Cinematical

1. This also lends itself to a continuity problem.

In the first X-men (events which is supposed occur after these prequels) there is a scene where Wolverine enters a bar and glaces at a television. On the television is Hank McCoy (beast) giving an interview. He looked the way he appeared before completeing his mutation which is like a regular human...with glasses.

This is kind of annoying news.

Posted at 9:57AM on May 14th 2008 by John R

2. Continuity problems aside this could be interesting. We know that Magneto and Xavier together build Cerebro and the Institute and we learn in *shudder* X-Men 3 that Beast is one of the first pupils. Perhaps we explore the early years of the Institute where we might see Hank. Or maybe Hank comes to know both Charles and Magneto when the beastly youngster is attacked by a mob and he is saved by two benevolent mutants.

They could always explain the continuity problem with the first film by saying that because mutants weren't "out" yet he was using an image inducer much like Nightcrawler does in the comics.

In any case I'm glad to hear news about the movie in general as the focus has seemed to be more on Wolverine and the other upcoming Marvel properties. And as for all the character additions in Wolverine, I can't imagine that they'll all be integral parts to the story. I'm assuming most will be eye candy cameos, like a character you see in a single page on a single panel that is nice to see and buit of an inside joke or something. I'm reminded of the cartoon series when Wolverine is tracking Morph through Africa and Morph takes on a bunch of character forms of guys like Gideon and Deadpool who are fun to see, but whom we never see at all in the series.

Posted at 10:39AM on May 14th 2008 by Quito

3. they dont deserve to make another xmen movie they way they screwed up the first 3 pieces of crap. in age where people are supposed to be fixing previous errors and what not i hated all 3 xmen movies.

why? numbe 1 complaint i think is no gambit. EVERYONE loves gambit and u dont put the only person in the stupid group that has a personality and sense of humour in the movie.

3 movies no gambit. no rogue didnt fly and didnt use an ounce of her super stregth. nexttttttt at the end of the second one they implied jean was the phoenix. now i am by no means a comic book buff but from the cartoons i always saw gambit around when the phoenix was there. so to me something is definitely all over the place.

finally im not interested in either of these movies. maybe a little bit wolverine but honestly xmen has alllllllwaysssssss been mainly wolerine. hes the go to guy and everyone likes him. so i dont see the NEED for a wolverine movie it just seems too much.

magneto i dont even know why. hes not that interesting his plots are tired and repetetive. he wants to be in control yawn its the same crap from the first 2 movies cant remember the first one if he was there or not. magneto definitely doesnt deserve his own movie.

can someone fix this the way they did batman. i think personally xmen movie franchise is SHOT. wolverine's movie will probably make money. but im calling it right now magneto will flop a la speed racer which was a good cartoon. but i dont know who they were targetting with that overboard movie commercials. i could have told u that movie was gonna flop the moment u told me it was coming. it doesnt have mass appeal and if u want it to they needed to make it more serious. not something that looks like it belongs on teletoon after reboot lol

Posted at 10:50AM on May 14th 2008 by Riley Freeman

4. Just so you know:
Gambit first appearance: 1990
Jean Grey as Phoenix first appearance: 1976
Dark Phoenix saga: 1980

Posted at 11:42AM on May 14th 2008 by Ronan

5. thanks. didnt know. like i said im not a comic buff. nevertheless killing off character before the entire cast is there. terrible

Posted at 11:45AM on May 14th 2008 by Riley Freeman

6. "The picture showed a younger guy in the Beast getup leaping down. He was in the full blue costume with his long tail and you couldn't mistake him for anything other than Beast."


Okay, in the article, at Latino Review, he puts in an update saying how people keep telling him that Beast doesn't have a tail and that it's probably Nightcrawler. Then, the writer then gets all defensive saying that the guy he spoke to said it was definitely Beast.

Wow... complete BS. If Beast shows up in this film with a tail, I'm just completely giving up on all X-Men property. It's like they can't any of it right... except for arcade games, apparently.

Posted at 11:56AM on May 14th 2008 by Hellstorm|INC

7. I was mad at Xmen 3 too, but you guys are holding the grudge for all of us. If you like the cartoon so much, just hold on to that. I'm worried about these spin-offs too, but you just have to hope for the best. Some director some day will get it right, and luckily the fans will always be there to hope for it.

Posted at 10:29PM on May 14th 2008 by Hughman Bein

8. by tryin' to do too much, the quality of the stories and the development of the characters have suffered greatly. the only MARVEL adaptations to show any respect or attention to process:

1. Spiderman 1 & 2
2. X-Men 2
3. Iron Man

let's be completely honest, comics are written ad nauseum until the source material wears thin & only a minute percent of that is actually worthy of film adaptation. if combed through carefully & properly written with a sequel/continuation in mind; 1 good film & 4 excellent sequels could be produced. i personally want to see an end to the "dogpiling" (read X3 & Spiderman 3). keep it simple, entertaining and exciting but, don't beat us over the head with a plethora of undeveloped characters and story line tangents that amount to nothing.

Posted at 6:11AM on May 19th 2008 by Zion