Well, it connects to the idea that they're often instinctively feared because they born differently. The point of the story then is to reflect on real life; how do we treat people different from us because of how they were born?
Fair point, but not what I meant. The story suggests that there are essentially two possible outcomes, either mutants and humans can learn to coexist peacefully, or one will dominate at the expense of the other. Professor X and Magento each favor one position and present arguments for them.
I don't get it. He was in X2 since he was the lead villain. He was in Origins: Wolverine since that movie dealt with Wolverine's past in Weapon X, making him a logical character to appear. His appearance in Days of Future Past made sense; Trask was using the military to help further his experiments and Stryker being involved with mutants and mutant experimentations is a good set-up for his own future involvement with Task Force X and Weapon X in the original timeline.
As I recall, the comics constantly shift the team rosters. The movies picked a specific roster to work with, and, understandably, prefer using characters the general public will know.
I've seen worse. A lot worse.
I forget, what problem is this?
Their CIA ally was killed in an attack by the Hellfire Club. As I recall, they spend the rest of the movie trying to stop the Club's master plan.
Part of the point of the movie is that the Sentinel project was in development long before the war (which had already been established in X3, with the X-Men running Sentinel training exercises in their holodeck). Mystique murdering Trask inspired others like him to advance the project (and unwittingly gave them the tools to take the later models up to eleven). Besides, having the Sentinel already underway gives a rational for Trask vivisecting mutants, which is one of the reasons Mystique wants him dead.
(FYI, the movies have never shown mutants to be all innocent victims -- e.g. the Hellfire Club and the various iterations of the Brotherhood --- nor have they shown all humans to be hostile oppressors or evil -- e.g. Moira McTaggart, the two unnamed US presidents, the humans we're told risked their lives helping mutants hunted down by the Sentinels in the Days of Future Past timeline. Even Senator Kelly got a redemptive scene of sorts before his passing in the first movie.)
It's move and countermove of the "cold war" (for lack of a better term). A mutant terrorist makes a strike to further his cause (movie 1), a human retaliates (movie 2). I found the exact plots to be different enough, but if you didn't, fair enough.
As I recall, a mutant was the one considered responsible for the problems by assassinating a mark at a high profile event.
I will concede some characters aren't given much to do (Cyclops is not an important character in these stories, case in point), and it other cases, there are numerous characters who are one-shots. However, the movies do give many of the supporting characters beats, materials, and other stuff make them more than just paper cutouts. For example, notice how Rogue is very humanized in the first movie, despite essentially being a plot device? Case in point, most of her train scenes before the attack have no bearing on the plot and are only there to give her depth.
