‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’: Singer Teases Rogue & Metal Claws Explanation

Published 1 year ago by

x men days future past movie rogue X Men: Days of Future Past: Singer Teases Rogue & Metal Claws Explanation

The X-Men: Days of Future Past movie revolves around present-day Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) – not Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page) like in Chris Claremont’s original comic book story – getting his consciousness sent back in time to his younger self, in the hope that he will help to prevent a terrible chain of events that leads to a dystopian future – one where mutantkind has been pushed to the brink of extinction, by giant robots (known as Sentinels) designed to hunt and kill them.

It’s an ambitious project and not just because it might well be the most expensive superhero movie ever (certainly north of $200 million); the time-travel plot device could help tidy up the convoluted X-Men film continuity, but it might just as well end up confusing things further, especially if speculation about there being multiple time-travel attempts and timelines proves to be correct. And that’s not to mention the sheer number of characters, as nicely illustrated by the 25 Days of Future Past covers premiered by Empire Magazine this week (each featuring either a different human, mutant or Sentinel in the movie).

Many people were confused that Rogue (Anna Paquin) got her own Empire cover, seeing how Days of Future Past director Bryan Singer had previously said that the character was one of the first to end up on the cutting room floor during post-production (note: that was after the teaser trailer had been released, featuring a Rogue cameo). To refresh your memory, here is the relevant part of Singer’s previous comments:

“… Unfortunately, [the scene we cut] was the one and only sequence Anna Paquin was in, the Rogue character was in. Even though she’s in the materials and part of the process of making the film, she won’t appear in it.”

That quote seems pretty straight-forward and unambiguous; likewise, when interviewed by Empire, Days of Future Past screenwriter Simon Kinberg (Sherlock Holmes) also clarified that “[Rogue's big scene] was one real sequence in the movie. We felt like it was taking tension out of the main story drive.” However, at that point Singer went ahead and threw a monkey wrench into the situation, when he added:

It does not mean that we won’t see her in the film. Also, I hope to make the sequence available on the DVD as she was quite wonderful in it. She is an important part of the X-Men family. I ‘m very pleased she will remain as one of Empire’s anniversary covers.”

After Singer’s original X-Men movie explored Rogue’s backstory – introducing moviegoers to the world of mutants through her and Wolverine’s eyes – the character’s significance to the larger narrative dwindled in the subsequent installments. While the news that Paquin’s character may show up in Days of Future Past after all is welcome, at this stage there’s little reason to expect that she’ll be given much to do (not counting the deleted sequence, that is).

x men days future past 1970s wolverine claws 570x294 X Men: Days of Future Past: Singer Teases Rogue & Metal Claws Explanation

1970s-era Wolverine in ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’

That wasn’t the only tempting breadcrumb that Singer threw to Empire, as part of the organization’s Days of Future Past marketing blitz. Fans who’ve been paying close attention to the footage and images released from the film thus far have observed that modern-day Wolverine appears to have regained his Adamantium-laced claws, despite the events that took place in last year’s The Wolverine; when asked by Empire, Singer hinted at a possible explanation:

Director Bryan Singer explains that Magneto’s ability to manipulate metal might have something to do with it. The Master Of Magnetism could, perhaps, “reconstitute the adamantium claws… [Wolverine] has a different relationship with Magneto, and perhaps Magneto could forge them.”

During their Days of Future Past character design video analysis, Screen Rant’s editors half-joked about Wolverine’s metal claws being explained by a throwaway line of dialogue about Magneto fixing them; if that is the route that the film takes (as Singer implies), then hopefully the execution is more satisfying than that. Admittedly, the most intriguing – though also potentially messy – approach would be for the movie to include multiple time-travel attempts that give rise to different timelines (another idea proposed by the SR crew), as a means of explaining what seem to be discrepancies in continuity in the X-Men film universe.


X-Men: Days of Future Past is directed by Bryan Singer and stars franchise newcomers Peter Dinklage, Omar Sy, Boo Boo Stewart, Fan Bingbing, Evan Peters, Adan Canto, Josh Helman and Evan Jonigkeit along with returning X-Men: First Class cast members Jennifer Lawrence, Michael Fassbender, James McAvoy and Nicholas Hoult, as well as X-Men trilogy stars Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen, Hugh Jackman, Anna Paquin, Ellen Page, Shawn Ashmore, Halle Berry, Lucas Till, and Daniel Cudmore.

Look for X-Men: Days of Future Past when it opens in 2D and 3D theaters on May 23rd, 2014.

Source: Empire (link 1) (link 2)

Follow Sandy Schaefer on Twitter @feynmanguy
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. Magneto can “reconstitute adamantium”? An alloy that must be cast in the first 8 minutes of its creation and is unable to be remolded afterwards?

    Although I suppose if he can rip it out of Logans body I suppose he can put it back in. Magneto, Master of Magnetism and Mystic Arts….

    • There’s a comment in either X1 or X2 (I believe) that says something along the lines of “Stryker is the only person other than Magneto that has successfully manipulated adamantium”

      • (probably not X1, obviously Stryker wasn’t in that)

      • The line is “His bame is William Stryker. The only other man I know who can manipulate adamantiumn, the metal on your bones.” Do this is wahat I e bee wanting to see. I hope they show it.

      • This. No mystic arts required. Don’t get too caught up in the “science” they sprinkle over a fictional metal.

        • Future Wolverine dips his claws into molten adamantium procured by Xavier’s mutants.

          Problem solved.

          • that wouldn’t really make them sharp though. the point is, someone can do it with little to no problem.

      • Comic book fans are weird.

        “It happened in the comics so they’re allowed to do it in a movie.”

        “They can’t do that! That never happened in the comics!”

        We act as if film-makers are not allowed to take creative license because only the comic writers can do that. Which is especially odd when you consider which of them tries to keep things more grounded vs which is more fantastical.

        • So when a film maker *cough*Lucus*cough* says that you can’t change his cannon material, it works the same way? LOL

          Comic books fans are not weird, people who care about the core concept enjoy the core concept….i.e. Lord of the Rings people have strong opinions over and that is not comic related and my brother is still complaining about the film adaptation of Starship Troopers.

          The comics are the base material that the film makers should be working from like they would any written media ( i.e. Girl with the Dragon Tattoo ). You would not expect Lisbeth to suddenly be re-written to be a wealthy white straight old man who hates computers because the film maker wanted to put his creative stamp on the project would you?

          • I’m not saying film-makers can’t be wrong. I’m just saying judge their changes on their own merits. Not hate them simply because it’s not how it is in the comics.

            • Lets agree to disagree. Thanks!

    • It is a movie based on COMIC BOOK characters. Calm down their cowboy and enjoy it for what it is rather than looking for a real world explanation. I love tacos!!!!!!!!!!

    • No way, I loooove tacos too!!!!

  2. It would have been interesting to see rogue in this movie even though the movie version of her (IDK the comic book version) couldn’t really fight without nearly killing one of her teammates.

    I like the idea of Magneto reconstructing Logan’s claws but I had heard once that in the comics he lost his metal claws but since the adamantium was so fused with his DNA that he grew like “beta claws”. I figured that would be the case since the metal claws in the most recent pictures seem to be skinnier more like just a thin layer over the bone claws.

    • also…I know that sabertooth wont be in this but it would have been nice to see him do a cameo just to wrap that whole sibling mess up. But Logan still wouldnt remember him right?

      • I hope they don’t make them siblings again. That was stupid.

        • Well, he was originally meant to be Wolverine’s father but they’ve had a more sibling relationship since that idea was scrapped in the 70s.

          It kinda makes sense, even if they’re not brothers by blood, they’d still be brothers in arms, two sides of the same coin. Sabretooth embracing his animal instincts and Wolverine trying to hang onto his humanity to avoid becoming like his mortal enemy.

          • Wolverine and Sabretooth never had any connection until they just happened to use the latter during the Mutant Massacre and the retconed their history from there. Sabretooth started out fighting Iron Fist and probably was not even considered a mutant until they paired him up with Wolverine in the 80′s. The whole father thing came about because of the mind wiping they did on everyone in the Weapon X project, Logan and Victor were never related by blood. What they did in the movies they just did for exposition sake so they would not have to do a separate back story for Victor.

    • I hope that there is actually a scene with Rogue in it. If it is the Rogue of the future she could have super strength and the ability to fly, like she does in the comics. They could explain how she gets these powers in some future movie.

  3. Seems to me that time travel and alternate realities can go a long way to correcting the continuity problems. Though it may take more than one film to do so.
    I’ve said many times that Emma Frost is NEVER referenced by name and does not display telepathy in Origins and the Creed Sabretooth issue can be explained as cloning done during the Weapon X experiments.

    • My thought was, Emma Frost could have have been the first sent back in time to stop Trask and failed. Thus, she lived out her life back in the seventies.

    • In the credits of Wolverine Origins the young girl with diamond skin is named Emma.

  4. I think that this will be a good movie but with them trying to tie up so many lose ends in one film i think it’ll be too confusing and possibly long. I personally think they should only do a few lose ends in this one(IE maybe some stuff with wolverine,Death of Professor X etc.) and leave the rest for the next film. I mean if they do too many in one film it’ll make the film confusing and possibly too long.

    • Yes I think it will be a good movie. They should focus on correcting major stuff like bringing back the professor and Scott and Jean Grey.

  5. Multiple timelines makes sense to me. Frankly, if they can muddy it up as much as possible, then wrap it one by unifying into one unified timeline, I think they’ll have something to move forward with.

    That gives them the freedom to retcon at will and yet create a blank slate using this movie bringing all timelines (however many we’ve already seen in other movies and will see in this movie) into one continuity.

  6. Doesn’t every X-Men movie revolve around Wolverine? If there’s ever an X-Men theme park every ride should revolve around Wolverine, literally!

    • Character popularity does that. It’s why Iron Man is the main focus of the Marvel movie universe.

      • The Iron Man success probably has more to do with the actor then the character. I doubt anyone would have said 20-25 years ago that an Iron Man movie would outsell Hulk, Captain America or even Thor. Wolverine is a fair combination of character popularity and at this point having a bankable actor playing the part. I doubt the things would have lasted on this long if Jackman had not of gotten popular with the general public.

  7. You guys have mentioned the continuity issues of the previous films in almost every update for Days of Future Past. It’s been 14 years since the first film perhaps you could go over what these discrepancies actually are…

        • Now I know why you’ve mentioned it so much.

      • If that´s the very same list that was floating around during the time First Class was released, then 70% of that list can be explained while paying attention when you watch those films.

    • there is a pretty great video on youtube called “The F’d Up Timeline of X-men First Class” Id post the link but i don’t know the link protocol but its a short 2 minute video that really makes ya wonder what is up with continuity there

  8. Called it. I knew Magneto could put Wolvy-Dumpty back together again.

  9. Why? Why can they not just stick with the comic story lines? The Xmen were my favorite Marvel Comics, but the movies have ruined them. Rogue has strength and flight and is therefore one of the most useful xmen characters, but not in the movies. I wish Marvel would reboot Xmen, like they are doing with Fantastic 4 and did with Spiderman.

    • Sony rebooted Spider-Man.
      Fox is rebooting F4.

  10. Rouge is a important part of the X-Men family and yet Singer treats the character of Cyclops like a piece of throwaway trash? There are only a handful full of characters as important to the X-Men as Scott Summers, and yet we won’t include him? That is the reason why I think his “vision” is a joke and why I will not spend a dime on anymore of Singer’s crap!

    • Given Scott Summers died at the start of X3, I think introducing him into the story would only serve to convolute the story even more than it already is. (The exact opposite of what they’re trying to achieve with this film.)

      Once the timeline has been “fixed”, (which, let’s face it, is going to happen) then I can see Scott making a cameo at the end, since his death might not have occurred in the new timeline.

      • He may be one of Xavier’s students in the 70′s as a child. Just because we haven’t heard anything about him doesn’t mean he won’t appear in some capacity.

        • He’s looking pretty good for a 50+ dude in X2 then, if I do say so…

    • I’m hoping that they bring back Scott Summers and Jean Grey, if not in this movie then in the Apocalypse movie.
      These characters are much too important to be disposed of in the manner that they were, in X Men III. XMen III (The Last Stand) was a really bad movie, in my opinion. They made lots of money at the box office but this was due to excellent marketing and the fact that XMen II (XMen united) was an excellent movie, so everyone wanted to go and see XMen III.

  11. Xavier is still walking and still friends with Magneto when the first go to visit Jean in Last Stand.
    Xavier is shot/crippled and friendship with Magneto ends in First Class

    Juggernaut is NOT a mutant.

    Alex Summers who is in late teens/early 20′s in First Class (1962) is the *younger* brother of Scott Summers who is in late teens in Origins:Wolverine (1977)

    Juggernaut is NOT a mutant.

    Emma Frost is a teen at the end of Origins:Wolverine (1977) but a mature adult in First Class (1962).

    Juggernaut is NOT a mutant.

    Sabertooth in the first X-Men movie vs the Sabertooth of Origins:Wolverine.

    I know there are more, but those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

    • Alex Summers is clearly NOT the brother of Scott Summers so far as the film “universe” is concerned. Just because something is different from the comics does not make it a discrepancy to be corrected. The same thing applies to Juggernaut, clearly he IS a mutant in the film universe.

      The character with ‘diamond-skin’ in Origins is never called “Emma Frost”, so once again there is no discrepancy to be corrected. There is also nothing to correct between Sabertooth’s appearance in Origins and X1, unless you have a specific example?

      So for all your ranting, the only issue you have identified is Xavier walking when they visit Jean.

      • There are ways to make it so that they are brothers using time travel.

        IMDB lists the Emma character in X-men origins wolverine as Emma Frost.

        This is what wikipedia says.

        Tahyna Tozzi as Kayla’s Sister / Emma: A mutant with the power to turn her skin into diamond, who in the film is Silverfox’s sister.[32] X2 writer Dan Harris said that Sigourney Weaver would have played Emma Frost in X-Men: The Last Stand if Bryan Singer had stayed on to direct.[33] The film depiction of Emma does not exhibit the character’s traditional telepathic abilities.

        I would say that both movies were using Emma Frost.

        • Yes, because IMDB is always spot on. Also, I agree that the character being E Frost may have been Singer’s original intention, but since she was not named as such in the film, there really is not discrepancy to fix.

          There can easily be more than one individual who has the same diamond-skin.

          • Singers intention is irrelevant and has nothing to do with it. He didn’t write or direct X-Men origins. My quote above was simply showing that 2 different sources have her listed as Emma Frost. Both IMDB and WIKI. Yes both can be wrong.

            I also found the following info on Wiki. …..
            “The character’s identification was later supported by a Marvel article released on their official website and in commercial trailers; however she is unnamed in dialogue, and listed only as “Kayla’s sister/Emma” in the film’s end credits.”

            Either way, come on…a character that is blonde, diamond form, helping to lead the young mutants, named Emma, …All of those are attributes and qualities of Emma Frost character. It is obvious what the intention originally was. I agree its an easy fix. Fox can just release an article saying it was someone different. The problem is that they NEVER HAVE said it was or was not her. It is still a problem to most people who have seen X-films more than once.

            Plus, are you telling me that if a character showed up in an X-Men movie named only Scott in the credits and he displayed leadership qualities and shot red optic blasts from his eyes that we shouldn’t assume it was Cyclops? What you are telling me is that if that hypothetical situation presented a continuity problem then you would keep your argument that “Well, they didn’t say his last name so it is obviously not him.” That is a fair comparison.

    • “Xavier is still walking and still friends with Magneto when the first go to visit Jean in Last Stand.
      Xavier is shot/crippled and friendship with Magneto ends in First Class.”

      He could walk and was crippled in the comic books at LEAST a dozen times.

      “Juggernaut is NOT a mutant.”

      He is in the Ultimate Universe.

      “Alex Summers who is in late teens/early 20′s in First Class (1962) is the *younger* brother of Scott Summers who is in late teens in Origins:Wolverine (1977)”

      Origins: Wolverine can be ignored, since it´s not official canon (anymore).

      “Juggernaut is NOT a mutant.”

      He is. In the Ultimate Universe.

      “Emma Frost is a teen at the end of Origins:Wolverine (1977) but a mature adult in First Class (1962).”

      In the credits, she´s listed as “Emma/Kayla´s sister”. No one ever said she is the White Queen.

      “Juggernaut is NOT a mutant.”

      Hm. Where did I read that before?

      “Sabertooth in the first X-Men movie vs the Sabertooth of Origins:Wolverine.”

      I´m getting tired of explaining the Origins matter.

      • @Scapegoat…

        Generally I agree with a lot of your stuff but I will respectfully disagree with 2 things:

        1. On IMDB she is officially listed as Emma Frost.
        2. No one has ever said that Wolverine Origins isn’t canon anymore. That has never been officially announced. If so, please send me that link so I can read it for my satisfaction.

        • Oh, because IMDB can’t ever be wrong? I remember reading an IM3 character list before its release where Stephanie Szostak was listed as Janet Van Dyne, so…

          She’s called Emma in the credits and has diamond skin therefore people assumed she was Emma Frost. Doesn’t mean it was the case. Same with Bolivar Trask. There’s a black military named Trask in one of the previous movies so people ranted about him being changed into a white midget in DoFP while there’s no actual proof that this black guy was Bolivar.

          • I never said IMDB is always right. Way to be counterproductive in your tone.
            I also remember Stephanie Szostak listed as Janet Van Dyne but that was BEFORE the movie came out. Then once the movie came out she was listed differently.

            Generally IMDB is correct on it’s cast listing info WELL after the movie has released. In this case almost 5 years later. Other things to consider are that FOX studios has never said that the character WAS NOT Emma Frost. ALso, Wikipedia (which can also be wrong) states the character as Emma Frost.

            Lets face it, it is pretty obvious that the character was intended to be Emma Frost. No matter what source you go with, the facts are; she is named Emma, she’s blond, she turned to diamond form, she seemed to have chemistry with Cyke, …. It’s not like we are grasping at straws here.

            Fox will probably just say it was a very similar but different mutant just to cover the butts since the movie DVD doesn’t list her as Emma Frost (I dont think). Fox got lucky that the movie didn’t say Emma Frost in it. But, again, lets face it. It was obviously intended to be Emma Frost at a young age.

        • Scapegoat is the ONLY person I have ever seen say Origins isn’t canon anymore. I get people having a personal preference that a film not exist, but it does, so we have to deal with it.

          • I tried to find a link, but I failed. I think it was either Lauren Shuler-Donner or Avi Arad who said that.

            • Hey Scapegoat…

              Check out my post above in regards to interview with Lauren Shuler Donner.

      • What is this kick people are on about Origins not being cannon and that somehow explaining the choices they made in First Class? I would have to guess that in the movie-verse Havoc is not Cyclops younger brother or brother at all. They might end up making him his father since there is no way Scott could be older then the character in First Class because that would make him nearly as old as Xavier and Magneto going forward if they were to write him in as being older then Havoc in First Class.

        As for the Sabretooth theory if one wants to throw the word cannon around in the comics Sabretooth was originally not a huge, feral beast unable to speak. He was psychopathic, bigger than average guy with a thing for slicing up women, but he was able to hold a conversation. The issue was they needed an actor to perform lines in Origins and not a stunt man like Mane to look menacing.

        Emma was just another stupid Easter Egg in the series that comes back to bite them in the butt when they actually need to use a character in the context they should be used. I hope they do not continue the trend with this film, but they have set a precedent.

        • I’ve said this a couple times but what if…

          In this movie time travel is being used to transport a person’s “mind” right? What if the Summer’s family found a way to time travel a whole person. What if Sinister was after Cyclops and Havok when they were little cause he needed them for experimentation. What if the only way for the parents to protect them was to hide them in different time periods. Havok in the 60′s and Cyclops in the 2000′s or whatever.

          • That is a lot of what if’s that requires so much other back story and characters to explain. There is nothing established in the movie narrative to support a scenario like that.

            • True but the movie hasn’t been released yet. The scene can easily be explained and seen in less than 10 minutes.

              Xavier, when talking to Wolverine about time travel, can easily explain that it is risky but has been done before. Something like this…

              He begins to explain that Scott and his brother were young (cue the flashback while Xavier narrarates) “It was the 1980′s and Scott and Alex Summers parents were trying to escape a mad mutant geneticist named Nathaniel Essex who wanted the brothers for there unique X genes. The parents had a friend of theirs, a mutant named Forge who can build anything he thinks of, build a time machine. Their wasn’t any guarantee that the machine would work. As Essex and his marauders were about to break in and kidnap the children, the children were time displaced… Alex was sent to the past and Scott to the future. Their parents were killed immediately after. Using the original cerebro I happened to locate Alex when I was young and helped train him. By studying his mind I learned about Scott. Later, once I opened the school, I located Scott and he became one of my first mutants. Neither of them realized that they had a brother as I erased their memories of the incident and each other. I wanted to protect them from their memories.

              • That would be ten minutes too much for something that they wrote themselves into a corner with in the first place and would just untangle about ten more threads in the process. First off it would not jive with the time travel idea they are trying to sell in this movie since everyone involved theoretically would have to be sent back into their own bodies, which could not be done if Scott or Alex were not born yet.

                Secondly mentioning Forge and Mr. Sinister in passing means nothing to casual movie goers and it would be a tease for people familiar with the characters that might not go over well if they are never actually properly introduced. Much of what is off about this franchise at present is due to excessive use and abuse of Easter Eggs that later come back to bite them when it someone or something needs to be used in the proper context.

                Third it would mean establishing the Summers parents, which is a whole other convoluted tale altogether which they would have to alter completely to fit in with a scenario that is not really needed at this point. They have to just go with what they have started and stick by it.

                • IMO…

                  you don’t have to send everyone back into their own bodies. That’s why I threw in the bit about Forge making a time machine that sends people, not just minds. It could end up that Forge’s machine worked but replicating it has been impossible cause maybe Forge (the only one to know how to do it) had been killed by Sentinels. That is why Professor X knows time travel works but not how to send an entire person. That could be explained by Xavier, something like, “Time travel has been done but the man who created the only known machine to have worked (FORGE) was killed in an attack by the very Sentinels we need to go back and stop. However, Beast has found a way to send the mind back in time, which will have to do under current circumstances.”

                  In regards to casual viewers knowing or not knowing Nathaniel Essex and Forge… I don’t think that matters as long as Prof. X says a quick line explaining who those characters are, showing their appearance, and explaining their purpose in that scene while X is narrating. The scene could foreshadow the important roles of Mr. Sinister, the Summer’s bro’s, and Forge in the Age of Apocalypse future movie. If anything, comic fans would be the one’s to make a bigger deal about them being used as “throw away” characters in the movie which they wouldn’t be. they would be fixing the canon issue of them being bro’s, staying within themes/plot of time travel and sentinels, and showing that if they stop the Sentinel program from happening then Forge would never have died, and maybe Wolverine’s actions in the past may possibly interact with Sinister which stops the initial time displacement of the bro’s causing them to both be alive together in the 80′s as was what would have happened had Mr. Sinister never interfered with the Summer’s family. That could be a cool a button scene. Showing but Havok and Scott hanging out together in the present day (which would happen as result of Wolverine interacting with Mr. Sinister.)

                  As far as the Summer’s parents. They need no back story for the scene being proposed. Yes their dad is important as a Starjammer, but right now their parents would be of little on screen importance. They are important because they are shown as protecting their children from being kidnapped by a mad scientist/geneticist with evil intentions and for sacrificing their lives for their kids. This could also foreshadow the parents in future story lines.

  12. 200+million dollar budget. Too many characters. Too many timelines. Centered on Wolverine, again? I’m slowly losing interest in seeing this movie. No way it should cos more that 200 million to produce.

    • Right.

  13. Not all of those continuity errors are real continuity errors. Some can be explained away the same way Obi-Wan’s “Anakin is dead” statements were from ANH.

    • This movie is going to be so Damn confusing. Alt timelines? Stupid way to sell a movie. I’ll wait til a torrent site has it. I cant wait til fox reboots the franchise and hope they give someone else a shot over singer.
      Guess I’ll have to wait for them to destroy FF with a weird cross over film

      • “Alt timelines? Stupid way to sell a movie.”

        People complain all the time about a comic book movie being adapted not accurate enough. Now we get different timelines, just like in the comic books, and those very same people cry about it. WTF is wrong with you?!

  14. Rogue’s character has proven to be one of the most annoying, self loathing, useless characters on screen. She’s nothing more than a weak cowardly teenager in these Xmen films. The 1990s animation version of Rogue is the one I’ve come to know and love. A shame I’ll never see that confident fearless Rogue kicking butt for the Xmen.

    • I disagree, her character was written beautifully in the first two movies. She was the heart and soul of those stories. The third one, however, was when they made her character annoying, self loathing, and useless.

      • Heh, you can’t expect Brett Ratner to convincingly tap into the human psyche…

      • EH, Rogue was Kitty Pryde in the first two films to people used to her from the old comics and cartoon. Problem was when they wrote Kitty in with speaking parts Rogue become redundant, and she really never used her powers (or got her much more practical powers from the comics).

  15. Whatever the budget is, as long as it is a good story, I’ll watch it. At least twice.

  16. Y’know what? I am really hoping this film does well. The original starting point was a good storyline (I am talkint the comics).
    But y’know what? It sounds like it is becoming a great big cluster-mess. Hope I’m wrong.
    And y’know what? If I were Anna Paquin and my only scene was cut, I would give Singer and company a great big super-powered weenie-punch!
    Does the words “Breech of Contract” apply here and ring a bell (probably not, but I would be mad if I was here).

  17. People put way too much thought into these things it’s just unnecessary but you know what is necessary shoes … which reminds me I need a new pair …

  18. Well, they had better include Rogue in the theatrical cut. At least a glimpse; it needn’t be something that screws with the “flow” of the film or anything like that. Rogue was the first character that we really go to know in the first X-Men film, and she deserves to be in this one.

  19. I loved the way they portrayed Rogue’s character in the first two X men films, but her character was completely wasted in the third one. I was very sad to hear her scenes were cut from Days of Future Past, but if she is in a little bit of it (even just a cameo) I’ll be happy.

    As for the claws thing, I don’t mind the idea of Magneto putting adamantium back into Logan’s body IF they actually show it. I don’t want there to be some throw away line explaining it. Other than that though, I am by no means worried about the movie. It sound like they know what they’re doing for the most part, and X1, X2, and First Class are hands down the best X men movies, so taking the best of both worlds and putting these characters into one movie (in my opinion) is a great idea.

  20. this movie will be a mess as will any explanations in it. bryan singer is a terrible director.

  21. What a farce this is, still. After X2 i was in love with Singers approach to xmen. He then left and it took a turn for the worse. Now years later he’s been back and doing whatever he wants with a property that wasn’t his to begin with. i.e.: Xmen First class – Which i knw a lot of people like. Magneto was great in it but i gotta say thats all that was great about it. ” You be Magneto and you be Professor X and Ill be Mystique” Oh please!!!!! Doing a movie that was true to the Source material would be better don’t you think? There is a responsilbity here. This movie looks worse all the time. Magneto fixing wolverines claws??? anyone here coulda come up with something bertter in Grade 7 English. The idea of doing DOFP was to fix the continuity mistakes of previous movies through time travel. This looks to be nothing of the case. You got logan back with bone claws – wtf was that to begin with? Juggernaut and Xavier not even sharing even the slightest glance, a dead Jean, a lost in the past Gambit , where is Rouges powers and Hey, Where the blazes is Cylops???? Looks to be another cash cow in the vain of a Michael Bay Makeover Movie, Fixing nothing!!!!! But hey we still have a body possessing of magenta apocalypse to look forward to with the first class cast which resembles nothing of XMEN at all!!!! Hey Logan – Use what little you have left of your “ferocity” and disembowel everyone at FOX so you can get back to the loner sidelines where you belong!!!!!!!!

  22. What I never understood when the adamantium was being bonded to his bones the first time… If it was in such a hot molten state when his bone claws were still inside him… How did the adamantium not just bond his bone claws to his forearms disallowing him use of claws completely?

    • …and how did it turn irregular bone-shaped claws into razor-sharp katana-shaped claws?

    • It is a movie based on COMIC BOOK characters. Calm down their cowboy and enjoy it for what it is rather than looking for a real world explanation. I love tacos!!!!!!!!!!

  23. I love tacos!!!!

  24. I’ve said this a couple times but what if…

    In this movie time travel is being used to transport a person’s “mind” right? What if the Summer’s family found a way to time travel a whole person. What if Sinister was after Cyclops and Havok when they were little cause he needed them for experimentation. What if the only way for the parents to protect them was to hide them in different time periods. Havok in the 60′s and Cyclops in the 2000′s or whatever.