MCU X-Men

[AndrewGilkison]

You think it's best to start with the second team because it's best to switch out members of the O5? Complaints don't matter, your idea has strengths, but it also has weaknesses, which don't get any stronger by pointing out that an all white 16 year old O5 also has weaknesses.

It depends on what you want to use them for. If they are supposed to be unimportant with no real arc and are supporting characters who are not very heroic themselves, you can do that. If you want them to feel more heroic or capable than Wong or Hank Pym or Maria Hill, then you'll have to give them a movie to grow, like Drax got. Like Mordo got.

I liked Wong in Dr. Strange. I liked Hank Pym in Ant-Man. I would be fine with the O5 being used as well as both of those characters were used in those movies. I don't need them to be "main" characters. Not every character needs to be a "main" character. Not every character can be a "main" character. A good supporting character is just as cool.

As for your Drax and Mordo comparisons... did we need to see a prequel set up movie involving Mordo meeting the Ancient One to care about him in Dr. Strange? Did we need a prequel set up movie with Drax and his family before we got to care about him in the Guardians movies (that come after his origin story). So why do we need an entire O5 movie to care about them as characters? You keep proving my point for me.

There's nothing dumb about a bitter old former hero finding his heart and heroism again from his lowest point. That's a classic moving story. With character development, instead of trying to get emotional drama out of a shorthand or "a look" or whatever people try to substitute for giving a backstory you want people to care about the screen time it needs, they would have been able to draw on things that we really did care about because we'd experienced the building of those things with the characters, and not in a thirty second slo mo scene. This is exactly what Civil War did. "I don't care. He killed my mom." Is an implausibly similar sentiment, and just as unintelligent, but because you've been with the characters, you care, and suddenly Tony being dumb in that moment makes you care about him more, not less.

Does every character need a prequel movie in order to care about them? You seem to think so. That seems to be the argument you keep making.

I don't think there is enough set up in the world that could've made that Martha moment work though. I can buy Tony Stark wanting to kill the guy who murdered his parents. I can't buy Batman going from one extreme (I want to kill Superman for no real good reason) to the other (I want to help and team up with him because both our mom's have the same first name) with nothing real or believable to support either motivation.

Long story short, people like movies that tell them stories, not movies that tell them about stories. If Beast/Angel/Iceman are important, lets see their journey. If not, leave them out. They have nothing to add that Xavier/Scott/Jean can't do, so they're just wasting space.

I think this is why we keep going back and forth. You think I'm talking about information. I've NEVER been advocating an O5 movie for intellectual purpose, but purely for emotional purposes. You can put all the information about the O5, hell, about the Giant Size X-Men in a 30 second crawl at the beginning of the movie, and the audience will have all the information they need, but they won't have the emotions they need to invest in Jean turning bad, or Angel coming back from the dead, or Psylocke being in a new body, or whatever, because information doesn't make for good stories. Emotions do.

And an O5 movie can make a Giant Size movie offer much more profound emotions, things that they could not do showing up with 'information' that we don't have any real reason to care about.

Are we clear, that I'm not talking about information, but emotions? Because the more I think about all our back and forth pretty much comes down to that: I agree ALL the information about the O5 can be delivered in 30 seconds, as can all the information on 10 years of X-Men missions. How does that address anything I've been talking about? Why should anyone care about an infodump?

To put it another way: Why should the audience care about characters or adventures that are, in your words, pointless?

So you want Marvel to spin millions of dollars and take two years to make a movie starring the O5 just on the assumption that its needed to make the audience care about them as characters? That is just not a good enough reason to make that movie, imo.

You still haven't explained why its not possible to get the audience to care about them by introducing them in a future movie as characters that Xavier/Scott/Jean already know. I am fine with them not being in the first MCU X-Men movie. I don't think it would be a good idea to have a massive roster of characters in the first movie anyway. You don't want to cram too much into one movie, obviously.

But there is no reason you can't introduce them in later movies. There is no reason why you can't get the audience to care about them when you introduce them later. Not every character needs an origin movie, and its not always the most practical or sensible approach for every character either.

 

[DrCosmic]

I liked Wong in Dr. Strange. I liked Hank Pym in Ant-Man. I would be fine with the O5 being used as well as both of those characters were used in those movies. I don't need them to be "main" characters. Not every character needs to be a "main" character. Not every character can be a "main" character. A good supporting character is just as cool.

As for your Drax and Mordo comparisons... did we need to see a prequel set up movie involving Mordo meeting the Ancient One to care about him in Dr. Strange? Did we need a prequel set up movie with Drax and his family before we got to care about him in the Guardians movies (that come after his origin story). So why do we need an entire O5 movie to care about them as characters? You keep proving my point for me.

I like Wong and Dr. Pym too, but no one would care if they turned blue or evil or died and came back, in short, treating them like that takes the wind out of the classic X-Men stories. Plus Wong works because he has a distinct mentorship role. If there were five Wongs, he wouldn't be as interesting.

Both Mordo and Drax go on heroic journeys where they become superheroes that they were not before. It takes that much for us to care about Mordo going bad, we had to journey with him into his first world saving foray for it to matter. Drax has a moment to cry by proxy in GotG2, but the only reason it matters is because we've been around him so much so the revelation that he's sad hits us. Without that, he's just a random guy crying. Where's Star Lord?

Does every character need a prequel movie in order to care about them? You seem to think so. That seems to be the argument you keep making.

They need a full journey to herodom in order to be cared about on the same level as other characters who have shared that journey with the audience, like Captain America and Dr. Strange. Becoming a hero is not a "prequel" that's just good storytelling.

I don't think there is enough set up in the world that could've made that Martha moment work though. I can buy Tony Stark wanting to kill the guy who murdered his parents. I can't buy Batman going from one extreme (I want to kill Superman for no real good reason) to the other (I want to help and team up with him because both our mom's have the same first name) with nothing real or believable to support either motivation.

You can't buy Batman not wanting to be like the guy who killed his father? Even if you don't, it's widely understood that this was the film's intent, we just didn't care about how he felt about his parents, because it was done with a shorthand, like you want to do the X-Men's early adventures.

So you want Marvel to spin millions of dollars and take two years to make a movie starring the O5 just on the assumption that its needed to make the audience care about them as characters? That is just not a good enough reason to make that movie, imo.

You still haven't explained why its not possible to get the audience to care about them by introducing them in a future movie as characters that Xavier/Scott/Jean already know. I am fine with them not being in the first MCU X-Men movie. I don't think it would be a good idea to have a massive roster of characters in the first movie anyway. You don't want to cram too much into one movie, obviously.

But there is no reason you can't introduce them in later movies. There is no reason why you can't get the audience to care about them when you introduce them later. Not every character needs an origin movie, and its not always the most practical or sensible approach for every character either.

It's not impossible, it just comes with other unnecessary problems I've explained because emotions take time, and retconning in characters or justifying epic backstories takes even MORE time than a new character would. Trying to rush through the journey does no one any favors. Calling the basic hero story a "prequel" does not make it so.

Show, don't tell. Simple as. If infodumps were enough to get the audience to respond to your O5, then it'd be enough to get you to respond to what I'm actually saying, and you'd 'get' BvS.

Happy hunting, bro.

 

[Mad Ones]

The latest issue of Marvel's "X-men Grand Design" came out last week. Grand Design is a condensed retelling of the X-men mythos that started with Xavier and Magneto's childhood and will end around the 90s comics. This issue focused on the 05 years, and man were those stories, villains, and plots bizarre and super not great. It only gave me more justification for wanting to either skip the 05 stories or create a drastically different original team with different stories.

 

[DrCosmic]

Even people who want the O5 want something with different stories, something that evolves the O5 the way the ANAD comics did from X-Men First Class comics did from the actual original team.

 

[Mad Ones]

Even people who want the O5 want something with different stories, something that evolves the O5 the way the ANAD comics did from X-Men First Class comics did from the actual original team.

I'd also prefer different character dynamics entirely, though. Scott and Jean's romance should get some attention, but there are so many different combinations of characters that produce more compelling and dramatic dynamics than the 05.

You're right that any decision Marvel makes will have critics. I was critical of Marvel's decision to make Peter Parker a high school student (AGAIN), and ended up being a fan of how they did it.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I like Wong and Dr. Pym too, but no one would care if they turned blue or evil or died and came back, in short, treating them like that takes the wind out of the classic X-Men stories. Plus Wong works because he has a distinct mentorship role. If there were five Wongs, he wouldn't be as interesting.

Both Mordo and Drax go on heroic journeys where they become superheroes that they were not before. It takes that much for us to care about Mordo going bad, we had to journey with him into his first world saving foray for it to matter. Drax has a moment to cry by proxy in GotG2, but the only reason it matters is because we've been around him so much so the revelation that he's sad hits us. Without that, he's just a random guy crying. Where's Star Lord?

They need a full journey to herodom in order to be cared about on the same level as other characters who have shared that journey with the audience, like Captain America and Dr. Strange. Becoming a hero is not a "prequel" that's just good storytelling.

So by this logic, are you saying it was a mistake for Marvel to skip Spider-Man's origin in Civil War and Spider-Man Homecoming? Because he seemed pretty heroic already in those movies. Did we need to see him build his first suit or Uncle Ben dying in order to care about him?

Again... not every character needs to be introduced with an origin story. Its not always the only option or even the best one in every situation. I don't think an O5 movie would be the best approach here for many reasons.

You can't buy Batman not wanting to be like the guy who killed his father? Even if you don't, it's widely understood that this was the film's intent, we just didn't care about how he felt about his parents, because it was done with a shorthand, like you want to do the X-Men's early adventures.

You're right. They should've given us a prequel movie where Bruce Wayne is a baby and breast feed by his mother. That would've made that Martha stuff in BvS so much more emotionally engaging and believable.

It's not impossible, it just comes with other unnecessary problems I've explained because emotions take time, and retconning in characters or justifying epic backstories takes even MORE time than a new character would. Trying to rush through the journey does no one any favors. Calling the basic hero story a "prequel" does not make it so.

Show, don't tell. Simple as. If infodumps were enough to get the audience to respond to your O5, then it'd be enough to get you to respond to what I'm actually saying, and you'd 'get' BvS.

Happy hunting, bro.

An entire trilogy with the O5 as teenagers is not a viable option for many reasons, and would take up far too much time. Any one and done movie would feel like a pointless prequel, because those characters would then get sidelined in the next movie.

And introducing them as brand new characters in a sequel means having to spend time introducing them to everyone, and coming up with a reason for them to join the team, as well as explaining and or showing their origins, etc.

How are any of those options practical or viable? You are wasting millions of dollars and time, and bogging things down so much with origin and set up that you won't have time to actually tell a story.

That's why I think its best to bring Beast, Angel, and Iceman in later as characters that other characters already know. It takes less set up and takes less time, and given how massive and unwieldy X-Men is as a property, we can't really afford setting everything up from the beginning and building everything from the ground up. Its best that somethings already happened off screen.

 

[Marvel united]

The equelivant to Homecoming would be to have the X-Men as rookies and recently formed. They did not skip 10 years of history with the character. Homecoming essentially was kind of an origin story in its own way. Why not go that route? Have a team that's existed for a year but they're still at the beginning of their journey.

 

[Shikamaru]

I honestly question if Beast and probably Iceman and definitely Angel are iconic characters that people pay tickets for. If it's okay for them to be missing, it's okay for them to be different is a good rule of thumb, I think.

That said you're probably right. The simplest thing to do is to have Scott, Jean, Storm, Wolverine and Jubilee be the O5, with the only downside to that being it's similarity to X1.

It would depend on the story. But if they pull a Lee/Kirby and start with just a handful of students, I can't imagine not having them each represent something real. I don't see how it would feel contemporary otherwise.

That's where Beast, Iceman and Angel would be at disadvantage. You can give them a real metaphor, but they didn't start out with one. It begs the question of why they would get priority over A-listers like Storm (an actual minority), and even over white A-listers like Scott and Jean (one has a disability, the other looks bipolar). Before we even debate whether to alter them or to bring in new X-Men, some of those seats have already been filled.

Iceman may or may not be the exception to that, though. I don't think Marvel would have issues making him LGBT like in the comics, but I heard it would censor the film in a lot of countries. If it hurts the film's profits that much they might just pass on it.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

It would depend on the story. But if they pull a Lee/Kirby and start with just a handful of students, I can't imagine not having them each represent something real. I don't see how it would feel contemporary otherwise.

That's where Beast, Iceman and Angel would be at disadvantage. You can give them a real metaphor, but they didn't start out with one. It begs the question of why they would get priority over A-listers like Storm (an actual minority), and even over white A-listers like Scott and Jean (one has a disability, the other looks bipolar). Before we even debate whether to alter them or to bring in new X-Men, some of those seats have already been filled.

Iceman may or may not be the exception to that, though. I don't think Marvel would have issues making him LGBT like in the comics, but I heard it would censor the film in a lot of countries. If it hurts the film's profits that much they might just pass on it.

This is another reason why I think its best to just take the Giant Size X-Men #1 approach.

 

[Marvel united]

This is another reason why I think its best to just take the Giant Size X-Men #1 approach.

And how exactly would you explain where the X-Men let alone mutants in general were in the last 10 years?

 

[Shikamaru]

This is another reason why I think its best to just take the Giant Size X-Men #1 approach.

Doing that would have all the problems of starting with a late 20's Spider-Man but on steroids. It would have been awkward enough had one superhero and his rogues gallery been there the last 10 years without seeing them, it would get even more awkward with the X-Men and a global concept like the mutants.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

And how exactly would you explain where the X-Men let alone mutants in general were in the last 10 years?

You could ask that about the Ancient One and her magic school, and about the existence of magic in general in the MCU that we didn't see anyone use until Dr. Strange came out.

Did the audience care enough about that that we needed a Dr. Strange prequel movie with the Ancient One becoming Sorcerer Supreme, or a prequel about Mordo's origin story?

If no, then why do we need an O5 X-Men movie of any kind?

Is there a real story there to tell with an O5 movie or are you just hung up on explaining the existence of mutants in the MCU (something that is ultimately never going to be perfectly explained anyway)? Because I'd rather have that problem then sitting through a bunch of set up movies just to explain the existence of mutants.

Doing that would have all the problems of starting with a late 20's Spider-Man but on steroids. It would have been awkward enough had one superhero and his rogues gallery been there the last 10 years without seeing them, it would get even more awkward with the X-Men and a global concept like the mutants.

Who's to say the O5 X-Men operated for ten years? Who's to say they had all the adventures their comic book counterparts had and fought every villain they fought there (and outside of Magneto/The Brotherhood and Sentinels, did they fight anyone worth a damn in those comics)? Maybe the existence of mutants is only tabloid stuff and stuff of government conspiracy websites and forums because Xavier has done everything he could to keep it that way up until now.

Its not without some precedent in other X-Men media. In the first season of X-Men Evolution the existence of mutants didn't become known until the second season (until the X-Men fought a Sentinel in public streets). Its not clear in the first two X-Men movies how well known the X-Men are to the public (the President didn't even know they existed until Stryker showed him photos of the X-Jet coming out of a basket ball court).

The X-Men have not always been public heroes that everyone in the Marvel universe knows.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Edit

 

[Shikamaru]

Who's to say the O5 X-Men operated for ten years? Who's to say they had all the adventures their comic book counterparts had and fought every villain they fought there (and outside of Magneto/The Brotherhood and Sentinels, did they fight anyone worth a damn in those comics)? Maybe the existence of mutants is only tabloid stuff and stuff of government conspiracy websites and forums because Xavier has done everything he could to keep it that way up until now.

Its not without some precedent in other X-Men media. In the first season of X-Men Evolution the existence of mutants didn't become known until the second season (until the X-Men fought a Sentinel in public streets). Its not clear in the first two X-Men movies how well known the X-Men are to the public (the President didn't even know they existed until Stryker showed him photos of the X-Jet coming out of a basket ball court).

The X-Men have not always been public heroes that everyone in the Marvel universe knows.

The examples you sourced are exactly why I think they'll start with the X-Men as teenagers and mutants being new. In Evolution they didn't make it past high school before they were outed. In X2 the concept of a mutant was already public even if the X-Men weren't.

Xavier mindwiping everyone is the only theory I heard not relying on contrived multiverse/reality-altering plots. Still, it would raise other questions that would have to be addressed. It wouldn't be as easy of a fix as it sounds.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

The examples you sourced are exactly why I think they'll start with the X-Men as teenagers and with mutants being a new thing. In Evolution they didn't make it past high school before they were outed. In X2 they were unknown but the concept of a mutant was already public.

Do you really see Marvel making Wolverine and Storm teenagers?

I have no problem buying that Xavier could keep the existence of mutants under the radar for awhile given the resources at his disposal, and the possible government and SHIELD contacts he has (not to mention his powers).

 

[Shikamaru]

Do you really see Marvel making Wolverine and Storm teenagers?

I have no problem buying that Xavier could keep the existence of mutants under the radar for awhile given the resources at his disposal, and the possible government and SHIELD contacts he has (not to mention his powers).

I see them starting out Storm as a teenager and founding member, and waiting on Wolverine the same way it looks like they're going to wait on Downey a bit. I think a lot of fans are setting themselves up for disappointment if they expect Wolverine back in the very first X-Men film, particularly if they take the X-Men back to their teenage years like Spider-Man.

The problem is there's a limit to how long Xavier can keep them under the radar. I can maybe buy it being possible for a few years, long enough for Scott and Jean to be a bit older than Peter. After which it would seem silly. We've seen the SHIELD corner of the universe and had there been something like an X-gene popping up, they would have mentioned it. SHIELD's all about paranoia and weaponizing superhumans, they would have mentioned it.

Furthermore, Tony would have mentioned it. Tony hacked all of their files way back in Avengers and still went to recruit a kid that debuted a few months ago. Tony would have learned of any mutants on file long before he learned about Spider-Man, who wasn't even on file. The Netflix shows already make it confusing why he didn't just go get Luke Cage or Jessica Jones, injecting mutants into SHIELD would make it worse.

The easiest way to incorporate mutants is to say they're predominantly in the younger generations. You can have older mutants but you can argue the gene didn't take off till the 21st century due to artificial chemials and environmental changes.

 

[Marvel united]

Do you really see Marvel making Wolverine and Storm teenagers?

I have no problem buying that Xavier could keep the existence of mutants under the radar for awhile given the resources at his disposal, and the possible government and SHIELD contacts he has (not to mention his powers).

Why would they make Logan a teenager? He's been around since the 1800s and even in X-Men Evolution, he's already an adult much older than the other members. And yeah, Storm can be a teenager.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The examples you sourced are exactly why I think they'll start with the X-Men as teenagers and mutants being new. In Evolution they didn't make it past high school before they were outed. In X2 the concept of a mutant was already public even if the X-Men weren't.

Xavier mindwiping everyone is the only theory I heard not relying on contrived multiverse/reality-altering plots. Still, it would raise other questions that would have to be addressed. It wouldn't be as easy of a fix as it sounds.

There were many adult mutants in Evolution before the reveal including Xavier, Magneto, Mystique, Wolverine, Storm, Beast, Angel, Gambit, Sabretooth, and Colossus. It was only a specific group of mutants that were still in high school.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I see them starting out Storm as a teenager and founding member, and waiting on Wolverine the same way it looks like they're going to wait on Downey a bit. I think a lot of fans are setting themselves up for disappointment if they expect Wolverine back in the very first X-Men film, particularly if they take the X-Men back to their teenage years like Spider-Man.

I don't see Marvel relaunching X-Men and bringing it into the MCU without Wolverine being a part of it. They are going to want iconic heavy hitters for that. There is no way they leave him on the table.

Why do you assume Marvel wants to take the teenage approach to X-Men? The original X-Men comic where they were teenagers never sold well enough to avoid cancellation, and the property didn't become a big name until they were all adults.

The problem is there's a limit to how long Xavier can keep them under the radar. I can maybe buy it being possible for a few years, long enough for Scott and Jean to be a bit older than Peter. After which it would seem silly. We've seen the SHIELD corner of the universe and had there been something like an X-gene popping up, they would have mentioned it. SHIELD's all about paranoia and weaponizing superhumans, they would have mentioned it.

Furthermore, Tony would have mentioned it. Tony hacked all of their files way back in Avengers and still went to recruit a kid that debuted a few months ago. Tony would have learned of any mutants on file long before he learned about Spider-Man, who wasn't even on file. The Netflix shows already make it confusing as to why he didn't go get Luke Cage or Jessica Jones, having mutants on SHIELD files would convolute that even further.

I can buy Xavier keeping the existence of his students and certain mutants a secret far easier than I can buy Peter Parker keeping Spider-Man a secret (he doesn't have the money and connections that Xavier does, and there is no way to keep swinging around NYC on webs under the radar).

I could also buy it just as much as I could buy the Ancient One's magic school staying under the radar for so long, or why we haven't seen people use magic in public yet before the Dr. Strange movie.

 

[Shikamaru]

I don't see Marvel relaunching X-Men and bringing it into the MCU without Wolverine being a part of it. They are going to want iconic heavy hitters for that. There is no way they leave him on the table.

Why do you assume Marvel wants to take the teenage approach to X-Men? The original X-Men comic where they were teenagers never sold well enough to avoid cancellation, and the property didn't become a big name until they were all adults.

I could also buy it just as much as I could buy the Ancient One's magic school staying under the radar for so long, or why we haven't seen people use magic in public yet before the Dr. Strange movie.

Wolverine isn't the only iconic heavy hitter in the X-Men and not jumping to him immediately is a smart way to tread new ground and separate themselves from the Fox series. Marvel was hesitant to immediately jump to used Spider-Man characters that never had the screentime and memorability Jackman did. Plus if word is true that Marvel will wait on Iron Man after Downey, the same would apply after Jackman.

The problem with the initial X-Men was that they were an afterthought. Stan Lee created them because he got too lazy to keep coming up with origin stories and Magneto was basically a Doom stand-in. Conceptually them being teenagers was never the issue and some of the best received X-Men post-1975 started out as teenagers.

It's also in line with Marvel's MO of casting as young as possible for ongoing stories. Mind you, I'm not saying they'll all be 15. They could do what Ultimate did where they introduce Scott and Jean as college-aged (I think they were 19?) but established they were living with the Professor for a while and had more training. That would still make them relatively younger, though, and the youngest among them will most definitely be Peter Parker's age.

Lastly, the Ancient One's magic school haven't fought in our reality until one of them brought Dormammu. The X-Men would have fought physical threats like the Avengers.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Wolverine isn't the only iconic heavy hitter in the X-Men and not jumping to him immediately is a smart way to tread new ground and separate themselves from the Fox series. Marvel was hesitant to immediately jump to used Spider-Man characters that never had the screentime and memorability Jackman did. Plus if word is true that Marvel will wait on Iron Man after Downey, the same would apply after Jackman.

Marvel still used Peter Parker as their Spider-Man. I can see them wanting to use new villains for their X-Men movies (like they used Vulture for Homecoming) but I don't think they're going to sideline Wolverine just because Jackman played him for so long (and I don't see them waiting too long to recast Iron Man either, but that's another story).

The problem with the initial X-Men was that they were an afterthought. Stan Lee created them because he got too lazy to keep coming up with origin stories and Magneto was basically a Doom stand-in. Conceptually them being teenagers was never the issue and some of the best received X-Men post-1975 started out as teenagers.

It's also in line with Marvel's MO of casting as young as possible for ongoing stories. Mind you, I'm not saying they'll all be 15. They could do what Ultimate did where they introduce Scott and Jean as college-aged (I think they were 19?) but established they were living with the Professor for a while and had more training. That would still make them relatively younger, though, and the youngest among them will most definitely be Peter Parker's age.

I can see characters like Kitty Pryde and Jubilee being Peter Parker's age. I don't see Marvel introducing us to characters like Cyclops, Jean, Beast and Storm as teenagers, or younger than mid-twenties, honestly. Especially when they will have properties like New Mutants that can be the "teenage X-brand".

Lastly, the Ancient One's magic school haven't fought in our reality until one of them brought Dormammu. The X-Men would have fought physical threats like the Avengers.

I don't really buy that EVERYONE that went to that school (or everyone else who learned magic from other places that we don't know about), used their powers in another reality. That's a much more convenient hand-waving conceit to accept than mutants being secret.

Even with the X-Men being built from the ground up, you are still going to have mutants like Apocalypse (an ancient Egyptian) and older characters like Magneto who would predate a lot of MCU characters already established. There is no way to have it all perfectly make sense and line up with what we've seen so far, either way.

 

[Marvel united]

Marvel still used Peter Parker as their Spider-Man. I can see them wanting to use new villains for their X-Men movies (like they used Vulture for Homecoming) but I don't think they're going to sideline Wolverine just because Jackman played him for so long (and I don't see them waiting too long to recast Iron Man either, but that's another story).



I can see characters like Kitty Pryde and Jubilee being Peter Parker's age. I don't see Marvel introducing us to characters like Cyclops, Jean, Beast and Storm as teenagers, or younger than mid-twenties, honestly. Especially when they will have properties like New Mutants that can be the "teenage X-brand".



I don't really buy that EVERYONE that went to that school (or everyone else who learned magic from other places that we don't know about), used their powers in another reality. That's a much more convenient hand-waving conceit to accept than mutants being secret.

Even with the X-Men being built from the ground up, you are still going to have mutants like Apocalypse (an ancient Egyptian) and older characters like Magneto who would predate a lot of MCU characters already established. There is no way to have it all perfectly make sense and line up with what we've seen so far, either way.

The Sorcerers are not even in the same dimension as everybody else. They do not and will not deal with the same threats as the Avengers. They monsters and beings from completely different planes of existence. This was explained In the movie. And it is nothing like the Mutant situation. Mutants are a global phenomon. They happen EVERYWHERE and anywhere, it's much harder to keep that a secret and the Xavier mindwipe idea opens up a whole new can of plot holes.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

The Sorcerers are not even in the same dimension as everybody else. They do not and will not deal with the same threats as the Avengers. They monsters and beings from completely different planes of existence. This was explained In the movie. And it is nothing like the Mutant situation. Mutants are a global phenomon. They happen EVERYWHERE and anywhere, it's much harder to keep that a secret and the Xavier mindwipe idea opens up a whole new can of plot holes.

Even without a mindwipe, Xavier has money and technology at his disposal and possible Government and SHIELD contacts and knowledge about their inner-workings.

That's just as believable as the idea that EVERYONE who went to the Ancient One's school kept their power use to another dimension (not bloody likely) or that all the outside threats they faced were successfully contained from the public. How can you accept that conceit and yet the idea that mutants don't immediately become a worldwide phenomenon until much later is something you can't accept? Which is it?

 

[Shikamaru]

Marvel still used Peter Parker as their Spider-Man. I can see them wanting to use new villains for their X-Men movies (like they used Vulture for Homecoming) but I don't think they're going to sideline Wolverine just because Jackman played him for so long (and I don't see them waiting too long to recast Iron Man either, but that's another story).

Miles Morales isn't just another Spider-Man, he's a different property in the same way Batman Beyond is a different property. They both spun off from Peter Parker and Bruce Wayne but ultimately have their own separate mythos with their own villains, supporting cast, etc. Wolverine is just one part of the traditional X-Men property.

I can see characters like Kitty Pryde and Jubilee being Peter Parker's age. I don't see Marvel introducing us to characters like Cyclops, Jean, Beast and Storm as teenagers, or younger than mid-twenties, honestly. Especially when they will have properties like New Mutants that can be the "teenage X-brand".

If they start with a teenage Scott/Ororo/Hank/Jean, it will probably have less to do with doing a teenage brand and more to do with staying power and avoiding continuity issues. That's what it would boil down to.

I don't really buy that EVERYONE that went to that school (or everyone else who learned magic from other places that we don't know about), used their powers in another reality. That's a much more convenient hand-waving conceit to accept than mutants being secret.

Even with the X-Men being built from the ground up, you are still going to have mutants like Apocalypse (an ancient Egyptian) and older characters like Magneto who would predate a lot of MCU characters already established. There is no way to have it all perfectly make sense and line up with what we've seen so far, either way.

They were taught to use their powers only in alternate realities. The Ancient One didn't just let anyone into the school, you had to abide by a set of rules and philosophy.

Suppose it wasn't all in alternate realities, though. Nothing as big as Dormammu could have happened any recent time in history, and any minor battle of magic on Earth would be the exceptions. X-Men battles on Earth aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

The thing that scares people about mutants is that they're a trend. An occasional one popping up in the past doesn't cause the same fear as a bunch of them popping up at once, particularly when anyone you meet can be a mutant. The bullied kid at school could be a mutant. The guy you cut off in traffic could be a mutant. That's what causes the moral panic over them.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Miles Morales isn't just another Spider-Man, he's a different property in the same way Batman Beyond is a different property. They both spun off from Peter Parker and Bruce Wayne but ultimately have their own separate mythos with their own villains, supporting cast, etc. Wolverine is just one part of the traditional X-Men property.

I don't see any reason why Marvel would hold off on doing Wolverine. That has to be one of the characters they would be most excited about putting their own stamp on. They didn't hesitate to recast Spider-Man and shove him into Civil War as soon as they saw an opportunity to get their hands on him.

If they start with a teenage Scott/Ororo/Hank/Jean, it will probably have less to do with doing a teenage brand and more to do with staying power and avoiding continuity issues. That's what it would boil down to.

I don't think Marvel cares about the continuity issues as much as some people in this thread do, to be honest. If they did, they would've introduced properties like Dr. Strange and Black Panther a lot sooner than they did because of the world breaking aspects of their mythologies (ancient magic taught by the Ancient One, a high advanced civilization that never got colonized by the western world, etc).

They were taught to use their powers only in alternate realities. The Ancient One didn't just let anyone into the school, you had to abide by a set of rules and philosophy.

Suppose it wasn't all in alternate realities, though. Nothing as big as Dormammu could have happened any recent time in history, and any minor battle of magic on Earth would be the exceptions. Even if you go by what we've seen in the Dr. Strange movie,

X-Men battles on Earth aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

The thing that scares people about mutants is that they're a trend. An occasional one popping up in the past doesn't cause the same fear as a bunch of them popping up at once, particularly when anyone you meet can be a mutant. The bullied kid at school could be a mutant. The guy you cut off in traffic could be a mutant. That's what causes the moral panic over them.

That's only the case once mutants become public knowledge. Which is all the more reason why Xavier would've done everything in his power to keep their existence a secret for as long as he possibly could, and why he would keep his X-Men team a secret from the world. And why some mutants would also try to keep a low profile before their existence is discovered.

I can buy the O5 X-Men covering their tracks about as much as I can buy the idea that no one found out about the magic world of Dr. Strange until the events of his movie. If you looked at that movie under a microscope and applied real world logic to it, there is no way every magic user would stick to other dimensions or their existence wouldn't be public knowledge long before the events of Dr. Strange.