Nicholas Hoult explains why Beast looks human in X-Men: Days of Future Past

Minor X-Men: Days of Future Past spoilers to follow…

If you’ve been keeping an eye on the marketing for X-Men: Days of Future Past, chances are you’ll have a few questions about the upcoming X-Men sequel. Why is James McAvoy’s Professor X still walking around? How has Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) got his adamantium back? And what the hell was Bryan Singer smoking when he signed off on Quicksilver’s (Evan Peters) costume? Meanwhile, you’ve probably also noticed that Beast has been spotted in both his human and mutated form, and now we have an answer as to why, with Nicholas Hoult revealing the details during an interview with Joblo (via CBM)…

“What’s happened up to this point is between the time of the last movie and this movie my character has created a serum which basically controls his mutation so his appearance is normal as long as he doesn’t get worked up. Any animal instinct or urges, that kind of brings him out. So yeah, he changes into Beast a few times throughout the story and they’ve done some great action sequences with him this time, particularly in the mansion flying around on these chandeliers and stuff.”

So, what do you make of that, then? Are you a fan of Hulk-Beast, or is this deviating too far from Hank’s comic book character? Let us know your thoughts below, or head on over to The Flickering Myth Forum

X-Men: Days of Future Past is set for release on May 23rd, with a cast that also includes Michael Fassbender (Magneto), Jennifer Lawrence (Mystique), Patrick Stewart (Professor X), Ian McKellen (Magneto), Lucas Till (Havok), Halle Berry (Storm), Anna Paquin (Rogue), Ellen Page (Kitty Pryde) and Shawn Ashmore (Iceman) alongside franchise newcomers Evan Peters (American Horror Story) as Quicksilver, Booboo Stewart (The Twilight Saga: Eclipse) as Warpath, Fan Binbing (Iron Man 3) as Blink, Adan Canto (The Following) as Sunspot, Josh Helman (Mad Max: Fury Road) as William Stryker, Evan Jonigkeit (Girls) as Toad, and Peter Dinklage (Game of Thrones) as Bolivar Trask.

Around the Internet…

  • AL

    WTF ? Fox just hates sticking to the source material huh

  • derpa

    Wow, what a big Fck You from Fox.

    Way to destroy any credibility left in your name Singer.

  • http://mycareersuicidenote.tumblr.com/ anghus

    seriously party people. Singer has said time and again that he doesn’t read the comics and doesn’t have a strong understanding of their history. He’s a surface guy. He takes stuff that looks cool (like Nightcrawler) and weaves it into his own kind of story. This should surprise absolutely no one.

  • Kayoss860

    So the beast have the ability change when he is filled with animal instinct similar to how banner change to hulk when he is angry.

  • Seth

    Gotta show the pretty faces.

  • Corther

    well, that clears up why he looks human during the characters cameo in X2.

    • derpa

      No. No it doesn’t.

      Part of the dark irony in Beast’s name (even though being given before his transformation) is the fact that he Can’t just change back.

      I was really really hoping Hank found a defective cure, which triggers due to something, but unable to change back.

      • General Pepper

        It does clear up the X2 cameo. Also, despite the movie’s unfortunate similarity to Hulk, Hank temporarily looking “normal” is an idea derived from the comics, where some mutants like Nightcrawler would use hologram technology to look “normal.”

        • General Pepper

          I wasn’t at all surprised when I first saw that Hank would look normal sometimes.

          • General Pepper

            And I think Hank used a hologram in the comics sometimes too. The X2 cameo always made sense to me and I’m glad, after they decided to make Beast transform in First Class (because in one of the earlier X2 drafts, Beast transforms at the end) the filmmakers went with that.

        • derpa

          Even though Singer originally wanted to do the first Beast transformation, Ifeel Mystique playing the human version of Hank could’ve been an explanation. This “looking normal” thing was only used in X;Men Evolution. No other point in the comics was this used for Beast or nightcrawler.

          Even in Evolution, Beast declined using a holo-inducer.

          • General Pepper

            Actually, Nightcrawler used the hologram several times in the 1980s, possibly at Black Tom’s castle and definitely around Christmas in NY when the Sentinels attacked them; the arc when they get taken into orbit before the Phoenix/shuttle stuff. You can read these in Essential X-Men Volume 1 I think.

            And there is another Christmas issue I have from the early 2000′s where Nightcrawler definitely (during a snowball fight) and possibly Beast both use it.

          • General Pepper

            The Essential stuff may have been late 70s.

  • mrbrockpeters

    The real explanation:

    They cast a pretty boy actor and they need his pretty boy looks to make the movie more marketable to teenage girls. Never mind following the story logic. It’s about marketing the movie. Can’t have the pretty boy actor look ugly 100% of the time.

    • Knowles2

      Or another explanation is that fox are cheap bastards and didn’t provide the budget necessary to keep him in beast mode through out the whole film.

  • Knowles2

    Not the best budget saving idea they have had.

  • lolo

    Wolverine is easy to explain. he never lost his adamantium he only got the claw part cut off. They regrew as bone as we saw at the end of “The Wolverine”. Magneto obviously regrew the adamantium over his claws by using the one still in his body.

    Quicksilver’s costume is lame though. They could have kept the lightning bolt at the very least.