X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST: Watch The Horrid First Trailer Now

Founder and Editor; Toronto, Canada (@AnarchistTodd)
Sign-In to Vote
X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST: Watch The Horrid First Trailer Now
Who's up for the glittery teen romance version of The X-Men? Because that appears to be what director Bryan Singer has in store for us with X-Men: Days Of Future Past. Sentinels? Nope. Clenched hands and wet eyes and pregnant pauses building up to a lot of nothing? You bet. Approach this from virtually any angle - performances, editing, score - and it feels like Singer is making a romance rather than a mutant powered action film. While Brett Ratner nearly killed the X franchise by making ... well, by making the Ratner version of an X-Men film it appears that Singer is doing his very best attempt at killing it here by making the Twilight version.

You like your mutants with a healthy dose of over wrought sentimentality? Then congratulations, this is the movie for you! If not? Well, then, this looks bloody horrible. Check it out below. And let's start the petition to bring back Matthew Vaughn.
Sign-In to Vote
Screen Anarchy logo
Do you feel this content is inappropriate or infringes upon your rights? Click here to report it, or see our DMCA policy.
days of future pasttrailerx-menBryan SingerSimon KinbergJane GoldmanMatthew VaughnHugh JackmanJames McAvoyMichael FassbenderJennifer LawrenceActionAdventureSci-Fi

More about X-Men: Days Of Future Past

FistacuffsOctober 29, 2013 12:33 PM

Really? Horrid is a bit much, especially for a TEASER trailer.

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 12:39 PM

At 2:18 this aint no teaser. That's a whole lot of awful. And horrid is kind compared to where I started with the headline ...

xtcOctober 29, 2013 12:39 PM

I disagree, the trailer looks great

KurtOctober 29, 2013 12:46 PM

Ugh.

While I remain uncertain of the 'content of the film' and how they will pull that off, the ugh is for the lazy construction of the trailer, lazy (and poorly edited together) score choices, lazy montage/noise, lazy, lazy, lazy. It is more evidence of all that is wrong with Studio Trailer cutting these days, if nothing else.

FistacuffsOctober 29, 2013 1:17 PM

I didn't find it that bad. I agree with Kurt. I feel like a different score and better editing would have changed the tone drastically (for the better).

Mike RichardsOctober 29, 2013 1:53 PM

Lest anyone had any doubts of just how homophobic the geek community can be, Todd Brown is here to remind us with his horrid breakdown of the first trailer for X-Men: Days of Future Past. And we're not talking about a genuinely funny or good-natured but sarcastic way to frame an argument and begin a discussion, either. No, this is all lazy and mean spirited attempts at biting critique fraught with the pathetic frustration of forum trolls, missing the mark of real solid commentary completely. It's like Brown as made the 4chan of entertainment reporting, turning in completely incompetent jabs at homosexuality when what people want is thoughtful analysis of how successful the trailer's attempt to sell itself as a film of drama and emotion more complicated then 'punch shit until shit blows up'. Seriously, the only thing that's missing is a properly written news article above for Brown to fling his shit at and we'd been in entirely different territory altogether, that of forum commentators who do nothing but fling shit because shit-flinging is all they know how to do.

You like your entertainment news to come with a healthy dose of overwrought petulance, whiny incompetence, and a clear delegitimization of anyone who has a different opinion then yours? Then congratulations, this site is for you! If not? Well then, this place looks fucking atrocious. Check it out above.

Or, you know, don't.

QinlongOctober 29, 2013 1:54 PM

Personally I think it looks fine. Not any more or any less ridiculous and over-serious than any superhero film trailer in the past 6 years...

XLOctober 29, 2013 2:02 PM

looks good

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 2:08 PM

Nowhere do I say (or certainly intend to say) that there's a problem with gay romances. I have no issue with that at all. I do, however, have an issue with an X-Men film being shot, performed, edited and scored like one. Not because I'd have an issue with gay hero characters - the gay community is very, very under-represented in the mainstream comic world - but because a) none of these characters are and b) the story they're ostensibly telling here isn't a romance. There's a fundamental disconnect between form and content in this trailer and that disconnect is what makes it fail.

I'd actually kind of love for someone to make a smart, well crafted hero movie that dealt with the politics of sexual orientation. It'd be a very interesting format to do it in. But this just aint that movie. This just looks like trash.

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 2:12 PM

(Also, you forgot to insult me for insulting Twilight.)

Eric VinsonOctober 29, 2013 2:18 PM

Todd has never been one to shy away from angry hyperbole. I felt this was kind of homophobic as well. I don't think he explicitly meant to be, but all the same its there. If the director was not openly homosexual I don't that screed about homoeroticism would have been so front and center in the author's mind. Or anywhere on his mind for that matter. Says more about him than the film.

With all this in mind I didn't think the trailer looked fantastic either. But it is just a trailer. Why would anybody let themselves get so worked up about a trailer?

ToddOctober 29, 2013 2:21 PM

Homoerotic???? In what way does this trailer portray homosexual desire??? Perhaps you're broadcasting your own latent homosexual tendencies.

60hzOctober 29, 2013 2:21 PM

horrid i would have to disagree, horrid would at least be entertaining... this is just a dull boring trailer, where are the sentinels, yes wolverine has healing powers, mystique seems to have the only interesting action set piece in the vid and geesh can we get rid of berry as storm pronto the girl is camera AWKWARD.

Also did they change the story, i thought they go into the future in the original...

Eric VinsonOctober 29, 2013 2:25 PM

Again I maintain you're projecting based on your knowledge of the directors sexuality. Though I do enjoy your thoroughly modern "separate but equal" thoughts on homosexuality in hero films. "NOT IN MY BACKYARD!!!" am'I right?

linusOctober 29, 2013 2:26 PM

Great teaser, delves into aspects of comic book writing that, though deemed homoerotic by some, can as be interpreted by those of us comfortable with bromances as interesting and well adapted.

60hzOctober 29, 2013 2:27 PM

but it IS a super hero film, what's wrong with wanting action sequences and explosions... though i would reference avengers over man of steel as an example of what a super hero flick could be like... or hell even terminator, which is basically "days of the future past" storyline anyway...

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 2:28 PM

Singer's orientation didn't cross my mind at all until after it was published, actually. And I find it odd and surprising that people latched onto 'homoerotic' as the primary criticism (or inherently a criticism at all, really) when I spent far more time bagging on it for being shot and edited like a bad teen romance. The criticism was intended to be a fundamental disconnect between what the story is and the way it's been shot and presented here. As said elsewhere in the thread, I'd quite like to see a smart gay superhero movie. I think the format would lend itself incredibly well to that.

Clearly I read the initial post in my own head with my own inflections and intentions, however, and those didn't come across in straight text, so I've changed the text.

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 2:29 PM

Who says homoerotic can't be interesting?

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 2:31 PM

I'm not at all sure what you mean by your 'separate but equal' and 'not in my backyard' comments here.

Eric VinsonOctober 29, 2013 2:37 PM

I can't tell if you're taking the piss or if you really can't see what was meant. I'll assume it wasn't the expressions themselves that were confounding. So I'll just let it all lay there. And if you feel like thinking about it great. If not great. I don't expect to change you or your blog through thoughtful comment posts.

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 2:45 PM

Where exactly have I said that I'd like homosexuals to be kept separate? This is what's confusing. What I have said is that homosexuals are dramatically under represented in mainstream comics and that I think a hero film would be a very good platform for making a smart statement about the politics of sexual orientation. The fact that I also don't think this film looks good at all has no bearing on that.

linusOctober 29, 2013 2:46 PM

True. Though I feel that's one of the Aspects that the studios currently adapting comic books are tweaking through the various adaptations. It's true homoeroticism has been very well used very well as red herrings on films. Real question here really, is how to adapt certain elements of comic books that seem more masculine, from a heterosexual perspective, but on screen would come across more homoerotic. And I have a feeling they will be working on that for a few years. But this trailer seems to concentrate on that whole effort to pull off that 'comradery' with not much else to show off. On that note, I feel is a very good trailer that previews the bonding elements the characters will share in the feature, minus any element of threat that usually follow bonding among men.

disqus_oH1mMUHZ8gOctober 29, 2013 2:46 PM

Superhero or Comic book films do not need all that action to be good they need to emphasize story (remember writers strike) like batman begins, V for vendetta, Watchmen, etc. There are way too many shitty/ average films lately like man of steel/lone ranger that had a bit of everything that is why summer box offices have been declining. People are tired of explosions and similar action scenes. In the days of future past storyline it was not only about action, to avoid spoilers it was about "time", "unity", "understanding", and "reconciliation" thats why this arc is regarded as one of the best in the comic book universe.

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 2:48 PM

It's a tricky line to walk and almost certainly a major part of why Singer discarded the spandex in the first place ...

benuOctober 29, 2013 2:50 PM

I remember when the first trailer for Singer's 'X-Men' was released. I flipped a lid. I couldn't stand it. And then I saw the film and was very pleasantly surprised.

I've learned to rarely trust trailers as indications of what the actual film will be. The problem herein with trailers as a marketing tool, and what I think Todd is getting at in the bigger picture, is that trailers they are, by and large, supposed to convince the folks to come out and spend their money, saying "here's a taste of the actual film." Is that always the case? No, of course not, but as of now this trailer for DoFP is telling us something and it is rather boldly saccharine and cheesy and off-putting to me. Whether the film is this or not...

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 2:50 PM

I love how you're criticizing me for commenting on parts of the trailer having a homoerotic subtext by accusing me of being gay, as though that's some awful thing people need to be accused of.

linusOctober 29, 2013 2:50 PM

Agreed.

benuOctober 29, 2013 2:53 PM

Having taken another look I think what's really off putting here is that series of shots from the future timeline of Bishop and Blink etc. Those costumes and that lighting... That's what I'm rolling my eyes at.

A lot of the 70s stuff looks generally fine.

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 2:55 PM

I'd love to know how much of the pre-production was done before Vaughn walked and Singer took over ... I wonder if that's part of the split ...

Michael LangOctober 29, 2013 3:05 PM

It looks fine. I mean really. Get a life.

ArnpriorOctober 29, 2013 5:01 PM

Reminds me of a boatload of trailers that didn't sell me on movies I absolutely loved. This isn't a trailer, it's a collection of characters staring at... something, set to voice-over and ominous music. We KNOW there's loads of s**t in this movie not shown here. (lilke The Sentinels and their creator). Let's forget about Superman Returns and give Singer's team a chance to finish the film.

Todd BrownOctober 29, 2013 5:10 PM

We also have to forget about Jack, unfortunately, and some other dodgy titles. I quite like Bryan when he's good (love Usual Suspects, quite like Apt Pupil and have programmed it in a film series up here that's still waiting to be announced, enjoy both his previous X films) but it's been a while since he made something people really loved and the balance of good films to forgettable films is starting to tip in the bad direction ... And I'm a bit worried about how much Matthew Vaughn's last minute departure will have disrupted this one. Stuff like that isn't always catastrophic but it's never helpful.

Jose GoncalvesOctober 29, 2013 5:28 PM

Strange argument! We don't see the same thing! I still prefer the director of X-Men 1 & 2 than the one of First Class... witch is good by the way!

Shelagh M. Rowan-LeggOctober 29, 2013 5:39 PM

Interesting that Todd is accused of both being homophobic and gay. He is neither, by the way, and most definitely not the former in the least.

His statement that the trailer has homoerotic elemets is one of fact, not criticism (negative or positive); I thought the same thing when I watched it, before I read his evaluation. Personally, I like a little homoeroticism in my comic book & action films, and directors straight and gay know that a lot of their audience does.

Personally, I'm not quite as negative on this trailer as many; as someone has said, this is not necessarily a reflection of the film. My first thought is that it is confusing. I have no idea what it's trying to tell me about the film. But I'll probably still see it.

Mellow_Enthusiast!!!October 29, 2013 5:40 PM

man, interesting to see what others' bring to the table in viewing things, personally I thought it lacked any kind of "umph" and was disappointed to not have that last second Sentinel eyes cliche laser blast bit with some iconic sound effect, otherwise it is what its suppose to be, the first trailer slowly explaining to the "not fanboy" audience how this is gonna work, outside that i figured there really wasn't much more to judge about it, I'll wait for more to do that, it's like trying to decide whether or not a story is good from the pictures supplied to an entertainment magazine.

Hiroaki JohnsonOctober 29, 2013 6:36 PM

Bryan Singer did say that this "teaser" would be extremely light on visual wow because so few of the effects are finished.

I will try to remain cautiously optimistic. Also, I realize I'm probably a minority but I thought First Class was a pretty awful movie outside of Magneto: Super Spy Nazi Hunter. I just personally wouldn't beat the drum for getting Vaughn back.

terebi-kunOctober 29, 2013 6:56 PM

I can see that nobody likes this, but I think the emphasis on drama helps to distinguish it from the other superhero blockbusters. The X-Men comics have a lot of soapy drama besides actions, so I kinda liked the tone. No Sentinels? No problem for me.

PatOctober 29, 2013 8:59 PM

I don't know what all the huff is about. I just know that any trailer that uses Adagio in D Minor (Surface of the Sun) makes the trailer a million times better. And yes, Wolverine Origins had a fantastic trailer too because it also used that song, and that movie was like watching a botched abortion in slow motion.

Mad_Dog_YayanOctober 29, 2013 9:13 PM

No, in the original comic book, the present day X-Man are forewarned of the possible future by a future version of their teammate Kitty Pryde, whose mind traveled back in time and possessed her younger self to warn the X-Men. After she succeeded in her mission, she goes back to the future

Mad_Dog_YayanOctober 29, 2013 9:16 PM

There's going to be Setinel in the movie, the previous "ad-style" preview already showed the Trask Industry and the Sentinels, they just haven't show them yet.

TheTaskmasterOctober 29, 2013 9:49 PM

I don't understand how anyone can say this isn't laugh out loud bad or at least embarassing after seeing the Cap 2 and Thor 2 trailer. This doesn't even look like a movie. It has straight-to-video written all over it. Most fan film budgets somehow look better.

That One GuyOctober 30, 2013 3:08 AM

"...killing it here by making the Twilight version."
I don't know about that, but the trailer, to me, seems to be underselling the movie; so far we know Sentinels are involved, we know it involves a war in the future, and yet we didn't get any of that; instead, we are given a side we didn't expect which is a bold choice for a first trailer.
Overall the trailer is fine but nothing really "sells" it for me. If these guys want to save all of the stuffs (the sentinels , the future war, etc.) for another time, then by all means, I'll be waiting.

KieranOctober 30, 2013 3:20 AM

A crossover ! Hunger Games meets the X-men ;-)

King_LeerOctober 30, 2013 3:45 AM

"DO judge a book by its cover!"
-Todd Brown

Mina BontempoOctober 30, 2013 3:59 AM

One X-Men that looks interesting AT LAST. James McAvoy oddly looks like David Thewlis in Naked.

SylarTheCylonOctober 30, 2013 6:10 AM

It's probably fair to say that they didn't have enough finished VFX shots ready for this trailer. I agree, it looks horrible and is awkwardly edited, but i fail to see any homoeroticism anywhere, am I missing something? What I don't like is the sets, because they remind me of the Stargate Atlantis tv show. Someone said in another website that what we see is Genosha. Anyway, what I think happened here is someone rushed Bryan Singer and made him release this unfinished collection of scenes. To finish this message, I'll echo what many have said before and state that I wish they'd cast someone else as storm and that they had centered the plot around the character of Sprite. BTW, i'm a geek through and through, and I attended a gay wedding some weeks ago. Let's not generalize...

Action Movie FreakOctober 30, 2013 7:33 AM

Schmaltzy! As a woman, have always hated the whole body-painted Mystique thing. Really made me cringe to see what amounts to a naked blue woman being dragged like that. If there was a male equivalent, whatever, but there never is. The score and the narration were the killers.

Matt BrownOctober 30, 2013 8:48 AM

Singer's on the record saying that this teaser is people-focused (i.e. not Sentinel-focused) because he has next to no effects shots complete at this stage.

Everything else you've ascribed to this trailer is beyond me, though. I think it looks terrific, but any trailer for a genre movie half a year out of release is a roll of the dice anyway, so my wild-assed guess is just as wild-assed as your wild-assed guess.

And bringing back Matthew Vaughn would be great, if he were able to turn in more than half a decent X-Men movie. At least Singer had the insight to ditch January Jones.

QuietusOctober 30, 2013 9:01 AM

Where the fuck are the Sentinels ?!?

Todd BrownOctober 30, 2013 9:10 AM

I'm more than happy to judge the trailer by the trailer. And the trailer's horrible.

Todd BrownOctober 30, 2013 9:20 AM

I got down voted for saying it's been a while since Singer has made a movie audiences really liked? Really? This is demonstrable fact, people ... Jack The Giant Slayer was an enormous financial bomb. Valkyrie managed to turn a profit off the international numbers but got very wobbly press. Apt Pupil (which I actually like) and Public Access both have Rotten Tomatoes rankings in the 50s (As does Jack). This will be his 9th feature. The only ones comfortably on the plus side in terms of both critical success (judged by RT) and public response (judged by box office, IMDB ratings, etc) are The Usual Suspects, the prior X-Men movies and Superman Returns and given that Superman is a popular punching bag amongst a vocal subset of people it's dodgy to include that one. So of the ones that have released he's - at best - batting .500. None of the rest are really horrible but they're eminently forgettable.

noodels2October 30, 2013 12:34 PM

This looks nothing like the comic book . Why not just call it something else .

noodels2October 30, 2013 12:36 PM

Why are you bothering with the comments dued .What you wrote should stan on its own.

JasenOctober 30, 2013 3:34 PM

I forget sometimes that this is 2013 and people want the entire movie told to them in the trailers. Bryan Singer himself said that the first TEASER (and yes, that's what this is) would focus on character rather than action for the simple fact that most of the effects aren't even done yet.

Todd BrownOctober 30, 2013 3:48 PM

Except it doesn't do that well, either.

davebaxterOctober 30, 2013 5:22 PM

100% disagree. This trailer is great because it took a different approach than the majority of other superhero/blockbusters. This feels like "Back to the Future" by way of grand complexly plotted Cameron-ian action/adventure (and obviously this is the "Star Trek: Generations" for the X-Men crowd, too). The score I also found entirely effective, to initially complement the still, quiet shots and then to counter the screaming/raging/fierce emotive quality of the latter visuals.

There's obviously a convoluted plot with a large cast of characters (possibly too large) and action, and plenty left unshown. While I suppose the trailer's aesthetics can be compared to a romance film (a comparison that I think is close-minded - soft tinkling music! Emotion! Very little action! Lots of crying! It's like a romance, dude! Except the music eventually swells in ways unsuitable to most romances, the action that is shown is decidedly unromantic, and the crying is equally the raging/dying/pissed off kind that would not be at home in a romance) it certainly does not come across like one at all. It comes across like a very intense, complex, time-travel adventure/action film, though with pretty much zero specific plot points revealed. Which I think is ideal.

And who needs to see a Sentinel in a trailer? If you know they're going
to be in the movie, save it for the movie. Or save it for the briefest
glimpse in the final trailer before release.

In fact, this trailer reminds me a lot of the earl HOOK trailers, which went for a similar approach to infer a momentousness in a quieter way, and didn't show the viewer a single glimpse of never-never land. I thought that trailer was super effective at the time, I think this one is, too, right now.

jessicapancakesNovember 5, 2013 9:19 AM

Seriously, get a life! What are you doing reviewing movie trailers on a film site, don't you have better things to do with your time, like your job?