Apocalypse Should Ben Foster return as archangel?

[kasjan]

How can Warren be Archangel in the 80s? Makes no sense.

If he comes to 80's from future, he can.

 

[Spider-Fan]

If he comes to 80's from future, he can.

2 time travel films in a row? Very bad idea. I don't want X-Men: Apocalypse to basically be X-Men Days of Future Past only in the 80s and with Apocalypse as the villain. It would feel too repetitious and very unoriginal. I would rather Apocalypse's film feel distinct and original.

 

[kasjan]

very unoriginal

Time travel after time travel in TAS was very good.
Bring on Cable with his X-Force!

 

[Great Mind(s)]

They should not complete the Apocalypse story in one film. Return to the future and bring Foster back for another OT and X-Force film

 

[HIA]

agree. Apocalypse is too huge to just force him in one movie. That would be too cheap, and Fox has the chance to create their most famous villain, using him in a long run, making him almost as popular as Darth Vader. At least, for new generations.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Time travel after time travel in TAS was very good.
Bring on Cable with his X-Force!

That was a TV series, not a movie. On TV, it is okay because you have 13-26 episode seasons, so using it more than once is fine. When you only make 1 film every 2-3 years, the same plot device feels cheap. This is why MJ can be kidnapped many times in the Spider-Man TAS and no one complains, but in SM1-SM3, it feels unoriginal due to them doing it 3 times in 3 films.

 

[Spider-Fan83]

The time stuff really threw a loop into the works...with Gambit, Deadpool etc being so much older than many of the others.

If Angel is in Apocalypse, they need to recast to at least make the character SLIGHTLY younger. I mean...yeah...he should be a lot younger...but whatever...I want him in the film, and it makes no sense to have him be 4 years old. This is another reason why I feel like the build to Apocalypse should be a few movies.

what if, part of Apocalypse's transformation of turning Warren/angle into Archangel(as one of his horsemen), means aging young Warren to his full potential... maybe even as a kid, Apocalypse, can see the potential of what Warren will become (he is Apocalypse after all, not much he can't do)

 

[kasjan]

@Spider-Fan
Hmmm, no.
It would be unoriginal if they do the same scheme of time travel, but physical time travel will be something original for this franchise.

 

[Spider-Fan]

To the average film goer, time travel is time travel, regardless of how it is obtained. X-Force is different given Cable is a time traveler by trade. Part of the concept. But, the X-Men are bit less Sci-Fi than that overall, even if they detour there on occasion. At the least the film series has been more grounded and only just used this concept last movie. It is going to come across as similar.

 

[A Dollar Short]

They should not complete the Apocalypse story in one film. Return to the future and bring Foster back for another OT and X-Force film

 

[combocaz]

Recast because noones gonna care. Their was nothing memorable with fosters angel in The Last Stand.

 

[Mariah]

Daniel Sharman for a recast

or bring back Cayden Boyd, he's 20 now

 

[pavlov]

Retcon the "10 years ago" angel intro to 20 years.

 

[Human Torch]

Well,if they are gonna retcon Gambit into a different actor,I doubt they'll bring back Foster.But I say bring Ben back.I thought he was good in X3 and he really didn't get anything substantive to do as an X-Man.

 

[Super Jim]

I hope he's not in the 1980's scenes. It just wouldn't make any sense. If there's a future component to Apocalypse, then he should be in it. Ellen Page and Kelsey Grammer were used in this film so I am for continuing with Foster. It wasn't his fault X3 was creative dog poop. I think he could do a good job as Archangel. Look no further than his work in 30 Days of Night for an example of a dark and creepy Foster.

Agree!

If the Apocalypse movie is in the 1980's, as has been reported, then how could you have Angel in the movie, unless it's a future timetravel type thing, which I hope they don't do.

Yes, Ellen and Kelsey (and others) were in the film, but they were in the future after the 1990's (meaning there was continuity).

Just because Mystique dropped the gun doesn't mean that Warren Worthington, with the identical powers, would be born 10 years earlier!

Here are some important dates to think about:

- 1932 - Charles Xavier born
- 1962 - X-Men First Class is formed (Prof. X is 30)
- 1973 - X-Men Days of Future Past (Prof. X is 41)
- 1979 - Wolverine: Origins - Retconned (thankfully)
- 1985 - Prof. X and Magneto visited Jean Grey (Prof. X is 53) - Retconned?
- 1997 - Warren Worthington's mutation starts to manifest - Retconned?
- 2005 - X-Men movie - Retconned?
- 2006 - X-Men 2 & (blech) X-Men3 - Retconned?
- 2013 - The Wolverine - Retconned?
- 2023 - Days of Future Past - Retconned?

If Warren/Angel was say 20 in X-men3, which was in 2006, then in the mid-1980's he wouldn't even be born.

Thus, it would be very wrong for them to include Warren/Angel (the real one) in the 1980's timeline. By the way, I think it's interesting to try to determine the ages of possible Apocalypse movie characters/options:

Jean Grey = 15-ish
Scott Summers = 15-ish
Storm = 15-ish
Havok = 40-ish
Mystique = early 50's (though her power keeps her young looking)
Beast = 30-ish
Prof. X = 53
Magneto = mid-late 50's/maybe early 60's
Toad = 30-ish
Ink = 30-ish
Gambit = 30-ish
Wolverine = Doesn't really matter - doesn't age

It's also important to note that Azazel died in 1963, giving less than 1 year for Mystique and him to, well you know... That would mean that baby Nightcrawler was born in 1963 or early 1964, making him around 20 years old in 1985, which would be perfect. (That made him around 40 in X-Men 2).

So a possible cast for a 1985 movie would be:

Professor Xavier = 53 years old
Beast = 30-ish
Gambit = 30-ish
Nightcrawler = 20
Jean Grey = 15-ish
Scott Summers = 15-ish
Storm = 15-ish


Mystique = early 50's (though her power keeps her young looking)
Magneto = mid-late 50's/maybe early 60's
Toad = 30-ish
Ink = 30-ish

Wolverine = Doesn't really matter - doesn't age

Add in a few others that would make sense (meaning NOT Warren Worthington) and you have yourself a cast!

 

[Dr. Remy Lebeau]

Great temporal analysis Super Jim!

 

[Sun_Down]

The options as I see it:

1) Bring Warren back via time travel. Seems like a lot of work and/or clunky storytelling.

2) Bring Apocalypse into the future. Also clunky and repetitive, and implies heavy OT involvement, which may not be feasible/wise (Lawrence is the big draw now).

3) Warren was born earlier. By altering the past, we sent ripples into the future. The main things stay relatively stable, but some things changed. Warren III's birth date could be one of them. Could work for recast or no recast. I vote no recast for continuities' sake and because I think Foster could be a creepy good Archangel.

 

[georgec]

Absolutely, yes.

That character was criminally underused in X3. Foster has shown great range since then, and I think he'd nail Archangel.

 

[psylockolussus]

I really wish they included him in DOFP. It would have been so cool to see him in the altered future with the other X-Men and with the Sentinels, they would probably go after his wings and we would have seen Angel with a cool costume and not just street clothes. His participation in DOFP would have probably redeemed his role in X3.

 

[marvelanddcfan]

Why would anybody want him back?

SPOILER ALERT (if you haven't seen DOFP, what are you doing here anyways?)


First of all, Apocalypse takes place in the 80's. Ben Foster wasn't even born, since the Last Stand took place in 2004 approx.


Second, they're recasting younger cyclops, storm, and jean for this movie. If they wanted an Archangel, I'm sure they'd need to recast a younger Angel too.


Third, that whole timeline (Last Stand) was erased in DOFP. Gone. Never happened. Ben Foster doesn't exist. It's a clean slate.


Get some fresh faces in Apocalypse. Leave the past in the past.

 

[psylockolussus]

Just because they are now in a different timeline, it doesn't mean Angel of X3 won't exist in the future.

 

[batnkevlar]

It would be cool to see a 10 year old, creepy as f**k Archangel. Why is everyone saying he was 20 in X3?

 

[Super Jim]

^ Take a look at my timeline analysis above.

Look, it's really simple:

In 1997 Warren Worthington's mutation starts to manifest. Although the specific scene that we were shown from X3 is now retconned, logically Warren would still be born around the same time, just like we saw that Rogue, Bobby, Kitty and Piotr were. Again, just because Mystique didn't shoot Trask doesn't mean that Warren would now be born a decade or two earlier.

So, when his powers were first starting to manifest how old was he? Maybe 10 years old? Maybe slightly older?

Now X-Men 3 took place in 2006. Again, even though it is now retconned, age wise Warren was around 19 or 20 years old. Maybe 22 or 23.

So, if the Apocalypse movie is going to be in the mid-1980's, and Warren/Angel was around 20 in 2006, then in the mid-1980's he wouldn't even be born.

Thus, it would be very wrong for them to include Warren/Angel (the real one) in the mid-1980's timeline.

 

[P Supreme]

Arch Angel is a must for apocalypse so I'll recast the part I though Foster was rather small for the role Chris Hemsworth would be perfect but that is not happening so

 

[Super Jim]

^ First of all, Archangel is not a must. If they go with Wolverine as the Horseman Death they stay away from Archangel.

Look, Warren Wothington is screwed up in this universe age wise and just because Mystique didn't shoot Trask doesn't mean that Warren can be born 10 or 20 years earlier. That means that Angel can't be there in the mid-1980's, unless it's as a baby.

So unless they are going to bring him into the 1980's from the future, which would convolute the story, then he can't be there. IF, and it's a big if, they have a future scene, then yes, Archangel could be there, but why would they have that. This story is supposed to be around 1985, right when Jean Gey's powers will develop, and I have a big feeling that that is where the focus will be.

Professor X bringing his students (Storm, Jean, Scott, Nightcrawler, etc.) to the mansion, training them, and having to deal with the threat of Apocalypse and his four Horsemen. If you want Wolverine (which means selling tickets), then he'll likely be the Horseman Death, just like I explained in a different thread.

Also, from the feedback that concept has received, most seem to love the idea of Wolverine as the Horseman Death!