X-MEN: FIRST CLASS question-- was that red teleporter dude supposed to be Nightcrawler's father?

Cafe Society
1

So I finally got around to watching X-MEN: FIRST CLASS a few days ago. As is usual of late I did not give the movie my full attention, as if I’m home watching a movie, I am also home with the babies, and frankly they’re much more amusing. Anyway, it was obvious that this movie was far afield from the comics continuity; there’s no way this Havok was Cyclops’ little brother, for instance. But I noticed that one of the villainous mutants (who as far as I noticed never spoke), was a red-skinned teleporter with a barbed tail and acrobatic fighting style.

Was that supposed to be Nightcrawler’s father? Is Mystique said to be Nightcrawler’s mother in the movies?

I still prefer Claremont’s plan for comics!Mystique to be comics!Nightcrawler’s father, having shapechanged into a male so she could knock up Destiny. Though, now that I see it typed out, it’s not as gay-friendly a concept as it might seem.

2

IIRC, yes, red dude and Mystique are Nightcrawler’s parents in the movie. I could be wrong though.

I still don’t understand why Eric tried to hold onto the sub that first time. He’d already demonstrated that he’s supes good at crushing things. Crush the propellers and that sub ain’t going nowhere.

edit: I looked at a previous thread and apparently Mystique and Azazel are Nightcrawler’s parents in the comics but the movies haven’t said boo about it yet. Would make sense, though.

3

Yeah the comics version of Azazel (the red dude) is Nightcrawler’s father and Mystique is his mother.

In the Fox movie-verse there appears to be no relation–even implied–at this time.
Azazel was one of the off-screen deaths in DOFP and no mention had been made of anything between him and Mystique.

4

The X-men movies have a very poor history of introducing characters without context. That’s one of the things I hate about the series. It’s always, “let’s see how many mutants we can show without any context or backstory whatsoever”.

5

I have a question about this movie. The black guy and the black girl with the wasp-like wings, were those actual mutants from the comics or were they made up for the big screen?

6

Actual characters.

Darwin and Angel (Salvadore)

Darwin was retconned as being a lost “class” of mutants that were nearly all killed on their first mission.

Angel was introduced (IIRC) in the Morrison run on X-men where the mutant population exploded.

7

I like that. I hate how comic movies keep sticking to origin stories and early famous stories. I liked how DoFP just showed a bunch of new people in the future without even saying who they were or where they came from. I knew them all, since I’ve been reading for nearly 25 years. I’ve only read a few stories with Blink and don’t know her origin, but I know what she does. That was fine with me in the movie.

8

I agree with you about filmmakers obsessing over the origins. But I hate how the Xmen movies just put characters out there with no intro or context at all. They’ve done it through pretty much all of the movies. I always had a problem with it but it didn’t really become glaring to me until the Avengers movie. You notice how all of the characters and enough pieces of their stories were represented? No character really dominated. THAT was lacking in the Xmen movies.

9

I think it works for the X-Men movies though. The idea behind them is that mutants have been around for awhile, are public knowledge, and more are appearing every day. So you have the central cast and a bunch of mutants who just are there. They don’t all need a backstory.