Batman-Online.com

Trailer #1 for Fox's last big hurrah with the X-Men.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYjBVUwUbs8

I think I see what people mean when they say this looks so similar to X-Men- Last Stand. There does seem to be a lot of commonality there.

Then again, both of them are stories about Jean losing control of the Phoenix force. So there really are only so many ways to tell that particular story. Considering the personnel overlap between X-Men Last Stand and Dark Phoenix movies, similarities are inevitable.

Looks interesting. This was one of the few superhero movie franchises I gave a crap about anymore so seeing the last movie in the run is a priority.

Trailer #2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-q8C_c-nlM

Quote from: The Joker on Thu, 28 Feb  2019, 06:17

Trailer #2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-q8C_c-nlM

I'll be the only person here to say this, but this is my most anticipated superhero film of the year. Everything I've seen from it looks awesome imo.

Quote from: The Joker on Thu, 28 Feb  2019, 06:17

Trailer #2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-q8C_c-nlM

I didn't like the last X-Men movie that much so I wasn't too hyped about a sequel, but this looks pretty good. I'm interested.

There was a point about this time last year where I was convinced this movie might not come out. The acquisition didn't do much to change my mind.

And yet, here we are. This thing has been so committee-banged that it'll be a minor miracle if it's watchable at all. But the trailer looks pretty good, gotta admit.

Has anyone here seen this ?

Yup.

Much like "The Last Stand", Dark Phoenix isn't a faithful adaptation to the source material (ideally it would take more than one movie), but I found the movie to be alright. There's a dour tone to the film that some people may or may not like, something to which I don't believe was the case with "The Last Stand", but I think it worked with the story we're given.

Dark Phoenix isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but not nearly as bad as some are making it out to be. Given that I really liked some of the Fox X-men movies from the past 20 years with this franchise, seeing the finale wasn't something I was going to avoid.

I'll try watching the movie this weekend. No promises. But I'm going on with low expectations, though with an agenda to actually like the movie since none of the First Class-related movies have been an out-and-out letdown for me.

I'm not interested in seeing Dark Phoenix, but the media is reporting the film had undergone reshoots because it was too similar to certain MCU movies, and like JL, it was originally supposed to be a two-part saga.

And like JL, fans are petitioning for the true version of the movie:

https://www.change.org/p/20th-century-fox-release-the-original-version-of-dark-phoenix-resurrectphoenix?recruiter=942746599&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=tap_basic_share

Alas, it appears we have another Snyder cut situation. Oh joy!

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Thu, 13 Jun  2019, 22:15
I'm not interested in seeing Dark Phoenix, but the media is reporting the film had undergone reshoots because it was too similar to certain MCU movies

Hmm. They must have cut back on constant comedy and one-liners. As the film itself is fairly serious and dour for the most part. Not something you typically see when going into a kid friendly MCU movie. I am actually thankful for the reshoots if that changed the overall tone, rather than something that just fades into the usual Disney product.

QuoteAnd like JL, fans are petitioning for the true version of the movie:

https://www.change.org/p/20th-century-fox-release-the-original-version-of-dark-phoenix-resurrectphoenix?recruiter=942746599&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=tap_basic_share

Alas, it appears we have another Snyder cut situation. Oh joy!

So is the true version the one that's alot like the MCU? If so, that sounds about as fascinating of a cut as a PG-13 cut of Deadpool 2.

From what I've heard, the tone itself isn't the issue. The reshoots were apparently done so the movie didn't compete with other action sequences the MCU had to offer this year.

That's weird. So basically the allusion is, "We need to tamper down the action sequences, and reshoot them, juusst in case people think Fox's action scenes are superior to Disney's MCU!"

To me that's just a complete waste of time, effort, and money. But hey, it's Disney. What do they care? But let's be honest here, after the Captain Marvel debacle, I think it's fair to assume RT, and the critics have the MCU's back on everything. The war was over. The sale was going thru, and Disney was always the front runner spot for purchasing Fox and it's franchises. Dark Phoenix could have been a 5 star epic conclusion of a film (which it's not), had outstanding action sequences, and there would be some who would nitpick the film simply for the fact that Dark Phoenix had the audacity of not being a Marvel Studios produced movie.

Kinda makes me think of the CEO of WWE, Vince Mcmahon, and his line of thinking over the years.

Happy to lose millions, just to prove a point!  ::)

Saw Dark Phoenix with the wife earlier. What's the problem with it exactly? I enjoyed it. Not as witty as the previous films, that's true, but still pretty enjoyable in its own right.

I got a lot more satisfaction from Dark Phoenix than I ever did with X3.

Maybe I'll feel different after subjecting DP to some analysis but as things stand, I enjoyed the film.

The experience of seeing the film is a different matter because of the $h!++y theater but whatevs, you can't have everything, I guess.

Quote from: The Joker on Fri, 14 Jun  2019, 03:21
But let's be honest here, after the Captain Marvel debacle, I think it's fair to assume RT, and the critics have the MCU's back on everything.

Yes. If this little excerpt from what this critic said is anything to go by then your claim is definitely not as far-fetched, as a skeptic would like to believe.

https://twitter.com/Dataracer117/status/1103524417190092800

By the time of writing, this thread has gained over 18,000 views despite nobody is actually discussing the movie. At this rate, it will probably get more views than most Batman-related topics on this forum. It's very odd, but allow me to increase its popularity further by sharing this ***SPOILER HEAVY*** list of changes affected by the reshoots.

https://screenrant.com/xmen-dark-phoenix-movie-comic-changes/

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Sat, 22 Jun  2019, 08:20

Quote from: The Joker on Fri, 14 Jun  2019, 03:21
But let's be honest here, after the Captain Marvel debacle, I think it's fair to assume RT, and the critics have the MCU's back on everything.

Yes. If this little excerpt from what this critic said is anything to go by then your claim is definitely not as far-fetched, as a skeptic would like to believe.

https://twitter.com/Dataracer117/status/1103524417190092800

By the time of writing, this thread has gained over 18,000 views despite nobody is actually discussing the movie. At this rate, it will probably get more views than most Batman-related topics on this forum. It's very odd, but allow me to increase its popularity further by sharing this ***SPOILER HEAVY*** list of changes affected by the reshoots.

https://screenrant.com/xmen-dark-phoenix-movie-comic-changes/

That link seems to mostly discuss differences between Dark Phoenix and The Phoenix Saga.

The same website has an article about changes stemming from the reshoots at https://screenrant.com/dark-phoenix-movie-reshoot-changes-explained-fox-xmen

My mistake, I linked the wrong article!

(https://media.giphy.com/media/bPRuutBS8vmJW/giphy.gif)

I saw it too and I enjoyed it. Like The Joker said, a faithful adaptation of this saga would have to take more than one movie, but all things considered, this wasn't bad at all.

There are parts I liked and others that I didn't like about the Fox X-Men movies, but in the end I think the good parts stand out more. I look back at most of them with fondness.

And I don't see what was so terrible about Dark Phoenix either. Maybe it was "bad" for some just because it was not an MCU film...  ::)

So what's up with this thread? Every time I've checked the site over the past couple of weeks, this discussion has been getting dozens – in some cases hundreds – of views at any one time. It's got fewer than 20 posts altogether but presently has over 55,000 views!

Rewatching this movie now.

In fact, I've been on an X-Men movie kick for a few days. Maybe I'm wrong. But I think history will look back very favorably at the Fox X-Men franchise from 2000-2019. Maybe not every single movie is an instant classic. But I predict that the franchise in general will age well.

(I'm not just saying all this because I expect for the MCU X-Men stuff to be a dumpster fire... but let's not ignore that possibility either)

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sun, 13 Jun  2021, 06:10
Rewatching this movie now.

In fact, I've been on an X-Men movie kick for a few days. Maybe I'm wrong. But I think history will look back very favorably at the Fox X-Men franchise from 2000-2019. Maybe not every single movie is an instant classic. But I predict that the franchise in general will age well.

(I'm not just saying all this because I expect for the MCU X-Men stuff to be a dumpster fire... but let's not ignore that possibility either)

I still maintain that Days of Future Past is the best comic book superhero film since The Dark Knight. I think it's a brilliant film and probably my third favorite comic book film overall.

MCU hasn't reached the lows of the X-Men franchise, but I don't think it has reached its highs either.

Also one more thing,  I think Apocalypse is very underrated. A step down from DOFP for sure but I really enjoy that movie. In a lot of ways I see that as the true ending to the Fox X-Men franchise rather than Dark Phoenix.

Quote from: BatmanFurst on Sun, 13 Jun  2021, 06:47

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sun, 13 Jun  2021, 06:10
Rewatching this movie now.

In fact, I've been on an X-Men movie kick for a few days. Maybe I'm wrong. But I think history will look back very favorably at the Fox X-Men franchise from 2000-2019. Maybe not every single movie is an instant classic. But I predict that the franchise in general will age well.

(I'm not just saying all this because I expect for the MCU X-Men stuff to be a dumpster fire... but let's not ignore that possibility either)

I still maintain that Days of Future Past is the best comic book superhero film since The Dark Knight. I think it's a brilliant film and probably my third favorite comic book film overall.

MCU hasn't reached the lows of the X-Men franchise, but I don't think it has reached its highs either.

Also one more thing,  I think Apocalypse is very underrated. A step down from DOFP for sure but I really enjoy that movie. In a lot of ways I see that as the true ending to theFox X-Men franchise rather than Dark Phoenix.

There's some consensus on that. But First Class, DOFP and Apocalypse are their own trilogy. DP was meant to be the start of a new trilogy where the FC trio (except maybe Magneto) got phased out and the kids from Apocalypse took centerstage. If at least one more movie could've been made under the old regime, I think DP would come to hold a different position. As it stands now, DP is kind of an oddity that doesn't have very much context.

But yes, Apocalypse is underrated. I think it would get more love if DOFP wasn't as beloved as it was.

DP really got screwed by the Disney/Fox merger. From what I've seen in other forums it sounds like there's a better cut of DP out there, but idk that anybody outside of a minority (including myself) would care to see it.

Out of all the X-Men films, post-X-Men: First Class, I feel as if Dark Phoenix is decidedly the lesser film in the series. Noticeably so from the heights of X-Men: Days of Future Past, and X-Men: Apocalypse to some extent.

One thing I wish would have been seen in Dark Phoenix, though it really wouldn't have made the film any better to be perfectly honest here, is having Magneto finally having a head of white/grey hair by this point. I remember Fassbender himself stating in a interview promoting Dark Phoenix that he actually brought this up prior to filming, but for whatever reason, the studio didn't want to pull the trigger on it. So, Magneto basically looks about the same as he did in the prior two films he appeared in, despite decades having past.

Oh well, Fox's X-Men timeline was never known for it's great attention to continuity/details anyways (the whole Magneto, Quicksilver father/son subplot never being fully resolved being another example). For better or worse.

As far as what's in store for us on the MCU front? Hoo boy! This should be fun. Especially so when you have someone like Victoria Alonso giving an interview in 2019, and coming across as actually triggered by the interviewer inquiring about the MCU X-Men plans, with her responding with something about the X-Men name being "outdated" in her estimation since there are so many women members.....

That's some, well, quirky thinking to say the least. I'll give her that.

I wanted to chime in because I'm a long-time fan of the X-Films and have a lot to say!

X-Men was a film that was received a bit lukewarmly at the time by die-hard comic book fans because it represented a bit of what we'll call the old ways of superhero genre filmmaking. It desired to translate the spirit of the work but was not interested in a literal translation, which still irks that sublet of fans to this day. Honestly, all of the Singer-directed films go for that and it is actually why his movies end up being the standouts if you ask me. Understanding the material goes further than someone making superficially perfect translations. It was also a big transition point, where the old ways met the new. Now, we have a more chapter-based continuing serial. X-Men is in many ways understated as  'blockbusters' go in that it refuses to show its full hand at the outset and chooses to keep you moving to the next stop while it allows the quality of the actors and the direction to get you back.

X2: X-Men United is why X-Men 1 is remembered so fondly, the first film becomes the first act, doing the heavy lifting so that the real meat of their story can pay off.  In hindsight, this is a difficult balancing act between two films, as it was being proven by other franchises that never were as they opted to put one too many eggs in the 'we'll do more in the sequel' basket. Smart, simple, and clever, this damn thing hits all the right notes and I can hardly sing its praises loudly enough.

X-Men The Last Stand is a cheap knockoff. This is painfully obvious from the word go. The style is amped up and the set pieces are impressive, but it's all anticlimatic in the face of a truncated and disingenuous story that is only trying to utilize it enough to milk it for the explosions. If this had been the first entry it might have worked as an acceptable studio-driven money machine, but the knowledge of its predecessors makes that impossible.

X-Men Origins Wolverine is the bottom of the barrel. It makes The Last Stand look like a gold nugget. A movie that was almost certainly made entirely by a studio checklist, this thing stumbles around and can't even manage to be the piece of spoiled candy that X3 was. It seeks to accomplish nothing and achieves the same. It's difficult for me to discern what they were thinking with this one. At least it provided a guidebook for the future.

X-Men: First Class is very much a 'we have to retain the rights' kind of movie, but it was a pretty gutsy movie bringing Singer back, which is ultimately why the movie is saved from being another dumpster fire. Mathew Vaughn directed this one, but it is still very much a Singer joint, something the film sells to you from the very first frame when we return to the origins of Magneto. Noticeable is the return to tight storytelling that relies on character and the quality, not quantity of the spectacle. Once again, the movie is presented as a first act, that seeks to pay off next time and boy howdy does it.

The Wolverine is a flawed movie, interestingly enough, because it ends up relying on cliche comic book tropes. After spending the better part of its time being a (very) thoughtful action thriller, it degenerates because it decides to backload the movie will all of the comic book gimmicks, and they no longer fit. The fanservice provided by Silver Samurai ends up being a tedious boss battle in a movie that probably would have been bettered served without that kind of confrontation.

X-Men: Days of Future Past is one hell of a beast. It's the delicious rarity of having one's cake and eating it too. You get a big fat blockbuster, the whole purpose of which is to generate more films and it accomplishes this feat by being a huge, emotionally driven critique of the peaks and valleys of the franchise itself! Extra bragging points get awarded because, in the midst of the time period where Marvel was ripping up the box office and everyone else was looking like pretenders, it is the X-Men, the reason for the boom period that the MCU enjoys, who return to remind who it was that made it possible. Oh! And it does it TWICE! The Rogue Cut ends up being even better! Holy crap! Avengers Endgame wishes it were a tenth of what DOFP is. A tenth! I can't say enough.

X-Men Apocalypse is underrated. It has the issue of being a movie trying to be bigger than DOFP. Full stop, that's what hurt it. This was a moment to get small again, but instead, the studio clearly wanted to get even bigger and finally start to replicate the success of Marvel by trying to do their schtick. In other words, I think it was the inclusion of Apocalypse himself that caused the issue. Too much, too soon. You just had the kitchen sink...

and yet Singer IMO makes it work. I think on paper it is kind of a so-so outing, but the high execution level is ridiculous. This one is the dark horse (no pun intended) of the franchise and will have its day sooner or later.

More soon....

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57X-Men was a film that was received a bit lukewarmly at the time by die-hard comic book fans because it represented a bit of what we'll call the old ways of superhero genre filmmaking.

Pretty much. The consensus at the time sounded a lot like "I like it... but..."

It was ambitious for its time. But as you say, comic movies were done a certain way back then. This first movie rly had to tone down some of the goofier stuff from the comics. It works in the aggregate. But my criticism was (and still is) that it looks like a rly ambitious TV show rather than a feature film. Plus, Magneto's Wicked Evil Super Sinister Plot is kind of incomprehensible. And lame.

I'm no fan of Raimi's first Spider-Man movie. But I do place Raimi's movie well ahead of Singer's first X-Men movie. But the first one isn't horrible, I'll say that.

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57X2: X-Men United is why X-Men 1 is remembered so fondly, the first film becomes the first act, doing the heavy lifting so that the real meat of their story can pay off.

People tend to forget that the first X-Men movie didn't set anybody's expectations ablaze. The summer of 2003 had several sequels.

It was considered a bizarre irony at the time that X2 was the only sequel from the summer of 2003 that didn't let everybody down. And I think that's a big reason why it's so fondly remembered today. Yes, it's a good movie. But fundamentally, nobody was expecting too much from it. They were essentially gearing up for more of the first movie. What they got, of course, was X freaking 2.

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57X-Men The Last Stand is a cheap knockoff. This is painfully obvious from the word go. The style is amped up and the set pieces are impressive, but it's all anticlimatic in the face of a truncated and disingenuous story that is only trying to utilize it enough to milk it for the explosions.

I'll cut this one some slack. No, it's not very good. But it went from, like, a six page outline to the big screen in twelve months. I'm not saying that to argue the film's merits. I'm saying that only to suggest that we got off relatively light.

As an attempt to do justice to the Phoenix storyline, X3 is a letdown. There's just no other way of looking at it. But considering the odds the movie was facing, again, could've been worse.

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57X-Men Origins Wolverine

Moving right along...

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57X-Men: First Class

I can't be sure if I love the fact that the movie is set in the Sixties or if I just have a lot of fond memories of the weekend it came out. Either way, this is an X-Men movie for which I have a lot of affection.

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57The Wolverine is a flawed movie

I see it as a lot of fun. Logan stealing a joke straight from James Bond was a bit distracting for me. But it's not like one stolen joke ruined it for me or anything.

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57X-Men: Days of Future Past is one hell of a beast. It's the delicious rarity of having one's cake and eating it too. You get a big fat blockbuster, the whole purpose of which is to generate more films and it accomplishes this feat by being a huge, emotionally driven critique of the peaks and valleys of the franchise itself! Extra bragging points get awarded because, in the midst of the time period where Marvel was ripping up the box office and everyone else was looking like pretenders, it is the X-Men, the reason for the boom period that the MCU enjoys, who return to remind who it was that made it possible. Oh! And it does it TWICE! The Rogue Cut ends up being even better! Holy crap! Avengers Endgame wishes it were a tenth of what DOFP is. A tenth! I can't say enough.

Weird that people don't talk up the Rogue Cut more. Originally, I held off buying it because everyone said it's almost the exact same movie, just with a bit more Rogue. That's not rly true. There's some additional drama and peril to it. I rather enjoy both versions.

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57X-Men Apocalypse is underrated. It has the issue of being a movie trying to be bigger than DOFP. Full stop, that's what hurt it. This was a moment to get small again, but instead, the studio clearly wanted to get even bigger and finally start to replicate the success of Marvel by trying to do their schtick. In other words, I think it was the inclusion of Apocalypse himself that caused the issue. Too much, too soon. You just had the kitchen sink...

This is the movie where the decade-by-decade thing starts working against the series. Peter decides to do something about this whole Magneto thing the very same day that Havok dies and everything starts going to hell? He couldn't have made his movie eleven years earlier? It's not a deal-breaker. But the timing just seems a little too convenient.

The movie's good. Definitely better than the first X-Men movie, X3 and Wolverine: Origins. It's just nowhere near X2 or DOFP levels.

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57More soon....

Can't wait.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 18:10

Quote from: Gotham Knight on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 14:57X-Men: Days of Future Past is one hell of a beast. It's the delicious rarity of having one's cake and eating it too. You get a big fat blockbuster, the whole purpose of which is to generate more films and it accomplishes this feat by being a huge, emotionally driven critique of the peaks and valleys of the franchise itself! Extra bragging points get awarded because, in the midst of the time period where Marvel was ripping up the box office and everyone else was looking like pretenders, it is the X-Men, the reason for the boom period that the MCU enjoys, who return to remind who it was that made it possible. Oh! And it does it TWICE! The Rogue Cut ends up being even better! Holy crap! Avengers Endgame wishes it were a tenth of what DOFP is. A tenth! I can't say enough.

Weird that people don't talk up the Rogue Cut more. Originally, I held off buying it because everyone said it's almost the exact same movie, just with a bit more Rogue. That's not rly true. There's some additional drama and peril to it. I rather enjoy both versions.

Both are great, but I knew the Rogue Cut was going to be better less than ten minutes in. It is well known that the X-Men meet Bishop's team scene (exposition time travel intro) was something that went through a great deal of editing and reshuffling, owing to scripting flaws and the pressure to make this heavy exposition scene go faster. In both cuts, you still have an obviously constructed bit featuring Xavier's VO over a montage that is trying to streamline the hell out of everything.

In the end that's the only issue with the TC that I have. That bit all happens way too fast for my liking. The RC takes no more than a couple of minutes to fix it. The X-Men unveil the time travel plan and get instant blow-back. Then they have to make the case. It's just a tiny bit and yet they use it for everything that it is worth. Bishop and his guys aren't big characters in this, but instantly we care. We know WHO we're fighting for, not just what! And the X-Leaders are so in character.

"You're asking us to fight for a future we may not even be apart of!"

"Yes."-Magneto.

Chills every time.

I could go on all day about the RC. It's like the X-Men movies were the trendsetters all over again.

One area in the new films (First Class-Apocalypse) never got its due imo is the Jennifer Lawrence Mystique. That's a character that I've constantly heard people put down time and time again. Personally, I think this is a prime example of people letting their fixation with comic book accuracy get in the way of taking things into a new and interesting direction. From First Class-Apocalypse I think that version of Mystique is one of the best female characters that I've ever seen in a superhero comic book film. In each individual film her motivations are sound and she's given a compelling arc, then at the end of the trilogy you're given an arc that spans across all three films. Her starting out as a conflicted character torn between the ideologies of Xavier and Magneto but slowly inching back to Charles side eventually culminating in her coming back to the mansion to train the new class of X-Men is a great story for the version of the character.

I don't mean to bash the MCU too much, but comparatively speaking they have yet to come up with a female character that's on that level. A lot of comic book films think that a strong female character is simply a woman that can kick ass, but I appreciated that the Lawrence version of Mystique went well beyond that. It's a shame that the character development hasn't been given its due.

Quote from: BatmanFurst on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 21:30
One area in the new films (First Class-Apocalypse) never got its due imo is the Jennifer Lawrence Mystique. That's a character that I've constantly heard people put down time and time again. Personally, I think this is a prime example of people letting their fixation with comic book accuracy get in the way of taking things into a new and interesting direction. From First Class-Apocalypse I think that version of Mystique is one of the best female characters that I've ever seen in a superhero comic book film. In each individual film her motivations are sound and she's given a compelling arc, then at the end of the trilogy you're given an arc that spans across all three films. Her starting out as a conflicted character torn between the ideologies of Xavier and Magneto but slowly inching back to Charles side eventually culminating in her coming back to the mansion to train the new class of X-Men is a great story for the version of the character.

I don't mean to bash the MCU too much, but comparatively speaking they have yet to come up with a female character that's on that level. A lot of comic book films think that a strong female character is simply a woman that can kick ass, but I appreciated that the Lawrence version of Mystique went well beyond that. It's a shame that the character development hasn't been given its due.

I agree with you. But sometimes I wonder if that was the original plan. Canonically, Mystique is supposed to be broadly aligned with Magneto. (Nb4 switching loyalties, yes, that happened; I'm talking about canon rather than individual storylines)

So, I think FC was meant to wrap with Mystique being a sympathetic antagonist in future films. DOFP certainly hints that near the end. But, unexpected by all parties involved, Jennifer Lawrence became a star and I wouldn't be surprised if Lawrence's stardom didn't change the plan for Mystique. She might've insisted her character find some kind of redemption.

So, she goes from turning her back on the X-Men in FC to leading them in DP. And it feels like a natural arc for her character. Mixed up young girl, villain, rebel and, ultimately, leader.

These days, the MCU seems deeply reluctant to show a woman being wrong, admitting to her error, learning and then growing. With some exceptions, their female characters seem basically fully formed from the jump these days. There's nowhere for them to rly go.

But Raven is a pretty interesting character because she screws up and then she fixes things.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 15 Jun  2021, 22:38

I agree with you. But sometimes I wonder if that was the original plan. Canonically, Mystique is supposed to be broadly aligned with Magneto. (Nb4 switching loyalties, yes, that happened; I'm talking about canon rather than individual storylines)

So, I think FC was meant to wrap with Mystique being a sympathetic antagonist in future films. DOFP certainly hints that near the end. But, unexpected by all parties involved, Jennifer Lawrence became a star and I wouldn't be surprised if Lawrence's stardom didn't change the plan for Mystique. She might've insisted her character find some kind of redemption.

So, she goes from turning her back on the X-Men in FC to leading them in DP. And it feels like a natural arc for her character. Mixed up young girl, villain, rebel and, ultimately, leader.

These days, the MCU seems deeply reluctant to show a woman being wrong, admitting to her error, learning and then growing. With some exceptions, their female characters seem basically fully formed from the jump these days. There's nowhere for them to rly go.

But Raven is a pretty interesting character because she screws up and then she fixes things.

It wasn't the original plan. I saw an interview with Matthew Vaughn talking about where he wanted his trilogy to go. The last film in that trilogy would've been Days of Future Past. When the studio heard his pitch for what Days of Future Past could be they hurried to make that the next film rather than wait for a film in between which ultimately led to Vaughn's departure from what I understand.

So the trajectory of Mystique's character is most likely influenced by Lawrence's rise to fame from 2011 onwards. I think First Class was able to sign her on before she became an Academy award nominated actress.

Quote from: BatmanFurst on Wed, 16 Jun  2021, 00:18
So the trajectory of Mystique's character is most likely influenced by Lawrence's rise to fame from 2011 onwards. I think First Class was able to sign her on before she became an Academy award nominated actress.

Makes sense, and was readily apparent following First Class. Lawrence's star was most definitely on the rise at this stage in her career, so why wouldn't Fox at least exploit that star power to their benefit? As a result, her role in future sequels was expanded upon to give her more screentime.

That's one thing that glaringly differentiates Rebecca Romijn's Mystique, with Jennifer Lawrence's Mystique. The former was a key player in the original trilogy, sure, but not necessarily one of the character's that was really zeroed in upon with any of those three films. Where the latter enjoyed a rather expanded upon character arc to where not only did her allegiance's change back and forth due to personal experiences and her own perception's changing, but also diving into a much more deeper relationship with Xavier AND Magneto (and you can add Beast in there as well). Having close ties to several characters, rather than the devoted loyalist to solely Magneto that was presented for the overwhelming majority of X1-X3.

But as what's been stated before in this thread, Jennifer became a star, and that's show business.

Dark Phoenix is bad. I really tried with this one, but the problem is Simon Kinberg. First and foremost, he is not a director. There is a strange emotional disconnect throughout the film that hovers over most of the actors (Fassbender excluded) that ranges from confusion to apathy. It affects how the movie flows because you don't get any real punctuation to pivot you to the next scene. It's a kind of strange monotony that can only be the fault of the one yelling action. 

The other issue with Kinberg is that he seemed to forget X-Men: Days of Future Past and what it set out to resolve. This is bizarre considering that he was the scribe on that movie. Though I think the explanation could be as simple as he was also the scribe of (and was defending the honor of) The Last Stand, which DOFP pointedly spends its runtime seeking to avert because it takes the issue of it being a crappy movie on as an in continuity issue. It's not a bad movie, it's a bad timeline, where our characters made bad decisions. It's just a twist of figuring out who it was exactly that messed up. You think it was Mystique, but actually it's Charles and suddenly you realize that the movie has set it's sights not just on helping Chuckles but also holding him accountable for the bull crap he pulled on Jean Grey that set X3 in motion. Brilliant! And you realize that this has been in play all along. Charles is a POS in First Class. He's a high falutin, pretentious know it all, whose actions actually cause some of the harm in that movie. Remember where he 'outs' closeted Henry McCoy? What an ass! He's way too forward with his interventions and doesn't leave enough to choice. DOFP says, alright, in order to save the future, Charles learns that lesson now in the 70s and done! It's resolved.

In that resolution lay Dark Phoenix's death knell. We have a situation where Kinberg has decided, in essence, to just do X3 again! So he remakes the movie and has this idea that Magneto and Charles switch places. On Magneto's end it sells pretty good and kinda props up some of the movie because Mags has been flowing in this direction naturally. Charles is just making all of the same mistakes again, it makes one wonder what the hell DOFP was all for. We did all that just to play out the same stupid story that didn't really work last time and while we're at it James McAvoy looks bored, tired, and seems most of the time to have lost contact with the character.

QuoteI think First Class was able to sign her on before she became an Academy award nominated actress.

Lawrence got cast because of her Oscar nomination for Winter's Bone. It's all part of the latest trend of comic book movies following the Superman casting model. That's the only reason we've seen the likes of Mickey Rourke and even Michael Keaton appear in them.

Is this becoming an all-purpose X-Men movie thread?

Watched The New Mutants the other night. I put off watching it because the reviews were such an acid bath. But I must say, I rly enjoyed it. I don't see what's supposed to be so terrible about it. People who know more about New Mutants comics than I do assure me that a lot of stuff was practically ripped out of the comics and used directly in the movie. No idea if that's true. All I know is I think the movie is incredibly underrated.

The New Mutants film is not X2, let's be clear on that. But it's also not even close to being Origins: Wolverine either.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Fri, 18 Jun  2021, 20:42
Is this becoming an all-purpose X-Men movie thread?

Works for me.

Just for fun.

FLASHBACK 1998. Wizard Magazine casts X-Men.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWhqN_CX0AMLDhd?format=jpg)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWhqN--WYAEHSKE?format=jpg)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWhqN_MXoAE6o_6?format=jpg)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWhqN_kXoAE30bH?format=jpg)

FLASHBACK 1997. Wizard casts "Generation X" movie

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fm4QnJ6aMAEq8cL?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fm4QoZIacAMQ-2G?format=jpg&name=large)

I remember a little bit of the tv movie "Generation X" that aired on FOX just a year (1996) prior to Wizard publishing this fan casting, but ultimately felt it was rather unremarkable. The Konami X-Men arcade made a brief appearance though, and that was the highlight for me.  :D

That's a pretty good cast when you think about it. By 1997, Wizard's fancasting wasn't for laughs anymore. A Generation X movie with that cast could've been pretty awesome. I watched a lot of Party Of Five back then and since Lacey Chabert and I are pretty close to the same age, obviously I had a major crush on her. So, she would've been a selling point for a Generation X movie all by herself for me.

Here's how I'd rank the X-Men films. Not counting Deadpool movies. Haven't seen The New Mutants and Logan yet.

1. X-Men: First Class
2. X-Men: The Last Stand
3. X2: X-Men United
4. X-Men: Days of Future Past
5. X-Men (2000)
6. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
7. Dark Phoenix
8. X-Men: Apocalypse
9. The Wolverine

Quote from: Edd Grayson on Sun, 19 Feb  2023, 03:22Haven't seen The New Mutants

It's worth it. Very different from the standard superhero film.

Quote from: Edd Grayson on Sun, 19 Feb  2023, 03:226. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
...
9. The Wolverine

I'm... not sure I understand this ranking.

The Wolverine was not a very good film to me at all.

Origins: Wolverine, while not great, was better.

Thanks for your recommendation. :)

Quote from: The Joker on Tue,  5 Jul  2022, 03:59

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Fri, 18 Jun  2021, 20:42
Is this becoming an all-purpose X-Men movie thread?

Works for me.

Just for fun.

FLASHBACK 1998. Wizard Magazine casts X-Men.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWhqN_CX0AMLDhd?format=jpg)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWhqN--WYAEHSKE?format=jpg)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWhqN_MXoAE6o_6?format=jpg)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWhqN_kXoAE30bH?format=jpg)

Here's my random post for the day.

I've been trying to cast a live action X-Men movie from the early to mid nineties. Some of the actors in the actual X-Men films – especially Patrick Stewart and Kelsey Grammer – were perfect in their respective roles, and it's hard to think of anyone better suited to them. But for the sake of this exercise, I'm not allowing myself to use any of the actors who appeared in those movies. This has to be a completely new cast. They have to have been the right age and at the right stage of their career to have done this circa 1990-1995. Budget is not an issue; we've got blackmail material on everyone in Hollywood, so we can get whoever we want dirt cheap.

The scenario is this: Batman 89 was a huge box office success, and Marvel wants to cash in on its popularity. A studio is willing to invest in a big budget X-Men picture. Who do you cast? Here are my ideas.



Academy Award-winner Kingsley is a superb actor and would have been a good physical match for the Xavier in the comics. To see how diverse his range is, check out his performances in Ghandi (1982), Schindler's List (1993) and Sexy Beast (2000). Stewart would have been the most logical choice given the popularity of Star Trek at that time, but Kingsley – who I believe is a better actor than Stewart – would have been a great alternative.



Granted, Jack would have been in his fifties at the time and wasn't in particularly good shape. But I'm thinking of his performance in Wolf (1994) and imagining him as an older more grizzled version of Logan. Jack had the acting ability, he had the star power, and he had the bad boy magnetism needed to convey Wolverine's feral charisma. At 5'9, he would have been closer to the comic book Logan's height than Jackman. Stick him in a muscle suit and have stunt doubles handle all the action, and I reckon Jack would've been good for at least one nineties X-Men film.

Still not convinced? Here are some rough AI-generated images of Jack as Wolverine.


I heard rumours he was being considered for the part back in the nineties, though there might not have been any truth to them. Any later than 1995 and he'd have been too old. But in the early nineties, coming off the recent success of Batman, I reckon he'd have made a solid Wolverine.



A good actress with the right look and physicality for the part. Russo was at the peak of her popularity in the nineties and appeared in several notable action thrillers during that period. She'd have made a good Jean Grey.



Because why not? He'd have looked good in the visor. Call me crazy, but I think Kilmer might also have been a good alternate pick for a nineties Batman if Keaton had passed on the role.



Never mind the fact Bassett is currently up for an Oscar for playing a Marvel character in Wakanda Forever. She's always been a talented and elegant actress, and she made a believable action hero in Kathryn Bigelow's Strange Days (1995). She'd have been my top pick for Storm.



This one's a no-brainer. The muscles from Brussels was a top A-list action star of the nineties. He had the looks, the swagger, the martial arts skills, and he could affect a Cajun accent. If you're having trouble visualising JCVD as Gambit, just check out his performance in the John Woo movie Hard Target (1993).




Coming hot off the success of Twin Peaks, the beautiful Amick would have made an appealing Rogue in the early-to-mid nineties.



Wait, don't close the tab! Just hear me out! I know what you're thinking. I'm thinking it too. But let's look at this in the context of the early nineties. Sure, he couldn't act, but that didn't stop Hollywood from trying to capitalise on his popularity by putting him in several movies. And he was popular, at least for a time. Having the real life Iceman play the comic book Iceman would have been pure stunt casting, but it would have opened up the door to a tie-in rap album.

"Yo! Have you ever seen a mutant get dooooown? Go X-Men, go X-Men, go!"


His chiselled looks, with the right ice makeup effects, would have matched Bobby's glacial features in the comics. Casting Vanilla Ice at any other time would have been a disaster. But in the early nineties? It could have worked, yo!

I sense none of you are convinced? Ok, let's move on.



I'd have had Jones supply Beast's voice while a stuntman portrayed the character physically. The Jim Henson Creature Shop could have provided the puppetry effects for his facial movements. I'm thinking of the live action Ninja Turtles, Tokka and Rahzar from Secret of the Ooze, and Prince Goro from Mortal Kombat. Imagine Beast brought to life using similar techniques.


But as far as his voice goes, there's no one better than Jones. I'd have had him use a Mid-Atlantic accent similar to Grammer's.



No explanation needed. If Magneto dies, he dies. Dolph must break him.



Fujitani starred in the Heisei Gamera movie trilogy and would have been in her late teens in the early nineties. She didn't actually start acting until 1995, and she's Japanese rather than Chinese, but I think she'd have been a good pick for Jubilee. The only problem is that her dad in real life is Steven Seagal, who wouldn't have been too happy about her working with Van Damme.


So that's my cast for the main X-Men. I haven't got around to casting the Brotherhood of Mutants yet. I might come back to that later. But to start with, how about:



Warner was around the same age as Kingsley, was Jewish, stood 6'2, had a square jaw and looked less frail than Ian McKellan. He would have been too young to have been a teen during the Holocaust, but then so was McKellan.

Jack Palance might have made a good alternative pick if an older actor was preferred. He won an Oscar in 1992 and also had the recent success of Batman to boost his popularity with comic book fans.

Anyway, that's all I've got for now.

Kingsley and Warner as Xavier and Metallo is inspired.

I do quibble over casting for Bishop. Wizard's choice of Morris Chestnut isn't all that impressive. Omar Epps was a fairly prominent AA actor back in the Nineties so he would've been my choice.

Quote from: Edd Grayson on Sun, 19 Feb  2023, 04:46
The Wolverine was not a very good film to me at all.

Origins: Wolverine, while not great, was better.

Thanks for your recommendation. :)

Yeah, The Wolverine was a disappointment. You're better off reading the 1982 Frank Miller four-issue run to experience a better Wolverine vs the Yakuza story, and the love triangle with Yukio and Mariko was fleshed out a lot more than the movie. Even the Wolverine anime is better.

The video game adaptation of X-Men Origins: Wolverine (Uncaged Edition) is a much better experience than the movie if you want to experience Wolverine unleashed. Jackman does his best acting here than he does in most of the movies, even recites classic lines e.g. "I'm the best there is at what I do, but I do isn't very nice", cut scenes set in the Day of Future Past era, and has more in common with the comic book lore. Such as Mystique helping Wolverine destroying the very first prototype, and Wolverine confronting Dr. Cornelius. It helps that you can change the character skins to his comic book costumes too.

While not much of this can translate into a movie, it's surprisingly a good game for a movie tie-in. You don't really see that often.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Mon,  6 Mar  2023, 01:59I do quibble over casting for Bishop. Wizard's choice of Morris Chestnut isn't all that impressive. Omar Epps was a fairly prominent AA actor back in the Nineties so he would've been my choice.

I hadn't thought about Bishop, but Epps would have been an interesting choice. I suppose we should also cast Angel, Banshee, Psylocke, Nightcrawler and Kitty Pryde while we're at it.

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Mon,  6 Mar  2023, 21:43Kitty Pryde

Assuming a mid/late Nineties X-Men film, Michelle Trachtenberg. No idea how that works with the official canon and the characters' ages. But I think there's a lot to be said for giving younger viewers some sort of gateway into the film. Set Kitty up as a supporting character who can take on more of a leading role in sequels (i.e., when child labor laws no longer apply).

Trachtenberg made her bones at Nickelodeon and it's not a stretch to think that at least some of her fans would've followed her over to X-Men.

I see that Victoria "I don't know why they're continued to be called the X-Men since women are on the team" Alonso is now gone from Disney's Marvel Studios.

Who knows if this makes any difference whatsoever when X-Men are eventually rebooted under Disney, but I can't construe this news as being a negative.

Quote from: The Joker on Tue, 21 Mar  2023, 13:21

I see that Victoria "I don't know why they're continued to be called the X-Men since women are on the team" Alonso is now gone from Disney's Marvel Studios.

Who knows if this makes any difference whatsoever when X-Men are eventually rebooted under Disney, but I can't construe this news as being a negative.

Midnight's Edge put up a video about it earlier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxR6CbbMa3Y

He, at least, is interpreting her ouster as the first step of a course correction for the MCU in light of Quantumania's underwhelming box office performance. Personally, I'm with you. I can't see her dismissal as a negative.

As to the X-Men name, illiterate people have a real problem with using "men" to refer to everyone. It's like they don't realize that "man" is a generic word while "woman" is the bio sex-specific word. Calling the team X-Men is linguistically accurate. In fact, I sort of regard objection to "man" and "men" as an indication of someone's intelligence. People throwing tantrums over that tells me not only that they're brats but they're also STUPID brats.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 21 Mar  2023, 14:43
Midnight's Edge put up a video about it earlier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxR6CbbMa3Y&ab_channel=Midnight%27sEdge

He, at least, is interpreting her ouster as the first time on a course correction for the MCU in light of Quantumania's underwhelming box office performance. Personally, I'm with you. I can't see her dismissal as a negative.

As to the X-Men name, illiterate people have a real problem with using "men" to refer to everyone. It's like they don't realize that "man" is a generic word while "woman" is the bio sex-specific word. Calling the team X-Men is linguistically accurate. In fact, I sort of regard objection to "man" and "men" as an indication of someone's intelligence. People throwing tantrums over that tells me not only that they're brats but they're also STUPID brats.

I couldn't agree more. An exemplification of unadulterated buffoonery.

I'm placing this here, since this is pretty much the X-Men movie thread, and I didn't think placing something associated with "Deadpool 3" truly belonged over in the LOGAN thread.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F0r3lMBXwAA2GZc?format=jpg&name=large)

If he wears the mask, this'll be damn near perfect.

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Mon, 10 Jul  2023, 17:40If he wears the mask, this'll be damn near perfect.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F0s5PksWIAAbcuM?format=jpg&name=large)

 :D

It is very Astonishing X-Men influenced from the mid 2000's comic run. Given the 4th wall breaking in Deadpool movies, it makes me wonder if the deleted suit scene from "The Wolverine" will be referenced? If even in a off-hand, flippant manner. 

It is sort of funny that almost exactly 23 years after the "yellow spandex" line... well, here we are.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 11 Jul  2023, 15:47It is sort of funny that almost exactly 23 years after the "yellow spandex" line... well, here we are.

X-Men First Class technically did it first and we did get that tease of the Wolverine costume in The Wolverine.

Comic accurate 5'3 Wolverine.

FLASHBACK 1998.

Wizard Magazine conducted a poll on America Online, on who fans would cast as Wolverine, as well as info on the pre-production at the time with Bryan Singer.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F4os2WiaQAQjB--?format=jpg&name=large)

FLASHBACK 1998!

"X-Men 101" courtesy of Wizard Magazine X-Men special.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBUgIqybwAAkj4m?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBUgIrFbEAAIUGf?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBUgIrZaIAANp1W?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBUgIrraIAA6aJm?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBU6Gb_awAEeGZ1?format=jpg&name=large)

Also, Wizard's rankings for the X-Men villains in 1998.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBaaXc9aEAENQK5?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBaaXdEbEAATyHo?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBaaXdVaEAEgowI?format=jpg&name=large)

Another FLASHBACK from 1998, featuring casting reports and speculation for the-then upcoming X-Men film that was two years away.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBwWyeHbgAA-2R5?format=jpg&name=large)

Well, one of those ended up being accurate.

Angela Bassett reportedly not returning Bryan Singer's calls is kinda amusing.

Michael Biehn as Cyclops would've been a very plausible casting choice back when James Cameron was looking into doing a X-Men movie during the early 1990's, but I'm not so sure how likely Biehn would've been by the late '90's, and with Singer on board as director by that stage.

Thomas Ian Griffith as Gambit is kinda intriguing to think about. Especially so during the early '90's with Cameron directing. Admittedly, Gambit wasn't one of those characters I spent a whole lot of time fantasy-casting and thinking what a X-Men movie would be like prior to it becoming a reality, but Griffith isn't a bad choice. Not sure how good of a southern cajun accent he could've muster, but I can't imagine it being any worse than whatever Channing Tatum had in mind.

Wizard Magazine's schematic breakdown of everyone's favorite mutant hunting robots, the Sentinels!

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBRLtyJaQAAGuVt?format=jpg&name=large)

FLASHBACK 1998:

Wizard Magazine takes a look back at the highly successful "X-Men #1" from 1991 with Chris Claremont and Jim Lee.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GFGnbLsbgAEOVYp?format=jpg&name=large)

FLASHBACK 1999:

Wizard Magazine article on what was being talked about thru the grapevine about the casting of the-then upcoming "X-Men" movie.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKF5-AEX0AIU1WT?format=jpg&name=large)

Great find. It's interesting to contrast Singer's apparent humility with the first X-Men as compared to almost critical mass ego he displayed in the run up to Days Of Future Past.

Then again, DOFP is a vastly superior film to the first X-Men. So, maybe Singer with an out of control ego makes for a great X-Men film?

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue,  9 Apr  2024, 02:48Great find. It's interesting to contrast Singer's apparent humility with the first X-Men as compared to almost critical mass ego he displayed in the run up to Days Of Future Past.

Then again, DOFP is a vastly superior film to the first X-Men. So, maybe Singer with an out of control ego makes for a great X-Men film?

True.

I don't even hate X3, but it really makes you wonder what X3 would've been like with Singer, had he chosen to stay on rather than hop over to Warners for "Superman Returns". I'm sure Fox would have acquiesced to Singer's ego and demands considering his success with X1/X2. He pretty much had all the cards in his favor at that point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3qMtxYs1eY

I can't imagine Channing Tatum trying to pull off a cajun accent, being anything but comedy gold, but a Gambit film was actually in the cards, so to speak, once upon a time.

Another Wizard Magazine X-Men fan casting that goes back to 1995 (probably 1994 given it was a Jan 1995 issue)!

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GM0r_TPXoAAsWAT?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GM0r_TQXwAA4YNe?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GM0r_TOWYAAjcyN?format=jpg&name=large)

Not going to lie, Wizard really makes me wish that Bryan Singer would have included Tia Carrere as Psylocke in either X1, or X2. Though, a mid-90's X-Men movie where Tia appears as Psylocke is just about as perfect casting as Patrick Stewart was with Professor X quite frankly.

The one casting that sticks out, is Clint Eastwood as Cable. Not bad, BTW. As I could envision Clint during the mid 1990's, being a great Cable, but I don't think he would have ever agreed to playing 2nd, or 3rd fiddle as a supporting player. Definitely not in that stage of his career. Unless the film would have been Cable-centric, and that would have felt very off for X-Men's first ever cinematic movie.

Admittedly, I like the idea of Rutger Hauer as Magneto. At the same time, given the restraints of a movie running time and having to introduce so many characters, in addition to plot, within a film that would have introduced the X-Men concept to the general audiences, Rutger as Magneto comes across as cinematic depiction that's going for something decidedly more in line with the Stan Lee/Jack Kirby original representation, than the Holocaust survivor Chris Claremont incorporated in the character's background/origin. 

If you read those 1960s/1970s X-Men comics prior to Chris Claremont, Magneto was basically a cipher. As nothing about his background, or ethnic heritage was ever revealed. Nor was there anything about his family. And absolutely no question of him being "noble" in any sort of way. Magneto, as originally depicted, was the complete opposite of Xavier. He was, in a nutshell, a complete and unabashed son of a b*tch that wanted to enslave humans (and probably mutants as well given his excessive fanatical personality). I've seen videos and such of people comparing Magneto to Malcolm X, and I just see that as being pure and simple revisionist history. Pick up a Marvel X-Men Essential/Epic/Masterworks trade of the Lee/Kirby era, or even the material following both their departures from the book prior to Claremont's X-Men era, and tell me with a straight face that's a apt comparison. Something tells me Malcolm X would have found that comparison unflattering to say the very least, and for good reason!

In short, concerning the Silver Age Magneto, and with both Stan Lee and Jack Kirby being Jewish, I believe both purposely infused their version of Magneto with the mental state and imagery that was clearly more aligned with nazi idealogy, and ultimately unmistakable shorthand for "This guy is the worst kind of bad."

I still remember when Grant Morrison was wrapping up his "New X-Men" run back in 2003 with "Planet X", Morrison had Magneto absolutely wrecking New York, effectively making him a mass-murderer (only a few years after 9/11, BTW), and the online reaction was something to the effect of, "Morrison is bringing back Magneto to his Silver Age roots!!!".

Admittedly, I didn't completely understand this at the time, given that I had only read very few Pre-Chris Claremont X-Men issues, but now having the Epic Collections of all that Silver/Bronze age material, I know exactly what they meant.

So yeah, Rutger Hauer playing the Lee/Kirby Magneto in the mid-90's?

I'm sure Rutger would have made that work.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GM1W6HXXAAEvWi4?format=jpg&name=900x900)

I have that issue on my bookcase. Even back then, I disagreed with casting Clancy Brown as Sabretooth. He would've been a great Magneto... if Rutger Hauer has other obligations going on. But Hauer is already accounted for, I love Brown but I don't see much else for him in an X-Men movie.

I thought Singer got it right by casting a wrestler in that role. At 6'9", ~270 lbs and built like a brick $#!+ house, it's hard to argue against Tyler Mane. But if not him, then some other super jacked wrestler should've gotten the gig.

Maybe it's because I grew up with the animated series, but I always preferred the more physically imposing depictions of Magneto over the frail old man we got in the movies. Hauer looked closer to how I envisage the character in live action. After watching Blind Fury (1989) earlier this year, I'd also keep him on the shortlist for a 1980s Matt Murdock.


But really he was a better physical match for Magneto than Daredevil. As discussed in other threads, he also would've been my top pick of Adrian Veidt in a 1980s Watchmen film.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Mon,  6 May  2024, 03:56I have that issue on my bookcase. Even back then, I disagreed with casting Clancy Brown as Sabretooth. He would've been a great Magneto... if Rutger Hauer has other obligations going on. But Hauer is already accounted for, I love Brown but I don't see much else for him in an X-Men movie.

Brown's performance as the Kurgan ranks as one of the most intimidating movie villains of the eighties. If you wanted a younger and more menacing version of Magneto, Brown's voice and height alone would've qualified him.

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Mon,  6 May  2024, 17:34Brown's performance as the Kurgan ranks as one of the most intimidating movie villains of the eighties. If you wanted a younger and more menacing version of Magneto, Brown's voice and height alone would've qualified him.

I didn't want something too long in my last post.

But since you mention it, one thing I did want to draw attention to is Magneto as envisioned by Lee/Kirby vs. Magneto as interpreted by Claremont.

Lee/Kirby pretty obviously intended Magneto to be Super-Nazi. He's the Superior Man out to bring the world to its knees because he believes his power gives him the right to do so. Considering Lee/Kirby were both Jewish, it makes a lot of sense that the Nazis loomed large in their imaginations. Reading those early Lee/Kirby X-Men issues, it's hard to escape the idea that Magneto is basically Super Hitler. The metaphor of Nazis is barely a metaphor in their approach to the character.

Claremont obviously wanted to go in a different direction. Magneto was as physically imposing as ever. But he had that sympathetic backstory of being a survivor. He knew only too well what mankind was capable of doing to each other and certainly to him. As you know, he sees his war against the human race as a preemptive strike in an inevitable war. His history creates an intriguing irony to the character that he wants to subjugate and ultimately exterminate his would-be exterminators. So, what is the moral difference between him and the people who have persecuted him?

We should also mention McKellan's performance. It's fine for the films that he appeared in. But you are correct when you say that McKellan's Magneto and comic book Magneto have very little in common aside from a name and a backstory. I have become concerned that McKellan's portrayal of the character will "haunt" future live action incarnations. Rather than being the physically imposing powerhouse that Magneto was intended to be (and was consistently drawn as for all or most of his publication history), future live action performances are very likely to somewhat emulate McKellan's casting.

Maybe that's inevitable if his World War II history remains an unbreakable aspect of Magneto's canon?

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue,  7 May  2024, 04:27I thought Singer got it right by casting a wrestler in that role. At 6'9", ~270 lbs and built like a brick $#!+ house, it's hard to argue against Tyler Mane. But if not him, then some other super jacked wrestler should've gotten the gig.

Kevin Nash has stated that he was, apparently, the first choice for Sabretooth, but declined when he found out that he would essentially be taking a substantial pay cut to participate in the film, for the months off needed from active wrestling.

Nash did briefly portray Super Shredder back in 1991, and later appeared as "The Russian" in the 2004 Thomas Jane Punisher movie.

QuoteBut since you mention it, one thing I did want to draw attention to is Magneto as envisioned by Lee/Kirby vs. Magneto as interpreted by Claremont.

Lee/Kirby pretty obviously intended Magneto to be Super-Nazi. He's the Superior Man out to bring the world to its knees because he believes his power gives him the right to do so. Considering Lee/Kirby were both Jewish, it makes a lot of sense that the Nazis loomed large in their imaginations. Reading those early Lee/Kirby X-Men issues, it's hard to escape the idea that Magneto is basically Super Hitler. The metaphor of Nazis is barely a metaphor in their approach to the character.

Right. Exactly. As much as some people want to memory hole this fact, Magneto, as originally intended by Lee/Kirby, was Super Hitler. People tend to forget the generation Stan and Jack came from, and the Nazis were the models for a whole lot of villains back in those days. His counterpart, Professor X, is the good guy in a wheelchair. Pretty clear what's going on there.

QuoteClaremont obviously wanted to go in a different direction. Magneto was as physically imposing as ever. But he had that sympathetic backstory of being a survivor. He knew only too well what mankind was capable of doing to each other and certainly to him. As you know, he sees his war against the human race as a preemptive strike in an inevitable war. His history creates an intriguing irony to the character that he wants to subjugate and ultimately exterminate his would-be exterminators. So, what is the moral difference between him and the people who have persecuted him?

Yes, indeed. Magneto starting out as a ruthless killer, to something of a "freedom fighter", has been baked into the cake for nearly 50 years now. As such, Mags worldview is a testament to the ultimate "tragic irony" of the character.

QuoteWe should also mention McKellan's performance. It's fine for the films that he appeared in. But you are correct when you say that McKellan's Magneto and comic book Magneto have very little in common aside from a name and a backstory. I have become concerned that McKellan's portrayal of the character will "haunt" future live action incarnations. Rather than being the physically imposing powerhouse that Magneto was intended to be (and was consistently drawn as for all or most of his publication history), future live action performances are very likely to somewhat emulate McKellan's casting.

Maybe that's inevitable if his World War II history remains an unbreakable aspect of Magneto's canon?

Only way around a senior citizen Magneto for the movies, that I can think of, is that supposedly mags is a geneticist to some extent in the comics. If you have Magneto state in the film that he was successful in slowing down the natural ageing process, this could be used to illustrate, in his mind, more credence that mutants are just that much better than neanderthal humans. Another possibility, is that he sorta feeds off Earth's magnetic field, which in turn slows down his ageing. Because ... well ... comics.

Personally, I'd rather Magneto remain as holocaust survivor, since, again, it's been baked in the cake for quite awhile now. From what I gather from the comics, and have read online, Claremont was originally intending to have Magneto's background be that of a gypsy, but the Fantastic Four people vetoed the idea because it was just too similar to Doctor Doom's background. Thus, the holocaust survivor origin was born. Which pretty much quickly changed his demeanor from "killer" to "sympathetic shades of grey mutant freedom fighter", and essentially ignored the previous more villainous maniacal portrayal from the Lee/Kirby and even Neal Adams days.