PDA

View Full Version : X-Men: Days of Future Past (SPOILERS!)


Ishara
06-04-2014, 08:44 AM
Okay, I'm betting many of you have seen this already. I saw it last week and have been geekily mulling it over since then.

Bearing in mind that I didn't read the Chris Claremont comic, I have so many questions, and wikipedia can't help. So, in true TL fashion, let's go through this together, shall we?

So, we're told that this movis is supposed to both sequel to X-Men: Last Stand, and X-Men: First Class. Fine. We open in a dystopic future, looks terrible. We're told by Professor X that after an event in 1973, Mystique was captured and experimented upon for 50 years. Which takes us to 2023 (what we assume to be the present). So - already - this can't be the sequel to all the previous movies since she was alive and behaving badly in all previous films. Right? So the Sentinels storyline was simply bypassed in the previous films because it's essentially a different reality?

Is it that simple? Have I missed something?

Isabel
06-04-2014, 12:16 PM
Okay, I'm betting many of you have seen this already. I saw it last week and have been geekily mulling it over since then.

Bearing in mind that I didn't read the Chris Claremont comic, I have so many questions, and wikipedia can't help. So, in true TL fashion, let's go through this together, shall we?

So, we're told that this movis is supposed to both sequel to X-Men: Last Stand, and X-Men: First Class. Fine. We open in a dystopic future, looks terrible. We're told by Professor X that after an event in 1973, Mystique was captured and experimented upon for 50 years. Which takes us to 2023 (what we assume to be the present). So - already - this can't be the sequel to all the previous movies since she was alive and behaving badly in all previous films. Right? So the Sentinels storyline was simply bypassed in the previous films because it's essentially a different reality?

Is it that simple? Have I missed something?

I think so.

Another thing about it, why would he need both Magneto and professor X to save Raven?
That didn't make any sense.

Zombie Sammael
06-05-2014, 10:55 PM
At least by the end of the story, X3 was no longer canon or a thing that happened in any way. I'm not a hundred percent sure, but I think Singer was basically ignoring any film he didn't make, hence why in the future Xavier was Patrick Stewart and not some random guy, Magneto was at full power, and Wolverine had metal claws.

I may have missed the 50 years bit, but I thought it just said Raven was captured and experimented on, not for 50 years. At some point before X-Men and X2 presumably she got out and joined up with Magneto again, I guess. I mean, the other explanation is that someone else with the same powers took on her name and appearance, which at least explains her looking like Rebecca Romijn in the first two films. :p

Reading the Claremont comic won't give you much insight into the plot of the film. It's a very loose adaptation. For example, in the comic it was Kitty Pryde herself who was sent back in time - by Wolverine and Jean Grey's daughter, Rachel!

Mort
06-06-2014, 05:42 AM
I may have missed the 50 years bit, but I thought it just said Raven was captured and experimented on, not for 50 years. At some point before X-Men and X2 presumably she got out and joined up with Magneto again, I guess.


Same interpretation.

In the new future of the X-men. Does the Sentinals still exists? We know Trask didn't get killed and started the whole "We need the Sentinals" but instead they made themselves known to the world by lifting up a goddamn stadium and trashed a few city blocks. Sounds like that Sentinal program is still in effect...

ShadowbaneX
06-06-2014, 07:03 AM
I may have missed the 50 years bit, but I thought it just said Raven was captured and experimented on, not for 50 years. At some point before X-Men and X2 presumably she got out and joined up with Magneto again, I guess. I mean, the other explanation is that someone else with the same powers took on her name and appearance, which at least explains her looking like Rebecca Romijn in the first two films. :p

Firstly, yeah, it wasn't that she was captured and experimented on for 50 years, she was captured, experimented on, escaped, and then 50 years later we get the Sentinels (which look suspiciously like the Destroyer from the Thor movie, but that's something else).

Also, no need for the same name, different powers explanation and it involves one little cameo I really liked about First Class. Not the Wolverine one, but the one where Erik goes to his room and finds Raven waiting there for him in his bed. He comments is that she's far too young to which her response is to shifts to an older version of herself, ie Rebecca Romijn.

Same interpretation.

In the new future of the X-men. Does the Sentinals still exists? We know Trask didn't get killed and started the whole "We need the Sentinals" but instead they made themselves known to the world by lifting up a goddamn stadium and trashed a few city blocks. Sounds like that Sentinal program is still in effect...

Seeing as how they were easily corrupted, used to shoot up a bunch of cop cars, and nearly got the President and a bunch of others killed by an 'insane' mutant and only saved by a very blue woman, yeah, I'm gonna go with 'no'...more or less by the point that they're still living in a utopia future which has Kitty teaching Architecture, Bobby & Rogue hooking up, Scott & Jean still alive, and Erik wandering the halls of the school. The only character that I cannot remember showing up there (well, aside from Nightcrawler) is Mystique.

Ishara
06-06-2014, 08:41 AM
I'm certain I heard the "experimented on for 50 years" part, but regardless, I think what we ended up seeing was an alternate present (with the War) as well as an alternate future (with Jean and Scott still alive).

Because, in the first alternate future (let's call is A1), the Sentinal project had been alive and working, and progressing, since 1973. Trask had at least 5 working prototypes when he was killed my Mystique. His company had Mystique, for however long. They used their access and experimentation on her to further advance and develop their Sentinals, which we know evolved with available technology. So in A1, the Sentinals were a constant threat to Mutants starting from 1973, and leaving us with the War and the A1 present we saw at the beginning of the film. All of that happens, regardless of how long they kept Mystique for. The previous movies never happened as we saw them, because their relaity was already different (let's call it A). There were *always* the Sentinels by the time we got to the time period of the first movie.

In the second alternate future (let's call it A2), Trask wasn't murdered by Mystique (or anyone), he was declared insane and incarcerated (you see pictures of him in a straight jacket). The Sential program was abandoned and never got off the ground. So, certainly closer to our future A, but still different because of the existence of Jean and Scott.

I think that the next movie will have essentially retconned everything so it now falls into the A2 storyline. Should be good!

As a total aside, the use of Jennifer Lawrence and not Rebecca Romijn was entirely because they were rebooting the series with younger actors, and she was the younger version of Mystique. You're 100% correct in the cameo, SBX. It was meant to show what Mystique would look like in the future, as an older self.

Also, what happened to Alex Summers? I suppose in the movies, he's not Cyclop's little brother? So, he was drafted from the school (along with Toad?), Mystique freed him in Vientnam, and then what? I love/hate little cameos like that.

And how are they addressing the fact that Angel is one of the four horsemen seen at the end?

Tomp
06-06-2014, 02:02 PM
I think I heard somewhere that the next one will be set in the 80's with the younger team.
Maybe we will be reintroduced to younger versions of Storm and Cyclops as well.

I liked how Singer gave the finger to the non-Singer movies and fixed all the continuity problems from those movies.

I guess all of you got the after credit scene.

Zombie Sammael
06-06-2014, 09:50 PM
And how are they addressing the fact that Angel is one of the four horsemen seen at the end?

Death doesn't necessarily have to be Angel/Archangel. Off the top of my head, Wolverine, Gambit, and at least one completely new character have all served as Death. I would imagine that if they use the Horsemen from Egyptian times in the next movie, they will all be completely new characters.

As to the rest, that's one interpretation. My personal view was that the horrible future was the post-X3 world, with it being removed by DOFP. But it is both awfully muddy, and not necessarily something you need to worry about to enjoy any of the movies.

Frenzy
06-08-2014, 02:45 PM
I read the X-men comics religiously in the 80's. Still have most of them. Therefor I've only seen the first X-men movie. I start twitching just thinking about it.

Though it isn't anywhere NEAR as bad as i get when Michael Someone put a goddamn bullet in his junk Bay's mutilation of the Transformers comes up in conversation.

Sarevok
06-15-2014, 03:47 PM
Finally got around to seeing it last saturday. I really like it! :)
I did have a problem that I could not stop hearing Tyrion whenever the scientist talked...

Zombie Sammael
06-15-2014, 08:25 PM
Finally got around to seeing it last saturday. I really like it! :)
I did have a problem that I could not stop hearing Tyrion whenever the scientist talked...

Davidus Tertius Rex: So, is Bolivar Trask a little person in the comics?

Me: No.

DTR: Hmm. I wonder why they cast Peter Dinklage then.

Me: Because they could cast PETER F***ING DINKLAGE, maybe?

DTR: ...point.

Ishara
06-18-2014, 08:33 AM
Exactly.

I saw him in real life a few weeks ago - he's shooting in Toronto, and happened to be walking past my building downtown as I was out for lunch. The man has precense about him. Holy moly!

eht slat meit
06-18-2014, 09:57 PM
It was mildly entertaining, but failed to move me in any sort of meaningful way - and I'm a long time fan of the X-Men who is familiar with the source material for these movies. More importantly, I'm a fan that doesn't expect movies to live and die by the source material, and fully expect that they're going to be entirely different creatures than the paper they spawned from.

Yet, I don't really get anything from these movies other than fleeting entertainment, and I foresee the Apocalypse movie not just being lackluster but something straight off the cutting room floor.

Too much Wolverine, not enough diversity of plot as well as character, and nothing that really wows me about seeing it on the big screen.