X-Men: Apocalypse - May 27, 2016

[SNIKT1950]

Shame its too late to cancel Mangold's Wolverine 3 and just give him to the Russo's to turn into a bad ass.

i'll take a PG-13 Russo Wolverine over a rated R Mangold.

Right, a neutered Wolverine who won't harm a soul is what we've all been waiting for.

I swear to God, if Thanos kills ZERO people or aliens in Infinity WARS, people will still eat that **** up and ask for seconds.

"As long as he looks like Thanos and is credited as Thanos we don't care if he acts like Thanos." -Every MCU fanboy ever

 

[EVILFACE]

"we are just here for the Hot Toys." -Every MCU fanboy ever

fixed

 

[a-dev]

It's so weird how these movies deliberately ignore how the last one ended.

1. Final scene of First Class: Magneto in a red outfit is leading evil mutants! Emma, Devil Guy, Whirlwind Guy, Wasp chick! ------> DOFP: Nope! They're all dead, Mags doesn't dress like that either, in fact he never did.

2. Final scene of DOFP: Stryker doesn't have Wolverine because he's really Mystique! --------> XMA: Psyche! That was really Stryker.

The next movie will probably open with a prologue that says "The year is 1993. After 20 years of peace the earth has finally embraced mutantkind..."

They don't limit themselves to forgetting about just the endings to prior movies either. It's all sorts of things. Trask going from being a 6 foot 5 black man in X3 to a caucasian dwarf in DOFP is one of the more hilarious ones. If memory serves First Class ignored X1's timeline of Xavier and Eric's first meeting or something like that. They really just don't give a crap. I find it frustrating I have to say. It shouldn't have been so hard to keep things consistent, it's a movie series not a television franchise with a thousand episodes to keep track of.

 

[EVILFACE]

It's so weird how these movies deliberately ignore how the last one ended.

1. Final scene of First Class: Magneto in a red outfit is leading evil mutants! Emma, Devil Guy, Whirlwind Guy, Wasp chick! ------> DOFP: Nope! They're all dead, Mags doesn't dress like that either, in fact he never did.

2. Final scene of DOFP: Stryker doesn't have Wolverine because he's really Mystique! --------> XMA: Psyche! That was really Stryker.

The next movie will probably open with a prologue that says "The year is 1993. After 20 years of peace the earth has finally embraced mutantkind..."

The Friday the 13th flicks had better continuity.

 

[jye4ever]

It's not MCU.

Besides, Capt would beat him up.

They don't limit themselves to forgetting about just the endings to prior movies either. It's all sorts of things. Trask going from being a 6 foot 5 black man in X3 to a caucasian dwarf in DOFP is one of the more hilarious ones. If memory serves First Class ignored X1's timeline of Xavier and Eric's first meeting or something like that. They really just don't give a crap. I find it frustrating I have to say. It shouldn't have been so hard to keep things consistent, it's a movie series not a television franchise with a thousand episodes to keep track of.

The Friday the 13th flicks had better continuity.

 

[wanderlai]

And I wonder which of them handled the plumbing and electricity.

I volunteer to handle Jeans plumbing

 

[SNIKT1950]

They don't limit themselves to forgetting about just the endings to prior movies either. It's all sorts of things. Trask going from being a 6 foot 5 black man in X3 to a caucasian dwarf in DOFP is one of the more hilarious ones. If memory serves First Class ignored X1's timeline of Xavier and Eric's first meeting or something like that. They really just don't give a crap. I find it frustrating I have to say. It shouldn't have been so hard to keep things consistent, it's a movie series not a television franchise with a thousand episodes to keep track of.

I can agree with the continuity issues going from the 2000s films to the prequels, but not the alleged continuity issues between the prequels.

-November 1962, X-Men First Class ends with Magneto freeing Emma.

-November 1963, Magneto is apprehended while trying to save JFK in Dallas.

-March 1965, Banshee and Havok are drafted and sent to Vietnam. Banshee is KIA.

-At some point between '64 & '72, Emma, Azazel, Riptide & Angel Salvatore are captured by Trask and Stryker and killed for experimental purposes. Mystique is the sole survivor of Magneto's crew.

-January 1973, Wolverine arrives at Xavier's School and the plot of DOFP unfolds.

-DOFP ends with Mystique posing as Stryker to save Wolverine from Stryker's experiments

-At some point between '73 and '83 Stryker captures Wolverine or Wolverine volunteers for Weapon X.

So again, where are these continuity issues everyone's obsessed with?

 

[ironwez20]

I can agree with the continuity issues going from the 2000s films to the prequels, but not the alleged continuity issues between the prequels.

-November 1962, X-Men First Class ends with Magneto freeing Emma.

-November 1963, Magneto is apprehended while trying to save JFK in Dallas.

-March 1965, Banshee and Havok are drafted and sent to Vietnam. Banshee is KIA.

-At some point between '64 & '72, Emma, Azazel, Riptide & Angel Salvatore are captured by Trask and Stryker and killed for experimental purposes. Mystique is the sole survivor of Magneto's crew.

-January 1973, Wolverine arrives at Xavier's School and the plot of DOFP unfolds.

-DOFP ends with Mystique posing as Stryker to save Wolverine from Stryker's experiments

-At some point between '73 and '83 Stryker captures Wolverine or Wolverine volunteers for Weapon X.

So again, where are these continuity issues everyone's obsessed with?

They don't show what happens to the audience so they think we should guess?

 

[jye4ever]

It's so weird how these movies deliberately ignore how the last one ended.

1. Final scene of First Class: Magneto in a red outfit is leading evil mutants! Emma, Devil Guy, Whirlwind Guy, Wasp chick! ------> DOFP: Nope! They're all dead, Mags doesn't dress like that either, in fact he never did.

2. Final scene of DOFP: Stryker doesn't have Wolverine because he's really Mystique! --------> XMA: Psyche! That was really Stryker.

The next movie will probably open with a prologue that says "The year is 1993. After 20 years of peace the earth has finally embraced mutantkind..."

 

[a-dev]

I can agree with the continuity issues going from the 2000s films to the prequels, but not the alleged continuity issues between the prequels.

-November 1962, X-Men First Class ends with Magneto freeing Emma.

-November 1963, Magneto is apprehended while trying to save JFK in Dallas.

-March 1965, Banshee and Havok are drafted and sent to Vietnam. Banshee is KIA.

-At some point between '64 & '72, Emma, Azazel, Riptide & Angel Salvatore are captured by Trask and Stryker and killed for experimental purposes. Mystique is the sole survivor of Magneto's crew.

-January 1973, Wolverine arrives at Xavier's School and the plot of DOFP unfolds.

-DOFP ends with Mystique posing as Stryker to save Wolverine from Stryker's experiments

-At some point between '73 and '83 Stryker captures Wolverine or Wolverine volunteers for Weapon X.

So again, where are these continuity issues everyone's obsessed with?

Between the original films and the prequels, which you agree with. If it had been a full reboot these wouldn't matter but they connected the two sets of movies so they do. As for the prequels in isolation, well how about the total lack of ageing over the course of 20 years? They could avoid that issue by not insisting on the one movie per decade thing, which was arguably pointless for the last 2 films anyway since they hardly even cosmetically made it look like the decades in question.

 

[nexus]

I don't worry about continuity any more with X-Men since it's really been a process of trying to retroactively turn this all into a cohesive narrative and then somehow connect back to the 2000 movie. Directors want the audience to think they've had this epic master vision all along, and the reality is they're usually making it up as they go unless the franchise is based on a novel series like LotR, Harry Potter or The Hunger Games, or they map out the storylines like how Marvel is now approaching. That could be hamstringing them to a degree if the series is basically supposed to conclude essentially 20 years in the past. But that's the corner they are painting themselves into. I think if they are going to stick with that plan then the smartest thing to do is just map out the next 2-3 X-Men movies along with New Mutants and XForce and keep it all connected with a destination in mind, whatever that may be--and 98% of the audience will be forgiving of continuity murkiness as long as the movies are entertaining. I'm not certain if they should try to shoehorn Deadpool into an X-Men movie however.

 

[karamazov80]

Right, a neutered Wolverine who won't harm a soul is what we've all been waiting for.

I swear to God, if Thanos kills ZERO people or aliens in Infinity WARS, people will still eat that **** up and ask for seconds.

"As long as he looks like Thanos and is credited as Thanos we don't care if he acts like Thanos." -Every MCU fanboy ever

As has been discussed elsewhere, if this story follows the comic in even broad strokes, then

Spoiler

everything reverts to the way it was at the end of the story, with no implications apart to a handful of characters who remember what happened. I don't think that's a good thing, but if you take the perspective that movies should imitate comics more closely. . .

 

[jye4ever]

Marvel has a choice:

A. Do we kill off primary characters for good in IW after 17 films with them?
B. Do we not kill off primary characters for good in IW after 17 films with them?

If they go with A that will be quite the impact after being with these characters for 17 movies.

But is that really needed?

 

[karamazov80]

Well I think you want dramatic weight. There are different ways of getting at that, but as Khev can tell you, killing off characters is a major one (he was very upset at some film for not doing this awhile back, can't remember which one though). Star Wars does this with Ben Kenobi, Yoda, Han, Vader, younglin. . .er, Han and Vader. In Game of Thrones almost everyone dies. Take away the credible fear of death for characters you care about, or who the story demonstrates as important, and you take away dramatic consequences. And this is key to creating a context within which you care about the events unfolding. In the comics you see this every other week, though they always come back, and for that reason they lose a lot of their value IMO. And of course, deaths also provide opportunities for the story to develop. Like the death of Luke's caretakers.

In the Marvel movies so far I don't think we've had much of this. Thor's mom, Quicksilver (who we saw for about 10 minutes before that), several lame villains. . .

Also, in terms of ranking X-films, it would go like this for me, now:

1) X2
2) Days of Future Past
3) First Class
4) Apocalypse
5/6) X-Men and Deadpool


7) The Wolverine





.
.
.






8/9) Wolverine Origins and X3

 

[a-dev]

Well I think you want dramatic weight. There are different ways of getting at that, but as Khev can tell you, killing off characters is a major one (he was very upset at some film for not doing this awhile back, can't remember which one though). Star Wars does this with Ben Kenobi, Yoda, Han, Vader, younglin. . .er, Han and Vader. In Game of Thrones almost everyone dies. Take away the credible fear of death for characters you care about, or who the story demonstrates as important, and you take away dramatic consequences. And this is key to creating a context within which you care about the events unfolding. In the comics you see this every other week, though they always come back, and for that reason they lose a lot of their value IMO. And of course, deaths also provide opportunities for the story to develop. Like the death of Luke's caretakers.

In the Marvel movies so far I don't think we've had much of this. Thor's mom, Quicksilver (who we saw for about 10 minutes before that), several lame villains. . .

I think the reluctance to do it stems from say, 1989 Batman killing the Joker. Back in the days before everything just got rebooted every few years that was a big deal as it seemed to throw away any opportunity to cover various comic stories etc. But it's still holds true for the MCU, no one superhero character there is going to be rebooted until they decide to end the whole thing - so, anyone they kill, it would seem to have the same impact as 1989 Joker's death until it all gets rebooted again.

 

[Khev]

It depends on if they want a ROTJ ending or a TFA ending. I think the only way for audiences to truly "hate" Thanos and cheer for his defeat is if he really does off one or more important heroes, for good.

Though as a self-professed Osama Bin Laden sympathizer I'm sure karamazov would prefer that Thanos become an honorary Avenger or something after eradicating half of all sentient life in the universe. As long as he helps rebuild Stark Tower at the end all will be forgiven.

 

[karamazov80]

Well any comic fan worth his salt knows that bad guys frequently become good guys. It's just the way it is. In the Avengers alone you've got Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, Wonder Man, Namor, U.S. Agent, Sandman, and others I'm sure. And in the Marvel Studios-verse, Loki betrayed the good guys numerous times and killed countless people, but is still loved by his brother. Iron Man was responsible for Ultron, but is still sent love letters by his special friend Steve. Etc. So, there's room for forgiveness here.

I think the reluctance to do it stems from say, 1989 Batman killing the Joker. Back in the days before everything just got rebooted every few years that was a big deal as it seemed to throw away any opportunity to cover various comic stories etc. But it's still holds true for the MCU, no one superhero character there is going to be rebooted until they decide to end the whole thing - so, anyone they kill, it would seem to have the same impact as 1989 Joker's death until it all gets rebooted again.

There's probably some truth to this. So what we see is studios going the Marvel Studios/comic book route and try to have the best of both worlds--"kill" someone, then bring them back to life.

 

[a-dev]

There's probably some truth to this. So what we see is studios going the Marvel Studios/comic book route and try to have the best of both worlds--"kill" someone, then bring them back to life.

I could see them killing Steve Rogers eventually because they can have Bucky assume the Captain America mantle or even Falcon guy. Does anyone take over as Iron Man in the comics? Tony Stark is only human so he could die at some point, probably when they decide they're closing out the current MCU altogether and no longer need the RDJ factor.

 

[karamazov80]

Rhodey did for awhile. In particular when the West Coast Avengers formed, which might be why Hawkeye was allowed to lead . I'm not sure it happened for anyone else in the time span that I paid attention (through the mid-'90s or so). But to sustain that franchise they would have to create an entirely new character I think, with major charisma and comedic abilities (or maybe give it to Chris Pratt????). But even then, he's not likely going to be close to RDJ in terms of popularity.

I said this before and I still think it's true--you can replace Steve Rogers, or Thor, or almost any character in those films. But not Tony Stark.

 

[jye4ever]