Bryan Singer Explains ‘X-Men: First Class’ Story & Characters

Published 5 years ago by , Updated February 15th, 2014 at 4:28 pm,

At last, we have answers to some of the burning questions regarding X-Men: First class, its story and characters! After the onslaught of recent casting announcements for Bryan Singer and Matthew Vaughn’s X-Men prequel, fans were left wondering what direction the project was taking and what possible story they were trying to tell, considering the seemingly odd and somewhat inconsistent character choices.

With two poorly received X-Men films in a row, moviegoers are skeptical of the franchise and the reactions have been very mixed from the latest X-Men: First Class news reports. To clarify the First Class confusion and answer key questions about what the next X-Men installment is about, Bryan Singer reached out today to ease the tension and set the record straight.

Singer called Harry Knowles of Ain’t It Cool News and entered into a detailed discussion about his story for First Class, confirming some of the character reports and revealing the setting of the film. Here are the details in point-form:


  • X-Men: First Class is not like the “X-Men: First Class” comics, hence the significant character differences.
  • It takes place in the 1960s where Kennedy is still president.
  • Equality and racism are key issues with Martin Luther King and Malcolm X dominating mainstream media with the Civil Rights movement (foreshadowing (even mirroring) the mutant situation to come).
  • Director Matthew Vaughn is very interested in the setting and what Singer describes as the “James Bond tech of the time”, as Harry puts it.
  • Shooting will begin with Charles Xavier attending Oxford University.
  • We’ll get to see classic X-Men costumes, much more similar to the comics than we’ve seen in previous movies.
  • The movie will be the franchise’s most international yet, with shooting taking place in the U.S. and England, and the story also involving at least The Soviet Union as well.
  • We’ll get a first look at some X-Men: First Class costumes within a month.
sebastian shaw emma frost hellfire club x men first class movie Bryan Singer Explains X Men: First Class Story & Characters

Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon) and Emma Frost (January Jones)


  • Story will explore how Charles Xavier (Professor X) and Erik Lensherr (Magneto) met and their goals for the future of mutants (Origin of X-Men and their initial purpose).
  • Lensherr and Xavier will be in their late twenties – Xavier will have hair and function of his legs.
  • Cyclops and Jean Grey are NOT in the movie. Havok definitely is and Lucas Till will be playing him.
  • January Jones is Emma Frost and there’s no truth to Rosamund Pike’s involvement.
  • Singer is excited about them getting Nicholas Hoult as Beast because of a fortunate delay in start date for Mad Max: Fury Road.
  • Kevin Bacon’s villain is in fact, Sebastian Shaw. Yes, that means Hellfire Club is in X-Men: First Class.
  • Singer explains the 1960s setting is perfect for the Hellfire Club, from the characters to costumes.
  • There are other characters that will be in the film that they’re keeping secret. Could it be more mutant X-Men or more likely, other members of the Hellfire Club?

Continue to Page 2 for our thoughts on the X-Men: First Class story and characters!

« 1 2»

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. if you go back a few years and remember after the first film or second film,Singer went to Marvel and helped co-write their “Ultimate X-men” line which was very similar in style to the films but strayed away more to a “R” rating especially on certain situations,but the one storyline that i remembered was their version of the phoenix force/jean grey and its relation to the Hellfire Club which is quite different in the regular universe which only had the Hellfire club exploiting jean grey prior to the phoenix force’s appearence…Like said before Fox is taking advantage of a possible storyline that hasn’t been written by Marvel-though some of it may have a basis in continuity-the majority of this new film’s story will be a total “origin” story to Fox’s version of the X-men, not Singer’s, so what was inferred by Marvel over the years through different characters or seperate storylines will now all be in one film.

  2. Based on this news, it seems Vaughn and Singer are discounting X3 and Wolverine.

    Technically, Wolverine screwed the continuity of the series up. At the lastest, Wolverine takes place between 1979 and 1982. As shown, we see Scott in the film who’s around 16 to 18 years old. The first X-Men film takes place in the “not too distant future” of 2004. Scott’s age is somewhere around 26 to 30 in that film.

    But, if you go by Wolverine and that film is suppose to be in continuity with Singer’s first film, Scott should be around 38 in the first film…which he clearly isn’t.

    Jean’s origin at the beginning of X3 doesn’t fit either. Xavier and Erik are still friends and that probably takes place at around 1985. But, it’s clear from First Class that Xavier and Erik’s relationship will have soured way before then. It’s also pretty clear that Xavier will be in a wheelchair way before then as well.

    I honestly believe Vaughn and Singer are “forgetting” Wolverine and X3 happened, just based on this news…which is fine with me. X-Men and X2 are the only X-Men films anyway.

  3. Not sure where you got that the first xmen was 2004 unless I missed the memo X-men took place in 2000. I’ve heard several tines that Wolverine took place in 1980 and Scotts age was never stated in any film I tend to think he was 14-15 in Origins which is more than believable and makes sense and it’s easily believable that he is 34 or 35 since age is never stated. There are errors in these films but I don’t see scotts age as one of them.

  4. I am not a fan of Bryan Singer.

    After watching the boring “X-Men II” and “X-Men III” movies, I will give this one a pass for something else. “X-Men” comics were an extremely fun read, but the last two movies kind of ruined the fun.

    What I cannot figure out is — If you are looking to make a franchise that has long term success, why would you kill off all of your main characters?

    • Marcus, Singer had nothing to do with X-Men 3. He left to do Superman Returns.

      That was a a Ratner special.

      • After I made that post, I knew I should have been more clear. I didn’t mean to connect Singer with X-Men 3. Lol… As for the whole “Superman: Returns” hell, I can understand why people were upset.

    • I think X2 is one of the best superhero movies ever. Boring? The action was amazing i thought.

      The Nightcrawler attack on the White House is still probably the best action scene i’ve seen in a comic book movie to date. Insane action scene whatever the genre.

      • I love the heck out of that Nightcrawler scene. :)

      • I agree on all your points.

  5. I can’t agree there Aknot I’ve always been a supporter of changing things with in reason. I just don’t want them to change so much that I can’t recoignize the property anymore. BB and TDK made changes but they never lost touch with the comics I still could feel it was Batman all the way to it’s core. Xmen is only recoignized to the source because they share the same name. I don’t want a 100% faithful adaptation I’d be bored I’ve already read the comics and I’d prefer something with tweaks and I’d prefer to take it as being another universe just like the ultimate verse or the millions of non canon one shot mini series.

    Batman comics have always been inconsistant for several years the Joker had been wearing make up. There have been stories where he has the scar as well it’s nothing new and Nolan did not create that it’s taken right out of comics. That movie Raas isn’t only working on Gotham that’s just his current plans in this movie. He spoke of previous tasks world views and his ultimate goal in a speach early in the film. I can show several comics where Raas gets pre occupied from ruiling the world to work on a little side project so that is from the comics as well. I agree on racheal and Two Face though so I’ll give you those points. However both films were great and easily the top two comic films for me better than films that have been more fauthful so I’m not bothered by the changes. While some of the things you listed are not changes and in fact come from the comics there are several small changes I could tell you if your interested. I’ll say this other than Racheal existing and Two Face being killed I love pretty much all the other changes and think they are better than what was in the comics I think a lot of things were improved.

    • Yes but where does your reason (for change) begin and end and where does mine, and or others?

      Also I dont ever recall when the one true Joker was ever wearing makeup. That is in the continuity that is the Batman. It has always been a disfigurment of pale white skin. Before I ask this I know the answer but could you provide any information with regards to the Joker makeup and scar? I would like to read up on it and add it to my collection.

      As for the several small changes… Im sure I could pick them out yet small changes is not what we (and yes im also irked at the direction FC is going) are up in arms about. Its the “big” canges especially to characters and continuity. You say no Jean or Scott in FC and I say Dead Two Face.

      You can always add Jean and Scott later… kind of hard bringing main characters back from the dead. That is a character/continuity change to the highest degree.

      • While I can’t officially tell you right off the top of my head I do believe it was in earlier issues of the comic and the chemical bath wasnt revealed until much further in to the Comics run. I know there were a couple of non cannon one shots that he didn’t have make up. While they are not officially cannon according to modern era Batman it is still from the comics. To be fair to films they have decades of endless material to go through and pick elements from dozens of stories. If you are only counting todays official continuity than Joker does not wear makup, but I wouldn’t consider that a major change. The only major changes from TDK that I see are Two faces death and Racheal’s existence and no I don’t like either, but they happened. To be fair to Two Face it his death worked very well in the story and actually made the story more powerful and gave it extra substance. I wouldn’t have a problem with his death if it were not for the fact that now I don’t get to see Two Face with his own film in a sequel. However there is no excuse for Rachael. Still no film is perfect and I think TDK is much better than what we would of got if we had a faithful 100% adaptation. There are alot of cheesy aspects to the comics that we sort of ignore because that’s the industry standard. I liked that we were not stuck with those in the Nolan films. I like changes and a few in Begins that I think are better than what we actually got in the comics are for example Gordon having lived in Gotham his entire life, Being there for Bruce as a kid when his parents died, and not cheating on his wife. I think they really improved those aspect of Gordon and were things that I never liked much in the comics especially cheating on his wife.

        You ask where we draw the line, but the same could be said about a million other things in life. It’s the same argument that Gay bashers used for not allowing them to marry. If we allow that where do we draw the line next people will want to marry their dogs. It’s a slippery slope argument. The truth is that’s life you have to take the good with the bad in this case. So where do we draw the line? To me that’s an easy answer when the film suddenly starts to not resemble the comic at all. If you can change the name of the film and change the names of the characters and suddenly can’t tell what comic it’s based on then you crossed the line. Begins, TDK, Ironman all have changes but ultimately they ring true to the source they create a great experience with it’s own uniquness that is more than a carbon copy of the story you read 14 times while still being respectful to it’s own origins and having the soul of the comics. In Xmen you could change everyones name and suddenly have Heroes 2.0 lol. There is hardly anything resembling Xmen and while there are some things that ring Xmen in it as far as first class is concerned there isn’t. In first class you could literally change the names and not be able to tell. You might think that person has similar powers to beast, but that doesn’t make him beast. Think Heroes it was obviously inspired by Xmen and they have similar powers, but it’s clearly not Xmen. That’s what First class sounds like just another random hero film that’s inspired by xmen, but not about the xmen.

        You say you can always add Scott and Jean back in later, but by doing that you ruined this specific universes very own continuity. It was stated in Xmen the first film that Jean and Scott started it all his first students his first class. Xavier said that in the first film. So this film is not just having a minor continuity error it’s completely destroying it’s own official cannon that’s the biggest no no.

        • Well see I tend to disagree as the chemical bath was the catalyst that pushed him over the edge completely it also creates the bond between the two.

          As for getting stuff from “any” comic as long as it was a sponsoreed version then I could say and probably pull stuff from Xbabies, Ultimate Xmen, Xmen Magna etc.

          Again to “allow” Batman to pull from ANY Batman source then say another property can not do or shouldnt do it.. well seems wrong.

          Rachel can be explained with a few of “Batmans” love intreset in the books that knew his identity one being:

          Rachel Caspian: In a 1987 storyline “Batman: Year Two”, Bruce Wayne falls in love with Rachel. Unfortunately, Rachel’s father moonlighted as a murderous vigilante who committed suicide once losing a battle against a gun-wielding Batman. Discovery of her father’s evils drove Rachel to pay her father’s penance on his behalf by enrolling in a nunnery and breaking off her engagement with Bruce Wayne, who had prepared himself to end his crimefighting career to marry her.

          Same first name, Batman ready to give up the cowl for her..

          Gordon in the books shows that everyone can have a flaw. He is not the perfect person he appears to be… but he is the best we have.

          “You ask where we draw the line, but the same could be said about a million other things in life.” Yes I do… and you say we cant so why do ‘we” complain about it if we cant draw the line? Why do people say I will not see this movie? When they know they will.

          How far off do you ring to the source? Batman black? Asian? Alien? Does it really matter as long as the core of the “story” of batman stays intact? Then why not the Xmen? People that are different persecurted. Jsut so happens their differences are superpowers.

          As for adding Scott and Jean…. Well First Class could be Charles and Erics first class together until they found they had different paths with regards to their same vision.

          When they split Charles creats HIS First Class (Jean, Scott, etc) and Eirc creats his.. The Brotherhood. Makes sense and still stays within the cannon.

          Sad thing is I probably wont see Xmen FC til video. As I agree 100% about continuity to the books as much as possible. However I think it shoudl span across all the characters/movies. Whereas others feel it is ok to tweak things as long as they end up liking the movie.

      • Umm… Am I missing something?

        Speaking about timelines, Scott and Jean would still be alive in the time of FC. That was long before Singer’s & Rattner’s X-Men trilogy even began. Besides, FC is supposed to be about Eric & Charles starting the school together (as I understand it) and seeing the early students turn into what we know of: X-Men (and Brotherhood, etc.).

        Oh, and as much as I enjoyed the X-trilogy, and how in the cinematic sense they were high-calibre, there were several irreparable continuity flaws that don’t mix with O:W or (presumably) FC. So I would prefer to see O:W & FC as reboots, not as prequels.

        If done correctly, FC should show–or leave the door open to show–the original 5 becoming X-Men (which is what diehard X-Men fans wanted in the first place… BRYAN/BRETT), and could further open the door to the X-Men stories being told right and ultimately save the property. In which case, the continuity flaws of the trilogy would be moot.

        If they are going to treat FC as a prequel, then I don’t know how they can rectify the continuity flaws they left behind with the trilogy. It would just be easier to wipe the board and start all over (reboot).

        Besides, there’s only so much you can do going backward and forward in storylines with human actors who continue to age. So unless they want to continue from where they left off with the trilogy, that line is at an end. The pattern now appears to be to go back to the beginning with O:W & FC. So let’s run with that.

        So far, O:W is in continuity with the X-Men Universe, so they’re off to a good start. Hopefully, FC will continue that trend.

        And as far as Two-Face…

        I can’t recall the actor’s name who played him in TDK, but I thought he really nailed it on both sides. I saw the duality. He was great, even though the special effect of the acid burn was almost too brief to catch (Thank heavens for frame-advance).

        But don’t get me started on Two-Face in BF (or should I say One-Face?). That was not Two-Face, by any definition. I never saw any of the humanity of Harvey Dent. Jones was terrible in his incompetent attempt to portay Dent. But I don’t know who I should blame more; him or Schumacher. Pfffft, not even worth discussing anymore.

        Some changes are inevitable. Disfigurement? Make-up? I prefer the former myself. It’s truer to the source material. But when you have a fine actor like Keith Ledger playing the character so well, does a small change like that matter? I am more concerned about the big changes that can destroy a franchise.

        I am hopeful that FC will be what the franchise needs to get back on track, and I am resisting any judgments until I see it.

  6. Daniel,
    The Joker was revealed as The Red Hood in Detective Comics #158 (Feburary 1951)

  7. why doesnt Singer himself direct this?

    • Because Fox wanted to rush this film, and Singer wouldn’t have been able to direct this and ‘Jack the Giant Killer’, so they made him a producer instead.

      • man, what a dummy, if he is so passionate about X-Men…ehh forget it lol not it the mood really, been a crappy weekend already

        • It’s not his fault, it’s Fox who wanted to rush the film. Singer was all set to direct, but Fox liked the script soo much that they wanted the film to go into production as so as possible. In other words, they rushed it.

  8. Dam u bryan singer!!!!

  9. The problem with this film is that it may be called “X-Men – First Class” but it has absolutely NO resemblence or ties to the comic books whatsoever.

    It totally disrespects MARVEL’S original mainstream source material and Singer & Fox and Ratner are guilty for completely ruining this franchise.

    Their arrogant, obnoxious stance in inventing their own convoluted continuity reeks of egotism beyond beleif.

    I will not be seeing this in the cinema nor wasting my money on the DVD release for the simple reason that this is NOT the GENUINE AUTHENTIC X-Men based on the popular Marvel Comics series.

    It is a very POOR Fox Studio’s c**p adaptation that has changed everything from characterizations, continuity, costumes, timelines, everything except the actual associated name of X-Men.

    Do us all a favor Fox and hand the film rights back to their rightful owners and let MARVEL STUDIOS do justice to this once proud team of super heroes.

    Right now it is nothing short of PATHETIC. LOL!

    Why anybody would pay to see a COUNTERFEIT representation of a comic book is beyond me. Truly an insult. It has no right to call itself an adaptation when the only familiar thing in the movie is the X-Men title.

    This will be a whizz bang FX driven B Grade movie with some fairly unknown X-Men characters designed to appeal to the Twilight / High School Musical generation.

    Nothing more and nothing less. What a joke.

    • Come on, don’t beat around the bush. Tell us what you really think. 8-)

      • Just venting off some steam :-)

  10. I was respecting your argument at first but then you said “Why do people say they won’t see this when they know they will” we have disagreed alot but I never lost respect for you but I lost a little with that. How do you know they will? I can promise you I won’t be watching this or Spider twilight. You insult several people and call them all liars with your statement with out any proof and it’s pretty insulting.

    Your still using the sluppery slope argument. It’s pretty clear we arnt gonna come to an agreement. I can’t agree with the hard core purist fanboy logic. I’d honestly hate to see a pure 100% faithful interpretation. It want something that’s true to the characters the concept and comics while still being at least semi original telling something that’s got it’s own uniqueness. Any director or writer can buy a few comics and copy them panel for but a true talent can craft his own vision and unique story that’s different but the same that even crazy fanboys like.

    I guess we can’t agree on that.

    • you know daniel, i had to you figured to be a fanboy cry baby. but i can’t agree with you more about your last statement. which i totally agree with you. The only thing i question is how havok (i think is cyclops younger brother) play into the film? i thought havok came long after scott had joined x-men. perhaps after wolvie,storm,banshee,etc. but because this film will take place in the sixties makes this film even more interesting to see. they should’ve got the watchmen director for this one.

      • It is quite simple. Havok in the Ultimate Universe is older then Scott.

        Charles and Erics (FIRST CLASS) consist of Havok among others. By the end of the film the line is drawn.

        You are on one of two sides. Havok can not decide. So he goes on sabbatical. He left his family thinking himself a freak so he does not know Scott is also a mutant nor does the family know Alex has powers. He just ran away… teens do that..


        You can have Havok do something pretty powerful with his powers alerting the Shi’ar Empire that comes and grabs him…


        Emma Frost after (Hellfire Club) deeming him to powerful does a mind wipe and he is walking around not knowing who he is with hos powers suppressed…

        All within the realm of possibilities… all still within context of the books…

        Now how it will be handled is a totally different story. :D

        • I know Wikipedia information can’t be trusted all the time but it says that Havoc is older than Cyclops in some editions.

    • @ Daniel f

      Are you responding to me or to someone else? I’m not quite sure.

    • People need to realize that these movies are simply adaptations of the comics. The movies have got to appeal to a broader audience. Comic book fans probably make up about 10% of the audience. Well, with these bigger budget movies anyway.

      If the studios started to make more modest budget comic book/superhero movies then you could have them be more accurate translations and you could use more obscure but still great characters.

      • @ The Dude

        I don’t get this misplaced notion that what appeals to comic book fans won’t appeal to a broader audience. Why not?

        I’ve had friends who aren’t into comic books at all walk out of the cinema and not enjoyed adaptations of super hero movies.

        It’s a bit of an excuse I think, a throw away statement. In essence it’s almost saying the broader audience are too dumb to understand comic book stories so they deserve a watered down adaptation, a vague representation of the original source material.

        I think the broader audience deserve faithful and accurate looking comic book movies.

        I don’t mean a panel by panel copy of the books either but rather capturing the essence and aesthetics of the books, to some degree continuity, accurate character traits, and present that with real dramatic interactions. You can still upgrade or modernize characters and be true to the source material without having to compromise.

        There are some great studios, good writers and brilliant directors who are as passionate, dedicated, thoughtful and creative about their art as is their awareness of the original source material playing a greater role for commercial success.

  11. That was 11 years after his first creation. Also there is no 100% for sure origin story for the Joker. His origin has been told many different ways and the joker himself can’t even remember what happened. He confirms this in a story when he says something along the lines of “Sometimes I think of it one way and other times I think it happened another. I prefer to think of it as multiple choice HaHaHaHa”

    • @”Also there is no 100% for sure origin story for the Joker. His origin has been told many different ways and the joker himself can’t even remember what happened.”

      That’s one of the many reason The Joker is my favorite comic book villain.

  12. Wow Anthony I didn’t realize you were so hung up on looks. I thought you were refering to the character because to me that’s what’s important and in TDK they nailed his personality perfectly but your right physically he is not a perfect carbon copy. Damn by your standards that’s not the Batman or Iron mam you grew up on either because despite acting just lie their characters they look a little different. He may not be a perfect carbon copy but he still looks like the joker no one could see TDKs joker and not figure out in about one second that it’s the joker. As long as it looks ver similar and is the same character wise I’m happy. I’m far more interested in seeing a great film than complaining the character looks kind of sort of different. Technically Joker in Batman the animated series isn’t the joker your were raised on but by most he’s considered perfect but he does look slghtly different than the comics.

    • I like Nolan’s take on the Joker! I like how Ledger seemed to have channeled a mixture of “Eric Draven”/”The Crow” & “Alex” from “A Clock Work Orange” and created a whole new more realistic “punk” JOKER.

    • Always up for discussing TDK, one of the things I felt the films got spot on (despite my mant issues with it) was The Joker. Two Face is another matter altogether though, they should have played on the characters split personality more, Harvey was a deeply damaged person long before the scarring.

      Batman The Animated Series never put a foot wrong with any of its characters, reinventing many of them, Mr Freeze’s background story was changed in the comics after “Heart Of Ice” (one of the best pieces of episodic televison I have ever seen), and I certainly think they added some of Mark Hamill’s Joker into several variations of the comic’s.

      But what they did with Harvey Dent was brilliant, the split personality already existed, he was not necessarily the white knight character at all, and he was Bruce’s friend too which I think they should have used in the film.

      I suppose my point is, for me, the truest version of Batman, the one I will always remember is The Animated Series. That’s one of the great things about Batman as a character, like Superman he endures, but there are so many differen incarnations and we all take something different from each one.

    • “I’m far more interested in seeing a great film than complaining the character looks kind of sort of different. ”

      Then why not see Singers FC? Why cant it still be a “great” film?

  13. You’ll have to be more specific Magnetic depends on which comment your talking about. I’m on my phone.

    • That’s cool. You were actually responding to someone else. My mistake.

  14. While I enjoyed the animated series Begins and TDK are my fave Batman interpretations. I honestly can’t say what I like more the Nolan films or the comics. I think the Nolan films improved alot of things I didn’t like plus cut out most of the overly cheesy stuff. Still the comics have decades of great stories that were well written. TDK and Begins had more depth and substance and emotion than any other bat film or cartoon only the comics can compete with it on those levels. Batman TAS was fun but still was empty for the most part with only a few episodes containing substance.

  15. I’m inclined to believe everyone who says they are not going to watch it probably won’t. I know I won’t.

    I’ve alrady responded to each and every one of your points. I shouldn’t have to respond to the sane point 5 tines simply because you decided to repeat it 5 tines.

    There us no point in disscussing this if you can’t tell that there is a difference between a few minor changes maybe one big one and changing nearly every thing.

    Like it or not Nolan didn’t really change that much and most if what he changed was very minor things.

    The x films have changed nearly every thing and continue to change even more major things with every new film.

    If you can’t see the difference there then this discussion is pointless.

    It’s a simple concept it’s ok to changes things he’ll you just said nothing will be 100%. So the simple concept is it’s ok to change things as LNG as you don’t change to much.

    If you don’t understand or agree with my points fine but I’ve answered your points several times. I don’t care if you don’t agree but at least don’t pretend like I never responded.

    Once again changes are ok:
    as long as the characters ring true to the comics
    as long as you can still recoignize the property
    as long as respect for the source is apparent
    and as long as you don’t change to much

    so for this comment

    “As for your “vision” comment… so you are saying Nolan can craft his own vision yet Singer can not? ”

    I’ve just answerd it yet again.

    If you honestly believe Nolan has deviated from the source as any where near as much as Singer this disscussion is pointless. Nolan made changes but not all that many and hardly any of it was major very minor things changed for the most part. Singer changed nearly every thing more so as the franchise went on and FC appears to have changed so much that it’s nit even resembelng the source. Not even close. There’s a difference between changing 15% and changing 80%.

    Oh and for the record despite the changes I liked xmen and x2. Because I still got the xmen vibe from it they still kept some of the xmen feel to it, but with the info we got on this it’s lost every thing that makes it xmen. Theve changed the team they changed the characters motivations they changed every thing. Not to mention this has lost pretty much all of the characters that makes xmen a good comic Xavier can’t carry the comic on his own and he certainly can’t carry this film.

    Ok maybe Patrick stewart could that guy could carry any film but not his extreamly mediocre replacment.

    As for the joker as I said before the xhemical bath is not his definitive origin it’s just the popular one the joker has no definitive origin. As for the make up it’s been done in a few one s*** and was touched on in the 49-50s but then in 51 the idea of the chemical bath was introed. The scares have been done in a few one s*** comics. I believe there is one simply called Joker. The joker in this comic looks like the TDK joker almost exactly if it wasn’t written before TDK I’d swear they copied it.

    Not related to the scare or make up if you want to read a really good Joker story with a cool twist on the chemical origin read Death and the Madness it’s awsome. Great story and I like the tweak to the character it’s less sympathetic and tragic though.

    • Im inclined to believe they will eventually see it.

      But as I asked where is a point drawn? Where do you say its ok to “tweak” a little here and there but not a lot here and not a lot there?

      He changed more then just a little. From his initial statement of “his” Universe in not including Robin or any of his rogues gallery. As mentioned the death of 2 Face, no feeling of connection to the Joker, No “Jokes” by one that calls himself .. the Joker no “gag based weapons. It is young Bruce’s fault his parents are dead. In the book it was his father that made the decision. He is not really out to avenge his parents death.

      Small things? I don’t find them small when Nolan took the universe and made it his own. Or put a batclad superhero in his universe.

      Once again changes are ok:
      as long as the characters ring true to the comics
      as long as you can still recoignize the property
      as long as respect for the source is apparent
      and as long as you don’t change to much (What is to much???)

      Lets use First Class…
      1. Characters ring true? We dont know if they will be true portrayals. If you have some insight as Beast being a fish creature as opposed to the super intelligent later clad in fur person let me know.

      2. Again are we talking the looks, the “acting”, or the story behind the property? so far we have everytihng that points to “X”. Mutants on a team.

      3. How do you disrespect the source? Kill off a major villain? Incorporate your own version of a popular villain?

      4. What is to much? You speak as if there is a magic number/limit that you can hit that says nope this is not the Xmen or Xmen characters I know.

      ““As for your “vision” comment… so you are saying Nolan can craft his own vision yet Singer can not? ”

      I’ve just answered it yet again.”

      No you haven’t as there is no answer. If you change it, it has been changed… for the better for the worse you will never know til you see it. But if it is changed it is changed.

      How much change you choose to overlook is a preference. There is no way you can measure it.

      This discussion is only pointless as you see it as Nolan vs Singer. I see it as 2 people changing the mythos I know.

      You see it as a little change is ok where as I see change is change regardless if it is big or small.

      You say they have changed the team…. what team was under Charles and Eric? As I stated earlier… This first class could be the first class of mutants ever brought together by Charles and Eric.

      Then Eric and Chuck have a falling out. Chuck makes his team (the Xmen) and Eric makes his the Brotherhood.

      This movie is (I believe) first and foremost about Charles and Eric. The story bullets at the beginning of this article makes it quite clear. Especially the: X-Men: First Class is not like the “X-Men: First Class” comics, hence the significant character differences.

      People are hung up on a name. “First Class”. Should it be Xmen Origins The C&E show? Nope seems to me the very first class of Xmen would be what Charles and Eric put together.

      I have always found the chemical bath for the Joker the one staying point to his origin. The one constant if you will along with the Batman “being” nearby. I feel as though that is constant as it usually play a part. Now Red Hood, no Red Hood, wife kidnapped, he is only making money as a criminal etc… who knows.

      I was always under the impression they THOUGHT it was makeup back then and then created the chemical bath. Meaning he was white faced based on the Joker in a deck of playing cards, no answer was stated as to why, people (criminals, police, readers) assumed it was makeup.

      Death and the Madness… was it a Graphic Novel or thick format? I cant seem to find reference in my collection.

    • The only reason I ever got to see “Wolverine” was because my mother in law gave to me as a Xmas present otherwise I still wouldn’t have seen it.

  16. Aknot

    You said we will never see a 100% faithful adaptation, if you meant comic book movies in general, then I offer up Sin City as evidence to the contrary.

    • sam, did you ever see the directors cut of sin city?

      • I was going to say wasnt there a lot “cut” and edited from the book? It has been awhile I wont lie.

      • I own it, its excellent, very good dvd, I like the way they seperated them into the individual stories, makes it seem less like a film though

    • Fine a 100% Superhero representation. :D

      • Its the only one though. Watchmen is asthetically identical to its comic counterpart but the story deviates so much towards the end. No giant squid thing! Bah!

  17. Why the hell are we listening to Bryan Singer?

  18. I believe it’s Death and the Madness hope I’m not screwing that up I’ll double check when I get home. Basically in it before being the Joker he is a bad a$$ hitman. He’s like a perfect shot and starting to get bored with his work. He is about to retire until he meets Batman and starts feeling the thrill he felt when ge started he becomes obsessed. They even feature a short fat young Thug named Iswald Cobbelpot. Awesome story I’d you don’t mind reading an alternate take.

    It’s always nice to share a great read with fellow fans I’d like to think despite a disagrement we can still get along.

    The Joker I saw in TDK made a lot it jokes. He made me laugh every time he was on the screen not only did he make me laugh but he made me feel dirty and guilty for it. I’m not sure why you didn’t see the jokes.

    Joker doesn’t use a gag weapon every times ge appears sometimes he does and sometimes he doesn’t I believe it was Grant Morrison he wrote that Jokers mind is so chotic that he is always a different person. That’s why sometimes he’s funny , cheesy lame gag crazy and some times he is dark and sinister. Grant used this to explain inconsistancy In Jokers behavior over the years. So just because he didn’t use gag weapons this time doesn’t mean he never would. Actually always considered the hospital bomb a gag weapon I always assumed he rigged it to not work from the first couple pushes for comedic effect. Also while it wasn’t a weapon I thought him dressing as the nurse and the way he said hi and flicked his hair was a hilarious gag classic joker.

    No one should complain about no Robin as a change Nolan is doing three films all being at the begining of his Carer Batman didn’t get Robin until later in life. Also nolans films are not seperated by real time meaning Begins and TDK released three years apart but in movie time it has not been three years is much sooner than that it’s only been a little over a year. I’d imagine it will be the same for number three making it only 3 or 4 years in to his carer 5 tops so I’d imagine it would be dumb to bring Robin in. I’ve always suspected at the end of his time working on Batman Nolan will hint at Dick Grayson I can see him putting a flying Grayson flyer in the third film.

    I’ve already agreed with you on two faces death as the only major change but while I’m probably wrong I still have this nagging feeling two face is still alive and only Harvey Dent died in TDK. Probably wrong but they never said he was dead in the film and the script says that dent died. Could mean nothing but I’m waitng for the third film to see.

    Racheal was added and was hated by most but I never saw her as a massive change just a change. She Ed promptly killed off which was nice.

    No need for us to be so hostile over this though. I get the impression very few people here actually read the comics so us fans need to stick togather.

    Do you only read official canon or are you open to non canon stories?

    • I always thought the possibility existed for Two Face to still be alive, but Nolan and Eckhart have both stated he died in TDK, shame because there was so much more than the character than they did.

      Are you reading The Return Of Bruce Wayne right now? It’s a weird story but I’m enjoying it. I pick and chose my Batman reading very carefully, I’m also getting the new batman Beyond series, loving that, did you ever see that when it was on?

    • I read it all but treat the noncanon like “What ifs” and or “Elseworlds” types of things.

      That is why I was so surprised I enjoy the Ultimates line. I guess I knew it would last a little instead of a 1 shot or mini/maxi series type thing.

      meh Hostile… im sure we would get along fine. Just different views.

  19. Scott Summers (Cyclops) and Jean Grey(Phoenix) were two of Xaviers first recruits. So not having them in the film is a major change right there. Sounds like another case of producer and director doing the movie they want to do rather than the movie the fans want.

  20. I say thank god there was no squid ugh that part of the comic was so lame and would of ruined the film for me.

    Drsam have you read the TDK script? What still gives me hope is that it says Harvey Dent dies which is true but that doesn’t mean two face is dead. I know it’s probably a fan boy dream but there is still hope. Even in interviews they say Harvey is dead.

    Last two years I stopped bothering with comics I just wait 6 months and get the graphic noval I can’t stand the comic format a couple a pages a months bugs the he’ll out of me and it costs way more instead I spend a lot less and get to read the full story with graphic novals. So I’ll get the return of Bruce Wayne later.

    I didn’t watch Beyond when it was on but picked up the DVDs 3 years ago and loved them, when it was on TV I was bitter about it not being Bruce Wayne. I finally gave it a shot and liked it. Never read the Beyone comic and don’t plan to to many comics to read as it is.

    • I would love to find out at the end of Batman 3 (I hope they release a title soon I’m sick of calling it that!), that Two Face is still alive and has been running the crime in Gotham! That would be great.

      I was the same about Beyond, so set in my Animated series ways, but a friend forced me to watch, it was great the way it was done, awesome to have Conroy still voicing Bruce. The comic is good, you’d like it, it features the return of Hush!!!

      As for the squid, I wasnt really saying I wanted it in the film, its dumb and never really made any sense in the first place. I was just saying how the film deviated.

      I stopped buying single issues for a while, but I came to comics late in my life, so I still get that great thrill from going to the comic shop and eagerly grabbing the newest issue. I have done myself a nonsense though, having finally caught up with the entire current GL run, all the graphic novels (apart from Rage of The Red Lanterns which I cant find anywhere!), I started collecting the single issues! I am a fool.

  21. I try to keep up with every thing else but I’m so busy with Justice League and the 37 Batman titles lol. While I live Batman I’m sick of all the titles. I think all the heroes should have one solo title that Is official canon. Sucked having to read Shadow of the bat , Detective comics, and Batman. Switching to graphic novals helps.

    I like GL always gave and keep up as best I can but have trouble lol life has gotten hecktic With work , pain , dental problems and the baby on the way. Finally cut Marvel off my reading list little over a year ago. The story telling has gotten so convoluted it’s sad.

    Oh sent you some new mail. Also your book is on the way should be here tomorrow lol when you get your next check think “wow screen rant helped with this” rofl : p

    • Cool.

      I cut all Marvel titles about two years ago, I agree, the storytelling was so convoluted in so many different titles that I just gave up altogether.

  22. My problems with marvel is that every month there is some major earth shatering even and every week every problem us solved by creating an alternate timeline. No issue can ever end with out some one going through time or to another universe. Not to mention the Avengers rotating door policy some one leaves every other month and some new person joins every other week. I mean Spuder man becomes an avengers? And as much as I love Wolverine why did he become an Avengers what exec thought that was a good idea? Plus DC has an amzing Rogues gallery much better than Marvels. Marvels big rule the world rogues have a cast of two well written characters and all the others who try are jokes.

    Dc has the better story telling DCs regular non mega event comics are better crafted story telling wise than Marvels mega events.

    By the I was a marvel fan boy it was great but the last few years have been awful.

    • DC often has the whole alternate timeline thing going on but it was easy to follow most of the time. it’s taken DC a while to sort themselves out though, to get characters like GL and the Flash back on top form.

      Im very interested to see what will happen with Batman, Will Dick carry on being Bats when Bruce eventually returns?

      As for Superman that remains to be seen, the whole walking the earth plotline is cute and character building but after 2 issues I need some action!

  23. You want to know what really pushed me from a marvel fan to more DC. Marvel changed to making fun exciting comics and DC changed in to making interesting and exciting ART. The big push was DCs mega master piece Identity Crisis. That book was more than a comic it was pure art it was a master piece. I couldn’t believe what I had in my hands. Such amazing story telling. It really is beautiful in a sick way.

    I can’t recomend enough how much every one needs to read Identity Crisis. It’s the kind of book that’s never written twice.

    • I agree it is a great read, one of my favourites. The art in DC over the past few years has been just that, art, there has been some truly staggering art. Marvel comics look deeply sloppy in comparison.

  24. Meh DC doesn’t do it any where near as much as Marvel he’ll Xmen alone does it more than DC lol.

    Never been that in to Supes or Flash. They are readable in the Justice League but I can’t stand reading their comics and I really hate all Flashes that are not Wally West. If it’s not Wally I won’t even read Justice League I hate the others that much.

    I’ve been curious what’s gonna happen with Dick. Honestly I’ve been let down with Batman lately but then again I can’t stand Grant Morrison I’ve hated most of his stories. Bringing back all the cheesy Batman stuff from the past has annoyed me. He made Batman less dark it’s been annoying reading Bruce be so colorful it’s just not right it makes sense for dick but it was weird with Bruce. I read Grants gonna make Bruce even nicer in his new comic Batman Inc and supposedly rumor is there are gonna be multiple batmen so one might be Dick…. I say yuck multiple ? WTF . I’m tired of watching that crazy nut job ruin Bats. Ever since he claims he was abducted his writing went down hill it was good before. I’ve waited all this time to see Bruce back as the one true Batman and still not gonna get it.

    Plus I want Nightwing back his comic just finally started getting good and dick was becoming his own hero and boom they ripped it from him.

    I’m curious what will happen between Damien and Tim when Bruce returns. Because Tim want to be Bruces son and side kick and the D-boy is currently in that spot.

    • I think something unpleasant might end up befalling the unpleasant Damien, his character is possibly the most irritating Robin of them all, I keep wanting to give the boy a slap! I don’t trust him either, what will he make of Bruce’s return I wonder.

  25. I recently stopped buying comics (this month). I’ve always been more of a Marvel guy… I was buying all the crossover stuff for Civil War and then what came after and slowly started dropping titles where I just didn’t care about what was happening. It bugs me that to get some critical story points you have to read the individual titles scattered all over the place and can’t get it from the main title.

    I had dropped it down to the Avengers titles and Iron Man titles – and then just Iron Man (long time fave). But now they’ve turned him into a freaking cyborg… he’s just not the same character to me anymore.

    And at $3 a pop, it wasn’t that hard a decision.


    • I know how you feel, if many more of the titles I like start dropping off I might just give up buying single issues completely.

  26. I absolutely agree Vic I’m a long time IM fan as well and he has been absolutely destroyed the past few years. Same goes for Wolverine the biggest loner is Marvel joins every team he can get his claws on lol. Seriously it’s like marvel forgot how to write their characters. Captain America dies and his replacment uses a gun. Iron Man turns on his friend and becomes a Borg (double nerd reference) while Wolverine goes from a berserker loner to a pussy cat team player. Don’t even get me starts on Thor lol he’s all over the place lol dead alive lost found uptight guy with a heart of gold angry destructive force secretly a robot made by stark lol. That’s all just the past few years lol.

    My list would
    1. Batman
    2. Wolverine
    3. Ironman
    4. Thor
    5. GL ( as long as it’s John Stewart or Hal Jordan. Guy can die and Kyle makes me throw up.

  27. I swear I’m the only Bat fan who like Damien.

    I don’t think they can afford to hurt him. Batman needs a Robin and Tim is just to old. I want to see him cone back only to have Bruce reject him being Robin telling Tim he’s ready to be his own man. Tim is an adult now it’s time he either hangs it up or becomes a hero not a side kick. I’m really digging Red Robin and it’s better than Nightwing ever was. You have to respect Dick but Tim is a much more interesting character. Dick is much happier and able to be content but Tim is becoming more and more like Bruce and made some pretty dark choices over the past year that he may be darker than bruce him self. Bruce lost one father Tim lost two.

  28. For me it wouldn’t be cool at all. What makes Red Robin a good read isn’t his name or his costume it’s his back story it’s Tims personality. With out the back ground and history it’s pointless safe goes for Red Hood or Nightwing. Non of them would be interesting with out the robin background. Because with out the proper background it’s not the character you love it’s just a name of a character randomly thrown in.

    Also I’ve never wanted Robin in these films.

    • Having Robin in Nolan’s films was never going to work, but there is a lo t to be said for having the character of Dick Grayson in there somewhere, with Rachel dead, Bruce needs someone to be his anchor to humanity.

    • I see what you mean,that makes total sense and since obviously Nolan won’t be going there and this will be his last one then it won’t and shouldn’t happen yet.

  29. You know Sam I agree. Robin should not apear in the Nolan films but Dick Grayson would be nice. However I’d prefer he be called Richard lol and he has to be a kid non of that stupid 17 year old Batman forever Chris Odonnel crap. That was really annoying. I say a kid 10-11. It would be kind of Beautiful to watch Bruce try to take care of this kid who just went through what Bruce did. It’s something I wish we were able to see more of in the comics instead of diving right in to Robin. Bruce becoming a Father Figure it brings Nolans films full circle with out killing Bruce or having him quit I don’t like either of those ideas. I think Nolan has made changes but stayed pretty close to the comics and to end it either of those ways would just piss me off I’d probably only watch the film once. Killing Batman isn’t a good end and I feel we already covered the quoting thing in TDK and not go mention every other Super hero film franchise.

    I’ve constructed two Batman stories one featuring Dick Grayson and one with just a flying Graysons poster.

    • Absolutely, that would be a great way to end the series. Having Bruce as a father figure is a good device to drive the emotional heart of the movie, becuase it would be different, something we havent seen before. I’d rather they did that and had a smaller scale villain (not the Riddler), I dont want to see a copy of TDK.
      To see Bruce fighting his own demons and trying to look after a child? That would be great viewing. And it would have that emotional hook that TDK didnt really have for me. The parallels are obvious but there is a lot to be gotten story and character wise.

      What do you think might happen to the franchise after Batman 3? I don’t see Nolan doing another one, and I imagine Bale will depart if thats the case. Who do you like as a replacement? Would you carry on the story or start over?

      • What do you guys think if Talia was involved and what way would you put her in? I think if she was in the movie as a rogue character not villain but kind of gray area character trying to learn the truth of Bruce Wayne/Batman and her father’s connection to him but tempted to either kill Batman and or help him, I think having Richard Grayson around would help HER see Bruce Wayne/Batman in a different light.

        • I mean Talia seeing how Bruce is like a father figure to Richard Grayson seems like it would be a good story with her changing her mind and wanting to help Bruce. Hey I may be wrong,you guys are the Batman experts.

        • In my Batman 3 story treatment I put Talia in as the love interest. But I also chucked in The Riddler, Dick Grayson, Oliver Queen and Victor Friez. In many ways using her character seems a natural part of the story considering her father was the villian in BB.

        • I’m not a fan of Talia being in the film Ulik. NO offense nothing wrong with it just doesn’t work for me. Personally I don’t want any potential love interest in this film unless it’s a father son love kind of thing. Personally I hate the notion that every comic film needs a love story. Not to mention I really don’t want to see Talia at all. I just can’t seem to place her in this story for some reason at least not this early in his carer. I’d prefer no Talia no Catwoman no Viky Vale. Just Batman against his opponent or opponents and this time have them be a real physical challenge. Batman has been mentally challenged, but not one has really hurt him i mean really hurt him. This is one big reason why I do not want The Riddler that and I want Batman 3 not TDK 2 or TDK the continuation. I’d prefer all the film to make a giant story about Batman and if the third film tries to hard to be TDK it really hurts the story as a whole and really makes it a two film epic instead of three if that makes sense.

    • Sounds good!!! I’d like to read that. Or are you saving it just for WB? LOL

      • It’s not really pieced together as a proper script I’m more looking for some one to help with that part. I’ve written scripts before, but struggle on the Batman ones. It’s more of a two page outline and concept. With most of the details of the story pretty much all that is missing is dialogue lol.