Not a joke. This movie is a return to previous glory. It was very good: excellent. Two thumbs up. I just came back from watching it, and I'm literally bursting with enthusiasm over how good it was. If you like X-Men, if you liked the first two movies, if you HATED the last two movies, then watch this. It will make you smile. It will make you forgive, even forget the shit of the past(as MovieBob alludes to in the video). But I'll stop here (like I said, I'm BURSTING) ... just do yourself a favor and check it out.
Escape to the Movies: X-Men: First Class
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Considering that I thought X-Men Origins was the best of those 4 movies (and that POTC 4 was pretty good), I'll probably hate this movie. So excuse me if I'm extremely skeptical of MovieBob saying it's up there with the Dark Knight (which is one of my favourite movies).
Call it whatever you want, the movie is still Amazing.voidspawn said:
OT: Just watched it today and I agree with you, Bob. They actually pulled back pretty nicely. But i have to say... While it's not a must to have any former connection to the franchise it would certainly make things a lot more enjoyable if you did.
As for the point about about the familiar cast of heroes being gone in this one, i think that's part of what made this one so good. Those who have watched the last 4 movies would probably be getting tired of the same old powers, so it's refreshing to see some new ones around.
Wow! What a pleasant surprise! When I heard they were doing another XMen, I was like, "Dear God. Why? They're so awful!"
But maybe it's actually good. May have to go see this one.
But maybe it's actually good. May have to go see this one.
Its good but its not really Dark Knight class. It certainly wants to be, it emphasizes character development and relationships (very well too) but it doesn't engage with the underlying themes as fully as Dark Knight does. Yes there are some interesting scenes that try to look at the questions of what mutants mean for humanity but it never quite gets there.
Going forward I'm curious to see what happens, if they do intend this to be something of a prequel to the X1 and X2 there isn't much further they can go before they really start stepping on some continuity toes.
Going forward I'm curious to see what happens, if they do intend this to be something of a prequel to the X1 and X2 there isn't much further they can go before they really start stepping on some continuity toes.
Aureliano said:
Because you don't want to so much as touch (or play "keepaway" with) someone who can absorb and redirect kinetic force whose just siphoned up something close to an H-Bomb's worth of juice. Even just crushing it wouldn't do the trick, as he'd probably be strong enough to resist it and we've already seen he can expend stored-energy outward in a blast-radius. Hence the need to immobilize him first, as he seems to need to consciously "activate" his energy-releases - remember, he says he uses absorbed energy to stay young and he actually looks YOUNGER in 1962 than he did in 1944, so it's reasonable to assume that he's always walking around with some level of a "charge" but is able to do so without blowing up everything he touches.
in all honesty i believe X-men 3 was much worse that origins wolverine. At least in XOW you had over the top characters and good actions scenes even if the CGI was dodgy and Deadpool's origin story was at best reworked and at worse taken out back and raped. While X3 not only killed off most of the interesting characters but managed to be both boring and cliche. the fight scenes were bland and uninteresting and while I'll admit for a moment phoenix was pretty cool, wolverine being powerful enough to shrug off disintegration and kill her with claws was just stupid and uncreative.
Now i have to ask, is this what origins; Magneto became or are we still waiting for that?
Now i have to ask, is this what origins; Magneto became or are we still waiting for that?
MASSIVEJohnnyRooks said:
MASSIVE
MAJOR
MEGA
HUGE
SPOILER(S)
in "Wolverine," We see Xavier still able to walk in 1979. According to this movie, he's been crippled since 1962. Thusly, those two films cannot exist in the same timeline.
By the same token, this ALSO invalidates the additional wrinkle to Jean Grey's backstory shown in flashback in "X-Men 3," because in that scene Xavier is still walking AND he and Magneto are still pals in the late-70s/earily-80s - NEITHER of those things lasted past 62 according to "First Class." And since so much of "X3's" plot relies on that event having taken place, it cannot have happened either.
Meanwhile, we can still assume that the first two films are "safe" (for now) because of the TWO "ageless" characters from the original series who appear in the same form here: Not only do we get the much-ballyhooed Wolverine cameo, there's also the bit where Magneto tells Mystique she's too young to be making advances at him and she "ages herself up" into Rebecca Romijn, who played the character as an adult in the originals.
By the same token, this ALSO invalidates the additional wrinkle to Jean Grey's backstory shown in flashback in "X-Men 3," because in that scene Xavier is still walking AND he and Magneto are still pals in the late-70s/earily-80s - NEITHER of those things lasted past 62 according to "First Class." And since so much of "X3's" plot relies on that event having taken place, it cannot have happened either.
Meanwhile, we can still assume that the first two films are "safe" (for now) because of the TWO "ageless" characters from the original series who appear in the same form here: Not only do we get the much-ballyhooed Wolverine cameo, there's also the bit where Magneto tells Mystique she's too young to be making advances at him and she "ages herself up" into Rebecca Romijn, who played the character as an adult in the originals.
Thanks that answers my questions too.MovieBob said:
In the comic univesre that wouldn't be enough to invalidate the continuity, Xavier has regained his ability to walk just to lose it again a couple of time and Magneto has flip flopped from villain to ally several times.
I saw it and was actually quite pleased. But any fans of the comics book may find it hard, like I did, may find it hard to overlook the knit-picky details. Such as Alex Summers being a main character when he's Scott Summers' (Cyclops) LITTLE brother. And cyclops isn't even born yet. But they're a small complaint for the quality of the movie.
this is most probably a big "no-no" for you, but moviebob, could you possibly PM me with how x-men united/wolverine: origins is negated, i just watched the film and is actually my fav super hero movie (3 missile cock-blocks)i just dont see how they're erased
Hahahaha, I love that, if I ever have to put make-up on, some Cherry lip balm is going on too.cursedseishi said:
but besides that, fair point, he didnt portray The Joker as he was envisioned.
but i think we can both agree that for that movie, he played the part exceptionally well, The Dark Knights opposite in every way. although i do think he kept the psychopath vibe going throughout the whole film quite well, and thats The Joker all over isnt it?