The X-Men Cinematic Universe (General Discussion)

[Ethros]

If you don't agree, and don't feel like having a conversation, just say you disagree and move on. I prefer to do that, and would do it more if I didn't have a hard time not replying to people who are replying to something I posted. Trying to say I'm wrong is itself wrong, and generally starts an argument.

Dude I wasn't laughing at you, I was laughing at Fox, that the idea that they'd care that they'd used a character before in a minor role and now weren't sure about making a new role for them despite in breaking continuity. ie, Emma Frost, Psylocke, Angel, Jubilee, etc
Chill, I was basically on your side!

 

[Anwar]

Spoiler

Why is "dead mutants" such a problem in the first place?

Why is there such unwillingness to accept superhero deaths in these films?

Must these characters only exist in a form of Saturday-morning-cartoon stasis, in which the status quo is always maintained and as a result there are no real stakes?

With the exception of Logan, ALL the X-Films have been done like that.

And in Logan, it was just an excuse to have Logan be all alone in the future. Nothing more.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

X-men 3 killed Cyclops off-screen, Professor X and Jean, First Class killed Darwin, Days Of Future's Past killed (and couldn't bring back) Banshee and others from First Class.

The franchise has had zero problems killing characters.

 

[Set Harth]

With the exception of Logan, ALL the X-Films have been done like that.

No, we've been down this road before. "You killed off Cyclops, therefore your movie is crap and I demand that it be ignored going forward."

X-men 3 killed Cyclops off-screen, Professor X and Jean

Technically Xavier survived in another body.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Which looked exactly like Patrick Stewart and was also paralysed. What are the odds.

 

[kirk55555]

Spoiler

Why is "dead mutants" such a problem in the first place?

Why is there such unwillingness to accept superhero deaths in these films?

Must these characters only exist in a form of Saturday-morning-cartoon stasis, in which the status quo is always maintained and as a result there are no real stakes?

Spoiler: Logan

I'm against killing off every hero in your franchise, yes. One or two characters dying, ok. You don't kill all the X-Men, or all the mutants. That's stupid. That's some grim dark Snyder-ish junk. Its not "saturday morning cartoon" to not go full apocalyptic, dark ending to your franchise. Murdering every single character and then BSing your way to a mutant-less future is just doing dark crap to give Logan more things to brood about.

No, we've been down this road before. "You killed off Cyclops, therefore your movie is crap and I demand that it be ignored going forward."

X-3 was bad for a lot of reasons, Cyclops being one of the least, although still an issue. Still, Cyclops dying wouldn't have been that big a problem for me if it basically hadn't been done off screen, was anti-climatic and only happened because the actor decided a bit role in a mediocre Superman film was better then playing Cyclops. Also, if the Phoenix hadn't sucked, that would have helped a lot.

 

[Aldo]

X-3 was bad for a lot of reasons, Cyclops being one of the least, although still an issue. Still, Cyclops dying wouldn't have been that big a problem for me if it basically hadn't been done off screen, was anti-climatic and only happened because the actor decided a bit role in a mediocre Superman film was better then playing Cyclops. Also, if the Phoenix hadn't sucked, that would have helped a lot.

At least this, we can agree on.

Well, except for the part about Superman Returns being mediocre

 

[JD]

Dude I wasn't laughing at you, I was laughing at Fox, that the idea that they'd care that they'd used a character before in a minor role and now weren't sure about making a new role for them despite in breaking continuity. ie, Emma Frost, Psylocke, Angel, Jubilee, etc
Chill, I was basically on your side!

And my GIF was a sarcastic response to the idea that the TPTB would not reuse a character because of "continuity". That ship sailed a long time ago.

 

[kirk55555]

At least this, we can agree on.

Well, except for the part about Superman Returns being mediocre

To be fair, I think SMR isn't terrible. I like that Superman is shown saving people, and Spacey worked well as a Hackman-esque Luthor. but, Superman is not shown doing much besides saving people, he doesn't have much personality, the Lois & Kid plot isn't done well and goes nowhere, and its just kind of boring. I honestly think Superman III and IV were more entertaining to watch, although technically Superman Returns was better madethen they were.

 

[Set Harth]

Spoiler

You don't kill all the X-Men, or all the mutants.

Spoiler

Murdering every single character and then BSing your way to a mutant-less future

But this is ultimately not an accurate description of the film. I would refer back to the

Spoiler

Children of Men

analogy.

That's some grim dark Snyder-ish junk.

Grim and dark like Superman sacrificing himself to save everyone from Doomsday, and then coming back to life anyway?

 

[kirk55555]

But this is ultimately not an accurate description of the film. I would refer back to the

Spoiler

Children of Men

analogy.

Spoiler

Who cares if there is a slight chance some mutants might exist after the film? The X-Men franchise is about the X-Men, not random mutants. You don't kill them en masse for any reason, especially in such a stupid way that would even kill several of them and doesn't explain what happens to the ones that weren't in range because no way did Xavier randomly kill every X-Men while they all happened to be in the same area. there are a lot of X-Men, and they don't all live or hang out in a small area o24/7.

Plus, even ignoring that, a few possible mutants might restart mutant kind, if the magical food additive disappears, is not a future for the franchise and fixes none of the problems I have with it.

Again, its ok if other people like it or are ok with that. But, it doesn't fix my problems.

 

[Set Harth]

Spoiler

and doesn't explain what happens to the ones that weren't in range because no way did Xavier randomly kill every X-Men while they all happened to be in the same area. there are a lot of X-Men, and they don't all live or hang out in a small area o24/7.

This part feels like you're arguing against yourself.

is not a future for the franchise

Do you imagine that Deadpool 2, New Mutants, the so-called "Supernova", etc. will be projects set after Logan? Also, what about time travel? The franchise clearly seems to think that the existence of time travel as a plot device gives it carte blanche to do whatever it wants.

Spoiler

a slight chance some mutants might exist after the film

Isn't that a massive understatement?

 

[Anwar]

No, we've been down this road before. "You killed off Cyclops, therefore your movie is crap and I demand that it be ignored going forward."

X3 was disliked for reasons, and one of them was that they bothered to shake up the Status Quo in ways the other movies never did.

 

[Reverend]

^One of them sure, but most of the other reasons was that it was a hot mess of half-baked plots (plural!), underdeveloped characters, a chronic case of spectacle over substance and not a lot of faith in the source material.

Also, I'd hardly say the first two X-Men movies established a "status quo". Indeed, the first was little more than an introduction into the world and it was X2 that flipped the script. Having the mansion invaded, everyone on the run, giving Wolverine closure and a sense of purpose, having Rogue find some peace with her condition and having Jean sacrifice herself and become the Phoenix. It's not that movie's fault that the later ones squandered all of this. Indeed, X3 is by far the worst offender in that regard.

 

[kirk55555]

Do you imagine that Deadpool 2, New Mutants, the so-called "Supernova", etc. will be projects set after Logan? Also, what about time travel? The franchise clearly seems to think that the existence of time travel as a plot device gives it carte blanche to do whatever it wants.

Nope. I think they're set in a completely different timeline, regardless of what might have been stated. As soon as Logan no longer needs to be marketed, any talk of it being in continuity with the rest of the franchise by FOX will probably disappear. To me that seems the most likely scenario, with the second most likely being another time travel event to change the future. Either way, the events of Logan are never going to be the actual future of the franchise. They did not just declare all their movies as pointless and preemptively kill off all the characters they expect people to pay to see movies about. You don't kill off a character and then go back and make movies about them, that just makes the stories set earlier pointless when you know the X-Men lose, and both they and all mutant kind basically die. So, as long as they're still making X-Men movies, Logan is not the future of the franchise.

 

[Tosk]

X3 was disliked for reasons, and one of them was that they bothered to shake up the Status Quo in ways the other movies never did.

I gots a lot of gripes with X3, that ain't one of them.

 

[Ethros]

I do kinda agree and it won't surprise me if in a few years Logan will be subtly declared to be an alternate timeline. Just they obviously can't say so now as it's not exactly great for marketing.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

In the comics, any future depiction is an alternate or possible future/timeline. Why can't we do the same here if we choose? It doesn't change the story one bit.

They don't have to be marketed that way, they just are.

 

[Set Harth]

plots (plural!)

The horror...

You don't kill off a character and then go back and make movies about them, that just makes the stories set earlier pointless when you know the X-Men lose

"No one should ever do prequels because I personally can't handle the concept."

and both they and all mutant kind basically die.

The word "basically" here playing the same role as "virtually", i.e. you could replace it with "don't literally".

 

[kirk55555]

If you actually think they just pre-emptively ended their franchise, fine. That's ridiculous to me, but whatever. Its a crap story regardless of continuity in my opinion, but I'm content that the franchise will never kill off all the X-Men or mutants, and that the X-Men will still be around in the franchise's future regardless of what a bad spinoff films did. No X-Men gets killed like Logan said, and there are still plenty of mutants regardless of whether its 1985, 2017 or 2050. Logan is no more the actual future of the franchise then the bad future of DOFP was (although that was at least a good story). Logan is just a terrible story of a bad future that is about as canon as the DOFP future is at this point.