MCU X-Men - Part 3

[DACrowe]

P.S. I'm kind of amused so many made a fuss about casting Cyclops, Storm and Jean so young in Apocalypse, but now a lot of suggestions around here are the same group.

With that said, I imagine Marvel will probably cast those characters in their prime and go with a second generation coming in. Pretty much like how Singer first introduced this world in the 2000s.

 

[CaptainWagner]

Shia's personal....... issues would probably have Marvel cautious about him. Sure, RDJ had a lot of problems, but he had placed some space between him and his infamous past. Shia is still kind of all over the place.

One guy I've seen mentioned who DEFINITELY won't get touched with a ten-foot-pole is Emile Hirsch. If Gunn's 8 year old tweets were too much for Disney, Hirsch's assault (And pathetic sentence) from only three years ago is going to keep him far, FAR away from any movies like this.

 

[Marvel united]

P.S. I'm kind of amused so many made a fuss about casting Cyclops, Storm and Jean so young in Apocalypse, but now a lot of suggestions around here are the same group.

With that said, I imagine Marvel will probably cast those characters in their prime and go with a second generation coming in. Pretty much like how Singer first introduced this world in the 2000s.

Well it's a well-known fact that no hero in the MCU starts off in their "prime" in their first movie. Everybody starts off in their origin story in the MCU, so why wouldn't the same apply to the X-Men? Why would they skip decades worth of material for the main team and go straight into Legacy teams about a new group of kids taking over.

There is no precedent in the story telling structure for the MCU and like you said, it would be a repeat of Singer's films.

 

[Havok83]

Well it's a well-known fact that no hero in the MCU starts off in their "prime" in their first movie. Everybody starts off in their origin story in the MCU, so why wouldn't the same apply to the X-Men? Why would they skip decades worth of material for the main team and go straight into Legacy teams about a new group of kids taking over.

There is no precedent in the story telling structure for the MCU and like you said, it would be a repeat of Singer's films.

that wasnt the case for Black Widow, Hawkeye, Thor and Black Panther. Arguably Gamora, Drax, Starlord, Groot and Rocket.

 

[Marvel united]

that wasnt the case for Black Widow, Hawkeye, Thor and Black Panther. Arguably Gamora, Drax, Starlord, Groot and Rocket.

What I meant was, no hero film in the MCU starts off with the characters years or in the case of jumping into a 30 year old X-Men team, decades worth of character development- straight into them fully formed and in their prime. No MAIN hero, at least.

I'm not talking about the individual Guardians, the team; the team came together in their FIRST movie. It was an origin story for the group itself. And all of the characters were who they were when they were first introduced in the comics anyway.

Black Panther was about T'Challa becoming his trademark "King of Wakanda" He went through the origin story of his father dying and being forced to step and be a king. He was not fully formed when we met him in Civil War

The only heroes who were "fully formed" that were not part of a team unit, were Widow and Hawkeye. Everybody else started off fresh. Even Pietro and Wanda started from the beginning and weren't in their prime. Vision was born in AOU.

So again, why wouldn't this apply to the X-Men? Why would they be the only franchise in the MCU to start with the team having already had a decade and half worth of development and been around since before Stark became Iron Man? Even Cap Marvel coming up is an ORIGIN story for her.

 

[Jh7058622]

You constantly use Spider-Man: Homecoming as your smoking gun with this needs to start young for character development yet they didn't even make an origin story for him so your point is moot. Why do they have to do an origin story of the X-Men as teenagers?

 

[Marvel united]

You constantly use Spider-Man: Homecoming as your smoking gun with this needs to start young for character development yet they didn't even make an origin story for him so your point is moot. Why do they have to do an origin story of the X-Men as teenagers?

Because what you want for the X-Men Is NOT the equivalent to what they did in Spider-Man: Homecoming. The equlivant to Homecoming would be starting the X-Men off as High-school students having only recently formed less than 8 months before we meet them in the movie. Not them as seasoned, grizzled team in their 30s. Homecoming is the antithesis of that suggestion; because Spider-Man was a rookie. He sucked at being a hero and Kevin Feige and Jon Watts made sure to highlight that this is the "beginning" for him.

Now I'm not saying I want the X-Men to start that young but it makes sense that they formed after Thanos attacked and not years before the first Iron Man film.

 

[Havok83]

What I meant was, no hero film in the MCU starts off with the characters years or in the case of jumping into a 30 year old X-Men team, decades worth of character development- straight into them fully formed and in their prime. No MAIN hero, at least.

I'm not talking about the individual Guardians, the team; the team came together in their FIRST movie. It was an origin story for the group itself. And all of the characters were who they were when they were first introduced in the comics anyway.

Black Panther was about T'Challa becoming his trademark "King of Wakanda" He went through the origin story of his father dying and being forced to step and be a king. He was not fully formed when we met him in Civil War

The only heroes who were "fully formed" that were not part of a team unit, were Widow and Hawkeye. Everybody else started off fresh. Even Pietro and Wanda started from the beginning and weren't in their prime. Vision was born in AOU.

So again, why wouldn't this apply to the X-Men? Why would they be the only franchise in the MCU to start with the team having already had a decade and half worth of development and been around since before Stark became Iron Man? Even Cap Marvel coming up is an ORIGIN story for her.

Why are you asssuming they are a 30 year team? No one is expecting the characters to be in their mid 40s, pushing 50. You always go to the most extreme. The other poster was suggesting that they've been experienced for several years by the time we've seen them and thats been the case for all the characters listed. NOT every character starts off square one just learning about their powers and/or training to be a fighter/hero. We've come into the middle of development for several major characters.

So you discredit the Guardians bc they don’t support your point? They are a team unit and probably more relevant than the other examples. You can still tell the origin of a team with experienced characters. Not every film follows the same formula

BP was already a trained and experienced fighter in CW. The only thing that movie did was usher the transition for him to become King and the official BP in his film

Spider-Man was also established by the time we saw him

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

I hope the X-MEN are early to mid 20's

 

[Marvel united]

Why are you asssuming they are a 30 year team? No one is expecting the characters to be in their mid 40s, pushing 50.

Most of the actors being suggested are that age and over.

You always go to the most extreme. The other poster was suggesting that they've been experienced for several years by the time we've seen them and thats been the case for all the characters listed.

As I've already explained with the Guardians, they were all still juvenile immature A-holes when we met them IN GOTG. It was an origin story for how these people came together and became the Guardians of the Galaxy. None of them were the finished article or in their prime, they had all not developed into what they became in the comics. T

NOT every character starts off square one just learning about their powers and/or training to be a fighter/hero. We've come into the middle of development for several major characters.

The overwhelming majority of heroes in the MCU DO start from the very beginning of their journeys. The ones who don't are like 2 or 3 heroes out of 10. Widow and Hawkeye are the only ones who were the finished article.

BP was already a trained and experienced fighter in CW. The only thing that movie did was usher the transition for him to become King and the official BP in his film

But he was still immature In a sense and he still hadn't had his father killed and he still wasn't the king of Wakanda. He wasn't even the "real" Black Panther yet. His movie was a pseudo origin story for him and he still falls Into category of heroes who did not start off in their prime within the MCU.

The X-Men would be the only franchise to have these start a decade into being a hero.

And with your suggestion of late 20s X-Men, that is still a decade and a quarter of development for the team itself off-screen and it is unprecedented in the MCU so far

 

[EnDz0n3]

P.S. I'm kind of amused so many made a fuss about casting Cyclops, Storm and Jean so young in Apocalypse, but now a lot of suggestions around here are the same group.

With that said, I imagine Marvel will probably cast those characters in their prime and go with a second generation coming in. Pretty much like how Singer first introduced this world in the 2000s.

I haven't been following who said they hated the kid X-men in Apocalypse and who are suggesting younger actors for the X-men in the MCU, but I'd hazard a guess that those two groups are not one and the same here.

Shia's personal....... issues would probably have Marvel cautious about him. Sure, RDJ had a lot of problems, but he had placed some space between him and his infamous past. Shia is still kind of all over the place.

Agreed. Shia is just too reckless a "talent" to ever be considered by Disney now. Besides why even risk hiring him when he's not that good an actor to begin with.

He's still also very much synonymous with the Crystal Skull role that most fanboys hated. Plus that annoying Transformers character lol

There is no precedent in the story telling structure for the MCU and like you said, it would be a repeat of Singer's films.

Well then, the kid X-men would be a repeat of the First Class films.

I'm not talking about the individual Guardians, the team; the team came together in their FIRST movie. It was an origin story for the group itself. And all of the characters were who they were when they were first introduced in the comics anyway.

So then the individual X-men characters can be older than your proposed teens/20 somethings but the movie could be their first coming-together as a team.

For every example of how you think Feige would handle the X-men entering the MCU, there's other examples that contradict them.

 

[Marvel united]

Well then, the kid X-men would be a repeat of the First Class films.

And Spider-Man being a High-school student was a repeat of the previous two franchises. Still doesn't change the fact that he was an adult in more films than he was a kid and the same applies to the X-Men. We had 2 films where the team was young and 4 films where the X-Men were seasoned and grizzled. 5 if you count Dark Phoenix which skipped a decade and now have a team of 25-28 year olds again.

So then the individual X-men characters can be older than your proposed teens/20 somethings but the movie could be their first coming-together as a team.

And then we open up another can of worms. So you have a group of late 20 and early 30 year olds coming together for the first time despite the fact that the X-gene is most prevalent and mainly manifests during Puberty and despite the fact that the X-Men were teenagers and early 20-somethings for years before being late 20s. This turns into a discussion of longevity and pointlessness of making the X-Men start so much older than they did when they were the "Children of the Atom" in the comics.

For every example of how you think Feige would handle the X-men entering the MCU, there's other examples that contradict them.

I have seen zero contradictions so far other than the argument that individual team characters didn't have origin stories which is irrelevant to the point I was making.

 

[CaptainWagner]

"Kid X-Men" certainly wouldn't be a repeat of First Class, where they were mostly in their twenties and the team was barely even relevant to the plot. It would be more similar to the characters introduced in Apocalypse, but that aspect was pretty miserably under-utilized. The only scene they shot of them "being kids" (the mall scene) was cut.

 

[Havok83]

Most of the actors being suggested are that age and over.
As I've already explained with the Guardians, they were all still juvenile immature A-holes when we met them IN GOTG. It was an origin story for how these people came together and became the Guardians of the Galaxy. None of them were the finished article or in their prime, they had all not developed into what they became in the comics. T
The overwhelming majority of heroes in the MCU DO start from the very beginning of their journeys. The ones who don't are like 2 or 3 heroes out of 10. Widow and Hawkeye are the only ones who were the finished article.


But he was still immature In a sense and he still hadn't had his father killed and he still wasn't the king of Wakanda. He wasn't even the "real" Black Panther yet. His movie was a pseudo origin story for him and he still falls Into category of heroes who did not start off in their prime within the MCU.

The X-Men would be the only franchise to have these start a decade into being a hero.

And with your suggestion of late 20s X-Men, that is still a decade and a quarter of development for the team itself off-screen and it is unprecedented in the MCU so far

Which actors are pushing 50? Most posted here seem to be closer to early 20s to early 30s

So bc every film followed a similar formula to you (which they didnt), that means the X-men must? Maybe doing something different with them would be a welcomed changed after over 20 films. Disney just may go in a different direction to switch things up. We've already see them do that with Black Panther and Spider-Man

Ive actually championed for the characters to be early to mid 20s. You can still tell the origin of the team with young adults. They dont need to be teens for that to happen. Just bc you lack that creative vision, doesnt mean Marvel does to make it happen

 

[Marvel united]

"Kid X-Men" certainly wouldn't be a repeat of First Class, where they were mostly in their twenties and the team was barely even relevant to the plot. It would be more similar to the characters introduced in Apocalypse, but that aspect was pretty miserably under-utilized. The only scene they shot of them "being kids" (the mall scene) was cut.

You can use Homecoming as an example again. Spider-Man was a HS student in both SM1 and TASM1 but neither utilized the setting and really leaned into what it means to be a High-school kid with powers. Same applies to the X-Men- sure we got a younger team in both FC and XMA but these characters were nowhere near the focus of the movie and they were heavily underutilized.

A young X-Men now in vein of Homecoming would be a fresh experience if you really delved into the theme of growing up, adulthood and maturity- which were themes the X-Men dealt with for years. And there's also the fact that from a commercial standpoint, it makes more sense to have a younger group of heroes because not only Is the MCU lacking in youth but you could market X-Men as the Harry Potter/Hogwarts of the MCU. Spider-Man is not a guarantee for the MCU with all of the shenanigans with Sony- so it makes sense that Disney would want the X-Men to appeal to a younger demographic for wider appeal in case Sony pulls Spider-Man out.

 

[Jh7058622]

Also Hank Pym and Janet anyone? Yeah they didn't age up those characters to their mid fifties literally at all. They came in exactly as they were in the comics....

So by that logic it's a free for all on ages.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

15 year old Hispanic Beast.... Not liking the sound of this.

 

[Marvel united]

So bc every film followed a similar formula to you (which they didnt), that means the X-men must? Maybe doing something different with them would be a welcomed changed after over 20 films. Disney just may go in a different direction to switch things up. We've already see them do that with Black Panther and Spider-Man

Come on, man. You're moving the goal post here. First it was "Not every MCU hero" and now it's "Why not do something different" the formula has remained the same because it makes the most sense within the MCU. Having people who have decades of experience randomly popping up in the MCU would open up all sorts of plot holes and continuity errors. That's why the overwhelming majority of heroes start from the begining or close to the beginning. And with a subject as delicate as mutants, it has to be handled with care. It has to make sense and not get overly complicated and convoluted.

Ive actually championed for the characters to be early to mid 20s. You can still tell the origin of the team with young adults. They dont need to be teens for that to happen. Just bc you lack that creative vision, doesnt mean Marvel does to make it happen

Right.... Yet most of the actors and actresses being suggested are late 20s to early 30s NOW and fail to take into account that X-Men won't start production for another 2 to 3 years at the earliest. Somebody who is 22 now will be 24-25 by the time the movie starts production. We're talking about a movie in 2021-2023.

I wouldn't mind a early 20s X-Men, that's still part of the younger demographic. As I've said before, young adults would be a great base to start. And actors around the same age as Tom Holland and Olsen and Taylor-Johnson when they were cast in 2013 (a wide net of 19-26 yo age range).

But who knows, Marvel may go even younger ala Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson in 2001. MCU Hogwarts and have these kids grow up

 

[Double B]

The age issue is such a weird conversation because people act like they’re all going to be the same, when the joy of the X-Men is the varied age groups. Have Storm, Jean and Cyke being mid 20s or so, veer into the 30s age range for Logan, teens/early 20s for Bobby, Kitty, Rogue, whoever, and it’s sorted.

Also some of these suggestions... Emile Hirsch? Alex Pettyfer?! The guy sunk his career by allegedly being a huge *******. Disney ain’t going there.

 

[EnDz0n3]

And Spider-Man being a High-school student was a repeat of the previous two franchises. Still doesn't change the fact that he was an adult in more films than he was a kid and the same applies to the X-Men. We had 2 films where the team was young and 4 films where the X-Men were seasoned and grizzled.

"Doesn't change the fact that" for every example you give there's an example that contradicts it. You seem so sure about what Feige will do but there's always an exception to your rule.

5 if you count Dark Phoenix which skipped a decade and now have a team of 25-28 year olds again.

It doesn't matter if they're playing 25-28 year olds. They still look like kids.

And then we open up another can of worms. So you have a group of late 20 and early 30 year olds coming together for the first time despite the fact that the X-gene is most prevalent and mainly manifests during Puberty and despite the fact that the X-Men were teenagers and early 20-somethings for years before being late 20s. This turns into a discussion of longevity and pointlessness of making the X-Men start so much older than they did when they were the "Children of the Atom" in the comics.

Let's talk longevity with 43 year old Iron man, 60 year old Nick Fury, 30 year old Captain America, 28 year old Thor, 45 year old Hulk, 26 year old Black Widow, 40 year old Hawkeye, 35 year old Starlord, 36 year old Gamora, 45 year old Drax, 40 year old Dr. Strange, 46 year old Ant-man and 30 year old Captain Marvel.

 

[Marvel united]

"Doesn't change the fact that" for every example you give there's an example that contradicts it. You seem so sure about what Feige will do but there's always an exception to your rule.

Where are the examples of any main hero start as a grizzled superhero who has been fighting criminals for a decade coming out of the Shadows? I have yet to see any contradictions to that FACT of the MCU of most heroes starting from the beginning. If anything, having a late 20s, early 30s veteran X-Men contradicts the MCU as a whole because it goes against the basic hero's journey that has been the standard formula within the confines of the MCU storytelling structure.

It doesn't matter if they're playing 25-28 year olds. They still look like kids.

It doesn't matter that they look like kids since they're playing 25-28 year olds. That's the established age being set for them and they are indeed in their prime as confirmed by the EW article last year. This is just another movie with a seasoned X-Men team.

Let's talk longevity with 43 year old Iron man, 60 year old Nick Fury, 30 year old Captain America, 28 year old Thor, 45 year old Hulk, 26 year old Black Widow, 40 year old Hawkeye, 35 year old Starlord, 36 year old Gamora, 45 year old Drax, 40 year old Dr. Strange, 46 year old Ant-man and 30 year old Captain Marvel.

And none of these characters had a specific age set when they were introduced in the comics; none of these characters were ever High-School students. None of them lean as heavily into the themes of youth, puberty and adulthood as the X-Men have for decades (X-gene being a metaphor for Puberty). Spider-Man is a much better example than any of these adult heroes because the teenage/young aspect of both of these franchises is ingrained within both of these properties. They were the "Children of the Atom" long before the 90s Claremont run and 90s TAS which everyone wants to immediately jump into

 

[EnDz0n3]

I must've missed the comics where Storm, Banshee, Wolverine, Sunfire, Thunderbird, Nightcrawler were introduced as teenagers...

Maybe the issue is, you think 30 year olds are grizzled...LOL

30 year olds are not old dude.

 

[Marvel united]

I must've missed the comics where Storm, Banshee, Wolverine, Sunfire, Thunderbird, Nightcrawler were introduced as teenagers...

The original X-Men were.

And they currently have their own ongoing run in All-New X-Men:

Which has been amazing so far

Maybe the issue is, you think 30 year olds are grizzled...LOL

30 year olds are not old dude.

I will be 30 in 2 years. The issue is them having 10-15 years of experience. And if you assume they formed when they were 15-16 year olds like the comics, that's a decade of experience for the core X-Men.

 

[Havok83]

You can use Homecoming as an example again. Spider-Man was a HS student in both SM1 and TASM1 but neither utilized the setting and really leaned into what it means to be a High-school kid with powers. Same applies to the X-Men- sure we got a younger team in both FC and XMA but these characters were nowhere near the focus of the movie and they were heavily underutilized.

A young X-Men now in vein of Homecoming would be a fresh experience if you really delved into the theme of growing up, adulthood and maturity- which were themes the X-Men dealt with for years. And there's also the fact that from a commercial standpoint, it makes more sense to have a younger group of heroes because not only Is the MCU lacking in youth but you could market X-Men as the Harry Potter/Hogwarts of the MCU. Spider-Man is not a guarantee for the MCU with all of the shenanigans with Sony- so it makes sense that Disney would want the X-Men to appeal to a younger demographic for wider appeal in case Sony pulls Spider-Man out.

The 40 something year old Avengers appeal to a young demographic. The charcters dont literally need to be kids in order for kids to be interested in them. Their sales numbers and merchandising is proof of that

Come on, man. You're moving the goal post here. First it was "Not every MCU hero" and now it's "Why not do something different" the formula has remained the same because it makes the most sense within the MCU. Having people who have decades of experience randomly popping up in the MCU would open up all sorts of plot holes and continuity errors. That's why the overwhelming majority of heroes start from the begining or close to the beginning. And with a subject as delicate as mutants, it has to be handled with care. It has to make sense and not get overly complicated and convoluted.

And again you are putting words into my mouth (or rather posts). Ive NEVER said anything about the X-men having decades worth of experience. Didnt I just debunk that in one of my previous posts to you? Its hard to respond to you when you just make up stuff about what Ive written. Please stick to whats actually on your screen.

Right.... Yet most of the actors and actresses being suggested are late 20s to early 30s NOW and fail to take into account that X-Men won't start production for another 2 to 3 years at the earliest. Somebody who is 22 now will be 24-25 by the time the movie starts production. We're talking about a movie in 2021-2023.

I wouldn't mind a early 20s X-Men, that's still part of the younger demographic. As I've said before, young adults would be a great base to start. And actors around the same age as Tom Holland and Olsen and Taylor-Johnson when they were cast in 2013 (a wide net of 19-26 yo age range).

But who knows, Marvel may go even younger ala Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson in 2001. MCU Hogwarts and have these kids grow up

early 30s is still a far cry from pushing 50 and hardly what most of the suggestions over the past few pages have been. Stop going to the absolute extremes

The original X-Men were.

And they currently have their own ongoing run in All-New X-Men:

Which has been amazing so far


I will be 30 in 2 years. The issue is them having 10-15 years of experience. And if you assume they formed when they were 15-16 year olds like the comics, that's a decade of experience for the core X-Men.

All New X-men was cancelled last year and Marvel is getting rid of those characters in Extermination

 

[Marvel united]

The 40 something year old Avengers appeal to a young demographic. The charcters dont literally need to be kids in order for kids to be interested in them. Their sales numbers and merchandising is proof of that

Spider-Man being the same age as them (a kid) combined with him being more relatable than any of the Avengers undoubtedly appeals to them more. It's a factor in why Spider-Man sells more merch than all of the Avengers combined. Kids and young people can see themselves in him and the X-Men should be the same way imo and grow with kids watching these movies. All you have to do is look at the age demographic for Spider-Man vs the Avengers. Not saying the Avengers don't appeal to younger audiences (they OBVIOUSLY do) but Spider-Man easily appeals to them more for the aforementioned reasons.

And again you are putting words into my mouth (or rather posts). Ive NEVER said anything about the X-men having decades worth of experience.

You suggested an X-Men in their mid 20s. If they formed when they were teens, that makes them have a decade worth of experience. If they are in their early 20s, that gives them 5 or 6 years worth of experience which isn't as bad. As long as they formed after Thanos attacked

Early 30s is still a far cry from pushing 50 and hardly what most of the suggestions over the past few pages have been. Stop going to the absolute extremes

Now you're putting words into MY mouth because I never said anything about a 50 year old. 30+ still too old to be playing College kids in their early 20s imo. Get actors who are in their actual 20s

All New X-men was cancelled last year and Marvel is getting rid of those characters in Extermination

Well, I had no idea. I just started reading the series a few months ago. I haven't made it to Vol 6 yet but it's really great so far. It's interesting to see these kids reacting to their older selfs, especially Scott dealing with who he is going to become and Jean dealing with the fact that she will be dead.