How do you think the X-Men will be introduced into the MCU?

[Kuwolski]

Those films aren't part of a shared universe.

 

[Raiders]

Those films aren't part of a shared universe.

Good point.

 

[AResistor]

It’s amazing how everybody thinks they know Kevin Feige. I not going to say what Disney is going to do. Because no one on this forum knows, even if they act like they know.

Is Disney going to reboot the Kingsman or Planet of the Apes or Avatar or Ice Age or Kong Fu Panda too?

But people do know pragmatic business sense from working in the industry themselves.

Box office numbers are worldwide

Kingsman = first = $414 mil, second = $410 mil; but, still, for the next one they're making it a prequel

Planet Of The Apes = first = 481 mil, second = 710 mil, third = 490 mil (lead character dies at the end, no word yet on continuance)

Avatar = there's only been one HIT successful film that even led to a theme park land, random ex but okay?

Ice Age = first = 383 mil, second = 660 mil, third = 886 mil, fourth = 887 mil, fifth = 409 mil, so naturally after FOUR films of GROWING earnings the studio is going to try again.

Kung Fu Panda = saw diminishing returns, started with plans for 6 movies now the director of the 2nd and 3rd doesn't even know if there will be a fourth. Will there be a 'Kung Fu Panda 4'? Here's what director Jennifer Yuh Nelson told us

All have common business sense explanations and a couple - no word

Find me a film franchise from the last TWENTY years that saw diminishing BOX OFFICE theater returns and is still going

 

[Marvel united]

Those films aren't part of a shared universe.

Nor are they licensed properties owned by another studio

 

[DOBSON10]

This is not a hard question to answer as the complications only arise when you try to retcon in the entire 56 year publication history of the X-Men's lore into the MCU -- which would be a fool's errand because it only serves to confuse people and create countless more questions in what should be a very simple, easy to follow introduction.

The answer to "where are the mutants" can easily be found in the early issues from the Stan Lee/Jack Kirby X-Men run. In the original run -- prior to Charles forming the X-Men and before the atomic weapons testing started activating the X-Gene -- mutants were a VERY rare species. Charles grew up as one of the few around the world. He was doing papers and thesis presentations on the prospects of the hypothetical "X-Gene" with Moira McTaggart in Grad school as well as traveling the world after serving his time in Vietnam. The mass emergence of mutants was happening relative to when the 60s books were being published, not decades before the first issue in the Marvel Universe timeline. Follow the comics' explanation and tell that story in real time. This is why "Cerebro" was built in the comics, when mutants were still new and still emerging.

The most simple explanation is the best explanation. Charles Xavier, Wolverine, Mystique, Irene Adler, Sabretooth etc are a couple of the hundred or so mutants that exist in the MCU. "Where was Charles Xavier during the Batte of New York?" Simple, he was in Egypt: on the other side of the planet. (He still had his legs and he was traveling the world) Bumping into a then 14 year old Storm who was still a thief living on the streets of Cairo as an orphan:
View attachment 20395
Wolverine is in Canada with Alpha Flight, Erik is in Bosnia and Raven/Irene are in Europe (These two do not even know they are "mutants" yet).

The events of Avengers: Endgame cause the X-Gene that lies dormant in thousands of adolescents to be activated in 2018-2019. The snap/Infinity Gauntlet causes accelerated evolution in natural selection. The Eternals would establish that mutants are a doomsday clock that's set go off at a certain point (because Celestials) and the snap has just accelerated the process. What should be happening in 300 years is now happening in the span of 5. This is the how you can keep the evolution angle but tie it into the biggest event in the MCU's history. Why are mutants? Because they are nature's natural response to the events of Avengers, AOU, IW and Endgame. As @sleekstereo said, they are the result of nature's need to evolve humanity in preparation from outside threats that they can no longer defend + the presence of people with powers contributes to the need for mankind to change. Mutants are quite literally --Mother nature's answer to the Avengers.

Normal people would feel left behind in a world of gods, mutants and mutates. "Why do people hate mutants but not the Avengers?" That's another answer that can be found in the original run. How did mutant hatred begin in the comics? Propaganda and fear mongering. In issue #14, Bolivar Trask was the one who started instilling fear into people about mutants. He was writing papers about how mutants are going to enslave mankind, trying to convince people the need of Sentinels

From this point onward, mutants were feared and hated. You can transfer Trask's role to any other politician and the result would be the same. The Government introduces fear and suspicion into the general public because they want an excuse to go after, imprison and experiment on mutants (all of which they'd already be doing anyway, just without legislation). There are many real-world examples of those with a platform introducing the seeds of hate into the general populace for marginalized minorities. So there's your answer to that question.

And the rest is history

I agree with all of this and it's what I would do more or less. With one exception, I wouldn't restrict the Mutant rise to adolescents, I have no interest in seeing another kiddie X-Men team. The large majority of teen actors stink, I'm out if they go with a bunch of teens or early 20's actors. I'd start with Wolverine, Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm, Rogue, Pyslocke, Beast, Gambit & Nightcrawler, all 25 or older. Let the teenagers be the students of the School and move up as the franchise goes.

Also, it will and should be a completely new cast.

 

[metaphysician]

An additional factor is, yes, Disney cares about making money. However, they care about making money not just today, but tomorrow. . . or more accurately 10-20 years in the future. Keeping the dying dregs of the Fox X-Men around, even if Dark Phoenix manages to not-suck, would be sacrificing that longer term pictures for the *possibility* of some extra revenue today. Only it probably wouldn't even be that, given the enormous success Marvel Studios has had at basically every turn.

So, put bluntly, Disney is going to let Feige do whatever the hell he wants with the X-Men, within reason. They certainly aren't going to object to him recasting and rebooting everything, not when even the best most successful X-Men movies have only managed to perform as well as an average Marvel production.

 

[AResistor]

An additional factor is, yes, Disney cares about making money. However, they care about making money not just today, but tomorrow. . . or more accurately 10-20 years in the future. Keeping the dying dregs of the Fox X-Men around, even if Dark Phoenix manages to not-suck, would be sacrificing that longer term pictures for the *possibility* of some extra revenue today. Only it probably wouldn't even be that, given the enormous success Marvel Studios has had at basically every turn.

So, put bluntly, Disney is going to let Feige do whatever the hell he wants with the X-Men, within reason. They certainly aren't going to object to him recasting and rebooting everything, not when even the best most successful X-Men movies have only managed to perform as well as an average Marvel production.

If it's a hail Mary pass - no, they wouldn't.

They'd keep the series until it was less risky to start over again AND THEN they'd start over from within the still running MCU to make EVEN MORE MONEY since the box office would quickly soar again. In your mind it's integrate or never integrate, but that's only in your mind. Disney would see it as another and separate pick up with current guaranteed earnings AND later projected earnings.

"Greed is good."

As said this isn't an either-or. There is a reason why industry trades nor those in the industry (who aren't affiliated with Disney OR Fox (as in not affiliated at all)) are giving a concrete 100% answer on what they might do at this point and only fans are.

Also, as said - there will be 99% sure NO hail Mary pass. For reiteration Hail Mary Pass: it'd need to make enough money to stand alongside MCU films, have 89% or above on RT, and have general audiences (sorry, bankers don't care about fan say) clamoring for more (if general audience is clamoring for more, no way does Disney shove them aside for comic fans - g.a brings more money than comic fans, they'd rather have backlash from comic fans for non-immediate-integration than they would from the g.a. who fills most of their pockets).

Anything remotely short of the above paragraph - will not fly and signal sudden termination.

Cows will be able to fly though before a film with poor trailer reactions, terrible test screenings, and coming off a terribly received movie film gets ANY of the above.

 

[Raiders]

What about this scenario? Disney will scrap the main X-Men, I mean just end it. Because Fox mistake was focusing too much on Xavier, Magneto and Wolverine, the other X-Men was basically minor characters. I think it’s better to scrap it than reboot it.
The MCU is already so big, taking in the main X-Men would be too much.
We will still have Deadpool. I’m one of the few people who still thinks Tatum’s Gambit and Franco’s Multiple Man will still happen, also X-23.
They also might keep the universes separate for a few years.

 

[AResistor]

What about this scenario? Disney will scrap the main X-Men, I mean just end it. Because Fox mistake was focusing too much on Xavier, Magneto and Wolverine, the other X-Men was basically minor characters. I think it’s better to scrap it than reboot it.
The MCU is already so big, taking in the main X-Men would be too much.
We will still have Deadpool. I’m one of the few people who still thinks Tatum’s Gambit and Franco’s Multiple Man will still happen, also X-23.
They also might keep the universes separate for a few years.

They're not going to outright scrap it because:

(1) X-Men has rotating roster
(2) MCU saw phenomenal success with rebooting Spider-Man AFTER diminished returns (3rd time)
(3) X-Men opens more doors to more stories

If it's a hail Mary they would keep the universes separate. It's not going to be a hail Mary though - terrible test screenings, poor trailer reactions, coming off a film that disappointed at box office = it's dead.

New Mutants, Gambit, Multiple Man, X-23 are life rafts because Fox knows the solo series is sailing for an iceberg and are seeking other ways to use it to get around that dead end coming up.

 

[SPO2 Dalisay]

I think that a Feige run but divorced from the MCU X-Men weakens both the future X-Men films but also since the "all" is no longer "all" it will weaken the future Dr. Strange and Captain Marvel films. Since the golden goose killed in favor of an immediate X hit and the magic of the franchise, its shared universe would be broken

 

[AResistor]

I think that a Feige run but divorced from the MCU X-Men weakens both the future X-Men films but also since the "all" is no longer "all" it will weaken the future Dr. Strange and Captain Marvel films. Since the golden goose killed in favor of an immediate X hit and the magic of the franchise, its shared universe would be broken

Hail Mary:

It wouldn't necessarily have to be Feige running X-Men. It would be completely and totally separate.

General audiences would have no idea X-Men can now be part of the MCU. General Audiences think Batman and Captain America exist in the same film universe; there is a disconnect between fanboys and most of the people who see the films.

It wouldn't impact the MCU since it wouldn't be part of the MCU until it was rebooted - fans would know, general audiences would still be asking "when will Batman be in an Avengers movie?"

And again - chances of Hail Mary that leads to this road - 1/100.

It's possible which is why industry trades and people in the industry with no affiliation to Disney and Fox aren't giving 100% concrete answers; but 99% odds against it.

 

[Raiders]

Solo X-Men movies have proven to be successful. Just keep the budget down like Logan and Deadpool.

 

[AResistor]

Solo X-Men movies have proven to be successful. Just keep the budget down like Logan and Deadpool.

Not in the box office range that either Fox or Disney wants.

Even if Disney didn't get X-Men, Fox would have stopped the solo films for a while and focused on spin-offs due to how DP is looking to be received and then - years down the line - look to reboot.

Any way around it DP is looking to trigger a reboot Disney or no Disney.

The Hail Mary chances are 1/100.

 

[Raiders]

Not in the box office range that either Fox or Disney wants.

Even if Disney didn't get X-Men, Fox would have stopped the solo films for a while and focused on spin-offs due to how DP is looking to be received and then - years down the line - look to reboot.

Any way around it DP is looking to trigger a reboot Disney or no Disney.

The Hail Mary chances are 1/100.

Profit is profit, they don’t care if it comes from a big budget movie or a small budget movie.
I can’t say Fox’s intended to do.

 

[AResistor]

Profit is profit, they don’t care if it comes from a big budget movie or a small budget movie.
I can’t say Fox’s intended to do.

Profit is profit.

HOWEVER

Realistically, they wouldn't make a small budgeted X-Men movie just to keep a dying franchise alive.

This is why Fox didn't make a small budget X-Men movie that continued 'The Last Stand.'

This is why Sony didn't make a low budget 'Spider-Man 4.'

This is why Sony and Disney didn't make a low budget 'The Amazing Spider-Man 3.'

Every single time - without fail - when a studio was in this position for the last twenty years they either rebooted or cut the franchise entirely. Name one franchise over the last twenty years where that wasn't the case (and outside of horror - which doesn't revolve around big budget level special effects).

 

[Raiders]

But now Deadpool and Logan has taught us that a blockbuster budget is not needed.

 

[AResistor]

But now Deadpool and Logan has taught us that a blockbuster budget is not needed.

You're looking for straws now, man.

Name one franchise that revolved around visual effects that saw diminishing returns that wasn't axed.

They're not going to keep lowering the budget of a major franchise just to keep a dying horse alive.

 

[Raiders]

You're looking for straws now, man.

Name one franchise that saw diminishing returns that wasn't axed.

They're not going to keep lowering the budget of a major franchise just to keep a dying horse alive.

Not looking for straws, it fact that both movie didn’t have blockbuster budget and they did blockbuster box office. That fact.
What dying horse are you talking about?

 

[AResistor]

Not looking for straws, it fact that both movie didn’t have blockbuster budget and they did blockbuster box office. That fact.

It is a fact that those films have low budget.

What isn't a fact -

Studios keep lowering the budget of franchise films after diminishing returns.

Find one franchise that revolved around visual effects with diminishing box office returns that didn't get the axe.

It's common practice, this won't be a one in a million rare event where that doesn't occur.

 

[Raiders]

Deadpool and Logan woke the industry up. There was always a belief that they need to make a blockbuster movie with a blockbuster budget. That belief don’t hold up anymore. All they have to do is make movies people want to see, because the audience don’t care about the budget.

 

[AResistor]

Deadpool and Logan woke the industry up. There was always a belief that they need to make a blockbuster movie with a blockbuster budget. That belief don’t hold up anymore. All they have to do is make movies people want to see, because the audience don’t care about the budget.

Here's the thing - diminishing box office means the property is falling out of favor.

Deadpool 2 saw a box office increase = people love the series.

Logan saw a box office increase = people love the series.

Dark Phoenix is set to see a continual box office decrease =

 

[Raiders]

I wasn’t talking about the main X-Men, just the possible future solo movies.

 

[AResistor]

I wasn’t talking about the main X-Men, just possible future solo movies.

The solo movies still have a chance, actually (but only as long as they are completely separate entities). Gambit will be stopped (possibly X23). But, I see no reason why Multiple Man, X Force, New Mutants (if the first one is a success), won't be allowed to continue. X Force is Deadpool which Disney will keep as is. New Mutants is very far and away separate that it won't impact the MCU. And Multiple Man is a really obscure character.

In a world where people think Batman exists in the MCU, I don't see how or why those films would be held back due to the MCU.

Gambit since there's a chance MCU would want to save him for their X-Men.

X-23 since it may tie too much into the old films.

 

[Raiders]

I think Gambit has the best chance for two reason.
1. It farther along, it just missing a director.
2. Reid Carolin one of the writer and producer of Gambit, he is also Tatum’s business partner. But more importantly he is the future son in law of Disney Studios Chairman Alan Horn.

 

[AResistor]

I think Gambit has the best chance for two reason.
1. It farther along, it just missing a director.
2. Reid Carolin one the writer and producer of Gambit, he is also Tatum’s business partner. But more importantly he is the future son in law of Disney Studios Chairman Alan Horn.

Ah, didn't know #2 and that does help Gambit. It may be prolonged though so that it's accurately folded into the MCU since his character may later become a bigger player. Basically just a re-write so that it's in the MCU rather than Fox's X-Men universe.

With making the other smaller films, as said I see no problem and neither does Disney. If they did, they would have stopped making Deadpool films.

Disney Promises Marvel Will Keep Making R-Rated ‘Deadpool’ Movies

So films that don't impact the MCU would be a go. As per Gambit, as said - they may even fold that more into the MCU while still making it.