quote:Also, why are they flying the SR71? That plane doesn't have bomb bay doors. It has no carrying capacity - it is a pure reconnaissance vehicle. It fits a pilot and a navigator in a tiny cockpit - that's it.
quote:Yeah and how is that guy lifting a sub out of the water. Sorry, I just enjoy how your suspension of disbelief ends at the inaccuracy of the SR-71. Like you were on board till that happened.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Those amused me but, I think they have a point about the ages. How is Xavier in his like mid-30s and the others are only a little younger? Prof. X is in his like 50s or 60s in the modern day iterations, when our commonly known X-Men are generally in their 30s. In other words, there's a rather large time gap there.
Having said that, I love that they're adapting the X-Men universe to a real historical event rather than some tired doomsday machine. The authenticity of picking a real-life doomsday machine is far more satisfying.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I think that the age problem is the trade-off when you cast a good actor who looks like the Xavier we know but is young himself, that character must carry the brunt of this story seeing as Magneto will turn and we will be left with Charles as the sole protaginist.
I just question why Beast would be the pilot and Xavier would be on the two man strike team, his power should have already been strong enough to work over a distance so trying to keep up with Magneto would be pointless and Beast is wasted sitting in a chair.
Has there been many instances of actually placing an age on Prof. X? He was always ageless and seemed to be older than he might be due to baldness and dissability.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
It looks lackluster to me.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:I just question why Beast would be the pilot and Xavier would be on the two man strike team, his power should have already been strong enough to work over a distance so trying to keep up with Magneto would be pointless and Beast is wasted sitting in a chair.
It looks to me that Beast gets his transformation into blue and hairy in the movie. Maybe before that he was the one who learned how to fly the jet?
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Beast had nothing to do with Prof. X and the others until he was a mutant, in fact he was artificially mutated in the course of trying to cure the mutant gene (as a kindness rather than the later more malicious attempts.) Which is why Beast was the best choice to be the mutant representitive for the government seeing as he was a respected human beforehand and would be less biased.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: Beast had nothing to do with Prof. X and the others until he was a mutant, in fact he was artificially mutated in the course of trying to cure the mutant gene (as a kindness rather than the later more malicious attempts.) Which is why Beast was the best choice to be the mutant representitive for the government seeing as he was a respected human beforehand and would be less biased.
I know that. But when he was transformed from monkey-like and human looking to monkey/cat-like and hairy looking, his powers also increased. Or at least that's how I remember it.
And if you have a house full of mutants, somebody has to learn to fly the jet. Why not him?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Beast had nothing to do with Prof. X and the others until he was a mutant
Isn't that pretty much the case with all of the X-men?
Beast was an X-man before getting blue and hairy, BTW. He was featured in issue #1; the only difference between Beast and a regular human was oversized limbs, feet, and hands.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote: And if you have a house full of mutants, somebody has to learn to fly the jet.
It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a house full of mutants must be in want of a jet pilot.
I don't know about this. This trailer suggests that they're keeping the same reality all the way through the movies, and I really don't feel like I can believe that Halle Berry and James Marsden etc. were supposed to have been young adults in the 60s, unless the first two films were supposed to have been happening in the 70s or 80s instead of the 2000s. But hey. Mutants just age well, obviously.
And then the last two or so films in this franchise were so horrible that anything would be an improvement - at least the concept looks interesting and the costuming should be fun.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
Marvel has always operated with a sliding timescale, so I guess I've gotten used to suspending my disbelief in this aspect of the continuity.
[ February 11, 2011, 12:05 PM: Message edited by: Xavier ]
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
X2 wasn't terrible. I rather enjoyed it. X3 was an abomination.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
quote: And if you have a house full of mutants, somebody has to learn to fly the jet. Why not him?
He is a scientist, lobbyist and a superstrong acrobat the guy should have something better to do. Let Cyclops drive, its not like it would get in the way of his overall potential, maybe Dazzler or Jubilee i.e. people whose only use thier power in certain circumstances.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote:X2 wasn't terrible. I rather enjoyed it. X3 was an abomination.
I liked X2 as well. X3 - least said the better. I was counting Wolverine as the other one which was... not great.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
Yeah, X3 was terribad. When I heard X-3 was going to have Phoenix I was thinking to myself how awesome it would be to have Dark Phoenix going around destroying entire planets until the X-Men could stop her.
Instead we got a horrible movie that essentially gave us no storyline. It seems like the writers said to themselves "I'm tired of these X-Men movies. Let's just kill off three of the main characters and call it a day."
Wolverine wasn't that great of a movie, but the opening action sequence was pretty awesome, especially with Ryan Reynolds.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
I loved X1 and X2, though both had some flaws.
X3 was pretty "meh", which was very disappointing with the anticipation I had for it and saw it in theaters.
Wolverine was just plain crap, and even on TV I could barely sit through it.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: Let Cyclops drive, its not like it would get in the way of his overall potential, maybe Dazzler or Jubilee i.e. people whose only use thier power in certain circumstances.
Jubilee and Dazzler as jet pilots?!? They're not that desperate! Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: Yeah, X3 was terribad. When I heard X-3 was going to have Phoenix I was thinking to myself how awesome it would be to have Dark Phoenix going around destroying entire planets until the X-Men could stop her.
To be fair, I think you totally misjudged the scope and scale of the films if you thought that was at all likely.
Posted by ambyr (Member # 7616) on :
As far as I'm concerned, the X-men franchise consists of X1, X2, and X-men: Hugh Jackman Takes off His Shirt. There is no movie between the second and third of those.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
From a nerdsite
quote: Singer cites the character of Havok (played by Lucas Till) as an example. Although in the comics Havok (real name Alex Summers) is the brother of Scott Summers, aka Cyclops, that relationship does not exist in the movie, which is set in the '60s.
So... Alex Summers whose power is the same as Scott Summers just with his hands as the conduit is not connected to Scott Summers in this? Why not, and you may as well make Juggernaut a natural mutant and give Gambit a Boston accent.
But Rogue having killed people and left with some permanent a-list powers? cant have that, keep her teenage and emo instead.
[ February 11, 2011, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: AchillesHeel ]
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon:
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: Yeah, X3 was terribad. When I heard X-3 was going to have Phoenix I was thinking to myself how awesome it would be to have Dark Phoenix going around destroying entire planets until the X-Men could stop her.
To be fair, I think you totally misjudged the scope and scale of the films if you thought that was at all likely.
Look, I know it was probably too much to expect the movie to show Dark Phoenix literally committing xenocide throughout the galaxy before coming back to earth. But they didn't even mention it. All I wanted was maybe a 30 second "This is what happened" scene showing her blowing up planets, and then her showing up on Earth.
Instead we got an emo amnesiac Phoenix that basically acts like a zombie throughout the film. It wasn't Famke Janssen's fault, she did the best with what the writers gave her.
The film just felt like a cop-out aimed at getting fans in seats than creating a quality plot. A lot of fans probably went in expecting Phoenix to be completely awesome, and it didn't happen. One saving grace of the film though: Ellen Page
Posted by FoolishTook (Member # 5358) on :
James McAvoy is in it. Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon:
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: Yeah, X3 was terribad. When I heard X-3 was going to have Phoenix I was thinking to myself how awesome it would be to have Dark Phoenix going around destroying entire planets until the X-Men could stop her.
To be fair, I think you totally misjudged the scope and scale of the films if you thought that was at all likely.
Look, I know it was probably too much to expect the movie to show Dark Phoenix literally committing xenocide throughout the galaxy before coming back to earth. But they didn't even mention it. All I wanted was maybe a 30 second "This is what happened" scene showing her blowing up planets, and then her showing up on Earth.
Instead we got an emo amnesiac Phoenix that basically acts like a zombie throughout the film. It wasn't Famke Janssen's fault, she did the best with what the writers gave her.
The film just felt like a cop-out aimed at getting fans in seats than creating a quality plot. A lot of fans probably went in expecting Phoenix to be completely awesome, and it didn't happen. One saving grace of the film though: Ellen Page
My point is that the x-men films, like many superhero movies of this day and age, take a more down-to-earth and realistic approach to the material. The more outlandish comic book staples are avoided.
Phoenix as a repressed personality with full access to Jean's awesome powers fits today's comic film landscape a lot better than Phoenix as a planet destroying cosmic entity. I would have thought that was obvious even if you don't agree with that mentality.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
quote:Originally posted by ambyr: As far as I'm concerned, the X-men franchise consists of X1, X2, and X-men: Hugh Jackman Takes off His Shirt. There is no movie between the second and third of those.
Wasn't there one other in there? I keep trying to recall, and getting flashes of something abominable and repressed before I wake up on the ground, covered in tears.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
quote:This trailer suggests that they're keeping the same reality all the way through the movies, and I really don't feel like I can believe that Halle Berry and James Marsden etc. were supposed to have been young adults in the 60s, unless the first two films were supposed to have been happening in the 70s or 80s instead of the 2000s.
But Halle Berry and James Marsden's characters aren't in this movie. Why does the age of their characters matter?
Also, Alex Summers does not have the same powers as Cyclops.
Nerd out.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Isnt it the same kind of energy though?
Too add to Neo's point, it seems more than silly now that the Summer's father was a space pirate.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
I know it's been described that way at least once, but it didn't make sense to me then either.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I just spent an inordinate amount of time on wikipedea, Cyclops apparently channels interdimensional energy through his eyes while his body channels ambient energy used to control the dimensional energy. Havok absorbs and channels solar energy, they are both immune to each others powers.
Still doesnt justify ruining a barely relevant but pivotal (in referance to Cyclops) character for no apparent reason.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: Isnt it the same kind of energy though?
Too add to Neo's point, it seems more than silly now that the Summer's father was a space pirate.
It's comic books. It happens to all comic book characters who have to exist in these ridiculous worlds long enough. Movies tend to trim that in significantly, such as by removing things like how scott summers is actually space pirate royalty and how ororo munroe is actually a goddess worshipped by an african tribe and who is also simultaneously a master thief who can break any lock and escape any bonds.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Dont forget that Gambits powers are from bayou magic and when his full potential is unlocked he too is basically a god. The X-Men certainly had more stupid back stories per character than the other marvel franchises.
Posted by Emreecheek (Member # 12082) on :
quote:Originally posted by ambyr: As far as I'm concerned, the X-men franchise consists of X1, X2, and X-men: Hugh Jackman Takes off His Shirt. There is no movie between the second and third of those.
You are a user after my own heart.
I've yet to see the last movie you've listed, but I've been meaning to for a very long time precisely because of its title. Posted by Emreecheek (Member # 12082) on :
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)