Sequels The Original Cast Appreciation Thread

[def28]

as for Storm she can end up with BP!

Never gonna happen.

 

[def28]

They ignored the Emma Frost from Origins, they'll probably do the same thing with Gambit.

Not the same, he had a much larger role and awareness. People remember him. But they are doing that for Deadpool and sounds like Gambit's gonna be recast. If they recon Gambit to not use him during the FC time and in a later OT film they would be doing so specifically for the OT fans, which I don't see happening. But who knows. I'm fine with whatever they choose. I'd prefer to see Gambit and Rogue but we are now 14 years into this thing and will be almost 20 by the time he is re-introduced. I just want to see the character done justice.

Ultimately there should be nothing keeping him from being in the FC time. Like I said he has direct connections to Storm and unless they have Logan still, they need a character like that in the 80s crew. If Apocalypse is mostly in the 80s/FC time, then that's were we would get the most out of the character.

 

[Rike]

Not the same, he had a much larger role and awareness. But they are doing that for Deadpool and sounds like Gambit's gonna be recast. If they recon Gambit to not use him during the FC time and in a later OT film they would be doing so specifically for the OT fans, which I don't see happening. But who knows. I'm fine with whatever they choose. I'd prefer to see Gambit and Rogue but we are now 14 years into this thing and I just want to see the character done justice.

Ultimately there should be nothing keeping him from being in the FC time. Like I said he has direct connections to Storm and unless they have Logan still, they need a character like that in the 80s imo. If Apocalypse is mostly in the 80s/FC time, then that's were we would get the most out of the character.

Why would Gambit be kept in the past because someone had the "brilliant" idea of putting him in that ****y movie?
Like I said Emma was rebooted and Deadpool is confirmed to be also rebooted...

I'd like to see Gambit with Rogue and the future team, unless they have plans for him in the past (ignoring his previous version), if that's the case I'm OK with it.

 

[Angamb]

They ignored the Emma Frost from Origins, they'll probably do the same thing with Gambit.

Emma was a cameo, basically. Gambit a stronger supporting role, heavily promoted, along with Reynolds, but Gambit is actually one of the most famous X-Men and a big favorite.

And Fox and producers seem to keep Ryan Reynolds involved in the delayed Deadpool. So if they change the history or origin of Origins Deadpool, but with the same actor, they can easily change little things about Gambit, while keeping the same actor too.

Both actors would give continuity to the franchise and both can work with Hugh again, developing their relationships. It all works better for the narrative. It feels more cohesive as a long journey.

An if Fox continues with original cast for more than one movie, and Hug

 

[Angamb]

They ignored the Emma Frost from Origins, they'll probably do the same thing with Gambit.

Emma was a cameo, basically. Gambit a stronger supporting role, heavily promoted, along with Reynolds, but Gambit is actually one of the most famous X-Men and a big favorite.

And Fox and producers seem to keep Ryan Reynolds involved in the delayed Deadpool. So if they change the history or origin of Origins Deadpool, but with the same actor, they can easily change little things about Gambit, while keeping the same actor too.

Both actors would give continuity to the franchise and both can work with Hugh again, developing their relationships. It all works better for the narrative. It feels more cohesive as a long journey.

An if Fox continues with original cast for more than one movie, and Hugh decides to stop, Cyclops and Gambit are more than enough to carry the future, along with the rest of the crew and some new comers.

Cyclops and Gambit having leading roles with great material can please the audience pretty fine. They are two big favorites of the universe, so Fox can take advantage of them and their relationships with the rest.

 

[def28]

Why would Gambit be kept in the past because someone had the "brilliant" idea of putting him in that ****y movie?

It's more the question of why leave him out. As much as I know OT fans want everything to line up the way they have wanted for years, FC is still taking the focus right now. To miss a chance at a decent Gambit role makes no sense.

 

[Rike]

Emma was a cameo, basically. Gambit a stronger supporting role, heavily promoted, along with Reynolds, but Gambit is actually one of the most famous X-Men and a big favorite.

And Fox and producers seem to keep Ryan Reynolds involved in the delayed Deadpool. So if they change the history or origin of Origins Deadpool, but with the same actor, they can easily change little things about Gambit, while keeping the same actor too.

Both actors would give continuity to the franchise and both can work with Hugh again, developing their relationships. It all works better for the narrative. It feels more cohesive as a long journey.

An if Fox continues with original cast for more than one movie, and Hugh decides to stop, Cyclops and Gambit are more than enough to carry the future, along with the rest of the crew and some new comers.

Cyclops and Gambit having leading roles with great material can please the audience pretty fine. They are two big favorites of the universe, so Fox can take advantage of them and their relationships with the rest.

Okay, but how could they keep the same actor? Deadpool ages like Wolverine, so it's OK to keep Reynolds.
But Gambit? Kitsch can't play a 50+ years old Gambit and I nobody wants to see a 50+ years old Gambit.

 

[universeman]

This is just my opinion but I think after XMA they should just reboot with new cast, new writers, and new director with O5 with Mr. Sinister as the villain!

 

[def28]

This is just my opinion but I think after XMA they should just reboot with new cast, new writers, and new director with O5 with Mr. Sinister as the villain!

I actually agree with this. But definitely not what most want to hear, and kind of misses the point of giving FC a clean slate post DOFP.

 

[Rike]

It's more the question of why leave him out.

For me it's more about keeping him where he fits best.

As much as I know OT fans want everything to line up the way they have wanted for years,

That's not me, seriously. I love both casts and I want Fox to keep them both, that's why I made this thread.

Spoiler

I'm not like that poster here.

FC is still taking the focus right now. To miss a chance at a decent Gambit role makes no sense.

 

[Rike]

This is just my opinion but I think after XMA they should just reboot with new cast, new writers, and new director with O5 with Mr. Sinister as the villain!

 

[def28]

For me it's more about keeping him where he fits best.

Definitely, but that could be either time period right now. Being on a team with Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm and Beast ain't bad. And he will stand out more as the teams bad ass if there's no Logan.

Rogue is his only leverage for present time imo.

That's not me, seriously. I love both casts and I want Fox to keep them both, that's why I made this thread.

That wasn't directed at you or anyone specific btw.

 

[marvelrobbins]

If they were going to reboot why bother with DOFP and Apocalypse.Or even X-force,another wolverine solo or even attempt to do deadpool.

people apparently know nothing of X-men history.The original five era was least successful run of history.Sinster wasn't even Introduced In comics till peroid the original team was X-factor and Sinster was villain against X-men without any of original 5.

A reboot means none of other films In series ever happened

1:batman begins throws out the previous 4 films
2:Casino Royale throws out the first 40 years of James Bond films
3:Amazing Spider-man throws out rami trilogy
4:Man of steel throws out all previous superman films
5:Unitled Superman/Batman film throws out nolan trilogy

Star Trek 2009,and apparently Terminator:Genesis are in the grey era.DOFP may or may not move X-Men Into somewhat of the grey area.A reboot wouldn't just throw out Ot but also First Class too.

 

[def28]

The original five era was least successful run of history.Sinster wasn't even Introduced In comics till peroid the original team was X-factor and Sinster was villain against X-men without any of original 5.

So what? That holds no relevance for todays popularity with those characters. Or that these movies need to line up to comic dates. FC had the weakest roster and made money. The original five could easily make more, and have Sinister as a villain because of the connection to Scott.

 

[Duran Man]

So what? That holds no relevance for todays popularity with those characters. Or that these movies need to line up to comic dates. FC had the weakest roster and made money. The original five could easily make more, and have Sinister as a villain because of the connection to Scott.

This, and there isn't much about this franchise that is faithful to X-Men history anyway.

 

[universeman]

Yep also the reason why they created Mr. Sinister was because the CB writers knew the readers would get tire of Magneto vs X-Men all the time so they created a new character in the CB series to fight The X-Men which work out well!

 

[psylockolussus]

Well for me, I would like to see an OT cast film without Magneto/Ian McKellen. And I want them to face a new big villain and that villain has his team of mutants.

These two statements seem contradictory. Way to beat a dead horse whilst calling it a black kettle.

I don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Angamb]

Okay, but how could they keep the same actor? Deadpool ages like Wolverine, so it's OK to keep Reynolds.
But Gambit? Kitsch can't play a 50+ years old Gambit and I nobody wants to see a 50+ years old Gambit.

I posted a comment recently, not sure if on this topic or another one, but the point basically was that the age thing in movies is never 100% realistic.

And many studios have used same actors playing their roles in different time periods, its called a creative license.

And the most recent example for all of us is Dofp: FC actors are playing their characters being 11 years older, but only being just 3 years older compared to FC. Its not realistic, but at the end, it doesnt matter, because the audience can see the journey of those characters with the same actors, ands thats always better for a franchise, since the audience can connect with the actors during all the movies.

If Fox and Singer has done this with FC actors, they can do the same with Gambit. Taylor is older now, and by the time of next movie, he will be closer to 40 years old. So its fine. He doesnt need to really has 50 years old, he will be older than Origins, and thats enough. And he fits perfectly with Anna's age, since Taylor is one year older than her. So its fine.

As I said on an older comment too: Movies arent reality. Its fiction, and these licenses can be taken.

 

[Rike]

I posted a comment recently, not sure if on this topic or another one, but the point basically was that the age thing in movies is never 100% realistic.

And many studios have used same actors playing their roles in different time periods, its called a creative license.

And the most recent example for all of us is Dofp: FC actors are playing their characters being 11 years older, but only being just 3 years older compared to FC. Its not realistic, but at the end, it doesnt matter, because the audience can see the journey of those characters with the same actors, ands thats always better for a franchise, since the audience can connect with the actors during all the movies.

If Fox and Singer has done this with FC actors, they can do the same with Gambit. Taylor is older now, and by the time of next movie, he will be closer to 40 years old. So its fine. He doesnt need to really has 50 years old, he will be older than Origins, and thats enough. And he fits perfectly with Anna's age, since Taylor is one year older than her. So its fine.

As I said on an older comment too: Movies arent reality. Its fiction, and these licenses can be taken.

What?
McAvoy and Fassbender were in their 30s in FC and they were playing characters in their late 20s.
Hoult and Lawrence were 20 in FC and their characters were still teenagers.
So it makes sense for them to play the same characters after a decade.

It's not the same thing with Kitsch, Gambit was like in his 20s in 1987, right? Then Gambit would be in his 50s in 2023. It's not a jump of one decade, it's jump of over three decades.
And the age difference between Gambit and Rogue would be around 30 years. That's just creepy, Angamb.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Lauren Shueller Donnor has made it clear whenever Gambit is used again they are recasting
him.

 

[kasjan]

Xavier and Magneto were 30 in FC.
Mystique and Beast were 20, 20+, not teenagers in FC. Mystique wasn't 1yo in 1944.

But back To Gambit talk, I think Angamb is X4X5Campaign from twitter, the same nonsense about Kitsch playing 55+ Gambit in 2023 reality. He can play at least clone of 80's Gambit. He's only 32 and won't be any close to 40 in 2016. He could play 40+, maybe even he could play 55+ Gambit with makeup as Pitt had, but I'm not interested in 35yo Rogue love with 55+ Gambit. Travel her to 80's or make clone of Gambit.

 

[Angamb]

What?
McAvoy and Fassbender were in their 30s in FC and they were playing characters in their late 20s.
Hoult and Lawrence were 20 in FC and their characters were still teenagers.
So it makes sense for them to play the same characters after a decade.

It's not the same thing with Kitsch, Gambit was like in his 20s in 1987, right? Then Gambit would be in his 50s in 2023. It's not a jump of one decade, it's jump of over three decades.
And the age difference between Gambit and Rogue would be around 30 years. That's just creepy, Angamb.

you hasnt understand my point at all, I see.

if you use numbers, the proportion comparition is pretty similar between FC actors and Taylor.

FC actors are just 3 years older. 3. but they are supposed to be 11 years older. thats a difference of 8 years.

- So.... 1 decade later = 8 years older.

Since Origins was filmed in 2008, Taylor is 6 years older right now, so using same formula, that would mean:

- 2 decades later = 16 years older.

And if next present day movie is filmed in 2 years, Taylor would be 8 years older, almost the triple of Fc actors age difference between movies. So that would mean....

- 3 decades later

It fits

So basically, my point is still the same.

 

[henzINNIT]

I see no problem in Gambit being older than Rogue, but Kitsch has to go.

 

[Rike]

you hasnt understand my point at all, I see.

Yes, I have.

if you use numbers, the proportion comparition is pretty similar between FC actors and Taylor.

It's not even close.

FC actors are just 3 years older. 3. but they are supposed to be 11 years older. thats a difference of 8 years.

The characters were a little younger than the actors in FC, now the characters are a little older than the actors in DoFP. It doesn't make any difference. Their ages are whithin believable proportions.
Kitsch's is not because for the millionth time, he can't play a character DECADES older than him without heavy make-up. It's unrealistic and it's not even necessary to turn Gambit into an old man.

- So.... 1 decade later = 8 years older.

See the post above.

Since Origins was filmed in 2008, Taylor is 6 years older right now, so using same formula, that would mean:

- 2 decades later = 16 years older.

See the post above the post above. I'm not using your formula and it doesn't stand at all.

And if next present day movie is filmed in 2 years, Taylor would be 8 years older, almost the triple of Fc actors age difference between movies. So that would mean....

- 3 decades later

It fits

So basically, my point is still the same.

 

[Angamb]

I thought you would accept the explanation about FC example, but I guess you dont want to do it for some reason.

It doesnt matter what age FC characters were supposed to have, the thing is the actors "should look" 11 years older compared to FC, and they dont.

You may try to cover it, but it is what it is. Its not realistic.

If you can accept one rule, you should acept the same rule to all cases, but if you dont want to do it in Gambit case, then thats another story, about your prefferences.

Anyway, I tried to explain it, and I did. So theres nothing more I can do, if you dont want to follow the same rules on all cases