[trebleshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by loublanco1976

i'm down with the boycott but where is the venom for transformers? micheal bay has butchered that franchise into oblivion.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ludovicotek

No. Matthew Vaughn (Layer Cake, Stardust, Kick-Ass) is directing this time. There are rumors that Singer might possibly return to direct X-Men 4.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nakobass

Fox isn't even catering to the general audience at this point. The only reason they are making this crappy movie now, is so they can keep the rights to do so. It's the same thing with the Spider-man reboot. I understand everything cann't be exactly comic book accurate, but putting out crappy movies just to keep the rights, is a bad idea. We all lose in the end.

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.

Quote:

And if they really were thinking about the general audience, they would have the characters from X1 Cyclops, Storm, Jean Grey in this one. Most people have no idea who these new Characters are.

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.

Quote:

Valid points, but director Vaughn has already alluded to using some of the comics plot devices, such as alternate realities, specifically how it was used in the Star Trek reboot. Yes, this movie is technically a prequel, but I think there is room to play with some of the continuity of the films, much like is done within the comics. Who knows for sure. Emma Frost was is XMO:W and she is in XM:FC as well. That right there is an inconsistency as FC takes place prior to XMO:W. We know that Azazel has been confirmed to be in this movie, so maybe they have some ideas about playing with alternate dimensions and such.

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.

Quote:

I was incredibly let down by X3 and XMO:W. I keep trying to give them a chance but every time I try to watch them I end up disliking them even more. I still find myself having hopes that this movie won't suck ass. I'm down to watch it and at least give it a chance.

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by webz

No way of guaranteeing, but Marvel has a proven track record with Ironman. With Disney power behind it, it's ALMOST certain to be successful.

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.

Quote:

"Wolverine" was almost 80% taken from various comics. X3 also was almost 80% from various comics. A panel here, a quote there... didn't help that comics have retconned themselves so badly that keeping comics-accurate is impossible. The very fact that Wolverine has forearm claws was a retconn. In Hulk, the claws extended from his gloves. The first issues of Uncanny, that was continued. It wasn't for a few issues in that the retractable claws were penned in.

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.

Quote:

Other than Megatron tearing Jazz in half, and the fight in the forest, there was NOTHING for me with the TF movies. They insulted the intelligence almost as bad as the Bruce Willis/ Tracy Morgan buddy-cop film.

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

Quote:

Story was weak, but not many continuity errors. Sabretooth has gone feral over the course of 40+ years... who knows what happened to him? The Deadpool blades will NOT be in the Deadpool movie according to both Reynolds and producers.

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.

Quote:

That's the problem with ALL movie versions of Luthor. This one was no different. "New Krypton" was just a Superman-proof real estate scam. I prefer the more recent Uber-patriot, anti-alien war monger Luthor. Far more dangerous than the Realtor from hell.

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 ).

Quote:

That was so poorly handled I just chapter-skip those scenes.

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