X-MEN

No, wait, STRONG GUY!

The two characters have a personality as distinct as night and day, however they share long hair, agility, thrown weapons, stunningly good looks, a mysterious history and a love interest in Rogue.

Obv.

Longshot and Gambit have personalities
as distinct as night and day,
     however they share 
long hair 
agility
thrown weapons
stunningly good looks
a mysterious history
and a love interest 
     in Rogue.

Longshot and Gambit have personalities
as distinct as night and day,
     however they share 
long hair 
agility
thrown weapons
stunningly good looks
a mysterious history
and a love interest 
     in Rogue.
As a result of this,
it has dinosaurs.

He only says that because he wants to eat ice cream out of Halle Berry's ass.

"The two characters have a personality..."

1) Only one?
2) SEZ YOU.

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/gallery/2003/04/29/cyclops.jpg

Anybody else seen the new one yet. It had a couple of days premiere before it starts a full schedule on Friday. &it was cheap in the afternoon so I went.
Not sure hnx it fits with the rest of the Marvel cinema thing is there any overlap?
Anyway did seem a bit dumb but it is a !.2A. Does seem to take itself more seriously than I could. Maybe that's why I couldn't see an active thread for it?

Days Of Future Past thread. Believe that this great graphic is current. It'll give you an idea of which properties can share the same sandbox. Potentially, the X-Men could meet the FF or Deadpool (who already pulled Colossus over). Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, as characters in both X-Men and Avengers comics, look like the only overlap.

So happy that egos/money have allowed Spider-Man to cross over into Marvel Studios territory.

Weird release schedule. How come US get an American film released 9 days later than us?

This got 8.1 on Imdb I think which seems a bit odd. Wonder what others will think.
Looks ok and has some ok action scenes. But attempts at portentousness ain't that successful.

It's been the same with other recent Marvel movies too, like Civil War - they're released a week earlier in Europe than in the US. And I've noticed the same happening with some other Hollywood genre movies too. I've no idea why this has become a common practice.

Is it just me or has the promotion/ publicity push for this been pretty absent?

this movie was garbage: Oscar Isaac grunting through a Gamorrean Guard mask painted blue. Whole cast visibly bored.

xpost Compared to the other superhero movies released this spring (whose marketing was ubiquitous and inescapable), for sure.

I don't know, I feel like I've seen Olivia Munn chopping a car in half about a billion times by now.

I've not heard great things about this. Re: Apocalypse specifically, why would you slather Isaac of all people in prosthetics and not even attempt to make him look like the actual character? It's not nearly as egregious, but it reminds me of the insulting depiction of Galactus in the second Fantastic Four movie. If you aren't going to take advantage of an iconic character design that practically begs for a one-to-one translation from page to screen, why even bother? It's like making Wolverine just some dude who runs around carrying knives.

I think the design of Galactus works incredibly well on the comic book page and in animation and would look outrageously silly in a live-action film.

He doesn't have to necessarily be purple or have quite as many things projecting out of his face, but any ballpark depiction would've been a vast improvement over a cloud.

I expect the makers of Thanos are gonna have the same problem: how do you make this simian-like beast in blue convincing? And you still have the problem of 6000 characters needing a line or two to remind audiences that they exist.

My preview audience didn't laugh or applaud much, and it wasn't because there were critics in the audience (I was the only one, and I yawned once loudly).

GOTG did remarkably well with Ronan the Accuser & Thanos is looking not too shabby; I think a similarly muted approach to Galactus could work. Oh and there was that one shot of the Celestial in the Collector's educational reel.

I can confirm that Fassbender looks hot as a Polish steel factory worker, like the guy in Go West's "We Close Our Eyes" video.

Did I see that right, did the Sydney Opera House get destroyed for no real reason?
&the Golden Gate bridge stay surprisingly intacj for something that's had holes ripped in it while cars are on it?
Just been reminded of Sydney for another reason.

Then as I was typing one of the Sky Broadband ads came on. I think there are a couple. Quicksilver hitting on a girl in the lounge. So he elaborately makes snacks etc.

Everything about Isaac's presence in this is befuddling

And they overplayed the Quicksilver joke naturally

It's like making Wolverine just some dude who runs around carrying knives.

Fox, are you listening? Please do this, I will buy a ticket to see how ridiculous your movie is

Is Hugh Jackman still much of a draw?
Wonder how much longer he'll be in the role.
Also if they'll get somebody of the right height and the right commonwealth country eventually.
He is like the last actor in the series who hasn't changed ain't he?

this movie was garbage: Oscar Isaac grunting through a Gamorrean Guard mask painted blue. Whole cast visibly bored.

― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:31 PM (8 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I feel like Jennifer Lawrence's people totally missed the MUST BE IN ALL SEQUELS clause when she signed her contract for the reboot.

Yeah this is pretty terrible. The advertising has been pretty full-on here - every other bus has a shot of James McAvoy and his Sex Perverts. Also with the Sky Fibre ads (even before this film!).

how do you make this simian-like beast in blue convincing?

Haha how indeed? They could have addressed it in any way of course, and just walked into a pothole instead.

I wonder whether they considered doing a Suicide Squad on this, and remaking it at the last minute in the light of their previous film - in this case Deadpool, which takes much joy in mocking the po-faced nature of X-Men films, and this film is more po-faced than all of the others together and super long and incredibly loud and urgh.

I really wanted to like it too, but it's just pointless moving of stuff around and bellowing about humanity and evolution and strength.

It's totally po-faced. But they still managed to cram in a load of crap winky meta-jokes

kind of interested in this cos Age of Apocalypse was the last x-Men comic storyline i remember.

xp He's got Wolverine 3 next year and that's it apparently.

McAvoy / Hoult / Fassbender / Lawrence are apparently contractually done but the first three may come back for good script. This was supposed to set up the 'new' X-Men, but damned if I care about anyone much in it.

Apparently this was going to be 'age of' as well but they thought it might be overload after Avengers: Age of Ultron and Transformers: Age of Extinction, despite the fact that everyone on the planet has already forgotten the latter film.

xxp I can only remember when they go to the movies and the last line at Wolverine, but I may have been rolling my eyes while others were happening.

Oh yeah forgot to mention seeing a Suicide Squad poster up in the cinema when I went to see this. Is release August or sooner? Not seen anything about the film outside of mentions on threads here.

Also missed pre release hype on this new Xmen. Now seeing mainly Sky related ads.
I think I was semi surprised to see that this was Singer since I didn't think it felt like the initial couple. Though that was 16 years ago. I actually went to the first one several times. Couldn't see myself doing that with this.
I remember thinking that 3 had a pretty different feel which seemed glossier, shallower, younger than the previous 2. Thought at the time that had to do with Singer going to do Superman.
Now not remembering feel of previous 2 with the new cast too well. Think the time travel one might be closer to the 1st one.
This new one feels as schlocky as 3.

Seemed weird that Wolverine's healing factor didn't seem to be working on some cuts on his face and possibly back too.

&if anybody is going to see this, there is an extra scene at the end of the credits which looks like it might lead up to his next film.

so... this movie is batshit and amazing. for a genuinely bad and silly movie it has an improbably high number of legitimately powerful scenes and beats (and one all-time gif-worthy reaction shot.)

oscar isaac as apocalypse is completely wasted, of course... but oscar isaac as jeffrey tambor as apocalypse is incredible. in 5 years when my memory of this thing is hazy people are going to have to remind me it was oscar isaac because all i'll remember is jeffrey tambor.

Not sure if everyone in the world has seen it but it's a classic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYSyvIbTAJA

I'm being dragged this week. Please tell me Jeffrey Tambor is actually in this.

Stoked to see this today

Bring a pillow.

I pinky swear from the moment he shows up in the 20th century you'll believe it's Jeffrey Tambor and you'll enjoy the movie more bc of that.

pfft Alfred it is often dull but so batshit I honestly found it entertaining in a meta way

For me, if a movie consists of clamor in Gamorrean Guard masks, it's dull. It can't be dull and batshit at once.

I'm not sure who I thought the Apocalypse actor was. Don't think it was Tambour might have been Geoffrey Rush. Definitely didn't think it looked like the non make-upped Isaac.

This is like when I first saw the trailer for No Country For Old Men and thought that Javier Bardem's character was played by the brother from Everyone Loves Raymond

so... this movie is batshit and amazing. for a genuinely bad and silly movie it has an improbably high number of legitimately powerful scenes and beats (and one all-time gif-worthy reaction shot.)

oscar isaac as apocalypse is completely wasted, of course... but oscar isaac as jeffrey tambor as apocalypse is incredible. in 5 years when my memory of this thing is hazy people are going to have to remind me it was oscar isaac because all i'll remember is jeffrey tambor.

― Larry Elleison (rogermexico.), Sunday, May 29, 2016 2:58 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

OTM. I loved this movie. Relentless fun. Why use a name actor like Oscar Isaac if you're just going to make him unrecognizable and pitch his voice down?

Jesus, I really wish the version I saw could be described as "relentless fun".

can we spoil yet? or at least to whatever extent that this sloppy mess can be considered "spoiled"?

i admittedly have zero investment in X-Men and didn't see the first two in this trilogy, maybe i was just in a good mood

I saw the first two in this trilogy but couldn't tell you a thing that happened in them.

First was getting the team together in the swinging 60s, had no continuity boondoggles, and there was the possibility the other films would be brushed under the rug

Then Singer came back in, had a weird nonspecific future setting, and directly linked it with the earlier films with the ending acting as a reboot of the prior films.

Also a lot of 70s paranoia, far better used than the 80s this time.

Saw this last night. It was okay. If it had come out prior to the advent of the MCU, people would've been hailing it as Superheroes Done Right (such were the low standards back in the day). I didn't really give a shit about anyone in it or anything that happened, but it was decent portentous action with superpowers. I'll admit that I probably wouldn't give it even half a break if it didn't feature characters I'm invested in on a broader level. So much more could've been done with Apocalypse but I don't know if Fox has rights to the Celestials or any of that.

Just now realized that like Psylocke and Apocalypse were the only major characters making their cinematic debut. Which is pretty inexcusable when you have a comics cast of hundreds to choose from. Gonna be so miffed if Maggot isn't in the next one.

Lockheed or bust

Psylocke has previously been in either x2 or x3, I forget which

This had a couple of affecting Magneto moments, and I actually liked the kid actors this time around (Nightcrawler in a Thriller was adorable), but way too busy and, at times, incomprehensible (why are they fighting in a dream sequence at the same time as they're fighting in real life? what the fuck actually happened at the end there?). Butt-ugly FX too, but I'm getting used to that.

*Thriller jacket

this was ok, but I watched something like 5 x men movies in the past two weeks and it was one of my least favorite. It's the worst of the second trilogy for certain (first class is great, days of future passed is pretty good too); and it's much worse than the 2nd Wolverine movie, which is probably the best plotted of any of these films.

Fassbender should have worn an undershirt for entire movie imo

he was emulating this look:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4FtrKfZ0Lo

hoping for my friends who love Fassbender cheesecake scenes that this Assasin's Creed film pays off

Walter Chaw praised the film for spending an abnormal amount of time on casualties, notably Fassbender's family and the factory workers. I appreciate this up to the point that the film starts engaging in the usual tasteless disaster porn. I do agree with his point that a standalone Magneto film would be the way to go the next time out, though.

yeah he's the most interesting character of this batch.

also i wouldn't mind it if they returned to the original cast and explained wtf happened after X3 and why Charles Xavier is alive in Days of Future Passed.

they pretended X3 didn't happen, then they did a hard reboot so it definitely didn't happen

only Wolverine remembers that timeline

except Jean died, that happened

Which reminds me, the in-joke diss of X3 in the new one was tacky.

this movie is also a third entry so I figured it was a reference to itself.

anyway if they just made movies about wolverine that were as good as that wolverine in japan movie I'd be happy.

but that wolverine in japan movie was terrible!

Maybe it would be better to ask this in one of the threads on the comics in particular, but what latter-day X books (like, written after the Morrison and Whedon runs) are worth reading?

no, the wolverine in japan movie was cool

I think the first wolverine movie is supposed to suck, dunno, didn't bother

xpost Remender's Uncanny X-Force is highly recommended as a follow-up to those two runs. I really like Marjorie Liu's Astonishing run. Some of the only Claremont-ian relationshippy X-books of recent years. Paul Cornell's Wolverine stuff is good. Uhhh...trying to think of stuff that isn't mired in X-lore.

wolverine in japan succeeded in having the structure of an actual movie and plot/character development, but felt kind of flat and hindered by the jean flashbacks/dreams

Thanks, OL; I'll probably check out the Liu run first.

Her run comprises like four or five trades that you should be able to find fairly cheap at this point. They're also in the process of reprinting her NYX and X-23 stuff. She's not showy but I really dig her emphasis on the relationships between characters.

she's an excellent comics writer. Monstress is amazing

I've been curious about that since she kinda snuck up on my radar.

Cool; I think my library has most of the Liu trades, and I always tended to read the X series with more interest in character interaction/development than in continuity puzzles, so I'll start there.

If you're looking for BIG X-Men that isn't necessarily new reader friendly, I'd recommend Brubaker's Rise and Fall of the Shi'ar Empire, Mike Carey's run on X-Men/X-Men Legacy (he did some great stuff with developing Rogue), Victor Gischler's Curse of the Mutants (yes, the vampire thing, which I was pre-emptively super dismissive towards but which won me over)...uhhhhh...most of the big crossovers from recent years have been good. Messiah Complex and Manifest Destiny were solid.

Liu is Junot Díaz's girlfriend

Yeah, I just recently found that out.

Peter David's X-Factor is also good on character development but it's also pretty much one ten-year-long story.

Oh, Swierczynski's Cable is one of my favorites from the past decade. Big, crazy action and good character development.

Saw this today and surprised how much I enjoyed it on a big dumb action movie level. There were plenty of plot holes but nothing so egregious that it took me out of the story -- curious to know what Roger Mexico thought was so crazy about it! Like I could've used way more action!

The Horsemen were underused, but I was ridiculously giddy at watching Jean go nuclear.

I liked the Bendis run on X-Men but it's best if you just stop halfway through and pretend he died or something

good christ apocalypse was terrible - easily up there with wolverine origins and last stand as the most risible x-men movies

i was particularly annoyed by the fact that the final, world-shattering battle all took place on about 20 feet of set standing in for a single intersection in cairo, the least inspiring backdrop for a finale i can remember. at least the end of the first avengers film alleviated the obviousnessness of its overpass set with some airborne action!

Any X-Men movie that would cut out its scenes of mutants hanging out at the mall fundamentally misunderstands its source material.

this movie should've been set on fire

20 feet of set comment is... oh god, it's so right

No doubt they used green screen and CGI for those 20 feet, too.

first class wasn't a great film, but it had characters more interesting than anything that'd been done in the franchise for a very long time

it's as if bryan singer saw that the franchise could have some life, threw it in the bathtub with days of future past (the near-future scenes were a boring dirge that approached the lifelessness of his last film, and the past scenes with the younger actors started out fine but quickly devolved into character in-fighting that ended with the barely-understandable final action piece), and then tried to drown it in the bathtub with this one

Any X-Men movie that would cut out its scenes of mutants hanging out at the mall fundamentally misunderstands its source material.

there was maybe five minutes of 'normal life at the mansion' scenes which recalled the spirit of claremont but they got dumped double-quick in favour of poor oscar isaac joylessly teleporting around the world and giving people haircuts which turned them evil

what I got out of this movie is that mutants have powers, and they fight a lot

Bryan Singer does not get the appeal of the X-Men. But his movies make money so this is probably as good as cinematic X-Men are going to get.

(TBF, though, half the people who write X-Men comics don't seem to get the appeal of the X-Men either.)

there are a few angles of appeal and somehow singer made at least two films without finding any of them

A general rule with films like these is if that if I have to have someone explaining to me what is happening on screen with some variation of "in the comics, it is explained that..." which was the case with this film, then the movie can fuck off.

imo additional context makes this one worse

there's so much terribly delivered exposition in this

Rose Byrne gets saddled with some particularly horrifying dialogue

I just remembered that Havok's death was so unclearly depicted that the movie was almost over by the time I realized that he'd actually died.

Is anyone still reading Krakoa X-Men or have we all tapped out

I was deep into mutant stuff in 5th-10th grades and then dropped out. Started following a x-men cover thing on twitter and I'm stunned at how awful some of the 90's stuff looked. Just... ugh. The logos themselves are hideous, and seeing the bastard children of Jim Lee and Rob Leifeld barf barf barf was Slimer from the Ghost Busters in there at some point?

Did it actually get good again?

That was Doop.

Doop is awesome.

I'm reading more of it than I expected, I'll read nearly anything by Kieron Gillen and Ale Wing, and the current crossover (taking the three main titles 10/100/1000 years into a future where Sinister has succeeded in infecting the immortality process so that everyone is Sinister) is pretty wild.

Cow_Art - this is the foundation for the modern X-Men, if it sounds like something interesting - "Mutants can't die" as a foundation stone is at least an interesting start.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_X_and_Powers_of_X

Is Gambit still around? Gambit suuuuuuuuuuucked

First X-men I remember reading was on a road trip with my parents and I got it from a spinner rack in a gas station. I think the entire issue was Cyclops and Madeline (fake Jean Grey?) stranded in the ocean after their plane went down and fighting off a shark. The mix of action and soap opera really got to me.

I read whatever came out till March 2020 and enjoyed it. Then, during the pandemic, I subscribed to a bunch of comics in order to support my local comic store during the "strange times", and finally got them delivered to the house in a bundle sometime in 2021. By that point, there so many of them, it was too exhausting to comtemplate starting them. I have, like, the Jimmy Olsen series, some Ale Wing and Chip Zdarsky minis, the last year of Immortal Hulk, and way too many Hickman Krakoa X-Mens. I'll read them sometime, probably!

My desire to catch up was put off, somewhat, by the news that Hickman left.

Also I find Leinil Yu's work annoying to read!

My desire to catch up was put off, somewhat, by the news that Hickman left.

― Chuck_Tatum, Sunday, March 26, 2023 8:49 AM (eight hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

This

Plus there are constantly more and more and more series!

I may wait until this whole direction ends and then trawl to figure out which storylines are best regarded and buy those trades

good luck having those trades still be in print by the time you figure it out obv

Meantime

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv3Ss8o9gGQ