MCU X-Men - Part 2

[Silvermoth]

Good lord he looks like an absolutely terrifying Charles. I would sign up with magneto in an instant if he was the alternative.

 

[fan4stic]

Good lord he looks like an absolutely terrifying Charles. I would sign up with magneto in an instant if he was the alternative.

I know! That's why I dig it! We've had kindly grandfather Charles for too long. I would like to see creepy looking Charles.

 

[Mangle77]

This whole discussion really makes me hope Marvel keeps the mutants separate. There's too many to develop well in a series that, if treated like the rest, will only get a movie every 3-4 years. If they get more frequent movies, then they'd encroach on slots for the other series.

Then we start running into the issue of spans of several years in between movies and the MCU happening roughly in real time.

Seems easier to put them under the Marvel Studios helm, but keep it separate.

Separate... but equal?

No. Mutants need to be integrated, not segregated.

 

[HBarnill]

I’m probably gonna repeat a lot of things writing this but I’m too lazy to check, so here are my thoughts:

Why do they need the X-Men or F4? The MCU has been a massive success without them. Longevity? There's a lot more characters they can still use. Fox has made a major comeback with the franchise since First Class and, ironically enough, they've been more director-driven than the DCEU has claimed to be. Yeah, there's Apocalypse but that's all Singer and he ain't directing anymore of them. No matter what they keep saying, MCU would never green-light the Deadpool films or Logan. We got 3, R-rated, critically acclaimed, box office hits that took a lot more chances than what the MCU did, and they've made films with a talking tree in them! What's great about X-Men is how it can be its own universe. They have a large roster of characters that it makes sense to create a franchise out if it; a franchise that has lasted for nearly 2 decades and still counting. They can include a wide range of genres for the films to explore, such as comedy, neo-western, horror, etc. Outside of a couple of exceptions, one of the biggest criticisms,if not the biggest, the MCU has faced with since The Avengers is how they all feel the same. The merging risks the X-Men films from experimenting with different genres. And F4 is a lost cause at this point so why bother when Disney already has a great F4 movie in their roster?

I still remain skeptical of this deal being a sure thing but even if it is, there has to be a way for these universes to co-exist without resorting to merging and recasting.

 

[Gamma Goliath]

The fantastic 4 deserve to be in the mcu. They're the most mcu like property that marvel doesn't have. Mcu never needed spiderman or xmen or F4. But it will be nice to have them.

 

[Kuwolski]

They don't all feel the same though...That's a hollow critique repeated by people like you who prefer something else.

 

[Herofan]

I think the X-Men of the first three films could have been reasonably included in MCU by retconning that, being in the future, they were actually set around 2014/2017 (not, as was usually interpreted or said, 2004/2006) so the public discovery of mutants started around the same time as Iron Man's debut. Then the later films had mutants publicly debuting in the '70s although I'm not sure if that was actually supposed to be an alternate timeline or the same one or what.

 

[Gamma Goliath]

Theres no need for making things complicated. Marvel isnt going to want to play with Fox's messed up continuity. Come up with a reason for mutants to exist. Cast your xmen. Create good stories that allow them to exist in mcu but still have plenty room for their own story. Let the tired fox universe die.

 

[Creo]

Separate... but equal?

No. Mutants need to be integrated, not segregated.

Clever, but I disagree. They don't *need* anything, and unless Marvel increases their comic movie output by quite a lot, some properties will likely suffer.

I also don't see the X-men franchise, nor any of the other franchises, being enhanced by their inclusion in the MCU. A handful of mutants work well on an individual basis, but as a whole they're going to create a lot more hoop jumping then if they were in their own. Especially if they do it like the movies or comics and have thousands of mutants worldwide.

 

[Kuwolski]

Which properties will suffer?

 

[Detective Conan]

Why do they need the X-Men or F4? The MCU has been a massive success without them. Longevity? There's a lot more characters they can still use.

This is like asking why they need Spider-Man. Obviously Marvel doesn't 'need' those characters but adding them characters enriches the Marvel Cinematic Universe and allows for storytelling opportunities with those characters that simply could not happen with if they all existed separately. If you want an example look no further than Homecoming which had taken a character who had previously existed in a world where he was only hero and put him in a world where he was one of many heroes, and used that to contrast him with the other characters. Peter Parker was always created to be part of a wider universe in the comics, and what was unique about him was that he was a teenage superhero in a world full of other superheroes. They put the character in the context of the post-Chutari invasion; using that as the impetus for the villian's motivation and it proved to be refreshing change of pace from previous iterations which had done the mentor-figure-turned-bad guy plot to death and made Spidey into this sort of , in-over-his-head, wet-behind-ears, young teenage superhero which contrasted nicely with the seasoned superheroes like Iron Man and Captain America; not only that, but it went back to the characters roots from the comics and it worked.
Sure, Marvel didn't need to have Spider-Man(they've been just fine on their own without him) but having him added so much the MCU had been missing, allowed for the MCU to feel more ‘complete’ than before.
Plus the MCU has a better track record than Fox(for the most part). Even their worse(Thor: Dark World, Iron Man 2) are still far more watchable than Fox's worst(Wolverine: Origins, Fan4stic). Plus Fox continued hold on characters associated with the FF like Doctor Doom, Galactus,and Silver Surfer needs to come to an end because they have more value to Marvel than Fox and the merchandising restrictions tied to those properties due to rights issues would then cease. The MCU has proven to do their characters justice more so than Fox and at the very least they would do a consistently good job with those properties than Fox which has always been very hit-or-miss IMO.

Fox has made a major comeback with the franchise since First Class and, ironically enough, they've been more director-driven than the DCEU has claimed to be.

Josh Trank begs to differ.

Yeah, there's Apocalypse but that's all Singer and he ain't directing anymore of them. No matter what they keep saying, MCU would never green-light the Deadpool films or Logan. We got 3, R-rated, critically acclaimed, box office hits that took a lot more chances than what the MCU did, and they've made films with a talking tree in them! What's great about X-Men is how it can be its own universe. They have a large roster of characters that it makes sense to create a franchise out if it; a franchise that has lasted for nearly 2 decades and still counting. They can include a wide range of genres for the films to explore, such as comedy, neo-western, horror, etc. Outside of a couple of exceptions, one of the biggest criticisms,if not the biggest, the MCU has faced with since The Avengers is how they all feel the same.

The part I bolded has always been one the most laziest criticisms of the MCU that never amounted to much besides just an erroneous generalization. Is the goofy, heart-warming, nature of Guardians Of The Galaxy the same as the Winter Soldier's more serious, more grounded tone? Is the suspense-driven buddy-cop nature of Iron Man 3 really the same as the the heavy, topical, nature of Black Panther? lol wrong.

And Deadpool was a fluke that had that had that lightening-in-bottle success; which Fox never really wanted to make and only got green-light after a leak and fan demand was high enough, and Jackman had to take a pay-cut in order for Logan to be made the way it was.

The merging risks the X-Men films from experimenting with different genres. And F4 is a lost cause at this point so why bother when Disney already has a great F4 movie in their roster?

There's a laughable irony to your point I bolded here as Marvel have been recently experimenting with different genres and tones. Again, the Winter Soldier is a 70's spy thriller in the mold of Three Days Of Condor. The Guardians movies are a space opera in the vein of 'Flash Gordon' and 'Star Wars'. The X-Men experimenting with different genres? You mean like that godawful cheap looking New Mutants that has been delayed like two times and is now facing Fan4stic-level re-shoots? Or that totally pointless(and still director-less) Gambit film that Fox keeps shifting the release dates to? Logan was the exception not the rule and was really a once-in-the lifetime film that got made thanks to Jackman's star power.

And are you seriously making a case for the FF still staying with Fox after the sloppy job they've done with the franchise? With the X-Men I can definitely see your point but its almost like your saying the FF's reputation is too tarnished that not even Marvel can rescue them from the cinematic grave Fox dug them in. No sane fan wants the Fox to have the FF license anymore. If Marvel could make a talking racoon and walking tree work on screen then they can easily make the FF work.
The irony of your point is that Marvel has been experimenting with different genres and tones. Winter Soldier is a 70's spy thriller in the mold of Three Days Of Condor. The Guardians moves is a space opera in the vein of 'Flash Gordon' and 'Star Wars'.

I still remain skeptical of this deal being a sure thing but even if it is, there has to be a way for these universes to co-exist without resorting to merging and recasting.

The entire X-Men franchise right now is long over-due for a reboot. Jackman has already retired from the role, and Stewart and MacKellan are presumably done and the series(sans the spin-offs) as is is just stuck doing these superfluous period pieces. They should've done a complete reboot with First Class but they decided have their cake and eat it too and tried to make it fit in with the older movies which lead to continuity clusterf**k the series in now. Even if the Disney Merger for some reason doesn't go through(God, I hope it does, I really don't want a Doctor Doom movie) they would have to reboot and recast eventually and frankly Dark Phoenix doesn't look very good at all, and might potentially damage the X-brand(again).

So why not do a fresh take on the Mutants this time in the context of a bigger universe? It'd fun and you could contrast the mutants with the Avengers who are lionized and loved, while the X-Men are revolted and feared.

 

[Havok83]

or go even simpler and have mutants be a byproduct of the Infinity stones. Its easy enough for Avengers 4 to end and have things in the world be altered and mutants either activating or retroactively being in this universe is something that would work well and not require many hoops to go through

 

[Herofan]

Theres no need for making things complicated. Marvel isnt going to want to play with Fox's messed up continuity. Come up with a reason for mutants to exist. Cast your xmen. Create good stories that allow them to exist in mcu but still have plenty room for their own story. Let the tired fox universe die.

I think the biggest point against not continuing the old series it would be hard to top the casting of Stewart or McKellen as Xavier or Magneto but OTOH yeah they probably are finished playing them.

Is the goofy, heart-warming, nature of Guardians Of The Galaxy the same as the Winter Soldier's more serious, more grounded tone? Is the suspense-driven buddy-cop nature of Iron Man 3 really the same as the the heavy, topical nature of Black Panther?

The Winter Soldier seems to be a big outlier; I haven't seen Black Panther but the tone of IM3 and GotG (and The Avengers 1 & 2 and Ant-Man) did seem pretty similar, maybe more than by their stories they should have.

So why not do a fresh take on the Mutants this time in the context of a bigger universe? It'd fun and you could contrast the mutants with the Avengers who are lionized and loved, while the X-Men are revolted and feared.

Well it's been an issue in some of the comics why the public has such pretty-clearly-unfairly contradictory reaction and attitudes (and why non-Mutant heroes, even those prone to social critique and activism like Captain America, usually don't seem to care about Mutants) so the universe can easily seem too big and inconsistent.

 

[HBarnill]

This is like asking why they need Spider-Man. Obviously Marvel doesn't 'need' those characters but adding them characters enriches the Marvel Cinematic Universe and allows for storytelling opportunities with those characters that simply could not happen with if they all existed separately. If you want an example look no further than Homecoming which had taken a character who had previously existed in a world where he was only hero and put him in a world where he was one of many heroes, and used that to contrast him with the other characters. Peter Parker was always created to be part of a wider universe in the comics, and what was unique about him was that he was a teenage superhero in a world full of other superheroes. They put the character in the context of the post-Chutari invasion; using that as the impetus for the villian's motivation and it proved to be refreshing change of pace from previous iterations which had done the mentor-figure-turned-bad guy plot to death and made Spidey into this sort of , in-over-his-head, wet-behind-ears, young teenage superhero which contrasted nicely with the seasoned superheroes like Iron Man and Captain America; not only that, but it went back to the characters roots from the comics and it worked.
Sure, Marvel didn't need to have Spider-Man(they've been just fine on their own without him) but having him adding so much the MCU that had missing.
Plus the MCU has a better track record than Fox(for the most part). Even their worse(Thor: Dark World, Iron Man 2) are still far more watchable than Fox's worst(Wolverine: Origins, Fan4stic). Plus Fox continued hold on characters associated with the FF like Doctor Doom, Galactus,and Silver Surfer needs to come to an end because they have more value to Marvel than Fox and the merchandising restrictions tied to those properties due to rights issues would then cease. The MCU has proven to do their characters justice more so than Fox and at the very least they would do a consistently good job with those properties than Fox which has always been very hit-or-miss IMO.

Adding more to the MCU mythos, I can understand but the big thing I forgot to mention is that it makes no sense for mutants to exist in the MCU. There are many super-powered humans in these films, like Steve, who are beloved by many, yet when there's a mutant out there who has the same abilities he has, he's met with fear and hatred. You need to reboot the entire MCU for it to work because everyone else treats these extraordinary circumstances as ordinary. They've made plenty of jokes about that ("You kids never seen a spaceship?"). The prejudice story-line would be a huge hole in the MCU's current mythos.

And I disagree with Fox being hit-or-miss. In terms of X-Men, only 3 have been bad, even if I enjoy watching Origins because of how incompetent it was. The majority of them have been good to great. I haven't mentioned F4 too much since I'm a bit nonchalant about them being included and I added that last sentence as a tongue-in-cheek joke but whatever. But, yeah, I should've mentioned how they're cursed with Fox since they still can't get them right. My bad.

Josh Trank begs to differ.

After Origins, regardless of why they did it, they still let their filmmakers have a bit more leeway to their films than before, especially with Tom Rothman leaving. Trank is an exception and even he deserves half the blame for what happened. Apocalypse was more Singer's doing than Fox afaik.

The part I bolded has always been one the most laziest criticisms of the MCU that never amounted to much besides just an erroneous generalization. Is the goofy, heart-warming, nature of Guardians Of The Galaxy the same as the Winter Soldier's more serious, more grounded tone? Is the suspense-driven buddy-cop nature of Iron Man 3 really the same as the the heavy, topical nature of Black Panther? lol wrong.

And Deadpool was a fluke that had that had that lightening-the-bottle success; which Fox never really wanted to make and only got green-light after a leak and fan demand was high enough, and Jackman had to take a pay-cut in order for Logan to be made the way it was.
There's a laughable irony to your point I bolded here as Marvel have been recently experimenting with different genres and tones. Winter Soldier is a 70's spy thriller in the mold of Three Days Of Condor. The Guardians movies are a space opera in the vein of 'Flash Gordon' and 'Star Wars'. The X-Men experimenting with different genres? You mean like that godawful cheap looking New Mutants that has been delayed like two times and is now facing Fan4stic-level re-shoots? Or that totally pointless(and still director-less) Gambit film that Fox keeps shifting the release dates to? Logan was the exception not the rule and was really a once-in-the lifetime film that got made thanks to Jackman's star power.

I don't necessarily agree with that criticism either and it is a bit overused but when I mean "they feel the same", I don't mean they are all the same genres. They just have this formula about them that only now have they began shaking off. It's serious moment and then subvert that with funny scene, serious moment, then a funny scene afterwards, and it doesn't feel like a cohesive tone. Iron Man 3, in particular, suffered from tonal shifts. Is it a comedy or a PTSD drama? I never felt the tone was homogeneous. And the villains just feel like they're bad versions of the heroes, at least most of the films, like Ant Man, Dr. Strange, Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, being the most obvious examples. At least with Deadpool, despite the films tonal shifts, you still feel like you're watching a comedy. Logan, you feel like you're watching a drama. Both films are wildly different than the other X-Men films and each other. Same with Gifted and Legion. Can't say the same for Thor 3 or the Guardians films, correct me if I'm wrong.

The entire X-Men franchise right now is long over-due for a reboot. Jackman has already retired from the role, and Stewart and MacKellan are presumably done and the series(sans the spin-offs) as is is just stuck doing these superfluous period pieces. They should've done a complete reboot with First Class but they decided have their cake and eat it too and tried to make it fit in with the older movies which lead to continuity clusterf**k the series in now. Even if the Disney Merger for some reason doesn't go through(God, I hope it does, I really don't want a Doctor Doom movie, but its looking likely it won't happen) they would have to reboot and recast eventually and frankly Dark Phoenix doesn't look very good at all, and might potentially damage the X-brand(again).

So why not do a fresh take on the Mutants this time in the context of a bigger universe? It'd fun and you could contrast the mutants with the Avengers who are lionized and loved, while the X-Men are revolted and feared.

And we just lost Jackman just last year. We need to wait at least 8 years for us to be more accepting of another actor to play the role. You keep criticizing the other movies you haven't even seen yet as if they are bad because they don't "look very good" for you. Yeah, the timeline is all kinds of crazy now but whatever. I've moved passed that now. Are Fox perfect? No. Do the MCU arguably adapt the characters better? Probably. But they would never allow R-rated films of their characters, unless it's a Netflix show. Disney can't sell toys based on adult films.

And BTW, I'm against the Disney merger for reasons other than just this. What about the potential anti-trust concerns of the sheer fact many will lose their jobs over people wanting a couple of fictional characters into a cinematic universe that isn't really important in the grand scheme of the world?

 

[Kuwolski]

And I disagree.

 

[MasterCat]

Adding more to the MCU mythos, I can understand but the big thing I forgot to mention is that it makes no sense for mutants to exist in the MCU. There are many super-powered humans in these films, like Steve, who are beloved by many, yet when there's a mutant out there who has the same abilities he has, he's met with fear and hatred. You need to reboot the entire MCU for it to work because everyone else treats these extraordinary circumstances as ordinary. They've made plenty of jokes about that ("You kids never seen a spaceship?"). The prejudice story-line would be a huge hole in the MCU's current mythos.

This is usually stupid in the comics, but it doesn't have to be. Chris Claremont, the writer who made Magneto a Holocaust survivor rather than a standard Silver Age villain, even put the words "It is because of me that Mutants are feared and hated" in his mouth.
So like, do a film where Xavier recruits the sudden wave of 15-year-old mutants and tells them he and Prof. Lehnsherr are opening a prep school where people like them can learn to use their powers safely. Show Lehnsherr's high school history lecture going like "... and the German people feared Jews for their intelligence, so a majority voted to give up democracy in exchange for the dictator oppressing the Jews, which eventually led to death camps. Sadly for Homo sapiens, this was not the last time a minority was systematically murdered." From there, have him putting ideas in the kids's heads about superhumans should rule this country so it can never oppress them. When one of them calls him on "Can't anyone be a superhuman?", have him smirk and say "Anyone can wear a suit, but only a small minority are born with powers.
Throw moments like that into a plot that's like First Class with contemporary rather than '60s aesthetics, except make the climax Magneto attacking the UN for imposing registration, instead of the Mutants only breaking up their friendships after saving humanity from the Cuban Missile Crisis.

 

[Creo]

Which properties will suffer?

I've already discussed it, but adding the X-men in takes up some of their movie slots. That either means fewer be properties, or long gaps in time between X-men films, which would be tough to do from a story standpoint for teens as the MCU happens roughly in the year movies are produced. It's not been difficult with other movies, as the heroes are adults, but having teen X-men who are learning their powers go 2-3 years with no screen time is awkward. Then there's the actors adding as well. It's going to be an issue Spiderman will be dealing with soon, but that's only one character who has been easy to put into other movies to fill the gap.

It also creates the problem of potentially hundreds of heroes that should be able to help with future bad guys. It'll exasperate the issue of "why" X" character didn't help with "Y" character's problem" to the Nth degree. It's a little awkward that Iron Man wasn't involved in the finale of TWS. It would have been much weirder if the entire X-Men team wasn't, especially with a strong psychic and flyers.

Plus I want Marvel to keep taking risks. Fewer movie slots means fewer new properties. I'd much rather see Ms. Marvel, Nova, Valkyrie, Moon Knight, She Hulk, Spider Woman, etc. get movies before I see another reboot of the mutants.

If they introduce a handful of them, and keep low numbers, I think it can work. Otherwise I think it'll become the X-Verse 2 due to the volume of mutants and the storytelling requirements of kids and teens learning to use their powers.

 

[MasterCat]

Plus I want Marvel to keep taking risks. Fewer movie slots means fewer new properties. I'd much rather see Ms. Marvel, Nova, Valkyrie, Moon Knight, She Hulk, Spider Woman, etc. get movies before I see another reboot of the mutants.

Oh come on. Disney can't do a She-Hulk movie, Spider-Woman's origin is hard to do, and each of those other characters you name has zero name recognition. Yeah, I know, same with Guardians of the Galaxy, but they were only greenlit because the 2008 version of the team had two Thanos-related characters and Joss Whedon had made Thanos the Avengers stinger on a whim. You can't expect every bottom of the barrel Marvel character to make bank. Pride goeth before a fall.

 

[Detective Conan]

Adding more to the MCU mythos, I can understand but the big thing I forgot to mention is that it makes no sense for mutants to exist in the MCU. There are many super-powered humans in these films, like Steve, who are beloved by many, yet when there's a mutant out there who has the same abilities he has, he's met with fear and hatred. You need to reboot the entire MCU for it to work because everyone else treats these extraordinary circumstances as ordinary. They've made plenty of jokes about that ("You kids never seen a spaceship?"). The prejudice story-line would be a huge hole in the MCU's current mythos.

That's a fair point but I'm sure Marvel will figure out something. Personally, I think it'd be interesting exploring the classic X-Men theme in a universe where superheroes are celebrities. I'm not sure if you need to reboot the MCU to fit the mutants in but predicate the prejudices/animosity towards mutants partially due to the fact people take more comfort in people being made different than people who are born different. I would also argue the X-Men generally hit closer to home for normal citizens since Mutants are born into regular society due to genetic abnormalities than something like the Avengers who if you really think about most aren't naturally powered characters. Tony Stark is a known public figure who the populace at large knows he just uses tech, Black Widow and Hawkeye are normal humans, and Hulk and Thor? The former is a freak-accident who's already feared, the latter is basically a mythological space-alien. I think the Mutants will be interesting to integrate into the universe regardless, and at the very least it will be something we haven't seen before with them like with Spider-Man's inclusion into the MCU.

And I disagree with Fox being hit-or-miss. In terms of X-Men, only 3 have been bad, even if I enjoy watching Origins because of how incompetent it was. The majority of them have been good to great. I haven't mentioned F4 too much since I'm a bit nonchalant about them being included and I added that last sentence as a tongue-in-cheek joke but whatever. But, yeah, I should've mentioned how they're cursed with Fox since they still can't get them right. My bad.

To each their own. I find the first two Singer X-flicks to be total snore-fests with Origins and Apocalypse being the franchise nadirs. Only First Class and Logan are series standouts for me with DP being just 'okay'. Didn't like DOFP that much and I do think Apocalypse kind of undermined it to a degree. Still think Marvel would do a much better job with the property than Fox has done so far.

After Origins, regardless of why they did it, they still let their filmmakers have a bit more leeway to their films than before, especially with Tom Rothman leaving. Trank is an exception and even he deserves half the blame for what happened. Apocalypse was more Singer's doing than Fox afaik.

But I'd argue current Fox is no more director driven than Marvel Studios. Sure, in the earlier Phases there were some problems with their directors(i.e, Iron Man 2, Thor: Dark World, and of course Ant-Man) but for the most part I'd argue Marvel Studios is fairly director-friendly(especially their split from Perlmutter). Look at how director-driven the later phase films like Thor: Ragnorok, Winter Solder, and especially Black Panther were. The Russo's have repeatedly stated that Marvel gave them carte blanche in regards to their creative decisions on all the films they've been involved with and even with Spider-Man Homecoming Jon Watts explicitly stated that he received no mandates from Marvel and was basically allowed to make the movie he wanted to make. If anything, judging from recent reports about the disagreement between Josh Boone and Fox about how The New Mutants should be done(which is part of the reason for the delays since Fox isn't satisfied with his cut so they mandated reshoots) then current Fox still doesn't give filmmakers the leeway you're saying they do, at least with the young ones like Josh Trank and Josh Boone(funny that both their first names are the same, Fox must hate their Josh's, lol).

I don't necessarily agree with that criticism either and it is a bit overused but when I mean "they feel the same", I don't mean they are all the same genres. They just have this formula about them that only now have they began shaking off. It's serious moment and then subvert that with funny scene, serious moment, then a funny scene afterwards, and it doesn't feel like a cohesive tone. Iron Man 3, in particular, suffered from tonal shifts. Is it a comedy or a PTSD drama? I never felt the tone was homogeneous. And the villains just feel like they're bad versions of the heroes, at least most of the films, like Ant Man, Dr. Strange, Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, being the most obvious examples. At least with Deadpool, despite the films tonal shifts, you still feel like you're watching a comedy. Logan, you feel like you're watching a drama. Both films are wildly different than the other X-Men films and each other. Same with Gifted and Legion. Can't say the same for Thor 3 or the Guardians films, correct me if I'm wrong.

I disagree with you about Iron Man 3's tonal inconsistency. I thought it was tonally consistent and dealt with Tony's PTSD with the right amount of seriousness and levity and frankly I found more tonal inconsistency with Apocalypse than almost anything Marvel has done but its all subjective. And you’re bringing television into this? Thought we're just talking films though I will admit Legion alongside Logan is the best Fox has done with the property but I haven't seen Gifted(I have no interest)so I can't comment on it. As for your other point I find Marvel to be wildly different in terms of formula especially in the Phase 3 films were I feel they've been mixing things up(The Doctor Strange film, despite it being a rather by-the-numbers origins film did put a really neat spin on the CGI Boss battle fight at the end) but even then I feel the Marvel flicks are different enough that I can forgive some superficial simlarlities.
And Deadpool was incredibly formulaic with it basically being an R-rated Bugs Bunny revenge story with a mediocre villain(who's a worse villain than most of the Marvel films ever had). I'd argue Apocalypse was also the same. If anything the first two films are very formulaic as well. Heck most of the X-flicks are rather formulaic but what always matters is execution which the Marvel films have succeeded so far.

And we just lost Jackman just last year. We need to wait at least 8 years for us to be more accepting of another actor to play the role. You keep criticizing the other movies you haven't even seen yet as if they are bad because they don't "look very good" for you. Yeah, the timeline is all kinds of crazy now but whatever. I've moved passed that now. Are Fox perfect? No. Do the MCU arguably adapt the characters better? Probably. But they would never allow R-rated films of their characters, unless it's a Netflix show. Disney can't sell toys based on adult films.

Eh, I guess I can agree on your point(kind of) here since I think the Wolverine along with the rest of the X-characters need to be put on hiatus in order for enough time to pass between Dark Phoenix and The MCU reboot. Though I know this is a very unpopular opinion but I have to admit: I've never really liked Jackman in the role. Too chiseled and "movie star" handsome for my taste. And maybe I’m being a bit close-minded about Dark Phoenix since we haven't even gotten a teaser for the film yet but everything we know about the film so far(based on interviews, pictures, etc.) the film already seems intrinsically wrong-headed IMO. You shouldn't do a storyline as seminal as the Dark Phoenix and expect it to have the same emotional resonance unless it comes after a movie where you really got to know Jean and the rest of the younger generation of X-Men; doing Dark Phoenix after you just did a movie introducing those characters feels rushed and not to mention there is better source material to draw upon for a second film with this cast than just simply rehashing a famous story you already did a decade and a half ago.

And BTW, I'm against the Disney merger for reasons other than just this. What about the potential anti-trust concerns of the sheer fact many will lose their jobs over people wanting a couple of fictional characters into a cinematic universe that isn't really important in the grand scheme of the world?

There would be jobs lost no matter who bought Fox. Any big merger between two competing companies is inevitably going to cost jobs. I don't like to say this but its an unfortunate reality but if you ask me to choose between Comcast and Disney then I would pick the Mouse because I feel Disney is the lesser of two evils IMO. And most huge media aquisitions like this be it the vertical one like AT&T/Time Warner or the Horizontal one like Disney/Fox one will almost always face anti-trust concerns so its kind of a moot point.

If you do have concerns of monopoly then fine though I'd argue its not really one since Disney still wouldn't own that much at all as there are still plenty of film studios for them to compete against. Time Warner, Universal, Paramount, Sony Pictures and Amazon Studios aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[Detective Conan]

The Winter Soldier seems to be a big outlier; I haven't seen Black Panther but the tone of IM3 and GotG (and The Avengers 1 & 2 and Ant-Man) did seem pretty similar, maybe more than by their stories they should have.

But they're wildly dissimilar in the types of stories they tell in themes and execution. Those films you mentioned are all tonally similar but does not mean they're the same kinds of film.

Well it's been an issue in some of the comics why the public has such pretty-clearly-unfairly contradictory reaction and attitudes (and why non-Mutant heroes, even those prone to social critique and activism like Captain America, usually don't seem to care about Mutants) so the universe can easily seem too big and inconsistent.

Fair point. Though I contend Marvel can differentiate the mutants from other heroes.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

"The MCU doesn't need the X-Men or the FF." What the **** does need have to do with it?! These are movies based on comic books. They are there to entertain. None of this is "needed".

If you are Marvel, why would you hesitate to integrate the X-Men and the Fantastic Four into the MCU? That's a license to print money. That gives you crossovers you never thought you'd see in a live action movie because all the rights were owned by other studios.

I've already seen X-Men movies where the X-Men where the only superheroes in their universe. I've already seen Fantastic Four movies where they were the only superheroes in their universe. I've already seen Spider-Man movies where he was the only superhero in his universe. Why do we need to be limited by this anymore when having everyone in the same universe opens up more stories that can be told? The possibilities are now endless. Whereas having everyone split up in their own universes limits things. Limits what you can do. Why do we need these limitations anymore?

I am also tired of this "well how can mutants be hated and yet everyone loves the Avengers even though they also have super powers too!" crap as well. That's like asking how can there be racism when there are popular black celebrities. That's like asking how can there be sexism when there are popular and respected female celebrities. Look at the world we live in. Racism and bigotry still exists today, even though we had a black President two years ago.

 

[MasterCat]

I am also tired of this "well how can mutants be hated and yet everyone loves the Avengers even though they also have super powers too!" crap as well. That's like asking how can there be racism when there are popular black celebrities. That's like asking how can there be sexism when there are popular and respected female celebrities. Look at the world we live in. Racism and bigotry still exists today, even though we had a black President two years ago.

Those are actually intelligent questions to ask! "Mutants are the only superhumans anyone hates because waves hands bigotry exists!" is an unintelligent answer.
I agree that the X-Men don't need a separate universe, but this is silly.

 

[Creo]

Oh come on. Disney can't do a She-Hulk movie, Spider-Woman's origin is hard to do, and each of those other characters you name has zero name recognition. Yeah, I know, same with Guardians of the Galaxy, but they were only greenlit because the 2008 version of the team had two Thanos-related characters and Joss Whedon had made Thanos the Avengers stinger on a whim. You can't expect every bottom of the barrel Marvel character to make bank. Pride goeth before a fall.

Dr. Strange, Captain Marvel, Black Panther (as a hero, not the political group), Ant-Man, and to a lesser extent Iron Man were in the same boat prior to their movies. They're now considering the Eternals, which is much more "bottom of the barrel" than anything I posted.

I very much doubt the mcu would include half of the characters they use now if Marvel had owned the rights to the X-men and Spiderman from the get go. I imagine other projects will get pushed to the side of they do get the X-men back.

 

[Havok83]

Those are actually intelligent questions to ask! "Mutants are the only superhumans anyone hates because waves hands bigotry exists!" is an unintelligent answer.
I agree that the X-Men don't need a separate universe, but this is silly.

No its not. The point he is trying to make is bigotry isnt rational and it exists in the world all the time. The Avengers and they were trained, authorized heroes sanctioned by the government. People are confitioned to trust cops and they were that on a grander scale. Even so, as we saw in Civil War, not everyone loves them. I can easily see how there would be fear in that universe if a bunch of random people started getting powers with many high profile ones using those powers for terrorism. All it takes is the media to grab onto that and spread the fear by making it a story and politicians using that for their own advancement. It happens in real life and not that hard to grasp

Dr. Strange, Captain Marvel, Black Panther (as a hero, not the political group), Ant-Man, and to a lesser extent Iron Man were in the same boat prior to their movies. They're now considering the Eternals, which is much more "bottom of the barrel" than anything I posted.

I very much doubt the mcu would include half of the characters they use now if Marvel had owned the rights to the X-men and Spiderman from the get go. I imagine other projects will get pushed to the side of they do get the X-men back.

Thats not necesarily a bad thing. Id have much preferred an MCU film over Eternals

 

[MasterCat]

No its not. The point he is trying to make is bigotry isnt rational and it exists in the world all the time. The Avengers and they were trained, authorized heroes sanctioned by the government. People are confitioned to trust cops and they were that on a grander scale. Even so, as we saw in Civil War, not everyone loves them. I can easily see how there would be fear in that universe if a bunch of random people started getting powers with many high profile ones using those powers for terrorism. All it takes is the media to grab onto that and spread the fear by making it a story and politicians using that for their own advancement. It happens in real life and not that hard to grasp

"Bigotry isnt rational" is the excuse the comics have leaned on for a long time and it usually produces idiotic stories. I'd prefer to see an MCU where average Americans are sympathetic rather than moral monsters with an IQ of 70 who deserve to be ruled with an iron fist (no, not that Iron Fist).