Everything You Need to Know About the Messy 'X-Men' Timeline After 'Dark Phoenix,' Explained
If you think the timeline of the “X-Men” films doesn’t make sense, you’d be correct — and “Dark Phoenix” doesn’t really add much clarity
by Phil Owen(We spoil the entire ending of “Dark Phoenix” here, and since this is about the full franchise we’ll also have spoilers for the rest of the “X-Men” movies as well)
“X-Men: Dark Phoenix” was the lowest grossing entry in Fox’s “X-Men” movie franchise, and it wasn’t close. But the flick, which concludes the main series of “X-Men” movies that began all the way back in 2000, has landed on HBO, and we’re all in coronavirus quarantine, and so a lot of folks are finally giving it a shot. Might as well just go for it, right? “Dark Phoenix” is the capper on a movie series that has been around for two decades, and the oldest of all the current Marvel franchises. You oughtta see how it all ends.
It’s only the end of this whole thing because of the Disney-Fox merger, of course — “X-Men: Dark Phoenix” actually ends on a somewhat ambiguous note, rather than the sort of definitive conclusion you’d generally expect from the end of a two-decade series. And no, that’s not because the spinoff “New Mutants” will someday be actually released, despite all the delays. Or because a third “Deadpool” film starring Ryan Reynolds would seem to be a certainty though there hasn’t been any movement on that front in forever. (Either way, the “Deadpool” films are pretty much their own thing, connecting to the “X-Men” film series usually just to make jokes.)
“New Mutants,” as far as we can tell, won’t feature any character from the other Fox “X-Men” films. And as for post-“Dark Phoenix,” since Disney now owns 20th Century Fox, Marvel almost certainly intends to introduce the main X-Men into the Marvel Cinematic Universe at some point, and it’s unlikely they’re gonna keep going with these actors playing these characters — unless they really wanna get into that whole multiverse thing that was teased in both “Avengers: Endgame” and “Spider-Man: Far From Home.”
So it’s time to say goodbye to a franchise that kicked off nearly 20 years ago — and more importantly, to a crazy timeline built up over the years that makes it hard as hell to nail down what the story even is.
That difficulty stems from two factors: The fact that “X-Men: Days of Future Past” included an in-universe soft reboot of the franchise using time travel, a la the JJ Abrams “Star Trek”; and the series’ general lack of concern with maintaining its continuity as it began doing prequels with “First Class.” All we can say with absolute certainty is that the main continuity is probably everything except the “Deadpool” films and “Logan.”
So let’s talk about the time travel thing first, since it’s the biggest issue that throws people off. The original film timeline, in chronological order, prior to “Days of Future Past,” went like this: “First Class” -> X-Men Origins: Wolverine” -> “X-Men” -> “X2” -> “The Last Stand” -> “The Wolverine.” There are plenty of weird continuity issues among those movies, but those films made up one long story.
The frame story of “Days of Future Past,” set in an apocalyptic future in which the sentinel robots have destroyed the world in their quest to eliminate all mutants, takes place at the end of that timeline, several years after “The Wolverine.” In that terrible future, they send Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) back in time to 1973 to try to prevent that robot apocalypse from happening, and he succeeds.
The net effect there is that everything that took place after 1973 was wiped from history, and the following decades were very different from what they were in the original “X-Men” movies. The events of “Apocalypse,” for example, occurred because the existence of mutants became widespread much earlier than it had in the previous timeline, and that in turn set in motion the chain of events that brought En Sabah Nur (Oscar Isaac) back to wreak havoc on the world.
Likewise, Jean Grey’s whole Dark Phoenix situation happened differently after Wolverine’s journey through time. The prerequisite scenario for Jean to go Phoenix is that she has to either die or be put in a situation where she’s going to die — in the old timeline that happened in 2003 at the end of “X2,” and in the new timeline that happened in 1992.
So to be perfectly clear: none of the events of the original three “X-Men” movies are going to take place after “Dark Phoenix.” By going back in time and changing things, he created a new future. So Mystique dying in 1992, for example, doesn’t contradict the original films in which she was alive later on, because those movies didn’t happen in this timeline. The new sequence of events is: “First Class” -> the 1973 parts of “Days of Future Past” -> “Apocalypse” -> “Dark Phoenix.”
That’s the basic gist of it, though the movies haven’t been all that great at keeping their continuity straight otherwise, but most of the screwups come from characters being the wrong ages in different films. For example, the character Moira McTaggart features in both “X-Men: The Last Stand” (played by Olivia Williams) and “First Class” (played by Rose Byrne). Both actors were in their 30s when their respective movies were released — but the two films are set 44 years apart.
The “X-Men” movies are rife with that specific type of continuity goof because they kept re-using characters from the original films in movies set decades earlier even when that didn’t make sense — Angel, Jubilee and Psylocke being some other prominent examples. It was also amusing to see the character of Trask, played by Bill Duke in “The Last Stand,” be recast in “Days of Future Past” with Peter Dinklage. Obviously those two look nothing alike, but that’s not actually a continuity error since their ages do match up well enough.
Adding to the confusion a bit is the fact that James McAvoy, Jennifer Lawrence, Michael Fassbender and Nicholas Hoult are all playing characters who have aged 30 years across the films they starred in, even though in the real world less than a decade has passed. Hoult was still a few months short of his 30th birthday when the movie came out, but in “Dark Phoenix” he’s playing a character who’s in his 60s without the aid of makeup to age him up. That kind of thing can mess with your head.
Of course, “Dark Phoenix” goes out on a note that may throw one last wrench into the messy continuity of the “X-Men” films. At the end of the movie, Jean takes full control of her Phoenix powers and is seen flying around in space, with Xavier’s school now called the Jean Grey School, and Professor X implied to have left the school with Hank McCoy to run.
In “Days of Future Past” we get a glimpse of what the new version of 2023 will look like when Wolverine returns to the updated version of his present at the very end of the movie. We see Jean hanging around the school, with Xavier in charge. A lot can happen in three decades that could still bring that future to fruition, but with this main series ended now it’s tough to draw a line from what happened at the end of “Dark Phoenix” to where “Days of Future Past” shows everybody ending up.
That that means that “Dark Phoenix” may or may not have introduced some massive new continuity errors to the series, and we’ll never get to find out because there aren’t going to be any more movies that follow this thread. To me, that sort of timeline ambiguity is the perfect way to end this whole thing.
Just a nightmare. A total nightmare. There have been a number of bad superhero movies, but from the talking gas cloud the filmmakers cast as Galactus to Jessica Alba's dye job, this one transcends bad.
A totally chaotic stir fry of nonsense that tells the story of how Wolverine got his claws. Features an early version of Deadpool (also played by Ryan Reynolds) whose mouth is stapled shut, which should tell you all you need to know about it.
That five minutes when they tried to turn Jennifer Garner into an action star went about as well as it should have.
Just a total mess, incoherent from the word "go." After losing director of the first two X-Men films Brian Singer to the first Superman reboot attempt, replacement Matthew Vaughn gave way to eventual director Brett Ratner, who might have killed off the superhero genre entirely were "Spider-Man" not blowing up the box office.
There could maybe have been a good movie in here somewhere -- the cast (Michael B Jordan, Miles Teller, Kate Mara) certainly warranted one. But this Frankenstein of a film is a behind-the-scenes horror story, and you can see it in the totally disjointed final product.
This was basically "Early-2000s: The Movie," with Ben Affleck, Jennifer Garner, Colin Farrell and Michael Clark Duncan as the main players. The cherry on top of this turd sundae was that damn Evanescence song.
Tim Story's first "Fantastic Four" is just sort of there, challenging you to remember it exists. With Chris Evans, who played the Human Torch here, going on to embody Captain America in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, that gets tougher every year.
This is the Punisher as a straight revenge thriller, and it's not bad. Thomas Jane performs admirably, but the whole thing is missing that extra something that would have elevated it beyond standard genre fare. Setting it in Tampa didn't help.
Maybe the bad outweighs the good here, but Emo Peter Parker's dance number remains one of the greatest single moments in any comic book movie, sorry, haters.
A notorious flop at the box office and, yeah, it's not exactly "good." But now, 30 years removed from its premiere, "Howard the Duck" is pretty fun as a relic of the '80s.
Dolph Lundgren and Louis Gossett Jr. star in a low-rent '80s grunge C-level classic. This one's all novelty value.
For a movie starring Nic Cage about a dude who rides a Harley and turns into a flaming skeleton, this is a surprisingly mundane movie.
We may never figure out what went wrong with Marc Webb's Spider-Man duology, but his choice of Andrew Garfield to play Peter Parker is still brilliant. It just sucks that this movie doesn't really make any sense.
The beginning of the current wave of theatrical superhero movies, "X-Men" was kind of a cheapie and it showed. Novel at the time, now it just comes off as unremarkable mid-budget action fare as Fox was merely sticking its toe in the superhero waters. Timid.
It's sometimes hard to remember that this one counts as part of the MCU, since it placed Ed Norton in the Dr. Banner role since inhabited by Mark Ruffalo in the "Avengers" films. It's also hard to remember because it's generally not memorable.
The fantasy Marvel movie is directed by Kenneth Branagh, who covers the whole movie in canted angle shots and theatrical stylings. It's pretty boring, also, but at least it looks cool.
More of the same impossible-to-follow hack-n'-slash plotting from the previous movie, offset by Andrew Garfield continuing to be awesome and Jamie Foxx going way over the top as the big bad.
"The Dark World," in contrast to the first "Thor" movie, is certainly not boring. If anything, it suffers the opposite problem, going so hard and fast that it loses substance.
Starring a pre-Deadpool Ryan Reynolds basically playing a vampire-slaying Deadpool, throwing out one-liners like his mama's life depended on it, this may not a "good" movie, but it sure is fun.
A big step up from the first "X-Men" both in production values and quality, it still lacks much in the way of energy. Which is inexcusable when you've got Alan Cumming as the teleporting mutant Nightcrawler all over your movie.
Sam Raimi truly assembled the prototypical superhero movie with this first entry in the "Spider-Man" franchise, in 2002. Like "X-Men" before it, "Spider-Man" is a bit underwhelming today, but unlike "X-Men" it was proud of its nerd roots.
Could have been a bizarre ironic summer classic if it were structured like a real movie and had any character development whatsoever. Instead it's just a shot of visual adrenaline that I'll probably want to revisit at some point -- but not when I'm sober
"Ultron" is frustrating for what it lacks -- chiefly the feeling that it's advancing the overall story arc of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. But as with the first "Avengers" movie its weaknesses are overcome by great character work.
The story is a total mess, relying heavily on moviegoers' memories of previous MCU films (if you didn't remember or know coming in what the Tesseract was, hoo boy). But the novelty of the Marvel's first big superhero team-up was irresistible, and director Joss Whedon balanced his ensemble expertly, giving everyone plenty to do so none of them ever fades into the background.
Pure B-movie trash, which is fine because that's precisely what it aims for: bloody, crass, awesome. Blade, by the way, remains the only black comic book character besides Shaquille O'Neal's "Steel" to get his/her own movie, though Marvel's "Black Panther" is slated for a 2018 release.
For the sequel, they tapped the "Crank" director duo known as Neveldine/Taylor. It was an inspired choice, because "Spirit of Vengeance" was exactly as nutty as you'd hope a PG-13 comic book movie would be. Shame that it was apparently stressful enough to break up the tandem of Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor.
A lot of folks like to complain that all superhero movies are the same. But this was actually a pretty good World War II movie, too.
Plot-wise, it never really adds up to anything, but the strength of the cast and the bizarre world they explore more than make up for it.
Beloved nerd Guillermo del Toro took over for this one and ramped everything up to 11. More vampires, more blood, more people getting sliced up -- and of course baddies whose jaws can split open and swallow a person's head whole.
Disney Animation Studios made a Marvel movie, and it's really sweet. Sure, it's the kiddie version of Marvel, but that doesn't prevent it from being a wholly satisfying experience.
It’s fine, but “Captain Marvel” feels like a movie from before Marvel Studios really hit its stride in Phase 3 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Right now it’s a movie that seems very much out of place.
An improvement on the first film, and an absolute delight from moment to moment -- but it never quite coalesces into a coherent whole because so many subplots distract from the core story and rob it of its emotional impact. Would be a top 5 comic book movie if it had just reigned in the plot.
It was Robert Downey Jr.'s reemergence on the big screen, and he's flawless in this origin story that takes Tony Stark from billionaire playboy weapons manufacturer to billionaire playboy other-things manufacturer.
This movie is, frustratingly, far from perfect. In fact, it’s kind of a huge mess. But it’s also awesome and thrilling and hilarious and contains some individual moments that are perfect. I wish it was better, but with everything required of a movie that exists to wrap up 21 movies’ worth of story arcs, I’m glad it’s as good as it is.
In 2003 the modern wave of superhero movies was still in its infancy, and Ang Lee -- still the best filmmaker to do a comic book movie -- got experimental with "Hulk." And what he made was an incredible melodrama with visual stylings meant to ape comic book panels. It didn't sit well with audiences, but "Hulk" remains one of the most compelling and interesting Marvel movies to date.
This was, like, just a legitimately enjoyable melodramatic action movie. Sure, it turns into a video game boss battle by the end, but for most of its running time it's just an actual movie.
Whereas the previous "Punisher" movie was melodramatic and contemplative, this one is just murderous. And it's awesome.
How can anybody resist the pull of Tom Hardy doing comedy? This movie knows exactly what it's trying to be, and what it's trying to be is dumb and fun and nothing else. And it is extremely fun.
Its time travel logic is a bit iffy, but "Days of Future Past" is still tremendously entertaining because, while epic, it's not overly serious. As "Back to the Future" taught us long ago, you can get away with a lot of logical leaps if you strike the right tone.
Swaps Terrence Howard for Don Cheadle, while Mickey Rourke breaks cars with laser whips. Who knows what was going on in this movie, but it was almost OK anyway.
In the angsty and angry times we live in, "Deadpool" is perfect. Aggressively violent and flippantly meanspirited, it's the exact emotional release we needed.
The main series "X-Men" movies have never achieved any sort of greatness, but at least "Dark Phoenix" ends the whole thing with one of the best efforts of the bunch. And that sequence on the train in the third act is easily the best action sequence of these movies.
It’s frustrating that it doesn’t really deal with the immense fallout from “Avengers: Endgame,” but it’s still as visually creative as any movie in the MCU, and Jake Gyllenhaal’s Mysterio is an all-timer of a villain. Dude goes all the way out in this.
The first "X-Men" movie that could be described as "fun." It's basically two movies crammed into one, story-wise, but director Matthew Vaughn's touch is so breezy and enjoyable that it totally works anyway, thanks in large part to a brilliant cast that includes Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence and James McAvoy.
Not quite the best "Spider-Man" movie, but still an absolute delight, with a cast full of scene stealers. Michael Keaton as the Vulture makes for one of the best Marvel villains ever.
While you may get whiplash from the "Deadpool" sequel's occasional very serious and emo scenes, the rest of the movie is thoroughly delightful, somehow managing to be even funnier -- and more hilariously violent -- than the original.
"Ant-Man" represented a first for the MCU by being a straight-up comedy. And it's a very good one, with a cast that's perfectly suited for it. Aside from Paul Rudd who plays Ant-Man himself, Michael Pena is the true standout as Scott Lang's best friend and former cellmate.
It's ever so slightly frustrating that this one doesn't fully integrate into the "Infinity War" situation, but even so it's thoroughly a delight. Evangeline Lilly is so good at the Wasp that I'm retroactively irritated that she didn't don the suit in the previous "Ant-Man" movie.
If it weren't hamstrung with all the requisite elements of an origin story, "Doctor Strange" might have been the best Marvel movie ever. That's the power of the astonishing visual imagination on display here. People love to talk about the nebulous concept of capturing some long lost childlike sense of wonder though the magic of cinema -- "Doctor Strange" is one of the only movies I've watched as an adult that really accomplishes that.
This is a movie that fully understands its main character and taps into what made him such a captivating figure for so long. Yeah, Peter Parker's a superhero, but he's also a college kid working a minimum wage job to make rent while also taking university physics classes. Peter buckles under the pressure, something we can all relate to.
As far as I'm concerned this is the "Iron Man" movie. Somehow, Shane Black was able to infiltrate the MCU and make a legitimate Shane Black movie with all the wit and raw humanity you'd expect from him. It carries exactly the sort of authorial identity we should want all these movies to have.
A thorough delight. This might be the most fun we had at the movies in all of 2017, and so we can't help but love it.
Multiply the two previous best Marvel movies by one another and you get "Civil War." It packs the sort of emotional payoff all the disconnected Marvel movies can't really provide. And as an action film it's easily the best of the superhero genre.
You could certainly make the argument that "Infinity War" does not really hold up on as a complete movie on its own, because it kinda begins with the second act. But I don't care. The culmination of this ten-year shared universe experiment should stand on the shoulders of the movies that came before it. The fact that it packs such a profound emotional punch, however, is what really makes it work.
It's held back a little by being saddled with standard "origin movie" issues -- introducing audiences to the world of Wakanda isn't a quick and easy task, and it could use an extra 15-20 minutes to flesh out the supporting characters -- but still manages to be the most substantial superhero movie ever. It's kind of amazing that Disney let writer/director Ryan Coogler make this overt a political statement -- it's the most openly political mega-budget movie I've ever seen . Also, while I'm listing superlatives: Michael B Jordan delivers the best performance ever in a superhero movie. Good lord.
The best superhero movies, and movies in general, are the ones that are truly most human. And "Spider-Verse," despite being animated, despite the wacky cast of Spider-People, despite the outlandish premise, is as real as movies get.
James Mangold's small-scale western is a game changer for the entire superhero genre, daring to defy pretty much standard by which you expect these movies to operate. It's just a great movie by any normal standard. Where "Civil War" elevated the genre, "Logan" opts instead to be something else entirely and we're all the better for it.
The Russo brothers, who made their entrance to the MCU directing "Winter Soldier" before taking the reigns on "Civil War" and, eventually, 2018's "Avengers: Infinity War," really impressed with "Winter Soldier." It's a classic spy thriller with a superhero twist. And Robert Redford as the bad guy is a really nice touch.
Decades of big screen Marvel adaptations demand a long, ranked list. This is that list
View In Gallery