Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Dream, Jul 28, 2012.
Brian Singer breaks down the trailer for Empire Magazine.
I saw that earlier today. I always love it when directors/writers/ect. do stuff like that.
The stuff set in the '70s looks pretty decent, but the future stuff is really rough. This:
Looks like something out of Mortal Kombat: Annihilation.
specially since it looks like the future portions of the film will be in 2023.
They could easily have used a different form of time travel than the "travel back into your own body" kind if they'd wanted Kitty to be the main character. It's Wolverine because the Hugh Jackman Wolverine is the most popular character in the movies.
It's a double-edged sword (at least for me). On one hand I do hate how Wolverine is seemingly the focal point of all the stories, but on the other hand I really enjoy Jackman's performance and he at least makes it worthwhile.
Or they could change the time travel rules.
They should have just done a Terminator sequel instead of an X-Men film. Why even call it "Days of Future Past"?
Or maybe because he's the only character who wouldn't have significantly aged since 1973.
Except they have to change something. They can either change the character who is the main character of the story or they can change the rules for time travel.
I noticed the credits say.... Hugh Jackman... X-Men: Days of Future's Past... James McAvoy... Michael Fassbender...
Hopefully it's just because of his name recognition and not because everyone else is getting shafted in another Wolverine-centric movie.
Yup. Which is kind of a shame because how shocking would it be for audiences to Wolverine vaporized in the middle of the first act, and then let Kitty be the actual time traveler?
Actually, didn't the 90s X-Men series make it an actual Terminator-style traveling back in time rather than "inhabiting your younger self" when they adapted the story?
He's already met The Doctor. Why not the X-Men, too?
Given that it's Bryan Singer, I expect it to be more of an ensemble, even if Wolverine gets quite a bit of screen time. Not much point doing the story if it's nothing but "Wolverine's Time Traveling Hijinks: The Movie."
OK, I totally missed that 70's Logan is still rocking the bone claws! I did wonder how he hoped to convince 70's Magneto to do anything he didn't want to, now I know.
And Nixon was also in Watchmen...he must be a real genre fan.
Regarding Wolverine as the time traveler...dramatically, it makes a lot more sense. Kitty simply wasn't established enough as a character in the previous films to give that kind of spotlight to. The general audience wouldn't even recognize her.
^More to the point, she doesn't have the same degree of history and connection with Xavier as Jackman's Logan for the role reversal to have this degree of resonance.
I can't see it, but it would have to be bone claws in 1973, if ( as implied ) the bulk of Origins takes place after 1973.
It's been a while since I last saw Origins, but even then I could never get the exact timeline straight. All I remember is that Stryker first recruited them during or immediately after Vietnam. So unless I'm forgetting something this is either while he's still with the team, or just after he quits.
By-the-by, another reason why Logan in the better choice as the Sam Beckett of this movie: this is a way for him to finally regain his old memories. I mean if he's "leaping" into his younger bone-claw era body then it should have an undamaged brain and all of his old life memories.
Mind you, didn't he already remember some of it? In 'The Wolverine' he seemed to remember saving that bloke he saved at Nagasaki (or was it Hiroshima?)
Separate names with a comma.