MCU's X-MEN film (TBD) 3 3

[theCapraAegagrus]

2 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

You mean because I know how to determine facts and not get fixated on 'progressive' rallying against non-MCU actors?

His response is truly uncalled for.

[Bosco685]

 

[Bosco685]

 

[▫️]

[Hollywood1892]

Oh man they finally opened this back up after the kerfuffle?

Great now I can offer my opinion

There are plenty of movie titles that didn't directly relate to the film, this isn't the case

Mutants or X-Men I do not care, all I can hope for is the death of cyclops. I'm sorry just not my cup of tea.

I wonder what direction they will go in, maybe Captain Marvel is intertwined with them and turns into Binary (I simply bought I don't even remember the copy of mutants I mean X-Men where she turns into binary)

In all honesty they could do Apocalypse better, but I doubt that will happen, look what they did with Avengers, I mean Magneto is a massive villain so they can't lose with that 

Edited March 6, 2021 by Hollywood1892

[@therealsilvermane]

6 minutes ago, Hollywood1892 said:

I wonder what direction they will go in, maybe Captain Marvel is intertwined with them and turns into Binary (I simply bought I don't even remember the copy of mutants I mean X-Men where she turns into binary)

I've met Chris Claremont a couple times at different Cons and he always seemed eager to tell us stories about his past Marvel work, including one time when he explained at length his decision to change Carol Danvers' suit way back then, as he signed a couple of my Ms Marvels. If I met him again, I'd ask what was the purpose of depowering Carol Danvers and making her a longtime guest and ally of the X-Men? My guess is he wanted to still be Marvel's steward of the character(maybe didn't trust anyone else after Marvel decided to have her get raped) but couldn't have a powered up Carol Danvers running around in a book that features the life and troubles of Marvel's mutants.

[@therealsilvermane]

16 minutes ago, Hollywood1892 said:

maybe Captain Marvel is intertwined with them and turns into Binary (I simply bought I don't even remember the copy of mutants I mean X-Men where she turns into binary)

Oh, that's X-Men #164 where Carol turns into Binary. Captain Marvel already has the power of Binary, though, in the MCU. I remember that was one thing Mr. Claremont lamented was that Marvel Studios gave her the powers but didn't use the Binary name or the suit design.

[Hollywood1892]

2 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Oh, that's X-Men #164 where Carol turns into Binary. Captain Marvel already has the power of Binary, though, in the MCU. I remember that was one thing Mr. Claremont lamented was that Marvel Studios gave her the powers but didn't use the Binary name or the suit design.

I really should have got it signed

[Bosco685]

1 hour ago, Hollywood1892 said:

Oh man they finally opened this back up after the kerfuffle?

Great now I can over my opinion

There are plenty of movie titles that didn't directly relate to the film, this isn't the case

Mutants or X-Men I do not care, all I can hope for is the death of cyclops. I'm sorry just not my cup of tea.

I wonder what direction they will go in, maybe Captain Marvel is intertwined with them and turns into Binary (I simply bought I don't even remember the copy of mutants I mean X-Men where she turns into binary)

In all honesty they could do Apocalypse better, but I doubt that will happen, look what they did with Avengers, I mean Magneto is a massive villain so they can't lose with that 

Well, the 'X-Men' also comes down to setting familiar expectations. Long-time fans of either the comic books, animated shows and even films will look for some form of recognition to something they enjoyed. Even the original 1992-1997 X-Men TAS established comfort with the 1980s-1990s material involving more modern characters such as Cable, Bishop, Rogue, Apocalypse and much more. So fans will have expectations from the X-World things to come.

Now there will be some that have little familiarity. That's true. But there is quite the large fanbase that loves this part of the Marvel Universe. So knowing a Marvel Studios senior executive (Victoria Alonso) seemed to take offense to the term 'X-Men' without recognizing all this history was concerning how far these changes could go to appease gender-based sensitivity when the characters have had decades of equality baked into them.

[Hollywood1892]

5 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

Well, the 'X-Men' also comes down to setting familiar expectations. Long-time fans of either the comic books, animated shows and even films will look for some form of recognition to something they enjoyed. Even the original 1992-1997 X-Men TAS established comfort with the 1980s-1990s material involving more modern characters such as Cable, Bishop, Rogue, Apocalypse and much more. So fans will have expectations from the X-World things to come.

Now there will be some that have little familiarity. That's true. But there is quite the large fanbase that loves this part of the Marvel Universe. So knowing a Marvel Studios senior executive (Victoria Alonso) seemed to take offense to the term 'X-Men' without recognizing all this history was concerning how far these changes could go to appease gender-based sensitivity when the characters have had decades of equality baked into them.

That is a good point, I don't think the 'X' had anything to do with her offense, but to be fair biological differences don't appeal to me, I just want to be....entertained. Nobody seemed oftput by Samuel Jackson being Nick Fury, because he was entertaining as he always is...

[Bosco685]

[@therealsilvermane]

Why push X-Men anyway? Fox already gave us a handful of near perfect X-Men movies. There isn't a global clamoring for them. I say keep it about Avengers, Guardians, and introduce the Eternals and FF (all enhanced humans) and tell those stories for the next few Phases or until the end of the decade. Marvel Studios is going to need big hitters going in to the next decade so that's when they can introduce our merry mutant misfits when the X-Gene has awoken.

Then if they still don't want to use the X-Men title and hardcore older fans protest en masse against the Mutants title, Marvel can compromise and call the movie House of X, after the Hickman run. Maybe each subsequent movie in a X trilogy can be a different play on X (like Spiderman with Home), such as Power of X for the second film. It's a way to separate from the Foxverse and give the mutants a fresh take while keeping "X" prominent.

Either way, I think Disney/Marvel Studios is quite serious about not wanting to name a group of individuals "men" when girls compose half the team. Not a great way to get girls who could care less about the comics or a 90's cartoon to become fans of your movie.

Edited March 6, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[Hollywood1892]

3 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Why push X-Men anyway? Fox already gave us a handful of near perfect X-Men movies. There isn't a global clamoring for them. I say keep it about Avengers, Guardians, and introduce the FF (all enhanced humans) and tell those stories for the next few Phases or until the end of the decade. Marvel Studios is going to need big hitters going in to the next decade so that's when they can introduce our merry mutant misfits when the X-Gene has awoken.

Then if they still don't want to use the X-Men title and hardcore older fans protest en masse against the Mutants title, Marvel can compromise and call the movie House of X, after the Hickman run. Maybe each subsequent movie in a X trilogy can be a different play on X (like Spiderman with Home), such as Power of X for the second film. It's a way to separate from the Foxverse and give the mutants a fresh take while keeping "X" prominent.

Either way, I think Disney/Marvel Studios is quite serious about not wanting to name a group of individuals "men" when girls compose half the team. Not a great way to get girls who could care less about the comics to become fans of your movie.

Well ain't that a good idea. Tbh I hope they introduce Galactus in the next phase of FF. If they delay on X-Men then X-Men 1 will be so out of reach for probably 80% of people who actually know anything about the X-People

[Bosco685]

4 hours ago, @therealsilvermane said:

There isn't a global clamoring for them.

Unfortunately, that ignores all the questions Feige receives about 'When are we getting the X-Men'.

So where you are fixated on the current MCU portfolio, many others want the grand Marvel Universe. Remember, that was one of the many benefits with Disney spending $71.3B to purchase Fox.

[bentbryan]

3 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Unfortunately, that ignores all the questions Feige receives about 'When are we getting the X-Men'.

So where you are fixated on the current MCU portfolio, many others want the grand Marvel Universe. Remember, that was one of the many benefits with Disney spending $71.3B to purchase Fox.

Nobody was clamoring for Guardians of the Galaxy either. If memory serves me correct there was a bit of skepticism during production because absolutely no one outside of comic fandom even heard of them. Now it’s regarded as one of the best MCU films thus far. 
 

 

 

[@therealsilvermane]

2 hours ago, bentbryan said:

Nobody was clamoring for Guardians of the Galaxy either. If memory serves me correct there was a bit of skepticism during production because absolutely no one outside of comic fandom even heard of them. Now it’s regarded as one of the best MCU films thus far. 
 

 

 

It is a little different with X-Men as they have 20 years of successful cinema history still somewhat fresh in the public's mind. And with the Guardians, there was a reason to bring them in as they fit into the story of Thanos. If mutants fit the current story direction, by all means bring them in. But if they don't, why try to force them into a Celestials or Korvac storyline? I thought that was Feige's plan anyway, to bring the mutants in further down the road. This Mutants story might be just that, a story.

[Bird]

On 3/4/2021 at 7:18 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

so they don't really need to have a formal name if Marvel doesn't want to use the X-Men name.

New Mutants called them the X-Men. 

Yeah...I know and I'm sorry. 

[bpc3qh]

My prediction is we will get movies about a team of mutants, featuring some combo of the 1960s, 1970s, and 1990s characters. I suspect Xavier, Wolverine, Cyclops, Jean Gray, Colossus, Pryde, and some of the 1990s characters I'm less familiar with (Rogue? Bishop?); maybe Storm tying into Wakanda? I do think Magneto is a guarantee; he's too well known to be ignored. I also think this'll take 2-3 movies, total, including maybe a solo feature or two weaving everything together.

[Bird]

I want Maggot, Blink, Chamber, Doop, etc. Imagine how crazy we would go if they went like that...Longshot and Dazzler the most known? No OGs, no Claremont staples?

And it better be called X-Men. I agree on that for sure.

I read, maybe on CBR, about Feige loving Hickman and the possibility that they could go Xavier/Magneto as friends and teammates who work together rather than adversaries.

[godzilla43]

Kevin Feige just called me and told me about why the tittle is Mutants and not the X-men. The movie is about Magic and Colossus fighting Belasco and S'ym and also Storm and Gambit fighting the Shadow King.
After the big fight in the end Magic, Colossus, Storm and Gambit meet Magneto who leads the X-men (Dazzler,Rogue,Wolverine,Psylocke,Nightcrawler) and they join the X-men.
Next film is X-men Children of the Atom where the X-men go in to space to fight in Skrull-Kree war with FF, Avengers and Captain Marvel there will be also the Brood as enemies.