Matthew Vaughn on X-Men: "The Twilight girls will like it."

[Venom65437]

I'm gonna give Vaughn the benefit of the doubt on this one... Plus I've just read a volume of Runaways and that's very teen angsty, yet awesome....
He did give us Kickass after all and that movie is awesome.

Teenage Angst can work well and I seriously doubt Vaughn has seen Twilight, so he's just going with the stereotypical "Twilight girls love angst."
The Runaways, Young Avengers, various incarnations of X-men and Spider-Man have worked off of Teen angst to good effect.

And so the death of the superhero fad in movies has finally begun, Oversaturation of the market in its prime.

Vaughn made a comment on that and said he took the X-men job so he could get out a good mainstream comic book movie (Kickass kinda went out with a fizzle at box offices) before the market killed itself.

Well I have all the confidence in the world he'll do that with all those popular, well known X-Men in the movie. Oh wait...

[FSUSpiderFan]

He was probably just joking with the Twilight comment and the X-men does traditionally have some angst. Now if Magneto starts sparkling we will definitely be in trouble.

[CrazyChris]

Magneto is allowed to sparkle.

[FSUSpiderFan]

Magneto is allowed to sparkle.

So Twilight ripped off Stan Lee!

[Peter Palmer]

Magneto is allowed to sparkle.

Well yeah, he's not a vampire. Vampires in "X-Men" would just be stupid...

...Oh wait.

[Extreme Spider]

No. They Had Me In The" Placed In The 60s" But Xavier Looks A Little Out of Place. I'm Used To Baldie. He's Walking,There's No Scott And Jean. No Angel Is A No No. And No Bobby. This Has No Demographic For 14 yr old boys. Or His Friends

[Enigma_2099]

The hell is wrong with taking a good story from the COMIC BOOKS and adapting it to movie form?

[NickMB]

The hell is wrong with taking a good story from the COMIC BOOKS and adapting it to movie form?

Because they're written for a different medium? I mean, look at The Dark Knight, that wasn't exactly faithful to any one comic story, it looked a bit like The Long Halloween, but with many other bits beaten on. Heath Ledger's widely acclaimed Joker doesn't resemble many of his comic appearances. And none of the Spider-Man movies (ignoring arguments over which ones were good) have been particularly faithful adaptations.

Being 100% faithful is over-rated, as long as you get the spirit of the thing in there. The most comic-faithful superhero movie I've seen in recent years could well be Daredevil, and that was not particularly good, nor did it perform well commercially.

[Berserkfury819]

The hell is wrong with taking a good story from the COMIC BOOKS and adapting it to movie form?

Because they're written for a different medium? I mean, look at The Dark Knight, that wasn't exactly faithful to any one comic story, it looked a bit like The Long Halloween, but with many other bits beaten on. Heath Ledger's widely acclaimed Joker doesn't resemble many of his comic appearances. And none of the Spider-Man movies (ignoring arguments over which ones were good) have been particularly faithful adaptations.

Being 100% faithful is over-rated, as long as you get the spirit of the thing in there. The most comic-faithful superhero movie I've seen in recent years could well be Daredevil, and that was not particularly good, nor did it perform well commercially.

I think his point was that X-Men: First Class does not look good.

[NickMB]

The hell is wrong with taking a good story from the COMIC BOOKS and adapting it to movie form?

Because they're written for a different medium? I mean, look at The Dark Knight, that wasn't exactly faithful to any one comic story, it looked a bit like The Long Halloween, but with many other bits beaten on. Heath Ledger's widely acclaimed Joker doesn't resemble many of his comic appearances. And none of the Spider-Man movies (ignoring arguments over which ones were good) have been particularly faithful adaptations.

Being 100% faithful is over-rated, as long as you get the spirit of the thing in there. The most comic-faithful superhero movie I've seen in recent years could well be Daredevil, and that was not particularly good, nor did it perform well commercially.

I think his point was that X-Men: First Class does not look good.

It's not looking great. Then again, none of the previous X-Men movies, good or bad, were particularly faithful comic adaptations. They both kinda pounded lots of comic elements together.

[Enigma_2099]

The hell is wrong with taking a good story from the COMIC BOOKS and adapting it to movie form?

Because they're written for a different medium? I mean, look at The Dark Knight, that wasn't exactly faithful to any one comic story, it looked a bit like The Long Halloween, but with many other bits beaten on. Heath Ledger's widely acclaimed Joker doesn't resemble many of his comic appearances. And none of the Spider-Man movies (ignoring arguments over which ones were good) have been particularly faithful adaptations.

Being 100% faithful is over-rated, as long as you get the spirit of the thing in there. The most comic-faithful superhero movie I've seen in recent years could well be Daredevil, and that was not particularly good, nor did it perform well commercially.

I think his point was that X-Men: First Class does not look good.

BINGO.

It's not looking great. Then again, none of the previous X-Men movies, good or bad, were particularly faithful comic adaptations. They both kinda pounded lots of comic elements together.

lemme clarify... if the story/plot they decide to go with is actually GOOD, no one will care if it's not faithful to the comics. if the story/plot they go with is piss poor, WHY NOT JUST STICK TO THE BOOKS?!?!