If the X-Men became a part of the MCU, how should they be introduced?

[donpricetag]

He(she? I don't really know) said Marvel, and this is an hypothetical thread about the MCU, so I guess when he said "obscure hero" he was comparing to like Guardians of the Galaxy or Ant-Man.

...right, but if you were following the thread they and I were talking about Dazzler, they chose to go vague after the fact. It was their idea. And Fox and a host others hasn't been as successful with "obscure" as Marvel Studios who built their brand on it (seriously, all their movies were based on obscurity, but they had Disney money). Fox goes to known quantities and rarely takes chances on niche characters, example being why Deadpool took 6 years or more to get off the ground and still with a somewhat modest budget of 60mil. Compared to other projects away. If they were saying Marvel could do to Dazzler what they did to Antman... maybe after several years of set up and built trust. But using Dazzler to relaunch the X-Men? I doubt that. On the other hand, maybe they'd do that because it hasn't been done yet? Word is Taylor Swift is up for the role under Fox. But again I wasn't talking about using Dazzler as a solo movie, but as a means of relaunching the X-Men in the MCU originally. It devolved into something else...

But forget it.

[ohsnapulon5000]

Hey man, studios took a chance on comic book movies again after the wild success of a little unknown hero named Blade. After that franchise took off, they greenlit X-Men.

[Ambaryerno]

Hey man, studios took a chance on comic book movies again after the wild success of a little unknown hero named Blade. After that franchise took off, they greenlit X-Men.

Except X-Men was in development BEFORE Blade, it just took longer to film.

Also, I'm sure Blade's success had far more to do with the late-90s "Vampires Are Cool!!!" craze that was really kickstarted in pop culture by Interview with the Vampire. In fact probably 90% of the audience didn't even realize it WAS based on a comic book going in.

[donpricetag]

Hey man, studios took a chance on comic book movies again after the wild success of a little unknown hero named Blade. After that franchise took off, they greenlit X-Men.

Oh yes, one of my favorite comic book movies to date.... But that was like 1997 I believe? It had a small budget ($45mil) and a good chunk of that went straight to salaries. And I think Blade actually fell to New Line Cinema, a studio known in the 90s for tackling niche. Blade proved that comic book characters can make profitable movies, not that you can do it with just anyone; see Daredevil, Elektra, Ghost Rider, three Fantastic Four movies (while the first two werent flops, they didnt perform as desired), three Punisher movies... I could go on. But thats not what we're talking about. I'm not saying Dazzler couldn't work in a movie. No. I'm saying I seriously doubt they'd use her as focus to sail the X-Men into a hypothetical joined MCU.

Except X-Men was in development BEFORE Blade, it just took longer to film.

Also, I'm sure Blade's success had far more to do with the late-90s "Vampires Are Cool!!!" craze that was really kickstarted in pop culture by Interview with the Vampire. In fact probably 90% of the audience didn't even realize it WAS based on a comic book going in.

Yes agreed. Blade was comic based. But thats about it. It wasnt much of a comic book movie as 90% of the characters were exclusive to that movie. Up until that point, Blade was barely used in the Marvel universe. He was just their most viable vampire character and could be played by one of the times most profitable black action stars. It was right person, right time. Wesley wanted that movie more than anyone and had enough clout to push it through. Had he not got in trouble we would have saw a Black Panther movie starring him YEARS ago.

[Immortal Weapon]

Sure, but I still want Singer, Vaughn and Miller involved in the X-Men and F4. I don't want Feige softening the X-films, and it's okay if the X-films don't feel like the other MCU movies. I want Vaughn to give Doom the Magneto treatment the MCU never would.

Why are you insistent for anyone that worked with Fox handle F4? That's the one franchise that needs the Marvel movie formula to even get a general audience to care.

[ChildOfTheAtom]

This thread is pretty irrelevant the next FoX sequel's been confirmed

[Immortal Weapon]

This thread is pretty irrelevant the next FoX sequel's been confirmed

The thread presents a hypothetical situation. We also know know Fox got an iron grip on the X-Men. That's not the point.

[donpricetag]

The thread presents a hypothetical situation. We also know know Fox got an iron grip on the X-Men. That's not the point.

"Iron grip" hardly describes lol. "Adamantium Rigamortis Clench" may be better suited.

[gurkle]

I would say, do it in very broad strokes. Introduce the name "mutant" to replace "enhanced individuals" and reveal that a lot of the "enhanced individuals" we've seen are basically mutants. (Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, for example, could easily be mutants whose natural powers were unlocked by the magic stone.) Have Charles Xavier show up and start his school to protect/train some of these young people with powers, given that the Avengers are terrible at it.

The MCU as it's developed is a relatively hostile place for superpowered people, so it would make sense for the X-Men to operate as a quasi-secret organization for a while. Xavier's approach to superpeople could be set up as an explicit contrast to people like Tony Stark, who go around press-ganging super-teens into combat.

You could even have the students defy Xavier and fight bad guys more than he wants them to, make him more of a protective figure (while still morally ambiguous) to contrast with the way the Avengers use people as cannon fodder.