X-Men: Days of Future Past

Deckard said:

Just keeps piling up.

Click to expand...

Or not…

https://www.tmz.com/2014/04/18/x-men-director-bryan-singer-sexual-assault-hawaii-toronto/

Bryan Singer believes he has proof that will blow his sexual accuser out of the water ... he was NOT in Hawaii during the period he allegedly committed a sexual assault.

Michael Egan claims in a new lawsuit Singer anally raped him and forced hard drugs on him during 2 separate trips to Hawaii in August and October, 1999.

Sources connected with Singer tell TMZ ... the "X-Men" director has proof he was NOT in Hawaii during that period ... he was in Toronto shooting the first "X-Men" movie.

We're told Singer will file credit card bills and various other documents proving he was in Toronto during the times in question.

We know the movie itself was shot Sept. 22 - March 3 in Toronto, but there was pre-production and we're told Singer was present.

Read more: https://www.tmz.com/2014/04/18/x-me...-sexual-assault-hawaii-toronto/#ixzz2zHgolBze

Click to expand...

I say we just wait until this whole mess if finished before we start condemning people.

Singer sounds like a wretched individual even if he is innocent of these particular charges.

Yep, at this point I wouldn't be surprised if FOX goes with a new director regardless of the outcome of this suit, just because it's bad publicity to be attached to him.

I love that priest picture. Dirty! So so so dirty.

Singer's next film. XXX-men.

meanstreak said:

Yep, at this point I wouldn't be surprised if FOX goes with a new director regardless of the outcome of this suit, just because it's bad publicity to be attached to him.

Click to expand...

Pretty much, I just hope it’s a quality director that replaces him, no Gavin Hood

pturtle said:

Pretty much, I just hope it’s a quality director that replaces him, no Gavin Hood

Click to expand...

Can't believe that guy directed Ender's game.

Kibagami said:

Can't believe that guy directed Ender's game.

Click to expand...

Still haven’t had the chance to see it, did he do a better job with Ender’s Game?

Origins is one of the worst movies ever created in my opinion

Obviously all crime is bad, particularly felonies like murders or rapes committed against people, but in addition to sympathizing for the victims I really feel bad for everyone who worked on films like TDKR and now DOFP (like Nolan, Bale, Hathaway, Jackman, Lawrence, Fassbender and all the other cast and crew members) who put their heart and soul into a project only to have it overshadowed by some real life atrocity committed by some monster of a human being. It's too bad.

This is assuming Singer is guilty on any level of course with regard to DOFP.

His party essentially already admitted to saying the extras could be nude or all nude but according to the law that's a problem when it comes to minors. He's cooked.

Sucks that it seems FOX put all of it's faith into Singer for the X-franchise.

I would love if they just reboot the whole thing and got it right from the get go, to compete a bit better with Marvel Studios. Sure, we'd lose a great cast... but the potential for them to get the teams/looks/script right outweighs that.

pturtle said:

Actually the movie only “underperformed” because it was budgeted with the canceled Tim Burton Superman Lives film. Otherwise the movie would have made it’s money back, and it made more than Batman Begins did.


https://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=114329



https://filmjunk.com/2008/01/04/bryan-singer-and-brandon-routh-off-superman-returns-sequel/



I don’t know what I made up, these are 2 stories throughout the years pretty much confirm what I said. Singer was too busy focusing on Valkyrie and was barely thinking of Superman, Marvel started dominating, WB decided to reboot the whole thing with Nolan due to his success with Batman.

Do your research next time, just coming here talking out your ass is cheap.

Click to expand...

You're the only one talking out their ass pal, you and Singer must have had the same math teacher.

Yes it did make more money than BB, but BB didn't cost what SR did, BB also made another 150 million in dvd sales, SR didn't.

Even taking the 50 mill out of the picture, which is what they spent up till then, SR (even with tax breaks),cost over 200 million, plus another 100 million for prints and advertising. So that's 300 million right there. Movies have to make 3 times what they cost. SR made 400. So how would they make a profit? That film needed to do a billion to make money, and they didn't. Just like DOFP has to do.


Those articles prove nothing. Coming soon.net? Film junk.com? Come on. Even if you took what Singer said at face value, it was nonsense. He just said what he wanted to do. The studio at that point told him there wasn't going to be a sequel, so what else would he do? Warner lost interest, yes. In Singer.

They did the same thing with Green Lantern. I remember there was all that back and forth about doing a sequel for that movie too. That didn't happen either.

What do you think? Warner's forgot that they were doing a follow up to their Superman movie?

Studios don't walk away from potential money makers, regardless of what the internet says.

Practice what you preach, bro.

Hopefully Woodey Allen is hired for the X-Men reboot.

pturtle said:

Yea, most people felt FC was doomed because of all the production problems.

https://screenrant.com/january-jones-x-men-first-class-rushed-rob-101267/



https://www.reelz.com/movie-news/10...ion-script-process-and-possible-sequel-ideas/

Click to expand...

Thanks for posting that. I know I'm being a little tough on Vaughn. I do love Stardust.

I'm staying out of the Singer stuff for now. I'll reserve my judgement til we know what's really true and what isn't.

jye4ever said:

X-Men reboot.

Click to expand...

But we all already know Bryan Singer's Age of Apocalypse...

It's 17.

jye4ever said:

Hopefully Woodey Allen is hired for the X-Men reboot.

Click to expand...

It saddens me that Woody Allen has never really gotten any backlash for his indiscretions. Roman Polanski? Check. Guy who directed Powder? Check. Jerry Lee Lewis? Check. But Woody Allen MARRIES HIS ADOPTED DAUGHTER? Everyone turns a blind eye.

The Phantom said:

You're the only one talking out their ass pal, you and Singer must have had the same math teacher.

Yes it did make more money than BB, but BB didn't cost what SR did, BB also made another 150 million in dvd sales, SR didn't.

Even taking the 50 mill out of the picture, which is what they spent up till then, SR (even with tax breaks),cost over 200 million, plus another 100 million for prints and advertising. So that's 300 million right there. Movies have to make 3 times what they cost. SR made 400. So how would they make a profit? That film needed to do a billion to make money, and they didn't. Just like DOFP has to do.


Those articles prove nothing. Coming soon.net? Film junk.com? Come on. Even if you took what Singer said at face value, it was nonsense. He just said what he wanted to do. The studio at that point told him there wasn't going to be a sequel, so what else would he do? Warner lost interest, yes. In Singer.

They did the same thing with Green Lantern. I remember there was all that back and forth about doing a sequel for that movie too. That didn't happen either.

What do you think? Warner's forgot that they were doing a follow up to their Superman movie?

Studios don't walk away from potential money makers, regardless of what the internet says.

Practice what you preach, bro.

Click to expand...

There is so much wrong in your post, I don’t think I’ll continue this debate. I provided facts for my response, and now you’re saying thats not good enough.

Superman Returns and X-Men DOFP needed/need to make a billion to see profit?

SR did underperform, I never said it didn’t, but the bundling of budgets is what really hurt it. WB was expecting more, and they are just as much at fault at approving Singer’s script and getting the film made. I still don’t know what I said that was so “made up”? You don’t want to believe these links thats fine, but obviously I wasn’t talking out my ass which is what these links prove.

pturtle said:

There is so much wrong in your post, I don’t think I’ll continue this debate. I provided facts for my response, and now you’re saying thats not good enough.

Superman Returns and X-Men DOFP needed/need to make a billion to see profit?

SR did underperform, I never said it didn’t, but the bundling of budgets is what really hurt it. WB was expecting more, and they are just as much at fault at approving Singer’s script and getting the film made. I still don’t know what I said that was so “made up”? You don’t want to believe these links thats fine, but obviously I wasn’t talking out my ass which is what these links prove.

Click to expand...

Of course you can't debate what I said, you're wrong.

Get your information from something other than Superhero sites and maybe you'll know what you're talking about.

You provided no facts, just fluff pieces that mean nothing. What were they from, 2007?

You need to get it through your head that movies that cost a lot, have to MAKE a lot.

IF DOFP costs 250 million or more (since you said it was the biggest superhero budget movie to date), plus what they spend to market it and show it all over the world, do you think it will make a profit by taking in 400 million?

Because if you do, I'm the one laughing now.

C'mon boys, cheer up!

Party Time!

BYOT (Bring Your Own Twinkie)

The Phantom said:

Of course you can't debate what I said, you're wrong.

Get your information from something other than Superhero sites and maybe you'll know what you're talking about.

You provided no facts, just fluff pieces that mean nothing. What were they from, 2007?

You need to get it through your head that movies that cost a lot, have to MAKE alot.

IF DOFP costs 250 million or more (since you said it was the biggest superhero budget movie to date), plus what they spend to market it and show it all over the world, do you think it will make a profit by taking in 400 million?

Because if you do, I'm the one laughing now.

Click to expand...

I took an older article and a recent article to show you it was being developed, and even back in 2007 the word was Singer wanted to make other films instead of focus on the SR sequel, but you thought I was just making stuff up because I liked the film, and you were proven wrong. I don’t know whats wrong with the sites I gave, most of the news posted here are from superhero based sites, but I guess that just another one of your dumb excuses to try and discredit my post.

Please explain to me what I was actually wrong about? Where was I supposedly making something up? I expect you to deviate around this question.

I know they need to make a lot of money, but you said they needed to make a billion dollars to make profit, which is just stupid, like your last 3 posts.