transformers
 

Bay may suck. But his art department, ILM or who ever... gave us this. And this rocks!

Ilm may have given us that but he also gave us skids and mudflap, and that terrible megatron design.

It's not that low.

The budget for both Thor and Captain America is supposedly only $150 million apiece, not all that much more, and I'd bet a significant chunk of that is the 3-D conversion.

Still that's 30 million in Special Effects, and they are needed a lot more in a
X-men Movie. Btw 120 million is still a whole lot better then the 80 million budget the Spider-man Reboot is getting. No wonder you only see pictures of him running. They can't afford to let him web-sling, LOL!!!

All I care about is the ensuing toyline...hopefully :)

Bring on the movies!! Crappy or no.....just give me plenty of plastic crack to go with it and Ill be content

Thank you. Maybe that's where I got my wires crossed and thought he was on tap for this one.

I'm not going to see this film, or at least not in theaters. Maybe after it hits DVD. But I'm not, not seeing it in theaters because of some stupid point that will go completely unnoticed. I'm not interested in spending $10.00 on what looks like a crappy movie. If it were more comic accurate I would be more interested. But as far as I'm concerned all the X films have sucked and this one looks to be just another bad movie. For me I'm not sure why they feel it's so necessary to dismiss decades of stories and character development for some half ass script that only serves to piss off the one base that would surely see it time after time, bye the DVD and toys. But further more, what does it matter to John Q public, He has no idea what to expect, it's just another action flick to him/her. If it's a good film, people will go see it and there's no reason why they could not have used the original characters and still walked away from a good movie. It's fine if you want to update the film like what the new Batman films have done, or make a few changes here and there, but when you change every aspect of story thats been unfolding itself to fans both young and old for half a century, don't be surprised when they complain or are not interested in paying for it. This film is a product, and if this product turns out to be crap or unappealing to some, well then it's all our prerogative to buy it or not.

A lot of that has to do with the change in directors. Singer had a steady direction going. Ratner however was having the whole script rewritten every five minutes.
So when something has a strong direction that's suddenly lost, you can pretty much bet that it's the new director that dropped the ball.
Also, the Mutant Cure was taken directly from Joss Whedon's Astonishing X-Men, which was the big famous storyline that was happening just before the movie was written.
So, it's pretty obvious it's not some anti-gay message going on. It's more that Ratner can't direct his way out of a paper bag, and had complete ADHD going on, and wanted to capitalize on Whedon's work.

The goal was to make the movie on X1's budget. Add in inflation, and that's fine.

Heck scott pilgrim was only 60 million.

I can agree with that, I won't see the movie, but if a 6 inch Emma Frost comes out that looks just as Hot as the actor that plays her, I'll buy it.

Script was set before Ratner came aboard. I read a preliminary script for x3 that had most of the main segments to x3 in tact. Ratner added fanboy bits and that was it. The sucky movie wasn't ratner's fault entirely. Ratner is capable of delivering a solid film... Red Dragon was great.

How so? Transformers as a brand is bigger than ever, and it is directly related to the success of the first two movies, or at the very least the first one. Love him or hate him, Bay has been good for the TF franchise.

As long as Singer has some involvement, I feel that First Class will be closer to the first two X-Men films, which is a good thing IMHO.

While it may be true that Fox is doing this film to retain the rights to the X-Men, you really can't say it's a crappy movie when you haven't even seen it yet.

Chances are, several of the characters that appeared in the first X-Men movie were unknowns to general audiences when it was released. General audiences care nothing for whether character X appears in film Y because that's what happened in source Z. They just want to enjoy the movie.

Besides, as I and others have already stated, due to the timeline already established by the existing four X-Men movies, it would be impossible for those characters to appear in this film without a reboot or a major plot twist (e.g. alternate universes). Especially when you consider the time period of First Class.

Personally, I can't stand it when writers use alternate realities to "explain" continuity issues. If it had been done right the first time, they wouldn't have these problems to rectify.

Same here. Although there were some moments in XMO:W that I enjoyed. Wade was great, I thought. That "Deadpool" on the other hand....

I think you may have missed my point in that quote. I wasn't questioning Marvel's ability to do a good comic movie, I was simply stating that if they were to regain the movie rights to X-Men, it doesn't mean that we'd see Apocalypse or any of the other characters he mentioned in a future movie.

If you truly want to get technical, the nature and functionality of Wolverine's claws has been retconned about four or five times since his creation.

My point about comic accuracy is that there's no way to really measure how close it is to the source, since the source itself can vary considerably as you mentioned. X3 is a great example of a movie being very comic-accurate, but using so many different story arcs to build the movie's plot that it becomes muddled and clunky.

This is a point that we'll just have to agree to disagree. Well, except for the part about that buddy cop movie. *shudder*

But you have to admit that there's a hell of a lot that they would have to explain to get him from Creed at the end of XMO:W to the Sabretooth that appears in X-Men. I just don't buy going feral as a cure-all to the differences in those two portrayals.

As for the blades, I'm glad it isn't supposed to appear in the Deadpool movie, but it shouldn't have been in XMO:W to begin with. Same with all of the other "powers" it had.

Yes, but at least Hackman's version in the first film was somewhat believable, as far as motivation. Spacey's version worked to basically destroy the Earth and rebuild it. Why would he think that humans would prefer a Kryptonian version of Earth and be willing to pay top dollar for land that has all the appeal of frozen tundra? Seems counter-intuitive to me.

He even dropped the real estate angle in Part II when he realized he could just take over the world instead (or at least Australia ;)).

Wish I had thought of that when I watched the movie.

Uhh, I dont know maybe by putting at least 2 out of 5 founding members? and some accurate relations between characters or accurate age differences would be a good start.

This has been an increadibly interesting and enjoyable thread.

I don't know how people can call this movie crap, we haven't even seen a trailer for it yet have we? tell meif i'm wrong but its an adaption of the comics, not the comics panel for panel, I'm not saying everyone needs to go see it, but i thinks its wrong to judge it after just seeing a few leaked pics online. give it a chance guys, it may surprise you.

Since it's already been covered why Bobby, Scott, Jean and Warren cannot be in First Class, I'm not going to go over it again.

My point about judging the level of a movie's comic-accuracy is that it's rather subjective and you could easily do an X-Men movie that doesn't have any founding members in it but is still at least 50% comic-accurate. But based on your posts, it probably still wouldn't work for you. Which is fine, of course. I'm not about to tell someone that they should or shouldn't like a movie. I'm just saying "comic-accuracy" is a poor method for judging whether a comic-based movie is good or not.

Let's take the first X-Men film, for instance. Jean and Scott are not founding members. Hank isn't even mentioned. Bobby is a fairly new student and joined after Ororo. What percentage does that cover?

How about things in the film that are accurate? Wolverine joins after the school and team are well-established. Hell, Wolverine's practically ripped right out of the comics. Logan, Jean and Scott all have comic-accurate relationships with each other. Bobby is basically a modernized version of his comic debut (one of the youngest members, bit of a jester). So how much are we up to now? Ten percent? Twenty?

See, it's all relative.

Don't get me wrong, though. I have my own biases, too (see my "Deadpool" comments earlier), but I try not to judge a film solely based on how well it matches the source material. If that were the case, I would only enjoy nature documentaries or original films.

Yeah, let's skip a movie from a great director and cast because Iceman isn't in it.

Winning logic.

I actually hope they use time travel or alternate dimensions in the movie. That would at least explain why Havok and that Angel(Insect Girl) are in the movie in the 1960s.

Unfortunately, like X3 I don't think there's going to be any toyline for X-Men: First Class. Hasbro has its' plate full with Thor, Captain America, and Transformers 3 this summer, and likely didn't care to have to finagle with Fox and the actors and such for likeness rights and all that.

Or I'll put it another way: We've already seen some toys for Cap and Thor, but First Class comes out before Cap and we haven't even heard a peep about any toys for the movie. Barring a massive surprise at Toy Fair, I'm thinking the best we'll likely be able to hope for is that the Marvel Universe line will be X-Men heavy this year while Cap, Thor, and the continuing Iron Man line deal with "Avengers-ish stuff."

Well, they did release some characters from X3 in the Marvel Legends line (Pheonix, Colossus and Juggy). But is is disheartening to not have heard any news of a toy line for this movie. I just can't imagine that they wouldn't capitalize on the X-Men name as much as possible. That is easily one of the biggest properties for Marvel.

Yeah, except the movies aren't really for Marvel...they're made by Fox Studios, not Marvel Studios. It's in Marvel's interest to push their "in house" brands over Fox's licensed brands.

That, and I think the very rushed production schedule for this movie didn't really give Hasbro enough time to do an action figure line. If the movie is a big hit we might see figures inspired by it later on down the line (as you mentioned with the X3 figures in Marvel Legends).

However as I said, I'm thinking we'll likely get a lot of X-Men love in the Marvel Universe line this year (and next year, for that matter). Sort of as an indirect tie-in to the movie.

XMO:W was produced by Fox as well and received a good action figure push. Spider-Man was produced by Sony and received full support for all 3 films.

But I do have to agree that it is probably in Marvel's best interest to give priority to their "in-house" brands. The movie's schedule is indeed incredibly rushed, especially so considering the high-profile of the franchise. We haven't heard anything yet about toys and the movie comes out in, what, 3 months? I'm sure Hasbro has their hands full with MU, Cap Movie and Thor movie for now. My hopes aren't high for toys, but like I said earlier, I can't imagine them not attempting to capitalize.

At least Diamond Select has said that they plan on doing some stuff for the film.

You'd be surprised what hollywood can do on a low budget.

The price tags for others being so high has a lot to do with the set pieces.
Look at X-Men 1, most of that went to extravagant set pieces. The movie itself really had minimal action.

Now look at scott pilgrim, it had a tiny budget compared to almost all marvel movies, and yet it's by far had the most action and fight scenes.

Budget doesn't equate a good movie or even great scenes. Just remember that.

Even Kickass had a smaller budget, and the hitgirl scenes, among others were amazing choreography. Now I do have complaints about kickass, but that has more to do with how it was changed to please audiences... Hmm, funny that, a movie not being liked because it tried to please people as opposed to doing it's own vision.

Yeah, but none of those characters had to swing from skyscraper to skyscraper. I already saw another picture of the Spider-man reboot webslinging only 10 feet off the ground on to a truck. They have to do live-action because it cost too much for speacial effects. They are already saying the movie is full of High School angst. I'll pass on that to.

And the difference between that, and the collage angst that the first three were full of, would be? ;)

If it's done as well as the high school angst in Spectacular, or Ultimate, then count me in.

What college angst? He missed a few college assignments, that's not angst. He was too busy fighting crime, Trying to pay his bills, and trying not to get killed by super villians for any college angst.

They are trying to make Spider-man into Twilight. Even the Ultimate universe it's suppose to be based on didn't have that much high school angst in it.

Hey, you guys want to see these movies, go right ahead. Myself and others have been disappointed enough.