Marvel are calling him Peter but Fox (Avengers) will call him Quicksilver, its how they got round it, plus no refernce to the other was allowed to be made (so avengers wont ref he was/is an X-Men)
Does that include the use of his real name 'Pietro'? Or will they only refer to him by codename Quicksilver.
I've watched it again in the hope of liking it a bit more than I did the first time but it just isn't happening. By no means a bad movie, it's a very good movie - but it's by no means near my favourite X-Men film.
Oddly enough, for all the praise he's given I don't actually think Bryan Singer is all that impressive with these films. I'm not hating on the guy, and he does a lot of good for them - but overrated me thinks. The original X-Men film is actually very cheesy and has dated in a way none of the others has. X-Men 2 is decent enough but it really does drag a lot in the middle, and when they get to the dam - it's actually hard to remember what happens for much of the movie, and like the first the film succeeds in feeling like part of an ongoing saga but fails to feel like it has anything of its own identity as a movie.
This is where I'll definitely get shot down in flames, but I also think Brett Ratner is severely underrated. Whilst true that X-Men 3 deviated from the comics severely, that didn't bother me as a mainstream viewer not interested in comics. The film did pander to action-scenes a little too much but I don't think that that is anyones fault in particular - it was meant to be the end of a trilogy, in a time before comic book films are the fierce success they are now. It needed to up the ante a lot, and I doubt anyone at Fox thought the saga would be going still into 2016, 2017 and beyond! For these kinds of reasons, and the fact the film has a very strong standalone identity as well as feeling part of a saga, and the fact I thought Ian McKellen, Famke Janssen and Hugh Jackman gave their best performances here, X:Men 3 is actually my favourite of the original trilogy.
Beyond that I loved First Class to pieces, Origins: Wolverine wasn't great by any stretch but it was slated more than it deserved, and The Wolverine was actually quite good as a standalone adventure - again with a solid standalone identity.
Days of Future Past struggled for me for a few reasons. It wanted to be a comic book movie, simply with the prospects of resurrecting dead characters and putting the Singer-stamp of 'faithful to the source' all over it. But at the same time it wanted to be grand stadium-moving, time-travelling spectacle that comic adaptations tend to be better without. I also felt that the appearances from most of the original cast were more of a novelty than I'd hoped they'd be. It all mainly occured on one set for Patrick Stewart et al and it felt like they probably filmed all of their scenes in a matter of days compared to the First Class cast who carried the movie. I just feel the whole thing had an identity crisis - just my crazy opinion, but then who am I to talk, I absolutely loved The Last Stand.
I've watched it again in the hope of liking it a bit more than I did the first time but it just isn't happening. By no means a bad movie, it's a very good movie - but it's by no means near my favourite X-Men film.
Oddly enough, for all the praise he's given I don't actually think Bryan Singer is all that impressive with these films. I'm not hating on the guy, and he does a lot of good for them - but overrated me thinks. The original X-Men film is actually very cheesy and has dated in a way none of the others has. X-Men 2 is decent enough but it really does drag a lot in the middle, and when they get to the dam - it's actually hard to remember what happens for much of the movie, and like the first the film succeeds in feeling like part of an ongoing saga but fails to feel like it has anything of its own identity as a movie.
This is where I'll definitely get shot down in flames, but I also think Brett Ratner is severely underrated. Whilst true that X-Men 3 deviated from the comics severely, that didn't bother me as a mainstream viewer not interested in comics. The film did pander to action-scenes a little too much but I don't think that that is anyones fault in particular - it was meant to be the end of a trilogy, in a time before comic book films are the fierce success they are now. It needed to up the ante a lot, and I doubt anyone at Fox thought the saga would be going still into 2016, 2017 and beyond! For these kinds of reasons, and the fact the film has a very strong standalone identity as well as feeling part of a saga, and the fact I thought Ian McKellen, Famke Janssen and Hugh Jackman gave their best performances here, X:Men 3 is actually my favourite of the original trilogy.
Beyond that I loved First Class to pieces, Origins: Wolverine wasn't great by any stretch but it was slated more than it deserved, and The Wolverine was actually quite good as a standalone adventure - again with a solid standalone identity.
Days of Future Past struggled for me for a few reasons. It wanted to be a comic book movie, simply with the prospects of resurrecting dead characters and putting the Singer-stamp of 'faithful to the source' all over it. But at the same time it wanted to be grand stadium-moving, time-travelling spectacle that comic adaptations tend to be better without. I also felt that the appearances from most of the original cast were more of a novelty than I'd hoped they'd be. It all mainly occured on one set for Patrick Stewart et al and it felt like they probably filmed all of their scenes in a matter of days compared to the First Class cast who carried the movie. I just feel the whole thing had an identity crisis - just my crazy opinion, but then who am I to talk, I absolutely loved The Last Stand.
The X Men comics have never been faithful to the source material. Singer butchered Cyclops & Rogue, turning the latter from a sexy, flying invulnerable bad ass to a whiny insecure teenager. DOFP is the best of a bad bunch IMO
I just try my best to enjoy a film for what it is, rather than trying to mercilessly stick to the source material. With comics it tends to be outright changes, and with novels it tends to be plot segments left out. But then Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is often cited as the best of those films, despite the fact it left so much of the book out.
I just enjoy X-Men films for what they are. I think it's best to view movie universes as seperate to comic book universes, for the sake of your own enjoyment a lot of the time. It's so much more interesting to see someone do their own take on something rather than doing a meticulous translation to the screen
No date announced yet, but I would guess at mid to late September - Amazing Spiderman 2 is out on 1st September, so X-Men would be a few weeks after that.
The X Men comics have never been faithful to the source material. Singer butchered Cyclops & Rogue, turning the latter from a sexy, flying invulnerable bad ass to a whiny insecure teenager. DOFP is the best of a bad bunch IMO
Cyclops was always a bit soft in the comics (or at the least at that time) and Rogue was more based on the original Rogue (without the Ms. Marvel powers, which some people don't seem to understand).
By the way, it seems like DOFP will be (world wide) box office king for a few weeks (until the new Transformers movie is up and running) next month. It currently sits right behind Captain America and Spidey and is expected to beat their total next week.
Not bad for a movie which was calculated at 500-600 million dollars (world wide) after the opening weekend (it currently has almost 700 million dollars).
No date announced yet, but I would guess at mid to late September - Amazing Spiderman 2 is out on 1st September, so X-Men would be a few weeks after that.
I went to see this a couple of weeks ago and loved it, I'm going to see it again tonight.
I have always treated the X Men movies as separate from the comics. The comics have so many different universes that I've never had a problem accepting this is the movieverse. But I do like the way they give a nod to the comic fans with subtle things, like seeing Kitty and Colossus in the class room together, I always liked them as a couple.
I thought it was a very good movie in many ways, but really there was no need to transform the character of Quicksilver into someone unrecognizable. Instead of a Benedict Cumberbatch look-alike of Eastern European descent, and member of the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants led by his dad, Magneto, we got a wacky American teen, who had no idea who he was and looked entirely wrong. Why?
Watched it this evening. One thing bugged me for most of the movie. If Mystique was hell bent on killing the arms guy.. why not do it in his office? She had access to it and had met his secretary so surely she had already got to him? Although he was out of the country I suppose which added the reason for going to France. But it just struck me as being a pretty big plot hole so early in the movie. Mystique surely can kill anyone at any time of her choosing due to her mutant ability yet she seemed to struggle to find any way to kill the arms guy which set up pretty much the entire movie.
The other thing that I found difficult to keep up with was the time lines etc. If the sentinels were always invented prior to the future war.. why didn't they feature in the other X-Men movies?
I'm not even going to try and understand why Jean was alive when Wolverine woke up but I guess a more peaceful time line meant all the teachers were just that.. teachers.. not X-Men.
The movie had some highlights for me. The portal usage was great.. felt like that could have been used more. Fan of the game "Portal" so it appealed even more because of that. The scene in the Pentagon when time stopped to allow the quicksilver to run around was brilliant. Quite a few scenes reminded me of The Matrix also. The way the sentinels learnt the mutations during battle was very much Agent Smith meets X-Men.
All in all it was a decent enough movie. I can see why it did well. Teaser for the next one looked interesting.
Watched it this evening. One thing bugged me for most of the movie. If Mystique was hell bent on killing the arms guy.. why not do it in his office? She had access to it and had met his secretary so surely she had already got to him? Although he was out of the country I suppose which added the reason for going to France. But it just struck me as being a pretty big plot hole so early in the movie. Mystique surely can kill anyone at any time of her choosing due to her mutant ability yet she seemed to struggle to find any way to kill the arms guy which set up pretty much the entire movie.
The other thing that I found difficult to keep up with was the time lines etc. If the sentinels were always invented prior to the future war.. why didn't they feature in the other X-Men movies?
I'm not even going to try and understand why Jean was alive when Wolverine woke up but I guess a more peaceful time line meant all the teachers were just that.. teachers.. not X-Men.
The movie had some highlights for me. The portal usage was great.. felt like that could have been used more. Fan of the game "Portal" so it appealed even more because of that. The scene in the Pentagon when time stopped to allow the quicksilver to run around was brilliant. Quite a few scenes reminded me of The Matrix also. The way the sentinels learnt the mutations during battle was very much Agent Smith meets X-Men.
All in all it was a decent enough movie. I can see why it did well. Teaser for the next one looked interesting.
Yeah, some of them are so powerful, they have to sort of write around them. Notice how they had to engineer Charles not having his power for most of the film- he's just too powerful! I found it bizarre that the serum took his power and allowed him to walk, odd combination I think I could have handled him still being in a wheelchair, jus' sayin'...
As for Mystique, even in the meeting room, Mystique could have just took a gun and shot him, whilst still disguised as the Vietnamese general! But of course, morphing into Mystique, mid fight, whilst pulling off some martial arts is way cooler...
You're right about the sentinels too and I thought the same, but in a way, I'm glad they ignored the constraints of the original trilogy, they needed to do something to refresh the story and whatever new thing they added would always be questioned as to why it wasn't mentioned in the original series, but it would have been boring if they'd have re-treaded previous ground, so I can sort of forgive that plot hole. Overall, I still liked this film, despite the plot holes and silliness.
The other thing that I found difficult to keep up with was the time lines etc. If the sentinels were always invented prior to the future war.. why didn't they feature in the other X-Men movies?
Because the continuity is one big fat mess.
First Class had already screwed with it, and DOFP just messed it up even more rather than fix it.
I think it's best to see this and First Class as reboots of the franchise, rather than sequels, with the original trilogy only being canon where it's not contradicted by FC/DOFP.
I think it's best to see this and First Class as reboots of the franchise, rather than sequels, with the original trilogy only being canon where it's not contradicted by FC/DOFP.
Had they not introduced the old cast again I'd have had an easier time viewing them as totally separate but now I agree.. it's a bit of a mess really.
Comments
Does that include the use of his real name 'Pietro'? Or will they only refer to him by codename Quicksilver.
Oddly enough, for all the praise he's given I don't actually think Bryan Singer is all that impressive with these films. I'm not hating on the guy, and he does a lot of good for them - but overrated me thinks. The original X-Men film is actually very cheesy and has dated in a way none of the others has. X-Men 2 is decent enough but it really does drag a lot in the middle, and when they get to the dam - it's actually hard to remember what happens for much of the movie, and like the first the film succeeds in feeling like part of an ongoing saga but fails to feel like it has anything of its own identity as a movie.
This is where I'll definitely get shot down in flames, but I also think Brett Ratner is severely underrated. Whilst true that X-Men 3 deviated from the comics severely, that didn't bother me as a mainstream viewer not interested in comics. The film did pander to action-scenes a little too much but I don't think that that is anyones fault in particular - it was meant to be the end of a trilogy, in a time before comic book films are the fierce success they are now. It needed to up the ante a lot, and I doubt anyone at Fox thought the saga would be going still into 2016, 2017 and beyond! For these kinds of reasons, and the fact the film has a very strong standalone identity as well as feeling part of a saga, and the fact I thought Ian McKellen, Famke Janssen and Hugh Jackman gave their best performances here, X:Men 3 is actually my favourite of the original trilogy.
Beyond that I loved First Class to pieces, Origins: Wolverine wasn't great by any stretch but it was slated more than it deserved, and The Wolverine was actually quite good as a standalone adventure - again with a solid standalone identity.
Days of Future Past struggled for me for a few reasons. It wanted to be a comic book movie, simply with the prospects of resurrecting dead characters and putting the Singer-stamp of 'faithful to the source' all over it. But at the same time it wanted to be grand stadium-moving, time-travelling spectacle that comic adaptations tend to be better without. I also felt that the appearances from most of the original cast were more of a novelty than I'd hoped they'd be. It all mainly occured on one set for Patrick Stewart et al and it felt like they probably filmed all of their scenes in a matter of days compared to the First Class cast who carried the movie. I just feel the whole thing had an identity crisis - just my crazy opinion, but then who am I to talk, I absolutely loved The Last Stand.
The X Men comics have never been faithful to the source material. Singer butchered Cyclops & Rogue, turning the latter from a sexy, flying invulnerable bad ass to a whiny insecure teenager. DOFP is the best of a bad bunch IMO
I just enjoy X-Men films for what they are. I think it's best to view movie universes as seperate to comic book universes, for the sake of your own enjoyment a lot of the time. It's so much more interesting to see someone do their own take on something rather than doing a meticulous translation to the screen
No date announced yet, but I would guess at mid to late September - Amazing Spiderman 2 is out on 1st September, so X-Men would be a few weeks after that.
Cyclops was always a bit soft in the comics (or at the least at that time) and Rogue was more based on the original Rogue (without the Ms. Marvel powers, which some people don't seem to understand).
By the way, it seems like DOFP will be (world wide) box office king for a few weeks (until the new Transformers movie is up and running) next month. It currently sits right behind Captain America and Spidey and is expected to beat their total next week.
Not bad for a movie which was calculated at 500-600 million dollars (world wide) after the opening weekend (it currently has almost 700 million dollars).
Probably top 50 all time gross.
I hope there's loads of extras on the DVD/Blu-Ray
Alternative ending perhaps?
I did enjoy the twist in Dark Knight rises though, I'm a sucker for twists
I have always treated the X Men movies as separate from the comics. The comics have so many different universes that I've never had a problem accepting this is the movieverse. But I do like the way they give a nod to the comic fans with subtle things, like seeing Kitty and Colossus in the class room together, I always liked them as a couple.
What, even Quicksilver?
I thought it was a very good movie in many ways, but really there was no need to transform the character of Quicksilver into someone unrecognizable. Instead of a Benedict Cumberbatch look-alike of Eastern European descent, and member of the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants led by his dad, Magneto, we got a wacky American teen, who had no idea who he was and looked entirely wrong. Why?
The other thing that I found difficult to keep up with was the time lines etc. If the sentinels were always invented prior to the future war.. why didn't they feature in the other X-Men movies?
I'm not even going to try and understand why Jean was alive when Wolverine woke up but I guess a more peaceful time line meant all the teachers were just that.. teachers.. not X-Men.
The movie had some highlights for me. The portal usage was great.. felt like that could have been used more. Fan of the game "Portal" so it appealed even more because of that. The scene in the Pentagon when time stopped to allow the quicksilver to run around was brilliant. Quite a few scenes reminded me of The Matrix also. The way the sentinels learnt the mutations during battle was very much Agent Smith meets X-Men.
All in all it was a decent enough movie. I can see why it did well. Teaser for the next one looked interesting.
Yeah, some of them are so powerful, they have to sort of write around them. Notice how they had to engineer Charles not having his power for most of the film- he's just too powerful! I found it bizarre that the serum took his power and allowed him to walk, odd combination
As for Mystique, even in the meeting room, Mystique could have just took a gun and shot him, whilst still disguised as the Vietnamese general! But of course, morphing into Mystique, mid fight, whilst pulling off some martial arts is way cooler...
You're right about the sentinels too and I thought the same, but in a way, I'm glad they ignored the constraints of the original trilogy, they needed to do something to refresh the story and whatever new thing they added would always be questioned as to why it wasn't mentioned in the original series, but it would have been boring if they'd have re-treaded previous ground, so I can sort of forgive that plot hole. Overall, I still liked this film, despite the plot holes and silliness.
Because the continuity is one big fat mess.
First Class had already screwed with it, and DOFP just messed it up even more rather than fix it.
I think it's best to see this and First Class as reboots of the franchise, rather than sequels, with the original trilogy only being canon where it's not contradicted by FC/DOFP.
Had they not introduced the old cast again I'd have had an easier time viewing them as totally separate but now I agree.. it's a bit of a mess really.