The X-Men Cinematic Universe (General Discussion)

[JD]

Yes, it's called Fox.

I don't know what their status is now but Disney also had imprint labels for Touchstone Pictures (in-house productions that were deemed too edgy to bear the Disney name like Ed Wood & Who Framed Roger Rabbit?) and Dimension Films (their genre label for sci-fi, fantasy, & horror films like The Crow, From Dusk 'Till Dawn, Highlander: Endgame, & Scream). Miramax seemed to be more of their prestige label for Oscar bait like Good Will Hunting & Shakespeare in Love.

Personally, I hope that Disney keeps 20th Century Fox running as one of their imprints. I'm also hoping that we can put the 20th Century Fox fanfare back onto the Star Wars movies. They just feel naked without it![/QUOTE]
I forgot about Touchstone, but I had no idea they owned Dimension too.
The trailer looks pretty good to me, I'm glad to see that they really are focusing on Jean's story this time. I do like the Last Stand, but making Jean's transformation just a side story there was a big mistake IMO.
So does any of the stuff with Jessica Chastain give any kind of clue who she is?
I'm a little surprised to see them showing Mystique's death, I would have expected that to be saved as a big shocker.
I know the people who make the movie itself don't usually make the trailers, but do the people who make get some kind of a list of plot points not to spoil, or is all of that entirely up them? I know there have been at least one or two instances with the directors or actors being mad about something that was shown in a trailer.

 

[Christopher]

I'm a little surprised to see them showing Mystique's death, I would have expected that to be saved as a big shocker.

I saw it as implying Mystique's death, but I didn't think it explicitly gave it away. But apparently that was the intent.

I know the people who make the movie itself don't usually make the trailers, but do the people who make get some kind of a list of plot points not to spoil, or is all of that entirely up them? I know there have been at least one or two instances with the directors or actors being mad about something that was shown in a trailer.

The filmmakers are fine with it this time:

https://www.cbr.com/dark-phoenix-director-mystique-death/

 

[TV's Frank]

I saw it as implying Mystique's death, but I didn't think it explicitly gave it away. But apparently that was the intent.



The filmmakers are fine with it this time:

https://www.cbr.com/dark-phoenix-director-mystique-death/

Well, that is indeed pretty dramatic, I hadn't even known that that plot point was rumored beforehand, but it makes sense why Kinberg wanted to include an event such as this. If we follow that "Logan" is the wrap-up for the Fox/X-Men universe, then only Wolverine and Xavier actually need to survive this movie.

 

[Christopher]

My first thought when I saw Mystique implied to die in the trailer was, "Oh, of course, that's how they're dealing with Jennifer Lawrence getting too famous and expensive for them."

As for Logan, it's deliberately ambiguous about which timeline, if either, it's actually set in. It has elements that could refer to both timelines, and I think there's a stronger suggestion of continuity with the pre-DOFP version of the timeline in some ways. Like the Deadpool films, it's pretty much its own standalone version of things without a lot of concern for how it reconciles with other films.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I actually assumed Mystique was going to be killed off simply because she was the only character unaccounted for in either version of the future in Days of Future Past.

 

[Ethros]

I actually assumed Mystique was going to be killed off simply because she was the only character unaccounted for in either version of the future in Days of Future Past.

Quicksilver and Nightcrawler would be the other main possibilities if the end of DOFP when Logan wakes up is still canon (and Magneto)

 

[Teelie]

It's possible Mystique's death is a fake out but these movies don't usually have that much twist to them. I thought it was too spoilerish too to be in a trailer like that. Which has me thinking she won't be the only death.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

My first thought when I saw Mystique implied to die in the trailer was, "Oh, of course, that's how they're dealing with Jennifer Lawrence getting too famous and expensive for them."

Whereas I took it as Jennifer Lawrence being disenchanted with the film series (which has been reported a few times over the years) and having issues with the make-up (which is pretty damn clear in this trailer). Probably a combination of all of those factors.

 

[Marsden]

I would've expected them to try to distance this from The Last Stand, but when Jean's voiceover said "When I lose control, people I love die," they made a point of showing Xavier and Cyclops.

Still, it looks like a very different movie, one where Jean is more front-and-center, as she should've been the first time.

I'm hoping it's being billed like that but ending up a different movie. I'm not sure how ad campaigns work best but maybe it's a bit misleading on purpose? Maybe to cause more of a surprise? I hate when trailers give the whole movie away anyway.

I also wonder, regarding the MCU, the Infinity Gauntlet has the ability to re-write existence itself. Someone could use it to merge universes or bridge between them. It's almost endless what could change in universe within already established rules. As in, Mutants were always a thing now that reality has been changed. Or Deadpool falls through from his universe to the MCU. Anything could happen with that power.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I also wonder, regarding the MCU, the Infinity Gauntlet has the ability to re-write existence itself. Someone could use it to merge universes or bridge between them. It's almost endless what could change in universe within already established rules. As in, Mutants were always a thing now that reality has been changed. Or Deadpool falls through from his universe to the MCU. Anything could happen with that power.

I've been wondering if they might do something like that for awhile now. The timing works out nicely, even if it's not something that's overtly stated in Endgame. They could hint that something is different in the universe after everything that has happened but they don't go into details until a future film.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'm hoping it's being billed like that but ending up a different movie. I'm not sure how ad campaigns work best but maybe it's a bit misleading on purpose? Maybe to cause more of a surprise? I hate when trailers give the whole movie away anyway.

I also wonder, regarding the MCU, the Infinity Gauntlet has the ability to re-write existence itself. Someone could use it to merge universes or bridge between them. It's almost endless what could change in universe within already established rules. As in, Mutants were always a thing now that reality has been changed. Or Deadpool falls through from his universe to the MCU. Anything could happen with that power.

Or maybe the MCU exists because of Deadpool's meddling at the end of DP2.

 

[Reverend]

I've been wondering if they might do something like that for awhile now. The timing works out nicely, even if it's not something that's overtly stated in Endgame. They could hint that something is different in the universe after everything that has happened but they don't go into details until a future film.

For some reason I'm imagining the MCU equivalent of this bit.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Set Harth]

I think there's a stronger suggestion of continuity with the pre-DOFP version of the timeline in some ways.

But that doesn't work if you're setting your movie in 2029, after the future portion of DOFP. The problem is that Mangold & co. didn't seem to have any practical understanding of the content of DOFP and its effect on the movieverse, other than getting the idea that they needed to set their film after 2023 "to get far enough past". ( Yet 2029 isn't nearly far enough to allow the film's ill-advised "no mutant births in 25 years" plot point to really work in conjuction with the end of DOFP, though there are arguably defensible ways to explain the apparent discrepancy if one so desires. ) As such, if we are forced to choose one or the other, Logan only kinda-sorta fits the post-DOFP version of the timeline.

In fact, the movie plays out as if it ignores the existence of the McAvoy/Fassbender/Lawrence/Hoult "prequel" films completely. There are obvious references to the first X-Men movie and to The Wolverine; there is an apparent reference to X-Men 3 in a deleted scene; there is a nod to Origins, manifested in the form of a plot idea borrowed from that film yet used in a different and potentially inconsistent fashion. ( Though they ultimately went in a different direction, that the filmmmakers considered using Schrieber's Sabretooth is also worthy of note. ) But how can we be in a timeline where all these things happened yet the Sentinels, apparently, did not?

Furthermore, it's clear that there was no high-level coordination between the production of Apocalypse and that of Logan. Both films involved Caliban, and both films involved the Weapon X program, yet there's no indication anyone in charge was aware of these things. So we end up with two different Calibans, and with no Dale Rice in either timeline's version of Logan's escape.

In short, Fox needs a Feige. They don't seem to care much about continuity anymore, and thus Logan feels like an Elseworlds tale, to borrow a DC term, in its own little pocket timeline. Which for some of us makes it a bit harder to care about what happens in the film or to see it as the "end" or wrap-up of the overall universe.

 

[DigificWriter]

As for Logan, it's deliberately ambiguous about which timeline, if either, it's actually set in. It has elements that could refer to both timelines, and I think there's a stronger suggestion of continuity with the pre-DOFP version of the timeline in some ways. Like the Deadpool films, it's pretty much its own standalone version of things without a lot of concern for how it reconciles with other films.

This is inaccurate and has been confirmed to be so by James Mangold, Hugh Jackman, and Producer Hutch Parker.

Even without explicitly referencing the post-DoFP timeline's known events, Logan is expressly intended to be set within that timeline and any perceived discrepancies are exactly that: perceived.

 

[Set Harth]

This is inaccurate and has been confirmed to be so by James Mangold, Hugh Jackman, and Producer Hutch Parker.

Jackman's comments on the subject are not exactly helpful to the position that the film sits comfortably in the post-DOFP timeline:

“When you see the full movie you’ll understand. Not only is it different in terms of timeline and tone, it’s a slightly different universe. It’s actually a different paradigm and that will become clear.”

“It’s a stand-alone movie in many ways. It’s not really beholden to timelines and storylines in the other movies. Obviously Patrick Stewart was in there so we have some crossover but it feels very different and very fresh.”

 

[Caretaker]

I'd be fine with Dark PhoeniX and New Mutants ending with the M'Kraan effect washing over everything, crystalizing and shattering (as seen at the end of most X-Men comics leading up to The Age of Apocalypse).

 

[Anwar]

I'd rather the post-credits scene be Kevin Feige walk in and snap his fingers.

 

[DigificWriter]

Jackman's comments on the subject are not exactly helpful to the position that the film sits comfortably in the post-DOFP timeline:

“When you see the full movie you’ll understand. Not only is it different in terms of timeline and tone, it’s a slightly different universe. It’s actually a different paradigm and that will become clear.”

“It’s a stand-alone movie in many ways. It’s not really beholden to timelines and storylines in the other movies. Obviously Patrick Stewart was in there so we have some crossover but it feels very different and very fresh.”

He later clarified exactly what he meant... which is that Logan IS expressly meant to be part of the same timeline and universe as the X-Men and Wolverine films that preceded it both in release date and in-universe.

So, I will say it again: Logan has been confirmed to exist as part of the alternate timeline created by Days of Future Past, and any perceived discrepancies that prevent it from being seen as part of that timeline exist only in the minds of those doing the perceiving.

 

[Set Harth]

Oh, I can resolve a certain discrepancy -- but only because I've thought of several possible explanations for it, one of which happens to be supported by a certain line of dialogue in Apocalypse.

But that appears to be what I might call a "happy accident" as opposed to anything planned out by the franchise.

He later clarified exactly what he meant...

We call that sort of thing "backpedaling"

 

[crookeddy]

He later clarified exactly what he meant... which is that Logan IS expressly meant to be part of the same timeline and universe as the X-Men and Wolverine films that preceded it both in release date and in-universe.

So, I will say it again: Logan has been confirmed to exist as part of the alternate timeline created by Days of Future Past, and any perceived discrepancies that prevent it from being seen as part of that timeline exist only in the minds of those doing the perceiving.

I was about to write a response, but I realized that you're a lost cause and deleted everything i had previously written.

Some people just aren't worth responding to.