mormont Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 13 minutes ago, red snow said: He's a guy whose power is a set of claws and healing factor Interestingly, both the healing factor and the claws being integral to his body (as opposed to part of his costume) come after the character's introduction. At first he's just a short, scrappy guy. The reason Wolverine became a breakout is that he's a loner and an anti-hero, but paradoxically for those characteristics to work he needs to be part of a team. If you're on your own it's harder to push these characteristics because there's nobody to play them off. So Wolvie works best when there's a Cyclops, a Professor X, or even a Storm in charge of the team: someone he can rebel against (in the first two instances) or do the dirty work for (in the last). From that point of view, putting Charles in this movie is a smart move: so is introducing X-23, as it gives him a kid sidekick, something that's worked for him on many previous occasions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 1 minute ago, mormont said: Interestingly, both the healing factor and the claws being integral to his body (as opposed to part of his costume) come after the character's introduction. At first he's just a short, scrappy guy. The reason Wolverine became a breakout is that he's a loner and an anti-hero, but paradoxically for those characteristics to work he needs to be part of a team. If you're on your own it's harder to push these characteristics because there's nobody to play them off. So Wolvie works best when there's a Cyclops, a Professor X, or even a Storm in charge of the team: someone he can rebel against (in the first two instances) or do the dirty work for (in the last). From that point of view, putting Charles in this movie is a smart move: so is introducing X-23, as it gives him a kid sidekick, something that's worked for him on many previous occasions. That's a great point about how he needs the team dynamics to reflect his loner status. A bit like how Cyclops has to be the less fun leader character in order to have Wolverine bounce off him. The more I think about the all new x-men team the more obvious it seems why they became so popular. The creative team thought really carefully about how the characters played off one another. Your reasoning may also explain why it was maybe a good thing that Wolverine didn't turn up in a solo show/film prior to the X-men. I guess he could have a non-powered team but that may have lost some of the magic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetyrPunkinhead Posted November 1, 2016 Share Posted November 1, 2016 On 10/30/2016 at 4:33 AM, mormont said: Interestingly, both the healing factor and the claws being integral to his body (as opposed to part of his costume) come after the character's introduction. At first he's just a short, scrappy guy. The reason Wolverine became a breakout is that he's a loner and an anti-hero, but paradoxically for those characteristics to work he needs to be part of a team. If you're on your own it's harder to push these characteristics because there's nobody to play them off. So Wolvie works best when there's a Cyclops, a Professor X, or even a Storm in charge of the team: someone he can rebel against (in the first two instances) or do the dirty work for (in the last). From that point of view, putting Charles in this movie is a smart move: so is introducing X-23, as it gives him a kid sidekick, something that's worked for him on many previous occasions. In regards to the kid sidekick, I'm still a little sore I never got a true Jubilee/Logan team-up out of (almost) nine friggin' X-Men films. I know Kitty Pryde was his original teen sidekick, but I started reading the Wolverine comic when it was the Logan & Jubilee show. *sigh* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted November 1, 2016 Share Posted November 1, 2016 6 hours ago, PetyrPunkinhead said: In regards to the kid sidekick, I'm still a little sore I never got a true Jubilee/Logan team-up out of (almost) nine friggin' X-Men films. I know Kitty Pryde was his original teen sidekick, but I started reading the Wolverine comic when it was the Logan & Jubilee show. *sigh* we got a little bit of the logan and rogue as sidekick. Although I don't think that was a run in the comics she definitely fit into that slot at times - especially at the beginning where there was some mistrust of her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Apparently the rumor is that Fox is considering some form of reboot for the franchise, but would like to try and keep some of the actors. Quote Elsewhere, the reset button has been pressed. Sources say the flagship series will be reconfigured, with Simon Kinberg, overseer of the franchise as producer and writer, working on a new script. Singer, who directed four X-Men movies, will not be returning, according to insiders, but the script is being written with Lawrence, Fassbender and McAvoy optimistically in mind. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/foxs-x-men-issues-jennifer-lawrence-unsigned-deadpool-defections-gambit-hold-945505 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 32 minutes ago, RumHam said: Apparently the rumor is that Fox is considering some form of reboot for the franchise, but would like to try and keep some of the actors. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/foxs-x-men-issues-jennifer-lawrence-unsigned-deadpool-defections-gambit-hold-945505 Isn't that exactly what First Class was????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, Rhom said: Isn't that exactly what First Class was????? I guess it was only really obvious that it wasn't a reboot after the sequel (if we discount Jackman's brief appearance) so you're probably right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 14 minutes ago, red snow said: I guess it was only really obvious that it wasn't a reboot after the sequel (if we discount Jackman's brief appearance) so you're probably right there. Yes. I think they'd be better off not necessarily "rebooting" the franchise but moving in the direction of one of the many other X-men teams. Don't give us a third Cyclops/Jean Gray combo. Move us into X-Force or X-Factor or New Mutants, etc. You can keep McAvoy in that situation and just move on without a full reboot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myrddin Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Didn't the current comic continuity bring a version of the teenage of the original 5 teenage X-Men? I'm a huge fan of the comic (well, when I collected 80's-90's), but continuity on the page is really about as screwed up as on the screen. We just expect more from movies/tv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 26 minutes ago, Myrddin said: Didn't the current comic continuity bring a version of the teenage of the original 5 teenage X-Men? I'm a huge fan of the comic (well, when I collected 80's-90's), but continuity on the page is really about as screwed up as on the screen. We just expect more from movies/tv. In fairness to the comics they are 50 years old so if they want to keep all the characters at roughly the same age they have to mess with continuity. Usually they just have a sliding scale (Xavier went from Korean war to vietnam to Iraq etc as his wheelchair origin) and they age really slowly eg Peter Parker and the original X-men are in their early 30s at the latest. The original 5 X-men story is idiotic even by comic standards. The most glaring problem was they initially behaved like they were from the 60s which would mean present day Cyclops would be 76. As the story continued this problem was over-corrected in that the original X-men simply began behaving like modern teens. Bendis can do characterisation but clearly has issues putting a time-stamp on them. 1 hour ago, Rhom said: Yes. I think they'd be better off not necessarily "rebooting" the franchise but moving in the direction of one of the many other X-men teams. Don't give us a third Cyclops/Jean Gray combo. Move us into X-Force or X-Factor or New Mutants, etc. You can keep McAvoy in that situation and just move on without a full reboot. New Mutants is under production so will hopefully work. I heard "legion" would be set within the X-men universe so that makes a reboot seem less likely. Then again reboots can be nebulous terms - it might simply be they are returning to "present day" and keeping key actors (lack of ageing be damned). I'd be more than willing to give X-force and the PI version of X-factor a go as film franchises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted November 11, 2016 Share Posted November 11, 2016 3 hours ago, Myrddin said: Didn't the current comic continuity bring a version of the teenage of the original 5 teenage X-Men? Yes, beast brought them back from the past to try and convince Scott to stop being a dick. The ones I read were actually pretty rad. I think they're still bouncing around. I think they fudged the continuity by saying it's a semi-alternate reality. So they all had older and younger versions of the main 5 (excluding Angel, who was reborn with no memories after becoming Death again, and Jean who is dead at the moment.) 2 hours ago, red snow said: I heard "legion" would be set within the X-men universe so that makes a reboot seem less likely. I don't think legion will crossover at all, it's in the world but separated from it. I think soft reboot is the way they'll go. Surely they have the new guys from Apocalypse on multi film contracts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted November 11, 2016 Share Posted November 11, 2016 8 hours ago, The BlackBear said: Yes, beast brought them back from the past to try and convince Scott to stop being a dick. The ones I read were actually pretty rad. I think they're still bouncing around. I think they fudged the continuity by saying it's a semi-alternate reality. So they all had older and younger versions of the main 5 (excluding Angel, who was reborn with no memories after becoming Death again, and Jean who is dead at the moment.) I don't think legion will crossover at all, it's in the world but separated from it. I think soft reboot is the way they'll go. Surely they have the new guys from Apocalypse on multi film contracts? In some cases they had past, present and future versions of the characters running around eg Beast. I'm not expecting crossovers between film and TV but even if Legion is set within the film universe - I'd be hoping (for the sake of the show) the movies don't full on reboot. I think reboot is an overused term and tends to get mixed up with restart/relaunch. I think the next X-men film will be a bit of a shift in focus - ideally without Singer (and drop Kinberg from writing). Keep the young team and give them a chance to have an adventure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 Oldish (mid November) Legion news (apologies if this is somewhere else, I couldn't see anything for it.) http://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/legion/249797/legion-x-men-tv-series-trailer-release-date-casting-more It'll air in February. It isn't in the film continuity: Quote “It’s not in the continuity of those films in the sense that the current X-Men films take place in a universe where everybody on planet earth is aware of the existence of mutants. Legion takes place in a parallel universe if you will where the government is aware mutants exist but the public is not. I wouldn’t see characters moving back and forth because they really are parallel universes.” New footage: Non Yanks like me may need to find shady ways around FX's blocking them outside of the states. I'm really looking forward to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 There are 7 new videos but I'm having trouble linking them directly so here's the playlist: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Richard E Grant image as Rice, (presumably Zander) one of those responsible for creating X-23. http://screenrant.com/wolverine-3-logan-richard-e-grant-zander-rice/ And as posted in the Trailer thread Legion Trailer #2 New Mutants to start shooting in April http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/x-men/45812/new-x-men-film-new-mutants-set-to-start-shooting-april Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martini Sigil Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 I really hope that the R rating doesn't hurt the box office, if for no other reason than for Hugh Jackman.... he's done such a good job with his character that I'd hate for him to go out with a whimper.... .... and on the same note, I also hope that they don't waste the R rating by censoring the violence.... Deadpool needed the R rating for his jokes alone... Wolverine needs it for blood.... I hope they don't wimp-out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted December 13, 2016 Author Share Posted December 13, 2016 Hugh Jackman Took Less Salary To Get R Rating... http://www.avclub.com/article/hugh-jackman-slashed-his-pay-get-r-rating-logan-247289?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 According to stats brain website Jackman was paid $20 million for each of his solo movies. That's 15-20% of the production budget, If he really wanted to take a major pay cut he'd have to have knocked it down to <$5 million IMO, since dropping to $10 million would not substantially reduce the budget to the extent that the movie would drop significantly in financial risk. The last two Wolverine movies had $120 and $150 million production budgets. But maybe they are looking to make Logan for <$100 million. If the production budget is north of $150 million then I don't know that any drop from $20 million would really make much of a difference. Also, I'm sure any cut to his up front pay will come with a cut of the back end, which might wind up with him getting as much as he would normally have earned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 20 million for a film? Fucking Christ. Surely at some point you have to think 'that's enough money now.' How do you even spend 20 million? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 3 hours ago, The BlackBear said: 20 million for a film? Fucking Christ. Surely at some point you have to think 'that's enough money now.' How do you even spend 20 million? Hookers and smack don't come cheap man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.