Deadpool 3

[Bayne]

Ms. Marvel and Patriot and FalconCap, etc, are far more different from their namesakes than anyone I mentioned and they're all called legacy characters. I'm fairly certain you've made these same legacy character complaints about Ms. Marvel in the past, so it doesn't seem like you're talking about outright clones only.

Even if you are, characters like X23 and the Stepford Cuckoos are actually highly succesful characters who stand out in part *because* they literally are clones. Like Superboy, they have to deal with different kinds of stories than most characters because they were literally made in a lab by someone expecting to have total control over them. And because they have no childhood friends or family to lean on. And because they have to deal with the knowledge that they're copies of someone else instead of just being their own person entirely.

Every character has real contributions to make. None of them are actually 'just clones' who won't bring anything new to the table.

 

[BobJM]

Polaris isn't a legacy character though and doesn't look identical to Magneto. Nobody sees Quicksilver sees Magneto 2.0 anyway.

Its not the same as having:
X-23
Daken
Jimmy Hudson
Honey Badger

Who are obvious Wolverine clones. Thats what I meant by a legacy character. Being a sister or brother of a superhero doesn't automatically mean they are a legacy character. I don't see Havok as a legacy character of Cyclops.

As for Psylocke, she's not in the shadows of Captain Britain. Psylocke is a bigger comic book character that have already crossovered in cartoons, videogames and movies. I don't think that can be said to Captain Britain.

I think legacy characters, when done correctly, are an important part of comics--especially in film media where the actors aren't ageless the story needs to progress & not constantly reset to the status quo.

Admittedly, I'm not very up-to-date with recent X-Men comics so I don't know much about Honey Badger but she feels derivative of X-23 (who I do like), so I wouldn't advocate for her inclusion in the MCU.

Given that we'll likely be a decade removed from X-Men: Dark Phoenix by the time the MCU X-Men get going--and even moreso for certain characters like Rogue, Shadowcat, Iceman, Psylocke, Bishop, Emma Frost, Toad, Sabretooth, etc.--I think we can stop worrying about MCU having to pick different characters simply to differentiate from the Fox films.

 

[BobJM]

Are the Cuckoos considered legacy characters? I always thought of them as witty set-dressing. In most stories I've read, they're little more than plot devices.

 

[psylockolussus]

Ms. Marvel and Patriot and FalconCap, etc, are far more different from their namesakes than anyone I mentioned and they're all called legacy characters. I'm fairly certain you've made these same legacy character complaints about Ms. Marvel in the past, so it doesn't seem like you're talking about outright clones only.

Even if you are, characters like X23 and the Stepford Cuckoos are actually highly succesful characters who stand out in part *because* they literally are clones. Like Superboy, they have to deal with different kinds of stories than most characters because they were literally made in a lab by someone expecting to have total control over them. And because they have no childhood friends or family to lean on. And because they have to deal with the knowledge that they're copies of someone else instead of just being their own person entirely.

Every character has real contributions to make. None of them are actually 'just clones' who won't bring anything new to the table.

Kamala Khan is a character closely tied to Carol Danvers and her blatantly taking the mantle of Ms. Marvel makes her a legacy character. Marvel included her in those Marvel Legacy comic event. Polaris, Psylocke, Havok aren't legacy characters. They have their own identity, look and signature costume.

As for Sam Wilson, he had his own identity as Falcon, but that changed, when they gave him the Captain America mantle. I already said this before but he should have kept his Falcon identity.

 

[psylockolussus]

Are the Cuckoos considered legacy characters? I always thought of them as witty set-dressing. In most stories I've read, they're little more than plot devices.

I don't see the Cuckoos as Emma Frost 2.0. And so far I don't think any of them have been called as the White Queen.

And I even forgot they are clones of Emma as they aren't even as prominent as X-23, Kamala, Miles and those other legacy characters. That being said, the Cuckoos are not in my top 100 must see X-Men characters in the MCU.

 

[psylockolussus]

I think legacy characters, when done correctly, are an important part of comics--especially in film media where the actors aren't ageless the story needs to progress & not constantly reset to the status quo.

Admittedly, I'm not very up-to-date with recent X-Men comics so I don't know much about Honey Badger but she feels derivative of X-23 (who I do like), so I wouldn't advocate for her inclusion in the MCU.

Given that we'll likely be a decade removed from X-Men: Dark Phoenix by the time the MCU X-Men get going--and even moreso for certain characters like Rogue, Shadowcat, Iceman, Psylocke, Bishop, Emma Frost, Toad, Sabretooth, etc.--I think we can stop worrying about MCU having to pick different characters simply to differentiate from the Fox films.

Hmm I said this because certain characters like Dazzler, Sage, Cecilia Reyes, Banshee, Polaris, Marrow, Sunfire haven't been utilized much in the comiX, compare to someone like X-23.

We are already dealing with the overeXposed (original) Wolverine. I don't see the point of introducing Laura so soon and we did see her in a X-Men movie before the likes of Dazzler and Polaris.

 

[Spider-Fan83]

No?

The wolverine mutation makes him (and her by extension) long lived and age slowly. It didn't make him stay a kid or teenager his whole life. And he did get old after about 150-200 years or so.

well, yes, I didn't mean to say she never ages... but ages very slowly, since she (the actress in real life) has noticeably aged, more so then the character would have in the time since Logan (as you said it took Wolverine over 100+ years to noticeably age) unless she is coming from an alternate universe/timeline that is 100+ years into the future

the character (as play agian by the original actress) will appear much older, then they should be from where we last saw them

 

[Bayne]

Are the Cuckoos considered legacy characters? I always thought of them as witty set-dressing. In most stories I've read, they're little more than plot devices.

That's the problem with this entire anti-legacy character crusade. People act like Legacy characters were invented in the mid-late 2000s with the rise of characters like Kamala Khan and Miles Morales, Sam Wilson taking up the shield, etc, but every thing that makes those characters 'legacy' has happened dozens or hundreds of times before throughout comics history. There are *tons* of much older characters that are exactly as much 'legacy' as any of the ones people actually consider Legacy characters.

The only thing that changed in the mid-late 2000s is that Marvel invented a name ("Legacy Character") and tried to use it, apparently fairly successfully, as a marketing tactic. And a bunch of angry traditionalists on the internet then decided that meant that 'legacy characters' are awful, evil, terrible things which should never be allowed to exist.

Kamala Khan is a character closely tied to Carol Danvers and her blatantly taking the mantle of Ms. Marvel makes her a legacy character. Marvel included her in those Marvel Legacy comic event. Polaris, Psylocke, Havok aren't legacy characters. They have their own identity, look and signature costume.

As for Sam Wilson, he had his own identity as Falcon, but that changed, when they gave him the Captain America mantle. I already said this before but he should have kept his Falcon identity.

Kamala Khan has her own identity, look and signature costume and has way more differentiation between her character and Carol's than Polaris has with Magneto.

Reusing a name for someone who is completely different in every other way is not in any way 'more derivative' than not reusing a name for someone who is far more similar to the character that clearly inspired them. Especially when said 'original' name is clearly just a variation on the same pre-existing theme.

well, yes, I didn't mean to say she never ages... but ages very slowly, since she (the actress in real life) has noticeably aged, more so then the character would have in the time since Logan (as you said it took Wolverine over 100+ years to noticeably age) unless she is coming from an alternate universe/timeline that is 100+ years into the future

the character (as play agian by the original actress) will appear much older, then they should be from where we last saw them

But she hasn't aged 'more than she should'. She was a young teenager and now she's an adult. Logan also aged normally until he was an adult. He didn't stay a teenager for 100 years.

 

[Spider-Fan83]

^yes, but, in the comics, an even the creator of the characters (at least original intentions with her) was that because her mutation/ healing factor/ anti-age was triggered at a much younger age she would not physically age at a normal rate...

"To me, the beauty and tragedy of X-23's continuing story was she leaves the institute when she's 13...She's going to continue to grow and mature and evolve, but because they activated her healing factor early, she's going be trapped in her youthful body for a long time..." - Craig Kyle

rather that appeals to the movie version or not is unclear (and was not directly suggested on screen) so, it is all up to interpretation

 

[Bayne]

^yes, but, in the comics, an even the creator of the characters (at least original intentions with her) was that because her mutation/ healing factor/ anti-age was triggered at a much younger age she would not physically age at a normal rate...



rather that appeals to the movie version or not is unclear (and was not directly suggested on screen) so, it is all up to interpretation

Interesting. I've never seen that come up in a comic yet, but I'm still working my way through the 2010s. It is a potentially interesting take for the comics, but I think it's probably safe to assume it won't apply to any movie adaptations since it would make it impossible for them to make more than one or two movies in a row before the actor got too old.

 

[Mr. Peanut]

Deadpool 3: Dafne Keen Fernández Was Reportedly in Talks to Reprise X23 Role Before Strikes - Comic Book Movies and Superhero Movie News - SuperHeroHype

Honestly they should have already used her in DP2 as the volatile kid he has to protect, instead of that "fire fist" kid.
Also he could have played the 4th wall break- I asked for Wolverine, I got this instead! -shtick.

Hopefully this inevitably comes to fruition, Dafne Keen Fernández looking even more like X-23

God, she's aged into such a perfect teenage X-23. It hurts so much that the best we can hope for is a small role in a parody movie, rather than having her star in a dramatic followup to Logan.

well, yes, I didn't mean to say she never ages... but ages very slowly, since she (the actress in real life) has noticeably aged, more so then the character would have in the time since Logan (as you said it took Wolverine over 100+ years to noticeably age) unless she is coming from an alternate universe/timeline that is 100+ years into the future

the character (as play agian by the original actress) will appear much older, then they should be from where we last saw them

Why would healing powers slow down aging into adulthood? Shouldn't it just stop the deterioration of your cells that happens after you pass your prime?

 

[psylockolussus]

Kamala Khan has her own identity, look and signature costume and has way more differentiation between her character and Carol's than Polaris has with Magneto.

Reusing a name for someone who is completely different in every other way is not in any way 'more derivative' than not reusing a name for someone who is far more similar to the character that clearly inspired them. Especially when said 'original' name is clearly just a variation on the same pre-existing theme.

That thunder in her costume, is completely inspired by Carol Danvers' Ms. Marvel costume.

And sure, she might have a different background/powers compare to Carol Danvers. But her taking the mantle of "Ms. Marvel" and Carol Danvers being an inspiration for the character made her a legacy character. I don't think I've seen anything adaptation of Kamala Khan in which Carol Danvers isn't brought up...

She is literally appearing in her first movie with Carol Danvers... like thats not coincidence.

Also, may i remind you. Polaris was retconned as Magneto's daughter in the 2000s. Polaris eXisted since the 1960s.

 

[Bayne]

That thunder in her costume, is completely inspired by Carol Danvers' Ms. Marvel costume.

And sure, she might have a different background/powers compare to Carol Danvers. But her taking the mantle of "Ms. Marvel" and Carol Danvers being an inspiration for the character made her a legacy character. I don't think I've seen anything adaptation of Kamala Khan in which Carol Danvers isn't brought up...

She is literally appearing in her first movie with Carol Danvers... like thats not coincidence.

Also, may i remind you. Polaris was retconned as Magneto's daughter in the 2000s. Polaris eXisted since the 1960s.

Thought this conversation was long over, but ok.

Ms. Marvel is only connected to Carol in the sense that she looks up to Carol as a fan and a mentor (the mentor thing having only actually briefly existed on paper, since Carol barely ever actually appears in Ms. Marvel comics). Yes, that is why she took the symbol. And that is literally all she took. A symbol. Everything else is completely different.

And may I remind you that Polaris' very first debut story was about her supposedly being Magneto's daughter. Yes, it was revealed at that point that Magneto was lying in the end. But it's blatantly obvious the character's entire power set was designed specifically to make the audience think she was the same as Magneto because the idea of her being Magneto's daughter was central to that story.

Also, don't think I haven't noticed how you're trying to deliberately focus in on only the characters you think you can make the best argument about and completely ignore *everyone* else that I mentioned as if they aren't at all relevant to the conversation.

I'd loved to see someone seriously try to explain how Warpath and Siryn totally aren't legacy characters.

 

[psylockolussus]

Those are legacy characters, not Polaris.

As for Siryn and Warpath. Well I am not clamoring for them to appear in the MCU, to argue if they are a legacy character or not. As if Banshee and Thunderbird are in the same level as Spider-Man, Captain America, Carol Danvers and whichever main Marvel superhero got a legacy character...

 

[Breogan]

God, she's aged into such a perfect teenage X-23. It hurts so much that the best we can hope for is a small role in a parody movie, rather than having her star in a dramatic followup to Logan.

That irks me the most, - Sequels - Laura
They had the acclaimed director of the film, and the writer on-board for more.
Not only to do a legit sequel, but already in the process of developing it.
And the actress they still wanted, all game for more!

‘Logan’: Hugh Jackman on Laura Movie ... – The Hollywood Reporter
The film is continuing to defy expectations. While Logan is the rare superhero project that doesn’t exist to help set up a shared universe or sequels, a spinoff is brewing (“We’re just working on a script,” Mangold says of a film that would center on Dafne Keen‘s Laura).

I get it was "acquisitioned"= gobbled-up by another studio, Disney arguing they wanted to restart the X franchise with their own new time-line.
Yet there was nothing creatively that said they could not do both; keep her established alt-timeline going, and at the same time reboot their X-franchise? (except maybe a lack of vision on their part.) In fact the MCU has since been steeped in the exploration of multiple alt-timelines.

Based on the success of Logan, with Xavier, Logan to Laura(X-23) being one of the best legacy set-ups in the franchise, everything they needed to go forward was there; the premise, the writer, director, and actress Dafne Keen Fernández, all willing for more.

Reduced to now likely a parody cameo, in what, another alt-timeline?

 

[OrbOfConfusion]

I guarantee you the X-23 film probably would have happened if there was no Fox acquisition. I can't prove that, but it's my best guess. A lot of those planned spin-offs probably would have. But this one, like you said, had everything there. But this was October, and a mere two months later, Disney announced its intentions, so not like Fox could have done much beyond projects already in the pipeline. And I doubt Disney is interested in continuing anything from that universe that isn't Deadpool.

Sure, Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix may have been duds, and New Mutants had the disadvantage of coming out in 2020, but Deadpool 2 and Logan proved that the spin-offs had plenty of life. X-23 would have been no exception.

 

[squeekness]

X23

 

[Mr. Peanut]

That irks me the most, - Sequels - Laura
They had the acclaimed director of the film, and the writer on-board for more.
Not only to do a legit sequel, but already in the process of developing it.
And the actress they still wanted, all game for more!






I get it was "acquisitioned"= gobbled-up by another studio, Disney arguing they wanted to restart the X franchise with their own new time-line.
Yet there was nothing creatively that said they could not do both; keep her established alt-timeline going, and at the same time reboot their X-franchise? (except maybe a lack of vision on their part.) In fact the MCU has since been steeped in the exploration of multiple alt-timelines.

Based on the success of Logan, with Xavier, Logan to Laura(X-23) being one of the best legacy set-ups in the franchise, everything they needed to go forward was there; the premise, the writer, director, and actress Dafne Keen Fernández, all willing for more.

Reduced to now likely a parody cameo, in what, another alt-timeline?

Especially since the MCU version of the X-men isn't coming anytime soon, and in the meantime all we're seeing is FoX-men appearances anyway...

 

[psylockolussus]

A X-23 movie, might have happened if there was no Disney buyout, but still it wasn't going to benefit the other Marvel movies, FoX were producing at that time. FoX-Men as a whole was very all over the place. Some might have been good but clearly there was no clear direction for the franchise. They were literally just throwing ideas to the wall without acknowledging all of the films within the franchise. Thats not how you run a movie franchise.

Glad that mess is over. The last two films were critically panned (Dark PhoeniX and The New Mutants). We would have gotten more of those, even if James Mangold was releasing more well reviewed mutant films.

 

[TheVileOne]

Deadpool 3 should move back to November.

 

[psylockolussus]

Summer 2024 is looking pretty dry. Mad MaX prequel, Planet of the Apes, Quiet Place, Despicable Me, Inside Out, Bad Boys, another Alien, Kraven and Captain America. I can see a couple of movies set for March to move there. I don't think we'll see Venom 3 in June. But it will be interesting if Joker, Venom and Deadpool are released just a few weeks within each other in Q4.

 

[Sithborg]

Are the Cuckoos considered legacy characters? I always thought of them as witty set-dressing. In most stories I've read, they're little more than plot devices.

Legacy characters are different in a fascinating way in the X books. The only traditional legacy character is really Laura who is Wolverine. Instead of the traditional "takes up the mantle of Superhero X", you have the "next generation of X-men book". And pretty much, since the 80's, you get a new "next generation of X-men" every decade. New Mutants, Generation X, New X-men/Academy X. Wolverine and the X-men tends to blur with New X-men a bit, as they really didn't want to push the age that far forward yet.