'Third one is always the worst' says Jean Grey when leaving the theater after watching Return of the Jedi back in '83. She was right about that one, and conscious or unconscious (I doubt the writer intended for this movie to be the weakest in the second X-trilogy), she's also correct about X-Men: Apocalypse. However, also like Return of the Jedi, Apocalypse still is a whole lot of mutant fun for those who didn't expect the franchise to reach new heights anyway.
Granted, it's not the story that provides the mirth, since it's the stuff of repetition, variations on themes and lack of narrative evolution. Basically, another all-powerful mutant rears his head and threatens to destroy the world for mankind so that its stronger successors can take over. And once again, the X-Men, fighting for peace between man and mutant, must get together to stop this megalomaniacal scheme from becoming reality. This time, it's not Magneto who has hatched the diabolical plan, but rather a 5,000 year old ideological predecessor, an ancient Egyptian once worshiped as a god, with the modern moniker Apocalypse. Magneto, once more masterfully performed by Michael Fassbender, merely provides some muscle to help Oscar Isaac's semi-god with his evil shenanigans. Isaac does a decent job playing an age old villain, but he's no Fassbender and his Apocalypse is nowhere near as intimidating or intriguing as the much more relatable Magneto.
Still, the villain suffices for the cause of bringing together two generations of X-Men, the First Class lot and the new batch of young recruits, including novel takes on classic X-characters Cyclops, Jean Grey and Nightcrawler. Their performances and their chemistry make us hopeful for the future of the franchise, should the studio feel like using them for the next installment Apocalypse seems to be building up to. For although it's meant as a conclusion to a trilogy, the ground work is amply laid for more to come and these young stars succeed in making us curious about what lies ahead. The new additions to the cast are aided by snappy dialogue and light humour, making the shortcomings in the plot not nearly as blatant as they would have been in lesser hands. Nevertheless, it's clear director Bryan Singer, who has made his fourth X-movie with this title, has run out of ideas for the X-universe. Though we appreciate his work on both trilogies, new blood would be equally welcome in the creative room as it proved in the cast.
It's been a busy week, which left me no choice but to neglect my blog unfortunately. In the meantime, the news kept flowing on MovieScene, which has caused me falling behind in commenting on it. Let's try and catch up a bit.
Coolest trailer first. Obviously Game of Thrones. I doubt everyone who was already superstoked for the new season will experience that anticipation much more strongly after watching this trailer, since the tension has already mounted to nigh unbearable levels. But as expected, the new trailer looks splendid. Remaining fan favorites present: check. Quotable one-liners: check. Expensive FX shots of new locations and assorted vistas: check. New plot developments as opposed to the books: check. There's definitely going to be many a surprise for those who have already read the books, now that the series is rapidly catching up with them. There's a few shots of such scenes found in this trailer. I better spoil things for people who didn't read the novels while I still can. Personally, I just hope the series won't spoil the fun of the remaining books too much, as it's obvious by now this show will be finished much sooner than the original source material will. Nevertheless, HBO, bring it on!
Despite being involved in a sex scandal and busy directing another X-film, Bryan Singer is already planning his next project. It's gonna be adapting a Robert Heinlein novel. Let's hope this is going to honour the source material a bit more than most Heinlein based films, as there's only one of them that apparently really does so, and by now it's 65 years old (FYI, it's the classic Destination Moon). Many Sci-Fi buffs will still look back on Paul Verhoeven's attempt, Starship Troopers, with dismay, even though in many respects it turned out a pretty good film regardless (as long as you like satirical social commentary in your science fiction, and who doesn't?). So far, things don't seem too encouraging on staying faithful: the name has already been changed from the poetic The Moon is a Harsh Mistress to the rather generic (but likely sexier and easier to sell to general audiences) Uprising. I can live with that change. Not having read the book, I can probably live with more of them, as long as the final result still proves to be a good movie. I like the notion of a penal colony on the Moon rebelling against overlords from the Mother Planet, which is basically what the general premise is. So as long as they keep that bit in, things can't be too bad, eh?
Here's another Sci-Fi project for you. This one does less to me. I like Amy Adams fine, but my tolerance for Jeremy Renner has its limits. The plot also doesn't sound all that appealing to my ears: it has elements of V and Contact, and going on the available plot synopsis, not enough to really set it strongly apart. That leaves the director to get me interested, and Denis Villeneuve at least does that, even though I still have to see any of his work (I know, shame on me). The French-Canadian director's oeuvre isn't particularly long, but so far all his feature length films have won critical acclaim. Prisoners for one looked like a generic thirteen-a-dozen thriller judging from the trailer, but from what I've heard from critics and audiences alike, it turned out an unexpected gem against all odds. Plus, they wouldn't just hire anyone to do Blade Runner 2, but they hired him. (Personally, I have no desire to see a Blade Runner 2 get made at all, but that's beside the point.) So apparently, at least there will be some talent sitting in the director's chair. And then you learn the writer of the piece was responsible for Final Destination 5 and the failed reboot/prequel to The Thing, and a wholly skeptical attitude towards this project returns full force.
Another major motion picture franchise being re-developed to fit the small screen? That happens a lot lately. What's up with that?! Apparently the franchise has run its course on the silver screen and now the studio is looking for other venues for its appearance to make it cough up more dough. Aside from developing a spin-off of sorts at the same time (the all-female one, remember?). And stating 'they're still looking at the notion of more sequels', which is more or less saying there's not gonna be any for the next 20 years. Nevertheless, the concept of action stars coming together to make for an explosive team-up might work on telly. Are there enough TV action veterans available though. Sure there are! Plenty of shows to pick your oldies but goldies from. The A-Team, Knight Rider, Miami Vice, Quantum Leap or Battlestar Galactica, to name but a few. No doubt many an old and overly muscled actor from any of these shows is yearning for a chance to relive past glory and cash in on it at the same time. Of course, the appeal of such television (ex-)stars is probably not as great to audiences as it is for movie (ex-)stars, but hey, who cares, it's only television, right? Someone better inform the execs behind this project that these days, television is where all the high-class action is found, so if you want to make a worn-out concept like this work on the small screen, you better come up with some damn intriguing elements to ensure your viewers will stick with you. A gripping and compelling story, solid acting, captivating stunts, etc. Too bad not so much of these were present in the Expendables movies...
Ah crap, this looks like any contemporary generic PG-13 Hollywood blockbuster. I liked it better when we didn't really have much of a clue as to what it would be about, but now much of the initial mystery is lifted. I had hoped for something a little more ingenious from Brad Bird. But apparently, he too can't think of anything more than a teen prodigy saving a/the world because he/she is oh so fucking special. Paired with all the crazy and outlandish visual FX a outrageously giant budget can buy. And a superstar to draw in additional audiences (in this case, it's George Clooney). Oh well, expectations weren't high. It's a Disney flick based on a theme park ride, how often do those work? Only on Pirates of the Caribbean, if I recall, and even then only once for realsies (the sequels were okay, but not nearly as catchy). I doubt this will prove as succesful a film, nor spawn four sequels. There doesn't as yet seem room for the quirky humour and truly wondrously exotic locales found on PotC that really pulled audiences in. Please let me be proven wrong in my obnoxious pre-release scepticism, but from the looks of it and full well knowing cynical old me and bland old Hollywood blockbusters, that's not likely to happen, today or tomorrow.
This film is growing on me in terms of anticipation, though I remain skeptical (just not as strongly as I was initially). The fact it was chosen as the opening film of the upcoming 31st Imagine Film Festival makes it score some points, since those folks don't just pick the first genre film that comes their way for that honour. This second trailer also indicates this is more than just a repeat of last year's The Machine, and that it may actually be a better film as well (hence this receiving a theatrical release in the Netherlands, while The Machine sadly did not). However, any bits of ingenuity seem to be found mostly in execution rather than innovation, since this trailer makes no mistake this is again a movie about a robot gone bad, which has been done countless time since the Fifties got that ball rolling. It's the way in which the artificial intelligence goes awry that makes it more distinct. This AI appears to get under your skin on an emotional and sexual level, rather than by its mental superiority (though the fact it utilizes such basic human instincts against its creators goes to tell something about its intellectual capabilities as well). Of course, that too is an age old theme (Metropolis, for example), just not applied as often. I wonder what this machine's ultimate goal will be. Surely it won't be something as grand as world domination, since we already have Avengers: Age of Ultron to remind us of some other reaons why we should never fully trust our technological innovations.
Speak of the devil, that particular anti-robot film got a new trailer this week as well. Promises to be quite the superhero spectacle, but we already knew as much. The particular preview shines a bit more light on the motivations of the main antagonist. Save the world by killing the human race, it appears. That's one way to do it, sure. The easy way out, which makes for twodimensional baddies and clear-cut black versus white conflict. But hey, it worked on the first Avengers movie just fine. If you want an ingenious story, you know better than to look for it in this type of flick. This is all about fun characters and explosive action. First film showed both elements are in ample supply from this creative team and so it continues to work its merry magic for this second installment. There's plenty of Joss Whedon type humour to be found here, especially centred around the characters interacting. They just don't like each other all that much but they're sort of stuck with one another, and it makes for relatable scenes of humanity amidst all the superhero shenanigans. Just how the new characters relate to the old guard remains to be seen. It appears debutantes Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are somehow involved with Ultron initially, which is not that surprising since they're supposed to start off as bad guys themselves. As for Vision, quickly thrown in at the end of the trailer (and probably the film proper, too), he's no doubt the anti-Ultron AI, reminding us that not all technology is evil. Considering all the technophobia recently running rampant in the movies, there's a positive message for a change. After all, if we're gonna save the world, we'll need some technology to make it happen.
And if it isn't evil robots, we'll need to save our planet from extraterrestrials with sinister intentions, too. A bunch of all-American heroes did so nearly 20 years ago, and since Hollywood never forgot the financial benefits involved then, they'll have to do so once more. But will audiences pay to see them do just that once more? It's not like we know the story is gonna be anything but repetitive. Everybody knows there's gonna be more aliens out for our planet and some dudes have to get together and kick their asses, the American way. It would be a huge surprise to everybody if there was anything more to it than that, but that's not gonna happen for sure. The suits behind this film obviously want to play it safe, so they're going with the same characters as before, and if they can't get them because the actors don't feel like doing the exact same thing (good for them), they'll want the next best thing. So Jeff Goldblum is back (which I don't mind since I like him) and Bill Pullman likely is as well. Will Smith thought he could make better use of his time (doing After Earth 2 or stuff), so they cast somebody else to play his son, to literally follow in his father's footsteps. Are we glad they didn't opt for Jaden Smith, that would have been a huge turn-off for everybody that still hopes this will be any good. Jaden is probably too involved with the likes of After Earth 2 as well. In case Pullman passes on the project after all, they got Liam Hemsworth ready to go as his character's son-in-law. Apparently the point ID4 2 tries to make is that heroism specifically runs in the family, rather than running in everyone. As for making good movies, we'll find out sooner or later, whether we want to or not. Or we can try and ignore this project altogether and just get our anti-alien fix from watching the first film again.
I've honestly never seen a Bruce Lee picture. That doesn't mean I'm not interested in watching a picture about the man himself. But don't give me any of that 'only his relatives know what he was all about, so everybody else can't make a good biopic' crap. That's directly stating 'we're cashing in on the memory of our father' to my mind. It's not like there's no books written or documentaries made about the martial arts legend that involved thorough researching of all the documented facts, including earlier testimony from those same relatives. Of course the previous biopics got some facts wrong, that's a simple biopic staple. It's very likely a biopic made by his descendants is bound to turn some actual events around just as easily, if not more so. You think they'll address the negative aspects of the man's life (and there's bound to be some of those, especially taking his early demise into account) in any objective way? Yeah, that's gonna happen... I tend to be much more skeptical about biopics that do involve the direct family because a certain degree of subjectivity is unavoidable. And I figure the same thought applies to many people. I just don't think that many people will bother to concern themselves with the people behind the production of such biopics. To be quite honest: who really cares as long as the movie is good? If it isn't, at least we'll know who to blame for tarnishing Bruce Lee's memory.
Looks good. Looks positively final too. A sense of foreboding and imminent closure is clearly instilled with all the little hints at the show's ending found here. 'All Empires Fall', not very subtle, but it can't hurt to let the viewer know this grand show will soon come to an end. And am I gonna miss it. Boardwalk Empire is definitely on my Top-3 of currently running shows. Spectacular production values, compelling writing, intriguing mix of fiction and history and some of the loveliest acting you'll find on telly these days: what's not to like here? But as always, all good things must come to an end. Besides, I haven't even seen season 4 yet, so the finale is not so close for me as for most others. It's a nice thing the teaser makes it clear some of my favorite characters are still alive - some of them just had to be, according to the history books - but I can take a spoiler or two, as they are unavoidable when you're in a line of (unpaid) work that includes posting movie news. Nevertheless, as has become obvious throughout previous seasons (or indeed, most HBO shows for that matter), death still ever lurks around the corner for the characters we've come to appreciate. So we better enjoy seeing these folks interact with each other on screen for a final season, while we still can. For even if they do survive all the way up to the end, we won't be seeing them again anyhow.
There's no denying Sir Ridley Scott is the closest thing we have today to the Cecil B. DeMilles and David Leans of yesteryear. While most of his contemporary colleagues opt to film against mostly blue-screen backdrops on this type of epic film, Scott prefers to deal with the real thing as much as the budget allows. And thanks to his long list of past successes, his budgets tend to be fairly large. Hence his opportunity to shoot scenes on sets like the one above, which can best be described as 'lavish'. Which is not to say Scott has difficulty employing the use of digital trickery when tangible means fall short. There's still a Red Sea to part the blue way (or green, it's all the same). The appeal of lush visual effects, spectacular set construction and grandiose costume design aside, will this new retelling of the familiar Exodus story offer anything of novelty? Maybe Scott took a note from Darren Aronofsky's Noah, which told the Biblical tale in a more streamlined form (also to accommodate viewers of other persuasions, it cannot be denied). However, Scott is a much more straightforward director with a tendency to prefer the classical approach of storytelling. I very much doubt his take on Exodus will deviate much from previous incarnations, surely not as much as Noah dared to be different. Which may be for the better, considering the fairly uncomfortable, haphazard results that spawned (also thanks to studio interference).
And there's more ancient Egypt to go around in Hollywood these days. Which will not surprise audiences who knew better than to walk away before the end credits of X-Men: Days of Future Past had rolled completely. As Bryan Singer's tease of the treatment shows here, X-Men: Apocalypse will open more or less on the same note its predecessor left us, namely the backstory of the age old mutant En Sabah Nur, who will grow over the centuries to become the new X-nemesis Apocalypse. Spectators familiar with the comics won't be surprised by this particular bit of background story for the mutant megalomaniac, as it is integral to the formation of this big Marvel baddie and his 'not all mutants were created equal' philosophy. The scene also serves to flesh out his prime henchmen, the Four Horsemen, which may be of major importance to the various X-Men we're familiar with, as some of them will undoubtedly be chosen to represent Apocalypse - whether they want to or not - in the movie's present day and age. Or is Singer going to be very brave and ignore the events of Days of Future Past by diving directly in the alternate reality popularly known as the Age of Apocalypse? I would applaud that decision, but I'm sure it won't come that far, as the studio will be convinced it will needlessly confuse the general audience, which might have some difficulty accepting the notion of alternate universes which in the comics has become a routine ingredient of the X-franchise. It would also detract from the cinematic universe studio Fox is currently hoping to built (though Days of Future Past showed disappointingly little evidence of that, hinting at the studio's insecurity as to how to proceed on that front) if things were to be mixed up too much at this point. Lastly, Days of Future Past's overly cheerful ending, where a dark finale heralding the rise of Apocalypse seemed to have made so much more sense than the happy-happy joy-joy climax we were served instead, goes to show Singer too isn't so brave as to stir things up that aggressively. I don't expect to be surprised by X-Men: Apocalypse too much from a narrative perspective, as I'm not at all surprised by the hints dropped through this Instagram tease.
Any doubts I had about this film when watching the previous few trailers have disappeared: this film looks like a total blast! What it relays the most pressingly, compared to its predecessors, is the sense of a coherent story line; always welcome in a movie involving time travel. Even though it does kinda feel like a gratuitous set-up to have the original X-Men's X-Men and their recent First Class past counterparts hook up. It's definitely a step away from the original comic book story, wherein there was no past, only the present and the abysmal future that would have occurred if the X-Men hadn't halted certain events in said present. This time it's the past that needs to be altered for the good of both mankind and mutantkind, while the future serves as an alternate present, considering the characters from previous X-films do not appear all that much older (okay, so Iceman grew a beard: whoop-dee-doo!). Despite all the techie stuff involved, this grizzly future seems to takes place around the same time as our present (roughly stated, 2015-2020), making it a future only for the past.
More intriguing is what happened to the 'first class' of X-Men, who seem to have disbanded, making for a rather disheveled and depressed Xavier. There's definitely some explaining that needs to be done there. As happened in First Class, the need to form a new team is imminent, and this time it's Wolverine (Hugh Jackman playing that part for the seventh time, and still he's up for more: that's loyalty!) who must do the job. Question is: is this the actual future Wolverine transported in time, or has the older Xavier somehow mentally instructed the past Wolverine to do so through time? As seen in the marketing campaign, though not something easily picked up in this trailer, both the boney claw Wolverine and his adamantium wielding equivalent will be spotted in this movie, but will they share the screen, thus making for two different Wolverines in one film? This is still left a little vague, as can be expected from a film involving temporal mechanics. In the original story, Kitty Pride (Shadowcat) was the one doing the time travelling, but she didn't do so physically, as her present counterpart was mentally picking up future events sent to aid her in forcing a change that should prevent that bleak future from ever happening. Shadowcat makes an appearance in this movie, but since Wolverine is still the most popular X-Man, he now has taken over her role, and apparently reduced her character to mere cannon fodder. The notion of seeing two Wolverines onscreen simultaneously is a wonderful concept and I wouldn't mind exploring that avenue. But then, there's still plenty of fascinating character moments bound to pass, judging from the trailer, as Wolverine is confronted with past versions of fellow mutants he has come to know and love, or in other cases, hate.
And of course there's mindblowing action with Sentinels and all kinds of mutants and crashing football stadiums and stuff. Good to know, but in this case more than ever there's a great opportunity for getting to know these characters, some of them established is two different ways, from fresh and unexpected angles. Bryan Singer has previously proven to work well with large ensembles, giving everyone their appropriate due and I have full confidence he won't let us down in that regard once more. I was somewhat sceptical about this film thanks to the first two trailers - and the fact this movie deals with what is arguably the most classic and well loved X-tale of them all - but this trailer has gotten me X-cessively hyped for this latest X-travaganza. And those to follow, since Days of Future Past will have great consequences for various X-projects to follow, like X-Force and X-Men: Apocalypse. Seems the X-future will be at least as X-citing as the X-past!
This is a common occurrence for big budget blockbuster movies, to post finished clips of the actual movie in the few months leading up to its theatrical release. They usually stick to material from the film's opening to intrigue the audience as to the exact cause of events (which is left in the dark well enough for them to be enticed) and to prohibit giving too much away from the actual plot, which the studio prefer to keep to itself until the movie hits theaters. I recently posted a clip of Captain America: The Winter Soldier on MS that adhered to the same marketing strategy. Of course, some movies go even further and post way more than just a few scenes from the movie's first half: The Amazing Spider-Man 2 currently has so many clips up online you might puzzle together the whole movie from those. That's no fun for the nerds that actually attempt to do just that and end up spoiling the final viewing experience for themselves completely. Fortunately I'm not that determined.
This one minute scene begins and ends in medias res; you might accuse it of missing context, but then, the context is provided by the rest of the film this early released clip wants you to go and see soon. There's a lot of characters in this dynamic scene, half of whom fans will recognize from previous X-movies (Colossus, Shadowcat, Iceman). The other half consists of new characters, who appropriately get to show off their powers which define them. Even though we don't get much on their character background here as yet, we learn what they can do and how well they act as a team in a dire situation like this. We're also introduced to the nightmarish future world wherein these mutants have become the hunted, as well as their enemy, the ominous and ruthless future Sentinels. We learn little about those genocidal robots from this clip, which also pushes us to want to see the movie to learn just how dangerous they are to our heroes and what role they played in bringing about this Apocalypse. Deducing from this scene, Bryan Singer once again revels in his craftsmanship when it comes to making the audience acquainted with lots of characters, while not sacrificing the pace of the movie. It helps that the spectator is already familiar with many of the personas present in this movie, but there are many characters left to explore and all need ample screentime. If needs be, established characters are pushed to the background, as happened to Anna Paquin's Rogue, who was almost cut from the movie entirely, though word has now reached us that she will at least make a cameo appearance. Singer knows that in a movie with so many characters as this one, there is a serious risk of the story getting padded to the detriment of the film as a whole, so sacrifices have to be made. I expect these mutants to serve as canon fodder in their attempt to
escort Wolverine to the past where most of the story takes place though.
No problem, as long as Singer makes us care about their demise. If there's one person who excels at bringing together large ensembles without confusing the audience needlessly and making them empathic about all of them, it's Singer.
Tomorrow: final trailer for this same movie. X-celsior!
25 different magazine covers?! Am I glad I'm not a collector of anything X-Men, saves me a lot of money in this case. I doubt there would be many people - though I know there will definitely be some - crazy enough to collect them all if they can just behold them in Hi-Def glory online. And they certainly are glorious, me thinks. (Be sure to check them out right here to form your own opinion on the subject.) Though there's the usual Photoshop editing to post the various characters overly smoothly in the shot, you can't deny the full panoramic view of all 25 covers in the right order, moving from the Sixties to the (not too distant?) future, is quite an ingenious piece of work. I must admit I didn't even notice the big picture (literally) at first when I only saw the first six covers made available. However, it's the characters, new an old, that take centerstage on both the covers and in fan interest, including my own. We finally get to see decent shots of the much anticipated new characters, as well as the grim future appearances of beloved familiar ones from Singer's own first pair of X-movies. I'm first and foremost glad and thankful virtually all of both time frame's major players have returned, including personal favorites like Sir Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence and Ellen Page. Say what you will about the rather pretentious and arrogant cover text 'the biggest ever superhero movie', this film certainly has the most impressive cast to date of all Marvel flicks. The greatest fear in this regard is that with so many characters, few of them get a true chance to shine and many will be relegated to minor tidbits of interaction: a feeling not unwarranted since overcrowdedness has already cost Anna Paquin's Rogue her limited screen time, though oddly enough she's still present on these covers regardless. That said, if Singer proved one thing with X-Men and X2, it's that he knows how to handle star studded ensemble pieces, giving each character his or her due. I have faith he hasn't forgotten how to keep large casts worth our while on screen.
The most notable thing about these covers is the excellent new shots they provide of hot new mutant characters, namely Quicksilver (the first, as another will appear next year in the second Avengers film), Warpath, Sunspot, Blink and Bishop. A diverse bunch appropriated from the whole spectrum of the X-universe throughout its long history and hopefully not randomly thrown in the mix. Though Warpath, Blink and Bishop look a lot like their comic book counterparts (except with blacker costumes, to establish a sense of coherency in the bleak future X-look), Sunspot and particularly Quickie have underwent a few stylistic changes, in the latter's case no doubt to make him distinct from the other Quicksilver, which might follow the character's historically drawn dresscode more closely. As for Sunspot, maybe I'm just used to seeing him in full 'spot mode' too much to remember his actual physical regular appearance. What's more surprising than the addition of novel characters is the unexpected return of old ones, i.e. Colonel Stryker (who looks quite different from his counterpart in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, pushing that movie out of the cinematic continuity even further) and Toad (who also bears little similarity to the original as played by Ray Park). I'm guessing Toad will stay limited to playing the henchman as before, but Stryker clearly will have a bigger part to play as the film's secondary human antagonist (next to Peter Dinklage's Bolivar Trask), likely forming a liaison between the American military and Trask Industries as the pair of them engage in constructing mutant hunting Sentinels. As for those, they look spectacular. The past version looks retro and similar enough to the comic book robots to keep the fans satisfied (or me, at least), while the future Sentinel is a whole different beast altogether, which definitely allowed the design team to go all-out. As for the character design, I'm sure there will be ample whining about the black Batmanesque X-costumes, but I have little against them except they make for too uniform a look as opposed to the wildly divergent styles of costumes from the comics. Some characters make it work, like Colossus and Storm who look badass, while on others (Xavier, Shadowcat (here simply referred to by her real name Kitty Pryde)) the choice is less appealing. However, I'm all for substance over style, and as long as these are compelling characters played convincingly by capable actors, I have no qualms about their outfits. Not everyone can look like Mystique, who has found a perfect balance in that respect.
Aside from the background panorama, there's a few other little details to enjoy. I love Blink's teleporting window, revealing Warpath's back, and vice versa. Maybe the covers hint at a romantic relationship or some other personal connection between these newbie characters? Also of note is the difference between Wolverine's claws in both eras, the past showing the bone claws he originally was born with as illustrated in X-Men Origins: Wolverine (welcome back to the continuity!), the future witnessing him equipped with his well known adamantium claws instead. Since it was established Logan got the rare metal grafted onto his skeleton somewhere in the early Seventies, and the past section of X-Men: Days of Future Past as I understood it takes place in 1963 around the time of JFK's assassination, this fits the timeline neatly. And what's with the military look to Havok and Toad? They undercover or som'thin'? What's up with Quicksilver's utility belt? Why is Rogue all in white unlike the rest of her team members, and what's that spaceship looking thingy above here? These covers provide both answers and new questions, and prove more effective in terms of spawning speculation than the somewhat disappointing first trailer did.
In other news, Marvel is doing with the Russo Brothers what Fox recently did with Matt Reeves on Planet of the Apes, seemingly already hiring them on the basis of great expectations over concrete results for another sequel. I still say this is not the smartest move, but at least in the case of Marvel Studios advance planning of future projects has been shown to be taken much more seriously than is usual. And so far I have no reason to doubt the qualities of the Russos, as I very much liked what I saw of Captain America: The Winter Soldier so far. But who cares about a project at least three or four years in the future when you can drool over them X-covers some more? X-Men: Days of Future Past is only a few months away but thanks to promotional strategies like these the suspense is killing me. Considering the status of the original story line as one of the greatest X-Men classics and the presence of a humongous cast of talented actors, as well as this film's need to also serve as a decent set-up for the sequel X-Men: Apocalypse, the movie certainly has a lot to live up to. I trust Singer realized all of this well in advance. Considering his success on the first X-films, I'm willing to cut him some slack. X-celsior, Bryan!
I'm not surprised at this occurrence: considering the vast number of returning characters, not to mention a bunch of new ones, there were bound to be a few left in the cold. Apparently Rogue was only in this one single action scene, so it appears there was little substance to her character anyway. If it helps the pace and flow of the movie, sacrifices have to be made. 'Kill your darlings' is a well established editorial practice, and many a film has fallen prey to scenes featuring fan favorites being chopped out. Compare The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King for example, where everyone's preferred evil wizard Saruman was excised, despite being played by the formidable Christopher Lee (blasphemy says I!). At least that movie had an extended cut upcoming, which I doubt will be the case for Days of Future Past. At least Bryan Singer assures us we'll see the scene on the home cinema release regardless, albeit not reintegrated in the movie proper. It is always a hard thing for actors to swallow when they hear they haven't made it into the final film - the Saruman incident for instance resulted in a brief falling-out between Lee and Peter Jackson - but apparently Paquin is enough of a professional to be cool with it, even though it means she did the whole Comic-Con press thing last summer for nothing. That is, Singer tells us she agrees with the decision: we have not had confirmation of her own opinion yet, so maybe it's just a marketing tactic to assure us that despite the change everything has been resolved amicably. Something which I am inclined to believe, considering the director and actress have worked before twice, so they're probably dear friends as these things go. And as for the fanboys, get over it: there's still plenty of mutants around in Days of Future Past to make for an X-travaganza like nothing seen before. Unless Singer goes all Sentinel and terminates a few more to make the movie run more smoothly. It's Marvel, anything can happen.
Business is slow of late, but don't blame me, blame business. And blame time for not being available in the quantities one would like to have at his/her disposal. Anyway, here's a bit of news I managed to slip through:
I like alternative timelines, I like viral campaigns for movies that make good use of them to get me excited for a movie and I like X-Men, so this is a winner. It may not be the most detailed video (and a bit short really) and it's more of a teaser for the Bent Bullet website (which it itself is a teaser for next year's X-Men: Days of Future Past movie), but it serves as a decent catalyst for public interest. The article on the website looks fascinating too, but unfortunately, as mentioned above, lack of time prohibits me from reading it (probably until the Holidays have come and gone). I glanced through it and already found a minor spoiler for characters that we saw join Magneto's cause in X-Men: First Class, but won't be featured in the sequel because life (or its exact opposite rather) intervened with their goals. So no Jason Flemyng in DoFP apparently, since he's apparently too busy getting cast for Star Wars Episode VII.
You gotta love the eternal 'what if' question. Marvel certainly does, the House of Ideas even made a long running, delightful comic book series entitled What If on the subject, dealing exclusively with alternative plots to regular series, to explore the possibilities had things turned out otherwise. What if Wolverine was a Thirties' gangster? What if Spider-Man's daughter had survived? This viral video really fits right into that same venue. After all, First Class already handled historic happenstances that we know the conclusion of (at least, students of history do), but shed a different light on the situation because of the superpowered individuals native to the X-Universe, who could have influenced such global events for intriguing dramatic purposes. Occurrences that are shrouded into mystery until this day beg a mutant involvement in fiction, so the JFK assassination is a logical topic for an alternate history revisitation. Magneto bending a bullet so it would hit Kennedy is a wonderful notion, as is the thought of Mystique disguising herself as somebody else (in this instance, Lee Harvey Oswald) and taking the shot itself to add to the public confusion and number of question marks surrounding the case. Upon learning the possibility of mutant influence in the matter, the bleak future we'll see in the next movie, where mutants are hunted and slaughtered by the robotic Sentinels to guard the human public, is not such an unlikely thing to happen. I sure hope the viral campaign for Days of Future Past will contain more similarly themed conspiracy virals. I have heard it from reliable sources that such mutant scum was also responsible for the Watergate scandal and the Chernobyl catastrophe, ya know...
These are some fabulous, artistically appreciative posters! Gotta love the throwback to the good ol' propaganda style of the regimes of the Thirties that proved a definite inspiration here. And why not after all? With X-Men: Days of Future Past the franchise journeys into much darker territory than it has so far on the big screen. Sure, there have been incidents of violences and mutual attempts at genocide from both man and mutant in the series at numerous turns, but nothing as bleak as the comics on occasion explored. This is the first time we see just what the X-Men are fighting for, or better yet, what they're aiming to prevent: a future where mutants are a social minority on the verge of being purged by the ruling race that deems them a threat to its own existence. Rather than getting their hands dirty themselves, mankind had delegated this glorious task to machines with awesome power not all that dissimilar from their targets, coupled with a convenient off-switch (or are they?) should problems arise in their simple programming: destroy all mutants! The notion of one race/species overthrowing another it deems inferior or threatening of course hearkens back to the saddest pages of past human history, while this film is set both in the now (of sorts) and in the future, indicating man may not have learned so much from its past. Which is of course also a sad aspect of genocide: despite the mass cullings instigated by vast propaganda machines that produced posters such as these, mankind still hasn't alwasy learned from the past and repeated such abhorrent mistakes throughout the 20th century. At least in the Marvel universe, we have superheroes like the X-Men that fight for all kinds and creeds of man to stay safe from such atrocities. Unless they too are targeted for termination: Days of Future Past will show us just what happens then...
By the way, someone inform me whether it was a conscious decision on Marvel's part to have 'Trask' be an anagram of 'Stark'? I doubt there wasn't, as Stark Industries basically turned from creating weapons for profit to producing inventions and devices for the benefit of mankind when Tony Stark donned the Iron Man suit, while Bolivar Trask - who, it appears, will be played in this film by Tyrion Lannister Peter Dinklage: quite a surprising bit of casting, as the two look nothing alike, but with such a capable actor, I'm not complaining! - and his family got ever more obsessed with mutant genocide, Sentinels being one of their results. Seems they went the opposite route. Too bad there is no Stark Industries in Fox's branch of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. But there still is that alleged connection between the X-Men and the Fantastic Four that will supposedly witness its first link crafted in this flick, so who knows just who might come to the mutants' aid in this dystopian alternate universe?
It had to happen sooner rather than later, considering how much money studios make over superhero movies, especially the Marvel kind. Since the rights to various franchises and characters lie with various studios, a few characters would surely cause difficulty in terms of copyright, and now they have. The characters in point are none other than my favorite sibling superhumans, Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch. Starting off as mutant terrorists and enemies of the X-Men, they soon quit a life of wreaking havoc among humankind and turned towards protecting it as full members of the illustrious Avengers (which still made them enemies of the X-Men at times). So now the question is, where do they best fit in?
Of course, if they are to be done justice and stay true to their comic book origin, they are the children of Magneto first and mutants foremost. So that would mean they would best begin with appearing in the X-Men franchise, but so far, they've been completely ignored despite their father having appeared four times before, as has his Brotherhood of (Evil) Mutants. Apparently Fox saw little appeal to their presence, until Joss Whedon announced his plans to incorporate them in The Avengers 2 last month, at which point Fox catapulted them (or at least the male half of the pair) without advance notice in their latest X-travaganza, Days of Future Past. It really feels that was done solely to create further friction between Fox and Marvel/Disney, since there were no signs at all of their appearance in the movie before Whedon's announcement, nor were they featured in the original comic book story line (and neither was Magneto, but his Brotherhood at least was, run by femme fatale Mystique, who is in the film as I reported here last week). Whedon however has no plans of dropping his two beloved mutant Avenger members, nor should he, since they fit better in there, judging from their long run as Avengers in that line of comic books, which far exceeded the number of issues they served as nemeses to their fellow mutant do-gooders.
Of course, it seemed unlikely from the inception of their appearance in Whedon's next film that they would be featured as Magneto's kids, or mutants at all. That's really X-Men territory. So far there has been no word on mutants at all in the true Marvel Cinematic Universe, and maybe it's better if it stays that way, since it might become hopelessly convoluted for the general audience and so far the established MCU is extensive enough to last us a decade of movies and TV-series. Whedon will have to prove creative with these characters, which in his case I don't mind at all. I heard rumours he intends to render them Inhumans; a good solution considering they are the next best thing to mutants and they haven't been used yet, plus Quicksilver has had plenty of dealings with them considering he married one and sired a daughter with her. Plus, it would give Whedon a chance to return the favour to Fox and give them the finger, since the Inhumans have usually been used as antagonists to the Fantastic Four, a franchise still under Fox's control. If mutants are denied to the true MCU, Marvel might as well steal the Inhumans from Fox. You get some, you lose some.
My favorite solution to this whole mess? A super crossover between both studios' superheroes springs to mind, but I realize full well that's much harder to pull off on film than it is on comic book paper. So many characters played by so many stars, yet still retaining a lot of action and preferably a decent story too? Fat chance. So why not do what the comic books did: create separate universes that are so alike but leave ample room for explaining away all the inconsistencies. Fox started this whole comic book movie rage back in 2000 with X-Men, let they be the genuine Marvel-616 Universe. And let Marvel's Cinematic Universe be what in terms of feel and style it has always seemed to aspire to be, the Ultimate Marvel Universe. Comic book fans would surely appreciate such a crafty solution, though I know it would still cause confusion among regular audiences who simply are not aware of the intricacies of the Marvel Universe or the copyright issues surrounding the various Marvel movies. These are basically the same audiences who wonder when Batman will appear in The Avengers, the type of people I still have to explain why Spider-Man wasn't in the X-Men films, the folks who'll never know the difference between Captain Marvel and Captain Marvel. They don't get it anyway, all they have to do is sit back and hope for a good entertaining superhero flick. That's not so much to ask and not so hard to deliver, Cinematic Universes and superhero legal battles aside. Let the fans worry and wonder about all that nerd stuff, and just enjoy whatever the studios throw at you without pondering about crossovers and such. Marvel/Disney and Fox, all I ask is that you Make Mine Marvel. You did a pretty good job at that so far.
Good news, for various reasons. I'll quickly name the first and get over it, since it will immediately come to the minds of people who know me: I'm such a nerd sexy blue mutant women get me excited, even over ordinary girls. That's that over with. Moving on, it's nice to know Jennifer Lawrence isn't afraid to get all naked and covered in paint again - an arduous process, if we are to believe the few women who have gone through it all and survived - as she's now playing Mystique for the second time (the first was in X-Men: First Class). This time though, she's bound to have quite a bit more scenes in the (blue) buff, considering she's abandoned the X-Men and joined Magneto's Brotherhood of Mutants, thus becoming a terrorist. And who needs clothes for that if you can produce them at will? Third, it's also good to know Bryan Singer is still adhering to the X-Universe he set up with his own first two X-films, despite other directors having followed suit since. Judging from this and the other pictures released so far, Singer hasn't made any changes to the design of the characters he made us come to love a decade ago. Despite Singer's successors tampering with the time line a bit, Singer appears to stay faithful to both the fantastic original X-Men and the fabulous semi-prequel First Class. That makes for some great consistency in Fox's X-universe,which is very useful for setting up that other Marvel Cinematic Universe Fox wants to create so desperately to compete with Marvel's own Avengers. Too bad Fox's Fantastic Four won't get similar respect, but hey, it hardly deserves it as much.
If the original Mystique Rebecca Romijn's known tribulations - nine-hour make-up process, bitter cold on set - are any indication, Lawrence will be in for a rough ride, again. And she does so at free will, despite her jump to stardom caused by The Hunger Games and her recently acquired Oscar, so apparently she likes the character enough. Or it was one of those nasty contractual obligations, that would also make sense, playing Mystique at this point in her career. Maybe it was both. I like to think she likes Mystique. Who wouldn't like a naked blue woman that can alter her appearance to look like anyone dressed as anyone?!
Another reason to be excited once more over X-Men: Days of Future Past is Tyrion Lannister's Peter Dinklage's continued involvement. Especially since we still don't know who he's set to play. Us Marvel fanatics might be in for a real surprise. Or a huge letdown. But hey, it's Dinklage, so we know the performance can't be truly bad. I'm guessing he'll play Apocalypse, anyone wanna take that bet? Come on, you know this looks awesome!:
Other than the intriguing (and far less sexy, which is appropriate for this darker story) new outfit for Storm, what interests me most at this point is Bryan Singer's blatant readyness to communicate with the X-fans. Whereas most directors and studios try to keep the amount of officially released information rather limited so as to entice moviegoers by their lack of knowing what it's actually all about (I'm talking to you, Star Trek Into Darkness!!), Singer happily continues to tweet bits and pieces like this. Of course, no major plot points are revealed so far - not that there'll be that many of those, since X-Men: Days of Future Past is said to follow the original Uncanny X-Men story line of the same name fairly closely - and any existing cast list on sites like IMDb will tell you X-veterans the likes of Halle Berry, Shawn Ashmore and Patrick Stewart are returning to the mutated fold with a vengeance, but still, it's good to see an established director like Singer taking some of his valuable time to personally relay news goodies like this to a fanboy world that's eager to see this new X-travaganza of his. Here's to hoping we'll get a decent update on Tyrion Lannister's Peter Dinklage's character and costume soon, though I'm guessing that might prove to be just a little too big a spoiler after all.
I'm kinda digging the new outfit. Cape seems a bit small though, but hey, there must be economic crises in bleak, near Apocalyptic alternate timelines too, eh?
It's outrageous but unfortunately all too true: after two months of waiting for my PC to be returned to me, it arrived... with no Windows installed. The one thing I asked them to do they failed to perform. My trust in Dynabyte has shattered completely. Though I left my PC at the store once more so they can work on it, I'm now entirely set on buying a new one completely just to rid myself of having to get involved in further mind-boggling incompetence like this. I haven't fully decided yet whether I'm gonna go for a PC again or just switch to Apple like so many around me have done (and they seem like happier people). Time will tell, but hopefully I'll get back online within days.
In the mean time, I still get the chance every now and then of getting a scoop up at MovieScene. This week's scoop is double news around the same movie, which is once again named X-Men: Days of Future Past:
First of all, there's little to comment on the 3D release. It was a long time coming. The X-franchise is a major one, especially now that Fox is gonna compete with Disney/Marvel with its own corner of the Marvel Universe aligning (Fantastic Four/X-Men team-ups seem inevitable for the not too distant future). And with a big name like this, the studio harbors big expectations for making money; 3D is of course a major tool for just that purpose. So the fact it will be a 3D-release is not surprising at all. However, the news that it's gonna be shot in the 3D-format is. This is still a very expensive procedure and most often studios prefer to rely on post-conversions, even though this usually spawns less impressive result and both studios and audiences know it. I guess Fox is trying to upstage The Avengers here, which was post-converted but still did extremely well at the box office. No doubt Disney/Marvel will soon turn to shooting in 3D too. No bad news (if you have any affinity for 3D at all), since it should make for a more refined and good looking 3D presentation.
And then there's Peter Dinklage, short of stature, high on acting skills. This week Bryan Singer confirmed he has been added to the cast, but his role remains a mystery. At first it was widely speculated he was gonna play Puck, a short, old friend of Wolverine's from the Canadian super hero team Alpha Flight, since he does seem most suited for that role to anybody but fools and little people themselves. This has already been debunked and probably for the best, since Puck isn't a very interesting character, which goes for most of Alpha Flight. His presence might have been a good first step towards an Alpha Flight movie, but I doubt anybody is really waiting for that to happen. That does leave the question, who's Dinky gonna play? Enter digital technology, which for one thing allowed him to voice a giant prehistoric gorilla pirate in Ice Age 4, indicating the sky is the limit. Though it has been confirmed by now Dinklage will play a villain, that still leaves us with little to go on, considering the vast numbers of X-villains of all shapes and sizes. Mr. Sinister? Nimrod? Mojo? Perhaps even Apocalypse? We just have no way of telling, since the digital age coupled with grand acting abilities like Pete's can deliver to fancifully re-create any X-baddie from the comics for the big screen... Whoever it's gonna end up being, as long as Tyrion Lannister Dinklage is on board, it seems little can go wrong (get it?). The Days of Future Past seem ever brighter. For the audience, not for muties.
