Escape to the Movies: X-Men: Days of Future Past

[twosage]

There have been 7 X-Men movies in this series, 5 of them have Magneto in them. In every single one of those 5 films, Magneto is either the main villain with some evil plot to kill humans or he co-opts a pre-existing evil plot that was intended to kill mutants and tries to use it to kill humans. I love McKellen and Fassbender, but I am sick to death of the constant half-assed "Xavier and Magneto are eternal frienemies" storyline.

In 6 of the 7, the principle plot revolves around humans unethically experimenting on mutants.

Bob is exactly right when he says this series is jogging in place (or whatever the specific analogy was). They somehow made a sequel about a extremely convoluted time-travel plot seem like an unremarkable "greatest hits" album.

As for the movie itself, it's fine. Not really great by any stretch, but fine. If you want to see a much more fun and interesting version of exactly the same story, then watch Wolverine and the X-Men (which despite its name doesn't focus on Wolverine as much as you might think).

 

[Tiamattt]

Snip

I do find it ironic that not that long ago Moviebob did his whole Spiderman 3 thing which annoyed me quite a bit, yet here I am doing something pretty similar to it. I will however not go as far as to say you're wrong for thinking the way you do, it's your opinion and you're absolutely entitled to it. Here's just my reasons for having a different one


1. Yes it was lazy that they didn't explain his sudden, um, getting better from death but quite frankly I didn't want them to or thought it was necessary. Why was he alive really wasn't important to this movie, they only needed him to exist. I would rather them not waste time trying to clean up a crappy movie's mess, especially when the whole point of the movie is to reboot the franchise and essentially make the previous films not matter anyway. Them making up some silly reason why he's suddenly still alive wouldn't had helped make this movie better, the only thing that would do would remind us of a previous failure and make the current writing team look dumb trying to fix it.

2. Again, not really important. Lets say she was, I don't know Tempo. (actual time-based powers) Her role would've still been a minor character with very, very few lines whose job is hold her hands over Wolverine's head and groan every once and a while, only difference would be she would've had a different name. That wouldn't have made the movie any better or worse for me since again, it really didn't matter.

3. Mystique didn't just spare trask, she also saved the president's life from Magneto. That was huge since the whole dark future came thanks to everyone thinking all mutants were evil and they needed giant robots to kill them all. I admit this isn't a great reason but as far as comic book logic goes that's pretty much what we usually get since it's easier to write the general public as being overally dumb with thinking like:

"Ah, Hulk is smashing our neighboor just by jumping around! Someone call the army! Oh wait, he just helped the Avengers save the world, we love you Hulk!!!" Like I get what you're saying but you gotta remember what kind of genre we're dealing with here. Not saying they get a pass for every stupid thing they do but there were some things you just gotta expect.

As for Mags, he cared more about showing why he and mutants were vastly superior than humans, if I had to guess they were playing off how Charles/Erik had totally opposite views. Charles wanted to everyone to know that the sentinels weren't necessary, Magneto on the other hand wanted people to think that the sentinels and human resistance in general was futile. Plus the idea of humans beating his superior race must've made him pretty POed, so he wanted to beat them back in the biggest way he can think of. And of course there's probably revenge for putting him that jail for all those years. Again this isn't the best logic either but supervillians and logic aren't usually the best of friends.

4. This I totally agree with you, the whole idea seemed really dumb to me too.

5. He didn't shut her down because he didn't want to, the whole point was for her to make the right choice herself. Otherwise she would just keep trying or he would have to shut her down for good, which he clearly didn't want to do.

6. Quicksilver was great for sure, but in video game terms he was OP as hell. He would've made everything too easy if he stuck around or they would've had to find some dumb way to nerf him later, neither which would've been fun to watch. So the simpliest thing to do is to give us a brief moment of OP fun and then let everyone else actually work to finish the movie.


I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the movie, personally I thought it was great even if it taken more than a few logical shortcuts. But then again I've been reading comics for far too long, so there are some I'm used to and am willing to let go if it's not affecting my enjoyment of the movie. Here's hoping you have a better time in the next film you watch.

 

[Tiamattt]

(which despite its name doesn't focus on Wolverine as much as you might think)

I know it's been years since I've watched that, but I remember a LOT of Wolverine in that show. He was clearly the main character/hero of team and on top of that he got a few solo episodes to himself too. There was a good amount of the other x-men too but considering the ratio between them and Wolverine I thought the title was very fitting. Still a pretty good series, sad it never got that 2nd season.

 

[Seracen]

Huh...well, people didn't like "Rises" better than "Dark Knight," but I wouldn't say that it "wore out its welcome" with the majority, or we wouldn't be so ready to see Bats in the next Superman (although that is another freaking can of worms...).

Can't say I agree with Bob about this movie though. Sure, they look liberties with some of the powers, etc, but it seems petty to take offense to it (they could have been secondary mutations). It was acceptable, considering what it lead to by the end of the film (a complete ret-conning the worst parts of the series, while retaining most of the best parts). I really don't understand some of the sentiments in the video though, it's almost like I watched another movie. I loved the film; it did all of what I expected of it, and most of what I wanted!

Still love watching Bob, though I think the age of the geek has broken him somewhat (ie the bastardization of it in some spheres...see his review of Spiderman 2...hope that messy series just dies). We don't share much in the way of opinion anymore (for that, I go to Jeremy Jahns), but I still value hearing Bob's opinions. Look forward to seeing the crew at the next Expo!

 

[Xyebane]

Personally I think Bob missed the most important part of Days. Namely that it reboots the fanchise. In that sense I think it did a great job. It's much better than rehashing an origin story AGAIN while it lets them return to the present while keeping all the history from the other films while still white washing all the crap. We don't have to be reintroduced to the characters because we already know them yet we can ignore the fact that they destroyed the X-men universe in X3. Given the reason for it's existence I think it was very good. Now as a film in its own right it's okay. It doesn't have a lot of time to really develop anyone or even it's own story will all the characters and cameos it has to give nods to.

Also I really think Bob has developed a "if it aint MCU I don't like it" syndrome. There is a serious case of "Seinfeld isn't funny" trope with Wolverine that Bob has as well that I think clouds his judgement. Ya the gritty anti-social anti-hero is standard-game now but to a lot of us kids he was the first time we experienced it and was a big contrast to most of the heroes. Also, I think he is rather unique even in the marvel universe in that he is not particularly strong or powerful compared to most other mutants he fights, he just doesn't stay down. That's something that a lot of kids who are bullied can look up to: Wolverine regularly and severely gets beaten up, but he always gets back up.

Anyways, just my 2 cents

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

Snip

I do find it ironic that not that long ago Moviebob did his whole Spiderman 3 thing which annoyed me quite a bit, yet here I am doing something pretty similar to it. I will however not go as far as to say you're wrong for thinking the way you do, it's your opinion and you're absolutely entitled to it. Here's just my reasons for having a different one

1. Yes it was lazy that they didn't explain his sudden, um, getting better from death but quite frankly I didn't want them to or thought it was necessary. Why was he alive really wasn't important to this movie, they only needed him to exist. I would rather them not waste time trying to clean up a crappy movie's mess, especially when the whole point of the movie is to reboot the franchise and essentially make the previous films not matter anyway. Them making up some silly reason why he's suddenly still alive wouldn't had helped make this movie better, the only thing that would do would remind us of a previous failure and make the current writing team look dumb trying to fix it.

2. Again, not really important. Lets say she was, I don't know Tempo. (actual time-based powers) Her role would've still been a minor character with very, very few lines whose job is hold her hands over Wolverine's head and groan every once and a while, only difference would be she would've had a different name. That wouldn't have made the movie any better or worse for me since again, it really didn't matter.

3. Mystique didn't just spare trask, she also saved the president's life from Magneto. That was huge since the whole dark future came thanks to everyone thinking all mutants were evil and they needed giant robots to kill them all. I admit this isn't a great reason but as far as comic book logic goes that's pretty much what we usually get since it's easier to write the general public as being overally dumb with thinking like:

"Ah, Hulk is smashing our neighboor just by jumping around! Someone call the army! Oh wait, he just helped the Avengers save the world, we love you Hulk!!!" Like I get what you're saying but you gotta remember what kind of genre we're dealing with here. Not saying they get a pass for every stupid thing they do but there were some things you just gotta expect.

As for Mags, he cared more about showing why he and mutants were vastly superior than humans, if I had to guess they were playing off how Charles/Erik had totally opposite views. Charles wanted to everyone to know that the sentinels weren't necessary, Magneto on the other hand wanted people to think that the sentinels and human resistance in general was futile. Plus the idea of humans beating his superior race must've made him pretty POed, so he wanted to beat them back in the biggest way he can think of. And of course there's probably revenge for putting him that jail for all those years. Again this isn't the best logic either but supervillians and logic aren't usually the best of friends.

4. This I totally agree with you, the whole idea seemed really dumb to me too.

5. He didn't shut her down because he didn't want to, the whole point was for her to make the right choice herself. Otherwise she would just keep trying or he would have to shut her down for good, which he clearly didn't want to do.

6. Quicksilver was great for sure, but in video game terms he was OP as hell. He would've made everything too easy if he stuck around or they would've had to find some dumb way to nerf him later, neither which would've been fun to watch. So the simpliest thing to do is to give us a brief moment of OP fun and then let everyone else actually work to finish the movie.


I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the movie, personally I thought it was great even if it taken more than a few logical shortcuts. But then again I've been reading comics for far too long, so there are some I'm used to and am willing to let go if it's not affecting my enjoyment of the movie. Here's hoping you have a better time in the next film you watch.

1) This movie had every intention to be a chronological sequel to the previous movies. They had flashbacks from previous movies (the school/students, Weapon-X project, Wolverine killing Jean, Charles meeting Raven as kids, etc). Hell they brought back tons of people from First Class. All this raised even more questions why they couldn't spend just 30 seconds (that's all it would've taken) to explain Charles's "resurrection"....technically that's his twin brother's body but ALMOST NOBODY KNOWS THAT. It seems incredibly irresponsible to say "he only needed to exist, doesn't matter why", as if this movie was supposed to happen in some parallel sense. But it wasn't. If Jean was also alive would you have simply accepted that as well? Maybe you would, but I would consider that incredibly strange considering how it's accepting that previous movies happened...and at the same time it's pretending that previous movies didn't happen. Total contradictions.

2) This also isn't good enough. They could've introduced literally any mutant who's specific power was sending conscious back through time (some kind of time-warping/telepath), but instead they picked Shadowcat and simply TACKED-ON that power to her?? She already had a unique, powerful and well-established ability that came in very handy throughout the series.
Lets take the explanation that Kitty evolved new powers - the movie doesn't even explain that - then why did nobody else evolve new powers? Iceman, Storm, Xavier, Magneto and Wolverine were exactly the same.

The rest of the points you kinda agree with me how ridiculous the logic goes, there's just no explaining it.

Here's my bottom line - when I see any work of fiction that is trying to establish itself as a long-running franchise/story, then I just want it to play by it's own rules it has established in it's universe. That's all. Make things as crazy and imaginative as you like, but keep things consistent. XMen: Days Of Future Past could've absolutely pulled this off with just a little more attention to detail and smarter decisions with plot/characters. Unfortunately all this movie did was bury me in incoherence and inconsistency.

There had to be MASSIVE repercussions through time that Wolverine+Xavier+Magneto would've been created as they caused so much chaos, changed SO MANY THINGS that were not supposed to happen...yet the future stays 100% identical right up till Mystique's decision. Oh come on!

Yes the action scenes kicked ass, but this movie was clearly trying to be far more than raw action with all that time spent showing characters having long talks and getting emotional about shit.

Even Pacific Rim played by it's own rules and that movie was crazy lol (in an awesome way).

 

[MB202]

Having seen the movie now, I can pretty much agree with Bob on a few things: 1.) Yeah, it's stupid how Shadowcat suddenly has the ability to send people's consciousness back in time and there's literally no explanation as to how she got that power or how it's connected to her normal power. 2.) Wolverine IS kind of dull/overrated. Not that Hugh Jackman isn't awesome as Wolverine, but it feels like his healing power being able to undo Shadowcat's made-up-on-the-spot time-travel power was there just to make Wolverine the "protagonist", or at the very least, make him one of the main focuses... even though it seems to be more about Professor X trying to prevent Mystique from doing something that will do more harm then good. 3.) Yeah, it does feel like the series is jogging in place a bit, but then again, after X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine, we could use a bit of a reboot. I haven't seen First Class yet, and from the looks of things, it doesn't look like this necessarily undoes THAT since this takes place after the Cuban Missile Crisis. All that aside, freaking awesome movie. I even disagree about QuickSilver, though yeah, you'd think someone that useful would tag along for the rest of this, but oh well.

 

[immortalfrieza]

1) This movie had every intention to be a chronological sequel to the previous movies. They had flashbacks from previous movies (the school and it's students, Wolverine killing Jean, Charles meeting Raven as kids, etc), hell the brought back the cast from First Class. All this raised even more questions why they couldn't spend just 30 seconds (that's all it would've taken) to explain Charles's "resurrection"....technically that's his twin brother's body but ALMOST NOBODY KNOWS THAT. It seems incredibly irresponsible to say "he only needed to exist, doesn't matter why", as if this movie was supposed to happen in some parallel sense. But it wasn't. If Jean was also alive would you have simply accepted that as well? Maybe you would, but I would consider that incredibly strange considering how it's trying so hard to stay true to previous events (and utterly FAILING).

It's as Tiamatt said, it doesn't matter, and the explanation they gave in Last Stand was good enough anyway. Even without that explanation, all the viewers need to know is this: Charles Xavier is alive, Charles Xavier is in the movie, that's it. There's countless ways they could justify his existence, but how Xavier is there not relevant to the events in the movie in the least, either to people who haven't watched the previous movies and thus don't know he was killed or to those who have and thus already have an explanation. It would be a complete waste of the time of everybody involved and a waste of the filmmaker's money to bother to explain it.

2) This also isn't good enough. They could've introduced literally any mutant who's specific power was sending conscious back through time (some kind of time-warping/telepath), but instead they picked Shadowcat and simply TACKED-ON that power to her?? She already had a unique, powerful and well-established ability that came in very handy throughout the series.
Lets take the explanation that Kitty evolved new powers - remember the movie doesn't even explain that - then why did nobody else evolve new powers? Iceman, Storm, Xavier, Magneto and Wolverine were exactly the same.

Again, it's not relevant. Why does Shadowcat have time powers? It doesn't matter, all that matters is that there's a mutant here who has the powers necessary to make the plot work. Why they chose Kitty Pryde? Most likely it's because she's a much more well known character than just about every one of the characters who do have the necessary power set already. Besides, mutant powers have never made any real sense in the X-Men franchise to begin with, they're able to defy the laws of physics at every turn, and somehow Shadowcat getting time powers is unbelievable?

To put it simply, you aren't going to enjoy much of any sort of fiction if you get keep getting bogged down by insignificant details and obsessing over the fact that they don't explain every tiny little detail.

6. Quicksilver was great for sure, but in video game terms he was OP as hell. He would've made everything too easy if he stuck around or they would've had to find some dumb way to nerf him later, neither which would've been fun to watch. So the simpliest thing to do is to give us a brief moment of OP fun and then let everyone else actually work to finish the movie.

Exactly. This is the same reason they had Xavier without his powers for most of the movie, as well as why it's near impossible to make a good Superman/Flash/Green Lantern/etc. movie. These sorts of characters are so unbelievably powerful that they have to have their powers removed or weakened, fail to use them intelligently, or be incapacitated or killed early on to prevent them from easily solving just about every problem the writers could throw at them in 5 seconds.

Revisit your gripes about too many villains, and replace it with heroes, then see why X-Men is hard as a franchise.

Yeah. The problem with superhero and supervillain team up movies is that they lack the time necessary to really flesh out the characters. With say, a team of 5, they have to cram in the characterization and character development for all of them into 2 or so hours, and as a result the only real options as A. 1 or 2 really well done characters with a few background characters with next to no characterization or B. A bunch of mediocre characters none of which are good. The reason Avengers didn't fall prey to this is that most of the characters had at least 1 movie each to get this characterization beforehand.

 

[Tiamattt]

Snip

1. Here's the funny thing though, most of the flashbacks were of first class or Wolverine's origin which isn't exactly original movie material, the only reference to the other movies was Jean dying which didn't really have anything to do with this movie and could've easily been editted out without affecting this movie at all. That's how little importance those movies have on this one, that they could've taken out quite possibly the biggest moment in the that trilogy and it wouldn't have mattered, quite frankly I'm surprised they cared enough to make the effort.

But sure lets for fun say they took that time to do the whole twin brother thing, which btw would've taken a lot more than 30 seconds to explain in good enough way to satisfy people such as yourself, sounds really dumb and makes me even more happy they didn't bother, but all that aside how does that help make the movie any better? Him escaping death had nothing to do with the plot and trying to explain why would've only wasted time since we've would've forgotten about it soon afterwards due to, you know how it didn't have to do with anything going on. I guess it would've been nice to cross off the checklist but simply not something worth caring this much about. Oh as for whole Jean thing, that's a whole world of difference. Xavier is crucial to the plot of this movie so him being there is all that really matters. Jean on the other hand has absolutely nothing to do with this story and would only screw things up just by existing.

2. Again you seem to be making a mountain out of a mole hill. A new mutant wouldn't make the movie any better, at best it would've gave you 1 less thing to complain about I guess but would someone brand new or someone like Tempo hovering their hands around Wolverine's head doing pretty much nothing from a acting standpoint the entire time really made you that much happier? For me it was a strange but really minor detail that I'm surprised people care enough to really talk about, much less make a big deal about it.

I noticed you left out 5/6 where we didn't really agree at all, but w/e. I'll agree that comic book logic doesn't always make for intelligent thinking but you seem to be putting a little too much thinking into all this. Not saying you should turn your brain off to enjoy a comic book movie but very few cb stories will stand up to the magnifying glass you're putting DOFP under.

Since we're dealing out "bottom lines" here's mine: I don't stress over minor details. I'll happily call out on a movie on it's major screws up but imo that didn't happen here. Minor stuff happened that I wish didn't sure but those things just aren't important enough for me to really worry about. They'll make a movie less than perfect but I'm not going to nuts over details that didn't affect the overall product, it's just not worth the effort or the stress. And I'm guessing the critics were the same way, minor things lowered it's rating to the 90's but they weren't important enough to keep it from having a very high score.

Again if you don't like the movie that's fine, I have no intention of changing your mind there. I just think you're putting way too much importance into the wrong things that don't deserve it.

 

[Ralancian]

Sometimes it feels like I only signed up here to rag on Bob......but here we go again.

His overall summing up is accurate the film is pretty good not great. The problem is none of his arguments actually hold up. First up let me start of by saying that The Avengers is only pretty good to and one some levels it actually falls below DOFP on some levels. The main one being memorable/interesting action sequences there sin't one in Avengers sure there are memorable parts in The Avengers action sequences but no stood out. Quicksilver's bullet time sure bullet time is old news in terms of innovative style. however it was used to great effect for a bit of comedy and watching super speed from the speedsters perspective for a change instead of one shop blur. It's bullet time being used to great effect and how it should be used instead of the over abundance it got in the early-2000's just because it was the new thing. Blink's portals was new for film and had interesting sequences and opening action sequences with named characters dying (specifically Iceman made me go 'oh that's a shock'). The stuff with Sentinels was pretty cool too.

Kitty Pryde's new power's who the hell bloody cares need to send someone back in time ummmm okay do this. I'll bet there a Basil Exposition secne cut out explaining this (I'm fairly certain they've said it interviews) but too much of that in the first place would of slowed the film down and they needed to gets to the 70's.

Wolverine is not the main character of the film yeah he's publicised as that but it's really about Mystique, Xavier and Magneto. I know this wasn't a Bob criticism as such but people seam to be saying it despite being completely untrue. He's sent back because well might as well have you main marketable character go back who isn't already in the past setting.

Yes the movie does exist purely so they don't have to forever join the past to the present day X-Men. But it works and did it a lot better than Iron Man 2 or Thor 2 which felt clunky to the extreme. This was actually quite slick.

Also the movie seams to have strong storyline about Xavier being addicted to drugs whcih make him 'feel' better but don't actually make him happier. Isn't that what sci-fi and X-Men films are about taking a normal plot line and twisting them? sure a B-thread from the main plot but it works doesn't it?

Jennifer Lawrence well she wasn't as good as in the first one but for most of this she had nobody to really act a scene with except towards the end. Her motivation is spelled out before she really gets to use it on screen. Don't think she can really be blamed or the script just sometimes you can't play the character as brilliant as last time. She did feel like she was playing a natural progression though.

So yeah the movies not brilliant but very few superhero movies are (i'd say The Dark Knight and possibly The Winter Soldier are the only ones I'd consider amazing...maybe a few more) so can we stop harping about how this one or that one isn't as good as the Marvel franchise. Most first in about the middle of the franchise some a bit further down some a little higher up. The only thing Marvel has managed to do that others haven't is produce something with very different characters and make it all work together that's pretty commendable but it doesn't elevate movies into being better movies. It just means they're able to release two movies a year without feeling like their saturating the market with the same characters repeated thus make more money. I like having a joined up continuity but it doesn't make Iron Man 2 anything other than a pretty poor superhero film that retreads the first, it doesn't make The Avengers anymore than a pretty good superhero team up movie like this one was.

 

[Makabriel]

3) The entire future revolving entirely around Mystique killing Dr Trask and nothing else. MAGNETO DROPPED AN ENTIRE F**KING STADIUM AROUND THE WHITE HOUSE AND KILLED TONS OF PEOPLE IN FRONT OF TV CAMERAS. Even before that, all the world had seen so far about mutants was that they were dangerous....and Mystique not killing Dr Trask suddenly changed all that? So much emphasis was put on it it made no sense.
Also Magneto's actions near the end made absolutely no sense whatsoever and zero attempts were made to explain why he acted like such a colossal idiot. "Lets save mutants by teaching humans how just 1 of us can cause this much damage". Brilliant.
And yeah, despite all that it's implied that the future STILL hangs in the balance of Mystique shooting that 1 guy...and nothing else. I have seen a lot of time travel (or history alteration, same thing) movies and this one ranked pretty high on the bullshit-o-meter.

The future doesn't revolve around her killing Trask. The future revolved around what happens to -her- after they do. The future sentinels needed her DNA to become the killing machines that they were. When she saved the president, she was basically saving herself and the future. No one comes after her, no one gets her DNA and the future sentinels cease to exist.

 

[endtherapture]

There have been 7 X-Men movies in this series, 5 of them have Magneto in them. In every single one of those 5 films, Magneto is either the main villain with some evil plot to kill humans or he co-opts a pre-existing evil plot that was intended to kill mutants and tries to use it to kill humans. I love McKellen and Fassbender, but I am sick to death of the constant half-assed "Xavier and Magneto are eternal frienemies" storyline.

In 6 of the 7, the principle plot revolves around humans unethically experimenting on mutants.

Bob is exactly right when he says this series is jogging in place (or whatever the specific analogy was). They somehow made a sequel about a extremely convoluted time-travel plot seem like an unremarkable "greatest hits" album.

As for the movie itself, it's fine. Not really great by any stretch, but fine. If you want to see a much more fun and interesting version of exactly the same story, then watch Wolverine and the X-Men (which despite its name doesn't focus on Wolverine as much as you might think).

[/center][/QUOTE]

At the end of this TV series Magneto does exactly what he does in the film though. Rewires the Sentinels to destroy humanity.​

 

[Whytewulf]

I normally enjoy Bob's analysis, but I don't want to spoil anything with this movie, so I guess I can only watch this one after I see it? At which point, it's not a review.... it's more like.... a post-watch discussion? Which is cool, that can be enjoyable. But could we get a spoiler-free review?

That's what I have always wondered. I can never watch his "reviews" before a movie, because he spoils them. As you also said, I Watch them after to see if we are on the page, which we many times aren't or if I missed something. Bob needs to either do spoiler free previews to help us decide to watch or not, and then do a thorough review maybe later, or split these clips into first 3 minutes spoiler free, 3 minutes after spoilers.

OT: I enjoyed the movie.. Great action, I thought the acting was good and I didn't care much about plot holes since it's based on Comics and a movie about mutants and time travel, I am not worried about a "new unseen power" before.

 

[Whytewulf]

Really really clever. I liked it.

Entire plot hinges on mutant hunting killer robots being able to identify mutants. Beast invents perfect counter measure in 70's, seen in the film as being able to immediately de-mutant someone, which would totally invalidate the viability of sentinels and never bothers to bring it up later.

Maybe, however, who knows who that worked on or what it did to others and how temporary?

 

[AvtrSpirit]

A few suspicious retcons aside, I loved this movie. It had a cohesive plot and great action sequences (Flank aka Marvel's Chell was just blowing my mind). A lot was hanging in the balance, so you always felt the weight of every action taken in the past (wondering what it is changing in the future). But the movie knew how to be lighthearted as well (Quicksilver had the audience eating out of his hand).

This series couldn't have asked for a better way to tie-in and retcon the past entries. To quote Dolores Umbridge: Let us preserve what must be preserved, perfect what can be perfected and prune practices that ought to be... prohibited!

 

[mattawbrown]

I think the Escapist needs to hire a new person to do their movie reviews. Bob complains that Spider Man was rebooted too soon (even though the Amazing Spider Man movies are the best movies featuring spider man that I have seen and actually make me care about the character) but also complains that X-Men has been going on too long? Personally I also feel that a lot of what he has been covering in these recent reviews has been better suited for his "Big Picture" series has they seem to be dealing more with backroom policy stuff and development studios instead of reviewing a movie (which shouldn't need to contain spoilers). X-Men: Days of Future Past has giant plot holes, true, but it's an incredibly fun movie.

 

[endtherapture]

I think the Escapist needs to hire a new person to do their movie reviews. Bob complains that Spider Man was rebooted too soon (even though the Amazing Spider Man movies are the best movies featuring spider man that I have seen and actually make me care about the character) but also complains that X-Men has been going on too long? Personally I also feel that a lot of what he has been covering in these recent reviews has been better suited for his "Big Picture" series has they seem to be dealing more with backroom policy stuff and development studios instead of reviewing a movie (which shouldn't need to contain spoilers). X-Men: Days of Future Past has giant plot holes, true, but it's an incredibly fun movie.

Gotta agree with this. We need someone a lot more objective. I'm fine with Bob's informative and opinionated Big Picture series but Escape to the Movies seems to be influenced increasingly via his personal opinion pushing his agenda towards Marvel, and not really addressing whether it was a good movie or not.

 

[Seldon2639]

On the one hand, Bob raises some valid criticisms. Though, really, why is "Kitty Pride has this power" any more or less ridiculous than Rachel Summers using "vast psychic powers" to do it? Or Forge just whipping up a time-travel bracelet as in the cartoon series? Hell, half the stuff from The Avengers (power-wise) doesn't get explained properly aside from "for story purposes." Canonically, Thor should have curb-stomped Iron Man, and we still have no explanation for what gives Thor or Loki quasi-supernatural abilities (like endurance) other than "what you call magic we call technology." Hell, it doesn't even explain the mechanics of the whole "no one but Thor can lift it", much less the basis for it.

I'll digress on that for a moment because I just thought of it. In Thor, we see the hammer on the ground, unable to be moved either by people trying to lift it or by machines. But if it fell to the floor of the helicarrier, the only thing (a) keeping it airborne, or (b) keeping it moving. That makes no sense in the established mechanics.

And there's no superhero movie or comic without internal inconsistencies like that. Thor is practically invulnerable, but gets stabbed by Loki, but it doesn't matter. And it makes sense, if he really was as invulnerable as his fight with Iron Man or The Hulk (or just getting punched by The Hulk) suggests, nothing from any of the Thor movies (after he has his hammer) should really pose any threat to him. But that'd be boring, so it fluctuates depending on the needs of the story.

The Iron Man suits fit everyone in Iron Man 3, even though Iron Man 2 established that only people keyed to the suits could wear them (we'll ignore the problem of physically fitting inside the suits).

And it's doubly annoying for Bob to criticize this movie for having young Xavier need to undergo character development because of some combination of PTSD, survivor guilt, and wanting to be able to use his legs again, when he raved about Iron Man 3 for showing Stark's PTSD and need for character development. This not to mention that one can easily level the "why aren't they doing the simplest thing" against any of the stand-alone Marvel movies. Why isn't Iron Man helping stop the Winter Soldier? Why isn't Captain America helping stop The Mandarin? Why aren't both helping Thor in England? If we're being generous, we'll say story contrivances. But in reality it probably has to do more with it being financially untenable to bring all of the big stars in for every movie.

And on the continuity side, it's pretty clear that First Class is actually a complete reboot, and this movie simply solidifies and transitions that. Otherwise the timeline doesn't make sense. If First Class were a traditional prequel (and actually fit in the original timeline), it should have come up during the original movies (and the whole "mutants becoming widely known about and a big deal" should have happened sooner).

What makes it funny is that those kinds of "wow, our previous attempt kind of imploded, let's reboot it" is something Bob has praised in the past. And it means they can do interesting new things with the characters without being tied to what happened in the other movies.

 

[immortalfrieza]

And on the continuity side, it's pretty clear that First Class is actually a complete reboot, and this movie simply solidifies and transitions that. Otherwise the timeline doesn't make sense. If First Class were a traditional prequel (and actually fit in the original timeline), it should have come up during the original movies (and the whole "mutants becoming widely known about and a big deal" should have happened sooner).

What makes it funny is that those kinds of "wow, our previous attempt kind of imploded, let's reboot it" is something Bob has praised in the past. And it means they can do interesting new things with the characters without being tied to what happened in the other movies.

I get the distinct feeling that this movie exists largely to reboot the series while doing so in a way that has an in-universe justification as to why everything starts all over again, sort of an attempt to ease fans into the new continuity. I'd be very surprised if they continue with the old characters from this point on.