X-MEN: Days Of Future Past (Casting, Rumors, Pics till release)

My main issue is just the confusion. I understand the contracts say they can both use the Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, but I can just see a lot of people who aren't aware of all of the BTS stuff being really confused by why there are two different Quicksilvers in the different series. Have we ever had to versions of the same character in two different series close together like this. I just remembered there are the two modern day Sherlock Holmes, so I guess it can be done. But those are also two very different versions of the character on two very different shows, and I have to wonder if the two versions of Quicksilver will be that different

It's also IMO a little crappy to throw his casting out there so soon after it came out that they wanted to use Pietro and his sister in Avengers 2.

 

From what I undestand, only one of them can use "Quicksilver" the other has to use his real name. So the morons who get confused easily won't matter.

A relatively obscure one, but I recall back in the '90s when Ed Harris and Michael Rooker both played Sheriff Alan Pangborn in different Stephen King movies released in the same year. (Needful Things and The Dark Half.)

Yeah, but they'd have been working on the contract for X-Men for a while now, so maybe you should blame Whedon for stealing the thunder out from under Singer?

 

The contract for X-Men has been done for 15 years. There is no working on it. They even already used someone who is pretty clearly Quicksilver in a throwaway scene in Wolverine and supposedly Singer only wants him for another throwaway action sequence.

Screw your smiley, this is serious business!

 

I was speaking of the contract for Evan Peters to play the character. That contract would have been in motion in the last few weeks.

 

Not necessarily. Auditions, certainly would have been going on, but not necessarily exclusively for this particular role. They may well have had him as a runner up for another role and decided to offer him this part when they decided to go ahead with including the character/the particular sequence. I've gone from a callback to on set the next day. Unless you're a star or at an agency with the power (and enough interest in you) to negotiate, you don't risk losing the job for a few bucks.

 

Moira mark 2 isn't really Moira though is she? She has way more in common with Carol Danvers, who presumably they could not use because she's an Avenger, and the rest of her role seems to be a mish-mash of Gabrielle Haller. Further, McTaggert was Moira's married name - her maiden name was Kinross. They would have been better of using Gabrielle here to lead into using Legion later on.

Of course, given that Moira mark 1 was in her thirties, I suppose this Moira could be Joe McTaggert's sister and no relation to Moira Kinross at all. Moira is a popular name in the USA and Scotland after all. ;P

 

That was in X3. And yeah...just like Emma Frost in XMO:W, her age cannot be reconciled with the First Class version.

 

Says who?

BTW, the Origins: Wolverine Emma was only ever identified as Emma Frost in promotional materials, and there really isn't anything to reconcile about her character with regards to FC Emma because the similarities are actually rather minimal.

 

I dunno. Me, I guess? Rose played her in the 1960s at an early-30's age (Or 20s, if we're to be kind), and Olivia played her in post-2006 as late-30's.

I'm not saying there aren't excuses that can be made, I was just saying they don't match up as-is. The Emma thing, yeah it's easy to hand-wave it now, but who can be bothered anyway? XMO:W isn't worth worrying about.

 

"Right! This calls for immediate discussion!"

[LEFT]



... I mean, really? Does anyone here really care in which movie a corporate clothing product placement character appears? There's even a Quicksilver in DC Comics, for f*ck's sake.
[/LEFT]
​

 

I'm not sure where you got the notion that TLS Moira was portrayed as being in her late 30s from, but whatever.

I honestly believe that there are people out there who like to exaggerate just how many issues and inconsistencies there are with regards to the various films in the X-Franchise simply for the sake of having something to complain about with regards to how FOX has handled said franchise.

 

Maybe from the fact that the actress who portrayed her was 37 years old when the movie came out?

 

^ That means absolutely nothing. Given what we know about the timeline of the franchise as per First Class, what we've been told about DoFP, and what we see in Origins: Wolverine (assuming that the latter isn't scrubbed from canon), Charles Xavier is pushing 70 years of age by the time of the events of the X-Trilogy, yet he's played by a man - Patrick Stewart - who, at the time of The Last Stand, was only in his mid-60s, so the age of an actor doesn't necessarily or even automatically conflate to the age of the actor playing said character.

 

That's true, of course. But it's pretty obvious that Olivia Williams was not supposed to be playing a 70 year-old Moira.

 

I don't think it's quite as black-and-white that Olivia Williams' Moira can't be the same person as Rose Byrne's Moira - mainly because I personally know some people who are getting up there in years but still look incredibly young (my mom, for example, looks much younger than she actually is) - but there's not really much to be gained by arguing about this issue.

Edit: BTW, after seeing the image of Rose Byrne side by side with the image of Olivia Williams, I actually think there's a very strong case to be made for the latter being the former's daughter, as there's a very striking physical similarity between them.

 

Then why did you? I only mentioned that the two versions were not congruous, and you took exception.

 

^ I wasn't arguing with you; I asked you a legitimate question regarding what you said. I don't believe that there's no possible way that Rose Byrne's Moira can be the same person as Olivia Williams' Moira, but I'm not going to continue belaboring that point because it's ultimately not worth starting an actual argument over.

 

The Mother daughter relationship was my first thought for any easy explanation when I saw this debate yesterday.

Its unlikely but I would like to see that original X-men films take place earlier than they were made. In their universe technology advanced at a much fast pace. Which would be consistent with how tech is portrayed in superhero comics in general. I think this would solve some of the issues of ages. I would place them in the late 80s early 90s.