|
|
Post by judgejosephdredd on Aug 24, 2017 3:46:35 GMT
Quicksilver was not the lead in either Days of Future Past or Age of Ultron, both of which were ensemble films. Both iterations are fairly different from one another so the only thing they share in common is the nickname; X-Men's Quicksilver is an American raised mutant who is the son of Magneto, was born in the 1950's, lives with his mom, is a wise cracking trouble maker and typically dresses casually. His name is Peter. Marvel's Quicksilver is from contemporary times, was born and raised in Europe, and got his powers via experimentation - he wasn't born with them. His Father is definitely not Magneto, who doesn't exist in that universe, his name is Pietro. Neither movie was also made by the same creative team - Fox made X-Men, Marvel made Avengers. For general movie audiences who don't keep track of what studio is producing what movies, there isn't any distinction between the X-Men movies and Avengers movies (other than the X-Men movies aren't filled with bad jokes and lame villains). Both movies start with a red-colored Marvel logo on it so for general audiences, they're both Marvel movies. And they have 2 Quicksilvers. War Machine/Rhodey and Bruce Banner/Hulk are instances of re-casting a character, Don Cheadle's Rhodes is the same Rhodes Terrence Howard portrayed in the first Iron Man and Mark Ruffalo's Hulk in The Avengers is the same Hulk Edward Norton was in The Incredible Hulk. The Incredible Hulk was not a continuation of the 2003 movie with Eric Bana it was a total reboot. And that's where general movie audiences would get really confused. Because they've been told over and over again that it's supposed to be a shared universe. So when they replace an actor (and in Hulk's case, not for a minor role but for 1 of the key roles in the shared universe) after just 1 appearance, it confuses people. It would be like if Star Wars had replaced Harrison Ford or Mark Hamill after just 1 movie. Actually, the distinction between Marvel Studios productions and movies that are based on Marvel properties has become more apparent by general audiences, as soon phase one was completed with The Avengers people really started to see the difference between a legitimate Marvel movie where they are calling every shot( Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, etc.) to one which is based on their properties but primarily produced by a different party altogether( The X-Men's, the Spider-Man's, the Blades, the Ghost Riders, the Punishers, etc.) It's helped Marvel out a lot that with pretty much all their releases they use the "Marvel Studios" block on top of the logos for their films and have a special title sequence to play in front of each. Secondly, its clear as day that the X-Men movies do not occupy the same world as the Marvel Studios movies do, there is just too much in both franchises that contradicts the other its just impossible to think it were any other way. And both iterations of Quicksilver appear too vastly different to be the same exact character, and it wouldn't line up at all to think for one second that Quicksilver in DOFP is the same as the one in AoU, in DOFP Quicksilver is in his twenties and its in the 1970s, in AoU it is the 2010's and Quicksilver is not a mutant but an experiment with a very thick accent. It's called suspension of disbelief. Recasting roles in franchises is nothing new, the James Bond franchise - which you ironically used to defend WB's decision making with this Joker origins movie, has done it before and will continue to do so. Have a problem with it? Blame Howard and Norton for not being more professional and wanting to play ball. |
|
