New answers tagged

0

There are multiple continuity issues between the new movies and the old Trilogy. Mainly based on the idea that the old Trilogy is set in the 2000s. X3, The Last Stand, is supposed to be five minutes into the future of X2, which is explicitly set a few months after the events of X1. X1 is "present day" meaning, roughly the same time as it's real world ...


2

You are correct. X-Men: Days of Future Past doesn't explain the Angel in Apocalypse. The Angel in The Last Stand doesn't appear to fit in the same continuity with the Apocalypse Angel because of a serious age discrepancy. Whatever age Worthington is supposed to be in Apocalypse, he's clearly going to be older than 10. That means he would have been born ...


0

X-Men: Days of Future Past basically eradicated the previous continuity: Because of this the Angel that we've seen before existed in a different continuity - the same continuity in which Jean Grey / Phoenix (Famke Janssen) and Scott Summers / Cyclops (James Marsden) died. So the Angel we're going to meet during X-Men: Apocalypse will be an ...


26

Wolverine and Sabretooth were not in the American Revolution. They were born in the mid 1800s, nearly a century after the Revolution (1775-1783). The first scene of X-Men Origins: Wolverine takes place in 1845, when Wolverine is seemingly a pre-teen (typical age mutant powers emerge). The American Civil on the other hand, did have James and Victor fighting ...


7

According to X-Men Origins: Wolverine (which is very loosely based on the Origins comic series), Wolverine was born James Howlett in Canada in the late 1830's. In 1845, he sees his father murdered by their groundskeeper, and that triggers his mutation to activate: bone claws, regeneration, etc. It's at this point that Howlett and his half-brother Victor ...


4

This is a perfectly acceptable communication if he is only speaking figuratively. "Claws" doesn't mean only physical, literal claws, it is a metaphor for the ability to be violent, to be competently violent. He might very well have said the same thing if he had armed him with a rifle. And, if we examine these movies closely, Wolverine becomes physically ...


1

The X-Men films typically follow mainstream knowledge of the comics. Wolverine wasn't known to have bone claws by the general audience, so they didn't mention it. The Bone Claws reveal was only done in 1993, recent compared to Wolverines entire history. He's typically depicted as thinking that he gained claws from the Weapon X program. Wolverine has always ...


0

The X-Men film series has an ever-shifting canon. With the first two films, it is established that a number of handheld adamantium guns were used over an extended period of time to graft the metal to Logan's skeleton. With X-Men Origins: Wolverine, however, the scene was changed to show a number of automated rods simply impaling Logan's body and covering his ...


0

You didn't have to take that dialogue that straight. He doesn't means that he didn't have claws before but he means that he didn't have the Adamantium claw before. So he means that he was animal way before that experiment and he just gave a weapon to an animal.



Top 50 recent answers are included