Also, no way in hell did Civil War give Spidey depth.

Thinking about it, one of the issues with comparing the MCU to the X-Men's backstories is that the MCU characters are all individual franchises unto themselves. Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Hulk and Antman have all had their own individual movies to flesh out the characters and give non-fans an introduction to who they are. Saving the team-up movies for development and action.

The X-Men, other than Wolverine, pretty much come as a team, and with so many characters, it's difficult to introduce each character in the films, whilst giving us an in-depth look at who they are and then to develop where they're going.

I mean, Captain America and Iron work as solo movies... you think anyone would give a shit about a Cyclops solo film? Or a Storm movie? They gotta make do with what they can.

The Last Stand was the worst X-Men movie to date outside of Origins. It's definitely the worst one I've seen. And yes, Spidey had plenty of depth. They gave you what he was all about in his first scene. You knew what he stood for and why, in that universe, in one scene.

Whether or not people would see a Cyclops stand alone is an irrelevant question. These characters have no drive or motive. Raven, Charles and Eric have drive and motive. You can give that to the other characters without devoting a whole film or even more than a few minutes of screen time here or there. Not a 2 hour character study.

From his small role in civil war we know that he is a financially strapped very intellegent teenager struggling to come to terms with the powers and what that means for him and the people around who attempts to balance his life as the amazing spider-man with his life as peter parker student and nefew. Avec smartass. Thats every ounce of depth the character has had or ever will have. Amd it was all in 7 minute scene.

Okay. Let's take Scott for example. He developed powers he could not control. His brother, former XMen, took him to professor X to get help. Hank and Charles help him control his powers. Scott's brother then dies by Apoc. So he has a revenge motives due to his brother getting killed and the trust he built with Charles and Hank because they helped/are helping him control his powers. Plus, the world is ending.

What more do you want from a side character?

So why does he want to go to the school? Does he want to control his powers? Does he want to use them for good? Evil? Does he want them at all? When did he say he wanted revenge? He was essentially forced into action because of the mansion disaster. Not because he stood up and decided to lead.

And he never learned to control his powers. He just puts on glasses that blocks them. It's an on and off switch for him with no control over how much.

He was given zero motive in this movie. "My eyes shoot lasers" is a plot tool to insert him, not a character trait. See Destor explaining Spidey's Civil War scene to notice the difference.

He goes to the school because he can't open his eyes without blasting everything he sees. Or should he just close his eyes for the rest of his left.

I doubt he had time to decide if he wants to use his powers for good or bad yet. He was going off the guidance of his brother. Pretty sure it's not really needed for him to say he is sad that his brother died and would want to get back st who murdered him. He also didn't lead amything because he's still like 15 years old.

Those glasses con trolled his powers a hell of a lot better than not having them.

Anything else? Once again, he is a side character too.

Dude you'll probably enjoy movies a lot more if you don't take 'em so seriously.

I mean, Ruien is pretty much spot on in my opinion.

It's all opinions though, I don't really care how anyone perceives movies tbh.

And you want answers to all those questions about every single member of the team in a 2 hour long movie?

It takes a few minutes. You act like they have to give him 2 hours to flesh this out. They don't. It's takes one conversation. Like Destor pointed out, Spider-Man had one scene and you knew him. Same got T'Chala.

I'm not asking a lot here. These characters weren't anything more than super powers with names. They deserve better and the movie is served better if They were more than that.

Plus, Spidey went to fight Cap America because Stark asked. But Scott has less motive?

Spidey clearly says he wants to make a difference. That's why he joined with Stark. It was all there.

So I will assume you conceive to my Scott points.

Why is Stark even asking a kid to come fight Cap fucking America where he could easily die. Also, he wants to make a difference so he's going to fight Cap fucking America without really knowing all the facts?

This is also all moot because it has nothing to do with XMen. But you are ignoring my points about Scott's character and want to change the subject completly.

Concede to what points exactly?

Quoting for a third time. But you will ignore it and change the subject again.

I actually answered that. It's not motive. It's a plot tool to insert him into the story. Him having lasers shooting out of his eyes is not motive. Of course it's used to get him to Xavier. Beyond that there's nothing there. We don't know what he thinks of himself, his powers, what he wants to do with them

Quicksilver was explained in his intro scene in the last one. He is aimless because his father, who he has never met, abandoned him and he's lacking guidance and purpose for his powers so he uses them steal. Xavier gives him a reason to use them for good, it sticks with him, as does the identity of his father, and that's sorta expanded on here by finally deciding he'd like to join the gang. Simple. One scene. Some dialogue. And now you know who he is and what he's about. A side character getting some motive.

Scott clearly knew he was different and had trouble adapting early. But that's it. He gets sunglasses and that's the end of it. Nothing else about him id's expanded on.

You said it was a revenge story for him. Where's the part where he wants revenge? You can assume that's what he wants but it's not even implied. He goes after Stryker to save the crew and then fights Apocalypse to save Xavier and the world. Why? Well he just happened to be there so why not I guess.

The kid ends up being a leader. We know this is going to happen. At no point do they even hint that this a character trait for him. He has no character traitsl. He's a kid with eyes that shoot lasers. That's it.

They did a fine job with Jean. We got it and we got it early. A few lines here and there, one bad dream and a brief convo with Xavier and now you know who Jean is, why she's there, and what she looks to accomplish. In one scene and a few lines. She's a side character.

It's not hard. These are all common complaints in virtually every review of this film. It wasn't panned out trashed but this who did not enjoy or found to be whatever are saying he same things. It doesn't mean it's a terrible movie nor does it mean you can't like it or enjoy it. If you liked it, great. I didn't hate it. I thought it was ok. I found things to be lackingl. I'm clearly not the only one.

Damien the issue with your cyclops "lack of motive" is it is the inly motive he ever had. He had uncontrollable powers that needed to be controlled so goes to the only people who can help him. Hes a natural leader and when shit hits the fan he dives in to help others. What more is there to Scott Summers?

You can't be serious.... his fucking brother was murdered. Do you seriously need him to say "man, my brother just died. I néed to get my revenge"? Yes they lack overall depth but to say he has none does not make sense. Everything is there. But he's a side character. He has just as much depth as every other side character in a movie.

You can't be serious. No way. Your ignoring so many things to make your points.

You realize if he loses Charles and Hank then the one place where he knows mutants are accepted and cam help him then he will be alone again. You know, because his brother was murdered. That's more than enough motive to help Hank after he is captured.

Plus he is a teenager that just wants to be a hero.

Not sure why you take do much issue with me not caring for the film followed by giving reasons why I didn't care for it. He doesn't have any depth. Jean had depth. Quicksilver had depth in the last one. Scott didn't.

He didn't want revenge. They don't have to spell it out but it wasn't even hinted at. Not sure why you have trouble understanding why I find this to be a fault in the movie. Do you always get so tied up when people criticize or don' don't things you do?

More or less when people ignore things just to make their points. Then again, by the MLB thread this isn't suprising. Either way, thanks for the discussion.

But he wasn't a natural leader here when shit hit the fan. He just tagged along. He definitely dove in. But I just wanted more from him. Like they gave us with Jean and Peter.

What point am I ignoring here? You claimed he wanted revenge. Your backup to this is because his brother died. But you present nothing else? He didn't even know Apocalypse or that he was responsible for his death. Never mentioned or acknowledged. So I'm curious as to what part I'm skipping over here.

Perhaps you enjoyed the movie so you're willing to ignore things that have been commonly cited by the majority of reviews that have deemed the film mediocre? That's fine, you know.

He's my fav X-man so I will always want more from him

I always considered him absolutely boring. Until he turned all mutant terrorist, loved that and just couldn't get enough of him. It was a fantastic idea turning the biggest boyscout into the biggest enemy of humans.

I always gravitate to the leader types. Cyclops, Leonardo, Captian America, etc. I do love the darker take on him in recent decades though, it feels liek a logical progression after decades of racism.

Also random pet peev: people out running his optic blasts. or more accurately people strafing past his optic blasts. Completely illogical. If he can see you he can hit you. you arent going to dodge his blasts with out super speed.

Had a great time. L8ved everything about the final battle and how it ended.

Also,

Just seen it. I thought it was ok but nothing great. 6/10

I fucking loved this movie. It's the most 'X-Men' movie of the series.

Not dismissing issues with how hollow it is compared to the contemplative tone of the past films as per Singers pedigree, but fancy this:

A major theme of this film is letting loose/full potential. It's a theme shared between the heroes and villains. I believe it is the goal of this very movie.

For over 15yrs Singer and this series has told mostly quiet, introspective stories of mutants with your requisite action sequences. This is the first film, at least by Singer himself, to go balls out. This was celebration of the FoX-Men verse in a way that nods to literally all previous films while effortlessly apologizing for X3 and Origins Wolverine in two of the three standout sequences.

The third show stealer? Holy fuck, Quicksilver.

I'd like to highlight the new Storm especially. Halle Barry wasn't an 'RDJ/Stark' kinda match to begin with, but this girl with the little she got to do IS Storm. I want more of her.

Apocalypse was great. A living god who didn't get beaten by some lame ex machina; knowing who was involved the answer was clear. But hell if he wasn't just an epic presence. "Undefined powers" whatever: The fact that we don't know what he gathered over thousands of years is a part of the horror. What, he's supposed to list his abilities off?

I dunno, I'm not gonna say this was Civil War good and I probably still rate X2 and Days over this, but thus was a fun, epic, X-Men movie with both a sense of closure and a promising future.

The explanation of his abiguous power set was fine by me don't see the beef some people had with it.

I'm also glad they didn't beat apocalypse through some loophole, but by pouring everything they had and more, into him.

Guys,

I had a question about when X-Men I took place? (storyline wise). I realize that the movie took place in 2000 but if I recall correctly, the movie said something to the effect of, "in the not-so-distant future," (meaning, that perhaps the 'story' of X-Men may have taken place sometime between 2010-2015?).

Anyone know?

The reason why I ask is this: The next X-men movie (non-Wolverine Swan Song) is slated to take place in the 1990's. However - if the new 'cast' still looks noticeably younger than the cast that acted in the original X-Men, I think it will just make the whole thing look unrealistic?

However - if the next movie (storylines) takes place in say....1990, while X-Men I's storyline took place circa 2010-2015, then it makes things a bit more realistic in terms of how the characters looked/aged.

I think the Apocalypse job may have been used to highlight just how powerful Jean Grey really is. While it took all of the other X-Men combined just to hold Apocalypse at Bay, Jean Grey made relatively quick work of Apocalypse. I think there are major things in store for Jean Grey's character in future movies.

p.s.___________For the record, I absolutely loved the movie.

You're worried about the X-Men franchise looking realistic!?

Anywho, I believe the general rule is after the events of DOFP, we now have 2 timelines; one which has continued with Apocolpyse, the other is the original trilogy. So the Storm/Jean/Cyclops/etc. in the latest movie doesn't become the Equivalent from the original X-Men movie, i.e. Storm was born later/earlier in one time time compared to the other.

Doesn't explain how Havoc can be 20 years older than his brother and not appeared to have aged since the 1960s.

Fair enough.

"Realistic" may not have been the right term to use, but still. Guys like Magneto and Charles were born at the same time in both timelines (i.e. new Charles in the 1980's would have been the same age as the original Charles in the 80's in the original timeline).

That's why I ask - approximately what year did the Original X-Men take place (i.e. 'filmed in 2000 but with the disclaimer, "In the not-so-distant future."). Are we talking 2010? 2015?

It's a minor issue, but it will just be slightly weird to me if the "new" Magneto and Charles still look fairly young in the next movie (1990's), relative to how the original Charles and Magneto looked in the original X-Men (circa 2010-2015?).

It's a minor detail, but whatever. I think the entire series is awesome regardless.

Do you want silly ass age make-up on Havok and such? No we don't.

True, but I don't want new Charles and new Magneto looking almost the exact same way in the 1990's, as they did in X-Men: First Class (1960's)........or significantly younger than the Charles/Magneto of the original X-Men circa 2010-2015.

It's a minor detail, but I won't be too upset if the issue isn't addressed.

In the comics, the x-men go to space every other weekend. We haven't seen that yet in the movies, so perhaps the phoenix plot leads us there in the next film.

Apocalypse gets his tech from the celestials in the books, but perhaps here its from the Shiar, and the phoenix destroying their evolutionary caretaker gets their attention and brings the story to the cosmos. Shiar are also closely tied to the phoenix in the books.

kk.

I'm very excited about the next X-Men movies (Wolverine's swan song, and the 1990's movie). Will be interesting to see Weapon X/heel Wolverine go up against everyone (if I understand the post-credits scene correctly, I think that's how they'll play it? Stryker and Essex Corp unleashes Weapon X?).

If I had to guess, I'd say it's going to be X-23 that mr sinister creates with the blood.

It's been all but confirmed that the story is based on Old Man Logan. Go read it. Doesn't matter if you don't typically read comics. It's one of those books that trancends the usual fanfase and can be enjoyed by everyone.

@Heyman I think the problem is that you're overthinking the whole 'in the not-to-distant future' thing. The film was released in 2000, but seeing as how they only had all the same technology of the day, I'd have guessed that that movie is set in 2001 or 2002 or something.

It's not really something I'd have thought anyone would concern themselves over.

Yeah, like I said, it's not too big a deal. I just think it will be a bit odd to see Magneto and Xavier looking "so young" in this new 1990's, and yet extremely geriatric looking in the original 2001-2002 timeline.

The only person in the world that I've seen age that much in a 12 year time span, is David Flair.

Will do. :y:

Finally saw this movie.... Like most of the X-Men films it was "alright" but nothing great.

I like how Magneto kills probably millions of people worldwide, but then at the end seems to be "let free" because Moira told the gov't how he helped stop Apocalypse. I mean, that's all well and good, but when it comes down to it, Magneto murdered a whole lot more people than Apocalypse did in this movie.....

Again was "disappointed" at them "sampling" the music from the original X-Men Trilogy and not "sampling" the music from First Class, which had an amazing score.... but I completely understand why they do that....

On the subject of giving the X-Men "character development", I like how they did it First Class.... felt like each member of that team had development and whatnot via a couple of quick scenes of them just hanging out, and also via training montage.....

First Class still the best film of the franchise..... In my opinion......

rewatched this 7 times already. can't fucking believe how cool quicksilver is in those movies. he kinda sucks in the books, but here he always steals the show.

I thought this was trash, I was shocked by how stupid it was, especially seeing as Days of Future Past was a really good movie. But I guess this is more "comic booky", so I could see enjoying this if you are into that stuff.

I found it very mediocre. DoFP might be one of my top 5 comic movies. Love it every time I see it.

Deleted mall scene

<div class="tumblr-post" data-href="https://embed.tumblr.com/embed/post/3Y_5b7TUy_vxGF3UTxVnKQ/150230197052" data-did="6d9fa5ad1c61cc3ef0643ea1983bc25f5470e11f"><a href="http://xmenladies.tumblr.com/post/150230197052/x-men-apocalypse-deleted-mall-scene">http://xmenladies.tumblr.com/post/150230197052/x-men-apocalypse-deleted-mall-scene</a></div> <script async src="https://secure.assets.tumblr.com/post.js"></script>

Cool.

I just re-watched this movie again the other day.

Initially after watching at the drive-in I was a bit let down. I still thought it was good but I felt that it was odd this is the movie they made to follow up on Days of Future's Past.

I think it may have been more benefitial to pickup where Days of Future Past left off with Wolverine snapping back to a new reality where the original cast of actors/characters (using the original Professor X, Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm, Wolverine) are still alive and to then give them all a better send off than "The Last Stand". Even to put a final nail in that coffin and have Apocalypse defeat them and then set up another timeline shift that brings us back to the 80's with the new X-Men cast (McAvoy, Fassbender, Lawrence, Cyc, Jean Grey) to stop Apocalypse before he rises/has time to amass too much power.

Could even fix some timeline issues with bringing certain characters back to the past (Archangel), or sending IceMan to the past to correspond to the comics more and giving a couple more years for some of the new cast to age appropriately.

I just thought it was weird how at Days of Future's Past they teased a return of the old cast but then went in an entirely new direction for the sequel.

also Apocalypse should have had a better costume design and look.

You basically pitched an AoA movie that we will never ever get to see outside of a full reboot which we technically already got. :(

As much as I loved this movie, it would have been awesome if they did one more movie with the original cast.

Definitely, I am wondering if that is possibly why this movie got mixed reviews because it was not quite what people wanted at the time.

The second time I re-watched it and understood there would be no original cast of characters to further establish that new reality of DOFP I enjoyed this movie a hell of a lot more.

I still have hope.

Honestly, the whole thing would have worked much better as a two-parter.