Will Bryan Singer's Days of Futures Past be a retcon doing away with Last Stand?

[Comicopolis]

X-Men Last Stand is a far better action movie than the story-less X2, but all the changes made seem to really butthurt the fanboys.

 

It seems that studios are allowed to make mediocre movies like X2 as long as they stick to the established continuity, but if they make an action-packed flick like X3 and all over continuity, they are hammered by the fanboys.

 

I personally liked X3 because it's the only movie that actually showed that mutants were powerful and could actually fight. Magneto had some great scenes and Wolverine wasn't just a fool swinging his claws around aimlessly like in X2. Singer has absolutely no clue on how to stage or shoot an action scene and this is shown clearly in Superman.

 

You guys need to step back from the funny books a bit, as this was nowhere near the same as turning Gwen into a 'ho, and I'm just about the biggest Dark Phoenix fan alive. But I can still separate the movies from the comics.

 

Why should you have to?

You don't have to do anything but in many peoples opinions, movies work better being based on cmic books rather than copying comic books. Sometimes they work well and sometimes they don't but the X Men trilogy was very successful as was Avengers which shows that not everyone is hung up on how closely the films follow the comic storylines. You're entitled to your point of view but so is everyone else.

 

The majority of people who saw those movies have no clue how close they were or were not to the comics, so why would they be hung up on anything?

 

..... and film makers have to appeal to the majority so why would they worry about a few collectors who are interested in the film closely following the comics? Even among comic collectors, it seems that most enjoyed the first two films at least so we're talking about the minority of the minority who are actually hung up on the films following the comics.

 

Why on Earth would film makers then be worried about it?

 

They obviously don't care...the majority of people seeing the movies don't know any better. It's up to the so called comic book fans to give a rat's arse.

It's not that comic book fans don't give a rat's arse, it's that not all comic book fans agree with your point of view.

 

If you're an alleged comic book fan, why wouldn't you want to see at least a decent attempt made to be faithful to the source material?

Because the general audience will think it looks stupid

 

Really? I don't recall the general audiences thinking that Superman: The Movie looked stupid or that Batman Begins looked stupid

 

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

[DrWatson]

X-Men Last Stand is a far better action movie than the story-less X2, but all the changes made seem to really butthurt the fanboys.

 

It seems that studios are allowed to make mediocre movies like X2 as long as they stick to the established continuity, but if they make an action-packed flick like X3 and all over continuity, they are hammered by the fanboys.

 

I personally liked X3 because it's the only movie that actually showed that mutants were powerful and could actually fight. Magneto had some great scenes and Wolverine wasn't just a fool swinging his claws around aimlessly like in X2. Singer has absolutely no clue on how to stage or shoot an action scene and this is shown clearly in Superman.

 

You guys need to step back from the funny books a bit, as this was nowhere near the same as turning Gwen into a 'ho, and I'm just about the biggest Dark Phoenix fan alive. But I can still separate the movies from the comics.

 

Why should you have to?

You don't have to do anything but in many peoples opinions, movies work better being based on cmic books rather than copying comic books. Sometimes they work well and sometimes they don't but the X Men trilogy was very successful as was Avengers which shows that not everyone is hung up on how closely the films follow the comic storylines. You're entitled to your point of view but so is everyone else.

 

The majority of people who saw those movies have no clue how close they were or were not to the comics, so why would they be hung up on anything?

 

..... and film makers have to appeal to the majority so why would they worry about a few collectors who are interested in the film closely following the comics? Even among comic collectors, it seems that most enjoyed the first two films at least so we're talking about the minority of the minority who are actually hung up on the films following the comics.

 

Why on Earth would film makers then be worried about it?

 

They obviously don't care...the majority of people seeing the movies don't know any better. It's up to the so called comic book fans to give a rat's arse.

It's not that comic book fans don't give a rat's arse, it's that not all comic book fans agree with your point of view.

 

If you're an alleged comic book fan, why wouldn't you want to see at least a decent attempt made to be faithful to the source material?

There's nothing alleged about my being a comic book fan, pretty much anyone who knows me will vouch for that.

 

Personally, I'm of the opinion that quite a few comic stories wouldn't translate well to the big screen if they faithfully follow the comics. I think that attempts to do that would often lead to disappointment for those who wanted to see faithful recreations and complete lack of interest from the general public.

 

Also, I like seeing a fresh perspective on the characters when taken to the big screen rather than knowing what will happen and being underwhelmed as it just hasn't translated well between the mediums.

 

Wolverine should always look like this.

 

Constipated?

[Comicopolis]

Wolvie does look like he's on the toilet.

[DrWatson]

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

Superman was kind of stupid.

[Comicopolis]

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

Superman was kind of stupid.

 

At the time I enjoyed it but I wasn't blown away by it and I don't have the nostalgic glow about the film that some people do. Some of it was cringe worthy and stupid.

[Marvelfangirl]

X-Men Last Stand is a far better action movie than the story-less X2, but all the changes made seem to really butthurt the fanboys.

 

It seems that studios are allowed to make mediocre movies like X2 as long as they stick to the established continuity, but if they make an action-packed flick like X3 and all over continuity, they are hammered by the fanboys.

 

I personally liked X3 because it's the only movie that actually showed that mutants were powerful and could actually fight. Magneto had some great scenes and Wolverine wasn't just a fool swinging his claws around aimlessly like in X2. Singer has absolutely no clue on how to stage or shoot an action scene and this is shown clearly in Superman.

 

You guys need to step back from the funny books a bit, as this was nowhere near the same as turning Gwen into a 'ho, and I'm just about the biggest Dark Phoenix fan alive. But I can still separate the movies from the comics.

 

Why should you have to?

You don't have to do anything but in many peoples opinions, movies work better being based on cmic books rather than copying comic books. Sometimes they work well and sometimes they don't but the X Men trilogy was very successful as was Avengers which shows that not everyone is hung up on how closely the films follow the comic storylines. You're entitled to your point of view but so is everyone else.

 

The majority of people who saw those movies have no clue how close they were or were not to the comics, so why would they be hung up on anything?

 

..... and film makers have to appeal to the majority so why would they worry about a few collectors who are interested in the film closely following the comics? Even among comic collectors, it seems that most enjoyed the first two films at least so we're talking about the minority of the minority who are actually hung up on the films following the comics.

 

Why on Earth would film makers then be worried about it?

 

They obviously don't care...the majority of people seeing the movies don't know any better. It's up to the so called comic book fans to give a rat's arse.

It's not that comic book fans don't give a rat's arse, it's that not all comic book fans agree with your point of view.

 

If you're an alleged comic book fan, why wouldn't you want to see at least a decent attempt made to be faithful to the source material?

Because the general audience will think it looks stupid

 

Really? I don't recall the general audiences thinking that Superman: The Movie looked stupid or that Batman Begins looked stupid

Superman & Batman are well known enough by the general public that they didn't look stupid.

 

 

[Comicopolis]

A lot of people love the Incredible Hulk TV show but I've always hated it because it bears no resemblance to the original material.

[DrWatson]

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

Superman was kind of stupid.

 

At the time I enjoyed it but I wasn't blown away by it and I don't have the nostalgic glow about the film that some people do. Some of it was cringe worthy and stupid.

The cellophane chest emblem throwing thing from Superman II was the worst.

[Logan510]

X-Men Last Stand is a far better action movie than the story-less X2, but all the changes made seem to really butthurt the fanboys.

 

It seems that studios are allowed to make mediocre movies like X2 as long as they stick to the established continuity, but if they make an action-packed flick like X3 and all over continuity, they are hammered by the fanboys.

 

I personally liked X3 because it's the only movie that actually showed that mutants were powerful and could actually fight. Magneto had some great scenes and Wolverine wasn't just a fool swinging his claws around aimlessly like in X2. Singer has absolutely no clue on how to stage or shoot an action scene and this is shown clearly in Superman.

 

You guys need to step back from the funny books a bit, as this was nowhere near the same as turning Gwen into a 'ho, and I'm just about the biggest Dark Phoenix fan alive. But I can still separate the movies from the comics.

 

Why should you have to?

You don't have to do anything but in many peoples opinions, movies work better being based on cmic books rather than copying comic books. Sometimes they work well and sometimes they don't but the X Men trilogy was very successful as was Avengers which shows that not everyone is hung up on how closely the films follow the comic storylines. You're entitled to your point of view but so is everyone else.

 

The majority of people who saw those movies have no clue how close they were or were not to the comics, so why would they be hung up on anything?

 

..... and film makers have to appeal to the majority so why would they worry about a few collectors who are interested in the film closely following the comics? Even among comic collectors, it seems that most enjoyed the first two films at least so we're talking about the minority of the minority who are actually hung up on the films following the comics.

 

Why on Earth would film makers then be worried about it?

 

They obviously don't care...the majority of people seeing the movies don't know any better. It's up to the so called comic book fans to give a rat's arse.

It's not that comic book fans don't give a rat's arse, it's that not all comic book fans agree with your point of view.

 

If you're an alleged comic book fan, why wouldn't you want to see at least a decent attempt made to be faithful to the source material?

Because the general audience will think it looks stupid

 

Really? I don't recall the general audiences thinking that Superman: The Movie looked stupid or that Batman Begins looked stupid

 

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

 

They were very close in tone, mood and characterization. I do not wish for a verbatim translation from page to screen, just something a heck of a lot closer than most of the drek we've been getting.

[Logan510]

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

Superman was kind of stupid.

 

I'm not sure you even like comic books outside of a few issues of Avengers anyway

[Comicopolis]

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

Superman was kind of stupid.

 

At the time I enjoyed it but I wasn't blown away by it and I don't have the nostalgic glow about the film that some people do. Some of it was cringe worthy and stupid.

The cellophane chest emblem throwing thing from Superman II was the worst.

 

That was pretty bad. And the kiss to remove Lois's memories.

[Logan510]

X-Men Last Stand is a far better action movie than the story-less X2, but all the changes made seem to really butthurt the fanboys.

 

It seems that studios are allowed to make mediocre movies like X2 as long as they stick to the established continuity, but if they make an action-packed flick like X3 and all over continuity, they are hammered by the fanboys.

 

I personally liked X3 because it's the only movie that actually showed that mutants were powerful and could actually fight. Magneto had some great scenes and Wolverine wasn't just a fool swinging his claws around aimlessly like in X2. Singer has absolutely no clue on how to stage or shoot an action scene and this is shown clearly in Superman.

 

You guys need to step back from the funny books a bit, as this was nowhere near the same as turning Gwen into a 'ho, and I'm just about the biggest Dark Phoenix fan alive. But I can still separate the movies from the comics.

 

Why should you have to?

You don't have to do anything but in many peoples opinions, movies work better being based on cmic books rather than copying comic books. Sometimes they work well and sometimes they don't but the X Men trilogy was very successful as was Avengers which shows that not everyone is hung up on how closely the films follow the comic storylines. You're entitled to your point of view but so is everyone else.

 

The majority of people who saw those movies have no clue how close they were or were not to the comics, so why would they be hung up on anything?

 

..... and film makers have to appeal to the majority so why would they worry about a few collectors who are interested in the film closely following the comics? Even among comic collectors, it seems that most enjoyed the first two films at least so we're talking about the minority of the minority who are actually hung up on the films following the comics.

 

Why on Earth would film makers then be worried about it?

 

They obviously don't care...the majority of people seeing the movies don't know any better. It's up to the so called comic book fans to give a rat's arse.

It's not that comic book fans don't give a rat's arse, it's that not all comic book fans agree with your point of view.

 

If you're an alleged comic book fan, why wouldn't you want to see at least a decent attempt made to be faithful to the source material?

Because the general audience will think it looks stupid

 

Really? I don't recall the general audiences thinking that Superman: The Movie looked stupid or that Batman Begins looked stupid

Superman & Batman are well known enough by the general public that they didn't look stupid.

 

 

You don't think the X-MEN dressed in black leather biker S&M outfits didn't look stupid?

[Comicopolis]

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

Superman was kind of stupid.

 

I'm not sure you even like comic books outside of a few issues of Avengers anyway

 

He loves the X-Men.

[DrWatson]

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

Superman was kind of stupid.

 

I'm not sure you even like comic books outside of a few issues of Avengers anyway

I'm not sure you understand that super hero movies have to be both commercially successful and entertaining in a way as to appeal to the public as a whole and not just the Big Bang Theory crowd.

 

Why would I want to see a panel by panel pantomime of the same story I've already read twenty times over?

 

Plus, I like plenty of comic books. I just don't share my interests with you.

[Marvelfangirl]

X-Men Last Stand is a far better action movie than the story-less X2, but all the changes made seem to really butthurt the fanboys.

 

It seems that studios are allowed to make mediocre movies like X2 as long as they stick to the established continuity, but if they make an action-packed flick like X3 and all over continuity, they are hammered by the fanboys.

 

I personally liked X3 because it's the only movie that actually showed that mutants were powerful and could actually fight. Magneto had some great scenes and Wolverine wasn't just a fool swinging his claws around aimlessly like in X2. Singer has absolutely no clue on how to stage or shoot an action scene and this is shown clearly in Superman.

 

You guys need to step back from the funny books a bit, as this was nowhere near the same as turning Gwen into a 'ho, and I'm just about the biggest Dark Phoenix fan alive. But I can still separate the movies from the comics.

 

Why should you have to?

You don't have to do anything but in many peoples opinions, movies work better being based on cmic books rather than copying comic books. Sometimes they work well and sometimes they don't but the X Men trilogy was very successful as was Avengers which shows that not everyone is hung up on how closely the films follow the comic storylines. You're entitled to your point of view but so is everyone else.

 

The majority of people who saw those movies have no clue how close they were or were not to the comics, so why would they be hung up on anything?

 

..... and film makers have to appeal to the majority so why would they worry about a few collectors who are interested in the film closely following the comics? Even among comic collectors, it seems that most enjoyed the first two films at least so we're talking about the minority of the minority who are actually hung up on the films following the comics.

 

Why on Earth would film makers then be worried about it?

 

They obviously don't care...the majority of people seeing the movies don't know any better. It's up to the so called comic book fans to give a rat's arse.

It's not that comic book fans don't give a rat's arse, it's that not all comic book fans agree with your point of view.

 

If you're an alleged comic book fan, why wouldn't you want to see at least a decent attempt made to be faithful to the source material?

Because the general audience will think it looks stupid

 

Really? I don't recall the general audiences thinking that Superman: The Movie looked stupid or that Batman Begins looked stupid

Superman & Batman are well known enough by the general public that they didn't look stupid.

 

 

You don't think the X-MEN dressed in black leather biker S&M outfits didn't look stupid?

How were they S&M outfits?

 

I didn't mind the black leather suits.

 

I just can't see costume designs by Jim Lee or John Byrne work for the big screen.

 

The suits in First Class were pretty good.

[Flaming_Telepath]

You don't think the X-MEN dressed in black leather biker S&M outfits didn't look stupid?

 

Nope.

 

Take a look at the Cap costume in the films. Pretty damned laughable, eh?

 

Well, that's nothing compared to how ludicrous the X-Men would have looked in their yellow, blue, red and gold lycra.

[Cimm]

You don't think the X-MEN dressed in black leather biker S&M outfits didn't look stupid?

 

Nope.

 

Take a look at the Cap costume in the films. Pretty damned laughable, eh?

 

Well, that's nothing compared to how ludicrous the X-Men would have looked in their yellow, blue, red and gold lycra.

 

I thought the Cap costume was great

[Marvelfangirl]

You don't think the X-MEN dressed in black leather biker S&M outfits didn't look stupid?

 

Nope.

 

Take a look at the Cap costume in the films. Pretty damned laughable, eh?

 

Well, that's nothing compared to how ludicrous the X-Men would have looked in their yellow, blue, red and gold lycra.

 

I thought the Cap costume was great

I liked it too.

[Comicopolis]

You don't think the X-MEN dressed in black leather biker S&M outfits didn't look stupid?

 

Nope.

 

Take a look at the Cap costume in the films. Pretty damned laughable, eh?

 

Well, that's nothing compared to how ludicrous the X-Men would have looked in their yellow, blue, red and gold lycra.

 

I thought the Cap costume was great

 

It could and should have been a lot better.

[Logan510]

Both of those films played fast and loose with the source material.

Superman was kind of stupid.

 

I'm not sure you even like comic books outside of a few issues of Avengers anyway

I'm not sure you understand that super hero movies have to be both commercially successful and entertaining in a way as to appeal to the public as a whole and just the Big Bang Theory crowd.

 

Why would I want to see a panel by panel pantomime of the same story I've already read twenty times over?

 

Plus, I like plenty of comic books. I just don't share my interests with you.

 

If the public is used to being fed Hamburger Helper and has never had steak, how do we know they will not like it?

All I know about you is what I see on here, but I appreciate you not sharing your interests with me.