X-Men: Days of Future Past

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Did you honestly expect Halle Barry or a cast of young noobie actors to carry the franchise & Hugh Jackman take a backseat as Wolverine.

I guess if they casted a relatively unknown actor to play Wolverine, that would've given the rest of the Xmen characters a better chance to shine.

Hugh Jackman was relatively unknown. He'd done less Hollywood work than Berry, Marsden or Paquin when he was brought in to play Logan, and he only got his audition, iirc, because of Russell Crowe putting in a good word to get him an audition.

X-Men was his breakout role.

Honestly, I misunderstood your original point, as I thought you meant Logan being more mature than the others. Either way, yeah, Jackman was a noob when he was brought in.

I know Crowe was originally casted before suggesting Jackman...

The thing is, from an Australian perspective, Jackman was already making a name for himself in America...he already shared starring role in Swordfish but chose to pursue Broadway than the big screen.
He literally went from playing a gay icon on stage to Marvel's most iconic character.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I know Crowe was originally casted before suggesting Jackman...

The thing is, from an Australian perspective, Jackman was already making a name for himself in America...he already shared starring role in Swordfish but chose to pursue Broadway than the big screen.
He literally went from playing a gay icon on stage to Marvel's most iconic character.

Swordfish was after X-Men, I thought.

I'm sure that Australians would know him better than people from other countries, but I'd still argue that in Hollywood, it was still his breakout role. It was what made him a star.

I actually like Jackman as Wolverine. I couldn't stand Wolverine growing up, but Jackman actually makes him watchable, and I think he's done very well for himself.

That said, it's a movie about a superhero team. Even in Avengers, you still let Captain America shine a bit even though everyone loved Iron Man.

I just wanted Cyclops' role within the movies to be representative of his role in the comics. That's all. He was barely excusable in the first movie. Not at all in the second. And well, you know the third one.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Swordfish was after X-Men, I thought.

Wow. My memory's playing tricks with me.
I swear there was at least several years between both movies but apparently it was only one year!

Then again, I did see Swordfish on dvd release & the 1st XMen on the big screen...

Originally posted by -Pr-

That said, it's a movie about a superhero team. Even in Avengers, you still let Captain America shine a bit even though everyone loved Iron Man.

Admittedly, you can't beat Whedon when it comes to juggling multiple characters in a film. He has the ability to write a story & give each character their respected screen time.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Wow. My memory's playing tricks with me.
I swear there was at least several years between both movies but apparently it was only one year!

Then again, I did see Swordfish on dvd release & the 1st XMen on the big screen...

ah lol.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Admittedly, you can't beat Whedon when it comes to juggling multiple characters in a film. He has the ability to write a story & give each character their respected screen time.

that he does, and he had plenty of practice too, so i'm not surprised.

I just don't trust Singer when it comes down to it. I don't think he has the right sensibilities to adapt a comic book.

Originally posted by -Pr-

I just don't trust Singer when it comes down to it. I don't think he has the right sensibilities to adapt a comic book.

Well he did give us X1 & X2.
I don't think any other director would've shown Prof X & Magneto the respect that he did.

Originally posted by ares834
The movie presented the "real' Rouge. She only gets those powers after absorbing Ms. Marvel's and for some reason she kept them permanently.

And how many years ago did that happen in the comics? It should have been done in the movies by the 2nd or 3rd movie at the very latest. But I personally just would have set that from the beginning of the film series.

Originally posted by ares834
Wolverine was by far the most popular and famous of the X-men prior to the movies.

Nah Cyclops was easily as well known as Wolverine before the movies. It was like what- a couple of decades before Wolverine was even introduced into the X-Men. He's not the Original X-Man.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Well he did give us X1 & X2.
I don't think any other director would've shown Prof X & Magneto the respect that he did.

I thought X1 wasn't very good tbh. Found it kind of boring, and it wasn't exactly a massive hit at the time either. They should have used Sentinels for the first or second movie really.

I think anyone who understood the fundamental story and concept of the X-Men would have given Prof X, Magneto and Cyclops the respect they deserved.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER

Nah Cyclops was easily as well known as Wolverine before the movies.
.

I doubt it.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER

I thought X1 wasn't very good tbh. Found it kind of boring, and it wasn't exactly a massive hit at the time either.

I think anyone who understood the fundamental story and concept of the X-Men would have given Prof X, Magneto and Cyclops the respect they deserved.

Two pivotal scenes I remember from X1 was:
a) Logan's introduction as a cage fighter & then the fear & loathing that the patrons had for him after.

b)Magneto VS the police, turning their own fire-arms against them.

The audience reaction to those scenes was literally, "WHOAH WOW!"

As for Cyclops, he might've been just as popular to Wolverine in the comics but Marsden's portrayal of him was very uppity & snobbish, attributes that audiences don't want to relate to. Especially when you have a rugged anti-hero like Wolverine in the mix.

Originally posted by Kazenji
I doubt it.

I think he was. Anyone who watched the cartoons will remember Cyclops. Anyone who didn't and just saw pics, I'm pretty sure the visor always stood out.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Two pivotal scenes I remember from X1 was:
a) Logan's introduction as a cage fighter & then the fear & loathing that the patrons had for him after.

b)Magneto VS the police, turning their own fire-arms against them.

The audience reaction to those scenes was literally, "WHOAH WOW!"

The Mags vs Police scene was good and probably the highlight of the movie. But overall I found it pretty MEH as a movie. X2 was definitely an entertaining sequel though.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
As for Cyclops, he might've been just as popular to Wolverine in the comics but Marsden's portrayal of him was very uppity & snobbish, attributes that audiences don't want to relate to. Especially when you have a rugged anti-hero like Wolverine in the mix.

The reason for that was the way Cyclops was put in the script, not really bothered who they were casting for the role, as compared to the Wolverine casting, and the Director just not giving a rats ass about the character.

And as pissed as I am about the whole Cyclops thing, my annoyance isn't just about him. It's more that I feel like I've paid for a team up movie, but got a Wolverine plus friends movie instead. Not what I paid for. When I go to watch Wolverine Origins, then as bad as that movie was, at least I knew what I was paying for going in. Singer and Fox clearly didn't get the concept of a team up movie at the time. Whedon and Marvel have shown them how it's done now, and I'm sure that will reflect and lessons learned in DOFP. This movie won't be all Wolverine.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Singer and Fox clearly didn't get the concept of a team up movie at the time. Whedon and Marvel have shown them how it's done now, and I'm sure that will reflect and lessons learned in DOFP. This movie won't be all Wolverine.

Well we've seen Raimi bow out of his own franchise when Sony wanted to be instrumental to Spidey's direction.

I can only guess that Fox made it clear to Singer that they only wanted to see a profit regardless of upsetting a fan base.

I can also see Whedon benefitting a lot from Singer's mistakes.
I mean let's not mention The FF & give Singer credit to handling the 1st superhero team up movie.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Well we've seen Raimi bow out of his own franchise when Sony wanted to be instrumental to Spidey's direction.

I can only guess that Fox made it clear to Singer that they only wanted to see a profit regardless of upsetting a fan base.

They were under this strange idea that to make profit it has to be All About Wolverine. But I've said from Day 1 that's BS. And Avengers proved it.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I can also see Whedon benefitting a lot from Singer's mistakes.
I mean let's not mention The FF & give Singer credit to handling the 1st superhero team up movie.

Whedon always knew his comic books and team up's, and didn't really need to learn anything off Singer Imho.

Sorry but I just don't see the first two X-Men as proper team up movies. Did he do a good job of introducing Wolverine and mutants? Yes. Did he do a good job doing a "Team-Up" movie? Not IMHO. A team up movie would have been, Wolverine fights Sabertooth, while Cyclops fights Mystique, and Storm and Jean Grey go rescue Rogue from Magneto. But Wolverine fighting Mystique, then Sabretooth, then rescuing Rogue- while Storm and Jean Grey help levitate him so he can be the hero... No sorry that's not a team up movie.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Well he did give us X1 & X2.
I don't think any other director would've shown Prof X & Magneto the respect that he did.

I think X1 is barely passable.

I think X2 is crap, for the most part.

I do like the Charles and Erik stuff. But otherwise, they're bad X-Men movies imo.

You can consider them bad "X MEN" movies. But they're still good movies

Originally posted by Firefly218
You can consider them bad "X MEN" movies. But they're still good movies

Not to the extent that it makes them any more watchable to me, but sure.

Originally posted by Firefly218
You can consider them bad "X MEN" movies. But they're still good movies

Most people agree X3 is just a bad movie. I personally also think X1 was nothing special. But I know what you mean. I liked X2 as a movie, even though I hated it as a fan.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Not to the extent that it makes them any more watchable to me, but sure.

Fair enough

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Most people agree X3 is just a bad movie. I personally also think X1 was nothing special. But I know what you mean. I liked X2 as a movie, even though I hated it as a fan.

X3 is the most badly made of the trilogy in almost every way; It's hard to argue otherwise.

My only comment on Ratner, would be that I honestly think he has a better grasp of action and the scope of such action than Singer does. The Magneto convoy, the big fight scene at the end? That's superhero action. Singer let us down on that part, imo.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Most people agree X3 is just a bad movie. I personally also think X1 was nothing special. But I know what you mean. I liked X2 as a movie, even though I hated it as a fan.

Maybe it's because I was young when I last saw X3, but I remember actually enjoying it. 😬