Sequels "Gambit" starring Channing Tatum? - Part 2

[magneto23]

That's sounds like the same thing, neither of which is what I said in any case.

No. You were just using twisted logic to "condemn" a franchise that's in good shape. All because of another, completely separate, franchise's advertising. Absurd.

 

[RomyFan]

No good news yet? (And by good news, I mean a director, actual and realistic release date, more actors or filming date?) No? (*closes tab and walks away sadly, kicking small stones*)

 

[Mr. Youtube]

Geez am I the only one seeing a pattern here? Why do I feel like a certain poster is ranting about Fox again and again when he posts in X-Men forums. Geez. Its bad enough to go to the Fantastic Four forum and it continues here? Give us a break.

C'mon man, no subtweeting. I feel like you and I should storm the Fant4astic forums just for the Lolz and go around claiming it is better than The Dark Knight. You game? Either way, though, some people are going to want the X-Men in the MCU.

Personally, I miss the days when each property was in its own little universe. Back when if you made one movie, it did not need to be connected to another one. The Dark Knight was the last series to have that. X-Men technically still is, but only because every film is about the X-Men or their members.

 

[starscream22]

No. You were just using twisted logic to "condemn" a franchise that's in good shape. All because of another, completely separate, franchise's advertising. Absurd.

By twisted logic you mean listening to Millar, Kinberg and Singer constantly speak on a XM/FF universe?

Right, absurd, gotcha.

 

[starscream22]

The truth is, know and no sound the same as well. I don't see how Days of Future Past is a Cinderella story, and I don't think Bryan Singer is a Prince Charming. However, people that do tend to lump the two franchises together should consider other movies made by TSG Entertainment.

If Days of Future Past and Fant4stic belong together, well then so does The Counselor, The Book Thief, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, Gone Girl and Birdman.

Just because they were advertised together means nothing. It's something you saw in commercials and yes, trailers are commercials. It shouldn't be reflective of the film's quality in any way. Yeah, it might set you up for disappointment and you don't deserve that, but marketing people are the way they are. Hell, if marketing people were wise, Disney and Fox would be having another argument today over who sells Star Wars toys in Japan.

Alright, now you guys are just grasping at straws and getting testy as a result of it. Fox in general has been talking about their version of a Fox-MCU for years now. So if 4stic wasn't such a colossal disaster, some of you wouldn't be so hard pressed to avoid acknowledging it.

The marketing if nothing else was a hint to that. (Not that I believe they could outright do it without Marvel signing off anyway..)

But have fun bringing up other non-Marvel Fox films as if there were ever hints of a Birdman vs Planet of The Apes crossover. Despite all that no one is denying the fact that this Gambit spinoff is about to crossover with 2017 and Purgatory!

 

[magneto23]

By twisted logic you mean listening to Millar, Kinberg and Singer constantly speak on a XM/FF universe?

Right, absurd, gotcha.

They spoke on the potential. Just the idea of a shared universe. Nothing has come of it and probably never will. So go ahead, drop some quotes about their ideas for maybe doing a crossover. Like that somehow strengthens your argument that these two franchises are tied together. There's been no set up for it. They are 100% separate within their own universes. Using the failed FF to stain the X-Men franchise is weak. So yeah, your whole argument is absurd.

 

[starscream22]

They spoke on the potential. Just the idea of a shared universe. Nothing has come of it and probably never will.

Yeah what possibly could have gone wrong.....

Shame on me providing proof on subjects. t:

 

[Mr. Youtube]

Alright, now you guys are just grasping at straws and getting testy as a result of it. Fox in general has been talking about their version of a Fox-MCU for years now. So if 4stic wasn't such a colossal disaster, some of you wouldn't be so hard pressed to avoid acknowledging it.

The marketing if nothing else was a hint to that. (Not that I believe they could outright do it without Marvel signing off anyway..)

But have fun bringing up other non-Marvel Fox films as if there were ever hints of a Birdman vs Planet of The Apes crossover. Despite all that no one is denying the fact that this Gambit spinoff is about to crossover with 2017 and Purgatory!

They definitely could do it. Fox doesn't even properly own Fant4stic and Deadpool isn't a part of their X-Men deal. Marketing seemed very self contained and let's be honest - there were two, maybe three, hints of a Fant4stic-X-Men spin off.

Bryan Singer said there was a way and before Fant4stic entered filming I believe, Mark Miller said it would happen. Both are not involved with the film. Kinberg repeatedly said it was not involved. Oh, and that photoshoot which put the casts together. Honestly, it would likely be sensible to out right say that yeah, a couple insinuations were made but nothing was outright said. It's like Green Lantern. Had it been a success, we Man of Steel could technically have been the second film in a DCEU helmed by Martin Campbell. It's all hypothetical really.

That crossover with purgatory comment was funny though, I'll give you that.

 

[magneto23]

Yeah what possibly could have gone wrong.....

Thankfully, no one has to worry about that anymore.

Shame on me providing proof on subjects. t:

 

[psylockolussus]

C'mon man, no subtweeting. I feel like you and I should storm the Fant4astic forums just for the Lolz and go around claiming it is better than The Dark Knight. You game? Either way, though, some people are going to want the X-Men in the MCU.

Personally, I miss the days when each property was in its own little universe. Back when if you made one movie, it did not need to be connected to another one. The Dark Knight was the last series to have that. X-Men technically still is, but only because every film is about the X-Men or their members.

A lot if properties are still like that like Hunger Games, Divergent, Maze Runner, Alien, Pirates of the Caribbean, Kingsman, Star Trek, Planet of the Apes, 007, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Fifty Shades and those animated film series from Dreamworks, Pixar and Blue Sky. Its mostly happening in the Dc and Marvel film series because their characters do have a connection to the other characters in the comics.

 

[starscream22]

A lot if properties are still like that like Hunger Games, Divergent, Maze Runner, Alien, Pirates of the Caribbean, Kingsman, Star Trek, Planet of the Apes, 007, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Fifty Shades and those animated film series from Dreamworks, Pixar and Blue Sky. Its mostly happening in the Dc and Marvel film series because their characters do have a connection to the other characters in the comics.

Alright can we get back to Gambit not having a director please? All this other stuff is kinda distracting.

 

[-JKR-]

Yet Joe Cornish is also the least qualified of the three. Hell, why doesn't Tom Cruise just jump onto this project if he wants to work with Liman so much.

How is Joe Cornish the least qualified? Have you seen Attack the Block?

 

[Mr. Youtube]

A lot if properties are still like that like Hunger Games, Divergent, Maze Runner, Alien, Pirates of the Caribbean, Kingsman, Star Trek, Planet of the Apes, 007, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Fifty Shades and those animated film series from Dreamworks, Pixar and Blue Sky. Its mostly happening in the Dc and Marvel film series because their characters do have a connection to the other characters in the comics.

Those are not series based off of comic books. I meant comic book movies. Of comic book movies, the only series that is still self contained in its own little universe is the X-Men one. It literally is a dying breed. Sure, with Gambit and Deadpool it'll make its own little version of a cinematic universe but that'll be diffrent because those characters are intrinsic to the X-Men and it isn't like the series is connected to an entirely different character. I'm going to be honest with you. I did want a Spider-Man reboot, but not one set in the MCU because I would have liked Spidey to have been disconnected with that.

How is Joe Cornish the least qualified? Have you seen Attack the Block?

I have not and I'm sure it is a great movie, but Cornish has only made that movie and it is what, $10 million in the budget? Every other director on that list has better experience working with higher budgets, especially one that is the level of Gambit. You know what Spielberg's first movie with a budget over $100 million was? Minority Report. That was late into his career. If this movie had a lower budget, Joe Cornish would be a great fit, but with the budget it has, he doesn't have enough experience.

 

[-JKR-]

I have not and I'm sure it is a great movie, but Cornish has only made that movie and it is what, $10 million in the budget? Every other director on that list has better experience working with higher budgets, especially one that is the level of Gambit. You know what Spielberg's first movie with a budget over $100 million was? Minority Report. That was late into his career. If this movie had a lower budget, Joe Cornish would be a great fit, but with the budget it has, he doesn't have enough experience.

I'd agree with you if Attack the Block was a romantic comedy. But Cornish clearly demonstrated that he has a knack for action and adventure, while not forgetting characters and storytelling. And if he managed to make such an exciting pic for just $10 million, imagine what he could do with $100 million.

It's not about having experience with that amount of money. It's about knowing the kind of movie you're making. And Cornish is definitely a director I would trust with such a project.

Shane Black jumped from a $15 million pic to a $200 million pic. And to this day, Iron Man 3 is my favorite Marvel movie. Guess who directed my 2nd and 3rd favorite Marvel movies? James Gunn and the Russo brothers. Neither of them had experience with big budgeted blockbusters. And there are many more examples I could make.

And Steven Spielberg is a very bad example, as movie budgets have gotten higher also due to inflation, CGI allowing to great bigger worlds, etc. Even before Minority Report, Spielberg had done big budget movies. It's just that the bar of big budget movies got higher and higher. And by the way, Spielberg has always been good in keeping budgets down and delivering on time.

In 1991, Terminator 2 was the most expensive movie at $94 million. In 1994, True Lies was the first movie to cost $100 million.

It's not the numbers which matter, but the director's actual strenghts.

 

[Mr. Youtube]

I'd agree with you if Attack the Block was a romantic comedy. But Cornish clearly demonstrated that he has a knack for action and adventure, while not forgetting characters and storytelling. And if he managed to make such an exciting pic for just $10 million, imagine what he could do with $100 million.

It's not about having experience with that amount of money. It's about knowing the kind of movie you're making. And Cornish is definitely a director I would trust with such a project.

Shane Black jumped from a $15 million pic to a $200 million pic. And to this day, Iron Man 3 is my favorite Marvel movie. Guess who directed my 2nd and 3rd favorite Marvel movies? James Gunn and the Russo brothers. Neither of them had experience with big budgeted blockbusters. And there are many more examples I could make.

And Steven Spielberg is a very bad example, as movie budgets have gotten higher also due to inflation, CGI allowing to great bigger worlds, etc. Even before Minority Report, Spielberg had done big budget movies. It's just that the bar of big budget movies got higher and higher. And by the way, Spielberg has always been good in keeping budgets down and delivering on time.

In 1991, Terminator 2 was the most expensive movie at $94 million. In 1994, True Lies was the first movie to cost $100 million.

It's not the numbers which matter, but the director's actual strenghts.

You have to note that Cornish has had most of his success come from television. Shane Black has had a much more lengthy history in cinema. He's been an actor, a writer and a director. Cornish may have written and directed before Attack of the Block, but for television only. His progression was natural up until that point. However, giving Cornish a project that is over a hundred million dollars more expensive than his last project or a project he is used to is like giving Josh Trank Fant4stic or Alan Taylor Terminator. Shane Black is much more familiar with everything than Cornish is as well.

Sure, Cornish definitely could pull this off and do it well. He could give us an experience much like Jurassic World. The thing about Jurassic World was, though, that Trevorrow too made a huge jump in budgets and that movie, no matter how much I love it, has huge problems. And I love that movie and think it is amazing.

Look back at Spielberg's filmography. Jaws only cost $9 million. High budget movies around that time were in between $20 and $30 million. Superman broke that record by upping the bar to $50 million and that was in 1978. In 1981 and 1982, Raiders of the Lost Ark and ET only cost $18 and $11 million. They were not big budget for the time. Temple of Doom, still only $28 million and below an increasing number or big budget films. His first movie with a big budget for the time? Empire of the Sun at $35 million but guess what, the very next year Rambo 3 had a budget of $63 million (was an experienced second unit director's first film and boy does it suck). The Last Crusade cost $48 million, yes he was finally venturing into bigger budgets but guess what, it was still below most big budget movies because guess what Back to the Future II came out next year with a budget of $80 million. Here comes the kicker. Hook - Spielberg's first movie with a budget that actually matched big budget movies of the time at $80 million - sucked. I love the movie out of childhood nostalgia but boy is it regarded as trash. The jump between the budget of that movie and his last one is huge. Jurassic Park and Schindler's List, Spielberg's most well known works, but cost less than that film and that film had a lower budget than the film with the biggest budget at the time. Hell, Spielberg only did AI because Kubrick died. His first movie that matches a budget of big budget movies today, Minority Report, guess what, it didn't come out too long ago that times have shifted so much.

Shane Black is much more experienced in how cinema works than Joe Cornish is. I'm certain though that while Cornish could do a good job, he could also mess up very badly.

 

[-JKR-]

- I'm one of the biggest Shane Black fans out there, so I'd be MORE than excited if he got the gig.

- Back to the Future Part II didn't cost $80 million. It was filmed back to back with part III. They both cost that much to make. Together.

- Your reasoning is way too simplistic and numerical. You cannot make the assumption that Rambo III sucked because it had a big budget and a director who didn't have experience with such a sum. It sucked because it had a bad script, and because Peter MacDonald obviously is not that great of a filmmaker on his own.

- I like Hook. But I know people have problems with it. And I know it's not a perfect movie. But you can't just attribute its problems and complicated production to "the jump between the budget of that movie and his last one is huge." It's not like they had set a $70 million budget on the movie, and the director failed to work with such a sum. The production was complicated and Spielberg admitted to having started working slower on that movie, which led to the movie to go over budget.

I just don't think your formula really works. Many talented directors have jumped from low to high budgets without any problems. What matters is a filmmaker's vision and knack for telling this kind of story and making this kind of movie. And you should really watch Attack the Block to see why Joe Cornish would be a perfectly fine pick for Gambit. You either have it, or you don't. Such spectacular shots in that movie which you don't even see in huge blockbusters these days.

 

[x-er]

I can't wait to see Gambit's gloves on the big screen !!!

 

[Mr. Youtube]

- I'm one of the biggest Shane Black fans out there, so I'd be MORE than excited if he got the gig.

- Back to the Future Part II didn't cost $80 million. It was filmed back to back with part III. They both cost that much to make. Together.

- Your reasoning is way too simplistic and numerical. You cannot make the assumption that Rambo III sucked because it had a big budget and a director who didn't have experience with such a sum. It sucked because it had a bad script, and because Peter MacDonald obviously is not that great of a filmmaker on his own.

- I like Hook. But I know people have problems with it. And I know it's not a perfect movie. But you can't just attribute its problems and complicated production to "the jump between the budget of that movie and his last one is huge." It's not like they had set a $70 million budget on the movie, and the director failed to work with such a sum. The production was complicated and Spielberg admitted to having started working slower on that movie, which led to the movie to go over budget.

I just don't think your formula really works. Many talented directors have jumped from low to high budgets without any problems. What matters is a filmmaker's vision and knack for telling this kind of story and making this kind of movie. And you should really watch Attack the Block to see why Joe Cornish would be a perfectly fine pick for Gambit. You either have it, or you don't. Such spectacular shots in that movie which you don't even see in huge blockbusters these days.

You can organize the periodic table by atomic number or mass and you will get trends either way.

I was not aware of the Back to the Future production, but you do realize that in instances like that technically Back to the Future did have an $80 million budget. Sure, not all of it went to that film but it did technically have it. However, that's just me being nitpicky.

No. Rambo III sucked for pretty much the same reasons Fant4stic sucks. One of those issues is the director not being able to handle the budget. It's not the only reason, but it is one of the bigger ones.

Again, I'm certain Cornish could pull of this movie and do it with flair no matter the budget. I'm also certain that he could cause it to tank. Many directors have made the jump and many have had a progression. In both instances we've had successes and failures. To quote Cain from Supernatural "Not all killers are my descendants and not all my descendants are killers". See, there is no doubt that Cornish is a talented director and if he is chosen, I will no doubt be excited and hope for the best. I will also be more cautious than I would be if Shane Black or Doug Liman get chosen. Let's face it, Cornish is pretty much an indie director. Look I have no doubt that Cornish can make beautiful shots with a bigger budget and not let it get in the way of the acting, but I also know that this film is going to have a lot of studio involvement. X-Men is a Bryan Singer production through and through. He is a proven director and they know he will give the people what they want. If you throw $150 million at an indie director whose last film cost $140 million less... are you going to trust him with it entirely? Giving an inexperienced director a much larger than usual budget is a huge risk. Sure he can make the movie amazing, but how do you know he will know how to do everything or work with everything you give him? How do you know he won't cave? How do you know the pressure won't destroy him like it did Trank? The budget is just a number, but what it means is much more. Do you think Brian Singer is going to let Apocalypse be micromanaged? No. Can you say the same about Joe Cornish? That is where the budget makes the difference.

I gave you numbers to show the Spielberg point. I love Hook out of childhood nostalgia but even I agree that parts of it suck badly. Some parts like Dustin Hoffman are amazing, but the Tinkerbell subplot? Really? The production was complicated and the sum was already massive. Hook is an actual example of the budget causing a schism between the director and the studio. The thing is, though, Spielberg was such a powerful figure then that he could afford to take a hit and have the budget balloon on him. Yet think about it, his first massive budget and his first - considered - failure.

 

[def28]

- I'm one of the biggest Shane Black fans out there, so I'd be MORE than excited if he got the gig.

- Back to the Future Part II didn't cost $80 million. It was filmed back to back with part III. They both cost that much to make. Together.

- Your reasoning is way too simplistic and numerical. You cannot make the assumption that Rambo III sucked because it had a big budget and a director who didn't have experience with such a sum. It sucked because it had a bad script, and because Peter MacDonald obviously is not that great of a filmmaker on his own.

- I like Hook. But I know people have problems with it. And I know it's not a perfect movie. But you can't just attribute its problems and complicated production to "the jump between the budget of that movie and his last one is huge." It's not like they had set a $70 million budget on the movie, and the director failed to work with such a sum. The production was complicated and Spielberg admitted to having started working slower on that movie, which led to the movie to go over budget.

I just don't think your formula really works. Many talented directors have jumped from low to high budgets without any problems. What matters is a filmmaker's vision and knack for telling this kind of story and making this kind of movie. And you should really watch Attack the Block to see why Joe Cornish would be a perfectly fine pick for Gambit. You either have it, or you don't. Such spectacular shots in that movie which you don't even see in huge blockbusters these days.

The project would be lucky to have Cornish. Dude brings style, action, comedy, suspense and knows how to make it all gel visually while keeping it still about character.

 

[Mr. Youtube]

The project would be lucky to have Cornish. Dude brings style, action, comedy, suspense and knows how to make it all gel visually while keeping it still about character.

No diggity. Hopefully if he gets chosen, he'll do a great job and quash all my doubts.

 

[psylockolussus]

Those are not series based off of comic books. I meant comic book movies. Of comic book movies, the only series that is still self contained in its own little universe is the X-Men one. It literally is a dying breed. Sure, with Gambit and Deadpool it'll make its own little version of a cinematic universe but that'll be diffrent because those characters are intrinsic to the X-Men and it isn't like the series is connected to an entirely different character. I'm going to be honest with you. I did want a Spider-Man reboot, but not one set in the MCU because I would have liked Spidey to have been disconnected with that.

Kingsman is based from a comic book series.

 

[Mr. Youtube]

Kingsman is based from a comic book series.

Yeah, one movie out of the eleven listed. Sorry I didn't single it out even though I acknowledged it at as a Fox Marvel movie before. I was generalizing that list.

 

[def28]

No diggity. Hopefully if he gets chosen, he'll do a great job and quash all my doubts.

I still would prefer Liman. But most the Directors are solid choices.

 

[psylockolussus]

Yeah, one movie out of the eleven listed. Sorry I didn't single it out even though I acknowledged it at as a Fox Marvel movie before. I was generalizing that list.

Actually if you do some research, there are still a lot of comic-book film adaptations in the works. Fox is developing a movie based on a comic-book from Mark Millar.

 

[Mr. Youtube]

Actually if you do some research, there are still a lot of comic-book film adaptations in the works. Fox is developing a movie based on a comic-book from Mark Millar.

I'm well aware of what is coming out. You gave me a list and I sent those weren't CBMs. One of those was a CBM and I had, earlier in this thread, listed it as a CBM. I was generalizing a list of movies you gave. What I meant to say was, I miss the days when Batman's film series didn't need to crossover with Superman's or Spider-Man didn't need to belong in the MCU or even have an array of spin offs.

I still would prefer Liman. But most the Directors are solid choices.

I feel most would want Liman.