Amph X-Men Movies & TV - Discussion

He would still go to Poland due to getting out of the Pentagon and due to his alleged involvement in JFK's death. But yes, he was definitely a high priority fugitive. My guess is that the reason he wasn't found sooner in the new timeline is due to how dangerous he is all together. Without the Sentinels in either case, it would have been difficult to bring him in due to how powerful he was. From the way Erik talked about how he was captured, it was more random luck that they could get him when he was unable to truly defend himself. Here, he would be ready and so I think we're to conclude that while the FBI, the CIA, Interpool and the like tried to find him, they just didn't put as much effort into it as they could have. Even coming at him with plastic guns, with so much metal in the world, it's kinda difficult to nab him again. In this film, the local police attempt it when he's living in the woods and have an edge in getting him to go along peacefully.

 

Sure, that's another way of looking at it. It's all conjecture by us regardless, as the plotlines for the new trilogy were obviously written later, and it's safe to assume that apart from the major basic plot points, no effort has been spent by the writers to account for details mentioned in passing in previous movies. They're counting on that most viewers will remember the main plot points and key events, but nothing beyond that. They've already shown in previous movies in the franchise that they view continuity as merely a recommendation.

 

And did not the quack that made Eric show his power happen because of En Sabah Nur?

 

You mean the quake? Yes, you are right.

 

Right. Note that Logan didn't even know about his being associated with the assassination. He asks Erik about where he was and he tells him that it is a bit complicated, but that he was in the Pentagon. But it is young Charles and Hank who tell him that it was due to the JFK assassination that he was locked up. So I think there was a distinct possibility that his involvement was ruled out at some point.

One more thing to consider, when we first saw the original film, they had a plastic prison ready for Erik in record time. Granted, we know in the second film that Stryker was behind it and knew of him dating back to his son Jason, but it seems rather odd that it would be built so quickly to deal with him. It would have had to have been built well in advance of his capture. DOFP indicates that the idea of dealing with him was fairly new and that it gives Stryker a reason to have plastic guns and then later on, a prison to contain him. A simple enough fix.

As to Cerebro, I think that the simple fix is that Erik and Charles helped to design the blueprints for the mansion version, since the original would be off limits/confiscated. In the new timeline, we see the repairs to the mansion and since Cerebro was damaged in order to stop Apocalypse from using him, thus it is reasonable for him to help repair it. Thus making it true again. In a fashion.

Other musings; watching the series in a particular order starting with FC and going DOFP, some of the story beats work even better than before.

-Starting with FC, you get a good introduction of Mutants and their world with this film as much as you do with the original. It establishes the good and the bad, sets up certain characters and character beats and makes a nice intro. When you get to the original film, we see the older versions of three of the main characters and new teams. It raises a bit of a mystery as to what happened in between. Plus, Erik and Charles now have a history that's established, which for those who aren't familiar with the comics and cartoons can now latch onto.

-XOW is a poor film, but it does cover the basics of what is needed. History is given to Logan and we get to see Stryker, after his intro in FC via his father and a brief mention of him. When we come to the second film, now we know that Stryker is trying to paint himself in a more positive light by leaving out his manipulation of Logan. And we learn that Logan was a rarity for receiving and surviving the Adamantium bonding process and then seeing Deathstrike works, for a newcomer. Seeing Charles finding Scott and rescuing him gives a bit more weight to when Scott is later seen speaking highly to Charles while he is unconscious. Plus, seeing him here gives him a bit more screen time.

-Ending with Logan having lost his memories and drinking in a bar, then catching up to him in Canada again, gives a bit of a nice symmetry. Plus, we the audience know that he's worked with a team of Mutants before and will do so again, but this time, it's different. Before he only liked one of his teammates, now he likes all but one of them. And as we see, he keeps coming back willingly to the X-Men versus Stryker's team.

-The second film has Hank in a cameo and TLS gives us a full-on appearance. Now it works coming off of FC, since we know him and his history. Working for the government now works due to his having been working for the CIA in the past. When Storm comments on his hair being different, now we see the changes in hairstyles.



The gag about his weight works coming off of FC. His dispassionate attitude towards Mystique works when you take FC into account. Even his being the one to stop Erik with the Cure works, after seeing them together in FC. Hank really benefits watching in his order.

-Going from TLS to "The Wolverine" works since it's fresher in our minds and if you watched the deleted, alternate ending with Logan in the bar in Alberta works as a set up. Then when he sees Charles at the end, coming off of seeing his death and feeling a bit responsible for it, it works. Then going to DOFP and coming off the second solo film, it gives a nice sense of continuity. In this film, we have Logan as our POV into what happened between Cuba and Washington. Then we see how it all changes and takes us right into the newest film.

-I think it is smarter to pick up with "Apocalypse" rather than with "Deadpool" first. Between the coda and teaser leading into each other and the idea that Charles is filling Logan in on what happened, it makes sense to save Wade's adventures as a side story after the main story. "Deadpool" can be phase II, if you will. And with this film, the narrative is back to Erik, Charles, Hank and Raven since we're now seeing them going forward in a new direction. The ties to FC are stronger and we still have a foot in DOFP and in the future with the team still coming together.

 

Richard E. Grant as Mr. Sinister in Wolverine 3? I think it's a bit waste to use him simply as a Wolverine rather than X-Men movie villain.

 

Happened upon this funny deleted scene from First Class as I was watching TAS episodes. The best part is the exchange between Charles and Erik at the start.

 

Many of these deleted scenes should have been left in the film.

 

I've found 90% should, should be a studio rule there has to be a directors/extended cut with movies.

 

Indeed. The Amazing Spider-Man films would be better with most deleted scenes in the actual film.

Can anyone explain Mister Sinister's interactions with Apocalypse in the comics?

 

What are Sinister's powers specifically?

 

You know dude, Google is your friend.

 

But I want you nerds to tell me this stuff!!

 

Read, son. Read. His story is quite ridiculous, just as his name. It'll be worth a chuckle or two.

 

His main power appears to be making slowpokeking post

 

Oh good god. This is why I don't read comics. See? This is why I asked you guys rather than read and suffer a stroke.

 

I'll tell you why a look of comic book readers are looking forward to Mr. Sinister. It's because this guy can hurt the X-Men emotionally and psychologically in which the painful scars won't fade like flesh wounds. Nope, Sinister is obsessed with the Summer bloodline and into all kind of genetic experiments with it, like romantic clones and babies thereof. Dude is just one of the villains that can mess with the hero's head and heart.


I saw this video this morning. Japanese trailer that features a Deadpool end credit scene.

 

Well given he's the villain in the Wolverine movie... I think like every villain in the movies he's more obsessed with Wolverine's bloodline and genetics.

 

Booooo!

Well, not quite true. Trask was obsessed with Mystique's blood.

Anyway, you'll probably right and Sinister will be dabbling with Logan's blood. Bumper. Sinister should be use in the X-Men proper films.

I can't wait for the X-Men to be rebooted with Marvel phase 4.

 

In 1996's, "The Further Adventures Of Cyclops And Phoenix", we learn that Apocalypse awoke in the late 19th century England where he meet Nathaniel Essex before he was Mr. Sinister. Essex was trying to expand upon Darwin's theory of evolution by including Mutants into the equation. One thing that was driving him was that his wife gave birth to a child that died, but had signs of mutation. Nur decides to recruit Essex to serve him with his knowledge about mutation and alters him into being Mr. Sinister. Scott and Jean had come to the past thanks to Mother Sanctity and witness these events, but are unable to prevent them. But it does set the stage for how he becomes aware of them. In 1992's "The X-Cutioner's Song", Essex impersonates Apocalypse in order to make the Four Horsemen go after Scott and Jean, so that he can hand them over to Stryfe in exchange for what would be revealed to be the Legacy Virus, but he thinks it was genetic material from the future. In 2000, Sinister aides Gambit in stopping the Skrulls who had an alliance with Apocalypse. During "The Twelve" storyline, Sinister alters the Living Monolith in order to replace Havok who was part of the Twelve, the group of Mutants who would decide mankind's evolution. Apocalypse intended to transfer his consciousness into the Monolith.

I think that's the extent of their interactions, but for the most part, they didn't really interact all that often.

Funny.

 

Is it confirmed that Sinister will be in Wolverine 3? If so, I can't wait. But who would be playing him?

 

The Essex Corporation was shown taking Logan's blood in 1983, which suggests that he has some role. But it is unclear if he is the main villain, much less who is playing him. Slowpoke thinks it might be Richard E. Grant since he's British and is in the film. But it has not been confirmed.