X-Men: X²

Man, if being in T3 wasn't enough!

X² is X-Men 2 by the way.

I've edited the thread title to make that more obvious. Anyway, this film is probably going to kick all a**. Apparently the story focuses on Wolverine's origins...we're going to see a few new mutants, too...though not Gambit, most likely. Here's a story I posted back on the 13th:

imdb says the the too new x men are gambit and nightcrawler in the movie. I sure hope so, please god dont let there be a cg beast

__________________
"Who comes at 12:00 on a Sunday night to rent Butch Cassady and the Sundance Kid?"
-Hollywood Video rental guy to me

Nightcrawler is bada*s.

__________________
"I was walking down the street with my friend and he said, "I hear music", as if there is any other way you can take it in. You're not special, that's how I receive it too. I tried to taste it but it did not work." - Mitch Hedberg

Why is this title so bad? Why can't they just call it X-Men II and then have some sort of semi-colon sub title? Do they have to go for the M:I 2 and T2 crap? Do they ACTUALLY think this sounds catchy and appealing? Is Bryan Singer directing this? What did he have to say?

__________________
dappersm

I dunno, I think it's alright. I just have to wonder whether it's "X-Two" or "X-Squared." Probably the former. I think it's kinda cool...but it makes little difference either way. Oh, by the way: welcome to MovieForums.com, dappersm.

If you visit Superhero Hype!, it lists all the comic book hero's being given a movie.

Plus, if you click X-Men it talks about the sequel's title and what Bryan Singer said about it. He basically said, "It's not X to the second power", just a catchy title.

Also, McKellan mentioned that there might be 3 X-Men movies altogether.

ahhhh, wolverine. mmhmm, i'd say he's my fav of what they've established for the flicks. i will NEVER get over their choice for Storm though; that was just wrong.

they better gimme gambit; if Wolverine hadn't been old enough to be my father (at the time i watched the cartoon) I would have lusted for him (i did lust, but, the lust was full of angst) but gambit, gambit was deliciously BAD. a lady killer gambling baffoon with a nawleans accent, how can rogue resist that?! mmm-mmm, fingerlickin' good.

i'm afraid to see who they choose for him. *chews nails in fearful anticipation*

Colin Ferrel, I still don't know if this guys last name is spelled right, would be a good choice.

He's in American Outlaws, Tigerland, upcoming Daredevil. He's young, he might be a good choice if there aren't any conflicts between pictures.

The version of Wolverine we see in the "X-Men" movie is sort of a cross between himself and Gambit...he wasn't as gruff as Wolverine is supposed to be...he had a bit of flirt in him, as you may have noticed. Personally, in a movie, rather than a comic book, Gambit is a little bit of overkill; we've already got a tough guy, ya know what I mean? I dunno why everyone wants to see him in the sequel so very badly. I think he's alright, but I'm not losing sleep over the fact that all reports out have him NOT appearing in the second movie. They kicked a** with the first flick, so I've got faith in them for the second.

is it just me, or does the X-Men series seem more like the Wolverine series?

It's not just you -- Wolverine did get a lot of focus in the first flick, and I expect it to be (roughly) the same in the second...though I do imagine they'll tone it down at least a little.

Honestly though, he's the only mutant who doesn't really know how he became to be with claws...

See the problem is, that i've been hearing that they're gonna focus more on him in the sequel.

But... he is probably the most interesting character.

i just think it would hav been better to do a movie on all of the X-Men (without focusing too much on anyone in particular) and then doing another movie on Wolverine alone.

Well, I think that they didn't spend all of their time on Wolverine in X-Men, but they DID spend more time with Wolverine and Rogue rather than the other characters.

I could careless about that really, I was just in awe that X-Men was brought to the big screen and it succeded.

I thought X-Men was very good. Wasn't much character development with some characters, such as Storm and Cyclops though.

That's good if they're planning 3 X-Men films. More than 3 is pretty iffy. I think I read that Harry Potter is going to be 7 or so films. Isn't it going to get old after the first 5 or so?

I don't know if you've noticed or not, but Potter-mania has died down significantly. Well, I don't hear much about Potter other than about Chamber of Secrets.

As for X-Men 2...

I think it's safe to say Bryan Singer and Sam Raimi are the best damn comic book to live action directors out there...

Sorry had to throw that in, I do think that there will be more character development this time around, especially with new additions to the crew.

Well, we're in-between movies, AND books...it comes in waves. The next book and movie will be greeted with much publicity, I assure you.