So hypothetically you get the audience invested in a story about the O5 by doing an awesome movie featuring them, one that defies expectations. Then what? You basically have to get them to care about the new team in the sequel all over again. So at the end of the day, what was the point of that first movie? Do you not see why that is a problem?
Again, the point of the first movie is the same as the point of having an O5 in the backstory. When you have characters that audience cares about, such as Scott and Jean, you can use those to introduce new characters/teammates. This is how Avengers AOU added Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch and Vision to the team. This is how Civil War added Ant-Man, Spider-Man, and Black Panther to the team. So, no, I don't see the problem, because the MCU does the solution so well so often.
In the comics, the O5 started out as teenagers and then we got a time skip and they were adults. In a comic book this is easy and relatively fast to do (depending on the artist capabilities). You can produce more content more quickly and cheaply, whereas movies take millions of dollars and two years at a time to produce. So given that, is it really a good idea to devote massive resources to make an original five teen X-men movie, then do another movie with them as adults, and then finally get to the characters the majority wants to see anyway? I don't see the bonuses or the benefits to that.
I don't either. That's not how I would do an O5 movie at all.
I like the idea of having an original five X-Men team that existed before; because it allows us to skip unnecessary origin crap, and gives a seamless way to introduce Beast, Angel and Iceman into the fold and make them instantly relevant and important to the world. *Not* doing an O5 movie works better in this regard, because I think the concept of the original team ultimately works better as an off screen movie (pre-history) than one that is actually produced.
That's why we will never agree. I know there is no such thing as instantly important and relevant. The DCEU thinks there is, that by adding in Cyborg, Aquaman and Flash via a quick bastory with 'economical storytelling' that the audience would care, but as far as I've seen, No matter how important they were in the comics, if they're not important to the story of your film, then they aren't important, and can actually detract from the appeal of your film and current heroes by seeming rushed.
Who did they really race swap in Spider-Man Homecoming that anyone would care about? The most notable flirtation with that was Michelle calling herself "Mary Jane", but that was an obvious cop out by Marvel (they didn't actually commit to making her the Mary Jane of the comics).
They certainly didn't do anything in that movie that would be the equivalent of making Jean Grey a black woman (or replacing her spot on the O5 team with Storm). So I don't see how that proves your point.
My point is that changing characters people don't care about - Hank, Bobby, Warren - doesn't matter. So you do see my point. Neither of us see the point you're trying to make with Jean Grey.
I think establishing the idea that there was an original X-Men team in the past already sets up the idea that team membership can change.
Sets up the idea, yes, but also puts them in a position to hate the idea. Not a smart move.
How were we introduced to Tom Holland as Spider-Man? Was it an origin movie? Was it in Spider-Man Homecoming?
No.
We were introduced to him in Civil War, in ONE scene where Tony Stark recruits him. In that ONE scene we got introduced to Aunt May, got to see footage of him in prior action on Stark's phone, got to see his webbing, and even got him to tell Tony (and us) about his origin, all in the span of ten minutes. We were then treated to another awesome ten minutes of him in his new suit fighting Captain America's team. All a grand total of 20 minutes, and Marvel used Spider-Man far better in that time than Sony did with both Amazing Spider-Man movies.
If we can set Spider-Man up like that, why couldn't we introduce Beast like that in an future X-Men movie? Or Iceman or Angel like that? And why wouldn't it just be better to introduce them that way, rather than doing an entire movie about establishing their origins?
So, what I want for an O5 movie is the same as what we got with SMHC. Whether they're introduced in another film or not, the first adventure should be about them coming into their own, which has similar power as a traditional origin story, but instead of covering them getting their powers, it expands the last half of a traditional origin story: finding one's place in the world and integrating one's superheroic identity. That would be awesome.
If they'd tried to introduce Spider-Man as a 30 year old married man in Civil War who'd already battled the Sinister Six it would have been pretty absurd and uninteresting.
X-MEN have to start at least in mid to late 20's if there's any chance at decent AvX movie. Avenger's would own teenage O5 instantly. I'm thinking Cyclops actor is closer to Chris Evans age in 2011 than Tom Holland age in CW.
So, the Avengers are like 10+ deep now: Cap, Tony, Thor, Hulk, Widow, Hawkeye, SWitch, Viz, BPanther, Spidey, Ant-Man, so the only way to have a decent X-Men vs is to wait until Storm, Colossus, Nightcrawler, Wolverine and Shadowcat join with the O5.
In such a case, even if they're still teenagers (or more likely Early 20s), Scott has superior tactical skills to Cap naturally, and can clear the field of everyone but Thor, Hulk and Vision in a single blow if need be. Jean has area attacks that no one except maybe Wanda and Vision have ANY defense against. Iceman, going Omega Level is a Hulking threat. Nightcrawler attacks with
impunity. Shadowcat
attacks with impunity. Storm neutralizes Thor's new powers, and Wolverine outclasses every fighter except Cap and BPanther. Beast does too, on top of his tech and bio genius for any additional objectives. Sure Angel and Hawkeye will each be punching bags for the other team, but the X-Men have too too many tactical options, even as teenagers. If the Avengers were thrown off by the surprise of Giant Man,
they are the ones who stand little chance against teenage X-Men, much less early 20s. The only way for the Avengers to stand a chance is to limit X-Men to only five members, have the rest of the X-Men join the Avengers and give the remaining X-Men out of control evil idiot powers, like in AvX. And kill Xavier. Even in the much more interesting Ultimate War arc from the Ultimates line, where young X-Men defeat the much older Avengers, the fight only happened because Xavier wasn't available to one shot the entire Avengers lineup.
And the Avengers better hope to high heaven that teenage Psylocke, teenage Northstar, teenage Rogue and teenage Gambit are nowhere involved. Geez.
It seems like people are arguing between start with the O5 near the beginning and have the O5 already retired, make a new team. Why are those the only options? Isnt the best compromise a first team that was just assembled (like rookie Peter in SMH), but one that isnt the O5? Whats the benefit of doing specifically those 5? Nobody outside of comics fans knows that they were the original team, and only some comics fans want them in the movie. Its a small portion of the audience that cares. What are the upsides to making an O5 movie other than it respects the source material or whatever? Why bother raceswapping the O5 when you could just build an already diverse team?
Yo sho nuff right. Starting near the beginning is what's most important, imho. Changing who the "O5" is is almsot unavoidable, and certainly the best compromise.
Still, there are answers to your questions. Those particular five set up future storylines very well, and set up roster rotation very well. Scott's leader journey makes the X-Men as a team feel earned and cohesive, as Cap did in Avengers. Jean's powers journey works as a foil for Xavier to establish TP rules as well as sets up Dark Phoenix Saga (IF that's something they plan on ever doing). Beast's science journey works as a great transformation object lesson and makes his later mentor role more layered. Angel is needed if anyone is ever going to care about Archangel, and, honestly, his death would give some pretty epic stakes. Iceman is actually the most useless, narratively, but he's cool, and he comes with the set.
Others who would be good for the O5 are: Storm, Logan, Colossus, Nightcrawler and Shadowcat. That's not a very diverse team though. More diversity would involve include Bishop, Maggot, Darwin, Random, Frenzy, Sunfire, Psylocke, Thunderbird, or a character from the New Mutants, Generation X, Academy X or Five Lights generations, and NONE of those characters work as original members of the X-Men. They have the narrative weaknesses of Iceman - they do not set up iconic storylines, and in fact, some of them come with narrative baggage to derail the movie. Much better, imo, to make Beast Asian than to turn the X-Men origin story into a Japanese crime drama with Sunfire. Basically, because the X-Men diverse characters are actual characters, and not just tokens, they cannot all be used as tokens when diversity is needed among the overwhelmingly White roster.
Because if they go the O5 route, they might want the team to be more diverse. And imo -- none of those characters should be in the first MCU X-Men.
