The X-Men Cinematic Universe (General Discussion)
- Thread starter DigificWriter
- Start date
Yep. If they keep the First Class series going in the pre-X1 years, they can introduce a new Wolverine, and that would pretty implicitly signal that all else was up for grabs. And if the New Mutants movie, which allegedly films this summer, is set in the present and acts like a soft reboot, for the whole franchise, ditto.
I suppose our next big clue will be how said movie treats/refers to Cyke, Jean, Nightcrawler, Storm, and the rest of the Apocalypse team. Are they generally present, but off-screen? That would keep things entirely open. Have they been missing since a mysterious late-90s incident? That leaves the door open for time-travel hijinks bringing those actors into the present. Of course, given the chaos of this series, they could always go with the former option, do one last 90s period movie, and then zap that team into the present. Or, if New Mutants underperforms, that movie could just be ignored, with the Apocalypse team doing its whatever.
In short: Nobody knows anything! Nothing means anything! Black is white! Dogs and cats! It's all Barry Allen's fault!
Edit: MacAvoy is rumored to be in New Mutants. If it's set in the 90s, that would mean the 37-y.o. actor would be playing mid-50s, at least. If it's set in the present, he'd be in his 80s. If it's set in the present and McAvoy isn't aged up... then we'd really know how far out the window continuity would be.
Last edited:
I thought my whole point was that they really didn't?
Anyway, if it's any consolation Logan seems to be designed as one of those things that you can interpret as being in the DOFP timeline if you really want to, but it basically just does its own thing. There was no coordination with Apocalypse and the movie essentially ignores DOFP as well. Other than in being set in 2029 so that it would be after 2023. But the deleted scenes seem to act like X3 happened ( though that can be explained by things in DOFP ).
No Cyclops, Storm, Jean grey, Professor X, etc? Then no franchise. There are literally no "marketable" X-Men left (there also aren't any good X-Men or X-Men allies left, but I'll just go in purely franchise thinking). So, if we only include X-Men they could potentially use (and using only the characters the mainstream audience might slightly give a crap about) I can't wait until we see the post Logan team of...um, no one, since every single normal X-Men is dead. That definitely includes deadpool and the New Mutants, and Mystique and Quicksilver. So, get ready for characters like Skin, Dust, Surge and Maggot to be the characters FOX expects to lead the X-Men. Or don't, because Storm, jean grey, Beast, cyclops, etc won't be dying all together at any point in time.
So, you're right, FOX didn't end the franchise. Because Logan isn't the future of the X-Men. At no point will any X-Men movie every line up with the events of that movie, unless its to do something to specifically retcon it.
Its not in the DOFP timeline, its obviously its own timeline. One were some events vaguely like the main timeline happened, but branched off at some point (presumably with the killing of the X-Men and the invention of the magic, science defying thing that stops mutant births).
@kirk55555 You don't get to arbitrarily declare what the filmmakers of the X-Verse will or will not do or what is it is not part of the official continuity of the series, and the fact that you act like you do is where the problem lies.
Logan set up X-Men: The Next Generation, if that's the direction they want to go. They can meet up with other legacy characters who somehow survived, unbeknownst to Charles or Logan.
I'm not saying they will go that way, but they very easily could. Logan was the end of Wolverine and Xavier, but didn't end the universe by a long shot.
I'm not saying they will go that way, but they very easily could. Logan was the end of Wolverine and Xavier, but didn't end the universe by a long shot.
I can assure you that doing a film series with underage actors, and all their statutory labor limits, is not a direction Fox would want to go. Nor would they want to recast the roles as late-teens or older if it meant losing Dafne Keen when we don't even know the characters, and besides, they already have a "next generation" New Mutants movie about to shoot. I can easily see them bringing Keen herself back someday, especially when she reaches legal adulthood and can work full-time, but would be very much surprised if any of the other kid actors were ever asked to return.
No, it wouldn't. there are infinite timelines. Logan is just one of them. Whether its because of a later retcon or it just gets ignored without comment doesn't really matter.
Also, yes, I think most people prefer that all the heroes in a superhero franchise except two don't get pointlessly killed off screen in a spin off film. If you want to call that a reset button, that's fine. I call it common sense, really. You don't kill your franchise off for no reason, especially off screen in a spin off film. Putting a definitive, dark and depressing ending to your franchise years (or, let's be honest, decades) before the franchise will probably end would be so incompetent I don't believe even the company that put out Fant4stic would ever do that.
So, you're of the opinion that they just removed any reason to watch their movies, have a definitive end to every single X-Men hero we've been seeing and they've built up/are building up, and it all happens off screen in a spin off film? And that makes more sense then what I've said? I mean, you're entitled to your opinion, but I'm pretty sure I'll end up being right in the long run. Either that or a Disney executive has infiltrated FOX and is trying to kill the X-Men franchise from the inside.I don't really care if you agree with me or not. I know we'll never see all the X-men die, or all mutants go away. As far as I'm concerned, the discussion about that is over. I'll hate watch Logan once, probably post a scathing review somewhere, and then, just like Wolverine Origins, never bother to watch it again. Although, to be fair, I can see myself watching Origins again, even if its unlikely. Logan is going to be the worst superhero film I've ever have to sit through (and I've seen all the mainstream bad superhero movies, including Fant4stic, Superman IV, Batman & Robin, etc, multiple times), but it will be done after seeing it once and I know I can happily watch new X-Men movies knowing that Logan will never factor into them unless its to get directly retconned instead of just ignored.
Harry Potter killed a few people, and that was based on the books. It then pretty much did end the franchise, they took a chance and are trying to restart it. FOX, on the other hand, isn't going to kill off the main X-Men and expect to continue the franchise with the D-listers (and I say that as someone who enjoys most of the obscure X-Men characters), especially since they don't have to.
WB had to end Harry Potter the way they did since they were adapting specific books. FOX is making their own stories by adapting small parts of X-Men comic stories and usually mixing them together. Its a completely different situation, and they won't be getting rid of the big X-Men names, especially not off screen in a spin off film. I'm sure even Wolverine will be recast in the next few years.
No, it wouldn't. there are infinite timelines. Logan is just one of them. Whether its because of a later retcon or it just gets ignored without comment doesn't really matter.
Also, yes, I think most people prefer that all the heroes in a superhero franchise except two don't get pointlessly killed off screen in a spin off film. If you want to call that a reset button, that's fine. I call it common sense, really. You don't kill your franchise off for no reason, especially off screen in a spin off film. Putting a definitive, dark and depressing ending to your franchise years (or, let's be honest, decades) before the franchise will probably end would be so incompetent I don't believe even the company that put out Fant4stic would ever do that.
I don't really care if you agree with me or not. I know we'll never see all the X-men die, or all mutants go away. As far as I'm concerned, the discussion about that is over. I'll hate watch Logan once, probably post a scathing review somewhere, and then, just like Wolverine Origins, never bother to watch it again. Although, to be fair, I can see myself watching Origins again, even if its unlikely. Logan is going to be the worst superhero film I've ever have to sit through (and I've seen all the mainstream bad superhero movies, including Fant4stic, Superman IV, Batman & Robin, etc, multiple times), but it will be done after seeing it once and I know I can happily watch new X-Men movies knowing that Logan will never factor into them unless its to get directly retconned instead of just ignored.
Just stop with the condescension and this attitude of "I know best", because the fact of the matter is that, whether you like it or not, Logan IS in continuity and does mark an "end point" for the X-Verse, although, as I understand it, it also leaves A door open for future storytelling beyond the time of its narrative.
I would also point out that the scenario implemented in Logan as it concerns the "state of the mutant", as it were, is just a variation on the Dystopian future of Days of Future Past.
The characters you keep talking about are still getting stories back in the '90s, that gives them approximately 30 years to still tell stories with them.
And the comics have done plenty of successful stories without those characters anyways, and movies like Ant-Man, and Guardians of the Galaxy have proven that you can have a successful movie without any big name characters.
Kirk, does it make any difference to you that Logan is an absolutely amazing movie overall? The things you're complaining are a very small part of the movie, they're just a bit of backstory for the real story of the movie, which is Logan, Xavier and Laura and that story is very, very well told.
And the comics have done plenty of successful stories without those characters anyways, and movies like Ant-Man, and Guardians of the Galaxy have proven that you can have a successful movie without any big name characters.
Kirk, does it make any difference to you that Logan is an absolutely amazing movie overall? The things you're complaining are a very small part of the movie, they're just a bit of backstory for the real story of the movie, which is Logan, Xavier and Laura and that story is very, very well told.
X1 and X2 did this too.
There's a reason that Singer deliberately chose to make the future ending of DOFP pretty much the same as the ending of X1. That's the status quo he's happy with. He didn't want to deviate from that.
X2 ended relatively on the status quo as well, the school was safe and hidden again, the X-Men intimidated the President into backing off and doing absolutely NOTHING while threatening him, the only thing was that we had the hint of the Phoenix in the end.
And Singers' idea for the Phoenix saga was pretty crappy too.
People complain there are never any consequences in the MCU, but don't care that the XCU did the same damn thing.
Why would I watch any X-Men movie if Logan is canon? If it all ends with them dying (it a really stupid way) and all mutants basically dying, what's the point? Unless there is a chance (not a guarantee, but a chance) of a good ending for at least a good portion of the heroes, I wouldn't bother. I wouldn't watch a franchise that has a grimdark ending. I'm not going to watch New Mutants, Supernova, etc knowing how it all ends. that all these movies are just pointless fights against their inevitable, unheroic, pointless deaths.
I'll also point out that, while I love the X-Men, they aren't a whole universe like the MCU. They have a few workable spinoffs, I guess, that might get the general audience to pay attention that don't involve the more famous X-Men or Deadpool. But, we already know that the New Mutants would be dead if Logan were canon, and X-Factor is already ruined because Kinberg stuck Multiple Man in X3 as a villain for literally no reason except he could. So, that's the two most likely ones gone, and X-Force is dead with Cable. Besides, no franchise with any brain throws away Cyclops, Storm, etc for Maggot, Skin, Beak, Dust, Surge, Xorn, etc. Its stupid and would only cost them money for no reason, and I say that as someone who actually really likes many obscure X-Men characters.
It makes a lot more sense for Logan to go away then for all the well known X-men to basically be reduced to pitiful characters fighting battles that just end with their pointless deaths and the end of everything they fought for (well, ok, deadpool wasn't fighting for that stuff, but you get what I mean and he's not a mutant anyway so he'd probably survive into Logan's timeline).
I really don't think that FOX is going to go that route. I'd argue its a bad creative decision, but regardless of that its a stupid decision financially. Yeah, Marvel has Ant-Man and GotG. They can afford to do that because they have a huge cast of varied characters. But, even then, they still make Avengers movies. They still use the big names. I doubt Infinity War is going to kill off all the older heroes. Its a completely different situation.
Its not going to be an amazing movie for me. To be amazing X-23 would have to be older,
Xavier not senile and not having murdered anyone, and Wolverine not a broody idiot with a failing healing factor.
Also, all the X-Men (or at least most of them) would also have to be alive, and mutant births must still happen and not have been stopped by any moronic plot point. Also,
Absolutely no X-24
If those criteria were met, I might have hope. I'm actually not against
Xavier and Logan dying
in the movie, but this BS apocalyptic future, the complete middle finger to the source material (except, ironically, the source material they should avoid, Old Man Logan) and moronic franchise ending (if it was canon) stuff makes the movie irredeemable to me. I don't care about Baby X-23, or the non-continuity adventures of Professor Nutjob and Weakened by Plot Convenience Wolverine.I don't want to see them, and I just don't care. They aren't characters I want to watch. I want Wolverine, Professor Xavier, and an X-23 that resembles the version that got popular (for good reasons), not an X-23 that just barely resembles the lame cartoon version but with a drastically different backstory and personality.
I'd honestly rather just rewatch Wolverine Origins. A movie with far less flaws and somehow less stupid. but, like I said, I can't resist a mainstream superhero movie. I'm less excited to watch Logan then I was to watch Fant4stic, but I can't not watch it. I like superhero movies too much. So, eventually I'll watch what, for me, is guaranteed to be the worst FOX superhero film basically ever (I don't think even they can make something worse).
Prove that Logan will never be ignored or retconned. If you can't, then what you think is no more legitimate then what I think, and I think my opinion is the more logical course for a franchise that isn't ending anytime soon and is probably going to still be banking on characters like Storm, Cyclops, etc years and years from now.
Days of Future Past worked because it was a future that was never meant to be the "final" future, and it got fixed. Plus, it was actually written well and made sense from a "worst case future" standpoint.
Last edited:
1) Because you like the characters and want to see what happens to them BEFORE everything goes to ****.
2) Because the fact that many of the characters we know and love meet "sticky ends" in no way precludes stories from being told about them BEFORE they meet said ends.
^ He clearly doesn't care; he's decided that Logan can't possibly add anything positive to the franchise and doesn't actually matter anyway, facts to the contrary be damned.
If the end is crap, I'm not going to bother with any more of the middle. If Logan were canon, then every single X-Men movie is now pointless. We know what happens: the mutants lose. Not even a heroic sendoff, its senility (that somehow wipes out mutants that could not all have possibly been killed that way, but whatever) and a magic mutant birth stopper (that is stupid and wouldn't even remotely work even by comic book logic) that defeat mutant kind.
Also, when every single damn character is instantly consigned to "pointless death having accomplished nothing of value in the end", there is no story to save that. I'm not going to watch something when I already know its pointless. I don't enjoy depressing, pointless struggles. Not as an entire franchise, at least.
But, again, that isn't going to happen. At no point will FOX actually do that. I'll be watching movies with the normal X-Men years and years into the future, and they'll never be shown dying like Logan says and mutants will never die off like they did in that crap movie. So, I'll still watch the X-men movies, knowing that none of the Logan shit will happen.
That's fine if other people think that. For me, nothing good can be told with that stuff. There is no story I'd like that uses that. Logan is basically custom made to be the worst superhero movie possible for me. Worse then anything Snyder has done, and he made batman into a mass murderer. The only way I could possibly be more pissed and hate Logan more is if it went full Old Man Logan and had incest She-Hulk and her cannibal incest babies. So unless that is in a director's cut, or DC does something psychotic like have the Shazam film be about Billy Batson being a serial killer or something, Logan is already my most hated superhero film.
It has nothing redeeming for me. I have never dreaded having to hate watch a movie more then Logan. But, I'll do it, because I obviously have a problem. If nothing else, watching a superhero movie that is worse then I ever thought a superhero movie could be will be interesting. Still painful, but not something I thought FOX could accomplish (I would have bet on Zach Snyder accomplishing it, but FOX managed to beat even him).
There are no "facts" to the contrary. its all subjective. Your "facts" that Logan effects the franchise at all are especially subjective, and not in the same way an opinion on a movie is subjective.
Similar threads
