|
|
Post by Admiral Rodgers on Feb 11, 2011 15:56:15 GMT -5
I didn't mind the trailer , it was better than i expected
|
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Feb 11, 2011 16:01:00 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure this is supposed to be the same continuity. They even used clips from the orignal X-Men films in this trailer. Emma Frost's name was never even used in Wolverine Origins (and wasn't she supposed to be Silver Fox's sister or something?) so I guess they'll just retcon her identity from that movie and just credit her as Diamond Girl or something.
The clips from the previous films are a good point and I thought it myself, but the timeline just isn't working.That's good and all, but it stretches disbelief beyond acceptable levels. Do they want to say the films are in the same continuity? Sure, it's their right. But there is no logical way to pull that off.Because of Cyclops' age, I was under the impression that that movie took place around 10 years or so before X-Men 1. I seem to remember that also fitting in with something Xavier said to Wolverine in X-Men 1. "It's been frustrating, hasn't it? Wandering around for fifteen years, not knowing who or what you are" or something along those general lines. |
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Feb 11, 2011 16:03:51 GMT -5
I wish people would stop frustrating themselves by being up questions about Fox Studios' x-men continuity for two reasons: 1) their x-men continuity is already so fucked up nothing can make it make sense 2) fox just doesn't give a fuck about continuity Morph- yes. I believe it was matthew vaughan that actually came out and said it is not a reboot, but a prequel. If anything, the trailer solidifies that because it shows clips from the previous x-men movies. I'm not frustrating myself over it. I'm just looking it over to see if it actually works. I beleive the continuity actually does work out if you assume that 1) The Emma from First Class and the Emma from Origins are not the same person. 2) Beast was 60+ years old in X3 (possibly an extended lifespan, like Wolverine?) and 3) Alex is most definitely not Scott's younger brother. |
|
|
|
Post by Morpheus on Feb 11, 2011 16:06:37 GMT -5
@ Nexus - Yes, but Singer's X-Men clearly is not taking place in the 70s-80s. It's the 60s angle that makes the timeline not to work.
Even though Cyke not "remembering" Wolverine in X-Men is out of whack, too, but that's something that obviously could not have been predicted by the time Singer's first film was made, and for which I blame WO.
I never got to ask you, though, did you like Singer's X-Men, and X2? I thought they did justice to Nightcrawler.
|
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Feb 11, 2011 16:21:32 GMT -5
@ Nexus - Yes, but Singer's X-Men clearly is not taking place in the 70s-80s. It's the 60s angle that makes the timeline not to work.
Even though Cyke not "remembering" Wolverine in X-Men is out of whack, too, but that's something that obviously could not have been predicted by the time Singer's first film was made, and for which I blame WO.
I never got to ask you, though, did you like Singer's X-Men, and X2? I thought they did justice to Nightcrawler. Wolverine's retarded aging process makes the timeline of Wolverine Origins slightly ambiguous (and the fact that I haven't seen it in a while makes it more confusing), but I thought that the original X-Men movies happened somewhere around the early 00's, and that the end of Wolverine Origins was happening about 10 years earlier (1990s). That would fit with Scott's age, Stryker's age, and the time that Xavier indicated that Wolverine had had amnesia. Cyke not remembering Wolverine isn't really an issue. Unless I'm mistaken, Scott had contact with Wolverine for only a few seconds in Wolverine Origins, and he had that blindfold over his eyes the whole time. Yes, I did like X2. It's not like one of my favorite movies ever, but I think they did a good job of it. Nightcrawler was portrayed very well for the little screen time that he got (I rank his fight with the Secret Service as one of my favorite superhero movie fights). |
|
|
|
Post by Morpheus on Feb 11, 2011 16:35:08 GMT -5
Yes, but if this film takes place during the 60s, and Havok is with the team already, how does that fit the timeline of the original films and WO, according to which Xavier found Cyclops at the end of WO? Unless they turn Havok into not being Cyke's brother, or say that Cyke is, I dunno, over 20 years younger than Havok, I can't see how it works. Also, as you pointed out, how about Beast's age?
It's been a while since I watched WO, too, so I don't recall the detail about Scott. I simply remember walking out with the feeling that Cyke had contacted Wolverine in a way he shouldn't have considering what was shown in the trilogy. I could be wrong, though, I am relying on memory, and I can't say I enjoyed WO at all to say my memory can be trusted.
I actually really like X-Men, and X2. They are fun to watch, and hold up to multiple viewings. Nightcrawler did not have much screen time, true, but I really liked their take on him for as long as he appeared.
|
|
|
|
Post by DedmanWalkin on Feb 11, 2011 22:54:56 GMT -5
Are we forgetting that Professor X is quite the bastard? He likely mind wiped Scott. It is also quite f'ed up that Xavier probably telepathically scanned Logan and knew all he knew up to that point and then later when he finds Logan in X-men 1, refuses to tell him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Feb 11, 2011 23:14:48 GMT -5
Yes, but if this film takes place during the 60s, and Havok is with the team already, how does that fit the timeline of the original films and WO, according to which Xavier found Cyclops at the end of WO? Unless they turn Havok into not being Cyke's brother, or say that Cyke is, I dunno, over 20 years younger than Havok, I can't see how it works. Also, as you pointed out, how about Beast's age?
It's been a while since I watched WO, too, so I don't recall the detail about Scott. I simply remember walking out with the feeling that Cyke had contacted Wolverine in a way he shouldn't have considering what was shown in the trilogy. I could be wrong, though, I am relying on memory, and I can't say I enjoyed WO at all to say my memory can be trusted.
I actually really like X-Men, and X2. They are fun to watch, and hold up to multiple viewings. Nightcrawler did not have much screen time, true, but I really liked their take on him for as long as he appeared.If the continuity is going to work, I think we're going to have to forget about Scott and Alex being brothers. Alex would be about 30 years older than Scott. Still, the "Summers" surname and the incredible similarity between their blasts still kinda forces a connection between them. Heck, Alex might turn out to be Scott's dad or something. As for Beast, I'll assume that his powers slow down his aging process a little, so he actually was 60-or-so years old in X3. Heck, Kelsey Grammer was like 50 when they made that movie, so it's not a whole lot of a stretch. Again, I haven't seen it in a while, but I think I remember noticing that Scott barely had any contact with Wolverine in that movie, and he was blindfolded during the little bit of contact he did have. As much as everybody hates on it, I actually kinda liked X3 as well. As long as I remembered to check my brain at the door, I found it to be entertaining. |
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Feb 11, 2011 23:15:52 GMT -5
Are we forgetting that Professor X is quite the bastard? He likely mind wiped Scott. It is also quite f'ed up that Xavier probably telepathically scanned Logan and knew all he knew up to that point and then later when he finds Logan in X-men 1, refuses to tell him. That, my friend, is a very valid point. Never ever underestimate Chuck Xavier's power to be a heartless motherf**ker. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 12, 2011 9:52:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Rodgers on Feb 12, 2011 10:52:25 GMT -5
Because most marvel movies are incapable of fathoming the remotest sense of logic ?  But all the mistakes in this aside the movie looks okay . IMO |
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Feb 12, 2011 11:55:35 GMT -5
Sooo... somehow they'll have to avoid saying his last name for the duration of the movie... |
|
