The future of the X-Men on the big screen

[Ambaryerno]

Doesn’t matter since Storm didn’t have an on-going series until 2015. So why should she get a solo movie before Wolverine, Deadpool, and Gambit who all had on-goings before the first X-Men hit theater?

Storm fans are always overselling her potential as a solo act.

And Franchise408 makes a very good point: There's a very big difference between the X-Men and Avengers that directly affects the viability of solo films and spinoffs. The Avengers are like the Damn Yankees; get a bunch of successful solo artists together and let them rock. But the X-Men are defined by the fact they're a team, and very few of their members can actually support their own franchises. Thus why most X-spinoffs are other teams like X-Force and X-Factor, and you have a handful of characters that can support a solo ongoing for any length of time (mainly Wolverine, Deadpool, Cable, Gambit, and X-23).

[ChildOfTheAtom]

All of that is irrelevant. Marvel has the Midas touch right now. If they can make people care about Korg, Groot, & Shuri just imagine how a Flying Rogue will be received.


A Storm or Rogue movie etc etc with 2 or so X-MEN support characters would be a profitable movie.


Look at Captain America films he has alot of MCU characters in all three movies. Hulk in Thor 3 is another example.


Marvel can make X-MEN solo films if they think it's a good idea.

Or they can put X-MEN in other MCU movies.

The possibilities are endless


Human Torch & Iceman in Spider-Man 3

Rogue & Mystique in Captain Marvel 2

Wolverine vs Hulk

Beast in Avengers 5

Storm in Black Panther 2


etc etc


X-MEN will be mainstream again that's the important thing.

Other than Deadpool & Wolverine the X-MEN have been irrelevant for way too long.

[SpiderClops]

Because the X-Men franchise wasnt originally built to expand. Expanded cinematic universes WERE NOT A THING when the original X-Men trilogy was created. Trilogies were the thing that Hollywood did. X-Men was originally designed as a trilogy. Then they expanded and branched out to spinoffs with X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Around the same time is when the MCU began, and it started under the design philosophy of an expanded universe. Marvel was the first to do this (the one innovative thing they have done), and now you are condemning the X-Men franchise for not doing something that it was never designed or intended to do.

The First Class trilogy allowed them to start setting up that sort of stuff with the Days Of Future Past timeline reset, and now Fox had started to do that sort of stuff.

But that also doesnt mean that we need solo films for every character on the team. X-Men characters are NOT the Avengers. They are characters who are part of a team, not a bunch of individual characters who join up to form a super team. I wouldn't even want Storm spinoffs, or any other characters outside of Wolverine, tbh.

And Logan didn't disconnect from the franchise. In fact, it very much connected to it with a number of references. Just because it didnt attach itself to a specific storyline doesnt mean it disconnected from the rest of the franchise. That's nothing more than another one of those bad faith arguments to try to make up a false talking point just to trash on the X-Men films and not give full credit for their movies that go against your narrative.

Gifted and Legion disconnect from the main franchise because they take none of it into consideration.

Logan was actively a part of the main franchise. and even made a number of connections to it.

Storm fans are always overselling her potential as a solo act.

And Franchise408 makes a very good point: There's a very big difference between the X-Men and Avengers that directly affects the viability of solo films and spinoffs. The Avengers are like the Damn Yankees; get a bunch of successful solo artists together and let them rock. But the X-Men are defined by the fact they're a team, and very few of their members can actually support their own franchises. Thus why most X-spinoffs are other teams like X-Force and X-Factor, and you have a handful of characters that can support a solo ongoing for any length of time (mainly Wolverine, Deadpool, Cable, Gambit, and X-23).

Every single X-Men movie has failed to be a team movie. No scratch that. They haven't failed. First you have to attempt doing that so that we can determine if they failed or succeeded.

[sublimeclown]

Joss Whedon for the X-Men reboot! I mean, that's the obvious choice, right?

[ChildOfTheAtom]

Joss Whedon for the X-Men reboot! I mean, that's the obvious choice, right?

I think they should hire a female director, Russo's, or Ryan Coogler. He loves X-MEN.


But honestly whoever they get will be the best.


Directors are going to be fighting each other over who gets to finally reboot the X-MEN.

[Killerbee911]

Storm fans are always overselling her potential as a solo act.

And Franchise408 makes a very good point: There's a very big difference between the X-Men and Avengers that directly affects the viability of solo films and spinoffs. The Avengers are like the Damn Yankees; get a bunch of successful solo artists together and let them rock. But the X-Men are defined by the fact they're a team, and very few of their members can actually support their own franchises. Thus why most X-spinoffs are other teams like X-Force and X-Factor, and you have a handful of characters that can support a solo ongoing for any length of time (mainly Wolverine, Deadpool, Cable, Gambit, and X-23).

Nobody is over selling Storm here though .The X universe is ripe for one shot movies. It does matter if character an support an ongoing what matters if you can tell a compelling story that people will want to see for example Kitty Pryde has a movie in works which is just a story of her being a mansion trap with a demon.I believe there is enough compelling subject matter for Storm, Cyclops, Jean,Rogue,Bishop etc to all get movies. They might not have had ongoing but they all have mini series and one shots there is enough subject matter for solo movies. X-men not the Avengers the Team is the main show but the franchise can eat well off solo stories and team stories that spin off of the main thing.

Why is Dark Phoenix group X-men movie? It could be a solo Jean Grey Story the same way Civil War was "Captain America movie" .Second Genesis could be a Cyclops movie how cyclops has to work with a new team to save his old team.I think people are greatly mistaken that x-men couldn't expand out more .You might not get trilogies but Xmen is ripe for tons of solo one shot stuff. Many of the stories while being in a team book are better off focus on couple people and it is really hard to argue against this because the X-men movies are really good Wolverine,Magneto,Mystique and Xavier solo stories. If DoFP was renamed Wolverine 3 would anyone have an issue? X-men first class was called Xavier would anyone have an Issue?

[Maestroneto]

I feel bad for Wolverine12.

[Ambaryerno]

Nobody is over selling Storm here though .The X universe is ripe for one shot movies. It does matter if character an support an ongoing what matters if you can tell a compelling story that people will want to see for example Kitty Pryde has a movie in works which is just a story of her being a mansion trap with a demon.I believe
there is enough compelling subject matter for Storm, Cyclops, Jean,Rogue,Bishop etc to all get movies. They might not have had ongoing but they all have mini series and one shots there is enough subject matter for solo movies. X-men not the Avengers the Team is the main show but the franchise can eat well off solo stories and team stories that spin off of the main thing.

Why is Dark Phoenix group X-men movie? It could be a solo Jean Grey Story the same way Civil War was "Captain America movie" .Second Genesis could be a Cyclops movie how cyclops has to work with a new team to save his old team.I think people are greatly mistaken that x-men couldn't expand out more than that have.You might not get trilogies but Xmen is ripe for tons of solo stuff. Many of the stories while being in a team book are better off focus on couple people and it is really hard to argue against this because the X-men movies are really good Wolverine,Magneto,Mystique and Xavier solo stories. If DoFP was renamed Wolverine 3 would anyone have an issue?

AFAIK there have been no plot details about the proposed Kitty Pryde film AT ALL. Or even any indication that it's ACTUALLY moving forward or that a script is far enough along in development to GET such details (contrast Gambit and X-23, the former which was supposed to be ready to begin filming, and the latter which we've known has a script in development by Mangold and Kyle for some time now, and which we know very little beyond that).

[Killerbee911]

The point wasn't if the movie was being finished or not the point was they are opportunity for one shots movies.

You guys are thinking in terms of every xmen spin off has to be a trilogy like the Avengers. I am saying the Xmen can spinoff like cloverfield one ofs in the same universe with different genres of movies.

The options are vast even if you don't agree with choices I had in mind. You have admit between Gambit, Domino, Deadpool, Cable, Psylocke,Magneto and X-force, new mutants/genx, xfactor,Alpha flight,Excalibur, exiles, etc.We should have more than 2 spin offs in 18 years.

[Jopi]

Do you think the Gambit movie will be still made, now, that Disney bought Fox?

[SpiderClops]

Do you think the Gambit movie will be still made, now, that Disney bought Fox?

Gambit has been having trouble getting made even without the Disney acquisition.

[Jopi]

Gambit has been having trouble getting made even without the Disney acquisition.

I know. But now it seems much more unlikely, I think.

[ChildOfTheAtom]

I know. But now it seems much more unlikely, I think.

Introduce a new Gambit in X-MEN proper film then spin off.

it basically writes itself. After he's established as a X-MAN have Rogue & Jubilee or whoever ride down to New Orleans with him to deal with stuff from his past.

[Killerbee911]

If it can make its magical 2019 release date it could be made. Fox and Disney merger isn't a quick process so some movies will still get push out even after everything is official but the longer it lingers especially without stuff in place(like a director) the more likely it doesn't get made

[Sin Nick]

Do you think the Gambit movie will be still made, now, that Disney bought Fox?

Nope. I think a Starjammers movie has a better chance of being made now. Especially if the GotG franchise starts to stumble over the recent drama on that end. Starjammers could easily replace them IMO plus with their connection to the X-Men(Cyclops).