"X-Men Origins: First Class"

Well I guess we know why Donner made that statement a month or so ago about no plans for Xmen First Class. She was trying to keep the possibility of Singer directing from getting out.

Singer involved has me a bit more optimistic, but Im still being cautious.... it is FOX after all.

If they are going to bring Singer back, why not just develop a new storyline and make it X-4.  Let him mop up some of the mess that X3 left - namely:

 

* show Cyclops has survived his demise.  I mean this was so stupid.  The character should be brought back.  Nightcrawler could have popped in and saved him at the last minute.  Who knows. Some kind of storyline would resolve this. 

* show what happens to Xavier.  Remember the end credits?

* No Magneto

* Follow up with the Angel character

Why don't they just take Wolverine, Cyclops, Nightcrawler, Beast, a few others established in the previous films (along w/ the same actors like Jackman) and move this forward, not back.    And add 1 new character if needed (only 1, not 20). 

This could be so much better than a prequel.    I'm sick of prequels!!!!    They try to shoehorn in some "surprise" so that it ties into a future story (of a film that we've already seen) and it often doesn't work. 
 

Sure sounds like a prequel to me:

From Variety

Bryan Singer To Direct 'X-Men: First Class'

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118012931.html?categoryid=13&cs=1&ref=vertfilm

Could be interesting indeed

I dont blame Ratner for X3. I blame FOX. The studio gave the writters ridiculous guidelines to work with. Singer knew X3 would be Cyclops movie - the studio underestimated the characters importance (which only goes to show how little they understand about the properties they own) and later had said they regretted the decision to knock him off.

All things considered theres alot of X3 I actually like. My issues with it are the stupid deaths the studio forced on the writters. Cyclops, Pheonix and Xavier are wasted,  and were forced to watch another movie focusing on wolverine. They would have been better off making Cyclops disappear for the film, having him take off somewhere (Antartica) rather just just arbitrarily kill off such a important character. I also give Ratner credit for coming into a pretty chaotic situation,with a very short deadline and getting the film done with  the confines which he had to work with.


I actually liked the Cure storyline and enjoyed the  performances by most of the minor characters - Beast, Juggernaut, Kitty Pryde,Iceman, Pyro, Mystique, Angel and the like.Which shows that a Xmen movie doesnt need Wolverine to work. The characters are interesting enough to support Xmen films. Its too bad the studio doesnt hav faith  in the characters. There are other Xmen besides Wolverine.Problem is movie wolverine isnt as interesting as the comic book character was (at least when I was reading Xmen back in the day). And even during what most people will agree was the books best run - the Claremont Byrne years - the character was used in moderation. It wasnt until the Hellfire Club and Wendigo stories that Wolverine really came into the spotlight.

Most of the most interesting characters have already been used. My hope is they concentrate on the CHARACTERS, using less of them.

For First Class I like to see young Cyclops, Beast, Storm and Jean Grey and how they become a family and find a home at Xaviers school - maybe with Blob (already established) Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver as the main baddies. A prequel also means Magneto in a major role.

You have alot of years that predated the first Xmen film, so alot can be done. If Fox stays out of hte damn way and gives the creative team freedom to work, Im willing to give First Class a chance.
Edited by JonZ - 12/18/09 at 9:16am

http://www.heatvisionblog.com/2009/12/bryan-singer-xmen-first-class-jack-the-giant-killer-q-and-a.html

Very interesting nonetheless

With Singer heading this one up I doubt I'll see it, his films fail to impress me on just about every level.

Ron-P, you didn't like X-Men or X-Men2? They were the best!

Nope, I didn't. I put the X-men films near the bottom of the comic-book films list.

But then why would you care about another X-Men film?

But your answer compelled me to come up with a ranking of comic book films. Difficult for me since I don't always know what films came from comic books. So my list is more of the obvious ones I expect. My ranking of live-action comic book films would go something like this (best to worst).

X-Men 2
X-Men 1
Batman (Tim Burton)
Batman: The Dark Knight (New one)
Batman Begins (New one)
Blade Trinity
Batman Returns (Tim Burton)
Superman Returns
edit: Iron Man
...then there's a big drop in quality and the list would continue with...
Spiderman series
Blade
Blade II
Daredevil
Elektra
X-Men 3
The Hulk (Ed Norton remake)
Ghost Rider
Watchmen (so much wasted potential, so much tedium!)
The Hulk (Ang Lee disaster)
Fantastic Four
Edited by Will_B - 12/27/09 at 8:14am

I  just found a wikipedia entry on what films came from comics, and I was surprised to see that Constantine and The Crow came from comic books. I'm going to guess that they were graphic novels more than they were comic books. Both those films were very good, the latter especially.  V for Vendetta, another graphic novel that made an outstanding film. Men in Black is listed as being a comic book too, but I doubt it resembled the movies much.

Constantine came from a comic series called Hellblazer, which was a spinoff of the Swamp Thing comic series (in the pages of which John Constantine debuted).

Ron can answer for himself, but you mention Superman Returns and that illustrates (for me) how one could not like a particular movie and still enjoy the subject matter enough to hold out hope for future entries.  I would probably put Iron Man as the top comic movie for me, possibly followed by the Dark Knight and the second Spider-Man.  I liked the first X-Men, but not so much the second.  I didn't bother with 3 or Wolverine Origins.

Others you might not suspect are adaptations of comic books:

 

Ghost World
Surrogates
30 Days of Night
 

Okay, I can't think of any more.  But, there are quite a few that have the potential to surprise.  I didn't know Surrogates was a comic book adaptation until after it was released.

My list would be like this:

The Dark Knight
Superman
Batman Begins
Spiderman2
Xmen2
Watchmen Dir Cut
Superman Returns
Iron Man
The Rocketeer (which Im STILL waiting for a decent HV release of)
Spiderman


Greg, dont forget about Road To Perdition.

Rather than list my favorites (the majority of which are from this past decade) I'll just saw the last 10 years have been an embarrassment of riches for a comic book/movie nerd like myself. And in quality as well as quantity.
Superman Returns was one of the few I vehemently disliked and I lay just about all the blame at Singers feet.
OTOH, I have to give Singer huge props for the first X-men film, which in the wake of a more action filled sequel, doesn't get as much credit as it deserves. That film was strong enough to kick off 10 years of mostly high quality, imaginative work from loads of talented people.

I'm feeling apathetic about the prospect of First Class, but I do want to thank Singer for getting the ball rolling on 10 good years (not that he's gonna be reading this).

What, I cannot post negative comments about a film, or a franchises sequel / prequel? Am I only supposed to post positive comments?

As for listing good / bad comic book films. All I'd say is the X-Men and Spider Man films are at the bottom of my list, the worst of the comic book films.

Paul Scott, Id be interested to see youre top10. (BTW I think you and I are the only people on the planet who liked Ang Lees Hulk and it just missed my top10)

Ron, You didnt like Spiderman2? What about it didnt you like? 

So now this film has a release date June3, 2011, which is only 13 months away.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/44941

 

Oh, sorry for such a late response. As for the Spidy films, I though the casting was terrible and the movies un-engaging with actions sequences that were for the most part boring. Casting Tobey Maguire as Spider Man was not a good choice IMO...too bland of an actor. 

 

I just found the X-Men films and Spidy films mediocre at best, in pretty much every way. 

I'd say there is pretty much no way it makes that release.

Casting is now fast and furious.  Nicholous Hoult will play Beast:

 

http://www.deadline.com/2010/07/x-men-first-class-finds-a-beast-in-nicholas-hoult/

 

Landry Jones as Banshee:

 

http://www.deadline.com/2010/07/another-mutant-cast-as-caleb-landry-jones-plays-banshee/

 

Also cast:

 

James McAvoy (Xavier), Michael Fassbender (Magneto) and Alice Eve (Emma Frost)

The choice of Banshee is a suprise, but not someone Im excited to see. There are more interesting mutants that can be used - Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Havok,Thunderbird, Sunfire.....

 

I would love to see Havoks power displayed on film.

According to Dark Horizons Lucas Till is Havok and Kevin Bacon is in talks to play a villian.

Theres alot of info coming out about this the past 2 weeks as filming starts at the end of the month, including Janurary Jones and Zoe Kravitz being cast.

 

Heres a report from AICN:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/46217

I like Banshee in the old comics.   Too bad they are making him so young.   In the X-Men comics he always came across as an older guy who had been around the world a bit doing other things (he was Interpol if I recall).   He balanced out the newbies of the time.     I agree that Havok would be much cooler.   Sunfire brought in for attitude for sure.   

 

Will we get a good ROCKETEER after CAPTAIN AMERICA next year since they share directors?   I certainly hope so.  This is an often forgetting gem from the 80's that captured comics better than most even today.  Great stuff.  

I read this item about the movie:

 

http://blastr.com/2010/08/6-things-bryan-singer-jus.php

 

Sounds good. Takes place in the 60s and has a James Bond "look" to it. This went from one I was vaguely interested in to one I want to check out. Still wish the cast of characters mirrored the original book though. 

That is outstanding.    I was just thinking about this regarding the Fantastic Four franchise, too.  I was looking at a cover I have from issue 1 on the wall and thought that would make for a nice re-boot of that franchise.  To do it with X-Men would be too freaking cool.  I know comics write  their stories as if they were happening  "right now" but sometimes it would be nice to do them in the periods they originated.   60's for  most iconic Marvel comics,  40's for DC stuff like Supes and Batman, etc.    Hell, I remember Tarantino mouthing off about if he had the chance to do a Bond movie he would do it retro, too.  That would be too cool.

 

Thanks for the link!     My excitment ramped up for this, too.

The article mentions:

"One thing's for sure: First Class is abandoning the continuity of the first three movies (hell, that already went out the window with X-Men Origins: Wolverine), but we'll either get something either very cool or even more muddled in return."

 

If they are not going to follow continuity with the first films, why on earth would they not go ahead and "mirror" the characters from the original comics as Sam said?  

 

For whatever reason, some of the people producing these comic book movies feel compelled to ignore and / or change nearly 50 years of story-lines for a single movie.  This has happened over and over in the Spider-man and X-men movies.  

 

Those unfamiliar with the material don't notice the changes.  But the fans, those that are familiar, could be even bigger advocates.  Why not at least satisfy your advocates?  It makes no sense to me.