Fox and Marvel work out deal on new X-Men based tv show

[dragonmp93]

I don't see how Thor was wasted considering how he got three whole movies all to himself. Also, the original Ant-Man and Wasp were as unwasted as they were going to be considering the premise of the movie they were in. It's not like Cyclops who was nothing but a foil for Logan in X1, disappeared for most of X2 and was a crybaby who got killed off in X3 or Jubilee who existed just to go on a trip to the mall with three main characters and then get knocked out.

You know that Scott Lang and Hope Pym are not the original Ant man and the Wasp, right ?.

[Divine Spark]

You know that Scott Lang and Hope Pym are not the original Ant man and the Wasp, right ?.

They weren't in that movie either.

[dragonmp93]

They weren't in that movie either.

Well, i think that it's possible to miss that.

[Project Initiative Cascada]

Boo! Was looking forward to Hellfire since it had a very interesting premise. They should've scrapped Legion instead. I was hoping they would make up for the dreadfulness that was the Hellfire Club in First Class.

They should scrap this current idea and replace it with an X-Factor Investigation series! People just love these murder mystery shows and with a mutant twist it would be revolutionary! Just have Lorna Dane as the lead character and have Lucas Till return as Havok! (Who cares about respecting the continuity of Apocalypse? It was a flop either way!)

[teapartyofthedead]

What? You realize Pietro's an *******, right? He's one in 616, he was one in 1610, he was one in Evolution and he was one in WaTXM.

I think they mean in regards to 'Peter', and his more bubbly and open manner, in contrast to Pietro's usual icy haughtiness and rage issues. However, he does remind me of QS's incarnation in the 'What if? Quick and the Dead' comic, also known as the 'what if Anya had lived' storyline. There, Pietro was raised with his entire family in a safe if isolated home, and loving family (except for the bit at the end) So instead of being angry and distrustful of everything, he's the apple of his father's eye, adventurous and care-free, with a personality to match.

Since in the X-movies QS has a stable home, has a loving if frustrated mom and little sister, of course he isn't going to be as prickly or aloof as he is in the comics, where he faces fear and violence for being Romani and a mutant. And in the MCU, where he does lose his family to war, he is angry and confrontational. He reflects his home environment, and it makes sense for those respective movies.

[AdamFTF]

You know that Scott Lang and Hope Pym are not the original Ant man and the Wasp, right ?.

I know who Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne are, thank you very much. The truth is, they were always going to have reduced roles in the Ant-Man movie. Why? Because it was always going to be about Scott Lang. Why is that? Because the plan from day one was to make it a heist film and Scott Lang was a thief. All that considered, they gave Michael Douglas as Hank Pym as good a role as they could making him the mentor figure. From what I hear in early drafts of the film there was going to be no mention of The Wasp at all, but they changed that to use her as a noble sacrifice and motivation for Hank Pym's actions. Maybe not the best use of a popular character but pretty good considering the marching orders were "Heist film starring the second Ant-Man". But at least I knew why they were in this movie.

The difference with the characters in the X-Men films is that when they're "wasted" it's usually a case of including them when there is no point or purpose to their inclusion.

Let's use Jubilee in X-Men Apocalypse as an example. I love Jubilee. I've loved the character since the '90s. But why was she even in this movie? Jubilee's purpose in the movie was apparently to go to the mall with Cyclops, Marvel Girl and Nightcrawler. Her being at the mall was apparently her "big scene". But apparently her "big scene" was so extraneous that they could easily cut it for time without effecting the plot much. So, unless there is something really amazing in that deleted scene (which I doubt), the whole point of sending Cyclops, Marvel Girl and Nightcrawler to the mall was to get them out of the school when it blew up. So, why did they need Jubilee there at all? Jubilee wasn't the one who suggested they go to the mall (which, you have to admit, is kind of weird). She was knocked out by Stryker's men when she got back. Cyclops, Marvel Girl and Nightcrawler could have just gone to the mall by themselves and then come back without having an extra character in tow. There was no point for her to be in the movie except to make ex-90s kids go "Gasp! It's Jubilee!". If she were part of the final team that fought Apocalypse, it might have been different.

[AbnormallyNormal]

Boo! Was looking forward to Hellfire since it had a very interesting premise. They should've scrapped Legion instead. I was hoping they would make up for the dreadfulness that was the Hellfire Club in First Class.

They should scrap this current idea and replace it with an X-Factor Investigation series! People just love these murder mystery shows and with a mutant twist it would be revolutionary! Just have Lorna Dane as the lead character and have Lucas Till return as Havok! (Who cares about respecting the continuity of Apocalypse? It was a flop either way!)

What was the interesting premise of Hellfire?

And why say to scrap Legion?

Apocalypse was not a flop people need to stop saying that

Respect continuity IS important

We know absolutely nothing about this upcoming tv show right now. All we can do is hope it relates to comic material and is not too just randomly invented on the fly.

[Franchise408]

I know who Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne are, thank you very much. The truth is, they were always going to have reduced roles in the Ant-Man movie. Why? Because it was always going to be about Scott Lang. Why is that? Because the plan from day one was to make it a heist film and Scott Lang was a thief. All that considered, they gave Michael Douglas as Hank Pym as good a role as they could making him the mentor figure. From what I hear in early drafts of the film there was going to be no mention of The Wasp at all, but they changed that to use her as a noble sacrifice and motivation for Hank Pym's actions. Maybe not the best use of a popular character but pretty good considering the marching orders were "Heist film starring the second Ant-Man". But at least I knew why they were in this movie.

The difference with the characters in the X-Men films is that when they're "wasted" it's usually a case of including them when there is no point or purpose to their inclusion.

Let's use Jubilee in X-Men Apocalypse as an example. I love Jubilee. I've loved the character since the '90s. But why was she even in this movie? Jubilee's purpose in the movie was apparently to go to the mall with Cyclops, Marvel Girl and Nightcrawler. Her being at the mall was apparently her "big scene". But apparently her "big scene" was so extraneous that they could easily cut it for time without effecting the plot much. So, unless there is something really amazing in that deleted scene (which I doubt), the whole point of sending Cyclops, Marvel Girl and Nightcrawler to the mall was to get them out of the school when it blew up. So, why did they need Jubilee there at all? Jubilee wasn't the one who suggested they go to the mall (which, you have to admit, is kind of weird). She was knocked out by Stryker's men when she got back. Cyclops, Marvel Girl and Nightcrawler could have just gone to the mall by themselves and then come back without having an extra character in tow. There was no point for her to be in the movie except to make ex-90s kids go "Gasp! It's Jubilee!". If she were part of the final team that fought Apocalypse, it might have been different.

Because having those background characters be recognizable mutants we know is far better than just having random unidentified mutants or mutants made specifically for the movie.

Jubilee, Kitty Pryde's original cameos, Colossus' original cameo, Bishop, Blink, Sunspot, Pyro's original cameo, Syren, etc. all > Jones.

This expectation that every character be given equal characterization and development is madness. That doesn't even happen in the comics over decades. There are main players, supporting players, and superfluous characters.

I'm struggling to think of even 1 character that's been wasted in these movies.

Cyclops had a good role in X-Men, a source material accurate role in X2, was horribly mistreated in X-Men 3, but redeemed in X-Men Origins, Days Of Future Past, and especially so in X-Men: Apocalypse

Rogue was misused in X-Men 3 in conclusion of her arc only. Everything else about the character leading up to that is a very source material accurate depiction. It just didn't use a particular version of the character.

Angel had a symbolic role in X-Men 3. He was underused, but not wasted.

Bishop, Blink, Sunspot, Warpath, Jubiler, are all filler characters that were never intended to be significant.

Maybe Colossus? But even he got more milage from Deadpool, even if they did turn him into something barely recognizable outside of his accent.

[Divine Spark]

I know who Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne are, thank you very much. The truth is, they were always going to have reduced roles in the Ant-Man movie. Why? Because it was always going to be about Scott Lang. Why is that? Because the plan from day one was to make it a heist film and Scott Lang was a thief. All that considered, they gave Michael Douglas as Hank Pym as good a role as they could making him the mentor figure. From what I hear in early drafts of the film there was going to be no mention of The Wasp at all, but they changed that to use her as a noble sacrifice and motivation for Hank Pym's actions. Maybe not the best use of a popular character but pretty good considering the marching orders were "Heist film starring the second Ant-Man". But at least I knew why they were in this movie.

I think he is saying the didn't have make Hank so old that couldn't be an Avenger.

[Kurt LeBeau]

I guess that you dont think that Thor, the Original Ant Man and the Wasp were wasted either.

the big difference is that Thor, Antman and Wasp are alive and with future appearances and development. We cant say the same about Emma Frost, Banshee and Angel (any movie version).

[MarvelMaster616]

The more I think about this show, the more it reminds me of how Jubilee came into the picture during the beginning of the X-men Animated Series. She was sort of the eyes through which the audience entered the world of the X-men. This show, based on the early synopsis, seems to want to follow a similar path and I'm all for that. If they do go this path though, I don't think they should use Jubilee since that's been done before and she already has a role in the movies. But I think other characters would be perfect for this sort of thing.

The one character I'd love to see take on this role is Blink. She really shined in her parts in Days of Future Past. I think she has a bit of a fanbase to work with and I think this could definitely raise her profile, as the cartoon did for Jubilee.

If not Blink, then maybe Marrow could be that character. She's someone else who kind of slipped through the cracks and hasn't been a main player in X-men for quite a while. But if Fox can make Negasonic Teenage Warhead popular again, why not Marrow?

I think for this show to really work with the themes, the character should be young and should have powers that are difficult to hide to some degree. While I don't think the show has the budget to focus on a character that requires Mystique-level makeup, they shouldn't have a character that looks distinctly human. That wouldn't effectively convey the themes of the X-men. Blink and Marrow both have powers that affect their appearance, but not to the degree of someone like Mystique. Agents of SHIELD and Supergirl have both used characters that require a little makeup and CGI to a degree that works. I think any X-men TV show should make a similar effort.

[DurararaFTW]

I know who Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne are, thank you very much. The truth is, they were always going to have reduced roles in the Ant-Man movie. Why? Because it was always going to be about Scott Lang. Why is that? Because the plan from day one was to make it a heist film and Scott Lang was a thief. All that considered, they gave Michael Douglas as Hank Pym as good a role as they could making him the mentor figure. From what I hear in early drafts of the film there was going to be no mention of The Wasp at all, but they changed that to use her as a noble sacrifice and motivation for Hank Pym's actions. Maybe not the best use of a popular character but pretty good considering the marching orders were "Heist film starring the second Ant-Man". But at least I knew why they were in this movie.

Nobody obligated Marvel to make a heist movie. They could have made some other movie about Hank Pym and Janet van Dyne. They felt a heist movie was a better change of pace, which is completely understandable but ultimately involved having the Avengers franchise wasting Janet and Hank. No one's perfect. Saying no one ever feels wasted is not true.

The difference with the characters in the X-Men films is that when they're "wasted" it's usually a case of including them when there is no point or purpose to their inclusion.

Let's use Jubilee in X-Men Apocalypse as an example. I love Jubilee. I've loved the character since the '90s. But why was she even in this movie? Jubilee's purpose in the movie was apparently to go to the mall with Cyclops, Marvel Girl and Nightcrawler. Her being at the mall was apparently her "big scene". But apparently her "big scene" was so extraneous that they could easily cut it for time without effecting the plot much. So, unless there is something really amazing in that deleted scene (which I doubt), the whole point of sending Cyclops, Marvel Girl and Nightcrawler to the mall was to get them out of the school when it blew up. So, why did they need Jubilee there at all? Jubilee wasn't the one who suggested they go to the mall (which, you have to admit, is kind of weird). She was knocked out by Stryker's men when she got back. Cyclops, Marvel Girl and Nightcrawler could have just gone to the mall by themselves and then come back without having an extra character in tow. There was no point for her to be in the movie except to make ex-90s kids go "Gasp! It's Jubilee!". If she were part of the final team that fought Apocalypse, it might have been different.

Cyclops' interactions with Jubilee in Apocalypse infused him with more personality then his past 5 movie appearances put together. And X-Men is a team, not a collection of solo heroes that lend themselves too solo movies. Yeah, they're gonna be lot of them in any single movie but not all of them are gonna be focused on as much as Wolverine, that's always gonna be the case.

[Franchise408]

The more I think about this show, the more it reminds me of how Jubilee came into the picture during the beginning of the X-men Animated Series. She was sort of the eyes through which the audience entered the world of the X-men. This show, based on the early synopsis, seems to want to follow a similar path and I'm all for that. If they do go this path though, I don't think they should use Jubilee since that's been done before and she already has a role in the movies. But I think other characters would be perfect for this sort of thing.

The one character I'd love to see take on this role is Blink. She really shined in her parts in Days of Future Past. I think she has a bit of a fanbase to work with and I think this could definitely raise her profile, as the cartoon did for Jubilee.

If not Blink, then maybe Marrow could be that character. She's someone else who kind of slipped through the cracks and hasn't been a main player in X-men for quite a while. But if Fox can make Negasonic Teenage Warhead popular again, why not Marrow?

I think for this show to really work with the themes, the character should be young and should have powers that are difficult to hide to some degree. While I don't think the show has the budget to focus on a character that requires Mystique-level makeup, they shouldn't have a character that looks distinctly human. That wouldn't effectively convey the themes of the X-men. Blink and Marrow both have powers that affect their appearance, but not to the degree of someone like Mystique. Agents of SHIELD and Supergirl have both used characters that require a little makeup and CGI to a degree that works. I think any X-men TV show should make a similar effort.

Call it my personal bias towards Gambit, but your Marrow idea I think could really work towards connecting the film and TV universes, while being a separate part of the universe.

Have Gambit appear in the 80's and 90's in the movies, do a Mutant Massacre backstory where he saves Marrow from doom in the Morlocks tunnels and then connect that to Marrow being the POV character after she's grown up.

Even if the show comes out first, they can still go back and have Gambit save her in the movies.

I actually kinda like that dynamic. But then again it also has implications on Gambit being a semi significant player in the movie / TV verse, which as a Gambit fan is a major plus for me.

[jawbreaker]

The one character I'd love to see take on this role is Blink. She really shined in her parts in Days of Future Past. I think she has a bit of a fanbase to work with and I think this could definitely raise her profile, as the cartoon did for Jubilee.

I love the Blink idea! maybe she could work to make this like a Gen X series. The mutants working "underground" could be Emma & Sean who arent in the movies anymore. The Massachusetts school could be the hidden "underground" headquarters where they teach kids to use their powers secretly. Add Penance, Chamber, Monet and the other Gen x kids and bring in poor Jubilee from the movies & finally give her some spotlight!

of course it wont happen, right? it will be some generic tv mutants crap...

[AdamFTF]

Because having those background characters be recognizable mutants we know is far better than just having random unidentified mutants or mutants made specifically for the movie.

Jubilee, Kitty Pryde's original cameos, Colossus' original cameo, Bishop, Blink, Sunspot, Pyro's original cameo, Syren, etc. all > Jones.

This expectation that every character be given equal characterization and development is madness. That doesn't even happen in the comics over decades. There are main players, supporting players, and superfluous characters.

I'm struggling to think of even 1 character that's been wasted in these movies.

Cyclops had a good role in X-Men, a source material accurate role in X2, was horribly mistreated in X-Men 3, but redeemed in X-Men Origins, Days Of Future Past, and especially so in X-Men: Apocalypse

Rogue was misused in X-Men 3 in conclusion of her arc only. Everything else about the character leading up to that is a very source material accurate depiction. It just didn't use a particular version of the character.

Angel had a symbolic role in X-Men 3. He was underused, but not wasted.

Bishop, Blink, Sunspot, Warpath, Jubiler, are all filler characters that were never intended to be significant.

Maybe Colossus? But even he got more milage from Deadpool, even if they did turn him into something barely recognizable outside of his accent.

Actually, I personally would rather they were just random unidentified mutants. It would be more economical storywise to just let the extras be extras rather than making them cameos. I don't particularly care for the idea of "filler characters" and it's one of the reasons I never cared for Xavier's School being a fully operating school full of 100-something students. I feel more teased by the cameos than anything.