INT. WORKSHOP - Arthur sits at the table, working on a mechanism. A small cough prompts him to look up: Ariadne is there.
"I was born with a strange gift, or what they called a gift. It was really a curse. It’s ruined my life. It made me the person that I am today, a freak, a mistake, someone to hate.”
I get your thought process, Simon Kinberg, but I’m still side-eyeing you real hard.
In the Days of Future Past comics, Kitty Pryde goes back in time to alter the course of history and save mutants from a horrible future. In the upcoming Days of Future Past movie, the same thing happens – except it is Wolverine, not Kitty Pryde, who takes the role of time traveller. Many fans were disappointed to learn that Kitty was getting effectively kicked out of her own storyline in favor of a male hero. Why would the writers of this film put the focus on Wolverine all over again when they could give a female character a chance?
According to writer Simon Kinberg, the reason is mostly logistical. He told Empire Magazine:
“We made the decision for a lot of reasons, some of them obvious and some of them more nuanced, to make it Wolverine who goes back in time. One reason is that he’s the protagonist of the franchise, and probably the most beloved character to a mass audience. Probably the bigger reason is that when we started thinking about the logistical realities of Kitty’s consciousness being sent back in time, to her younger self, as opposed to her physical body being sent back..it was impossible.
Obviously in the book it’s Kitty..but you’re talking about an actress (Ellen Page) who, in the age of Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy, would have been negative 20 years old. So we started thinking again, and the first reflex response to that was a character who doesn’t age. Wolverine is the only character who would looks the same in 1973 as he does in the future.”
In short, the Kitty Pryde from the cinematic world of X-Men just isn’t old enough for this type of time travel to make sense. I get that. I really do. However, it seems telling that rather than make adjustments to the storyline to accommodate the Kitty they had (such as changing the method of time travel or moving the timeline up), they elected to simply replace her. Kitty will still be in the film, but she has been relegated to a position of supporting role rather than protagonist. It’s disappointing, no matter what the reason.
So there you go: another female-led superhero movie that almost happened. Wolverine gets the spotlight (again), and the studio gets a popular and conveniently male character to lead the film. The reasoning does make sense, but it’s an excuse. If the people behind DOFP had really wanted Kitty, there are a whole pile of ways they could have managed it and made it work within the world of the film. As it is, I’m rolling my eyes. The perfect opportunity to bring a beloved female character to lead a superhero film, and it is once again deemed too “tricky.”
Maybe next time.
You are having a story with time travel.
Awesome. Really cool.
Why do you have to use a type of time travel that won’t let Kitty go back?
You can literally do basically anything.
I’m definitely one of those fans who was (and still is) disappointed by this move, and I’ve tried to keep quiet about it because if you get me going I’ll never shut up. Yeah this makes sense, but you know what else would make sense??? SEND KITTY BACK IN TIME. ELLEN PAGE KITTY. GIVE HER SOME 70’S DUDS AND SEND HER WITH HANDWAVEY TIME TRAVELLING ABILITIES TO YOUNG CHARLES XAVIER. YOU KNOW CHARLES XAVIER? HE’S GOT SOME EXPERIENCE WITH PEOPLE WITH MIRACULOUS ABILITIES. KILLY SAYS ‘I’m from the future.” HE GOES “Oh really? GROOVY!” AND IF HE DOESN’T BELIEVE HER, HE READS HER FUCKING MIND AND GOES “SHIT. YOU *ARE* FROM THE FUTURE”
BOOM. DAYS OF FUTURE PAST. INSERT TITLE CARD. OVERLAY DRAMATIC MUSIC. OR DISCO MUSIC. WHATEVER YOU PREFER.
Can I also just mention two other very irritating facts about them deciding to use Wolverine instead of Kitty? They not only erased Kitty’s part in the story, but Rachel Grey, who’s the one that psychically sends Kitty back. So they erased not one, but two women’s huge part in this story, though Rachel doesn’t show up a lot in the original Days of Future Past, they easily could have expanded her role and the cast of characters in a way that makes sense. Because I’m not seeing the point of throwing in all these random new characters other than to expand the roster, which could be done in a way that makes sense to the plot and furthers it in an interesting way.
Furthermore, having Bishop there completelynegates the need to have Logan’s consciousness sent back. Bishop is a time traveler, he has devices that allow him to move through time which means he easily could go back in time or bring someone (ahem, Kitty) back from the future to explain the situation to Professor X.
This is my main problem with their decision to call this film “Days of Future Past” when the only resemblance it bears to the story of the same name is that it involves sending someone’s consciousness to the past in order to prevent a negative future. But time travel is already humongous within X-Men. You have characters like Bishop and Cable who travel through time so fucking often they easily could have created a new story or used one of those storylines involving Bishop instead of ripping off the name of an iconic X-Men arc to generate interest. They could have called the damn thing X-Men: Time Travel and that would be far more accurate.
And don’t get me wrong, I love Wolverine, I think he’s a wonderful character, but this is X-Men, not Wolverine and the X-Men. And they’ve already destroyed any sense-making timeline (because, let’s face it, even if Scott were Alex’s younger brother, that would still make him born in the 1950s, which would make him at least middle-aged by the time of the first X-Men, so I’m calling massive bullshit there [or, if he were his son, he’d have to have been born in the 70s or 80s and in the X-Men Origins: Wolverine, Scott was alive so…]), so why the hell couldn’t it be Kitty? This is stupid, the writers are stupid and this movie never should have happened.
i’d love to decorate your hair with tiny lights and christmas ornaments so you know how much of a gift you are to me
"So…what’s your real name, lass?"
”Mary Read to my mum. And them I call friends.”