X-Men: Days of Future Past Movie (SPOILERS)

[Cyclops' Optometrist]

The more clips I watch of this movie, the more worried I become that some changes were made just for the sake of production/writing convenience.

For instance, is there a good plot reason as to why Nick Hoult can now "hulk out" to become Beast, or was it simply so he wouldn't be in Beast make-up for all of his shooting? Will there be a good reason as to why Kitty's powers have expanded from physical tangibility to psychic time-shifting, or was this power revision made simply because the movie needed someone capable of doing it so why not her? Was Xavier "healed" of his paralysis merely because they didn't want to confine McAvoy to a chair for the whole movie, or will this be an important journey for the character that doesn't weaken the impact of his tragic injury at the end of FC but instead propels the character forward in a meaningful way?

I'm anxious to see if the movie addresses these issues or if we as an audience are supposed to just brush them aside along the ride. Changes that aren't driven by improving the plot aren't good changes, IMO. But until I see the movie, it's unfair to draw any conclusions one way or another.

I'm all for this. Magneto is one of my favorite characters from the movie. I still want to see a Magneto movie with him hunting Nazis.

Isn't that basically Inglourious Basterds?

So just got out of Amazing Spider Man 2 and saw the end credit DOFP past seen and was a bit underwhelmed. Thought they could have picked a more exciting scene to show to get people hyped up for the movie. Not a big deal as I am going to watch anyway but there was definitely more excitement by people who say the trailer than there was for this scene.

The scene seemed very quick to me, lots of quick cuts... as if it wasn't the full scene but a shortened version. My wife, who watches superhero movies with me regularly and has seen the original X-Men trilogy as well as FC, didn't understand it. I agreed with her that, out of context for people who don't know much about the movie, it made very little sense. It almost seemed like Sony did the bare minimum they were required to do to fulfill their agreement with Fox on this matter.

[Kaiolino]

The more clips I watch of this movie, the more worried I become that some changes were made just for the sake of production/writing convenience.

For instance, is there a good plot reason as to why Nick Hoult can now "hulk out" to become Beast, or was it simply so he wouldn't be in Beast make-up for all of his shooting? Will there be a good reason as to why Kitty's powers have expanded from physical tangibility to psychic time-shifting, or was this power revision made simply because the movie needed someone capable of doing it so why not her? Was Xavier "healed" of his paralysis merely because they didn't want to confine McAvoy to a chair for the whole movie, or will this be an important journey for the character that doesn't weaken the impact of his tragic injury at the end of FC but instead propels the character forward in a meaningful way?

I'm anxious to see if the movie addresses these issues or if we as an audience are supposed to just brush them aside along the ride. Changes that aren't driven by improving the plot aren't good changes, IMO. But until I see the movie, it's unfair to draw any conclusions one way or another.

Xavier gave up his mutation to walk again and Beast has created a serum to make him human again... but seems to have anger issues now. Both are running away from who they are at a high cost. That seems to be an important theme of the movie, so they're hardly brushing any of it aside.

[JackalsIII]

hmmmm

So brave to be seen with that hair!

[Kaiolino]

So brave to be seen with that hair!

They really get that Kitty is homely.

[Cyclops' Optometrist]

Xavier gave up his mutation to walk again and Beast has created a serum to make him human again... but seems to have anger issues now. Both are running away from who they are at a high cost. That seems to be an important theme of the movie, so they're hardly brushing any of it aside.

You make a good point about how it represents them running away from who they are. I can't help but wonder if those arcs could be accomplished without these changes from the original characters or reversals of things that happened previously.

Do we really need Xavier to give up his telepathy in order to walk again as a means of him running away from who he is? Is it really necessary to Beast's arc that he inadvertently develops this "hulking out" aspect of his power as a side effect of trying to be normal again, or could the writers have simply chosen to have him invent an image inducer that doesn't involve changing his powers, assuming they didn't want Hoult to spend four hours in the make-up chair for every scene?

These are minor issues, but ones that for me at least add up over time when you choose to prequel rather than reboot. At some point, the web of convolution becomes thick. Like I said, though, I'm anxious to see how the movie presents it. Maybe these changes come across as vital to the characters' stories and make a lot of sense, and my concerns are misplaced. I'm open to that possibility, and won't know one way or another until I see it. Until then, I'm just throwing out some vibes I'm getting.

[xhx23x]

You make a good point about how it represents them running away from who they are. I can't help but wonder if those arcs could be accomplished without these changes from the original characters or reversals of things that happened previously.

Do we really need Xavier to give up his telepathy in order to walk again as a means of him running away from who he is? Is it really necessary to Beast's arc that he inadvertently develops this "hulking out" aspect of his power as a side effect of trying to be normal again, or could the writers have simply chosen to have him invent an image inducer that doesn't involve changing his powers, assuming they didn't want Hoult to spend four hours in the make-up chair for every scene?

These are minor issues, but ones that for me at least add up over time when you choose to prequel rather than reboot. At some point, the web of convolution becomes thick. Like I said, though, I'm anxious to see how the movie presents it. Maybe these changes come across as vital to the characters' stories and make a lot of sense, and my concerns are misplaced. I'm open to that possibility, and won't know one way or another until I see it. Until then, I'm just throwing out some vibes I'm getting.

Well, if you want to go for another reason beyond character arcs, these changes also help adjust some of the discrepancies between the movies. Like Xavier walking in Origins and Beast appearing in Human form on TV in X2.

Plus, Beast continuing to experiment on himself and Xavier walking again have happen in the comics several times to, I can buy it as a nod to those facts as well.

[JackalsIII]

They really get that Kitty is homely.

Still nothing compared to poor Famke with the Dark Phoenix makeup. They did no favors for her with that.

[Cyclops' Optometrist]

Well, if you want to go for another reason beyond character arcs, these changes also help adjust some of the discrepancies between the movies. Like Xavier walking in Origins and Beast appearing in Human form on TV in X2.

Plus, Beast continuing to experiment on himself and Xavier walking again have happen in the comics several times to, I can buy it as a nod to those facts as well.

Good points! I appreciate your and Kaiolino's input. At this point, I'm just ready for the movie to come out so we have something substantial to talk about and some actual answers rather than clips and trailers.

[ProfeZZor X]

When it rains, it really pours... Now people from the UK are coming out of the wood work to slap Singer with more accusations of sexual assault. Makes me wonder if Fox will weather the storm (pun intended) and stand by their man, or will Singer's future with this franchise be a thing of the past.

Source: http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=865473

Article: An unnamed British man has added to filmmaker Bryan Singer's woes by alleging the "X-Men" director sexually assaulted him in a new lawsuit.

The new suit, filed by Jeff Herman, the same attorney who filed child sex abuse suits last month on behalf of Michael Egan against Singer and three Hollywood executives, suggests Singer had sex with his client at a Superman-themed party at a London hotel, when the plaintiff was 17. Singer and producer Gary Goddard, who has also been named in the anonymous Brit's lawsuit, have denied the claims they sexually assaulted him.

Singer’s lawyer, Marty Singer, who previously dismissed Egan's claims against his client has called the new allegations "totally untrue," according to The Hollywood Reporter. He adds, "After the substance of (Herman’s) previous defamatory and fabricated filing in Hawaii was disproved based on unassailable evidence, Mr. Herman's desperation has led him to fabricate these new anonymous accusations against Mr. Singer, which we will also prove to be completely false."

Egan claimed he had had sex with Bryan Singer at a party in Hawaii, while the director's lawyer insists he has credit card receipts, cellphone bills, movie production schedules and over a hundred witnesses that will demonstrate Bryan Singer was elsewhere at the time. In his suit, the latest plaintiff also alleges Goddard contacted him via social media when he was 14, and they eventually had sex after a series of nude webcam sessions.

Goddard’s lawyer, Alan Grodin, says, "It is a shame that the specious claim made by Herman in the Egan case has resulted in this new claim that we note is over 10 years old. For now we will say the claims are denied and Gary will vigorously defend."

The earlier suit against Singer has yet to be served, prompting Singer's attorney to add, "It is time for the media and public to focus their attention on Mr. Herman's nefarious motives and tactics which seem to be driven solely by his need to shake down an innocent man like Bryan Singer. We intend to seek sanctions against Mr. Herman for his reckless, unethical behaviour."

[Ambaryerno]

Isn't that basically Inglourious Basterds?

Only a Magneto movie like that might actually be GOOD.

[colossus34]

Success or not there is NO WAY Fox brings back Singer for any further X-films. His name is tainted in middle america at this point.

[Tomppa]

hmmmm

Oh great... Now my faith in this movie disappeared once again

[Kaiolino]

Success or not there is NO WAY Fox brings back Singer for any further X-films. His name is tainted in middle america at this point.

lol average joe doesn't know who Singer is.

[Tomppa]

lol average joe doesn't know who Singer is.

Yeah, he's no James Cameron. I wouldn't know about him if it wasn't for him being involved with X-Men films. But I could see this making Fox hesitant to bring him back. Big companies are usually pretty cautious.

[Logan]

Funny french video (with English subtitles) about the Best X-Men.
With Hugh Jackman

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVMoi...ature=youtu.be