Originally posted by xmarksthespot
How is he a combination of Cyclops and Wolverine?
He's close to Cyclops as in, his power is a purplish energy explosive in some sorts, and he's like Wolverine due to his attitude, his loner ability and his anger, and so forth. Not with the adamantium or anything lol
Originally posted by NoFate007
He's close to Cyclops as in, his power is a purplish energy explosive in some sorts, and he's like Wolverine due to his attitude, his loner ability and his anger, and so forth. Not with the adamantium or anything lol
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Cyclops absorbs solar radiation, and transmutes it into concussive force which is emitted as a beam from his eyes. His power is uncontrollable; which is as important a distinction from Gambit's power as the actual power, charging objects with kinetic energy - which has no specific drawbacks. I wouldn't say their powers are alike.
And in terms of character, Wolverine is far more complex than Gambit, who has a relatively simplistic personality. 😛
I'm talking in a general sense. That's the reason that he wasn't given a big part, Singer said it himself. There are all your differences but think about it, if there was another person that could shoot lightning out, would they be necessary while we have Storm? Get what I mean? Wolverine's been granted the a-hole of the group so to speak, and Cyclops has been granted the solitary role of the energy guy. Jean is the love interest with the mental powers, Storm is storm as she always is, Rogue is the McGuffin in the first film and the experimental weapon, Bobby's the supporter. There's archetypes and such, although "supporter" and such aren't the real terms, if you research it, there's really only room for one character of each in a plot. If you have 10 main characters, and 3 of them have the attitudes of Gambit and Logan, then there's nothing special about that.
Originally posted by Britrogue
They did replace Pyro. That wasn't Aaron Stanford that played him in the first movie.
Yeah, that's what I was saying. Pyro, Beast and Shadowcat are the only 3 major characters that they've replaced so far, but they've replaced all the minors here and there. I think two different people played Jubilee for example.
The initial movie Pyro, Beast and Shadowcat weren't major characters they were cameos, so I'm not too fussed. Would you really cast the person you used in a tiny cameo in a expanded role e.g. would you cast Pyro 1 in the role that Aaron Stanford played, or Beast 1 in the role Kelsey Grammar will play, when you know the role is going to be far more demanding.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
The initial movie Pyro, Beast and Shadowcat weren't major characters they were cameos, so I'm not too fussed. Would you really cast the person you used in a tiny cameo in a expanded role e.g. would you cast Pyro 1 in the role that Aaron Stanford played, or Beast 1 in the role Kelsey Grammar will play, when you know the role is going to be far more demanding.
Well, no, they definitely shouldn't keep the little cameo people. I didn't say they should, I was just simply stating that Kitty, Allerdyce and McCoy were the only 3 characters that are gonna be considered big roles, that have been played by more than one actor. Pyro was big in the 2nd one, Kitty and McCoy are gonna be big in #3, so that's true. They've had other versions of other minor characters, but none of the other big cast members have been recast besides those 3.
EG, Wolverine has always been Jackman, Storm has always been Berry, Jean has always been Famke, etc. Same goes for Cyclops, Magneto, Prof X, Mystique, Rogue, Bobby, so forth.
Wolverine is most likely gonna be the main character again, even though I doubt this story has much to do with him, but hey, Jackman is a producer, Wolverine is the most popular X-Man, and he's been the focus point of the first two. I love Wolverine, but I can see Professor X getting a lot of screentime on this one, and possibly Rogue too, even though I hate A.P. Who knows though, since they keep bottling so much stuff up.