Corrected entry: It seems ridiculous that Raven acts selfish saying Charles never sacrificed to save anyone. Clearly, and I speak for others not just myself, she was there to see him get crippled saving both the whole team as well as the USA and USSR naval vessels in X-Men: First Class.
Corrected entry: In the labs, the Beast is looking at colour LCD monitors, they weren't available in 1992.
Correction: They weren't available in the real world in 1992. This is science fiction though, and there are mutants both in the films and the comics they are based on that are extremely intelligent and innovative. The character Forge for example, who does not appear in the films but may exist offscreen, has the mutant ability to basically invent anything. Beast is also intelligent enough to invent LCD screens a lot sooner than we had them. He did create Cerebro in the early 1960's after all, which is a piece of technology that we in the real world to this day do not possess.
Next to that the first LCD screens came at the end of the 80's though in low quality and small. By 1992 they were very expensive but a lot better. The actual invention of the LCD technology was as far back as the 1960's.
Agreed that the Beast had the smarts to develop LCD screens but the story should be based on reality. For example if the Beast had pulled out an iPhone, it wouldn't fit the narrative, but the Beast would easily be able to construct such a device should he wish to.
Why should the story be based on reality? The movie doesn't take place in the real world. Should the president in the movie be George Bush since that would have reflected reality? The LCD monitors serve a purpose for the scene. While it technically wouldn't have been a mistake for Beast to have in invented one, an iPhone wouldn't serve any purpose for any of the scenes in the movie.
Plot hole: There are two timelines in the X-Men franchise - the original films and the prequels, up until Days of Future past, which alters the future, and at the end reveals that Jean Grey, Professor X and Cyclops are all alive, rather than dying as they did in X-Men 3. The "new" timeline is then followed in Apocalypse and this movie, giving them a bit of leeway to make changes, much like the new Star Trek movies. Only problem is...Jean Grey dies in this movie! So no way her older self can be around in DoFP.
Suggested correction: I think you might have missed the final shot in the movie, when the camera pans up from Charles and Erik playing chess and the Phoenix firebird is shown flying across the sky/stratosphere, implying that, much like the Phoenix's legendary namesake, Jean had risen from the ashes so to speak. There is precedent for this in the comics, plus there were supposed to be more X-Men movies after this one until the Disney/Fox merger happened.
Yes, but she even said she evolved beyond earth, so that is basically saying that she died. Or she isn't on earth anymore.
Suggested correction: Bryan Singer confirmed that the end of Days of Future Past with Jean Grey being alive is one of many timelines, there are more than 2 timelines in this universe, meaning that despite all the X-Men being alive in the future at the of Days of Future Past, they can still all die in other movies like in Logan and Dark Phoenix.
Plot hole: The shapeshifting aliens without even flinching take full barrages of M4A1 carbines point blank, absorbing in full all the damage, but somehow they can be kicked and punched and get hurt and stopped by scraps of metal, knives, whips, Beast clawing at them, and even better, the non-superpowered Nightcrawler snaps the neck of one of them.
Suggested correction: None of them are killed or actually harmed by any of the attacks as later shown when they just get up again. They have stolen human bodies and those bodies still react like a real human body does, they just take some time to regenerate.
Without mentioning the D'baris from the comics who don't steal bodies but just pose as humans, in this movie they are shown having their own body to begin with, with an ability to assimilate humans with their memories and appearances: it's doubtful they'd have a spine to snap. Their reactions are just all over the place though: they take virtually no time to regenerate full barrages of automatic weapons, staying all the time on their feet not even flinching and showing no pain (also, being equipped with superhuman strength, since they toss people all the way from one end of the train wagon to the other with one hand). They show no reaction to bullets maiming them, but if it's a main character taking a swing, then it's a hit - even if non lethal. The main villain reacts to no bullets but when Nightcrawler was cutting her up she swayed wildly under his every strike, just as an example. I get it that it's choreographic, but it just makes no sense.
The turret shot bullets through them and they quickly healed.
Correction: That's not a movie mistake, it's the character's opinion. It's insensitive, but her point was that they have friends that have died for the mutant cause. She is annoyed that Charles continually will send his team out on dangerous missions while keeping himself out of harms way. Her opinion might harsh but she certainly has a point.
BaconIsMyBFF