X-Men Movies Thread

[ShyViolet]

Well, if it isn't Singer, I really hope it's someone good. X-Men means a lot to me and even though I enjoyed First Class I didn't get a "wow" feeling, just a "Oh, that was pretty good I guess" feeling. The Last Stand--Ugh! No offense to anyone who likes it but for me everything fell so flat. There was no character development or resonance to it, only battle after battle and Magneto saying stuff like "Let the war begin!" or whatever it is he likes to say. Actually, in that respect, he wasn't so different from Shaw, who spewed very similar lines.

On the director: pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease not Michael Bay.

[Ben]

Well, we can safely say it won't be Bay!

And Eddie...interesting that you came back with a comment that defined a reaction from a certain sexual orientation, since Eric's remark about a "jilted date" was no doubt not aimed at either hetero or homosexuals, but just a general stereotype. When you came back with "straights do that too", I must say I hadn't thought that, in this case, there was any difference.

A jilted date is a jilted date!

[EricJ]

Well, if it isn't Singer, I really hope it's someone good. X-Men means a lot to me and even though I enjoyed First Class I didn't get a "wow" feeling, just a "Oh, that was pretty good I guess" feeling.

It felt like they were trying to "apologize" for XMO:W by bringing it back to the comics, but they were still saddled with Fox wanting to make it "current" with angsty CW teens playing the new characters old fans had never heard of, or "hip" reboots of the ones we had.
Which pretty much captures Fox's problem: You can make it Legendary and Iconic, or you can make it Hip and Modern, but doing both is pretty near impossible, without you have a lot of reader love for the franchise.
(Captain America 2 went for Modern Legendary by sticking to the classic material, and only updating what needed to be. Fox wants to be distinctive from Disney's movies by being more youthful and hi-energy, but you can't be a youthful classic.)

And Vaughn's good, but he's not really a reader. Singer comes about as close as anyone outside of Disney/Marvel (at least he'd watched the TAS cartoon), but...we also know what we're going to get from one of his X-movies, which isn't exactly perfect either.

And Eddie...interesting that you came back with a comment that defined a reaction from a certain sexual orientation, since Eric's remark about a "jilted date" was no doubt not aimed at either hetero or homosexuals, but just a general stereotype. When you came back with "straights do that too", I must say I hadn't thought that, in this case, there was any difference.
A jilted date is a jilted date!

(Well, I wouldn't exactly say "impartial"--
Just sayin', y'know, it don't recall it being Michael Douglas who stalked Glenn Close...)

[Ben]

Well, we've all been jilted at some point or ended up stalking someone we can't have, haven't we?

I mean, haven't we?

Guys?



Guys...?

[ShyViolet]

Hmmm....

http://comicbook.com/blog/2014/04/20/x- ... avel-epic/

Aaronofsky would be pretty cool. But still pulling for Ron Howard!

[EricJ]

Aaronofsky would be pretty cool. But still pulling for Ron Howard!

...WHY are they still courting Aronofsky for action comic book projects? Haven't they caught on by now, he only does ponderous artsy graphic novels?

[ShyViolet]

How about Danny Boyle? (28 Days Later) It would certainly be "interesting"...

[eddievalient]

Two words: Joss Whedon. Considering how awesome The Avengers was, just imagine what he could do with the X-Men, especially since he already has extensive experience with them. It's a no-brainer. Are you listening, Fox?

[ShyViolet]

Alfonso Cuaron might be good too, I think.

[Dacey]

Peter Jackson! Sam Raimi! Wolfgang Peterson! Gore Verbinski! Jon Favreau! Brad Bird! Anyone who worked on Game of Thrones!

There. Now that we've taken care of that, shall we get back to discussing the current X-Men movie?

(Actually, one more--and this is serious--, but I think Ken Kwapis--who's name probably doesn't even ring any bells here--would be a good choice. He's pretty much known for "chick flicks," but as he proved with Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants and He's Just Not That Into You, he's good at juggling around a ton of characters at once).

[LotsoA113]

Woah woah there Dacey! That's the kind of out-of-the-box thinking that Disney/Marvel put into their movies! Here at Fox, we think Brett Ratner and James (Knight & Day) Mangold are directors worthy of handling megablockbusters!

[Dacey]

James Mangold is a worthy director. In addition to the fun Knight, his resume includes Walk the Line, 3:10 to Yuma and the mostly very good The Wolverine. No complaints about him.

Fox also was going for David Aronofsky for that film. He was the one who ended up backing out so he could do Noah.

Seriously, not sure why it's "in" to bash on Fox about these things. They pick directors the same as anyone else.

[EricJ]

(Actually, one more--and this is serious--, but I think Ken Kwapis--who's name probably doesn't even ring any bells here--would be a good choice. He's pretty much known for "chick flicks," but as he proved with Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants and He's Just Not That Into You, he's good at juggling around a ton of characters at once).

And as I only know his name from Sesame Street: Follow That Bird, I can picture his being good at established characters, but I'm still curious as to why.

[Dacey]

That was his first film, actually.

Jeez, why do I know this stuff?

[Ben]

You're a geek. It's what we do.