Amph X-Men Movies & TV - Discussion

Well, there was another newspaper article that pointed out "terror mutant" in Rio de Janeiro, but I can't recall if there was any reference to the date of that article. I just got the sense that there's a long history of mutants being public knowledge, which I personally don't like as a long time reader of the X-Men comic books as the original concept was mutants were "Child of the Atom," side effects of the atomic age. I've always like the "Frankenstein's monster" consequences of the advancement of technology. But in comics that have been retconned throughout the years and it really doesn't effect the X-Men overall.

 

Doesn't mutation being caused by human activity somewhat undermine the racism/homophobia allegory? It grants the bigoted humans in the story who claim it to be unnatural and want to develop a cure a point. Maybe it's for the better that this story element has been jettisoned.

 

I can't recall either, but if I were to take a guess it's because of Apocalypse being labeled as "the first mutant."

To me, not really, because like "Frankenstein's monster," mutants are considered unholy creatures and thus hatred and fear stills exists.

 

I know hatred and fear still exists, but the allegory to racism and homophobia works better IMO when mutation is a natural phenomenon, just as homosexuality and the existence of different races are natural phenomena. If mutation is caused by humans, then even though it can be a beautiful thing, the argument can be made that it is a mistake made by humans that must also be rectified by humans, by developing medicines that suppress the X-gene, quarantining mutants away from the rest of the population, banning mutants from producing offspring etc. And the story becomes open to be interpreted as a cautionary tale of humans messing with nature rather than an allegory for irrational bigotry. Furthermore, since human activity has caused it, there's no telling if the absence of the thing that caused it will cause a reversal, which in turn makes discrimination against them more tolerable to those on the fence, because it's only a passing moment in human history. Whereas discriminating against a class of people in perpetuity forever because they are naturally different is harder to justify.

edit: I guess the former makes it very clear cut why the protagonists are in the right and the humans are in the wrong, and makes the allegory very easily understood to the children and young adults who would primarily be reading it. The downside, I guess, is that the allegory is then very on the nose. While the latter makes for a more layered setup, where the story must work a little harder to show why the protagonists are still in the right and the humans wrong, and even then a lot of people will read it as "eh well, both sides have a point...", which I don't think is actually the intention. Although I guess it can be.

 

I get where you're coming from and it makes alot of sense. But here's the thing about hatred and bigotry; it really doesn't matter how things came to be; natural or unnatural. I mean, the scene in X-Men 2 where Bobby comes out to his parents is still a metaphor for homosexuality. I mean, Bobby's mom actually says, "Bobby, have you tried not being a mutant?" Hatred and bigotry is born out of ignorance, so I feel mutants can still be born from the atomic age, as the "X-Gene" may have always been within the human DNA but not activated until the splitting of the atom.

 

I do agree with you, but there's the thing I added in my edit.

 

Got caught up on the episodes (cuz I thought the 2 part finale was airing yesterday, what the heck did Fox show instead?), the Stepford Cookos were fantastic and livened up a character who I thought was really dry when she was first introduced but I could watch them do their triple talk all day. Seriously, an entire episode, it's really enjoyable. Guess adding the Hellfire Club is how originally there was a Hellfire show in development and it got kicked up to here. Making the Stepford Cookos Frost as an alias (but everyone calls them Frost) is a unique trick, I can buy they're Emma's kid(s). Either grandaughter(s) of First Class Emma or kids of the X-Men: Origins Emma.

As for continuity, in my head, it takes place after Xavier and the Westchester Incident (a few dates on screen aside) and referencing mutants in the 50s is a bit of a stumble but, well, we've got Hellfire and/or the Fed spooks covering it up. The fact that it's really likely Magneto could have been "king" of the Hellfire Club is also a stumble (considering he was actively trying to kill them in First Class) but, hey, maybe it's he was made King after he killed Shaw (and got released from prison). there are big, decade long gaps between First Class / DoFP and Apocalypse (With another one coming up for Dark Phoenix) so, yah, bunch of ways to fiddle in there.

 

Regarding trying to reconcile the differences between the pre-time change and post-time change, only two things stand out that make it almost impossible:

Xavier's lack of hair in X-Origins: Wolverine, assuming it takes place in 1979 vs X-Men: Apocalypse taking place in 1983.

Cyclops's power: again, by X-Origins, it looks like it has fully developed, and yet by X-Men: Apocalypse, it's just starting too. My headcanon involving his schooling is that he's in eighth grade in Origins and a senior in Apocalypse.

The rest can be attributed to missing moments (like Magneto helping Xavier to start building his own Cerebro and eventually designing his own helmet based on that); Xavier walking and using powers post-DOFP: Hank McCoy finding a balance to make it work, etc.

 

I guess with some creativity you can convince yourself that the changes to the timeline in DOFP alters all those events to what they are in the new continuity.

1) Having to conceal his identity and those of his students in the original timeline put him under more stress, which gave him premature hair loss in the original timeline. He lost it anyway due to Apocalypse in the new timeline, so apparently he is destined to be hairless.

2) Somehow, the altered timeline and the outing of mutants made Scott and Alex's parents conceive a second child sooner than in the original timeline. Maybe knowing the rational explanation behind Alex being different made them more secure in their decision to conceive again? The parent's worries and stresses related to Alex being different and the fear of Scott being too, made both parents and child more stressed in the original timeline, causing Scott's power to manifest earlier in his life despite having been born later. Boom!

Where there's a will there's a way.

 

Well, some of the contradictions take place before the time change, like Magneto helping Xavier build Cerebro. First Class would be "canon" for both timelines since it takes place before the split.

As McCoy said, the timeline can readjust itself like the current of a river, which is how Logan still ends up in Stryker's hands. The circumstances would have been changed, because let's assume the following:

This is still canon for both timelines: Logan wakes up with the mob boss's daughter and fights the gangsters and flees.

In the original timeline, my guess is that he knows he'll have to get out of dodge pretty quickly, despite his healing powers. He finds Victor and they rejoin the U.S. Army in time for the final operations in Vietnam before the troops are officially withdrawn. And the rest is history. Up until their failed execution, Stryker probably doesn't know anything about either of them, judging by his expression at seeing Logan's claws in DOFP when trying to stop Mystique.

Obviously, in the new timeline, he never hooks back up with Victor and seemingly ends up in Stryker's hands, but that's Mystique posing as him: that begs the question how did he end up being Weapon X in the new timeline?

As for Mystique and Magneto: eventually Xavier persuades the government to release Magneto once evidence is shown that he wasn't involved in Kennedy's assassination, and they remain somewhat friendly (judging by their recruiting Jean Grey). Mystique, however, remains in Stryker's hands long enough for them to get the material needed to take the Sentinels program further, and she develops a bitter hatred of all humans (not just Trask). Given the "changes" in her voice, and not just attributing to age, maybe the torture altered her voice somewhat.

Just speculation on my part, and obviously some jumping through hoops is required.

 

I thought that Cyclops was the same age in both Origins: Wolverine and Apocalypse.

 

I don't even bother to try and make the X-Men franchises line up and make any continuity sense as that wasn't the plan from the start like the MCU. Which is fine by me.

In other news, despite the pending closure of the Disney purchase of Fox assets agreement, Fox is continuing with business as usual with a Collider report yesterday that a Kitty Pryde movie is in development and will be helmed by Deadpool director, Tim Miller. Now, it's not a surprise to me that Fox is proceeding with business as usual but it is surprising to hear that Kitty Pryde is the next X-Men related film to go into production especially after Laura Kinney/X-23 was the breakout character from Logan. So, a Kitty Pryde movie has piqued my interest as I wonder if the film will be more of a comedy like Deadpool or a more serious drama like Logan or even something different like a coming of age film type of film. Moreover, it's not clear if Ellen Page would reprise her role as Kitty Pryde so speculation can run rampant.

Reportedly, the Dr. Doom and Gambit movies will continue to be in development. X-Force is also expected to moving forward with it's development as well.

 

I think the timing is different. Wolverine and Sabretooth were recruited by Stryker at the latest the tail end of the Vietnam War, which would be '73-75, and the bulk of Origins takes place 6 years later (I believe), so anywhere from 79-81. But X-Men: Apocalypse is 1983 specifically because Jean, Cyclops, et al. ended up seeing Return of the Jedi.

 

X-Men movie New Mutants pushed back to 2019, Deadpool 2 bumps up

I'm surprised and disappointed to hear that New Mutants is being pushed by to 2019 as I was really looking forward to that film. To me, it signals massive writes and reshoots. And I'm kind of pleased and disappointed that Deadpool 2 is moving into May as I would like to have spaced out the comic book movies.


Gore Verbinski Pulls Off Of ‘Gambit’ Movie

I won't be a surprise if the Gambit movie never gets made.

 

This is starting to sound like Disney has started to step in. Unless Fox execs really didn’t like the cut of New Mutants - and even then, was it so bad they decided to re-shoot. This feels like a tonal change like Trank’s Fantatic Flop.

Or maybe Disney didn’t like the script for New Mutants? Maybe they were going to delay the Gambit script again?

I think only Deadpool is safe and Phoenix will release. New Mutants though-not sure what will happen there. Gambit is likely dead though I won’t be surprised to see it on life support for a few more months.

 

Maybe they think of Deadpool as the anti-superhero film that kind of looks at the genre from the outside in, and are therefore deliberately positioning it close to Avengers for those who would be burned out by Avengers. Or maybe they deliberately want the X-franchise to underperform as a pretext to reboot. Outside of those two, I really don't see the logic in the positioning they've chosen, other than that maybe since both of the major movies it's competing against are their own, they figure it makes no difference either way.

 

Maybe they want to compare and contrast the Josh Brolin films: from Thanos to Cable.

 

I came across a report yesterday affirming what you posted in that New Mutants was pushed back to next year as to not overlap and compete with the other X-Men related flicks in certain global markets.

I really wanted to see if New Mutants could pull off the horror genre elements, much in the same way that Logan did with the Western elements. Fox has been doing a really good job with their Marvel properties lately.

 

Oh, please no.

 

I hope the reshoots are just for cheap "jump scares," but rather for smart story telling and set up for the horror elements. But, by the time that New Mutants is released, it might be a dead end franchise as that's when the Disney/Fox deal so finally be closed and it will be up to Disney to figure out what to do with the New Mutants, which is one of the reasons why I was disappointed it wasn't release this year.

 

Considering how this film is to take place in the 1990s, I hope they make the time period distinctive. They did so for First Class and Days of Future Past, but not so much for Apocalypse. I liked JLaw's performance as Raven/Mystique in the first two, but not in the latter, although I'm inclined to blame the story more than her. I love JLaw. I have several posters of her. I generally like Fassbender in all of his films, whether he's a likable or reprehensible character. I hope they've learned from their Apocalypse mistakes. I don't expect a film as good as Days of Future Past or Logan, but I hope it will at least be as good as First Class.