Chris Claremont Interview: DOFP, Nightcrawler, and Marvel/Disney relationship

[NewMutant]

Random lengthy interview with Chris Claremont where he address a variety of topics including Days of Future Past movie, Nightcrawler, and Marvel's partnership with Disney.

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/jac...uture-past.php

[DirtyStorm]

He will always be amazing, but this just sounds bitter....

[ExcelsiorPrime]

LOL saying that Chris Claremont did not create Wolverine or the X-men but, is like saying Shakespeare did not invent the Play or Tragic Character but!


He has every right to be bitter. The man defined and crafted "the blue-print" for how to execute a successful X-book.

Lee-Kirby took the X-men into orbit. Chris Claremont took them to the Moon.

[NewMutant]

I thought his comments regarding the Marvel/Disney relationship is interesting. I feel like there is a lot more truth in all the rumors than I want to believe. Interestingly enough if the X-Men movies were done by Marvel rather than FOX, Claremont would probably get more credit.

[Slicknickshady]

I just watched his 75 minute panel from the Motor City Comic Con the other day on youtube. Very informative. He may sound bitter but he has a right to be imo. Also, it's not shocking that a creator of anything would want to write his babies or his creations and have more control then what he does.

[Probalus]

Which means you've got some, you're just hesitant to share.
I'm a working writer, I'll always have tons of stories. I have characters galore. My problem is, certainly from an X-Men perspective, is that there's no creating, I suspect, anything new in terms of characters and events in the X-canon because that's just food for [20th Century] Fox. And that's a primal reality now.

Meaning, characters for a potential X-Men movie?
I mean, anything that I create for the X-Men becomes a Fox-licensed property. Because Marvel can't use it, they're in the X-Men. And Fox has licensed the X-Men. The only possible way out of that would be if it was a character that originated elsewhere, which, if they get away with it, could be amusing.

What do you mean?
There are a lot of characters like Mystique, like Rogue, that came from outside the X-canon. Rogue was created in The Avengers Annual by me and Michael Golden; Mystique was created in Ms. Marvel, she just ended up in the X-Men. So it would be an interesting challenge, actually quite an interesting challenge. I mean, imagine one day if Disney legal walked over to Fox and said, you no longer have the rights to Mystique. She wasn't an X-Men character to begin with.

And imagine Kevin [Feige] getting his hands on a character with the possibility perhaps to cast Jennifer Lawrence in a role.

...

Great... More fuel for the rumors.

[Wind Rider]

LOL saying that Chris Claremont did not create Wolverine or the X-men but, is like saying Shakespeare did not invent the Play or Tragic Character but!


He has every right to be bitter. The man defined and crafted "the blue-print" for how to execute a successful X-book.

Lee-Kirby took the X-men into orbit. Chris Claremont took them to the Moon.

Well said.

[Slicknickshady]

Yep. He def has the right to be bitter. He said a lot of that interview a few weeks earlier in his motor city comic con panel. So CC must have some sort of script he memorizes before each comic con. Cause it's a lot of the same thing. Especially this section.

------

Is it because the climax feels like comes after they shut down Dark Cerebro?
It's not the climax, though. Well you get to the end though and they've won, they've won across the board, top to bottom, Magneto, Charlie [a.k.a. Charles Xavier], it's all done. They have their moment of salvation. And then all of a sudden, the shit hits the fan, like with the death of Jean in ["The Dark Phoenix Saga"] comic. The X-Men are fighting on the moon and they defeat Dark Phoenix. They've got their victory and then suddenly the Shi'ar show up.

And you go through the battle and you know they've got to find a way to win, they gotta find a way to win, because they're the heroes. They do that. Lilandra will see the light. And we get right to the end, and with the rewrite, which was one of the smartest moves that Jim [Shooter] ever made as editor-in-chief [of Marvel]. He had the right instincts and John and I were too close to it and too used to thinking in traditional Marvel terms.

John did a beautiful ending where they pull the Phoenix Force out of there and [Jean's] back to normal -- "Hi, Scott, I'm mindless but I'm yours" -- and the Shi'ar let them go. And in the back of our minds, we all know this is bullshit. In a year and a half, the Phoenix is going to come back. But that was our way out.

But Jim Shooter changed the ending?

Jim turned around and said, "She killed six billion people, there's got to be a reckoning." And it worked. The disadvantage of comics is that there's never a lasting consequence...good, bad, or indifferent. Mephisto can neutralize marriages, redheads can come back from the dead, you name it. But the reality, unfortunately, in comics is that every character is a fungible asset. Therefore, every character must be available within the context.

This is why, when it happened back in the day, I went to Jim and said, "The way to do this, to preserve Scott as a character, as a decent human being, and to give you the font for even more interesting stories, is don't bring Jean back. Leave her as the one unbreakable moment. She's dead, but she has a sister." Luke, you have a sister. And bring her in. Therefore, Scott can live happily ever after with Madelyne [Pryor], raise his kids, be a hero, be the head of the school, yada yada yada.

But now you have Rachel and she's single. That gives Bobby and Hank and Warren, suddenly they're center stage and Scott is in the background, and they could be the romantic center in the comic. Instead, they wanted to go back to the way it was. And for me, the idea has always been, find a way to give the audience what they want without giving them what they want, and especially do so that provides us, the creators, with the opportunity to take the book in a different direction and come up with utterly new stories that no one ever saw coming.

[Franchise408]

Interesting read, outside of the obnoxious X-Men 3 hate (get over it people, it's been 8 years, AND you finally got your god forsaken reboot already. I'm tired of people acting like there aren't a lot of people out there that like the movie and wanted to see it remain in continuity, and acting like it has absolutely no redeeming qualities to it. You got your damned reboot, stop bitching about it for once... please!)

Well, that and his bitterness over no writing credits for X-Men: Days Of Future Past.

How many comic writers have actually gotten a writing credit for a comic book movie? Last I checked, Claremont didn't get anything for X2, X-Men: The Last Stand, or The Wolverine. Joss Whedon didn't get anything for X-Men: The Last Stand. Barry Windsor-Smith or Bill Jemas didn't get anything for X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

And I can't think of any other comic book movies that had a "based on a comic book by ..." credit either.

[fod_xp]

Warren Ellis got writer and creator credit for RED and RED 2 in the opening credits, which was based on his own creator owned work. He even supported any changes the movie makers made to the source material.

Then there was Watchmen and all of the Batman movies giving credit to Bob Kane for "creating" Batman, even though the idea for the bat fetish suit was another guy's idea.

[Grey]

I found this interview to be very refreshing compared to other marvel employees who have dodged similar questions.

Specifically, I find it interesting that Claremont said that the editors are not too interested in creating new characters in the x-men comics, or developing sidelined characters, because then they would be giving fox more fuel for their movies (I.e., in the form of more potential mutants to cast).

I don't need any of the major conspiracies going around to be true; this line from his interview alone is enough to disappoint me when it comes to marvel.

That being said, I will still purchase my beloved xcomics until my favorite characters or gone or the xmen are done away with.

[motherofpearl1]

LOL saying that Chris Claremont did not create Wolverine or the X-men but, is like saying Shakespeare did not invent the Play or Tragic Character but!


He has every right to be bitter. The man defined and crafted "the blue-print" for how to execute a successful X-book.

Lee-Kirby took the X-men into orbit. Chris Claremont took them to the Moon.

He'll always be my favourite X writer. They should give him an ongoing starring Wolverine, Rogue and Nightcrawler. No one writes them like he does.

[Franchise408]

Warren Ellis got writer and creator credit for RED and RED 2 in the opening credits, which was based on his own creator owned work. He even supported any changes the movie makers made to the source material.

Then there was Watchmen and all of the Batman movies giving credit to Bob Kane for "creating" Batman, even though the idea for the bat fetish suit was another guy's idea.

I feel like a "creator" credit is different than a "writer" credit. Chris Claremont didn't "create" the X-Men.

Although under that context, Ken Wein, Herb Trumpe, and Dave Cockrum got "developed by" credit for the characters of Wolverine, Storm, and Colossus on X-Men: The Last Stand.

As far as RED goes - I stand corrected then. I haven't seen the movie, nor am I familiar with the comic book. Is it a comic book, or a graphic novel? Because I feel that's different as well.

I mean, no Marvel movie, whether by Fox, Sony, or Marvel Studios, has given Stan Lee a "created by" credit (as far as I'm aware - correct me if I'm wrong) So I don't know why Claremont is having a hoot over Days Of Future Past.

[Sundowhn]

I always like interviews with Claremont because he seems the closest to honest of any creators. He's too experienced to be willing to dance to the corporate tune and instead gives some real insight.

I'd say, yes, he has good reason to be bitter. I just hope his comeback is a success and that maybe he'll be given more X-Men projects down the line. Reading something by him verses some other current writers is the difference between watching "Pirates of the Caribbean" and in watching "Hannah Montana" -- both produced by Disney, but very different quality.

[mikeb]

Does Fox have just the rights to the X-Men or the broader rights to the term "Mutant"? There are mutants who have never appeared in X-books or were never X-Men. An example of this (as far as I know.) is David Cannon, aka Whirlwind.