New ‘X-Men: First Class’ Clip: Beast Gets Acrobatic

Published 3 years ago by , Updated March 3rd, 2014 at 7:06 am,

X Men First Class Beast Mystique New X Men: First Class Clip: Beast Gets Acrobatic

X-Men: First Class seemed like a movie that was destined for disaster when it (and its out-of-continuity storyline) was first announced, but there’s been a massive turnaround in opinion thanks to a few good trailers and TV spots, as well as some great character-focused trailers. When an actual clip from the movie was released a week ago, positive expectations for the film continued to rise. The movie clip indicated that trailers weren’t just well-edited sleight of hand – this movie actually seems to play well.

Today we have another clip from X-Men: First Class to share, this time featuring young actor Nicholas Hoult (About A Boy) as brilliant mutant scientist Hank McCoy, a.k.a. The Beast.

X-Men movie fans surely remember that Kelsey Grammer brought the elder version of Hank McCoy to life (in all his blue-furred glory) in the not-so-glorious X-Men: The Last Stand. McCoy’s presence in that film was one of the only good things about it, though Beast (like so many characters) felt very marginalized and unexplored.

Based on a recent character trailer (which you can view below) we know that in First Class Hank McCoy will play a much more pivotal and important role: We will witness the experiment that goes so tragically wrong and transforms a young boy (who yearns to be normal) into the iconic blue-skinned creature who struggles to retain a sense of humanity in his bestial form.

Check out the character trailer for Beast:

Now that you’ve seen that, you can check out the new X-Men: First Class clip, which comes our way courtesy of Yahoo Movies:

-

MILD SPOILER BELOW!

For those who don’t know yet, the relationship between Henry McCoy and a young Raven Darkholme/Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) will have important ramifications in the film. In this altered continuity (I know, I know, a dirty word…) it is reportedly Mystique’s shape-changing DNA that McCoy utilizes in order to synthesize a cure for his mutation (which we are now dubbing “freaky feet”). And we all know how that goes…

X-Men: First Class - for all its “blasphemous” violation of canon – seems poised to be the best X-Men movie yet, in terms of how it explores the characters and the X-Men themes. Hopefully the ensemble format of the film doesn’t take away from the Hank McCoy subplot. Beast has been one of the more engaging and fascinating Marvel characters of all time, which is why he has been included on so many different teams (The Avengers, The Defenders, several X-Squads) and still pops up in various capacities all over the Marvel Universe (with S.W.O.R.D. and The Secret Avengers most recently).

I say all that to say: let’s hope director Matthew Vaughn recognizes the value of the character (and we believe he does) and does him justice in this film.

X-Men: First Class will be in theaters on June 3rd.

Source: Yahoo Movies

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: x-men, x-men: first class

55 Comments

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.

  1. Xavier’s powers fail him if he can detect McCoy as a mutant but not sensing his secrecy.

    • To be fair we don’t have context yet. :-)

      Professor X could be (and we know he likely will be) irresponsible about his powers. Just blurts out the first things he sees. That CIA clip certainly back that theory up – he can read minds but couldn’t communicate his point to the government agents without looking like a spy, all because he said the wrong thing.

    • Maybe he assumed that the CIA already knows about his mutation. Why would they take a group of mutants to a regular scientist?

    • I read these comments before watching the clip (which I really want to stop doing).

      In that context it looked like Xavier was playing innocent, but really forcing the issue. From the dialog he does seem to scoop out and blurt a lot of information. It seems like we’ve already been told that he’s going to be more reckless and selfish with his powers. So often we hear these things but don’t really see it on the screen.

      It’s like when you confide in someone and they carelessly turn around and tell everyone. The secret is important to Hank, but to Xavier it’s more important to use it for his own agenda, even if it’s mixed with good intentions. He says, “It’s okay, you’re among friends.” So maybe he thinks he’s doing what’s best for Hank.

      • Just watching the clips, not reading the comments.

  2. Vaughn is great! Singer sucks! Vaughn did the best he could given with what Singer dropped on his lap at the 11th hour.

  3. The movie is going to suck. Why can’t the X-men franchise be a little like the other Marvel movies. Let’s start over again. Xavier runs the school. He inlists Cyclop, Marvel Girl, Beast, Angle, and Ice Man. Their enimy is Magneto, Toad, Blob, Quicksilver, and Scarlet Witch. Let’s get the “First Class” done right first then introduce other mutants. This is so rediculass of a movie that it needs to fail so badly that Marvel takes a major hit to their wallet that they will fix these mistakes before it happens. STOP THE MADNESS!

    • @ Jim Oster

      Not everyone agrees that this will suck, or that it will lose money.

      Don’t get us wrong – we would prefer FOX to give back all the Marvel Comics properties to Marvel/Disney; but on the other hand, a good X-Men movie is a good X-Men movie. And a lot of people feel like this could be a good one.

      • I agree. If we remove the context of the universe these characters came from, it very well may be a good movie and could do well at the box office. I’m of course hoping it will tank but that’s all it is and we will have to wait a couple weeks to find out what the general consensus is.

        That being said I don’t approve of them quite literally labeling this show as “The Beginning” of the X-Men in any way shape or form.

        • its the begining of the x-men established in the trilogy. not the comics.

          • Sorry it’s not, I was very clear in my statement. There are WAY too many inconsistencies, even between XMFC and XM1 to have that be the case.

            • Maybe i wasnt clear. It is. You can argue inconsistency, but it still is.

              • Sorry no. Just saying it’s so (just like them labeling it “the beginning”) doesn’t make it correct or the truth. You speak of arguing inconsistency as if the points are up for debate and we really aren’t sure about them but that’s false. We know exactly what all those problems are in trying to match up the two franchises. They are incongruous with each other.

                • I agree there are points they seem to ignoring, but even if you consider this movie a different entity from the original trilogy, it is still a story about the begining of this version of the X-men. I agree that it shouldnt have been called First Class, because of the comic of the same name, but many differnt versions of the X-men exist, and this is the origin story, or begining, of this particlar group of mutants lead by Xavier.

    • Oh look, we have a soothsayer here. This movie is going to suck? Good thing I haven´t bought my tickets yet… You might know that Marvel has almost nothing to do with these X-Men movies. Fox owns the rights, so they can do whatever they want to do with it. And for your information: the comic book series “First Class” takes it´s liberties from the original Lee/Kirby series, as well as the movies. So this is not an adaption of Marvel´s First Class, it´s a prequel to Singer´s X-Men movies.

      Aside from the continuity stuff (Havok), this looks like a really good movie. It´s been a while since we had a good X-Men movie.

    • DONNNT WATCH IT THEN. simple, always complainin

      • Quit readin’ our complainin’

        • LOL

    • I agree I hope it tanks the only way I’ll be watching this bastardization of my beloved X-men will be if it is free

      • Yeah, go ahead and watch “X-men: Kick-ass” for free. It’ll get you psyched up for the sequels.

    • Hi Jim,

      You know if you would read other peoples comments, you’d realize that your points have been made hundreds of times before, (probably) by yourself and others. They all say the same thing, over and over and over. I’m just concerned that you’re going to type your fingers to your (I’m certain) adamantium bones.

      The movie is scheduled to arrive in theaters June 6th. That date, much like your opinion, was established a long time ago and hasn’t changed at all.

      Anyway, do you have an opinion about this particular clip? Please be specific.

      • For me June 1st. Sometimes its good to live in Australia. Home of Hugh Jackman.

  4. For me – the comic book nerd, this movie will suck because of the continuity, characters, etc. all of the “fanboy” reasons…

    For the General Public this movie won’t have a chance to suck, it isn’t even a blip on their radar.

  5. The Xmen have so many different stories that intertwine with all o the other marvel characters, you could totally rewrite the origins and still have it work! Besides all the trolls out there just care about wolverine and maybe checking out Halle Berrys butt, I’m giving Vaughn and company props for doing something original to what i feel is a dead franchise.

  6. I continue to be impressed with the clips and teasers from this film. As I’ve said before, if folks can put aside the canon issues there is a good chance this will be a very entertaining flick. I really dug the Jekyll & Hyde moment in the beast clip, really well done.

  7. This movie will not suck. X3 and Wolverine show that even a bad film will do ok. However, the masses have learned, and whether they flock to see it will depend on the early reviews.

    Despite all the comments on this site, the average joe couldn’t give a monkey whether Marvel or Fox made the film, they only care if it’s good. Based on the footage to date it’s looking like a winner. You only have to read how critics raved about Thor to see that the masses will come if the right people say it’s worth their time.

    • I think you made an excellent point there – X3 & Wolverine did indeed do well and did indeed suck. Let us examine that briefly – Why?

      One could argue pedigree, marketing, etc. but at the core let’s be serious, it was Wolverine.

      Now about Thor, I think more people are excited to see where Iron Man/Thor/Cap & the Avengers is going and that helped drive the box office along with good reviews.

      Now what about this XFC – no Wolverine and we already know where it is going, it is a road that leads to X3 and Wolverine – and we’re back to the beginning.

      • X-Men 3 did pretty well ($234MM U.S.) and Wolverine did OK, not great in the U.S. ($180MM). Probably the lack of awesome of X3 hurt Wolverine. Keep in mind the pre-title for that was “X-Men Origins” as if they were going to do a bunch of those for different characters. It didn’t do that great so I guess they re-worked the idea into something fresh with this film.

        Vic

        • Sadly, X3 was the highest grossing of the franchise. This film may suck (or not), but it WILL make money. Why? Because of the title. People see this simply because it’s an X-men movie.

        • @ Vic

          I read that Lauren shulen-Donnor mentioned after this film, X4 will happen. Do you know much whats been said like that? She also said X4′s ending leads into a X5.

          
          
      • The main reason I think First Class will do well is becuase there will be no Wolverine. He was overused in the trilogy and Origins was pretty awful.

        • Exactly. But I bet the “surprise cameo” that Singer was talking about a couple of months ago, is indeed Wolverine. I bet my left ball on it.

          • Wrong, scapegoat. The surprise is storm.

            • @ Vic

              By the way, Vic, I saw Thor and I give it a 3 out of 5. Screenrant, you are aware, gave it a 3.5 out of 5.

  8. This film looks awesome IMO.

    I think it’s silly that people keep saying “Give X-men back to Marvel!” Marvel Studios is just the same as any other movie studio except it has the Marvel name. What, do people think that every person at Marvel Studios is a comic book writer, artist? The big heads behind the curtains are probably guys who went to film school with the rest of Hollywood’s producers and directors.

    If anything Marvel is just as big as a cash cow milker as *any* studio. I mean, they’re trying to tie in all these movies to lead up to The Avengers rather than just making great stand alone movies. Explain to me how that is any different from any other studio franchise.

    • Attempting to link four large blockbuster comic book heroes in a movie universe has been done by who exactly?

      Now imagine, if you will, that the universe in question was one that included the largest Marvel names, Spider-Man, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four, and you will have your explanation.

      • You’re missing the point. To the average movie goer, the Avengers might not make sense if you haven’t seen the other four films. Just like the saw franchise, how it won’t make sense to just start a number four and try to make out all the previous back story.

        What I am saying is just like any other studio, they’re making movies to make money.

        • The heck you say, do they make comics for money too?

          • Yes, they do. If they didn’t make money they wouldn’t be able to keep open, pay their writers, artist, printers, editors ect. Sure people do it for artistic measure too, but no one strives to not make a living of art if that is going to be their primary career. That’s like saying people who work in auto shops only work on cars cause they love them.

            • LOL

  9. I still think the guy playing a young McCoy looks a hell of a lot more like a young Cyclops.

    Vic

    • Now that is very true – Cyclops pre-accident?

    • I agree with that assessment. Frankly, I was just saying that January Jones looks more like Mystique to me in any real adult oriented X-men movie.

  10. on the subject of havok, we see that eric, hank, and charles develope tech that can harness his power. it would give a good explanation for how professor x knew how to build the glasses and visor for scott in the future.

  11. I think It’s kind of funny that Vaughn criticizes continuity but it was found necessary to rip one of the big comic titles; “First Class” to be the title of his movie. In doing so they also didn’t put his name in the title as you’ve seen many times in the past with directors like John Carpenter. Since it deviates so much with the “First Class” comics I would think they would want the unique distinction to show. Accredit Vaughn and Fox. Instead, until relatively recently, it’s looked all over the web, since it was just a production rumor like an original comic book series adaptation. When comparing the two the old smelly bait and switch selling technique comes to mind, which is very unpleasant and generates suspicion of the product and the motive of those behind it.

    Face it at some point the money invested in a given franchise series production compared to the return will peak. If the payoff for the series is bound mostly to the action you run the risk of running out of money before running out of story. What I mean by that is if each sequel has to top the previous one in effects to fill theater seats and the story does none of the heavy lifting then your franchise will prematurely run dry. We’ve now had four X-Men films and while some will argue this fifth one will make some new friends unfamiliar with the previous outings, it’s a safe bet that those numbers will be small compared to those having seen at least one of the previous films. That being said at what point does the previous story decisions become a liability rather than an asset? Advocates of the wait and see are ignoring the examples readily at hand “Transformers:ROTFL,” “X-3,” and “Spider Man 3.” They all had good paybacks but failed miserably to deliver adequately on story. It’s highly likely that Sony is rebooting “Spider Man” for that very reason, number 4 becoming an intractable problem to produce.

    I personally rate myself as only an average fan and I’m already tired of reboots, so what does that mean to the dedicated fan, the constant reboots? Is it cheaper to restart than to construct a satisfying continuation that’s predicated on comic story continuity as well as attending effects to effectively tell the story? In other words it’s deemed too expensive to create a story that crosses lines like the 1990′s cartoon version did when compared to the comic books. IMO what you end up having is always going to look like a shallow rendition rather than a rich interpretation.

    The movie going public betrayed the CBM when despite Warner’s willingness and Zack Snider’s generous and selfless action, produced a rich faithful interpretation of “Watch Men” to lukewarm reward. No matter what the public or the critics thought of the story good or bad the studios took notice of the box office numbers. They didn’t impress, so any kind of attention to the idea of cannon, continuity, or how much the story reflected what even the best writers of the genre produced was discounted. They proved to the industry that faithfulness to the original product wasn’t so important, that other metrics are more important. The financial success of “ROTFL” further exacerbated the problem of believing that faithfulness to continuity was a foundation piece in success of these properties, when despite bad press both from professional critics and knowledgeable fans of the product made little difference in the cume. Attendees made their decisions based on other things, brand loyalty perhaps or the successful sell of the trailers. The fracturing of the fan base and willingness of the audience to be sold by the industry is killing the idea or maybe the ideal of how empowering the newest mass communication system, the Internet, can be for the individual in mobilizing, reaching, or effecting what society as a whole does or how it makes a decision…

    • You mention “Watch Men” and say it was faithful and didnt perform well. I havnt read the comics or seen the movie, so I wont comment on it but did it under perform because it was too faithful? Would more people have gone to see it if the same direction was taken with the X-Men movies? Does the average person know the “Watch Men” story? Could the director have gotten away with playing with the story to make it more cinematic?
      Basically when it comes to comic book movies, your damned if you do, and your damned if you dont. Is it possible to create a faithful movie based on a comic book and still have story which works a movie and draws the crowd? Personally I dont think so. Take the Dark Phoenix Saga. THink how much back story you would need to have done that story. A movie to introduce the X-Men. A movie to intorduce the Shiar Empire. A movie of Jean transforming. A movie of Jean being corrupted. Fighting the Dark Phoenix etc etc. And you would still have the “fanboys” complaining about the minute details left out. I appreciated the effort put into X3 but I can also see how that story was a let down.
      Comics have years, decades even to establish chararcters and relationships and sagas and histories. You will never get all that in a 2hr cinema experience. I am a Singer fan and love what he has done with the X-men universe and already have my ticket for June 1st. Go First Class :)

      • Thanks Avata_popco for responding. I think your questions keep people like me honest So I thought about what you said and thought I’d share some information I looked up. Food for thought at any rate. Watchmen never went out of print since it was published. The 2008 print run alone for the “Watchmen” graphic novel was in excess of a million copies. The ICV2 conference that year said “”Many people who are buying the ‘Watchmen’ graphic novel are either lapsed readers or may not have read comics or graphic novels before.” yes the movie was derided for its accuracy to the novel. Critics like Philip Kennicott and Devin Gordon felt that was a hindrance to its success. Damned if you do damned if you don’t,” Your not saying anything they didn’t say, however the problem here is they’re throwing the source under the bus. So if what they say is valid this shouldn’t garner any more success than “Watchmen” because it goes too far the other way. Ultimately what I’m saying is that isn’t the case! “First Class” will be commercially successful because few care at the moment if it follows the comics. What I’m thinking is that myself and others like me will find unsatisfying will come in follow on stories when they run into the problems they’ve had with previous efforts and they end up going through yet another reboot.

        Your right it makes no sense to take on stories larger than your medium can handle but that still doesn’t mean you throw out what you medium can handle. The final nail in the whole enterprise is the fact that when those who are new to the medium go looking for answers to their questions they won’t find them in the classic written media. That comes across as immature. If the authors are immature and the frame work is immature what does that say about the readers? In my estimation those approaching the material for the first time will quickly abandon it as being too trivial to be worth following and you lose any potential gain to be made.

        Another theory of course is the no brow theory that with the shear quantity of media published quality levels run together and every stratum of media has varying quality. Classic examples of authors that have done this are Wells, Capek, and Lem all have written Science Fiction literature but are known for good written works in other fields… Oh yes if your set on seeing it, enjoy “First Class.”

        • Thanks for the reply, you raise some good points, I’ll probably end up seeing Watchmen now.

          But does a comic book movie really need to follow the comics religiously to be considered a good movie? I havent read any off the Batman comics, but have seen Batman Begins and THe Dark Knight. I have no idea how far the movies stray from the source material, but I left both movies more or less satisfied. I am much more of a Marvel fan than DC and quite familar with Spider-man and X-Men in particular. Strangely I found the first two movies in both trilogies enjoyable and was not dispointed in the ways the movies strayed from the comics.

          I can say as a memeber of the general public that knowledge of the source material is irrelivant if the purpose of veiwing a movie is to enjoy yourself. I loved the characters in X2 and not once thought twice about the fact Striker was a general and not a preacher, that Iceman and Rogue were teenagers dating, or Collusus had no Russian accent. But saying that I hate the Harry Potter movies while loving the books.

          I think a good story and great characters are far more important to movie based on a book/comic than sticking to the source material with no if’s or but’s. X-Men First Class only needs to deliver a coherent story with involving charatcers for me to be happy. The idea of X-Men is all that I care about and I already know the stories. Lets see what someone else can do with these beloved charcaters. Even if the movie fails to entertain me, I still have my comics.

          Also the idea that an X-Men team which is not based on the original, cant tell good stories, is a little silly. lets not forget Ultimate X-Men. It out sold the Uncanny X-Men quite frequently in monthly sales during its run and its team was actually created by Mark Millar whose only reference was the first X-Men film. Clearly the comic book fan boys can appreciate a re working of a classic in comic form, so why not film? I’ll be the first to stand up and say I was wrong if X-Men First Class tanks cause of sciprt, acting or failed effects, but untill its released, lets not automatically assume it sucks becuase its differnt. If the X-Men have taught us anything, its not to hate whats different.

    • That was one of the most eloquent ways to explain the seeming glut of negative comments towards a lot of films these days:

      I personally am responsible for ranting about:

      X-Men – First Class
      The Amazing Spider-Man (This one really hurts as a HUGE Spidey fan)
      The Man of Steel

      I think you put it best when you said we feel betrayed – exactly how I feel on the above films.

      • The above comment was directed at “the old man”.

    • @old man

      The thing with these comic book movies is that the way you view them probably depends on when you read the comics themselves. Clearly in 2000 when the first X-Men movie came out it drew the fans who probably were into the books and it’s various cartoon and video game spin-offs in the 80′s and 90′s. Due to the drop off in readership during the late 90′s I can’t say for sure how many fans were still active readers of the books in 2000 and beyond but, that movie was successful because it was embraced by fans from the previous 20 years.

      That said the first movie did not really explain anything or build most of the characters at all when you really look at it. It was to me the same set up used in the original animated pilot for the X-Men cartoon in the 80′s with Rogue put in the place of Kitty Pryde (with the Rogue character being totally neutered in the process). The fans were just happy to see the X-Men on screen and have it not look like the previous comic book movie abominations that never even saw daylight from Marvel and the movie left allot of blanks to fill that fans did with what they knew from reading the comics themselves.

      In the second movie they decided to focus on Wolverine (which even as a huge Wolverine fan seemed rushed and forced). The way they did that was by using a weird mix of a story that dated back to the 80′s with the Stryker character and a more recent book that they assumed people had read. The movie was still well liked, made it’s money but still there was little done to build up any of the other characters beside Wolverine and they added Nightcrawler to the delight of fans but, that ultimately went nowhere. The end of that film then teased the Phoenix story which was one of the best known stories from the 80′s, and here’s were things went downhill fast.

      Along the lines of your bait and switch idea this is probably why X-3 is really so hated by so many fans. X-2 ended with a clear and blatant image of the Phoenix concept which despite the Ultimate’s relaunch and all those retcon stories is widely associated with a certain story. This is where the studio and producers lack of caring about telling a cohesive story helped kill allot of goodwill with fans. X-3 did well at the box office due more then likely to fact that people expected to see one thing and got something else that many did not care for.

      The shifting of directors means little since the overall production cycle for these movies seems to be that they will dump scripts at a whim even if it makes little sense. Just like what unfortunately happened with comics in the boom period they seem to feel that if you just slap X-Men or whatever is popular and fans will pay for it. It eventually hurt the book sales and might do the same with the movies at the rate things are going.

    • hmm

  12. The comic book Watchmen is easily one of the five best comics of all time. What makes it a great comic book is the way it uses the comic book form. It uses the episodic issues to shift the focus of the story. It uses the composition of the pictures, word balloons, panel arrangements, and pages as tools that guide the reader and reinforce what is happening in the story. It was written as a comic book. It’s not a song, a play, a musical, a ballet, or even a movie. It’s a comic book. It wasn’t made as storyboards for a movie.

    The basic story is not completely original. It takes from the Outer Limits episode, “The Architects of Fear,” which it references towards the end of the story. I’m pointing this out only to emphasize my point that Watchmen’s strength and endurance has probably more to do with the way it is told than the actual story.

    The only way to make a Watchmen movie, IMO, would be to use film or TV in the same way the Moore and Gibbons used the comic book. It would have to be completely changed and made into something unique unto itself. I never saw a need to even try to make a movie out of it.

    All comics are like this to some extent, some just more so. It’s a different medium than film. If it’s going to be translated, it has to be made into a film that stands on it’s own. I loved the Harry Potter Books. The movies are a mess, except for the third one. That’s the only one, IMO, that works on it’s own as a movie.

    Anyway, you got me old man. I would criticize you for never adding anything about what the blog is actually discussing. You, like so many others on X-men blogs, are like people that attend any gathering where there are people, set up your soapbox and shout the same things you’ve been saying again and again. I guess repeating yourself saves you from having to think.

  13. “X-Men: First Class seemed like a movie that was destined for disaster when it (and its out-of-continuity storyline) was first announced, but there’s been a massive turnaround in opinion thanks to a few good trailers and TV spots, as well as some great character-focused trailers.”

    Well in my own defense I haven’t moved on and neither has those who care for the reboot. As Koffi said a few months ago certain kinds of fans are fickle. Well I’m endeavoring to be consistent and trying to explain a portion of the point of view people like myself have. I’m sorry if I’m boring you or you feel accused of surrendering to a re-imagined redefined comic story. I’ve fallen on both sides of this issue now,so I understand. In my eyes your no lesser a fan for your decision. Just consider though all the angst and craziness we went through over “Spider-Man 4″ here and other web sites? Is it possible that we’re allowing Fox to set us up for that kind of thing all over again in another couple of years? Consider this, do you want to answer all those people asking why Beast looks human in X-1 is transformed in #3 and is redefined in this prequel after a genetic experiment and since Donner has went on record saying their will be an X-4, by then, who knows what. Don’t worry though the rule of cool will be there to smooth things over…

Be Social, Follow Us!!