Darth Zangetsu
Super Freak
I like Rogue in the comics, but i do not understand all the love she gets in these movies. Her character has literally done nothing in 3 films. In fact her story outside of X1 has really just slowed the movie down.
X-Men: Days of Future Past
- Thread starter Uncanny Web-Slinger
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
bransen2099
Super Freak
Agreed, to me she's a very underwhelming character, maybe because they have underutilized her in the movies
GasparZizou
Super Freak
This speaks for itself, ladies and gentlemen
He's right tho.
Guess a lot of true blood fans like her yea she hasn't done jackshit as Rogue .
pturtle
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
- Messages
- 10,289
- Reaction score
- 36
I think she was fine in X1 and X2. Also, Anna Paquin is a fine actress, most fans were hoping to see her make an appearance full powered up fighting sentinels in DOFP.
jye4ever
Broke and happy
Three movies worth of Rogue standing around doing nothing is plenty for me.
Darth Zangetsu
Super Freak
Three movies worth of Rogue standing around doing nothing is plenty for me.
Don't forget she is often whining about how no one can touch her. Which in the comics is ok, when she is also a female version of Superman. Plus between Gambit, Magneto, etc she has found plenty of people who she can be with.
Yeah, you're right.
I always thought it was lame that they pulled that card on her to help push and drive the movie story lines. But hey, they might make a miss marvel movie; if she dies, hopefully rogue can steal her superman powers. Or not cause fox sucks. And they're holding onto the franchise for dear life.
Actually it’s from the original song
An epic 70’s track that goes hand in hand with the trailer primarily showing the past cast.
The Avengers was killed already this year by TWS, and was killed before it was released by X2, TDK, SM2, STM, IM1 etc…
The Empire interview said something about Hank making him something that helps him walk again, but it comes with a price.
The Avengers worked like this also, even though it has 4 films prior to it’s release to set everything up. The whole point of that movie is recruiting the main 4 members, and getting them to work together with Shield to take down what wasn’t even that much of a threat. Hulk could have handled everything just fine. I guess it’s only bad when FOX’s X-Men does it though
the song in the trailer didn't sound like the original, It sounded like the Godzilla version. technically they are similar but the beat is different. All I could think of was Godzilla showing up in the Xmen trailer lol
ExMem-LarjaThwei
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2010
- Messages
- 11,013
- Reaction score
- 38
Whether the song was attached to 98 Godzilla or not, it's ****ing awesome and made the trailer that much cooler.
I've always hated the way she looked in the movies. I know they were not going to make her look the same as the comic but to me she never felt like Rogue. even from the first movie i had problems with her.
she felt too young and too immature, too childish. this whole character was just a mess, she really was a waste in the movies.
RRJdesign
Freaked Out
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2014
- Messages
- 215
- Reaction score
- 2
I agree. For me I don't mind her not flying around and with superman strength like in the comics but at least I wish they gave her a stronger personality, brave and a bit seductive. In the movie, she was very weak, sensitive and always worry about her feelings.
I thought Iceman "Bobby" will be the same but at least he developed his power in X3 the last stand.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Exactly...
I hated that, she was nothing like the Rogue of the cartoon i saw when i was young, If anything the Rogue in the movies always felt like jubilee to me,
GasparZizou
Super Freak
Exactly...
I hated that, she was nothing like the Rogue of the cartoon i saw when i was young, If anything the Rogue in the movies always felt like jubilee to me,
That's a spot on comparison...
Mad Old Lu
Super Freak
I don't mind the changes to the characters in X1, 2 and FC. For the most part they have stayed true to the spirit of the characters. I never even think about X3 though. Watched it once and put it out of my mind, although I think they could have gotten away with bringing Scott back since we never actually see him die. After all, they brought Charles back and gave Erik his powers back.
I agree with you, RRJ, to an extent. But I almost see the movie Rogue as a completely different character because she lacks Ms Marvel's powers.
Right, crows. She's more like Jubilee, and a dash of Kitty.
I agree with you, RRJ, to an extent. But I almost see the movie Rogue as a completely different character because she lacks Ms Marvel's powers.
Right, crows. She's more like Jubilee, and a dash of Kitty.
Last edited:
hunnipot85
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 6,399
- Reaction score
- 27
Exactly...
I hated that, she was nothing like the Rogue of the cartoon i saw when i was young, If anything the Rogue in the movies always felt like jubilee to me,
Jubilee would at least fight, use her powers and get into the battles or get herself into trouble. Movie Rogue can't even do that.
Deckard
Super Freak
pturtle
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
- Messages
- 10,289
- Reaction score
- 36
Oh great, this thread will turn into non stop conversations about this crap, and forget the movie even exists.
Deckard
Super Freak
Well, this isn't the first time he's been accused.
Lawsuit[edit]
For Apt Pupil, Bryan Singer filmed a shower scene in which Todd Bowden, saturated with horrific stories from Kurt Dussander, imagines his fellow showering students as Jewish prisoners in gas chambers.[34] The scene was filmed at Eliot Middle School in Altadena, California on April 2, 1997, and two weeks later, a 14-year-old extra filed a lawsuit alleging that Singer forced him and other extras to strip naked for the scene. Two boys, 16 and 17-years-old each, later supported the 14-year-old's claim. The boys claimed trauma from the experience, seeking charges against the filmmakers including infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and invasion of privacy.[35] Allegations were made that the boys were filmed for sexual gratification.[36] The local news shows and national tabloid programs stirred the controversy. A sexual crimes task force that included local, state, and federal personnel investigated the incident. The Los Angeles District Attorney's office determined that there was no cause to file criminal charges,[28] stating, "The suspects were intent on completing a professional film as quickly and efficiently as possible. There is no indication of lewd or abnormal sexual intent."[36] The civil case was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.[37] The scene was filmed again with adult actors so the film could finish on time.[24]
The lawsuit reflected "a recent cultural concern" about nudity in showers being connected to "sexual or erotic forms of gazing". The journal Body & Society wrote, "The ways in which the accusation that the director and other crew members identified as gay is seen to collapse gay identity into gay sexual behaviour, but the wholesale collapse of nudity into sexuality." The incident reflected the cultural trend that being gazed upon while naked would cause different forms of distress, threatening the "stability of the self as subject". This undermines the subject's ability to perform and as a result of the discomfort, brings more into question what the displayed nakedness is for.[34]
Lawsuit[edit]
For Apt Pupil, Bryan Singer filmed a shower scene in which Todd Bowden, saturated with horrific stories from Kurt Dussander, imagines his fellow showering students as Jewish prisoners in gas chambers.[34] The scene was filmed at Eliot Middle School in Altadena, California on April 2, 1997, and two weeks later, a 14-year-old extra filed a lawsuit alleging that Singer forced him and other extras to strip naked for the scene. Two boys, 16 and 17-years-old each, later supported the 14-year-old's claim. The boys claimed trauma from the experience, seeking charges against the filmmakers including infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and invasion of privacy.[35] Allegations were made that the boys were filmed for sexual gratification.[36] The local news shows and national tabloid programs stirred the controversy. A sexual crimes task force that included local, state, and federal personnel investigated the incident. The Los Angeles District Attorney's office determined that there was no cause to file criminal charges,[28] stating, "The suspects were intent on completing a professional film as quickly and efficiently as possible. There is no indication of lewd or abnormal sexual intent."[36] The civil case was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.[37] The scene was filmed again with adult actors so the film could finish on time.[24]
The lawsuit reflected "a recent cultural concern" about nudity in showers being connected to "sexual or erotic forms of gazing". The journal Body & Society wrote, "The ways in which the accusation that the director and other crew members identified as gay is seen to collapse gay identity into gay sexual behaviour, but the wholesale collapse of nudity into sexuality." The incident reflected the cultural trend that being gazed upon while naked would cause different forms of distress, threatening the "stability of the self as subject". This undermines the subject's ability to perform and as a result of the discomfort, brings more into question what the displayed nakedness is for.[34]
bransen2099
Super Freak
So does that mean he's gone?
Similar threads
