Jennifer Lawrence is smoking Hugh Jackman? Patrick Stewart? Paquin already has her Oscar and has not been idle. These actors have commanded blockbuster franchises and revered television series for decades. She is nowhere near their star power. No. Where. Let's not oversell this young lady, m'kay? She's beautiful and gifted but...not quite there yet.
Never said Lawrence was smoking Jackman. I said
has as much marketability. I can't go into a grocery store without seeing her face all over the magazines. Not that I mind, of course. She's adorable. But she is the hot topic right now, leagues beyond Paquin. Lawrence's appeal is to the 12-30ish age group, which let's be honest, is the biggest demographic who's going to be seeing this movie. Stewart is revered for sure, in a different way. He's revered but he's not the hottest item of the moment. I'm not talking talent here. If I'm perfectly honest I like Lawrence more for the interviews I see her in than her skills as an actress. Not to say she isn't good, but I think she'll get better with time.
That's your opinion and I certainly respect it. But I also disagree and think you are seriously overestimating First Class' appeal. Box office receipts don't lie my friend.
There is a specific reason why FOX and Bryan are bringing back the classic actors into this film alongside the FC cast:
It's because they NEED IT. And some of us need to recognize that. One of the biggest gripes among fans with FC was its lack of star power and it's pretty clear the studio is addressing that. Points to consider:
1.) If FOX and Co. were so confident in this "A-List" star power you claim is possessed by Fassbender, Lawrence, etc., they would be making a straight FC sequel now, not a crossover hybrid.
2.) Box office receipts, box office receipts, box office receipts.
First Class underperformed the first X-film from 13 years ago even with inflation adjustment. And I'm sure you'll blame X3 for that too, but er uh, as you said, significant time had passed between the films, right?
Besides, if Lawrence and Fassbender were such A-Listers why couldn't they garner the same audience on their own merits with this "fresh take" as you put it?
You can't have it both ways.
I am so sick of this insipid "box office" argument. Just because it underperformed doesn't mean it wasn't well loved. With two horrendous X-Men movies before it, who WOULD want to take the chance and spend the money? If they made a third Ghost Rider movie and all the critics raved and RT gave it a 95% and everyone I knew told me it was one of the best superhero movies they had ever seen, I STILL would not see it. I'd wait till it was available on Netflix so I wouldn't have to spend money on it. And if it turned out everyone was right, Ghost Rider 3 IS awesome, then that's great. But my support of it will not be reflected in the BO numbers.
XMFC had a very, very long list of things working against it, and the fact that it made as much money as it did is a frigging miracle. I wish we could have some concrete numbers on its second life out of theatres. I do remember that when a decent copy of it hit the torrent world it was the most torrented movie for a decent amount of time. How we watch movies now is very different than how we watched them 10 years ago. We didn't have all this easy and oft-free access to films. Before we had to rely on rental places, charging fees that were barely higher than seeing the film in theatres, so why not just see it in theatres?
We adjust the numbers for inflation, but we don't adjust them for this brave new world of Netflix, Torrents, and red boxes.
FC had a lack of "star power" because the main three (four?) were virtual unknowns. James was doing well in the quieter, drama movie department and Lawrence had an Oscar nod under her belt (wow what a weird combo of allusions), and nobody knew who Fassbender or Hoult were unless they had a penchant for small British films or a certain UK drama series. That's all changing though. I have a feeling Nicholas Hoult in particular is set to get really big really quickly.
1) You may have a point, but I think if that's a reason it's only one of a number of them. I think after Avengers broke 1B FOX pissed themselves in fear and scrambled around trying to figure out how to match the BO numbers (spoiler alert: They never will). I actually think it's one of the reasons Vaughn left, not this paltry "uhh I have to make this mediocre comic a movie before anyone else steals this idea", or whatever the clearly-BS excuse was. I think he wanted to do a proper First Class sequel and then the studio stepped in and told him he had to make this giant blockbuster and bring in some old cast because AVENGERS. So he threw up his hands and left, because he can't stand people breathing down his neck and not letting him do what he wants. I've been thinking back to some of the things he said back when sequel possibilities were discussed, and none of them add up to what this "sequel" is turning out to be.
As for why the old cast is back, DOFP plot aside: they need the FACES. Avengers had the luxury of what, 5, 6 movies? before it that built up the characters individually. Which is why they were able to pull off Avengers with zero character development and hardly anyone noticed. But to make an event movie that follows ONE movie, First Class, you need to bring in WAY more characters, especially since the Hero team has been reduced to 4 members, maybe 3. Sooo they need to fill up the teams on both sides without the time of 5 movies to do it. With only 2 hours to tell the story and no room whatsoever for new characters to get development they turn to the closest Avengers-like solution they have: characters who were developed in other X-Men movies. Cue the old cast. Boom.
2) Significant time has passed and people will forget plot points and characters but not when a movie leaves them with a bad taste in their mouth. Especially when they feel betrayed by it. People are STILL upset about Spider-Man 3. People are still disappointed with Superman Returns. There are probably some people still pissed about Superman
III.
You think so? I'm not sure I'd give them both that moniker just yet. I'd say they're more rising stars and for Jennifer Lawrence I think hers will be bonafide pending tonight's outcome at the Oscars. The buzz around her reminds me of Ellen Page's turn with Hard Candy.
But no one here is questioning their talent. I am the biggest Fassbender fan (I have ALL of his stuff). But I'm not blind to say somehow he's eclipsing anyone like Hugh Jackman. I'm just saying it's foolhardy to assume that the producers are going to waste all of the tested talent they have invested with Hugh, Anna, Shawn, Patrick and Ian. They are reuniting with their director. They are not going to be on the sidelines.
A-listers aren't determined by Oscars alone. Heck, Brad Pitt has never won a single one, and he is pretty much the King of Hollywood! I guess we need to determine what defines A-lister. To me it's a very popular leading actor/ess who is highly sought after in the industry and whose name is instantly recognizable. Again with the 12-30something demographic, this is Jennifer Lawrence, win or no win tonight. Fassbender isn't near her level but he IS A-list, definitely well-known, and highly sought after. Lawrence has definitely eclipsed Paquin and Page though, no question whatsoever. Again, Paquin may have won an Oscar (20 years ago!!!) but since X3 her career has pretty much been True Blood. And I wouldn't call that A-list.
Fassbender is certainly not eclipsing Hugh Jackman, I never said that. But he will be more of a lead in this movie than Wolverine. At least that seems to be the direction based on comments from Kinberg. I'd like to think Singer knows how to make a movie where Wolverine isn't the centre of attention but his X-Men history proves the opposite... sigh. It will be interesting to see if Wolverine in Japan does well at the box office (can't help but think this will be because of FC, if it was coming off the heels of XOW it would be BO suicide) and is well received. If it is I imagine it will prompt FOX to continue his solo films, rather than keep him the focus of the so-called "ensemble" films.
Take note of what I highlighted above. Therein lies your position on this matter and that's fine. There's nothing wrong with being biased against the returning cast. But for some, like me, a stronger film will be generated from their inclusion with this FC class.
Who is to say that any of the old heroes WILL be interacting with the FC cast? The traveler could be an entirely new character. Either way it will probably just be ONE character, maybe two. Makes no sense to have them ALL go to the past.
Wait, I thought you said he was an "A-Lister"??
He is. A bunch of blockbusters does not an A-Lister necessarily make. There's no one secret recipe to it, it's a combination of luck and timing. If I were to pinpoint that moment for Fassbender, it would be when George Clooney made a joke about the impressive size of his manhood at a major awards show. It's unfortunate because this incredibly talented man will have to put up with dick jokes from insecure interviewers for another few years but it's fortunate because it made people look into his movies and discover what an actor he is. He really has exploded in the last year. Pardon the unintentional pun.
And your point is? No one said they weren't both talented.
The point was (at least the one I made) was that balance would be necessary and that this film would be about saving the future. Therefore, there will be multiple POVs in this project but in many respects I think the FCs are going to be supporting cast for the original trilogy members.
You described Sir Ian as conquering if they have a scene together.
And what respects are those? No one at all, Singer, Kinberg, even the embarrassingly pretentious and brutally uninformed Mark Millar, has said anything to give the impression that the movie will focus more on the originals. Everything that has been said leads to quite the opposite idea.
Let's be very honest here: the biggest star of this franchise is Hugh Jackman--not Fassbender, McAvoy, or Lawrence. They are all newbies to this franchise. Talented? Yes. But newbies. And I strongly believe they may take a back-seat a bit for the return of the Original Actors. Now what do the facts show?
1.) FOX has consistently proven for over a decade now that their main focus will always be Wolverine
featuring The X-Men. He has two solo films, two origin films, etc. They even inserted him as a cameo in FC for no reason.
2.) Do you honestly believe that things will suddenly change with this original trilogy member--and the franchise's main face--taking top billing in this film? If Storm, Cyclops, Jean, Xavier--hell
everyone else--can take a backseat to Logan in the
original trilogy films WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN
DAYS OF FUTURE PAST?
Does that scare you?
Yes, HJ is the star of the franchise, much to my chagrin. That doesn't mean it can't function well without him. Again, his absence/reduction to a cameo was not the reason FC failed.
There is absolutely no reason whatsoever the FC crew will take a backseat to the old cast. How on earth can you think that? Even if this was a brand new reboot-everything movie, the very idea of DOFP is that the X-Men of the PAST have to stop an event in the future.
1) I'm pretty sure he will not be the focus in this film. He'll have an unfortunate large role, I'm sure, but the focus will likely still be Charles and Erik (young and to a lesser extent old, I imagine). They threw him in as a cameo because it was a hilarious opportunity to see the pair get gruffly rejected, and a neat nod to the old trilogy. He was the ONLY mutant they could have done that with because he's the only one who doesn't age. I'll bet you every dollar I have that he wasn't in it because of studio pressure but because Vaughn (or Singer) wanted him in there for the cameo.
2) Yes. It's a good transition for them, as I doubt he'll show up for the third film. Can't have him consistently helping out the X-Men and then have NONE OF THEM remember him in the future. It's already a continuity clusterfrig as it is.
Are you sure about that? Again, what do the box office receipts show? That would suggest that FC wasn't quite as popular as some seem to believe. It'd be a gamble for FOX to put all of its eggs in that one basket again. Clearly they aren't. The original trilogy films didn't have such problems with their box office numbers. But somehow, I think you know this already.
Disagreed. This production didn't get real buzz until news of the return of Bryan Singer and the original cast hit the waves. Google it. Every comic and movie chatroom is debating which cast members are coming back or not. All of the articles are debating it. It's all the interviewers are asking Bryan about. I haven't exactly heard anyone inquire about McAvoy, have you?
In the real world, that is to say, the world outside of movie news and superhero forums, THERE IS NO BUZZ ABOUT THIS MOVIE. Normal moviegoers seem to be largely unaware of its existence, let alone the plot.
Not sure that people wondering what new cast will be announced is proof that people prefer the old. It's really the only thing people who aren't entrenched in this movie have to speculate because it's straightforward and simple to have a discussion about. It's the same as when any new superhero movie gets announced. "Who's the villain going to be? Who will play him?". Those are easy things. Wondering about how the FC characters will have changed over 11 years is a more lengthy discussion best saved for places like this. Or at least it used to be before everyone suddenly started playing for this weird "TRILOGY ONLY!!" team. Such a shame.
Again, you're totally underestimating the appeal of the original cast coming back. It's not a shot in the foot, it's a much-needed shot in the arm.
According to who? Again, as it's been stated by me and a few others many times, if X4 was so desired, why didn't they make it a few years after X3? It's not like its predecessor didn't make money. In fact IIRC, it made the
most money of all the X-films. So if your argument about FC is its box office numbers, and lack of cast desirability, why did FOX opt OUT of making a sequel to a box-office smash with so many "A-listers"? Seems to me that, according to your arguments, it would have been the perfect recipe for a smash hit.
If you're going to argue that FC NEEDS the old crew to make it viable, I'd like to argue that the old crew needs the FC crew much, much more.
No, we were referring to Fassbender going into FC. Quinto was the face of Heroes prior to Star Trek. And Quinto certainly was the bigger star pre-Star Trek compared to Fassbender.
Oh ok then yes you're right. Quinto was way more well known back then than Fassbender was before FC.
I may now be one of the "rusty old-timers" here but I can still keep up with these youngins any day. LOL 
There's no Indiana Jones 5 yet, there's no National Treasure 3 yet and there's no X-Men 4 yet.
t:
I do believe in a civil discussion.
