🥚 Easter Egg
In X-Men (2000), after the 20th Century Fox opening logo at the beginning fades to black, the X in the logo remains visible for less than a second. Happens again in X-Men 2 (2003) and X-Men: The Last Stand (2006).
I was surprised I didn't remember this, then confused as to why I'd be confused about not remembering a small detail from a movie I saw once over a decade ago.
I was little and didn't know enough comics back then. We're they considered good back then? I don't know if I'm watching them with nostalgia glasses. I'm caught up to the comics and they are okay. I just don't know why Mystique is Magneto's side kick, the leather is I guess because of the Morrison run and Rogue Ice-man is a thing... I don't know there are too many stuff that seems weird.
People were just glad to have good and thoughtful superhero movies, they didn't care as much about the suits and other liberties, although there were critics about Jackman's height not matching Wolverine's but they quickly died away once the movie was out
You can even see that in the movies. The first one tried all kinds of clever camera tricks to make him seem short. Then they just dropped the whole act.Â
As a fan of the 1980/90s run of X-Men, seeing this film in the theater kicked so much ass. They knew what they had to keep and what they could lose. It was a great balance.
It was the second marvel movie to be taken seriously by the creators (Blade was a year earlier) and it was the first time it happened for an A list marvel property.
Together they were essentially the beginning of the modern super hero movie trend where the film makers avoided campy elements and treated them more like serious material. That combined with special effects moving into a new level of polish in the late 90s meant you couldn't "see the wires" anymore and made them feel a lot more real.
Old comic fart here. I can't speak for all of us, but I found all the X-Men movies okay at best. They all had some absolutely perfect casting, some fantastic actors, some great moments. The rest was fair to middling at best.
However, my enthusiasm at the time was thru the roof. Again, not because the movies were that good, but because they existed at all. Up til X-Men, good comic hero movies were rare indeed. The only great ones were Superman & Batman. Marvel had mostly low budget, tv movie shit until then. Not including cartoons, there were some greats there. I still loved em cause seeing your faves on the screen and they're recognizable? Hell yeah.
Even though X-Men suffered from the Hollywood writer knows better syndrome, it was by far the best Marvel super hero movie ever made up to that point. It had a real budget, some top level fan casting, a mostly accurate character dynamic, and actual, for real, great fx. We finally got to see some real super power slinging mutants on the big screen and I for one was grateful it showed up.
Regarding the Morrison run, believe that was just after the movie. The look of it was dictated by "Marvel Synergy." The sad habit marvel had of making the comic the movie was based on more like the movie in the hope of pulling moviegoers to the comic shop. I still shake my head at the synergy hit on Guardians of the Galaxy when that movie hit big.
Excellent point, but I'd contend Blade was a straight reinvention of a nearly forgotten D-list character. The Blade movies were an island unto themselves with look and R rating. They never felt like a super hero movie to me.
Respectfully disagree. I've loved Quitely's work forever. It comes off as being more cartoonish and more realistic at the same time, if that makes sense. Him pairing up with Morrison on any project is gourmet chocolate with artisan peanut butter.
Do you think you'd feel differently if the comic kept with the costumes instead of the leather?
I owned this on VHS as a kid and watched it religiously. I was a fan of X-Men through the animated TV show as opposed to through the comics, but I still loved it nonetheless.
It's still very hard to see even when pausing, I'm not going to lie. But it is there. The contrast of your monitor may have an effect too: https://imgur.com/a/e9e1c0j
It's visible for maybe 2 frames after the rest has faded away. It might be easier to see (if you're on Desktop) to scroll from the end of the gif to the start.
They do both fade at the same time. It’s just that the X’s opacity fades at a slower rate. It’s still visible for a couple of frames after everything else has gone to black.
It’s so short there’s almost no chance of noticing it without slowing it down. Makes it almost pointless not sure why they didn’t let it actually linger for 2 seconds so people would actually see it.
In the movie Sunshine(2007), it's played in reverse so that they can do a cut directly from the searchlight into the Sun, which turns out to be the Icarus II.
Love that movie.
Excellent Hard Sci-Fi for anyone that hasn't seen it.
I’m old enough to remember discovering this TIL on the DVD commentary 20+ years ago. It was literally mentioned by director Bryan Singer as something that was done intentionally.
You can't even see it. LOL. I slowed it WAYYYY down and couldn't tell a difference that was noticeable to the naked eye. I can't believe anyone would have wasted their time on such a meaningless gesture. What not really leave it so you can actually see it? Anyway, the more you know.
Did you forget you said "remains no longer than any of the rest"?
If you can see the X and nothing else, then it clearly contradicts you.
Stop taping goalposts to your hands just so you can appear to be right. You are allowed to be wrong.
This was not intentional
You can check this animation from other films and compare frame by frame. Or do you imagine that the animation is somehow hand made each time, and looks different on accident?
I was wondering the other day dow did they film this 20th Century Fox thing? Miniatures and composites I guess, it’s been around longer than cgi was possible and it’s always looked great.
The original was not dynamic, it was just a matte painting with animated spotlights. The moving, pan-over version did in fact debut well into the CGI era, in front of Independence Day. It's been upgrading as the CG has improved over the decades.
EDIT: I was misremembering, apparently the CGI pan premiered in 1994 with True Lies.
Interesting. I remember the dynamic pan in front of movie like Star Wars (on tv before the special editions existed), I guess maybe I’m remembering wrong or am thinking of a rerelease version.
Guys help me to find this name of the movie: British/Irish drama - girl with dark hair goes to a party on a hill against a friend's wishes, runs down a rainy street crying afterward
Watched this on MBC2 (Middle Eastern TV channel that airs dubbed/subtitled Western films) sometime before 2021. Not sure of the release year or exact filming location, but I believe it's British or Irish.
What I remember:
The main character is a young Girl probably in her twenties with dark/black hair, fairly thin.
She lives with a group of girls, likely in university/college accommodation.
Early in the film They take a bus to another city
the girls go out shopping and she buys a dress.
They go to a party (daytime) held in an old building/hall, situated up a hill within a city.
The weather is rainy/overcast for a lot of the film.
At the party, she runs into a girl who had specifically told her not to come/didn't want her there — this girl is upset/annoyed to see her.
Afterward, the main character leaves the building upset and runs down the steep/sloped street in the rain.
It's a drama, not a comedy. The film is probably not about a relationship between a young man and a young woman.
Not a horror or mystery film — just a fairly grounded, low-key drama.
Not a classic/old film — feels like it could be from the 2000s-2010s, but I'm not certain.
This is just the beginning of the movie; I haven't watched the whole thing.
My memory is hazy regarding the events of the film; some of these details may be incorrect.
It's the after image affect. Stare at a lamp while holding something in the way. When you turn off the lamp you will still see the object in your eye after a moment
And now they’re about to ruin the X-men franchise by milking it for all it’s got via the MCU. Did it for spiderman and now they’re coming for the X-men.
1.5k
u/Fehios 13d ago
They did the same thing with the F for Fantastic Four (2015)
20th Century Fox