RUMOR: X-Men: First Class To Feature Classic Blue And Yellow 1960's Costumes?

RUMOR: <i>X-Men: First Class</i> To Feature Classic Blue And Yellow 1960's Costumes?

Someone claiming to have worked on the movie has revealed that the X-Men will have their classic 1960's era costumes as well as a pile of other interesting details about the characters and story...

Ok, so take the following information with a huge grain of salt. Someone over on the SuperHeroHype forums ("Player1") is claiming to have worked on X-Men: First Class and has posted the following pieces of information. This could of course just be an enthusiastic fan fiction writer who loves the attention or someone who is sharing genuine info after finishing work on the movie. I'll leave that up to you guys to decide, but like those recent Spider-Man and The Dark Knight Rises plot outlines, it makes for an interesting read!

•the xmen costumes are blue and yellow. they look good.

•mystique has an xmen costume, so i'm assuming she's apart of the xmen team at some point. she's also not going to be blue for the entire movie.

•i personally don't like beast's look. his fur is apparently made of some near-extinct albino fox or something. but that could just be a rumor.

•angel has tattoos all over her body and her costume is black, very short and revealing. (zoe kravitz and her stunt double are gorgeous).

•i'm not sure if it's ok to reveal the villain, but he looks really awesome. he also drank my soda.

•emma frost looks really good. but i don't like the hair and make-up, although it might translate better on film than it did in person.

•got to see some fight rehearsals. beast, mystique and *the villain*have a fight.

•the hellfire club is either a strip club or a casino. and it might be on a boat.

•a scene takes place outside a submarine. only a small part of the sub is real. most of it is green screen.

•know one scene revolves around beast, havoc and another guy trying to defend xavier from eric. mystique is in that scene as well, but she doesn't try to defend xavier. i'm guessing by that point, she's torn between xavier and eric

As I said, pretty interesting stuff! I'm actually inclined to believe this simply because they're not making any outrageous or unbelieveable claims! Regardless, X-Men: First Class is set to be released on June 17, 2011 and will be directed by Matthew Vaughn.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Posted By:
Josh Wilding
Member Since 3/13/2009
Filed Under "X-Men: First Class" 12/26/2010 Source: SuperHeroHype
DISCLAIMER: is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]
1 2 3
Hawksblueyes - 12/26/2010, 11:28 AM
Interesting stuff Josh. I would love to see the original outfits, hope it's true. What a shame it's not the original team.
Xandera - 12/26/2010, 11:38 AM
This would be awesome...
Nice stuff Josh!

Guys, check out the NEXT Sub-chapter of WHITE FIRE!

"White Fire"
Ibz - 12/26/2010, 11:50 AM
@what Zer00 said, beast being furry isnt new either, maybe the material there using is the only new thing i have heard. but this is a rumour
xinstituto - 12/26/2010, 11:57 AM
mystique wearing that costume.. and she is not blue.. hum! (morph)
xinstituto - 12/26/2010, 11:58 AM
Arminies.. it wil b Angel Salvatore (the fly girl)
JoshWilding - 12/26/2010, 12:02 PM
HAWKS: Exactly! Setting this movie in the 1960's and making it an adaptation of the classic comics (along with the blue and yellow costumes they wore at the time( is a pretty excellent idea, but removing the original five for the likes of Angel Salvadore is not. I'm still holding on to the hope that Matthew Vaughn wont let us down.

Zer00: "None of that sounds true and he doesn't give any concrete info "this may happen or this!" You've pretty much answered you question about why this article is labelled as "RUMOR". And I'm not sure what set pictures you've seen, but I've not heard a lot of this info before now!
JaySchluffy - 12/26/2010, 12:06 PM
Ibz - 12/26/2010, 12:08 PM
@Jay no they havent changed angels gender its a different character known as angel salvatore who shouldnt be there but its fox so you know
Frecks - 12/26/2010, 12:09 PM
@intruder: agreed
LEEE777 - 12/26/2010, 12:23 PM
I would NOT like the see the original X-men oufits on anyone other than the REAL FIRST CLASS...

Further more this is FOX!

A BIG BS from me!
ecksmanfan - 12/26/2010, 12:32 PM
*Sniff, sniff* What's that smell? Oh, that's right....SHIT!

10THTIGER - 12/26/2010, 12:36 PM
straight gaaaaarrrbaaagggeee
TheGeekFiles - 12/26/2010, 12:43 PM
Of course it's not the original five, you dumb morons. This is a PREQUEL to the existing films and obviously characters like Jean, Cyclops, Iceman aren't old enough to have been around in the 1960s.

The mainstream audiences aren't protesting in their thousands on the streets for a reboot so therefore this isn't one. It's a PREQUEL. Only in your obsessive bubble is a reboot required. The rest of the world isn't in that fanboy bubble.

And why would we want to see Jean, Cyclops and Iceman again when we saw them already in three films. Let's see some new students for a change. Let's see something that isn't a predictable retread of the comics. I don't want to be able to sit there and watch a comic translated frame by frame. Even the comics have varied - the First Class comic series adds a lot of things that weren't seen in the original 60s X-Men comics.

Stop being so anal about everything. Nolan's Batman films changed things, redesigned the costume and the Batmobile, created and destroyed Two Face in one film, and yet you love that. Seriously, guys, get a grip on reality.
13Deadpool13 - 12/26/2010, 12:53 PM
ugh, I'd be excited if it was the original x-men that we all know and love. ugh
13Deadpool13 - 12/26/2010, 12:54 PM
angels a girl?....have they mentioned this before, how have i missed this?
P862010 - 12/26/2010, 12:59 PM
look at the dumb fanboys

the guy can say they fight sentinels and apocalypse and you would still say oh smells like crap lol

if they put the original 5 you know how bad that would mess the continuity up than it already is

this is not a reboot but a prequel this is a known fact for months you cant be this stupid
TheGeekFiles - 12/26/2010, 1:00 PM
^^^ Of course they mentioned it before. Wake up!

Zoe Kravitz was announced as being cast as the comic book character called Angel Salvadore.

Do your homework.
bleedthefreak - 12/26/2010, 1:06 PM
TheGeekFiles: first off I hate Nolans films because they change around too much. Second I assume you run the website/blog of the same name on Coventry telegraph, right? I think its more the fact that they have chosen stupid mutants or [frick]ed up good ones. Nobody cares about Angel Salvadore and she is too random, it seems like they pull names out of a hate for these movies sometimes, do someone with credibilty to the team who has not been on film like banshee. And if Cyclops is too young why the [frick] is his little brother in there? Those are just two of the many list of credible complaints I have heard from this movie.
SuperDude001 - 12/26/2010, 1:06 PM
The source seems unbelievable but I think it still could be true.
SKGannbit - 12/26/2010, 1:07 PM
screw fox
TheGeekFiles - 12/26/2010, 1:09 PM
bleedthefreak: Those 'complaints' still don't make this a bad movie. Firstly, you haven't seen it yet. Secondly, those are minor quibbles from a fanboy. And, yes, i do run that blog - what does that have to do with anything? Why are you focusing on things that have nothing to do with the big picture.
bleedthefreak - 12/26/2010, 1:13 PM
TheGeekFiles: I was just curious about the blog part because I noticed your name, its nothing personal. Plus I know very well like the past x men films it could be a good film but a shitty adaption, which a good adaption is something a lot of people look for when adapting books or comics. It could be a great movie but they [frick] up the comics that we love so that is why we are uninterested.
P862010 - 12/26/2010, 1:18 PM
why cant you fanboys still not understand why the original five cant be in this it is simple freaking logic

set in 1960's

cyclops and jean would not be born in 1960's

marsden(Scott) was born in in 73 so he would not be born

and janssen(Jean) was actually born in in 64 so in essence she would not even be born as well

this is a prequel not a reboot

if they were in that would make the continuity problems even worse then they are

it would do more harm than good
Ibz - 12/26/2010, 1:19 PM
lets be honest even if this movie is good people are still going to hate on it because it wasnt a good adaption. end of the day comes down to whether your willing to watch a good movie but a bad adaption
P862010 - 12/26/2010, 1:21 PM
intruder you [frick] off all you do is bitch on something you know nothing about

ohh nooooooooo i need by cyclops and jean

go cry me a river

there is logical reason for them not to be in the movie you just choose not to listen to them
TheGeekFiles - 12/26/2010, 1:22 PM
bleedthefreak: Every comic book movie is an adaptation, some follow the material more than others. Not one of them has been a literal frame-forframe translation of the comics. Nolan's Batman films gained wide acclaim, and so have Raimi's Spidey and Singer's X-Men. The characters and essence and themes are recognisable. Following the comics exactly isn't the answer to making a good film. Moving a few pieces around (like making Iceman a young student, or Havok existing in the 60s) is not so horrific that it instantly makes the movie bad - as I said, you aren't seeing the big picture.

As for me, I do far more than run that blog. I'm involved in running the entire website and also working for the print edition of the paper. That blog is just a tiny part of my daily activities.
SuperDude001 - 12/26/2010, 1:24 PM
P862010 @ Actually it's not logical as Cyclops and Jean are supposed to be the first students, aswell as Beast and Storm in this continuity so it shouldn't really be set in the 60s.

TheGeekFiles & bleedthefreak @ How about you guys just agree to disagree and admit right now it doesn't look the most faithful movie to the comicbooks and a bit of a bad film, but it could end up being great.
bleedthefreak - 12/26/2010, 1:30 PM
TheGeekFiles: Like I said it could very well be a good movie, but as fans of the source we tend to get upset like everyone else when they destroy what we love. Whether that makes it a fantastic film or not we don't care you call it fanboy squabbling sure but we defend what we love and something screws it up we get upset. You get mad that we are being fanboys which is pretty much what this site is dedicated too so...yeah. Opinions my friend they come in different forms, doesn't mean either of us are wrong.
bleedthefreak - 12/26/2010, 1:32 PM
TheGeekFiles: SuperDude001 has a good point.
P862010 - 12/26/2010, 1:33 PM
@superdaniel yes it is logical if you read what i posted

this is set in 1960's this is not a reboot but a prequel to the existing franchise

in which cyclops and jean,iceman,storm are in

so unless storm/cyclops,jean, are in their 60's in x men 1 which came out on 2000 then it would'nt work


would not even be born

Beast works since Kelsey Grammar is damn near 60 in X3
JoshWilding - 12/26/2010, 1:34 PM
TheGeekFiles: If the two Fantastic Four movies Fox made arent explanation enough as to why fans react negatively to the changes they make in films like this one, then I have no idea what is. After turning Doctor Doom into a complete and utter shadow of his comic book self and Galactus into a cloud, why do you think people are upset to see them making more extreme changes to the comic books they love? X-Men Origins: Wolverine is another perfect example of that.

There's no need to translate the comic books "frame by frame" (if Marvel Studios were doing that there would be no Captain America in the first team of Avengers after all!) but when it comes to the X-Men, I know that myself and many others, want to see the original five and the classic origins that Stan Lee came up with. Some changes and a few extra characters wouldnt be a big deal, but completely IGNORING the source material and instead going for the likes of Angel Salvadore and Havok is a big deal IMO especially as Fox have done that before leading to pretty awful movies.

I have faith that Matthew Vaughn will deliver the best movie he can, but Fox have done absolutely nothing to give me any faith in them at all.
P862010 - 12/26/2010, 1:42 PM
aww intruder gonna cry

i just showed you complete facts on why they are not in this movie and guess what you got nothing to say but [frick] off thats all you have to say

yes you clearly have no merit or point
YourMomNaked - 12/26/2010, 1:42 PM
I'm likely to see it.
SuperDude001 - 12/26/2010, 1:43 PM
P862010 @ Yes but the first students are supposed to be Cyclops and Jean in this continuity, so it shouldn't be set in the 60s if Xavier is having students/members in the X-Men.
TheGeekFiles - 12/26/2010, 1:45 PM
@ Josh: The Fantastic Four movies were not poorly received because they weren't true to the comics. They were, on the whole, pretty accurate. Those movies were too cartoonish and flimsy, that was the problem. Would they have done better if we saw the actual Galactus as a 50ft man with a food blender on his head? I would argue not. Wolverine did fairly well but it was not solid/deep enough as a movie, that's why it had a mixed reception.

Wanting the original five is pointless at this stage. Sometime in the future I'm sure there'll be a reboot, but for now there is an established and currently existing movie continuity. So, there is no point in screaming for the original five, it's utterly pointless.

Even if they did have the original five, what story would they tell? They'd have to change the comic book version of events to create a satisfying two-hour movie. There's no way it would or could follow the comics issue by issue. And whatever story you say they should tell won't be the same as what someone else says they should do. The problem is you are already making the movie in your mind - but this film isn't your vision, it's not your movie, it's the vision of the writers/director who are making it. You are creating unreasonable expectations.
P862010 - 12/26/2010, 1:49 PM
i understand that superdaniel but you cant logically do that without completely killing the continuity or straight up rebooting

and none of those are happening

this is a prequel to the existing franchise where the so called original 5 would never be born in 1960
SuperDude001 - 12/26/2010, 1:54 PM
P862010 @ Who is superdaniel? and yes they wouldn't be born but all they really have to do is make Xavier older when he formed the school/X-Men so the dating would be correct and the continuity involving the first members could be made correct.
P862010 - 12/26/2010, 1:56 PM
well look intruder still has no merit to his posts once again it is like groundhogs day with your dumb posts

you know this is not a reboot

you even said you know this is a prequel

yet you complain that it is not a reboot

you make no damn sense troll
P862010 - 12/26/2010, 1:58 PM
whoops sorry bout name mix up but xavier and magento are 30 in this film he would not of met cyclops till later

later which means the sequel
TheGeekFiles - 12/26/2010, 1:59 PM
It's called First Class because it's the first set of students in the movie continuity.

Forget the First Class comics. Even they have retconned/changed things from the adventures of the original five in the first X-Men comics.

Disliking a movie because of its title is not very sensible. This film shows events prior to the first X-Men movie - it's really that simple and that logical.

So why didn't the first X-Men movie use the original five? Probably because the comic with the original five was cancelled because of poor sales - that team line-up is not popular. None of the cartoons have featured the original five either.
1 2 3

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.