‘Guardians of the Galaxy’ & ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ Drax & Mystique Teaser Images

Published 2 years ago by

Mystique and Drax the Destroyer Guardians of the Galaxy & X Men: Days of Future Past Drax & Mystique Teaser Images

It’s a good time to be a Marvel comics fan. Between the substantial slate of adaptations being made by Marvel Studios personally, and the movies with Marvel characters being produced by other studios, the chances of seeing your favorite Marvel character make it to the big screen are increasing all the time, if it hasn’t happened already.

Marc Webb, who has directed both installments of Sony’s rebooted Amazing Spider-Man series, played on the hype by keeping up a constant stream of communication with fans and posting a different photo for every single day of filming. Not to be outdone, X-Men: Days of Future Past director Bryan Singer has also been using Twitter to his advantage by sharing the occasional photo to generate hype, including big hints about which characters certain actors would be playing.

By contrast, details and images from James Gunn’s Guardians of the Galaxy movie have been kept under wraps quite effectively – so much so that the voice actors for Rocket Raccoon and Groot still have yet to be announced. We finally got our first look at some Guardians of the Galaxy footage during the Marvel panel at Comic-Con 2013, which included a sizzle reel of action shots and some basic scenes to introduce the characters.

Hopefully some more official images and perhaps even a teaser trailer will become available, but in the meantime Dave Bautista, who plays Drax the Destroyer, has shared this intriguing image of himself training for a scene underwater. In the accompanying tweet, Bautista jokes that he was trying out for the part of Prince Namor… at least, we think he was joking.


Dave Bautista training underwater for Guardians of the Galaxy 280x170 Guardians of the Galaxy & X Men: Days of Future Past Drax & Mystique Teaser Images


Assuming this wasn’t just a leisurely bonding experience, the image almost certainly means that Guardians of the Galaxy will feature some underwater scenes and/or battles.  It’s anyone’s guess what the context of such a scene might be; perhaps the Guardians will pay a visit to the reptilian Badoon on their watery home planet.

Things aren’t looking quite so serene on the set of X-Men: Days of Future Past. Singer appears to have perfected the art of the teaser, and has shared with his fans on Twitter yet another intriguing image designed to get Mystique fans hyped for the next addition to the X-Men movie franchise. Now allied with Magneto and the Brotherhood of Mutants, she seems to be wasting no time in becoming a full-blown ass-kicking (or throat-kicking) supervillain.


X Men Days of Future Past Mystique fighting 280x170 Guardians of the Galaxy & X Men: Days of Future Past Drax & Mystique Teaser Images


It’s difficult to get an idea of setting from this, though those curtains in the background suggest that this is from a 1970s scene as opposed to a flash-forward. The fact that it seems to be snowing inside means that Storm could be around stirring things up, but the only other key detail is the outfit worn by Mystique’s unfortunate victim, which looks like it might be some kind of uniform.

Two interesting photos there that don’t give much away, but what can you glean from these glimpses into the making of Guardians of the Galaxy and X-Men: Days of Future Past? Share your theories with us in the comments.


X-Men: Days of Future Past will be in theaters on July 18, 2014, followed shortly afterwards by Guardians of the Galaxy on August 1.

Source: Dave Bautista & Bryan Singer

Follow H. Shaw-Williams on Twitter @HSW3K
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com 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. Could that underwater scene just be a way to make “zero gravity” on some planets surface?

    They are in space after all…

    • Thats a lot of effort to pull off zero gravity like that. Why not stick to the old stunt wire route? There are thousands of movies that made it convincing that way.

      • they films 90 percent of the flying sequences in the original superman in a water tank, so while wires are probably easier, it’s not out of the question to use water for anti gravity

        • No it wasn’t. Don’t talk rubbish.

  2. Mystique’s a karate bada** again!! Like in Xmen 1 and 2.

  3. Can’t wait for GOTG! Can’t say the same for dofp

    • Agree with you on that dude! I’m glad James Gunn is going hopefully on the right direction, Bryan Singer probably did this movie though his ego.

      • “Movie” being X-Men: Days of Future Past. Duh! :D

  4. Something has been bothering me for quite some time and I’ve never heard it mentioned on the board Mystque lost all traces of her sibilant voice in X-Men first class one of the most awesome things about mystique was her reptilian voice in the first X-Men trilogy and I think it’s something sorely lacking in the new mystique by Jennifer Lawrence. Hopefully this movie will correct that because it just added to her, ahem, mystique…

    • Whatever I didn’t understand what you wrote you didn’t use punctuation it was almost totally unintelligible a couple commas and periods and question marks and exclamation points go along way I’m not saying it has to be perfect I’m not a grammar-nazi just enough to make it readable not just a giant clusterf*** of words strung together. Is that really too much to ask.

      • Ironically you used only 2 full stops and no commas. You also managed to use and twice in the same sentence with only one word separating them. Unlucky.

        • And someone missed the point entirely.

          • Indeed, but the original post that is being criticized is not at all hard to decipher despite the lack of punctuation. He liked the so-called “sibilant/reptilian” voice that was used for the adult Mystique when Romijn played her. I wouldn’t describe it exactly like that, though there was definitely some kind of heavy filter.

        • He missed off the question mark at the end too. Grammar Nazi wannabe :P

      • You have a passion that intimidates me….

      • Mystique and Drax would have gnarly babies…..

  5. I guess no one noticed Drax’s tattoos weren’t red. They couldn’t resist changing something could they?

    • Batista has real tattoos on his shoulders and back already.

      • But their not red.

        • Soooo what.

          • Is it black in the comic book! Then ok.

            • Actually, if you’ve seen the concept art based on the actors, Drax’s tattoos will indeed be red. If you take a look at the picture, they’re just testing, not filming. Look closer before jumping to conclusions, please.

    • I’m fairly certain that Batista isn’t actually wearing the Drax make-up here. Those are just his normal tattoos.

      • People seem stupid when they don’t actually read the article. It says it’s a picture of him TRAINING for an underwater scene. Actors don’t usually TRAIN for roles in costume.

        • Sorry, it did look like he was green, possible it was the effect of the pool water.

    • There’s this new invention you might now have heard of called CG Post Production. It’s where they shoot everything then add details like “Red Tattoos” after they’ve finished shooting. Since this is underwater and Batista has dark tribal tattoos already it’s a sure thing Drax’s red tattoos will be added in post.

  6. Would it hurt to give Mystique some kind of clothing. Not that I’m complaining, but her being blue & naked adds nothing.

    • Are you really complaining about Jennifer Lawrence being naked???? Smdh…

      • Can you read. I clearly said “Not that I’m complaining”

        Having her naked adds nothing but a gimmick.

        • A gimmick???? Ummm Mystique was naked in ALL of the X-men movies! THAT IS HER CHARACTER!!

          Ppl Bit&h when they change the things up, and they bit(h when they don’t change things up!! UN-believable!!! cant make everyone happy I guess!!
          You said “it adds nothing” but DOES IT HARM ANYTHING?? is ANYONE watching the movie thinking DAMN SHE HAS NO CLOTHES ON!!!
          I HIGHLY DOUBT IT!

          • It’s been a gimmick since then. She serves no purpose being naked.

            • Says you!!! You sound like someone who can’t say anything without it being somewhat negative. Like Bruce said, it’s not a friggin’ gimmick when she’s been that way in every X movie. You would probably be the first one to complain if they decided to put clothes on her…. “Im not complaining but could her tank top be a brighter red???” Get the hell over yourself and don’t take a comment thread SOOO serious.

              • You sound like you know me when you don’t. I’m not taking it seriously. You all are the one’s typing in caps. I said one simple thing, and you all reacted in a butthurt fashion.

                • Eh I don’t know you nor do I care to. You’re the one who got all snippy and uptight to a response that was made in good fun. That’s where people draw conclusions from. I don’t get snippy behind a keyboard and I don’t attack people’s comments on here. It’s all in fun bro/sis, have a good day!

                  • I didn’t get snippy anywhere, but it’s whatever.

            • I always found naked movie Mystique to be far more creepy then clothed mystique. This is not a gimmick idea but is a design idea.

              • I agree, it made her look more feral somehow.

                • I guess I’m wrong then. Sorry for offending everyone with one comment I made.

                  • look at it this way, they took a “real world” look at what shape-shifting would entail, any clothes you wore before would be the same. So it’d be best to be naked, but shift your genitals away so you can assume any form without being encumbered by your clothing. It makes sense, plus u can make the character even more sexy and intriguing but in the end it still leaves many of us wondering about the practical side of being naked all the time.

                    • Yeah, I remember seeing a behind-the-scenes interview on one of the DVDs or something where they actually explain that having Mystique be naked in her “natural” form was a practical decision. They wanted to make it clear that she was creating the illusion of clothing with her powers- not wearing a magical shapeshifting outfit.

            • Sounds like a lot of complaining to me. She’s naked because that’s how they designed the movie character. Shes naked because she’s a proud mutant showing off her mutation. The actress is not naked, she’s covered in make up and prosthethetics. You might as well be complaining about Man of Steel with Superman covered in skin tight blue. Oh my god! You can see his bulge!

              • LMAO!!!!

              • I don’t pay attention to movie bulges. Sorry, that’s your problem.

              • +1000

        • If she wore clothes then they’d have to explain how her clothes shapeshift when she needs them to.

          • When she shape shifts she manifests clothing… as in wearing a suit as Senator Kelly or domination leather as Wolverine. Why wouldn’t she be able to maintain her true (blue) form and manifest clothing on top of that as well?

            It doesn’t really matter all that much, I just think the way they have to constantly be shooting around the nudity aspect is annoying.

            Having said that, I think one of the cooler aspects of Mystique’s character is that she is an obvious mutant who has the ability to blend in with humans, but chooses not to unless it’s for a purpose.

    • (….to self…I will not do a “blue-B*ls” joke; I will not do a “blue-b*lls” joke; I will not do a “blue-b*lls” joke….)

  7. Teaser photo? That shot of Drax looks like one of those fish tank diving toys….

    • Trying hard not to snicker…but I think I just passed an entire cup of hot chocolate through my nose! Thanx, Slayer, for the laugh…!

  8. I wondering if they are going to tell us about Mystique and Azazel baby Nightcrawler. Hell Nightcrawler could be eight or nine years old in the time line already.

  9. Why does Drax look like Kratos? Or does Kratos look like Drax?

  10. What is all the liquid stuff in the Mystique picture did she kick over a glass of water or something? lol

  11. I like Mystique’s legs, looking kind of thick (yeah I know it sounds weird)

    • She can change that, if you like. She’s a shape-shifter!

  12. cant wait for Guardians of the Galaxy, at least the trailer

  13. God of war,so cool !
    Kratos in space..can’t wait !

  14. Gotta say, after reading/seeing all those interviews at comic-con, I’ve become less against the idea of Bautista playing Drax. The guy seems genuinely enthusiastic about the role, and at least he admits that he’s the “rookie” of the group in terms of acting prowess.

    • Well I’m not convinced. The guy is HUGE, way too big imho to be a match for Drax and after seeing him in The man with Iron Fists, he acting ability is sorely lacking. Don’t know if I would give a “rookie” that has yet to prove he cant actually act, in such an important role.

  15. Drax = bald mini hulk

  16. James Marsden had an interview over at Comicbookmovies where he says he will not be in DOFP. Man I hope he is because Cyclops blowing up Sentinels is some of the best stuff in the DOFP story line and where is Havok, Banshee, Angel Salvador, Arachangel, Night crawler, Gambit(etc) in the Future timeline? did they die did they just not join the X-men did they leave?