Marvel Films MCU X-Men - Part 4

[Iceman]

Back to debating whether the X-Men should or should not be introduced at a very young age with no experience, and arguments (yes my-way-or-the-highway type arguments, not constructive discussion) about race. This went on for months previously with no progress on any side and it really didn't seem like anyone was particularly enjoying it on either side. Then it stopped for a while and the thread was very fun - pretty much every topic discussed - with everyone getting on. Just an observation, feel free to continue of course.

 

[Lip]

It's a discussion forum and not all the subjects will be "fun" to everybody. And some subjects are highly important to be brought up, like representations. It's a subject Hollywood is starting to wake up to and address it. Marvel/Disney seems to be invested in promoting more diversity and the X-Men is the face of "minority issues" from Marvel. It's only natural this subject coming up.

I wanted to know how people feel about it, but this time regarding LGBTQ.

 

[Fincher]

The X-Men quite literally is "Minority Groups: The Movie" because mutants are literally classified as a minority group in the Marvel Universe. This argument you're making against having actual minorities in a movie about minority struggle doesn't make much sense to me. The mutant metaphor that mirrors what many gay teens go through "hiding your true self from the world" is not undercut because the mutant actually is gay. If anything, it makes the story more powerful because you are now DIRECTLY addressing the experience from which upon the writer built the metaphor off of in the first place. This argument that more diversity goes against the point of the franchise just.. Makes little sense.

Bobby Drake can be a mutant burdened by being a DOUBLE minority, so he's attacked from both sides. Inherent privilege some mutants have over others is definitely something that should be explored.

If you go by the perspective that real minorities beats fantasy minorities, X-Men is a watered-down version of real life discrimination and should be eliminated in favor of superhero stories focused on real discrimination. In that sense, it's a relic of a past when superhero stories couldn't be about the treatment of people of color. I like the metaphorical approach for its own sake, and that's what I watch X-Men movies for. I'm not interested in seeing mutants one-upped by the alternative.

Or... Actually have her be Genderfluid in the movie and not have a stand-in metaphor because the writers are too afraid? You said it yourself that the X-Men was created to address racial issues because it would have been too controversial address them directly when they were created in the 60s. So having stand-in characters experiencing the same things that black people and other discriminated racial groups was required at the time. But this is not that time, we are not living in 1963, not 1975, or 2000. We are on the edge of the 2020s and it's time for the franchise to update these ideas and themes for modern society. It will only serve to make the message of X-Men stronger to have more of the X-Men reflect the people their stories are based on. It's a natural evolution of the franchise.

A lot of people don't know that there's any such thing as genderfluid. I can't name a single genderfluid character in film or television, and while I'm sure somewhere in the history of film it's happened and while there may be rare examples in television, I really doubt the concept will be introduced to a whole bunch of people by way of changing a well-recognized character in a blockbuster film franchise. I also don't think it would do genderfluid people any favors to have their existence be introduced to millions of people by way of having a popular character be altered to be genderfluid.

That said, my argument wasn't that X-Men movies shouldn't have a genderfluid character (although I'd be surprised if they did). My argument was that it shouldn't be Mystique. Putting aside my own feelings on the character, I think subtlety is a better approach in including real world minorities.

 

[Lip]

If you go by the perspective that real minorities beats fantasy minorities, X-Men is a watered-down version of real life discrimination and should be eliminated in favor of superhero stories focused on real discrimination. In that sense, it's a relic of a past when superhero stories couldn't be about the treatment of people of color. I like the metaphorical approach for its own sake, and that's what I watch X-Men movies for. I'm not interested in seeing mutants one-upped by the alternative.

Storm and Bishop existence has never "water down" what the X-Men stands for. Neither Bobby's existence. You said yourself the X-Men are metaphor for real life minorities, so why not give them the spotlight and the opportunity to tell a story that is their as well? That takes inpiration from their real life struggle?

 

[CaptainWagner]

I mean, isn't Mystique kind of by definition "gender fluid"? I'm not exactly an expert on the subject, but hasn't she had sexual relationships as both a male and a female? That's about as fluid as gender can get...

 

[Lip]

I mean, isn't Mystique kind of by definition "gender fluid"? I'm not exactly an expert on the subject, but hasn't she had sexual relationships as both a male and a female? That's about as fluid as gender can get...

A transgender person is a person who does not identifies with the gender assigned at birth. For instance, a person designated male at birth but identifying as female. That's a trans woman. But out of the male-female binarism, there are other gender identities. Genderfluid is the person who identifies with both gender, but fluidly. Which means they don't identify with only one gender, but instead their gender identity fluctuate. So transgender and genderqueers are about gender identity. Mystique is a shapeshifter and she has shapeshifted into men several times, but, as far as I can remember, her gender identity remained the same: female. Which makes her, in my eyes, a cisgender woman. Even tho she shapeshifted to a male body.

But changing her into a non-binary gender identity like genderfluid or bigender makes more sense if done right.

 

[Marvel united]

If you go by the perspective that real minorities beats fantasy minorities, X-Men is a watered-down version of real life discrimination and should be eliminated in favor of superhero stories focused on real discrimination. In that sense, it's a relic of a past when superhero stories couldn't be about the treatment of people of color. I like the metaphorical approach for its own sake, and that's what I watch X-Men movies for. I'm not interested in seeing mutants one-upped by the alternative.

Going by this logic there should be no need to ever include characters like Storm, Bishop, Iceman, Forge or Jubilee because them being real world minorities is detrimental to the entire concept of X-Men. Any real-world minority being included at all takes away from the "metaphor of a mutant" in this line of thinking. A mutant can't be gay because it ruins the concept of the LGBTQ metaphor that the X-Men parallels therefore there should be no gay mutants. A mutant can't be black because it ruins the concept of the racism metaphor that the X-Men franchise was built on therefore there must not be any black mutants.

A lot of people don't know that there's any such thing as genderfluid. I can't name a single genderfluid character in film or television, and while I'm sure somewhere in the history of film it's happened and while there may be rare examples in television, I really doubt the concept will be introduced to a whole bunch of people by way of changing a well-recognized character in a blockbuster film franchise. I also don't think it would do genderfluid people any favors to have their existence be introduced to millions of people by way of having a popular character be altered to be genderfluid.

A lot of people aren't aware of/ignorant to a lot of things and a lot of issues, does that preclude the filmmakers from shining a light on these issues in their films? No. Especially when the franchise is built on themes like tolerance, equality and acceptance.

That said, my argument wasn't that X-Men movies shouldn't have a genderfluid character (although I'd be surprised if they did). My argument was that it shouldn't be Mystique. Putting aside my own feelings on the character, I think subtlety is a better approach in including real world minorities.

They don't have to be "subtle" about it. Black Panther was loud about the fact that this is the first ALL-BLACK cast in a CBM. Captain Marvel's marketing is emphasizing the "Her" aspect of the character. A metaphor is not lost because it's presented in a more direct light. Until we see Black Lives Matter and the Pride March, Senator Kelly talking about Roe V Wade etc in the movie, then it's still a metaphor. It's just a modern spin on the idea of the X-Men conveyed through the perspective of people in 2020 and not limited to the confines of the 1960s.

 

[Fincher]

Storm and Bishop existence has never "water down" what the X-Men stands for. Neither Bobby's existence. You said yourself the X-Men are metaphor for real life minorities, so why not give them the spotlight and the opportunity to tell a story that is their as well? That takes inpiration from their real life struggle?

I can't speak much about the comics, but people of color in the movies hasn't undermined the mutant concept because it hasn't been about them being people of color. And once genderfluid is recognized enough by society that a genderfluid character can exist in the MCU X-Men without it becoming a focus, then that can also happen without disrupting the mutant concept. However, choosing to make Mystique genderfluid because of her powers is putting it front and center, and that's only one of the reasons why I think it's a bad idea.

Not only is Mystique one of the highest profile X-Men among the general audience, but she's one of the bigger female characters in superhero movies so far. So you're taking that character from a group who's also considered underrepresented and making her genderfluid, so that she's sort of half female and half male. You don't think that'll make waves and pit feminists against LGBT+ rights activists in a contest of who deserves it more?

And Marvel hasn't yet introduced homosexuality into their movies. They say they're going to, but there's no timetable or named character, and it'll be at least five years after Arrow established Sara as bisexual. And Arrow didn't do it then because it had only then become doable; the show hadn't been around that long, and they hadn't gotten to it yet. I'm not aware of any genderfluid characters in the Arrowverse. They just recently got a transgender character, so maybe in five years there'll be one of them in an MCU film. All of which is to say that it'll be, I would say at least ten years before anyone genderfluid shows up in these movies.

 

[rebellion]

.... This is nice and all but we live in a world where a disney movie was banned in some asian countries cuz there was a reference to a character being gay.
Now lets be real, and do you really think feige would actually flesh out a gay romance or trans issues with any of his characters? I know he says a lot of nice things, but he still hasnt actually done anything about it. Every studio wants in on china, look how well aquaman did there. Do you really think they will risk censorship? And release being blocked?
Yes, we need representation, but its not gonna happen the way some people here want it to happen. If youre lucky you will get a tiny reference. Genderfluid? Yeah, i dont see that happening in a disney movie. Not for a looooong time.

 

[CaptainWagner]

If avoiding controversy is a factor in making creative decisions for the X-Men, then they've already failed. An X-Men movie that doesn't rile up the anti-SJW's and get the Far Right accusing it of "pushing an agenda" or "forcing diversity" isn't accomplishing its purpose. If they back down because of China, then they need to be held accountable. Disney can't continue to be allowed to be viewed as a supporter of the LGBT community if it won't represent them on film.

They don't need to "label" Mystique anything. Just establish that she's just as comfortable in a man's body as a female one. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't she have a significant romance with Destiny as a man?

 

[Fincher]

A lot of people aren't aware of/ignorant to a lot of things and a lot of issues, does that preclude the filmmakers from shining a light on these issues in their films? No. Especially when the franchise is built on themes like tolerance, equality and acceptance.

Them taking the time to properly explain what it means to be genderfluid is taking time away from the rest of the film, making TV, where time is less of an issue, better for that purpose. Well, or movies that are specifically about being genderfluid. And introducing this concept in X-Men, especially in the context of Mystique's shape-shifting, runs the risk that members of the audience will think it's something they just made up. That's especially problematic when genderfluid is similar to bisexual in that it falls somewhat between extremes, and therefore there's the risk that people won't take it seriously and will think that they're "kidding themselves". It's better to establish it first within realistic drama.

 

[rebellion]

She had a romance with destiny, and she was supposed to be kurts mom, with raven being his father. The whole idea was dropped cuz it was after all a different time. Comics today would do this without blinking.
If you ask me, disney has no reason not to continue queer baiting its audience. They keep making tons of money. They have 3 amusement parks in china and those are printing money. Bob iger is trying very hard to establish a friendly relationship with chinese government, you can tell if you have followed the merger. So yeah, they are not gonna piss them off anytime soon. At least thats how i see it.
Dont get me wrong, im not against the idea of representation in films, im just trying to be realistic about it.

 

[Boy Scout]

Yeah, realistically, I don’t see Disney going that deep with the exploration of LGBTQ+ individuals and their struggles, but it’s fun to talk about.

But honestly, they could have the best of both worlds and shoot a different version of the movie(s) for China.

 

[Lip]

So you're taking that character from a group who's also considered underrepresented and making her genderfluid, so that she's sort of half female and half male. You don't think that'll make waves and pit feminists against LGBT+ rights activists in a contest of who deserves it more?

Absolutely not. Feminist are socially engaged and quite aware of the differences between queer representation and representation of women in general. And they are aware that genderfluid isn't a female represented as half male.

 

[Lip]

I can't speak much about the comics, but people of color in the movies hasn't undermined the mutant concept because it hasn't been about them being people of color.

Well, the existence of Storm and Bishop never killed the Sentinels as metaphor for the KKK. And Northstar, Rictor and Shatterstar being gays didn't ruin the concept of mutants when they represented gay marriage and gay kiss in comics. So mutants can be black, latinos, asians, plus-size, atheist, white, cisgender, transgender, gays, bi... none of that will kill the metaphors or water down. It never has.

 

[Lip]

.... This is nice and all but we live in a world where a disney movie was banned in some asian countries cuz there was a reference to a character being gay.

Do you mean that movie that turned out to be one of their biggest case of success both B.O. and critically? I think they're fine. And I can quote Feige and other producers talking about adding more diversity to the MCU. They're commited to the idea. Including LGBTQ representation.

And IMO what push things back is not only the people strongly against the idea of representation, but also a supposedly progressive mentality of "Oh, yeah it's cool the idea, but let's just not do it now".

 

[Marvel united]

If avoiding controversy is a factor in making creative decisions for the X-Men, then they've already failed. An X-Men movie that doesn't rile up the anti-SJW's and get the Far Right accusing it of "pushing an agenda" or "forcing diversity" isn't accomplishing its purpose. If they back down because of China, then they need to be held accountable. Disney can't continue to be allowed to be viewed as a supporter of the LGBT community if it won't represent them on film.

They don't need to "label" Mystique anything. Just establish that she's just as comfortable in a man's body as a female one. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't she have a significant romance with Destiny as a man?

This. Marvel is doing something wrong if X-Men does NOT piss off a certain group of Comicsgate dudebros whining about diversity and "Forced changes". Getting them in up in their feelings should come with the territory. The X-Men are literally the textbook definition of a Social Justice team of Superheroes. It will be a huuuge missed opportunity not to feature their first openly gay character in Iceman. A modern adaption of this property should be a celebration of diversity and "Other"-ness. Also, I'm tired of hearing about the China excuse when Disney had an openly gay character in Beauty and the Beast and now the incoming Jungle Cruise. If Deadpool can depict an openly Lesbian relationship then it should be child's play for an X-Men movie.

 

[rebellion]

Do you mean that movie that turned out to be one of their biggest case of success both B.O. and critically? I think they're fine. And I can quote Feige and other producers talking about adding more diversity to the MCU. They're commited to the idea. Including LGBTQ representation.

And IMO what push things back is not only the people strongly against the idea of representation, but also a supposedly progressive mentality of "Oh, yeah it's cool the idea, but let's just not do it now".

Exactly. That movie passed china censorship cuz it was just a fleeting reference with lefou.
I dont see how you can use that to back up your point. Disney went as far as they could and thats all we could get. Hey, if youre happy with it, im happy for you.
And all the quotes you could post mean absolutely nothing regarding lgbt rep. They might as well have been talking about shang chi. Which, oh look, is actually fast tracked. And should kick ass in chinese box office.
You see how the game is played?

 

[rebellion]

Yeah, well, now that you mention deadpool, neither passed china censorship, you are right.
But come one, its capitalism, the only thing studios like more than money is actually more money.
Plus, fox isnt that invested in china, disney does more than just movies there. They have more to lose.

 

[Lip]

And all the quotes you could post mean absolutely nothing regarding lgbt rep. They might as well have been talking about shang chi.

They did mention the asian community. But also LGBT separately.

Marvel Cinematic Universe will soon have openly LGBT characters, promises Kevin Feige

Marvel Studios EVP Says Goal Is to Have Every Community Represented in Their Films

“I think we haven’t represented the Latin community, in general. I think that’s something we have to do better. I’m Latin, I can tell you that I’m longing for that. The gay community has not been represented whatsoever. I’m gay, so I can tell you that I would long for that,” she said.
“I think we haven’t represented the Asian community well, I think we’ve had some representation, but it’s minimal — and we would like to represent that, in a big way.”

But yeah, you take that as you want.

 

[rebellion]

Great, then, lets see how he actually pulls it off. Im guessing we are gonna see another lefou type situation.
Im not doubting his good intentions, but there are men in suits he answers to.
Time will tell.

 

[Fincher]

Absolutely not. Feminist are socially engaged and quite aware of the differences between queer representation and representation of women in general. And they are aware that genderfluid isn't a female represented as half male.

I mean, I've heard of feminists that are actually anti-gay or anti-transgender, but I'll grant you that I don't know percentages or anything like that.

However genderfluid gets categorized, though, I think it's a given that lots of women won't feel represented by a genderfluid character, and when that character was female and one of the biggest characters in the Fox films, changing her wouldn't go over so well.

 

[CaptainWagner]

It's entirely possible Disney will try to sell out representation for China dollars. I would HOPE that Feige and company would put their foot down and refuse to do X-Men without proper LGBT representation. In the event that they don't, then they need to be utterly destroyed by the public for the blatant betrayal of the values they claim to hold.

 

[CyclopsSummers]

Mutants must be present since centuries
Even if MCU didnt mention them

 

[BoredGuy]

I think we haven’t represented the Latin community, in general.

Glad to see them address this, I feel like Latinos have really gotten the short end of the stick, even more than most other groups... they're the largest minority in the country and we've gotten, what, one latino hero on TV??