X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)

[The Laughing Fish]

It looks like that Bryan Singer has cast somebody to play Quicksilver, who is supposed to appear in The Avengers 2. But it looks like Quicksilver may appear in both movies since Fox and Marvel are contractually obligated to do so:

Source: http://www.slashfilm.com/quicksilver-to-appear-in-bryan-singers-x-men-days-of-future-past-and-joss-whedons-the-avengers-2/

Here is a screenshot of a tweet that Singer has now deleted.



Just how many characters is this film going to have exactly? At this rate, this film is going to be just another mess just like the last three films. I didn't care for First Class that much either, primarily because it nobody could make up their minds on whether or not if it was a prequel or a reboot; more confusion and contradiction in the franchise's continuity.

[johnnygobbs]

I gave up on the overrated X-Men movie series a long time ago but it seems like Fox want to flog as much money out of that franchise as they can.

Laughing Fish, maybe I'm wrong about this but do you share my suspicions about Fox's motivations for incorporating Quicksilver into this film? I get the impression that they're just using him to 'beat Marvel to the punch' seeing as Joss Whedon has been quite vocal about his desire to use the character in 'The Avengers 2'.  Maybe I'm being unfair but that strikes me as pretty low and yet far from out of character for the clueless, money-grubbing philistines at Fox.

Also, does anyone else feel like Singer is a bit of a hack these days?  'The Usual Suspects' is feeling like a very long time ago and in view of all the mediocre films he's foisted on us since I'm wondering whether 'Suspects' was ever that good to begin with in retrospect.

[The Laughing Fish]

Laughing Fish, maybe I'm wrong about this but do you share my suspicions about Fox's motivations for incorporating Quicksilver into this film? I get the impression that they're just using him to 'beat Marvel to the punch' seeing as Joss Whedon has been quite vocal about his desire to use the character in 'The Avengers 2'.  Maybe I'm being unfair but that strikes me as pretty low and yet far from out of character for the clueless, money-grubbing philistines at Fox.

As long as it doesn't change the script for Avengers 2, I couldn't give a damn what Fox or Bryan Singer does. As a matter of fact, it would not surprise me that the Quicksilver will probably go unnoticed like twenty other mutant characters went by throughout this franchise. For instance, I had no idea that Psylocke was in The Last Stand, and I saw that piece of crap.

I used to be a fan of the the first two movies Singer made, but they haven't really held up well at all. But I must confess my interest in X-Men in general has been going downhill for a while now. I getting fed up with the constant metaphors for civil rights, and the contrived love triangle between Wolverine, Jean Grey and Cyclops. 

[johnnygobbs]

As long as it doesn't change the script for Avengers 2, I couldn't give a damn what Fox or Bryan Singer does.

I totally agree but that was my fear; that Fox I trying to undermine the superior Avengers films, or may inadvertently undermine them, by getting this character out first.  In view of the first Avengers massive and deserved success I doubt Marvel Studios will have any qualms whatsoever about going with Joss Whedon's vision but there's always a possibility that the studio might now turn around and say 'well the "X-Men" films have already done Quicksilver and we don't want to risk being accused of repeating them so...' and thus cancel Quicksilver, and by extension Scarlett Witch's, introduction for commercial reasons.

I doubt it will happen like that but Fox have potentially made things more complicated and like you state, their version of Quicksilver is unlikely to shine much like many of the other X-Men characters that have been unceremoniously stuffed with little development in the previous instalments.

I used to be a fan of the the first two movies Singer made, but they haven't really held up well at all.

You won't agree with this statement but I don't consider Singer's 'X-Men' films to be much better that 'X-Men: Last Stand' and it's arguable that the various issues with that film stemmed from Singer's decision to leave the series, thereby leaving Fox in a bit of a squeeze as far as rush-releasing the third movie out in time (still mainly Fox's help but Singer's casual decision to ditch the series speaks volumes about his 'commitment' to the X-Men characters), and the fact that Jamie Marsden followed him to do a pointless throwaway role in 'Superman Returns' thus meaning that Cyclops had to be written out of the third X-Men film in the most undignified manner possible (personally, I don't have a problem in killing off major characters in franchises - I admire filmmakers' guts in doing so - however, Cyclops was already so marginalised in the first two Singer-directed 'X-Men' films that he should have at least gotten a decent send-off if nothing else).

[The Laughing Fish]

You won't agree with this statement but I don't consider Singer's 'X-Men' films to be much better that 'X-Men: Last Stand' and it's arguable that the various issues with that film stemmed from Singer's decision to leave the series, thereby leaving Fox in a bit of a squeeze as far as rush-releasing the third movie out in time (still mainly Fox's help but Singer's casual decision to ditch the series speaks volumes about his 'commitment' to the X-Men characters), and the fact that Jamie Marsden followed him to do a pointless throwaway role in 'Superman Returns' thus meaning that Cyclops had to be written out of the third X-Men film in the most undignified manner possible (personally, I don't have a problem in killing off major characters in franchises - I admire filmmakers' guts in doing so - however, Cyclops was already so marginalised in the first two Singer-directed 'X-Men' films that he should have at least gotten a decent send-off if nothing else).

And that is exactly why I consider The Last Stand to be a piece of crap. Key characters get killed off, but the emotional impact of their deaths came across as apathetic - kinda like the Gotham's reaction to Batman's return in The Dark Knight Rises. 

The Last Stand felt like an ugly cash grab, from having too many characters than it ought to have and contributed nothing to the story, to important key moments being rushed and prematurely tossed aside i.e. Cyclops's and Xavier's death, to Wolverine killing Jean Grey in the end. And the action was just as bad as the shaky cam garbage shown in Batman Begins.

As far as never rating Singer's movies, fair enough. But at least those films were consistent in terms of the narrative within the continuity unlike the rest of the franchise has now. But I expect Days of Future Past to continue the trend. If Fox does end up undermining Avengers 2, then expect an angry boycott and hopefully a box office bomb (which might won't be happening unless the movie is a real stinker).

(Counting down to colors expressing his hatred of Singer and Superman Returns in 3...2...1...

[johnnygobbs]

(Counting down to colors expressing his hatred of Singer and Superman Returns in 3...2...1...

You won't see me taking issue with colors over 'Superman Returns'.  I don't hate it anywhere near as much as he does but I entirely respect and sympathise with most of his issues with the film and that movie is certainly no favourite of mine.  However, my point is that Singer's 'X-Men' films are just as bad, if not worse.

The 'X-Men' films' biggest failing, and something Singer seems to have set up for the entire series, is its over-emphasis on Wolverine (ironically, my favourite Wolverine moment in the entire series is his fairly hilarious cameo in 'First Class' where he's on-screen for no more than twenty seconds).  If Wolverine had been introduced gradually into the series I wouldn't have minded but he dominates proceedings from the first film onwards and barely gives the other X-Men a chance to shine, apart from perhaps Professor X.  Hugh Jackman is fine in the role and has bundles of charisma (even though from a strict comic-book perspective Wolverine isn't really the handsome, witty, Han Solo-ish iconoclast he's portrayed as being in the film, which is more Gambit's thing - Wolverine is an aggressive, hot-headed, practically feral loner) but I would have preferred a more team-orientated dynamic as opposed to a slavish love-letter to a single character (it even took Magneto to remind the audience that there were other heroes in the film: "You?  My dear boy, who ever said I wanted you?" he says to Wolverine at one stage).

[The Laughing Fish]

(Counting down to colors expressing his hatred of Singer and Superman Returns in 3...2...1...

You won't see me taking issue with colors over 'Superman Returns'.  I don't hate it anywhere near as much as he does but I entirely respect and sympathise with most of his issues with the film and that movie is certainly no favourite of mine.  However, my point is that Singer's 'X-Men' films are just as bad, if not worse.

The 'X-Men' films' biggest failing, and something Singer seems to have set up for the entire series, is its over-emphasis on Wolverine (ironically, my favourite Wolverine moment in the entire series is his fairly hilarious cameo in 'First Class' where he's on-screen for no more than twenty seconds).  If Wolverine had been introduced gradually into the series I wouldn't have minded but he dominates proceedings from the first film onwards and barely gives the other X-Men a chance to shine, apart from perhaps Professor X.  Hugh Jackman is fine in the role and has bundles of charisma (even though from a strict comic-book perspective Wolverine isn't really the handsome, witty, Han Solo-ish iconoclast he's portrayed as being in the film, which is more Gambit's thing - Wolverine is an aggressive, hot-headed, practically feral loner) but I would have preferred a more team-orientated dynamic as opposed to a slavish love-letter to a single character (it even took Magneto to remind the audience that there were other heroes in the film: "You?  My dear boy, who ever said I wanted you?" he says to Wolverine at one stage).

That's fair enough, I have no affinity towards those films anyway. I remember liking X2 a lot when I first saw it, but it pales after multiple viewings. It's a film that has a handful of good scenes rather than a good story.

I agree that Wolverine is overexposed. I would prefer that he would be introduced in a second film, where at first he is a member of the Brotherhood of Mutants until he converts to the X-Men to beat Magneto (which I've heard that's what happened in the Ultimate comics version, I believe). But the problem with X-Men is there are too many characters to choose from, and a lot of them can't fit into a two hour film anyway. The way Fox has handled the franchise makes it worse. I think whoever takes control of this franchise in the future should consider sticking to the same group of heroes, and then gradually change them in sequels.

So far, I find it sad that the the only X-Men adaptation that I liked about this franchise is the Uncaged Edition video game tie-in to X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Gory game, even the story is better than the film itself, and Hugh Jackman sounds more menacing here than he does in this game than in any of the movies i.e. quips "Thanks darlin', I'll call you some time!" after decapitating a female mutant to pieces.

[johnnygobbs]

I agree that Wolverine is overexposed. I would prefer that he would be introduced in a second film, where at first he is a member of the Brotherhood of Mutants until he converts to the X-Men to beat Magneto (which I've heard that's what happened in the Ultimate comics version, I believe). But the problem with X-Men is there are too many characters to choose from, and a lot of them can't fit into a two hour film anyway. The way Fox has handled the franchise makes it worse. I think whoever takes control of this franchise in the future should consider sticking to the same group of heroes, and then gradually change them in sequels.

I agree with you about the over-abundance of characters.  Too many of them amount to no more than brief ciphers anyway.  I appreciate that we are meant to understand this is a world full of various mutants of various abilities but so many great characters from the comic-books who were more than simply their mutant ability (hey, they actually had personalities and backstories like all the rest of us) seem short-changed on-screen.

If Fox, or whoever (preferably not Fox for that matter  ) were to ever reboot I'd like there to be an emphasis on the original X-Men team, preferably as youngsters (so Cyclops, Jean Grey, Beast, Angel and Ice-Man), which paid homage to the original 1960s comic-books, although I'm not necessarily suggesting I'd want the reboot to be set in the 60s.  I'd want the filmmakers to keep things simple to begin with.  The X-Men stories gradually become complicated enough without starting off on an overly-convoluted basis.  Also, cast some actors with a degree of charisma in the parts (Kelsey Grammer was great as an older Beast, but James Marsden, Famke Janssen, Ben Foster and Shawn Ashmore were dull and practically sleep-walked through their parts - no wonder Hugh Jackman completely outshone them all) and try to retain the characters' original personalities.  Angel was a dashing playboy in the comic-books not a weedy, scared emo kid.  Iceman was a witty, fun-loving practical joker in the comic-books not a somnolescent dullard).

[Edd Grayson]

I really, really hope they won't mess up this one, because Vaughn's First Class was great and deserves a good sequel.

[johnnygobbs]

I really, really hope they won't mess up this one, because Vaughn's First Class was great and deserves a good sequel.

I gave up on the X-Men series a long while ago.  Although First Class was comparatively decent in relation to the earlier X-Men films I had hoped that it was going to be a reboot featuring the original X-Men team as youngsters (i.e. Cyclops, Jean Gray, The Beast, Angel and Ice-Man)rather than a prequel within the continuity established by Bryan Singer.  Sorry to say, Fox, IMHO, have no clue how to do comic-book movies (especially if the rumours concerning the Fantastic Four and Daredevil reboots are anything to go by).  In fact, I don't think they know how to do franchise films period these days; they've lost the rights to the 'Star Wars' films and it's a long time since the last decent 'Die Hard' and 'Aliens' movie.