Spoilers Dark PhoeniX - Review and Discussion Thread

[kirk55555]

The funny thing is, when fans asked why they didn't bother trying to expand more on the other X-Men characters like Kitty Pryde or Cyclops and kept going back to Wolverine even in plots he didn't matter in (DOFP) the answer came down to "Look, if it wasn't for characters like Wolverine the X-Men would've stayed canceled after the 60s. Those older classic characters just aren't worth the effort. We're gonna keep inserting Wolverine cause he's more interesting."

Meanwhile the MCU takes someone who by all rights was as "Boring" as Cyclops like Captain America and makes him now be seen as a proper Icon on par with Superman and Batman.

Yeah, it seems like the MCU is the king of making more obscure characters popular. The X-Men are a treasure trove of characters that are ripe for many different types of stories, and Wolverine is definitely not the reason they've continued to exist. Sure the original Stan Lee comic run was lackluster, and the second group of X-Men were what made it really successful, but even Chris Claremont focused on a lot of different characters in his run, and we've only gotten more diverse casts of characters in X-Men related books since then. FOX thinking that X-Men had to have Wolverine (or a clearly phoning it in Lawrence) to be popular was just a sign of their lack of ability to take something more obscure and work with it.

Whenever the MCU actually fully starts to use the X-men, I bet we're going to see a lot of love for characters and concepts that FOX didn't use just because no one working on the franchise there had the ability or the desire to use, and it will probably make Disney/Marvel even more billions of dollars.

 

[Anwar]

The biggest problem was that the FoX-Men movies were run by people ashamed of comics and unwilling to put the real effort in.

 

[kirk55555]

The biggest problem was that the FoX-Men movies were run by people ashamed of comics and unwilling to put the real effort in.

Yep, and the X-Men might be the single worst property to have that attitude with. While the X-Men can be used very well to talk about real world issues, the characters and overarching stories themselves don't really go with a toned down gritty/realistic style, outside of some Wolverine stuff. Some of the best X-Men stories are huge, bombastic tales, involving everything from god level space entities to sentient islands, but FOX was never going to do that.

Sony's non-MCU live action Spider-Man related films are kind of in the same boat, really. Acting like its 2002 and they need to be ashamed of comics, even though the MCU has proven that the old attitude is completely wrong.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

The funny thing is, when fans asked why they didn't bother trying to expand more on the other X-Men characters like Kitty Pryde or Cyclops and kept going back to Wolverine even in plots he didn't matter in (DOFP) the answer came down to "Look, if it wasn't for characters like Wolverine the X-Men would've stayed canceled after the 60s. Those older classic characters just aren't worth the effort. We're gonna keep inserting Wolverine cause he's more interesting."

Meanwhile the MCU takes someone who by all rights was as "Boring" as Cyclops like Captain America and makes him now be seen as a proper Icon on par with Superman and Batman.

I'd argue Iron Man was made an icon to rival Supes and Bats. All the while being the overexposed one in the MCU. Like you mentioned with Wolverine, Tony was given Hank Pym's role for the creation of Ultron, Ultron's role of creating Vision, Nebula's role for undoing the Snap, uncle Ben's and Octavius' role for mentoring Spider-Man's heroism and intellect. I'm sure Tony lifted other things from more characters, but you get the idea.


After DOFP, a lot of people (the actors included) were jazzed up to see a proper X-Men 4. Hugh Jackman was bowing out of the role at that point. He only came back for a cameo in Apocalypse and then full time when his R-rated Wolverine movie that he was producing was greenlit. But Fox wanted to continue the First Class movies. Casting younger actors to replace the ones from X1-X3, and moving JLaw's Mystique as the new star of the series. Not because Mystique is that compelling and interesting of a character, but because Academy Award Winning JLaw was playing her.

Th silliest thing is, with Mystique being a shapeshifter, they could've recasted anytime and no one would have thought twice about it. I

 

[shapeshifter]

How well a film adheres to what comics did isn't my benchmark for films based on them. I never read any until I could choose to as an adult, and then I chose Trek. So no Marvel or DC for me, ever. So how do I know if a film is good or not? Simple. It's either a good film or not.

Been awhile since I watched DP but I remember it being a good film IMO. Jeans history was like an open wound and DP rubbed alcohol and salt in it.

Wait, didn't I say I liked DP? Yes. The character cannot catch a break in any timeline. Beautifully tragic story, take 2.

 

[fireproof78]

Simple. It's either a good film or not.

This. Comics be damned. Give me a good movie.

 

[Anwar]

I'd argue Iron Man was made an icon to rival Supes and Bats. All the while being the overexposed one in the MCU. Like you mentioned with Wolverine, Tony was given Hank Pym's role for the creation of Ultron, Ultron's role of creating Vision, Nebula's role for undoing the Snap, uncle Ben's and Octavius' role for mentoring Spider-Man's heroism and intellect. I'm sure Tony lifted other things from more characters, but you get the idea.

Well, yes. He was overexposed, the MCU also wasn't dumb enough to make him be the core of everything otherwise they wouldn't have put as much effort into Steve and having him be able to stand up to Tony and have arguments of his own at the same time. The way the FoX-Men films could have done the same with Cyclops against Wolverine if they really cared about using their characters right.

After DOFP, a lot of people (the actors included) were jazzed up to see a proper X-Men 4.

Doubtful, seeing how the result was X-Men Apocalypse. All DOFP was good for was resetting everything back to the status quo because they couldn't accept an X-Men series where Xavier is dead.

Casting younger actors to replace the ones from X1-X3, and moving JLaw's Mystique as the new star of the series. Not because Mystique is that compelling and interesting of a character, but because Academy Award Winning JLaw was playing her

Apparently Kinberg himself DID think she was compelling and interesting. He wanted the Sentinels in DOFP to look like robot versions of her and have her be in her own movie

 

[Kor]

I need to revisit this movie some time soon. I think I only saw it once.
A few of my impressions from back then:

The aliens needed just a little more explanation. It's quite odd for them to show up out of the blue at all in the X-Men cinematic universe, or whatever it's called.
We needed to see more large-scale destructive power of Jean with the Phoenix Force.
At the time I liked this marginally better than Apocalypse mainly because of the psychological stuff, but neither of them come anywhere near holding a candle to DOFP.
The story seemed like it was missing something. It's a bit hard to explain. I would agree with the earlier comment that it was a bit off. I think this movie would have benefitted greatly from an alternate version along the lines of the Rogue Cut, which DOFP didn't really need (as much as I like the Rogue Cut).

As far as how Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix fit into the overall X-Men movie saga, personally I look at the 'younger cast' X-Men movies almost like standalone stories that sort of vaguely follow up on the previous ones in a 'broad strokes' kind of way instead of actually forming a tightly cohesive continuity. I mean, the characters barely age in-universe over the course of decades, including non-mutants like Moira McTaggert. It's like everyone is scooped out of the setting of the last movie and carried ahead ten years and dropped there for the new movie. Of course, this is arguably a perfect representation of the "floating/sliding timeline" inherent in comic books. But it's really weird to see in the movies if you try to give it too much thought. Anyway, I don't think the events of these movies, including Dark Phoenix, negate or cancel out the original X-Men trilogy. They're just branching timelines.

Kor

 

[dupersuper]

I never read any until I could choose to as an adult, and then I chose Trek. So no Marvel or DC for me, ever.

Both DC and Marvel have made Trek comics...

 

[thribs]

What's infuriating about it is that the soundtrack is amazing. Such a waste for this movie.

 

[DonIago]

What's infuriating about it is that the soundtrack is amazing. Such a waste for this movie.

Filmtracks begs to differ: https://www.filmtracks.com/titles/dark_phoenix.html

 

[Kor]

I don't even remember the music. I'm not a huge fan of Hans Zimmer's soundtrack work, though. Generally I find it very atmospheric for the movie it's being used in, but not necessarily so interesting as music for listening to on its own.

Kor

 

[Set Harth]

Anyway, I don't think the events of these movies, including Dark Phoenix, negate or cancel out the original X-Men trilogy. They're just branching timelines.

It seems to be intended as a situation where a timeline is overwritten as opposed to a branching scenario. But even as such I wouldn't see the original movies as being negated per se. They're still part of the history of the timeline, of how things got to where they ended up.

All DOFP was good for was resetting everything back to the status quo because they couldn't accept an X-Men series where Xavier is dead.

Xavier was already revealed to be not-dead in the same movie that "killed" him.

 

[Anwar]

Xavier was already revealed to be not-dead in the same movie that "killed" him.

Yeah, but look at the ending of DOFP. It's clearly supposed to be a reset back to the end of X2, because the writers just can't imagine moving on beyond that.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah, but look at the ending of DOFP. It's clearly supposed to be a reset back to the end of X2, because the writers just can't imagine moving on beyond that.

Then don't.

X2 was a great film. Don't get anywhere else with it.

 

[Anwar]

Then don't.

X2 was a great film. Don't get anywhere else with it.

It was just a rehash of X1 and refused to expand or grow the story properly. Resetting it back to that just shows how the writers had no clue how to proceed despite knowing they'd have to move beyond it anyways.

It's like those unoriginal buffoons who keep wanting the Alien movies to be erased back to the 2nd movie because they're obsessed with Hicks and Newt and Ripley having some silly fairytale ending. That's not how that series works.

 

[Dee1891]

I thought it was an okay movie. Not as great as "X2" or "First-Class", but okay.

 

[fireproof78]

It was just a rehash of X1 and refused to expand or grow the story properly. Resetting it back to that just shows how the writers had no clue how to proceed despite knowing they'd have to move beyond it anyways.

So, don't. As I said, let it rest.

 

[Set Harth]

Yeah, but look at the ending of DOFP. It's clearly supposed to be a reset back to the end of X2, because the writers just can't imagine moving on beyond that.

Except Jean was considered dead at the end of X2.

 

[Anwar]

So, don't. As I said, let it rest.

That's not how a continuing serial works. Even Star Trek II, which was supposed to be the last Star Trek film at the time, didn't do that.