The future of the X-Men on the big screen

[CRaymond]

Who is “us”?

Hello. I’m an us.

[Killerbee911]

I prefer to take risks than be always juvenile and safe. Marvel made the right deal to go under the safety net of Disney. Look at how every Disney live action remake is making a billion, forget the quality. Avengers was not a trilogy, if you look at the infinity saga as one film, Age of Ultron was a low point in a trilogy. Infinity war depends on who you talk to. The question now becomes what qualifies as a solid movie when MCU is allowed to get away with anything that other won't or when MCU never attempted to be Aristotle to Fox and DC that tried due to the stigma of Batman and Robin. Would GOTG, Antman, Captain America 1 and 3, Infinity War and Spiderman be solid films if they were Fox and DC movies?

-And you would lose money and never get to make movies for the studio.

- Did Antman and Antman 2 make a billion? Did Homecoming make a billion? Did Gotg make a billion? Did Thor Ragnarok make a billion? Did Dumbo make a Billion? Did Aladdin make billion? Is the Lion King going make a Billion? Why you are pretending that everything Disney touches makes a billion. It never crosses your guys mind quality of the movie is driving the success.


Finally, put MCU bias stuff to bed DCEU has put out Shazam and Aquaman, Sony has put Venom all those movies are action-adventure with a solid dose of comedy all of those movies on the audience side is viewed just like MCU movies. It is sheer insanity once DC and Sony made good fun movies the audiences love them and they made money. It isn't some secret formula Marvel and Disney is doing Universal has been doing the same thing Jurassic World series and Fast and Furious with the same results as Marvel, It is the same formula as good Will Smith movies like Bad Boys, MIB, and Independence day. So yeah GOTG, Antman, Captain America 1 and 3, Infinity War and Spiderman be solid films at any studio that made them.

It is ridiculous that you are trying to MCU reputation aka trust with the audience/critics against them. MCU didn't magically overnight become this they keep on producing solid movies. I will just put RT scores 93, 67, 73, 77, 80, 92, 79, 67, 90, 91, 75, 81, 91, 89, 84....Rotten Tomatoes scores are only here as quick way to see trust in a brand.People are bias towards yeah Marvel earned their trust.The Fast and Furious franchise has done the samething. You keep making solid movies your fanbase will appreciate it.

[WebLurker]

It doesn't matter what X-Men universe is in, The MCU or on their own, X-Men is different. The X-Men concept was always a pain in a realstic discussion about superheroes.

Marvel is many things, realistic has never been one of them.

The ''Disney formula'' started around 2012. Its an incorrect formula when X-Men is involved.

A.) There is no "Disney formula;" in fact, each movie does have its unique touches and genres.
B.) How do you even know this alleged "formula" will be used when the movies are made in the first place? We don't. For all we know, they could well skewer closer to Winter Soldier then Ragnarok. Heck, for all we know, they could be introduced in other people's movies, like Black Widow, Black Panther, Spider-Man, and others were.

MCU movies are usually forgotten after every 100 days. Sometimes because there are so many of them and are so alike to the other. Its hard to overshadow any other movie.

And yet the overall series and characters are now household names.

Fox used this to their advantage that worked on 3 separate occasions. Logan, Deadpool and DOFP. DC wanted to use it as well but couldn't because Snyder was a hack.

Dunno about that. Two of those did market a lot on going against the grain, but, as I recall correctly, they were only competing against a specific MCU movie at any given point in time. Easy enough to carve your own niche if that's the case. (And it's not like any of those movies overturned the MCU installment in any event. People apparently wanted both.)

The last real serious DC movie that never gave most a big pain was TDKR 2012. what ''serious movie overshadowing'' was going with X-Men? MCU didn't even try to make a serious movie until The Winter Solider. Did it overshadow any X-Men movie?

The Nolan Batman movies, specifically the The Dark Knight. They never went away and are still the standard for dark superhero movie. X-Men is not known for that. If anything, it's known for being the (now first) X-Men movie series.

Deadpool was a fleshed out character. More fleshed out to GOTG.

Seriously?

I prefer Deadpool's comedy. The adult humor is more bearable than the humor of Thor and GOTG.

Gonna be honest with you; saw the trailers, read some of the comics; I do not find Deadpool that funny. Thing is, most of his humor is based on mocking the genre and general randomness. The other movies had character-based humor, which I found worked better. However, humor is subjective and all that.

Deadpool represented something bigger than humor. Deadpool was about taking chances and pushing the envelope. GOTG and Thor 3 are processed factory movies.

Maybe, but, then again, all of them are pieces of long-running blockbuster series.

Thor Ragnarok and GOTG are not supposed to be a movie about humor. Its not the back bones of the comics.

Which has nothing to do with the movies. The films adapted it into something else, the only question is if it worked when approached from that angel, and it would seem it did.

They only thing GOTG and Thor 3 overshadowed is how smarter the comics are and that is a bad thing, but it gets worse when you realize Disney stories are overshadowing Marvel stories in Marvel movies.

GOTG was a D-list series at best, the movie made them A-list superstars and was pretty darn successful. I also understand that Thor was a lower tier character until the films as well. Whe

We are talking about serious movies not blockbusters, blockbusters are purely financial. I already said the blockbuster game changer belongs to Spiderman not X-Men. Stop mixing them up.

The X-Men series are blockbusters. My point is that the movies are not as big a deal in the serious superhero movie legacy that you seem to think they are.

Its said everywhere. Its already has been brought up ''even here'', Truth to be told.
Every comic book podcaster on youtube says so. Everyone reminds people what X-Men 1 and X-Men 2 represented anytime there is a bad x-men film. Things seem to be getting desperate here, believe me you will find it very difficult defending reboot X-Men if and IF Reboot xmen turns out to be another formulaic mcu movie that ain't ''serious enough'' for X-Men.

Anecdotal evidence is not proof. Heck, I could point out that a lot of vocal people on this forum hate the Fox series and are happy that Marvel Studios will now be doing them, since they will now be made right.

The Dark Knight took it to another level after X-Men 1 and X-Men 2, doesn't mean X-men was wiped out , far from it.

Never said "wiped out," just "overshadowed."

TDK still paid tribute to X-Men.

Where?

Logan took it to another level after The Dark Knight.

How so? It wasn't the first R-rated superhero movie. It wasn't the first "last ride" of a movie superhero character. I mean, it's main selling point beyond being a grittier movie then most others in the genre usually are was that it was Hugh Jackman's last time.

Though I wonder if TDK will be ''The TDK'' if not for the sad passing of Heath that unbelievable elevated the movie.

Who knows?

I just remembered GOTG 2, Thor 3, and Spiderman Homecoming all ''overshadowed'' Logan. My apologies. I was in an alternate reality. When I got back to my own reality I saw almost everyone, including DC fans embracing Logan, Enjoying to see another movie raise the bar after TDK.

You missed how the others also got embraced and did pretty darn well by all metrics.

Have you heard of Parpirka instead of Dr Strange?

The European Donald Duck as a superhero comics? Never read 'em.

GOTG is one of the worst ones. Places in Star Trek from Vulcan, Romulan to The Klingon empire are more realstic to the eyes than GOTG.

Irrelevant; they were designed differently on purpose and both accomplished their different goals.

There are other ways MCU could have made him look better, No doubt, it would be a challenge for George Lucas or James Cameron but I am sure they would have figured out something better.

Pretty long odds.

My comparison to Thanos was Nightcrawler not Apocalypse.

Whatever.

Thanos did not look like a cosplayer, he looked like an animated character. Alan's Nightcrawler looked like a human flesh demon.

Scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard there.

I won't take GOTG. I would have to ask myself this question: why should my live action movie look animated with zero realness? If I want a better GOTG , Star Wars 3 Yoda vs Palpatine.

Personal preference?

I am taking a better filmmaking option with X2 to Disney's GOTG , as it feels more like I am making a movie where the most important objective is to be eye candy for children. Why would I take that when I know comic movies are more than eye candy to kids?

Because it's more then just kid's candy.

Mostly things MCU doesn't know.

Tell that to the Russo brothers and James Gunn.

X2 is not to be compared with any MCU movie.

Don't see why not; both have their strengths and weaknesses and it's an interesting comparison.

it has a better film prospect than the sterilized MCU , but this was the era of serious movies, obviously the filmmaking was a lot more demanding.

A lot of assumptions there.

Endgame did not meet the expectations of what it was obviously supposed to be. I was wise enough to point that out.

All you've pointed out is that you don't have a good grasp of the movie.

Endgame has all the same tropes as any time travel movie that has some level of darkness, world in ruins aftermath to it. Why should I look at it any lower or lesser than the others.

Because not every movie like that needs the same kind of darkness.

Must we always lower the scale for MCU? Gohan, Xavier, Thomas, Picard....Fat Thor? I expect fat thor in a pixar film, not an MCU film.

"Do not invoke her name."

Star Wars 7 and 8 is a better comparison for the MCU.

That literally makes no sense, even granting that the MCU does skewer closer to Star Wars then not.

The old star wars movies were not as adult oriented as star trek, but they are far ahead of the MCU in that department.

Yeah, not seeing it.

Because Spiderman is a pixar ? not anymore than mutants are?

????!!!!????!!????!?

I am reading Bendis X-Men finally. enjoying it so far, has a lot of new mutant children characters, I am not really seeing Pixar callbacks.

You never really understood what I meant by that, did you?

should I expect the same for MCU or is MCU going to make children mutants like pixar as they are doing with marvel characters. talk about a waste of time if it happens. A different waste than Kingberg's X-Men.

Unless it's something like Academy X.

[Wolverine12]

I think we've had enough discussion on the Disney Formula and what exactly makes a movie mature or not. Let's please get back to talking about the future of the X-Men on film and not have the circle discussions anymore. Points have been made, time to move on, you know who you are. Thank you.

[Wolverine12]

If you choose to keep derailing the thread it's going to get shut down.

[CRaymond]

I thought the conversations about humor, costumes, casting, roster, villains and locations were all fun topics but I stay away from the thread because there are way too many volatile single-minded people obsessing about Disney.

[Killerbee911]

How quickly do you guys think the MCU will get to next-gen of Mutants? Which would be better a completely fresh start slow introduce X-concepts ie.. O5 then ANAD then New Mutants or Just start a point where most mutants are available..ie in MCU X-men 1 you could see say Cannonball and Moonstar in the mansion and they could spin-off to New Mutants, X-factor or some other team easily without having to wait around a couple of years?

I lean to the quicker end, I wonder if MCU could do something crazy like start with New Mutants almost like PoV into the world

[CRaymond]

I’ve been advocating for a “start in the middle” setting, with Storm, Kurt, Piotr, Hank and Emma are running a school/refuge when Wolverine is captured by [redacted].

Jubilee would be the POV, and she’d train with a variety of NM, GenX, and Academy wallpaper kids.

[Graphicisnovel]

I still stick to my formula, In my head since the X2 days.

Film 1, original 5.
Film 2, Second Genesis team rescue 05 from Krakoa like island. (Maybe add a Storm leading plot for spice.)
Film 3, team from X-men vol. 2 #1 in Mutant Genesis.

Film 1 costumes are the ones from First Class comic.
This would set you up for any future story you wanna do + you get to brag in marketing it is X-men done "by the book".

Marvel, DM me for my phone #

[Zero Hunter]

How quickly do you guys think the MCU will get to next-gen of Mutants? Which would be better a completely fresh start slow introduce X-concepts ie.. O5 then ANAD then New Mutants or Just start a point where most mutants are available..ie in MCU X-men 1 you could see say Cannonball and Moonstar in the mansion and they could spin-off to New Mutants, X-factor or some other team easily without having to wait around a couple of years?

I lean to the quicker end, I wonder if MCU could do something crazy like start with New Mutants almost like PoV into the world

I could see them using the younger generations in a TV show on Disney+ before a movie honestly. I am not sure they are going to want to flood the theaters with multiple teams, and a school based show would seem a perfect place for a more teenage centered show. The way it sounds they are not going to cheap out on these new shows like Loki and Scarlet Witch so it could be a great place for a New Mutants or Generation X show.

[Sandmans_Raven]

I’ve been advocating for a “start in the middle” setting, with Storm, Kurt, Piotr, Hank and Emma are running a school/refuge when Wolverine is captured by [redacted].

Jubilee would be the POV, and she’d train with a variety of NM, GenX, and Academy wallpaper kids.

I would definitely be down for this. O5 doesn't really interest me as a starting point, so having a mixture of different generations would be cool

[luprki]

How quickly do you guys think the MCU will get to next-gen of Mutants? Which would be better a completely fresh start slow introduce X-concepts ie.. O5 then ANAD then New Mutants or Just start a point where most mutants are available..ie in MCU X-men 1 you could see say Cannonball and Moonstar in the mansion and they could spin-off to New Mutants, X-factor or some other team easily without having to wait around a couple of years?

I lean to the quicker end, I wonder if MCU could do something crazy like start with New Mutants almost like PoV into the world

Hopefully not for a long time, and MCU X-Men will not be fun. I hope they will keep the X-Men completely separated from the MCU. I would rather see a different universe where the mutants are outcast and fighting for there rights. A universe where the characters is more important than their abilities. I also want to see mutants other than the O5

[WallStreeter]

Hopefully not for a long time, and MCU X-Men will not be fun. I hope they will keep the X-Men completely separated from the MCU.

They are not keeping the X-Men separate. It´s already been stated there will be only one MCU. Fox´s last two X-Men films were critical FAILURES and overall Fox XMen did poorly compared to MCU films, commercially and critically.

[ChronoRogue]

Def do not want an 05 focus. They were a bad team, highlight of their run is being captured and rescued by a better team. Plus so WASP.

The MCU X-Men should focus on the characters that got the franchise out of obscurity ala ANAD and Outback.

[Havok83]

The MCU should be built on Scott, Jean and Storm as its core, much like Cap, Iron Man and Thor were for the Avengers. Those 3 need to be in it and any combination of other characters added in can work

Wolverine belongs in there too but Id rather they save him for a sequel.

I’ve been advocating for a “start in the middle” setting, with Storm, Kurt, Piotr, Hank and Emma are running a school/refuge when Wolverine is captured by [redacted].

Jubilee would be the POV, and she’d train with a variety of NM, GenX, and Academy wallpaper kids.

Why does the POV character always have to be a young female? I see it happen all the time from the videogames, comics, cartoons, movies, etc... Lets switch it up and bring in someone different like Iceman, Sunspot, or Prodigy