Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
Originally Posted by wd40 
And how in the shit did Mystique have any clue what Sebastian looked like? She had the helmet and wardrobe down. Did I miss something, or wasn't he out of sight up to that point?
You don't remember the assault on the CIA base, the scene wherein Angel defected and Darwin got killed?
EMBARASSING & SAD GEEK-OUT AHEAD:
Has anyone made a list of the continuity discrepancies between X-Men: First Class and the other movies? I still believe most of them can be ironed out without much heavy lifting, and I'm curious if there's anything major that could've been missed.
**********
The movie takes place in 1962, and the first one which came out in 2000 and was billed as taking place "in the near future", let's say took place somewhere between 2000 and 2010. That's approximately 40 years between movies, correct?
Michael Fassbender is 34, and James McAvoy is 32. Young Erik Lensherr looks to be around 11-12, which would make him 29 or 30 in the film's present. Xavier is a post-grad student, which would put him between 22 and 24, which makes sense also because he was definitely younger than Erik in the 1944 flashback. Plus, Ian McKellen is (and looks) older than Patrick Stewart, so that seems fine. That would put Magneto as being 72 in the OT, which is McKellen's exact age.
Haley Ramm was 14 when she played a young Jean Grey in X-Men: The Last Stand, which would theoretically place the events of that opening in 1986 or so, if we assume Jean Grey was 35 during the events of the movies (which was Famke Janssen's age when the first one came out). So, Erik and Xavier are supposed to be 54 and 48 in that scene, respectively. Now THAT one's tricky, isn't it? Actually, not really. This is Patrick Stewart at 46: http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsS/16548-11134.gif Not that big a difference from CG'ed Stewart, isn't it?
(And, yes, I'm pretending X-Men Origins: Wolverine doesn't exist, and it seems 20th Century Fox is intent on doing the same. The Wolverine and Deadpool were both going to ignore the events of that p.o.s., so no reason why we shouldn't either.)
***
Magneto claims he helped Xavier build Cerebro, wheras in X-M:FC it's established that it was Hank McCoy who built the original prototype Cerebro while he was employed by the CIA. This seems like a continuity mistake, but I think it's more obvious that Magneto was referring to the big Cerebro found at Xavier's Mansion, which is vastly more complicated and powerful (and indeed, the one he sabotages using his knowledge of it).
***
Speaking of Beast, we see that he starts out being relatively human-looking in X-M:FC and eventually transforming into his blue-furred beastly form before the film's end. He's still like this when we see him in X-M:TLS (where he's around his mid-50's, which is in line with Kelsey Grammer's age). The problem? Hank McCoy shows up fur-less in X2: X-Men United on a TV screen, during an interview segment where he's speaking about mutants. Uh-oh! How do we explain this? I got two words for you: "image inducer". I'm pretty sure the guy who built Cerebro when he was 16-18 can build one of those in his spare time. Why would he use one? I dunno, take your pick: maybe he didn't want to expose his frightening real form on daytime TV because he was concerned it would eclipse his argument in favor of mutant rights? Like I said, you don't need to stretch credibility much for these.
***
Mystique should be in her 60's in the original movies, what gives? Oh, wait, they already explained she ages slowly in X-M:FC (which is true to her comic book version). And even then, you could just assume she perpetually shape-shifts into a younger version of herself. No biggie.
***
In X-Men, we have Professor X appear to be dumbfounded as to why he can't read Magneto's thoughts. It later turns out to be because of his helmet. The problem some are finding here is that it's established in X-M:FC that Magneto began using the helmet in 1962, in Xavier's presence! And the movie establishes for the audience before that that the helmet deters telepath's powers. The question is, does Xavier know for a fact that the helmet was what was causing his impairment?
During the raid on Sebastian Shaw's yacht (before Shaw begins using the helmet), Xavier can't read the villain's minds and specifically points out Emma Frost's presence as the reason why. Later, when Magneto and Shaw are duking it out in the sub's reactor room, Shaw is wearing the helmet and Xavier once again can't access his mind, but seems to blame the mirrored panels lining the walls as the new reason. He eventually takes over Shaw's mind when Erik rips off his helmet, but is it shown that Xavier knows it's BECAUSE the helmet is now off? Honestly, I don't remember. I also can't recall for certain if he's aware the helmet blocks his telepathy when he's fighting with Erik at the beach. If not, if Xavier never fully grasped that the helmet was the true culprit (and never figured it out in the ensuing 43 years), then him being mystified by it is plausible. If my memory is wonky, and it's definitely shown he eventually realizes what the helmet can do, then that's definitely a glaring continuity mistake. Technically, it can be fixed with a memory swipe or some kind or whatnot, but that's definitely some of that "heavy lifting" I said initially we'd avoid.
***
Moira MacTaggert (soon-to-be-Dr.), rookie CIA agent and (eventually) a renowned specialist, is definitely not much older than 25 in X-M:FC, which seems fine considering she's apparently relatively new to her job. Rose Byrne is 31, so that's not much of a stretch. The problem in this case is that Moira shows up in X-M:TLS, not looking like she's 65-68. She's played by Olivia Williams, who was 38 at the time of filming. So, how can this be cheated? Well... we only see her three times in the movie: on a television screen from afar, at Xavier's funeral in a wide shot, and in the after-credits scene which is our only good look at her. My idea? Simple: Fuck it, we hardly see her, so just recast older if they do another present-day installment.
***
Returning to that 1986 scene from X-M:TLS, we see Xavier walking around without even a limp. He's clearly paralyzed already by the end of the events of 1962, so what gives? Well, there's still 24 years between the events of X-M:FC and 1986, and 20 more years after the flashback before X-Men, so that's plenty of time for Xavier to have temporarily regained use of his legs and then lose it. Again, it teeters close to "heavy lifting", but it's not entirely impossible to accommodate.
***
In the comics, Mystique and Azazel are Nightcrawler's parents. In X-M:FC, Mystique ends up joining Magneto alongside Azazel, effectively putting them on the same team. They'll obviously interact with each other, so it doesn't take a lot of imagination that in the next 40-odd years they could hook up at some point. Alan Cumming was 38 when he played Kurt Wagner in X2:X-MU, but the character was obviously more youthful than that, so I'm gonna put him in his late-20's, meaning he was born around '77-'78. That would put his birth more or less 15 years after the events of X-M:FC.
The bigger question is: why didn't Mystique recognize him when they meet? He's blue like his mother, and physically he's a dead ringer for daddy. Two explanations immediately come to mind: a) something happened around the time of the pregnancy/birth that made her lose her memory of Azazel and 'Crawler, or b) she's a cold bitch. Honestly, either one is entirely possible.
(Also, they give Azazel a German accent, which, c'mawn! So obvious.)
***
Havok is called Alex Summers, and his powers are red-tinted, so he's definitely Cyclop's older brother. In the comics, he's the younger brother, but whatever. That's nothing to lose sleep over. But, what's the age difference? Well, Havok is 16-18 in X-M:FC, meaning he was born around 1946-ish. James Marsden was 27 when X-Men came out, meaning he was born in 1973, which puts Havok in his late-20's at the latest when his lil' bro was born. That's not too far-fetched, right? I don't see a problem there.
***
Professor X refers to Cyclops, Jean Grey and Storm as "some of my first students" at his Academy. If Jean Grey was recruited in 1986, let's assume that's around the time the other two were as well. But, he's already getting the Academy ready at the end of X-M:FC, a good 24 years before recruiting his so-called "first students". My take? It'd been 20 years since he took them under his wing by the time he utters that "first students" line, so I think it's not that big of a deal. What was he supposed to say, they were some of his "kind-of-middle-y" students?
(Not to mention, a Storm-lookin' girl shows up in X-M:FC looking to be around 10-12, which is weird considering she's supposed to be 35-ish in X-Men, assuming she was Halle Berry's age.)
***
A guy named Stryker shows in X-M:FC! Oh, no, wait... it's William Stryker, Sr. a.k.a. Daddy Stryker. Xavier mentions his son, William, by name. Brian Cox was 57 when X2:X-MU came out, so if we assume William Stryker was the same age, that means he'd be 16 during the events of X-M:FC. That sounds fair enough, I think!
Once again, I'm pretending X-Men Origins: Wolverine never happened, but I'm gonna play the number game for Stryker just for shits 'n giggles. Danny Huston was 47 when the film came out, and the climax of the film is during the Three Mile Island accident in 1979. Now, if we use the same math used in the previous paragraph, that would make Stryker 33 during those events. If you can believe that a 47-year-old Danny Huston is actually a 33-year-old Danny Huston, then you're good to go. If not, just go back to pretending that shitty movie never happened.
***
Speaking of Wolverine, he shows up in X-M:FC! Yay! Does that fit, though? Now we know that Wolverine met (albeit briefly) Xavier and Magneto in 1962, and while he didn't get a look at their faces, he definitely got their names and scents. Now, scents can fade in 43 years, but I'm guessing the names should've probably rang a bell somewhere in that badly-combed head of his. So, what's up? Well, simple: even ignoring X-MO:W, the original films make it clear that the Weapon X events took place post-1962. So, just assume he lost his memories somewhere around that point. Ta-da!
Also, if you rewatch the X-Men trilogy (or at least the first two), you can see that Xavier and Magneto seem to have prior knowledge of Logan's existence. Magneto specifically refers to Xavier having information about Wolverine that he's not sharing, leaving it clear that they've both known about him since before he showed up at the Mansion's doorstep (or lab, in any case).
**********
Well, if I missed anything, feel free to point it out. As I argued, there are some weird things going on continuity-wise, but nothing on the scale of, say, putting the Weapon X HQ in a goddamn rainforest behind a waterfall.
Man, fuck that fuckin' movie.
P.S. Yes, I do have a lot of free time today, why do you ask?
BTSMGL, forget that stuff!
They need to go back even further and do an ALL-FASSBENDER Magneto movie.
That's really what I came out of the movie thinking. I didn't care that much about the mutant teens or the revised Cuban missile crisis.
I thought Xavier and Erik knew about the helmet at the end? And their plan was to get Erik in there to get it off Shaw, and then Xavier could shut him down (or so Xavier thought)?
And Shaw's German name was Klaus Schmidt.......wasn't that the Red Skull's real name??
That's Johann Schmidt.
Shit, I thought it was a small in-joke i caught. Dammit.
EMBARASSING & SAD GEEK-OUT AHEAD:
Has anyone made a list of the continuity discrepancies between X-Men: First Class and the other movies? I still believe most of them can be ironed out without much heavy lifting, and I'm curious if there's anything major that could've been missed.
The movie takes place in 1962, and the first one which came out in 2000 and was billed as taking place "in the near future", let's say took place somewhere between 2000 and 2010. That's approximately 40 years between movies, correct?
Speaking of Beast, we see that he starts out being relatively human-looking in X-M:FC and eventually transforming into his blue-furred beastly form before the film's end. He's still like this when we see him in X-M:TLS (where he's around his mid-50's, which is in line with Kelsey Grammer's age). The problem? Hank McCoy shows up fur-less in X2: X-Men United on a TV screen, during an interview segment where he's speaking about mutants. Uh-oh! How do we explain this? I got two words for you: "image inducer". I'm pretty sure the guy who built Cerebro when he was 16-18 can build one of those in his spare time. Why would he use one? I dunno, take your pick: maybe he didn't want to expose his frightening real form on daytime TV because he was concerned it would eclipse his argument in favor of mutant rights? Like I said, you don't need to stretch credibility much for these.
Moira MacTaggert (soon-to-be-Dr.), rookie CIA agent and (eventually) a renowned specialist, is definitely not much older than 25 in X-M:FC, which seems fine considering she's apparently relatively new to her job. Rose Byrne is 31, so that's not much of a stretch. The problem in this case is that Moira shows up in X-M:TLS, not looking like she's 65-68. She's played by Olivia Williams, who was 38 at the time of filming. So, how can this be cheated? Well... we only see her three times in the movie: on a television screen from afar, at Xavier's funeral in a wide shot, and in the after-credits scene which is our only good look at her. My idea? Simple: Fuck it, we hardly see her, so just recast older if they do another present-day installment.
***
Returning to that 1986 scene from X-M:TLS, we see Xavier walking around without even a limp. He's clearly paralyzed already by the end of the events of 1962, so what gives? Well, there's still 24 years between the events of X-M:FC and 1986, and 20 more years after the flashback before X-Men, so that's plenty of time for Xavier to have temporarily regained use of his legs and then lose it. Again, it teeters close to "heavy lifting", but it's not entirely impossible to accommodate.
***
In the comics, Mystique and Azazel are Nightcrawler's parents. In X-M:FC, Mystique ends up joining Magneto alongside Azazel, effectively putting them on the same team. They'll obviously interact with each other, so it doesn't take a lot of imagination that in the next 40-odd years they could hook up at some point. Alan Cumming was 38 when he played Kurt Wagner in X2:X-MU, but the character was obviously more youthful than that, so I'm gonna put him in his late-20's, meaning he was born around '77-'78. That would put his birth more or less 15 years after the events of X-M:FC.
The bigger question is: why didn't Mystique recognize him when they meet? He's blue like his mother, and physically he's a dead ringer for daddy. Two explanations immediately come to mind: a) something happened around the time of the pregnancy/birth that made her lose her memory of Azazel and 'Crawler, or b) she's a cold bitch. Honestly, either one is entirely possible.
(Also, they give Azazel a German accent, which, c'mawn! So obvious.)
A guy named Stryker shows in X-M:FC! Oh, no, wait... it's William Stryker, Sr. a.k.a. Daddy Stryker. Xavier mentions his son, William, by name. Brian Cox was 57 when X2:X-MU came out, so if we assume William Stryker was the same age, that means he'd be 16 during the events of X-M:FC. That sounds fair enough, I think!
Once again, I'm pretending X-Men Origins: Wolverine never happened, but I'm gonna play the number game for Stryker just for shits 'n giggles. Danny Huston was 47 when the film came out, and the climax of the film is during the Three Mile Island accident in 1979. Now, if we use the same math used in the previous paragraph, that would make Stryker 33 during those events. If you can believe that a 47-year-old Danny Huston is actually a 33-year-old Danny Huston, then you're good to go. If not, just go back to pretending that shitty movie never happened.
Nerdy, but awesome. Good on you, friend.
Points...
-There's a lot of wiggle room for that "in the near future" opening for "X-Men," no? I guess we can all assume that it really just means "2001" or even "2004." The future films never took advantage of future technology in this hypothetical "near future," which is weird because there some be some pretty advanced tech in "The Last Stand." I mean, we've got flat-screens in "Wolverine" right?
What strikes me as interesting about having an onscreen mythology is that the "real life" history fractures the "movie history" at play, and the Civil Rights situation becomes a lot more muddled with the involvement of mutants. It is interesting that none of the other white X-Men bat an eye when the black Darwin shows up. Is this an alternate reality where certain minorities didn't struggle as many as others? Probably NOT, since we're dealing with the Holocaust here. So getting a close-up look at the X-Men 1960's, in my opinion, goes a long way towards deflating Magneto telling Xavier, in the first film, "BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY."
-Beast's transformation. Is it unusual to assume he kept monkeying with alternate formulas for his de-Beasting technology over the years? Beast of the comics mutated often, so I'm willing to believe Beast in the movies did the same. I think they have a cool opportunity to go to Cronenbergian places with Beast's physical appearance in the next film.
-In "The Last Stand," Moira MacTaggart is clearly the Scottish doctor of the comic books. So how does she go from American CIA agent to Scottish doctor? Simple - twin sisters! Or something! My memory is fuzzy, but MacTaggart has some sort of affiliation with the alien Sh'iar people, so it wouldn't be a surprise for them to heavily influence/shape/transform a young CIA agent. Man, women in the X-universe keep changing.
-Any example of Xavier walking can be attributed to a mental projection of him standing upright. This seems slightly more dubious in "The Last Stand" than it does for "Wolverine" but whatever.
-I think it's reasonable that they have purged any relationship between Mystique and Nightcrawler from the movies. That being said, Azazel is certainly meant to be Daddy Nightcrawler. Maybe the baby is abandoned. Not an incredible stretch.
-Cyclops and Havok. The REAL question here is, who is daddy? I want to know what kind of dad fathers Scott almost twenty years after leaving a delinquent, lazer-shooting son in prison. Is it really Corsair the space pirate? And is Vulcan out there somewhere? Even though we're already in prequel territory, this movie made me more curious about even FUTHER origins. Who was Xavier's dad that he had that bitching mansion and those training/testing facilities? And that he would let his six year old son decides who moves in? And that he would never let his wife in the kitchen?
-The Stryker thing is curious, because William has that line in X2 about running missions during Woodstock. Also, he apparently mutates from being a Southern guy to clearly Canadian in Wolverine. I will let this one go.
-Airtight Wolverine cameo, agreed.
I imagine we're both missing some stuff, right? Whatevz. We are nerds.
I thought Xavier and Erik knew about the helmet at the end? And their plan was to get Erik in there to get it off Shaw, and then Xavier could shut him down (or so Xavier thought)?
And Shaw's German name was Klaus Schmidt.......wasn't that the Red Skull's real name??
Now that I think about it, Xavier CAN read Shaw. He tells Magneto to go into the sub and leads him to the "room" where Shaw is. When Erik doesn't see him, Xavier insists Shaw is there. Then we see he's hiding behind the false wall, inside the reactor. Then Erik goes in after him, and suddenly Xavier has trouble reading Shaw, and blames the panels in the room, urging Erik to tear them off.
So, how could he pinpoint Shaw's location if Shaw had the helmet on? And why would he blame the panels, if he supposedly knows about the helmet? That's part of my argument: he either doesn't know about the helmet's abilities, and if he does he doesn't realize it until after Magneto puts it on, but definitely not before.
Which still leaves unexplained how he knew where in the sub Shaw was. Hrm.
I have one major issue in particular: Magneto's experiences in this film do not fit with his beliefs in the Singer movies. Making the object of his rage into a mutant was a big, big mistake--he's supposed to hate humans. That's kind of vital. He's basically tormented from day one by people who wanted to create a "master race", one of whom turns out to be a mutant who has basically replaced "Aryans" with "mutants" in his philosophy. He devotes his life to tracking them down, destroying them. Then, at the end, with a line or two, he suddenly adopts their philosophy. I realize they were going for a "he became what he despised" thing, but it doesn't make any actual sense. If anything, he should have become a self-loathing mutant, not a mutant supremacist.
Then there's stuff like the Hellfire Club casually linking hands and teleporting off into the sunset with the guy who just killed their boss, or Mystique's mostly unmotivated heel turn. There really wasn't enough in this to explain the mutant's hatred of humans--it was more about hating each other.
Bingo.
I am hoping, if they do a sequel, that there are more compelling reasons to have Magneto hate humans. Perhaps a re-thinking makes him return to side with Xavier again, maybe ten years later, as they build their own personal Cerebro and recruit lil' Cyclops, Storm, etc? I think there are more places to go there, and more opportunities to show humans being not necessarily worthy of the mutants' wrath - seriously, these movies are so anti-human that there's no way you can't root for Magneto.
Maybe Havok is Cyclops' daddy. How's the timeline work with that?
Originally Posted by Gabe T
-Cyclops and Havok. The REAL question here is, who is daddy? I want to know what kind of dad fathers Scott almost twenty years after leaving a delinquent, lazer-shooting son in prison. Is it really Corsair the space pirate? And is Vulcan out there somewhere? Even though we're already in prequel territory, this movie made me more curious about even FUTHER origins. Who was Xavier's dad that he had that bitching mansion and those training/testing facilities? And that he would let his six year old son decides who moves in? And that he would never let his wife in the kitchen?
Now that I think about it, Xavier CAN read Shaw. He tells Magneto to go into the sub and leads him to the "room" where Shaw is. When Erik doesn't see him, Xavier insists Shaw is there. Then we see he's hiding behind the false wall, inside the reactor. Then Erik goes in after him, and suddenly Xavier has trouble reading Shaw, and blames the panels in the room, urging Erik to tear them off.
So, how could he pinpoint Shaw's location if Shaw had the helmet on? And why would he blame the panels, if he supposedly knows about the helmet? That's part of my argument: he either doesn't know about the helmet's abilities, and if he does he doesn't realize it until after Magneto puts it on, but definitely not before.
Which still leaves unexplained how he knew where in the sub Shaw was. Hrm.
xavier could of easily scanned the crew members thoughts of where shaw was at in the sub.
Originally Posted by Gabe T
Nerdy, but awesome. Good on you, friend.
Points...
-There's a lot of wiggle room for that "in the near future" opening for "X-Men," no? I guess we can all assume that it really just means "2001" or even "2004." The future films never took advantage of future technology in this hypothetical "near future," which is weird because there some be some pretty advanced tech in "The Last Stand." I mean, we've got flat-screens in "Wolverine" right?
There's not a whole lot of passage of time between X-Men (2000) and X2:X-MU (2003), so I just took as both of them taking place in 2005 or whereabouts, which means the "near future" from the first film is really "5 years in the future".
Does she have the accent in X-M:TLS, though? Her doing her research in Scotland isn't a big deal, but if she has the accent, then that's a stickler. It'd be a stretch if she gained it after living there a few decades, right?
-Cyclops and Havok. The REAL question here is, who is daddy? I want to know what kind of dad fathers Scott almost twenty years after leaving a delinquent, lazer-shooting son in prison. Is it really Corsair the space pirate? And is Vulcan out there somewhere?
I don't think they'll go down that road, but as for the age difference: my girlfriend is 15 years younger than her older brother, and 16 years younger than her older sister. AND all three have the same mother/father. So, it's entirely possible. I've seen even more extreme cases, too.
-The Stryker thing is curious, because William has that line in X2 about running missions during Woodstock. Also, he apparently mutates from being a Southern guy to clearly Canadian in Wolverine. I will let this one go.
Hrm, yeah, I forgot that line. Well, again, I was just doing the math assuming Stryker was the same age as Cox was when he played him in the movie. Cox's face hasn't changed at all in the last 10 years, so it's no difference assuming then that Stryker was older than Cox, thus making him old enough to be doing missions in 'Nam in 1969. No sweat!
Maybe Havok is Cyclops' daddy. How's the timeline work with that?
Works fine if you wanna do that. Havok is fully into get-'er-pregnant age by the time Cyclops would've been born.
xavier could of easily scanned the crew members thoughts of where shaw was at in the sub.
Ah, good point.
I think the writers should forget about the previoss films. Fuck WOLVERINE and the others. Just follow the story accordingly from FIRST CLASS.
Besides i get the feeling that Marvel is keeping the X-Films seperate from the "Main" Film Universe that IRON MAN, THOR and CAPTAIN AMERICA inhabit anyway.
P.S- Just checking. But what was Logan doing in the 60's anyway? I know he hasn't had his Adamantinum upgrade yet. But he still has some Bone Blades of some sort, right?
Really enjoyed this, but folks here need to remember this is the Casino Royale of X-Men films, it's a soft reboot, just like Bond and Superman have done in recent times. I don't get twisting yourself in knots trying to workout the continuity issues (which would be huge, granted, if this wasn't a reboot).
Biggest issue I had; why did the Russian general go along with Shaw? were we supposed to believe he was scared of Shaw? I did find myself wishing he was a mutant and in on with the rest of the villains.
You don't remember the assault on the CIA base, the scene wherein Angel defected and Darwin got killed?
Of course I do, but that was a bit earlier. Does he only wear the same outfit the whole time? Or maybe not enough time passed for him to change? If his outfit is the same in the assault sequence as it is in the sub at the end, then I did miss something and I retract my concern.
It did, however, just dawn on me that Mystique must have the most incredible photographic memory.
I also wondered if Mystique has enhanced strength or something. In this movie, she doesn't strike me as someone who regularly works out. And yet, we see her pumping iron pretty comfortably. Too much thinking on my part?
Hmm. Implied that she's stronger in smurf mode?
I also wondered if Mystique has enhanced strength or something. In this movie, she doesn't strike me as someone who regularly works out. And yet, we see her pumping iron pretty comfortably. Too much thinking on my part?
I'm of the feeling that people take the word "reboot" too literally. When a franchise is "rebooted", a lot of times it means that everything that came before is scrapped in favor of something wholly new (for example, Batman Begins).
But can't "reboot" other times mean kicking an old thing to get it started again? Hell, that's what it literally means in computer terms. Just because they're using the word "reboot" doesn't automatically mean we're supposed to literally take from that that everything else is no longer valid. It could also mean bringing back something that was dormant, starting it up again, blowing some dust off. Rocky Balboa and Rambo could be considered "reboots" of those series if they kept making sequels following the older characters.
Anyways, I just think lack-of-a-better-term has led to problems when thinking about stuff like this. I get irked everytime I see people calling the new Conan movie a remake.
I also wondered if Mystique has enhanced strength or something. In this movie, she doesn't strike me as someone who regularly works out. And yet, we see her pumping iron pretty comfortably. Too much thinking on my part?
I just thought they put that in the film because it was a "training" montage where all the mutant kids practiced for battle. Since having Mystique practice changing forms would be stupid, they just chose to have her work out. lol.
Also if she's working out, that sort of implies that she does not have super mutant strength, no?
Although, she is flexible, and probably is strong by human standards.
Is there anything in the original X-films that designates them as taking place specifically in the 2000s? The only indication of time period we're given in those movies is, again, "in the not so distant future," as far as I remember, and that's pretty damn vague and was clearly intended as a sort of ominous tonal thing rather than a firm designation of time period. If you just uprooted the original films from the 2000s and assumed they took place in the early 90s (where none of the technology, clothing, or political subplots would seem overly out of place) then a lot of the continuity issues might be solved.
Overall I enjoyed this movie a lot and was actually unusually moved by it, even to the point of tears when Magneto moves the satellite dish and flashes back to his childhood -- Stardust (the overblown but just plain very happy romantic ending) and Kick-Ass (death of Big Daddy) had the same effect, which leads me to believe that Vaughn is an incredibly well-attuned to the emotions of an audience, and maybe me in particular for whatever reason. Count me in, though, as being irritated by all the minor nonsense like the horrid Beast and Mystique makeup, Magneto's awful costume at the end (the helmet with the horns was awesome though), and stupid fucking characters like Darwin, Angel, the guy who makes wind gusts, and January Jones for her awkward impression of a living person.
Has anyone went to the film's Official site? It details aeveryone's powers.
According to it, Magneto has a minor ability in Telepathy and Astral Projection. I never cared much for Shaw in the comics, but i can't help but think the film's version is awesome. That ability of his makes him almost invulnerable to energy based and physical attacks.
Edit- Oh and yes, the site confirms that Havok is Scott's brother.
I hate to bitch about something like this, but Ebert's review kinda pissed me off:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110602/REVIEWS/110609997
It's not that he didn't like the film, but the flippant way he approaches it. "The best acting in 'X-Men: First Class' is by President John F. Kennedy" seems particularly bizarre. Even if the story isn't for you, you can't deny the quality work of the leads. How about singling one of them out? There seems to be lingering resentment towards Vaughn over "Kick-Ass". Win, lose, or draw, the film deserves more than a review on auto-pilot.
Of course I do, but that was a bit earlier. Does he only wear the same outfit the whole time? Or maybe not enough time passed for him to change? If his outfit is the same in the assault sequence as it is in the sub at the end, then I did miss something and I retract my concern.
It did, however, just dawn on me that Mystique must have the most incredible photographic memory.
He's not wearing the same outfit, but Mystique morphs into Shaw wearing the outfit he wore in the assault sequence. Wardrobe discrepancy or not it was enough to distract Azazel for a second.
Hell, I really really enjoyed this. I thought it was a great way to reboot this franchise and bring it back to where it belongs...among the best of the Marvel films. I totally ended up with the hots for Jennifer Lawrence's Mystique by the end.
As for the issue of Xavier and Shaw in the boat, there were several lines of dialogue that indicated, to me, that Xavier knew where Shaw was and directed Magneto to him not by making any telepathic contact with him, but by sensing the telepathic void in that general area where he should have been able to sense someone. Does the way I'm explaining that make any sense?
As for me, I'm glad just to consider this an entirely different continuity. (I hated X-3, and that, unfortunately, ends up tainting the first two movies too.)
I wasn't expecting much from this film, so I was surprised by how much I ended up loving it. I think this is my favourite film of Vaughn's. I love how he incorporated stylistic flourishes that help ground it in the sixties (the peek inside Emma's mind, the split screen during the training montage) but made these touches cool rather than campy.
What really drives the film is Fassbender and McAvoy. The way Fassbender plays Eric you can tell from a glance that this guy is dangerous, and that's even before he starts using his mutant powers to rip your fillings out. But to me the heart of the movie is McAvoy. It's amazing how he manages to be both cocky and self-assured but at the same time empathetic and caring. The training montage is great not just because it shows the team getting their act together, it shows Xavier's talent for inspiring others. It would be so easy to make it schmaltzy, but McAvoy's steady belief in the others is what really made the film for me.
I'm of the feeling that people take the word "reboot" too literally. When a franchise is "rebooted", a lot of times it means that everything that came before is scrapped in favor of something wholly new (for example, Batman Begins).
But can't "reboot" other times mean kicking an old thing to get it started again? Hell, that's what it literally means in computer terms. Just because they're using the word "reboot" doesn't automatically mean we're supposed to literally take from that that everything else is no longer valid. It could also mean bringing back something that was dormant, starting it up again, blowing some dust off. Rocky Balboa and Rambo could be considered "reboots" of those series if they kept making sequels following the older characters.
Anyways, I just think lack-of-a-better-term has led to problems when thinking about stuff like this. I get irked everytime I see people calling the new Conan movie a remake.
Let's be honest here, "reboot" is a buzzword used by studios who are afraid of the "sequel" stigma. X-Men is not unlike any other film series, in that continuity is really something for anally-retentive nerds, and it's more notable when it occurs as opposed to when it is ignored.
I am an anally-retentive nerd, for the record.
Also, did anyone catch the First Class roundtables? Not sure if CHUD covered them, but two of the credited writers were discussing sequel possibilities and they revealed that they were chomping at the bit to feature...
CABLE.
And that they had one-on-one discussions with Stephen Lang about this possibility and, anecdotally, he has agreed to it.
Now, how does THAT work into the whole "Havok is Cyclops' dad" theory?
As for the issue of Xavier and Shaw in the boat, there were several lines of dialogue that indicated, to me, that Xavier knew where Shaw was and directed Magneto to him not by making any telepathic contact with him, but by sensing the telepathic void in that general area where he should have been able to sense someone. Does the way I'm explaining that make any sense?
Yes, and you're absolutely right. Charles sort of reverse-sensed him, by sensing the void that his reactor core room created.
Let's be honest here, "reboot" is a buzzword used by studios who are afraid of the "sequel" stigma. X-Men is not unlike any other film series, in that continuity is really something for anally-retentive nerds, and it's more notable when it occurs as opposed to when it is ignored.
I am an anally-retentive nerd, for the record.
Also, did anyone catch the First Class roundtables? Not sure if CHUD covered them, but two of the credited writers were discussing sequel possibilities and they revealed that they were chomping at the bit to feature...
CABLE.
And that they had one-on-one discussions with Stephen Lang about this possibility and, anecdotally, he has agreed to it.
Now, how does THAT work into the whole "Havok is Cyclops' dad" theory?
I could be wrong, but Singer said in an interview that this version of Havok is Cyclops uncle. Hell, maybe they will make Cable Havoks brother and Cyclops dad?
We'll see if they include Corsair and furries in the sequel.
At first I was feeling the Iron Man comparison, mostly because this film feels so much a part of what Marvel's been doing as a studio. But Renn's Star Trek '09 comparison is pretty spot on. This was fun and sexy with great acting and characters. And it served as a franchise refresher to a worn-out, kinda stodgy, previous interpretation of the universe. Just like Trek. Obviously the FX and make-up work felt rushed and the dialog suffered in places, but I don't care because of MacAvoy, Bacon, Fassbender and JLaw. And it is a shame that this movie resets to the 1st X-Men film, as this is so confident in its approach.
CABLE.
And that they had one-on-one discussions with Stephen Lang about this possibility and, anecdotally, he has agreed to it.
I am a sad, lonely nerd who is really hoping for a Days of Future Past movie. Because, c'mon, imagine the metafiction of X-Men: The Last Stand leading to a dark, dystopian future... and then being completely erased from continuity.
Yeah, it seems they're full-on enemies by the end of this movie and claim that contradicts the Jean Grey recruiting scene, but there's still almost 25 years of history between where this film ends and that scene takes place, so who knows if they made amends even temporarily?
Well, Charles is walking in that recruiting scene.
X3 is on FX now. You get a full on close-up of Moira, which Charles freeze frames for his students. And she's hotter in X3. Might be the stethoscope:
I think this movie throws X3 away as much, if not more, than the Wolverine spin-off. It's almost a shame that they tied it to the original films at all, since you can't imagine Fassbender aging into the bitchy queen of X3. But the little surprise callbacks were played so well. And to be honest, this movie's cavalier approach to continuity is kind of refreshing. Strangling on convoluted continuity ruined so many comic book titles.
Just got back from seeing this. All in all, I liked it, but I think my expectations were a bit too high. When it was announced, I dreaded it, then it had a great cast, Vaughn directing, and started getting great reviews. I think my expectations were raised a bit too high. It's good and very enjoyable, but it's got plenty of problems, and it certainly isn't as good as X2 (which is a criminally underrated film).
The positives first. Fassbender and McAvoy are great. Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart are big shoes to fill, but they absolutely are up to the task. I echo the comments that I could watch an entire "Magneto hunting Nazis" movie. Those scenes are great, and Fassbender really hits the intensity and conviction that make Magneto work so well as a character. McAvoy might have the harder job as Xavier, being the caring mentor but also kind of a dick who wants to control everyone, and he conveys that really well. I also really enjoyed Bacon's Shaw as the villain. Lawrence gets some really clunky lines, but also has some great moments with the two leads. The attack on the CIA compound is a pretty excellent setpiece. Overall, the film hit at the heart of the X-Men story and really nailed the most important parts.
Now the negatives. Man, there is some clunky dialogue in this movie. There's a lot exposition spewing and "say what you're feeling" syndrome. Also, that codename scene is really, really painful. Honestly, the biggest problem is that it suffers from some severe prequelitis. There's this compulsion to show where everything in the later movies came from. It just fills up time that could be better used on the side characters, and it leads to a fairly rushed ending.
All in all, it's a solid film, if not quite as great as I was expecting.
I see this as a film that ties in to the Singer X-Men films, having nothing to do with X-3 or Wolverine.
The codename scene would've been better if Jennifer Lawrence had played it more drunk and giddy. As it were, she just stands there and smiles while saying the lines, which really doesn't sell the scene like how I assume it was intended.
I see this as a film that ties in to the Singer X-Men films, having nothing to do with X-3 of Wolverine.
Yeah, kinda like a Superman Returns situation, right?
Well, Singer does like to use whatever he wants, while ignoring everything else. That seems to be my impression of him at least.
Michael Ironside sure has lost a lot of hair over the years. Put on some weight as well.
Just something I thought I'd throw out there for your opinions...
I read recently that Vaughan had two people in mind for Shaw: Kevin Bacon and Colin Firth.
Now, not to detract from Bacon, but I would kill to see what Colin Firth would have done with that. Only because it seems so unusual a choice.
What do you think? How do you think it would have turned out?
Less fun.
Michael Ironside sure has lost a lot of hair over the years. Put on some weight as well.
He is no longer Michael Ironside. He is M. Ironside. It says so in the credits!
When did he start doing that, by the way?
Stethoscope or not, Olivia Williams is definitely hotter. I keep harping on this, but Rose Byrne is just too chronically melancholy to be hot.
Obviously, young Jean Grey lives in the Savage Land.
I would love it if they just COMPLETELY pretend that the 2 films didn't exist. I would love a remake of a good Wolverine story and another X-Men movie that takes place right after X2. Maybe do the pheonix story right.
Waaaaaaaalt, To do it right, then...The Phoenix Saga would have to happen, before there was a...Dark Phoenix Saga. The first saga would introduce Lilandra and co, The Starjammers, the M'Krann crystal etc. The problem with adapting...The Dark Phoenix Saga, in the concept of First Class is that, Shaw was apparently killed in the film. The Hellfire Club, led by Shaw, is a huge part of TDPS.
I avoided all hyperbolic reviews and headlines for this movie and came away convinced that this is no bullshit the best XMen movie so far.
I think its because this is the first one that I have had any kind of emotional attachment to. The Professor X and Mystique relationship was heartbreaking. Loved It!
But yeah continuity with the other films = now all fucked up
Anyone harping about the continuity obviously hasn't been reading comics long enough.
Parts felt rushed--expertly rushed, but still--and the new mutants weren't nearly as fun to be around as they should've been, Naked Blue Jennifer Lawrence aside. The "this is Fassbender's Bond audition tape" sentiment is spot on, but the whole thing stealing liberally from Bond (especially the Dr. No style end credits) is an odd but utterly satisfying fit altogether. The super-cameo is, indeed, the best tactical f-bomb usage in a long while. Vaughn is far more confident and embracing of this universe than Singer, and I can't wait to see what he's got in store for his X2.
If anything, I was one of those people hoping hard for a young Magneto film, and this movie just kinda made me ravenous for it. Especially considering the need to bring this whole thing to a head kinda robs Erik of a lot of little moments that would've made his switch to the dark side work a little better. Still...how fucking great was murder-by-coin?
Also, did I mention Naked Blue Jennifer Lawrence? Because......Naked Blue Jennifer Lawrence.
I know a bunch of people who are wrapping themselves up in knots trying to piece together the continuity of all the movies. Since when did continuity become such a big deal to people? Were there people back in the 1960s/70s trying to work out why we had three different versions of Blofeld facing off against two different Bonds?
Wikipedia says that it was Rebecca Romjin in that Mystique/Magneto seduction scene. Didn't realise that till now.
When did he start doing that, by the way?
....
I was wondering about that, myself. Is that some sort of SAG-enforced change?
Quote:
Wikipedia says that it was Rebecca Romjin in that Mystique/Magneto seduction scene. Didn't realise that till now.
Ah, that answers my other credit-related question. I was looking, but was too distracted by the listing of one of the Rooskie bit-players with the mononymous title "Marios".
I love that the final moment between Erik and Shaw came back to that coin.
Of course, just last night, my friends and I were eating sushi and debating the physics of that scene. Hahahaha. Such nerds.
"Does Xavier just freeze them or actually hold their bodies completely still?"
"Wouldn't the head just tilt back from the slow push?"
"Shut up, you fools! It was cool!"
