Several Nitpicky Problems I Had With X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST

Several Nitpicky Problems I Had With X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST

Overall, I thought X-Men: Days of Future Past was an excellent film. With that said, there were plenty of little things that irritated me. Want to hear one fanboy whine about things most people do not care about? Then hit the jump!

Editorial Opinion
By BobbyDrakeApproaches - Jul 15, 2014 09:07 PM EST
Source: Vulture.com

There is plenty to like in X-Men: Days of Future Past. There is great acting all around, dazzling special effects, and a story that (sort of) gives a fresh start to the franchise.
 

Of course, you are not reading this article to hear me praise this movie. Be warned that there will be multiple spoilers throughout this article, so stop here if you have not yet seen it. You should also take note that these are nitpicky problems, so if you think any of these complaints are too small and inconsequential, then you are reading the wrong article, bub.
 

How Beastly


Admittedly, there is an upside to Beast having a serum that allows him to easily transform between his blue-and-furry-form and his nerdy-human-form. It eliminates a continuity error in X-2, when we see Dr. Hank McCoy on a TV screen, talking about mutants. However, I would have preferred to think that he was using an image inducer, or just someone else with the same name.
 

Why? Because having the ability to transform back and forth between the two forms is something Beast never had in the comics. Also, why on earth is anger what triggers the transformation? This is Hank McCoy, not Bruce Banner.
 

On the plus side, some of his transformation scenes were very cool, but I still would have preferred Beast to be blue and furry the whole movie.
 

“Do you know what happens to a Storm when she is impaled by a robot?”


This complaint is not technically with the film itself, but with the marketing used to promote it. In multiple trailers and TV spots, we see Iceman making an ice bridge around a Sentinel, which has been frozen solid. Suddenly, the Sentinel breaks free, and grabs Bobby’s head. The merciless robot decapitates the poor mutant, and then crushes his head with its foot.
 

Okay, the decapitation and foot stomping might have come as a surprise when viewed in the theater, but the fact that Iceman dies was extremely predictable. It might not be much of a spoiler, since it happens at the beginning of the movie, but was it really necessary to use this in the trailer?
 

What happens to Storm is even worse. She is impaled from behind by a Sentinel, and it happens toward the end of the movie. Considering she is the first X-Man to die in the climactic final battle, her death should have been a surprise. Of course, it was not, since we see this clip in the trailer, less than a moment before she is stabbed.
 

Amnesia Sure Sucks


 

At some point in the movie, when Charles is feeling discouraged, Wolverine tells him that he needs to bring the X-Men together. Yes, Logan, that is what a downtrodden Charles needs at the moment, more responsibility. Then Wolverine tells him to remember these names: Scott, Jean Storm.
 

Um, am I the only one who thinks that someone is missing? Is Wolverine just naming those three because Professor X told him they were his first students, and they were already at the mansion when he arrived? Was there not another X-Man that Logan was close to, who was a lot more vulnerable than those three?
 

If you have not already guessed, I am talking about Rogue. The two had a sibling-like relationship in the trilogy (especially the first one), so why is he not trying to protect her like he is with Cyclops, Storm and Jean?
 

Does Wolverine assume he will arrive at the mansion at the same time Rogue does? Is he too stupid to realize that things will probably not happen that way in this reality, and that it is all his fault?
 

X-Men: Ways to Kill the Previous Cast


 

I was hoping to see a sequel to X-Men: First Class because I was hoping to see what happened next to all of the characters in that franchise, not just the big four. However, I am not really bothered by this, because a reunion of the cast of the trilogy is actually far more interesting.
 

With that said, it really irritated me that a movie that was designed to resurrect characters that died in previous movies also killed off all of the supporting characters from X-Men: First Class.
 

Simon Kinberg, the writer of X-Men: Days of Future Past, said “For me, the fun of this movie from when I said, 'We should do Days of Future Past,' was literally the scene of changing the future and Jean is going to come back and Jean and Wolverine are going to have a reunion.”
 

Basically, Kinberg wrote this movie to resurrect Jean, because he feels terrible about how he handled the Dark Phoenix Saga (he also wrote X-Men: The Last Stand). In the process he killed off Banshee, Emma Frost, Angel Salvadore, Azazel, and probably Riptide. Not only that, they all died offscreen. This is almost comparable to Cyclops’ death in X-3. The only reason that these deaths did not ignite the same outrage as Cyclops’ death was because none of these characters are nearly as important to the X-Men mythos.
 

At Least it is Still Plural


 

When it comes to the amount of X-Men on a team, I prefer to have a minimum of five, four at the smallest. The more the merrier, I say, but with a maximum of nine or ten.
 

How many X-Men are in Days of Future Past?
 

Two.
 

There are three, if you count Professor X, but since he is in a wheelchair the majority of the movie, and cannot use his powers throughout the other half, I do not really consider him to be an X-Man. The only X-Men in this movie are Wolverine and Beast.
 

Of course, I am only referring to the past. There are nine X-Men in the future, and that is not even counting Professor X and Magneto. However, the main story takes place in the past, and none of the X-Men in the future has a significant amount of screentime, save perhaps Iceman and Kitty.
 

Why did Havok have to join the army? Why did Banshee have to die? Why could they not have been at the mansion, taking care of things, like Beast?
 

If it is an X-Men movie, then it should be about the X-Men.
 

Sure, you’re dead now, but you’ll get better!


 

The opening of the movie was fairly shocking, as we saw multiple future X-Men slaughtered by the Sentinels. Then, only a few moments later, all the mutants that we just watched die are alive and well! What an astonishing opening, and what a great surprise!
 

It was also a great way to rob the story of any of its tension.
 

In the original comic book storyline, the X-Men were not certain that their time-traveling-save-the-world plan would work. Rachel Grey knew that she could successfully send Kitty back in time, but she did not know if they would be able to change the past. She thought that perhaps Kitty would merely create a new timeline.
 

Of course, she was right. Kitty managed to save Senator Kelly, and prevented the dystopian future she came from. However, she only prevented it in that timeline, as she could not change the one she came from.
 

I assumed the same uncertainty would be present in the movie. Instead, we learn that the younger X-Men have changed the past, and saved themselves many times already.
 

You could argue that every time Kitty sends Bishop back in time, they are actually creating a new timeline, and we only see the results of the timeline they saved. I would argue that we never see the timeline where they were not saved because that timeline was erased from existence.
 

This is starting to sound extremely complicated. My brain hurts. If only I could talk to Kitty, and have her send someone back in time to tell me not to write this article. At the very least, they could tell you not to read it.
 

How to Ruin a Franchise With One Scene


 

Boy, that scene at the end was great! Wolverine changed the past, he changed the future, and he managed to save Beast, Rogue, Cyclops, and Jean! With one scene they gave the franchise a clean slate!
 

Of course, they also dirtied up that slate within the same scene.
 

The easiest way to explain what I mean is to use the newly rebooted Star Trek as an example. In the 2009 film, Nero’s actions create a separate timeline, and arguably erase the old one. I realize that plenty of die-hard fans hated this movie, but it was able to successfully create a new version of the Star Trek universe where the filmmakers could do whatever they wanted. It was not technically a prequel, because it did not precede anything that had come before.
 

When it was announced that Days of Future Past would be the next X-Men film, many people assumed the same thing would happen with the X-Men franchise. In a way, it did, with one huge difference. Whereas the Star Trek franchise can now do whatever the filmmakers want because it is no longer a prequel to anything, the X-Men franchise does not have that kind of freedom, because every movie that is released from here on out is a prequel to that scene.

That means that none of the characters in that scene can be killed, and eventually everyone ends up in the mansion. Does this actually ruin the franchise? No, but it takes away a lot of creative freedom from future filmmakers, and it tells us that we do not need to be worried if certain characters will survive or not. This is the nature of all prequels, but it could have been easily avoided.
 

You have reached the end of this article! Do you have any complaints about X-Men: Days of Future Past? Did you want to complain about how much you hated this article? Do you want to complain about something, but it is too much work to touch the keys? Let me know in the comments!

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST Star Adan Canto Has Passed Away At Age 42
Related:

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST Star Adan Canto Has Passed Away At Age 42

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST Arrives On Disney+ With F-Bomb And Hugh Jackman's Butt Still Intact
Recommended For You:

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST Arrives On Disney+ With F-Bomb And Hugh Jackman's Butt Still Intact

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
Reasonnnn
Reasonnnn - 7/15/2014, 9:36 PM
Solid article and you make some very valid criticisms. I really enjoyed the film and I think it's one of the better films in the series, but the more I dwelled on it, the more I see the cracks/plot holes/etc.
Lhornbk
Lhornbk - 7/15/2014, 9:42 PM
Might read the article later, but as to your leadin, half the articles on this site are from fanboys whining about things that most people don't care about.
MightyZeus
MightyZeus - 7/15/2014, 9:49 PM
I don't agree with these nitpicks. To be honest i thought nothing could top The Avengers and surprisingly Days of Future Past happened to be better. The only small problem i had was knowing that Rogue was cut, i knew the reason why The Sentinels would copy each mutant's power, not because of Mystique but because of Rogue.
BobbyDrakeApproaches
BobbyDrakeApproaches - 7/15/2014, 9:51 PM
@AlexanderLykins, thanks! I don't completely understand your logic, but I'm not going to argue with it!
BobbyDrakeApproaches
BobbyDrakeApproaches - 7/15/2014, 9:54 PM
@Reasonnn, thanks! I think that is a very positive way to look at a movie, after all, no movie is perfect.
BobbyDrakeApproaches
BobbyDrakeApproaches - 7/15/2014, 9:57 PM
@DrDoom, holy cow, that's you? I didn't recognize you with your new profile pic. Anyway, you are probably right, not all of these complaints are nitpicks. I was mainly thinking about Beast's serum and Wolverine not mentioning Rogue when I came up with the title.
BobbyDrakeApproaches
BobbyDrakeApproaches - 7/15/2014, 9:58 PM
Also, "nitpicky" is fun to say! Nitpicky, nitpicky nitpicky!
BobbyDrakeApproaches
BobbyDrakeApproaches - 7/15/2014, 10:00 PM
@Lhornbk, dude, that's pretty harsh.

You make me feel like I'm not special.
BobbyDrakeApproaches
BobbyDrakeApproaches - 7/15/2014, 10:01 PM
@AlexanderLykins, I'm not sure I folllow.
BobbyDrakeApproaches
BobbyDrakeApproaches - 7/15/2014, 10:01 PM
Please explain.
BobbyDrakeApproaches
BobbyDrakeApproaches - 7/15/2014, 10:04 PM
@MightZeus that's fine, you're entitled to your opinion. I was not bothered by the absence of Rogue, as they never say that Mystique gives the Sentinels their powers, jut the ability to shapeshift.
Abary
Abary - 7/15/2014, 10:19 PM
Movie was so good, any logical complaints are pretty silly ones. As apposed to TASM 2 which is the exact opposite.
Maven
Maven - 7/16/2014, 2:43 AM
The Beast thing is pretty annoying. Same with Mystique constantly changing between herself and Raven/Lawrence whilst Romjin only had to like, once. It'll probably be a similar situation with Thing.

So much for that "Hey Beast - Mutant and Proud!" speech.

Drop this shit in Apocalypse please.
Maven
Maven - 7/16/2014, 2:46 AM
But yeah, I have barely any complaints about this film. Regarding the ending, who knows. Jean may have (already) died and been resurrected twice in the new timeline :P
kinghulk
kinghulk - 7/16/2014, 2:49 AM
i agree with your complaints even the smaller ones like beast. the biggest complaints i have of this film are the end scene although it was cool they probably shouldent have showed beast, cyclops,jean and others just because they would have had more freedom.

i also hated how they killed pretty much all the characters from first class, i think the only one that survived was havok. they killed of several cool characters like banshee azazel (i love azazel) and emma frost. how can they do that. what pisses me of more is that magneto then had the balls to blame proffesor x.

the only other complaint i had with he film if they decided to make magneto the bad guy again. dont get me wrong i loved him in the film it just from the trailers i was expecting he sentinels to be the bad guys and magneto and prof x teaming up to stop the future. but instead magneto made everything worse.
DrKinsolving
DrKinsolving - 7/16/2014, 6:29 AM
I thought DOFP the best X-Men movie yet, but I hear you, I wish they didn't kill off Emma Frost.... I really didn't like the Mystique/Striker twist at the end, and I'm hoping Wolverine gets his Adamantium skeleton/claws back somehow.... The Weapon X story is crucial to Wolverine's character so I really don't understand why they chose to mess it up

I was able to roll with Kitty's time travel powers even though it wasn't explained, they didn't have to explain it
Pasto
Pasto - 7/16/2014, 6:32 AM
This film sucked, plain and simple.

You get a thumb.
yossarian
yossarian - 7/16/2014, 6:42 AM
I liked the movie a lot actually. It is a kick in the nuts for them to tell us, "Okay...X1, X2, X3, The Wolverine and the second half of Origins never happened." But I still thought the movie was really good. I liked how the whole movie was just a battle for Mystique's morality. I can agree with some of your complaints, but they don't matter much to me.

I didn't think the QS scene was as amazing as everyone seems to, but it was still cool.

I also feel like I missed a movie. I guess a considerable amount of time passed between the stinger in The Wolverine and DOFP, but still...it seems like something was missing there.

JokerFanHAhaHA
JokerFanHAhaHA - 7/16/2014, 8:28 AM
@Yoss- SOME of that trilogy HAD to happen though in some form or the other. Rogues hair for one. The quick peak we got of her showed her white streak, something she only gets in the movie-verse because of Magnetos machine in the first movie.
yossarian
yossarian - 7/16/2014, 8:51 AM
@Joker - But it didn't happen. She must have gotten her steak a different way. You (the editorial) can't just pick and chose what is and isn't "real" anymore. The movies were a thing, then the future of the movies went to a time before those movies happened and erased them.
SauronsBANE
SauronsBANE - 7/16/2014, 9:52 AM
"I also feel like I missed a movie. I guess a considerable amount of time passed between the stinger in The Wolverine and DOFP, but still...it seems like something was missing there."

I felt exactly the same way. Like, one moment Wolverine is at the airport and Magneto and Prof X show up, warning him of some imminent threat that he has to save the world from right NOW. Then in DoFP, apparently they waited around for a few decades and only THEN did they decide to try to stop the world from becoming an apocalypse?

I mostly liked the way they did things in DoFP, but I feel like the teaser after The Wolverine was a little misleading...as if they weren't sure what they were doing with DoFP yet, and so they just came up with something that only barely connects it with DoFP. Weird.
AC1
AC1 - 7/16/2014, 2:03 PM
I agree with a lot of this, but I still really enjoyed the movie. Possibly my second favourite in the series. Side note - I think this movie also confirms that X-Men Origins Wolverine is considered non-existant even in the old timeline - the past segment of DOFP is set at the same time as the early parts of Origins (in Vietnam), but Stryker is like 30 in DOFP while he's like 45 in Origins - something which couldn't have been changed by time travel. There are also no flashbacks to X-Men Origins Wolverine (but they flashback to every other film at some point), and even when Wolverine freaks out after seeing Stryker, they never show him as he appeared in Origins - just as Brian Cox played him in X2. Also, Sabertooth is nowhere to be seen (despite he and Logan being together at this time), nor is the rest of Team-X or whatever they were called. Then of course there's the fact that Xavier looks as if he's under 40, has a full head of hair and a beard, and is either paraplegic or unable to use his powers due to the drug artificially enabling him to walk (in DOFP's 1972) while in Origins' 1979 he appears around 20 years older, is bald and shaven, and is able to walk AND use his powers at the same time. While the time travel may have altered certain things (like people's whereabouts and activities in each timeline, or even whether Charles was walking and depowered or in his chair and psychic) it wouldn't change things like people's ages and other important aspects. So I'm pretty certain X-Men Origins Wolverine has been completely discarded from continuity, and never occurred in either timeline. It's completely non-canon.

@yossarian and @SauronsBANE1 I got the feeling that Prof X, Magneto and Logan were aiming to fix things as soon as The Wolverine's credit stinger ended, but they failed (or were simply unable), leading to the future as seen in DOFP. Something definitely happened between those movies, but it probably wouldn't have been enough to make another movie out of. Most of it was described in the opening montage/narration of DOFP anyway - the only info we're missing is what happened after Logan reunited with Prof X and Mags, and before the Sentinels were activated. They were probably just finding the other X-Men and figuring out a way of avoiding the Sentinels.

@dellamorte1872 really? Changing Kitty's powers means the whole movie is "badly written"? How do you figure? All they did was slightly alter something from the comics in order to simplify that aspect of the movie - in the comic (from what I remember) time travel is achieved either through a machine, or Rachel Grey's power, sending Kitty's mind back into her younger self. The film altered it so Kitty's power had evolved, allowing her to send other people's minds back, hence sending Wolverine. It might not be faithful to the source, but I don't see how that's bad writing. If you're suggesting it's because Kitty's powers have changed since X3 - mutants powers often evolve in the comics, just look at Beast or Ice Man.

By your logic, The Dark Knight is a terribly written movie, because The Joker uses makeup rather than having had his skin bleached by toxic waste, and because Two Face was burned rather than scarred with acid. Those are merely cosmetic changes, just like altering Kitty's power. In fact, The Dark Knight deviates further - Two Face is in love with Rachel Dawes in the movie, while in the comics he's married to Gilda and Rachel doesn't even exist!
leonyippy
leonyippy - 7/16/2014, 6:14 PM
so-so on most of the nitpicks, I slightly agree with my desire to see a little my Emma Frost or Riptide. I also agree with the last nitpick of the eventual arrival at mansion scene. Does this mean X: Apocalypse definitely has a good ending with noone important dying? HMHMMHMHM too easy, I thought the stakes would be higher versus Apocalypse
leonyippy
leonyippy - 7/16/2014, 6:20 PM
and i also expect kitty to use more conscious sending tricks in all future movies now that the time travel card has been proven playable
Tainted87
Tainted87 - 7/16/2014, 8:47 PM
I liked it well enough the first time I saw it. The second time, I had some problems.

The Hellfire Club getting killed off was kind of a devil-may-care gamble to show half-assed semi-established characters die without hope of resurrection and increase the stakes, but it was way too cheap. It also showed that Bryan Singer is an arrogant control freak who would sooner kill characters he didn't want to use than try to work with them. That may seem a little harsh, but there's more.

Fox/Singer established a traditional American landmark to be utilized as a backdrop and/or setting for a plot element, even incorporating some bit of history. The first movie had the Statue of Liberty. The second had the White House. The third one followed suit and used the Golden Gate Bridge and Alcatraz. Origins had the French Quarter and Three Mile Island. First Class had the National Mall as well as the Las Vegas strip. We're supposed to feel some kind of connection, some form of reality with these sites, in addition to some of it pertaining to civil rights across generations.

In Days of Future Past, we went back to DC, we went to Vietnam, we went to Paris, and we even went to Manhattan. And it was really all for nothing. Not one single member of the general population of humans gives a f*ck about mutants. They don't perceive them as threats, and they don't treat them any which way, because geez, we don't see any interaction between humans and mutants.

Now, I am talking about civilians, the every day people. Not Tyr-er-Trask, not Stryker, not Nixon, just people. Singer filmed shots as if they had been recorded by a camcorder in that time period so that we'd feel some sense of importance, that oh, this is historic. But there's no connection, and it's just meaningless. He gave himself a closeup cameo when Mystique limped off in Paris, as a man filming the whole thing like he'd go post it up on YouTube when he got home.

Tyrion has no real motivation, just a profiteer who may or may not be compensating for his diminutive size and social misplacement, except no one cares that he's a dwarf. No one. Stryker as well, lacks anything but orders and a grudge against Mystique - and is really neither good or bad in any debatable or thoughtful way. He's a guard, he's an international processor, he's a young father, and that's it. The only villains are the voiceless Sentinels, and the idiotic asshole Magneto.

Check it out: in the future, there's metal man Colossus, energy absorbing Bishop, human-er-mutant torch Sunspot, frosty Iceman, elderly Magneto, tired Storm, tired Professor X, dodgy Kitty Pride, portal-kombat referee Blink, knife-wielding Warpath, and greying Wolverine.
I'll wager that for what they spent on the effects shots they used for the future segments, they could have provided the budget for an entire season of Game of Thrones. But there's no interaction, no friendship, no grudges, no arguments, no reminiscing... they are simply there to show the stakes.
I forget if Colossus says anything. Sunspot doesn't. Warpath doesn't. Blink doesn't. Storm might have said one or two words, maybe. Bishop maybe got a whole sentence in. These aren't characters - they're just one-dimensional purveyors of eye candy for when they demonstrate their powers.

So yeah, there's a certain emptiness present throughout the whole movie that makes it feel so very incomplete.
BrowniesExplode
BrowniesExplode - 7/16/2014, 10:52 PM
I didnt see the film and now I don't. This could have basically been X-Men 4 to tell you the truth also with the future portion change will X-Men Apocalypse take place in the future. Also I agree with @BobbyDrake I too wanted an X-Men First Class sequel. Not X-Men 4 with both cast.

theycallhimEl
theycallhimEl - 7/17/2014, 2:24 AM
All your gripes are ridiculous. More bothersome is that wolverine lost his adamantium in wolverine, but grew it back in the future. Wolverine met an older Stryker while fighting in Viet nam in origins. Here, he is not even in viet nam at the end of the war and hasn't met Stryker. kitty prydes ability to do the time travel thinh is NEVER explained. Lots of issues
MercwithMouth
MercwithMouth - 7/17/2014, 9:51 AM
Nitpicks are what they are, we all have them.

@BobbyDrakeApproaches

Well written article, I enjoyed reading it. I may not agree with everything, but it was definitely a good read.

Now then, I would like to touch on the Rogue/Mystique powers for a second...

Using Rogue as the basis for the Sentinels, would have the same problem as Mystique (assuming the same limitations are set, and nothing else about the film is changed). Rogue's powers would make slightly more sense than Mystique's on paper, but they fall out of logic just as fast.

For example, The Sentinel that kills Iceman uses Sunspot's power(or some variation) to thaw itself enough to grab Bobby. And the Sentinel that kills Sunspot uses Iceman's power(or some variation).

This is where the issue comes in. If you adapt Rogue's power to the Sentinels, then they would require physical contact to adapt to a mutants power. This is not shown in the film. Also, they would not have memory of power to uses a different mutant's power against a mutant.

Now, issues like this can be explained away with extrapolated science. But so can the issues with Mystique's power. What we need to remember is that Mystique was used as a piece of the puzzle for what the Sentinels would become, not the exact design. We have no way of knowing what other mutants they experimented on, and what else was part of the Sentinel's DNA "gulash".

And another thing... Kitty being able to send back Wolverine was just a fan service. We were told that. Since they couldn't be completely faithful by sending Kitty back (her younger self wasn't even born yet), they simply gave her a secondary mutation to keep her in the story. Sounds pretty logical to me. Secondary mutations are somewhat common in the X-Men mythos...

Mutants with known or suspected secondary mutations:

Gambit
Polaris
Beast
Emma Frost
Iceman
Black Tom Cassidy
Toad
Elixir
Wolverine
Siryn
Sharon Ginsberg

These secondary mutations are, a lot of times, used as a deus ex machine, allowing for a plot to continue with ease. May seem lazy, but it's been common practice in literature since the ancient Greeks, generally seen as an invention of the writer Euripedes. Other notable writers that have employed a deus ex machinas in one or more works are: Shakespeare, Moliere, William Golding, J.R.R. Tolkien, and even Matt Fraction was criticized for his use of a deus ex machine in Fear Itself #5.

Why people give Kinberg shit for it, I'll never understand.
1 2
View Recorder