Sequels "Gambit" starring Channing Tatum? - Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't have to be part of his PR team to know he's not desperate for any franchises when Disney already has him on call for the Pirates movies, the Alice in Wonderland sequel, and any other one off movies like Into the Woods and Lone Ranger.
I'm not saying he's such a box office draw, but he's been working steadily with no problem; that's not desperation.
 
I'm not saying he's desperate for money. He obviously has an abundance of it but for positive buzz... hell yes he's desperate. From him leaving his fiance and children for a new young thing to him going from horrible movie to horrible movie and the fact that he took either of those Disney roles ("Alice" not as much)especially considering the last Pirates was supposed to be the last for sure shows this. That is my opinion at least.

aannnyway.... back to the topic. I think he and a few others and a off the wall suggestion being like Hugh Laurie?
 
May I suggest Ethan Hawke for Mr. Sinister?

187020-thumb-300xauto-164231.jpeg

Mmm, I don't think so. I've always seen Ethan as a good guy. Or struggling father. Well in most of his movies he is doing one of those two.
 
I think this is one comic role I don't think I hate the suggestion of Hugh Laurie; only thing I'd want with him is a good wig.
 
Hugh Laurie is a good actor, but I feel like he would look too old for Sinister even with the make-up and the costume.
 
Sinister is not a young character, and he's never really looked it.
 
Depp is getting positive buzz for playing Whitey Bulger in Black Mass.

What about Robert Carlyle, or Peter Capaldi?
 
While I like Carlyle, I'm over his type-casting of being this big almost omnipresent villain.
Current Dr Who? Nah.
 
Robert Redford looks like he's on his death bead compared to Hugh Laurie. Also it wouldn't be too far fetched as Bryan worked with him on House that he would join him in the X-Films. Also found this to show what he'd look like with the make up.

2381a5e4cbbb01f3ec40e0ffa9276cb7.jpg

Of course it would be better quality but I think his eyes have the right intensity for a character such as this.
 
But... you just said Laurie is too old...

Yeah but I liked the structure of his face. If Sinister is gonna be portrayed by an older guy, I prefer someone like Redford.

Laurie looks too skinny for Sinister.
 
Redford is 22 years older than Laurie.

And I'm used to slender Sinister; anytime artist try to draw him buff, it looks ridiculous.
 
If Chris Claremont really wrote a treatment for this, wouldn't he include Rogue in this one too?
 
If rogue doesn't fit in the story they are telling then I don't see why he would
 
she'd be in WIII

I'm wondering though, do you think Anna Paquin and Channing Tatum would have good chemistry together?
 
Personally i think when there was talk of her maybe being in the wolverine was probably so they could use her power as a plot device since the plot involved logan losing his healing power and obviously someone else wanted it so rogues power may have been important use to the bad guy

Personally i don't think they will just add characters just for the sake of including them
 
The whole "ooh Rogue should be in it" thing is completely tied to the comics. Because, in the films, they haven't shared ONE SECOND of screentime together, and are separated by about 40 years timeline-wise (unless Gambit is in the future now post-DOFP or something).
 
she'd be in WIII

I'm wondering though, do you think Anna Paquin and Channing Tatum would have good chemistry together?
I can see them playing off each other pretty well, but we won't really know unless we see them together in something at some point.
 
If Chris Claremont really wrote a treatment for this, wouldn't he include Rogue in this one too?

They had him write it because he understands the character and would know how the character would logically fit in on his own, right? I understand how tying Rogue into the movie would work like they're doing Colossus for Deadpool, but it could also make a mess of things too, right? Plus, in Gambit's origin, Rogue isn't really present at all. It wouldn't make sense for her to be down in New Orleans during the Assassins Guild story whereas other elements like the Marauders and Sinister could fit in more easily, being an ex machina to start the story.

Also, she wasn't in the original Assassins Guild story so for those saying Gambit and Rogue should be together in the movie because of the comics. Well... if it is Assassins Guild, which makes the most sense, then if you want to follow the comics, no Rogue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"