekend for Apocalypse was a decent — but not great — debut by industry standards, the film earned quite a bit less than prior X-Men films that premiered over the same holiday weekend. Days of Future Past earned just over $110 million on the same weekend two years ago, while the much-maligned X-Men: The Last Stand earned $122.8 million across all four days in 2006.
The follow-up to 2014’s timeline-twisting X-Men: Days of Future Past earned an estimated $80 million over long its opening weekend, giving it the 10th best historic premiere for the holiday weekend. The film’s U.S. debut brought its worldwide gross to $265.8 million after its strong opening overseas.
While the opening weekend for Apocalypse was a decent — but not great — debut by industry standards, the film earned quite a bit less than prior X-Men films that premiered over the same holiday weekend. Days of Future Past earned just over $110 million on the same weekend two years ago, while the much-maligned X-Men: The Last Stand earned $122.8 million across all four days in 2006.
yeah its been covered. I'm glad they didnt really use her.
and it, and it begins...
Bryan Singer Is Taking a Break From the X-Men Movies
Basically, imagine that Bryan Singer is Michael Corleone and the X-Men movies are the mob. Only he’s not upset so much as he is resigned and kind of happy about it.
Speaking to The Los Angeles Times, Singer talked about how Apocalypse is both the end of this particular trilogy and sets up the characters to be who we met in the original 2000 movie. (That sets up a complicated canon tangle that is best not to think about.) But Singer also addressed whether or not he’d be sticking around for more movies, saying:
I recently met Danny Boyle — he and I have known of each other for many years but never met. He was prepping “Steve Jobs” at the time and I was doing this and he said, “Are you going to be doing ‘X-Men’ movies forever?” And I didn’t actually say no.
The reality is, even though I’m very desperate to jump to something completely different, I’ve spent so many years in this universe and I love this cast and the characters so much, I just don’t see myself abandoning them forever. Perhaps as a consultant, as a producer, even as a director, I could see myself returning in the future. Just right now, once this one is done, I’d like to do something really different.
In this particular universe, we’ve already got the third standalone Wolverine movie, X-Force, Deadpool 2, the troubled Gambit, and New Mutants all supposedly in production. They’re all spinoffs to the core movie series that can take up years before Singer returns. Or they can slot an X-Men movie with a different director in between two of those. We already know from Simon Kinberg that they next one will be in the ‘90s.
But I also call it an "in-betwee-quel" -- not a sequel or a prequel -- because it happens in 1983, before the first "X-Men." I’ve done something no other franchise has done -- not even "Star Wars," which is bouncing around in time. I’ve actually altered time so it concludes and also sows the seeds for the characters to find pieces of their destiny where we found them in the first three "X-Men" movies.
What a fucking AssHole!
Bryan Singer Is Taking a Break From the X-Men Movies
Basically, imagine that Bryan Singer is Michael Corleone and the X-Men movies are the mob. Only he’s not upset so much as he is resigned and kind of happy about it.
Speaking to The Los Angeles Times, Singer talked about how Apocalypse is both the end of this particular trilogy and sets up the characters to be who we met in the original 2000 movie. (That sets up a complicated canon tangle that is best not to think about.) But Singer also addressed whether or not he’d be sticking around for more movies, saying:
I recently met Danny Boyle — he and I have known of each other for many years but never met. He was prepping “Steve Jobs” at the time and I was doing this and he said, “Are you going to be doing ‘X-Men’ movies forever?” And I didn’t actually say no.
The reality is, even though I’m very desperate to jump to something completely different, I’ve spent so many years in this universe and I love this cast and the characters so much, I just don’t see myself abandoning them forever. Perhaps as a consultant, as a producer, even as a director, I could see myself returning in the future. Just right now, once this one is done, I’d like to do something really different.
In this particular universe, we’ve already got the third standalone Wolverine movie, X-Force, Deadpool 2, the troubled Gambit, and New Mutants all supposedly in production. They’re all spinoffs to the core movie series that can take up years before Singer returns. Or they can slot an X-Men movie with a different director in between two of those. We already know from Simon Kinberg that they next one will be in the ‘90s.
But I also call it an "in-betwee-quel" -- not a sequel or a prequel -- because it happens in 1983, before the first "X-Men." I’ve done something no other franchise has done -- not even "Star Wars," which is bouncing around in time. I’ve actually altered time so it concludes and also sows the seeds for the characters to find pieces of their destiny where we found them in the first three "X-Men" movies.
What a fucking AssHole!
Fuck Fox!
I just want someone to answer four questions for me about this movie:
*SPOILERS IF YOU DIDN'T SEE THE MOVIE, BTW*
1) Angel can fly & showed that he can use his wings to tear through shit, right? So, someone please explain how did he die in a plane crash? I mean, Psylocke, who can't fly, survived....but the guy with the wings & the ability to fly (and shred shit to escape) couldn't get out of the plane. And let's not forget, the plane has a big ass hole from when he & Psylocke first jumped in the plane. I mean, WTF?
2) If Jean Grey couldn't control her powers at the school, randomly reading minds & emotions & shaking shit up & what-not....then how in the fuck was she able to control the Phoenix Force enough to destroy only Apocalypse?
3) If Wolverine was in a berseker rage during the Alaki Lake scene, how in the world did Jean get halfway close to touching him, much less stopping him? She can't control her powers, remember? WTF! Her & the other junior X-Men should have been pieces of meat in a body bags at the end of the movie.
And I found it mad disrespectful to start the movie off in ancient Egypt & only have 1 black man holding a staff & a nation of white people. They could have gotten a few Arabs, at least.
All in all, fuck this movie. I hope that Marvel makes a deal or gets the rights back soon.
*SPOILERS IF YOU DIDN'T SEE THE MOVIE, BTW*
1) Angel can fly & showed that he can use his wings to tear through shit, right? So, someone please explain how did he die in a plane crash? I mean, Psylocke, who can't fly, survived....but the guy with the wings & the ability to fly (and shred shit to escape) couldn't get out of the plane. And let's not forget, the plane has a big ass hole from when he & Psylocke first jumped in the plane. I mean, WTF?
2) If Jean Grey couldn't control her powers at the school, randomly reading minds & emotions & shaking shit up & what-not....then how in the fuck was she able to control the Phoenix Force enough to destroy only Apocalypse?
3) If Wolverine was in a berseker rage during the Alaki Lake scene, how in the world did Jean get halfway close to touching him, much less stopping him? She can't control her powers, remember? WTF! Her & the other junior X-Men should have been pieces of meat in a body bags at the end of the movie.
And I found it mad disrespectful to start the movie off in ancient Egypt & only have 1 black man holding a staff & a nation of white people. They could have gotten a few Arabs, at least.
All in all, fuck this movie. I hope that Marvel makes a deal or gets the rights back soon.
don't worry about spoilers in this thread...
your questions and observations were made and asked already many times in this thread - without anyone able to fathom an answer...
I'm still tripping how Nightcrawler can't teleport through a trunk with chains around it and electric fence,but have no problem teleporting through thick doors
Also,you can forget the greatest line in the movie....Wreck Havoc
Also,you can forget the greatest line in the movie....Wreck Havoc
Similar threads
