The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 24

[Willie Lumpkin]

I thought The Last Stand had a spot-on Beast. Kelsey Grammer was amazing casting. One of the few good things about The Last Stand by far.

I liked the casting, but his action scenes were cringe-inducing (at least to me).

 

[Marvel united]

If that report is true, I gotta hand it to Feige he takes chances. If Marvel Studios can make the first MCU X-Men out-gross all the Fox-Men movies that have come before without having the property’s most popular character then I would no longer have any question on whether Marvel could pull off the impossible. They already made a movie with a talking racooon be one of the biggest cashcows in history. Can they make the highest grossing X-film without the dark-haired, clawed mutant himself?

The original five X-Men consists of Cyclops, Jean Grey(who went with the superhero name ‘Marvel Girl’ similar to Sue Storm’s ‘Invisible Girl’ moniker from the FF) Iceman, Beast, Angel, and last but not least Professor Xavier. It would be interesting to see an X-flick that takes the team back to its roots with the exact same roster that they debuted with in 1963 but I just don’t see Feige making a proper X-Men film without Storm. There’s no way Marvel Studios is going to get away with making a movie with five lily white people with no POC representation at all especially after the monumental success of BP.

It's the same as Spider-Man. Feige was always a fan of those first 30 or so issues from the Ditko era and he felt that the previous Spider-Man glossed over those early years and skipped straight to Peter in College. According to Greg, it's a known fact at Marvel Studios that Feige wanted the original 5 together as early as 2000 but he had limited creative control at the time. It's still early and things can change but if what he's saying is true that's where Feige wants to take the X-Men. Back to their roots and it makes perfect sense if you think about it.

Regarding the races. If they did do the O5, I don't think it's a stretch to imagine that race changes will happen. The only ones who have to be white are Jean and Scott imo.

Storm I imagine can be introduced in a Black Panther film first to really flesh her out and delve into the African culture side of her character that the Fox films have ignored. But yeah, I see her being in the movie. Maybe they will add her on top of the O5 to balance out the gender ratio of the team more and push Storm as one of the faces of the franchise.

According to Greg, some execs are discussing whether the movie to be from Jean's perspective but there's a lot of uncertainty over that because of the looming failure of Dark Phoenix.

 

[Spider-Fan]

If that report is true, I gotta hand it to Feige he takes chances. If Marvel Studios can make the first MCU X-Men out-gross all the Fox-Men movies that have come before without having the property’s most popular character then I would no longer have any question on whether Marvel could pull off the impossible. They already made a movie with a talking racooon be one of the biggest cashcows in history. Can they make the highest grossing X-film without the dark-haired, clawed mutant himself?

The original five X-Men consists of Cyclops, Jean Grey(who went with the superhero name ‘Marvel Girl’ similar to Sue Storm’s ‘Invisible Girl’ moniker from the FF) Iceman, Beast, Angel, and last but not least Professor Xavier. It would be interesting to see an X-flick that takes the team back to its roots with the exact same roster that they debuted with in 1963 but I just don’t see Feige making a proper X-Men film without Storm. There’s no way Marvel Studios is going to get away with making a movie with five lily white people with no POC representation at all especially after the monumental success of BP.

Which is why if they used that line-up, I would expect some race swapping.

 

[Detective Conan]

Venom is being released on October 5th in the States.

 

[Darkprime]

I was thinking about Sky as a reason EU might push this deal through sooner rather than later. The EU can't really rule on the Disney/Fox deal with the context of Sky at the moment because Sky is still an open issue.

So I'm thinking they go ahead and approve the Disney/Fox deal and then, when Sky comes up for consideration, they consider that on its own merits and with the context that Disney will own Fox and their Sky shares.

I mean they can't really say: "We don't like the idea of a Disney buyout of Fox because we don't want Disney owning Sky." When Disney doesn't own Sky.

The only logical way to handle Sky would seem to be to take it one step at a time.

They could give provisional approval like the DOJ did. E.G They will approve the deal on the condition that Disney sells its share in Sky immediately following the closure of the deal and does not pursue full ownership.

 

[DyfeddRex]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I haven't seen an X-Men movie yet.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I saw those films called X-Men that Fox produced, but unlike Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Dr. Strange, The Avengers etc., they never felt like the X-Men from the comic books to me.

I have no reason to believe that Marvel has hit any sort of high-water mark. They're just starting to hit their stride.

With special effects technology getting to the point that fully digital sets and actors can be done relatively cheaply, I believe we're just at the beginning of seeing films that are truly only limited by the imagination of the creator (which is the thing that made comic books work so well in the Golden and Silver ages when film special effects were highly limited).

There's nothing magical about the Avengers, and I frankly think most Marvel movies we've seen so far have been limited by cost and technology (in hindsight, the original Iron Man, Thor and Captain America films seem very simple with mostly practical effects and clear efforts to prevent the budgets from ballooning when viewed in the context of films we've seen since then).

I still have the irrational fear that Marvel will forget everything they've learned when they do the FF, but that's an irrational fear. My more rational side tells me the best is yet to come.

You ain't seen nothing yet.

And that is the song we need when they come home.... a little Bachman Turner Overdrive, 'cause "We Ain't Seen Nothing Yet" is really the truth on those properties.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

And that is the song we need when they come home.... a little Bachman Turner Overdrive, 'cause "We Ain't Seen Nothing Yet" is really the truth on those properties.

Imagine Feige showing up to Hall H with a video that puts that song over concept art for X-Men and FF.

 

[Detective Conan]

Marvel is promoting elderly abuse!!

As Helen Love Joy would say "Think of the Children!"

P.S, I know the old lady is a Skrull in disguise. I'm just having fun.

 

[wobbly]

I liked the casting, but his action scenes were cringe-inducing (at least to me).

Grammar was a great choice for an older Beast, but obviously the stunt work couldn't be done by him. Even with doubles though the wire work was pretty awful in Last Stand. Beast visibly slowing down before landing when he jumps down from the rooftop at Alcatraz is a stand out.

 

[WeaponXCII]

Venom is being released on October 5th in the States.

I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Ostensibly, Sony has a level of confidence in this, since they're not lifting the embargo something like the day before, right? I read an article about the often-cited correlation between late review embargoes and critical reception, and from what I can tell, Venom seems to just make the cutoff in terms of quality. I'm not sure if what Sony has here is confidence or arrogance. Is the 2nd considered a "late" embargo lift when it releases on the 5th?

 

[Spider-Fan]

I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Ostensibly, Sony has a level of confidence in this, since they're not lifting the embargo something like the day before, right? I read an article about the often-cited correlation between late review embargoes and critical reception, and from what I can tell, Venom seems to just make the cutoff in terms of quality. I'm not sure if what Sony has here is confidence or arrogance. Is the 2nd considered a "late" embargo lift when it releases on the 5th?

That's a normal window for releasing a review embargo the week a movie comes out.

 

[Iceman]

Fact is that the X-Men are not as popular as The Avengers so to expect Avengers money right out of the gate is foolish. It isn't a new property like Black Panther either. Like you say, the X-Men are known and audiences have already formed opinions on them. Now could Marvel build up the audience over the course of 2-3 films so that they can gross a billion? Yes. But even if the movie is good, it isn't going to do it right away. The only way that happens is if they do something like Avengers vs. X-Men first.

Based on the evidence we have, "X-Men" isn't much of a draw at all. Wolverine and Deadpool are, but the two X-Men films without them really struggled at the box office. The difference between an X-Men film starring Wolverine and one without him has been extremely noticeable. Meanwhile we have at least five Avengers that are proven to be significant draws (Iron Man, Captain America, Black Panther, Thor, and Spider-Man) on their own.

I thought people were talking about whether a billion is possible. Avengers money is way beyond that of course, ranging from $1.4B to $2B. The Avengers films make up 3 of the top 8 films worldwide. Those numbers aren't relevant to X-Men except to show that team superhero films are attractive to the audience when done in the way they want, and far more than the top solo films.

If the new MCU X-Men film comes out in 2022 and is equally as popular as DoFP was, 8 years of inflation and overseas growth would take that to not 100 miles away from a billion. If it comes later then the chances are that much higher. That is just maths outside of opinions. The question is if Marvel are capable of creating a film that clicks with audiences in the way and to the extent that DoFP did or not. And some would suggest an even better reception (not necessarily a better film) is possible. If they create a film that appeals as much as DoFP with a decade of inflation and overseas growth and a modest bonus (say 10%) for sitting in the currently most established film franchise of the lot, I think everyone will agree that all 3 of those factors will each cause it to make a percentage more than DoFP did. If we attribute 10% to each of those factors then we are already in the ballpark of $1B.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I thought people were talking about whether a billion is possible. Avengers money is way beyond that of course, ranging from $1.4B to $2B. The Avengers films make up 3 of the top 8 films worldwide. Those numbers aren't relevant to X-Men except to show that team superhero films are attractive to the audience when done in the way they want, and far more than the top solo films.

If the new MCU X-Men film comes out in 2022 and is equally as popular as DoFP was, 8 years of inflation and overseas growth would take that to not 100 miles away from a billion. If it comes later then the chances are that much higher. That is just maths outside of opinions. The question is if Marvel are capable of creating a film that clicks with audiences in the way and to the extent that DoFP did or not. And some would suggest an even better reception (not necessarily a better film) is possible. If they create a film that appeals as much as DoFP with a decade of inflation and overseas growth and a modest bonus (say 10%) for sitting in the currently most established film franchise of the lot, I think everyone will agree that all 3 of those factors will each cause it to make a percentage more than DoFP did. If we attribute 10% to each of those factors then we are already in the ballpark of $1B.

Marvel may make a movie that clicks with everyone when they see it, but I just don't see them getting enough people to make 1 billion on their first film out. DoFP is a good indicator of the X-Men's current ceiling, but largely the X-Men films have not matched that entry. I think it is going to take time before 1 billion is a realistic prediction on an X-Men movie. That's not to say it won't do well. 1 billion is just not as easy as I think we all think it is on here. Billion dollar films are more common now, sure. But it still is not an easy feat.

 

[Iceman]

Marvel may make a movie that clicks with everyone when they see it, but I just don't see them getting enough people to make 1 billion on their first film out. DoFP is a good indicator of the X-Men's current ceiling, but largely the X-Men films have not matched that entry. I think it is going to take time before 1 billion is a realistic prediction on an X-Men movie. That's not to say it won't do well. 1 billion is just not as easy as I think we all think it is on here. Billion dollar films are more common now, sure. But it still is not an easy feat.

Do you think Marvel can make a film that appeals to the worldwide GA as much as DoFP?

 

[Spider-Fan]

Do you think Marvel can make a film that appeals to the worldwide GA as much as DoFP?

I think they can make one that will match DoFP's gross. Maybe even something that will rival the grosses of the GotG films or Thor: Ragnarok. I just don't see it hitting a billion right out of the gate. Especially if they don't have Wolverine in the movie. I would prefer Wolverine not be in the first X-Men film they do, but he is the fan favorite and him not being in the X-Men at first I do think will hurt them monetarily.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Ostensibly, Sony has a level of confidence in this, since they're not lifting the embargo something like the day before, right? I read an article about the often-cited correlation between late review embargoes and critical reception, and from what I can tell, Venom seems to just make the cutoff in terms of quality. I'm not sure if what Sony has here is confidence or arrogance. Is the 2nd considered a "late" embargo lift when it releases on the 5th?

That's about as late as they go. I believe I remember the Fant4stic reviews came out the Tuesday before release, so this is pretty much the same as Fant4stic. With Midnight shows, a Tuesday evening embargo lift leaves just over 48 hours between reviews and release.

 

[Spider-Fan]

That's about as late as they go. I believe I remember the Fant4stic reviews came out the Tuesday before release, so this is pretty much the same as Fant4stic. With Midnight shows, a Tuesday evening embargo lift leaves just over 48 hours between reviews and release.

Tuesday before a release is fairly standard for reviews. When you want to worry is when they announce review embargo lifts on the Thursday before release. That normally means they want to bury reviews (though in rare cases it is a spoiler prevention method...but it is rare).

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Grammar was a great choice for an older Beast, but obviously the stunt work couldn't be done by him. Even with doubles though the wire work was pretty awful in Last Stand. Beast visibly slowing down before landing when he jumps down from the rooftop at Alcatraz is a stand out.

This is just one of the things I can see looking much different in Marvel's hands. Yeah, we got Beast from Fox, but he wasn't the leaping, tumbling incredibly acrobatic Beast we know from the comic books. And if we can get an Ice-man who actually ices up and uses his powers and cruises on sheets of ice, and a Wolverine who's a manic, snarling, blur of movement etc. etc. etc., I feel like Marvel's films will be light-years ahead of anything we've seen and feel completely new and fresh even if they use some of the same characters.

To me, the X-Films almost felt like television shows in that it always felt like the heroes powers were constrained by budgetary and technical limitations. They rarely put their powers on full display and when they did, they didn't look right.

 

[Iceman]

I think they can make one that will match DoFP's gross. Maybe even something that will rival the grosses of the GotG films or Thor: Ragnarok. I just don't see it hitting a billion right out of the gate. Especially if they don't have Wolverine in the movie. I would prefer Wolverine not be in the first X-Men film they do, but he is the fan favorite and him not being in the X-Men at first I do think will hurt them monetarily.

I realise all that but it wasn't what I was asking lol. If you can answer yes to my question then the rest is maths, not opinion. If you believe the film will match DoFP's gross then you are saying you think the film will appeal less than DoFP as DoFP's number would need to be adjusted up to compare to a 2022 or later release. We all know Iron Man (1) was received very well and better than many MCU efforts that came after but inflation favours the films that came after while the overseas number being smaller reflects both the smaller market at the time and the MCU bonus that inferior MCU sequels enjoyed, in large part due to that positive reception to Iron Man itself.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I realise all that but it wasn't what I was asking lol. If you can answer yes to that question then the rest is maths, not opinion. If you believe the film will match DoFP's gross then you are saying you think the film will appeal less than DoFP as DoFP's number would need to be adjusted up to compare to a 2022 or later film. We all know Iron Man (1) was received very well and better than many MCU efforts that came after but inflation favours the films that came after while the overseas number being smaller reflects both the smaller market at the time and the MCU bonus that inferior MCU sequels enjoyed, in large part due to that positive reception to Iron Man itself.

Matching gross and matching ticket sales are 2 different things. I think it can match its gross. Never said it will sell as many tickets. That is a trickier enterprise. DoFP had advantages this one won't.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Tuesday before a release is fairly standard for reviews. When you want to worry is when they announce review embargo lifts on the Thursday before release. That normally means they want to bury reviews (though in rare cases it is a spoiler prevention method...but it is rare).

I've never seen anything that late, but I have seen them a week or two in advance (Ant Man and the Wasp as one quick example).

 

[Spider-Fan]

I've never seen anything that late, but I have seen them a week or two in advance (Ant Man and the Wasp as one quick example).

It happens usually a few times a year. I believe Justice League was a recent example.

 

[Iceman]

Matching gross and matching ticket sales are 2 different things. I think it can match its gross. Never said it will sell as many tickets. That is a trickier enterprise. DoFP had advantages this one won't.

Yes. You are effectively saying it will appeal less overall than DoFP because of those advantages, which is fair. If the appeal is somehow equal, in spite of being disadvantaged, then the gross will be significantly higher due to those 3 advantages that have been well proven by now. I just want people to see that DoFP's gross is not all that far off a billion dollar gross by itself in terms of a film released in 2022-2024, and that's for a film outside of the MCU.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Yes. You are effectively saying it will appeal less overall than DoFP because of those advantages, which is fair. If the appeal is somehow equal, in spite of being disadvantaged, then the gross will be significantly higher due to those 3 advantages that have been well proven by now. I just want people to see that DoFP's gross is not all that far off a billion dollar gross by itself in terms of a film released in 2022-2024, and that's for a film outside of the MCU.

It's hard to find an adjusted WW number on DoFP. But, it grossed $233,921,534 unadjusted & $260,792,900 adjusted (via BOM). That's for the US. I am not sure what inflated numbers look like on its overseas gross of $513.9 but I don't think that puts it that near a billion. Probably pretty close to what GotG2, SM:H, and T:R made (which is $850ish). But again, that's an estimation by me. That $850 figure I sort of see being where I think X-Men can top out in its first entry if all goes well.

 

[Iceman]

It's hard to find an adjusted WW number on DoFP. But, it grossed $233,921,534 unadjusted & $260,792,900 adjusted (via BOM). That's for the US. I am not sure what inflated numbers look like on its overseas gross of $513.9 but I don't think that puts it that near a billion. Probably pretty close to what GotG2, SM:H, and T:R made (which is $850ish). But again, that's an estimation by me. That $850 figure I sort of see being where I think X-Men can top out in its first entry if all goes well.

That's just an adjustment for inflation for 4 years though. Now extrapolate that to 8 years or 10 years for when a MCU X-film will come out and then think about how much overseas markets will also have grown between the same period of 2014 to 2022/2024 and also what the bonus of being in the even bigger MCU will be by that stage. I think that will be worth around 10%, which takes an adjusted worldwide $900m gross after factoring for nearly a decade of worldwide inflation and overseas capacity growth, to about $1B.

$850m in 2022-2024 will be less impressive than DoFP's $747m in 2014. The main X-factor is exchange rates but we can only assume that they will be constant as they are hard to predict in the long term and could go either way.

None of this is to say that the MCU X-Men film will make these kinds of numbers, just that an X-Men film (even outside of the MCU) received as well as DoFP will be making a lot more than DoFP if it comes out 10 years later.