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

[Tymminator]

I love Count Nefaria (still waiting for his Marvel Legends figure). When he took on Ironman, Black Panther, Thor, Wonderman, Captain America, Beast, Wasp, Yellowjacket, Scarlet Witch and the Vision after getting his power boost is where I got into the character. He was like a aristocratic twisted golden-age Superman. It was such a fun run.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

I hope the MCU gets more X-villains like Mojo, Spiral, Stryfe, Arcade, Senator Kelly...

Hell if the first movie doesn't use Sinister, atleast have Graydon Creed and the Purifiers/Friends of Humanity, that would really drive home the mutant-human race relations narrative.

Post credit scene for Sabretooth and Mags.

 

[Marvel united]

The MCU can still adapt these ideas and use them in a first film. The movie versions of basically any story they have done have been vast departures. Any adaptation of the above would be as well, so it wouldn't have to be a sequel.

So then you have to introduce the Morlocks into the first movie. You have to introduce Maddie as well and it makes no sense for her to exist unless Jean is already dead. The reason why Sinister made her was to, again, manipulate Scott into producing a baby whom he hoped he could use a weapon against Apocalypse. So now you have to introduce Nathan Summers aka the baby would go on to become Cable in the future. None of this makes any sense to have in the first movie. So you introduce a story that has zero prior context and setup or you radically alter it to the point where it's no longer the same story. What's even the point then? None of these elements can be reworked to make any sense in the context of the first movie. We have two Sinister stories happening at the same time that required setup in the comics and prior arcs that gave these events context.

Because other comics exist without him really doesn't change anything. Magneto is still one of the hottest commodities coming over in this deal. He's going to get a major push. They're not going to wait like 8 years to use Magneto. Lots of other characters will be used in the MCU X-Men verse, I am sure. Especially since we're likely getting solo X-Men films and other X-teams on top of the standard X-Men. You can introduce Magneto in a first X-Men film and do it differently from how Fox. These are not mutually exclusive ideas.

There are more X-Men comics without Magneto then there are with him. He's not like a Scott Summers or a Charles Xavier both of whom have been on almost every lineup and incarnation of the X-Men since their debut in 1963. Magneto is not an essential supporting character/villain either like Loki. Just because he's the most popular X-Men villain (as a result of the Fox movies) does not automatically supersede Marvel's attempt to do something fresh and different with their incarnation of the X-Men. Like I said, there are only so many ways you can approach this character. The Fox movies have basically covered all the ground there is to cover with him besides legacy stories like the Acolytes. It's better to let him cool off a bit so we can have fresh blood in this new franchise. I'm going to jump off a cliff if I have to listen to his boring speeches again in the very first X-Men of the MCU..

 

[Spider-Fan]

So then you have to introduce the Morlocks into the first movie. You have to introduce Maddie as well and it makes no sense for her to exist unless Jean is already dead. The reason why Sinister made her was to, again, manipulate Scott into producing a baby whom he hoped he could use a weapon against Apocalypse. So now you have to introduce Nathan Summers aka the baby would go on to become Cable in the future. None of this makes any sense to have in the first movie. So you introduce a story that has zero prior context and setup or you radically alter it to the point where it's no longer the same story. What's even the point then? None of these elements can be reworked to make any sense in the context of the first movie. We have two Sinister stories happening at the same time that required setup in the comics and prior arcs that gave these events context.

Again, you're looking at it from in the comics this happened this way. In a movie, it can be different. The MCU has made plenty of them. See Ultron no longer being built by Hank Pym and Starlord's father being Ego as probably the 2 best examples. Also Iron Man is not a secret ID as Stark's bodyguard, Thor has no Donald Blake, Hulk was not sent to Sakaar by the Illuminati, etc. Some of these plot lines you're referencing can be dropped or used in a later movie in a different story line (like the MCU has always done). Things like Scott being used by Sinister for his DNA to build a super being can easily be in the first movie, while saving Cable being created in another. Again comics don't equal the movies.

There are more X-Men comics without Magneto then there are with him. He's not like a Scott Summers or a Charles Xavier both of whom have been on almost every lineup and incarnation of the X-Men since their debut in 1963. Magneto is not an essential supporting character/villain either like Loki. Just because he's the most popular X-Men villain (as a result of the Fox movies) does not automatically supersede Marvel's attempt to do something fresh and different with their incarnation of the X-Men. Like I said, there are only so many ways you can approach this character. The Fox movies have basically covered all the ground there is to cover with him besides legacy stories like the Acolytes. It's better to let him cool off a bit so we can have fresh blood in this new franchise. I'm going to jump off a cliff if I have to listen to his boring speeches again in the very first X-Men of the MCU..

100% not true. He's been their most popular villain since day one. This point right here has absolutely no merit to it what so ever. I get that you're sick of the character because of the Fox films, but don't let that cloud what you're saying. Cause this is just categorically incorrect. Are you right that he is in less than half of the X-Men's comics? Sure, but that's easy when there are thousands of them. He's still been in more comics than any other X-Men villain by a very fair margin.

 

[Marvel united]

Again, you're looking at it from in the comics this happened this way. In a movie, it can be different. The MCU has made plenty of them. See Ultron no longer being built by Hank Pym and Starlord's father being Ego as probably the 2 best examples. Also Iron Man is not a secret ID as Stark's bodyguard, Thor has no Donald Blake, Hulk was not sent to Sakaar by the Illuminati, etc. Some of these plot lines you're referencing can be dropped or used in a later movie in a different story line (like the MCU has always done). Things like Scott being used by Sinister for his DNA to build a super being can easily be in the first movie, while saving Cable being created in another. Again comics don't equal the movies.

These two stories are one in the same. The MCU didn't introduce Ultron and have him only want to elimate all animal and plant life on Earth so they can save him going after humans/The Avengers for future movies. His motivation of killing all living things Is complete just like Sinister creating a clone of Jean to mate with Scott. You can't have Sinister after Scott's genetics (And Jean's since she's a clone) and not have them create Cable. How else would Sinister get his weapon to use against Apocalypse? You're essentially watering down the future Cable/baby Nathan Summers story in later X-Films by cutting Sinister's plan of execution in to two parts. Yes, the MCU has made countless changes to classic stories but all of them keep the core of what the original story was and the context that makes sense.

You need Jean to be dead in order for Sinister to create a clone. You need Jean to be dead in order Scott to even consider being with the clone. You need Scott and Madalyne (clone) to create the baby. That's the core story. The sequence of events surrounding it may be changed but that's the way it would be kept intact going by the MCU's previous adaptations.

Also, how would Sinister even know about Scott's genetic potential when he hasn't even met him yet? In the comics it made sense because X-Factor had stopped the initial Marauders attack on the Morlocks so Sinister saw firsthand his potential. Now you could include some half-baked explanation to explain but it just comes off as rushed. This is a story that needs to happen when the X-Men have been established on screen for at least a couple of years. You don't jump straight into Gwen being dead in Spider-Man's first movie or Winter Soldier in Cap's first movie. Both require setup.

100% not true. He's been their most popular villain since day one. This point right here has absolutely no merit to it what so ever. I get that you're sick of the character because of the Fox films, but don't let that cloud what you're saying. Cause this is just categorically incorrect. Are you right that he is in less than half of the X-Men's comics? Sure, but that's easy when there are thousands of them. He's still been in more comics than any other X-Men villain by a very fair margin.

Magneto may have technically been the most recognizable X-Men villain but the Fox movies cemented him as a crutch that the franchise keeps going back to over and over again. And now people think he's the ONLY X-Men villain. He's the only one that the general populace knows because of these movies.

I'm sure Green Goblin/Norman Osborn has been in more comics than any Spider-Man villain (besides maybe Venom) but that doesn't mean he had to be forced upon us again in the first Spider-Man movie in the MCU. It's just such an obvious no-brainer that Feige will want to use new villains. I don't see Magneto getting a big push when he's been getting a "big push" by Fox/Singer for 19 years now.

 

[Spider-Fan]

These two stories are one in the same. The MCU didn't introduce Ultron and have him only want to elimate all animal and plant life on Earth so they can save him going after humans/The Avengers for future movies. His motivation of killing all living things Is complete just like Sinister creating a clone of Jean to mate with Scott. You can't have Sinister after Scott's genetics (And Jean's since she's a clone) and not have them create Cable. How else would Sinister get his weapon to use against Apocalypse? You're essentially watering down the future Cable/baby Nathan Summers story in later X-Films by cutting Sinister's plan of execution in to two parts. Yes, the MCU has made countless changes to classic stories but all of them keep the core of what the original story was and the context that makes sense.

You need Jean to be dead in order for Sinister to create a clone. You need Jean to be dead in order Scott to even consider being with the clone. You need Scott and Madalyne (clone) to create the baby. That's the core story. The sequence of events surrounding it may be changed but that's the way it would be kept intact going by the MCU's previous adaptations.

Also, how would Sinister even know about Scott's genetic potential when he hasn't even met him yet? In the comics it made sense because X-Factor had stopped the initial Marauders attack on the Morlocks so Sinister saw firsthand his potential. Now you could include some half-baked explanation to explain but it just comes off as rushed. This is a story that needs to happen when the X-Men have been established on screen for at least a couple of years. You don't jump straight into Gwen being dead in Spider-Man's first movie or Winter Soldier in Cap's first movie. Both require setup.

Again, you're assuming this will all play out like the comics. Maybe they instead of using a clone of Jean just use Jean's blood instead and make Cable their son proper. No Madalyne required and cut her out entirely. That's just at the top of my head, but again you're letting the existing comic continuity dictate how you think the story would play out. Changes would be made much like the MCU always has done. Cable can always be hinted at, but not actually factor into the story until later on. He doesn't need to be created and used in the same film. Thus by using Sinister now, you have set-up a potential Cable spin-off film where much of this can all be covered in there. There are plenty of ways to go about it.

I'm not going to write you an X-Men script right now or anything, and I am not going to keep going point by point justifying why they can alter things and make it work. Suffice to say I think it's easy to use Sinister in a 1st movie and I think he is the best options because he ticks a lot of boxes.

Magneto may have technically been the most recognizable X-Men villain but the Fox movies cemented him as a crutch that the franchise keeps going back to over and over again. And now people think he's the ONLY X-Men villain. He's the only one that the general populace knows because of these movies.

I'm sure Green Goblin/Norman Osborn has been in more comics than any Spider-Man villain (besides maybe Venom) but that doesn't mean he had to be forced upon us again in the first Spider-Man movie in the MCU. It's just such an obvious no-brainer that Feige will want to use new villains. I don't see Magneto getting a big push when he's been getting a "big push" by Fox/Singer for 19 years now.

Magneto is one of the most popular not just Marvel villains, but comic book villains. When he arrives, he's going to get a push regardless of being in past films. He's too popular to not push. Again, the Green Goblin example you keep returning to is a bad one. Marvel cannot freely use him. They have to get permission to use him if they ever do, assuming that Spider-Man isn't pulled out of the MCU or something. Also, once the X-Men arrive, we're likely looking at multiple X-franchises occurring at once. At this point, we have 1 Spider-Man MCU series going on. Thus character use/reuse is at more of a premium. It's easier to use characters when you're producing more content for that series. Plus, come FFH, who knows at this point, but maybe Norman will be referenced/hinted in it. We shall see on that front. But I think you're letting your own opinion of Magneto overshadow you're thinking.

 

[Marvel united]

Again, you're assuming this will all play out like the comics. Maybe they instead of using a clone of Jean just use Jean's blood instead and make Cable their son proper. No Madalyne required and cut her out entirely. That's just at the top of my head, but again you're letting the existing comic continuity dictate how you think the story would play out. Changes would be made much like the MCU always has done. Cable can always be hinted at, but not actually factor into the story until later on. He doesn't need to be created and used in the same film. Thus by using Sinister now, you have set-up a potential Cable spin-off film where much of this can all be covered in there. There are plenty of ways to go about it.

Drop Maddie? If you strip Madelyne from the story, you lose the emotional resonance of the entire thing. You lose the weight and drama that comes as result of Scott: now a broken man, living a superficially happy life that he knows is a lie because he subconsciously refuses to move on from Jean. You lose a suicidal Madelyne going on a journey of acceptance that Scott will never love her the way he loves Jean and ultimately sacrificing her life to save the planet... And then subsequently being resurrected only to be corrupted by hell itself (this could set up a major MCU crossover in Inferno) You lose the emotional weight from the sacrifice that Scott has to make later on when Apocalypse tries to infect his son with a Techno-Virus if you turn Cable into a lab grown baby. You're essentially turning him into Nate Grey from AOA. Nathan is essentially an eternal reminder of guilt he has over abandoning his family. The whole Summers family saga is one of the greatest unexplored stories in the X-Men's lore that absolutely should be adapted later on. And it would be a shame to completely lose all of that great material just so Sinister can have legitimate, non-hollow reason to be in the first movie.

I'm not going to write you an X-Men script right now or anything, and I am not going to keep going point by point justifying why they can alter things and make it work. Suffice to say I think it's easy to use Sinister in a 1st movie and I think he is the best options because he ticks a lot of boxes.

I mean, the only box he ticks is being the third most prominent X-Men villain behind Magneto and Apocalypse. There are countless other villains who would be better starting villains for the X-Men than him

Magneto is one of the most popular not just Marvel villains, but comic book villains. When he arrives, he's going to get a push regardless of being in past films. He's too popular to not push. Again, the Green Goblin example you keep returning to is a bad one. Marvel cannot freely use him. They have to get permission to use him if they ever do, assuming that Spider-Man isn't pulled out of the MCU or something. Also, once the X-Men arrive, we're likely looking at multiple X-franchises occurring at once. At this point, we have 1 Spider-Man MCU series going on. Thus character use/reuse is at more of a premium. It's easier to use characters when you're producing more content for that series. Plus, come FFH, who knows at this point, but maybe Norman will be referenced/hinted in it. We shall see on that front. But I think you're letting your own opinion of Magneto overshadow you're thinking.

I mean, not sure why it's relevant to the mainline X-Men franchise that there will be spinoffs. How does that dictate whether Magneto will be used? It's not like we're going to get an X-Factor: Investigations show before we get an X-Men movie. And even if we did, how do these two points connect? It doesn't negate the problem of Magneto being over exposed and Marvel needing to find new villains to distinguish their version from the Magneto trilogy of films. Everybody at this points knows there's absolutely no way Marvel will do Magneto AGAIN after 7 films in a main role. Seriously, nobody wants it. All you see are articles about different villains that Marvel can use for their X-Men whom haven't been done before.


It doesn't matter if Osborn is limited by Sony. Feige said he did NOT want to use him. He has stated time and time again that he had no interest in doing the Osborns let alone the Goblins again right off the bat because Spidey has dozens of unused villains that MS can mine from. Unless you think Kevin was lying and secretly wanted to use Norman but couldn't because of Sony? I see no reason why Magneto will be treated any different than Norman. I think you making Magneto out to be bigger than he is -- He's not Dr. Doom. He's not Galactus. And yet he's appeared in more in movies than both of them combined. Heck, he's been in more films than Gobbie, Galactus and Doom put together! There's no need rehash a stale character (who needs to go on a long hiatus) so soon in the MCU.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Drop Maddie? If you strip Madelyne from the story, you lose the emotional resonance of the entire thing. You lose the weight and drama that comes as result of Scott: now a broken man, living a superficially happy life that he knows is a lie because he subconsciously refuses to move on from Jean. You lose a suicidal Madelyne going on a journey of acceptance that Scott will never love her the way he loves Jean and ultimately sacrificing her life to save the planet... And then subsequently being resurrected only to be corrupted by hell itself (this could set up a major MCU crossover in Inferno) You lose the emotional weight from the sacrifice that Scott has to make later on when Apocalypse tries to infect his son with a Techno-Virus if you turn Cable into a lab grown baby. You're essentially turning him into Nate Grey from AOA. Nathan is essentially an eternal reminder of guilt he has over abandoning his family. The whole Summers family saga is one of the greatest unexplored stories in the X-Men's lore that absolutely should be adapted later on. And it would be a shame to completely lose all of that great material just so Sinister can have legitimate, non-hollow reason to be in the first movie.


I mean, the only box he ticks is being the third most prominent X-Men villain behind Magneto and Apocalypse. There are countless other villains who would be better starting villains for the X-Men than him

Once again, this story will not play out in the movies exactly like the comics. When I pictured an Infinity Gauntlet movie in my head, I pictured Adam Warlock, the Silver Surfer, etc. I ain't getting that version. I'm getting something that is an amalgamation of many different MCU Thanos stories, and a lot of original content mixed in. The same thing will happen in the MCU. Everything you just outlined here in your above post, not all of it will play out that way. Much of it will play out differently in practice, but much like IW and seemingly Endgame, that doesn't mean I won't like the end result. Heck, in CW's case, they actually IMPROVED the story quite a bit!

I mean, not sure why it's relevant to the mainline X-Men franchise that there will be spinoffs. How does that dictate whether Magneto will be used? It's not like we're going to get an X-Factor: Investigations show before we get an X-Men movie. And even if we did, how do these two points connect? It doesn't negate the problem of Magneto being over exposed and Marvel needing to find new villains to distinguish their version from the Magneto trilogy of films. Everybody at this points knows there's absolutely no way Marvel will do Magneto AGAIN after 7 films in a main role. Seriously, nobody wants it. All you see are articles about different villains that Marvel can use for their X-Men whom haven't been done before.

It's the point that whatever X-Men villains you're hoping may appear instead of Magneto may get used elsewhere and have more opportunities than say, Spider-Man villains who have more limited access to being in movies.

It doesn't matter if Osborn is limited by Sony. Feige said he did NOT want to use him. He has stated time and time again that he had no interest in doing the Osborns let alone the Goblins again right off the bat because Spidey has dozens of unused villains that MS can mine from. Unless you think Kevin was lying and secretly wanted to use Norman but couldn't because of Sony? I see no reason why Magneto will be treated any different than Norman. I think you making Magneto out to be bigger than he is -- He's not Dr. Doom. He's not Galactus. And yet he's appeared in more in movies than both of them combined. Heck, he's been in more films than Gobbie, Galactus and Doom put together! There's no need rehash a stale character (who needs to go on a long hiatus) so soon in the MCU.

No, I believe him. But that doesn't mean the same logic applies to Magneto for Feige.

 

[Dark Raven]

I don't think, when Marvel Studio acquire the Fox characters, that they should use all the Fox characters solely in a movie. They should mix and match. The beauty about now having the Fox characters is that they get to play in the same sandbox as the other MCU characters and unused ones which Marvel Studios have in their stable. If you're just going to solely use the Fox characters in a movie, then it's pretty much like the Fox universe still, just under different ownership.

I want to see the Marvel Studios heroes fighting some Fox villains, and some Fox heroes fighting some Marvel Studios or Sony villains.

That's why I'd like a Fantastic Four vs Frightful Four movie. You have the Fantastic Four and Wizard from Fox, Sandman and Paste Pot Pete/Trapster from Sony and Medusa from Marvel. If it gives way to a bigger Inhumans plot too, that's more of Marvel interacting with Fox characters.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I don't think, when Marvel Studio sacquire the Fox characters, that they should use all the Fox characters solely in a movie. They should mix and match. The beauty about now having the Fox characters is that they get to play in the same sandbox as the other MCU characters and unused ones which Marvel Studios have in their stable. If you're just going to solely use the Fox characters in a movie, then it's pretty much like the Fox universe still, just under different ownership.

I want to see the Marvel Studios heroes fighting some Fox villains, and some Fox heroes fighting some Marvel Studios or Sony villains.

That's why I'd like a Fantastic Four vs Frightful Four movie. You have the Fantastic Four and Wizard from Fox, Sandman and Paste Pot Pete/Trapster from Sony and Medusa from Marvel. If it gives way to a bigger Inhumans plot too, that's more of Marvel interacting with Fox characters.

I agree with this, also. Yes, throwing in X-Men/FF characters in other movies/crossovers will happen. But as a general rule, I am just saying we're going to be flooded with more X-Content than we know what to do with between movies and Disney+, so the chances are good that even lesser known X-Characters will see some life in the MCU.

 

[Marvel united]

Once again, this story will not play out in the movies exactly like the comics. When I pictured an Infinity Gauntlet movie in my head, I pictured Adam Warlock, the Silver Surfer, etc. I ain't getting that version. I'm getting something that is an amalgamation of many different MCU Thanos stories, and a lot of original content mixed in. The same thing will happen in the MCU. Everything you just outlined here in your above post, not all of it will play out that way. Much of it will play out differently in practice, but much like IW and seemingly Endgame, that doesn't mean I won't like the end result. Heck, in CW's case, they actually IMPROVED the story quite a bit!

Well, I'm not expecting it to be a 1:1 adaption of those sequences of events. Bu I do expect the basics/emotional core of the story to remain. No there was no Surfer, no there was no Adam Warlock, there wasn't even a Lady Death. But the core of the story (Thanos: the mad Titan, wants the Infinity Gauntlet to wipe half of the universe). Taking Madelyne out is like taking Thanos out of Infinity War. The story is as much about her as it is about Scott. She's a tragic character

How about compromise. Sinister (whom we don't know is him yet) hires Count Nefaria/whatever villain/group to go after the X-Men to collect their DNA they fail and then the cliffhanger it's revealed to be Nathaniel Essex. That's pretty much how they did Thanos in A1. So he's not the main villain but he's merely the puppet master pulling Nefaria's strings. The unnamed employer until we see a full reveal at the very end. Casual fans would be asking comic fans who he Is

It's the point that whatever X-Men villains you're hoping may appear instead of Magneto may get used elsewhere and have more opportunities than say, Spider-Man villains who have more limited access to being in movies.

So why can't Erik appear in a Kitty Pryde spinoff instead of the main X-Men movies? That way you keep him in the MCU but he doesn't overshadow every other X-Villain in the main franchise..

No, I believe him. But that doesn't mean the same logic applies to Magneto for Feige.

That logic should apply to him even more because he's been in more movies, in bigger roles than Norman.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Well, I'm not expecting it to be a 1:1 adaption of those sequences of events. Bu I do expect the basics/emotional core of the story to remain. No there was no Surfer, no there was no Adam Warlock, there wasn't even a Lady Death. But the core of the story (Thanos: the mad Titan, wants the Infinity Gauntlet to wipe half of the universe). Taking Madelyne out is like taking Thanos out of Infinity War. The story is as much about her as it is about Scott. She's a tragic character


How about compromise. Sinister (whom we don't know is him yet) hires Count Nefaria/whatever villain/group to go after the X-Men to collect their DNA they fail and then the cliffhanger it's revealed to be Nathaniel Essex. That's pretty much how they did Thanos in A1. So he's not the main villain but he's merely the puppet master pulling Nefaria's strings. The unnamed employer until we see a full reveal at the very end. Casual fans would be asking comic fans who he Is

I see it as closer to taking out Lady Death, which they did. But agree to disagree I guess. Sinister can be a background player also, but I don't see them freezing Magneto until movie 3 in order to build Sinister like that. Which brings me to:

So why can't Erik appear in a Kitty Pryde spinoff instead of the main X-Men movies? That way you keep him in the MCU but he doesn't overshadow every other X-Villain in the main franchise..

That logic should apply to him even more because he's been in more movies, in bigger roles than Norman.

Just because Feige sees it that way on 1 villain doesn't mean he sees it that way on all of them. Feige will have them introduce the X-Men however they and/or the filmmaker will see best at the end of the day. But to assume he feels that Magneto needs to be sidelined for a long time just because he opted to do a Sinister Six story for Spider-Man I think is faulty.

 

[Marvel united]

I see it as closer to taking out Lady Death, which they did. But agree to disagree I guess. Sinister can be a background player also, but I don't see them freezing Magneto until movie 3 in order to build Sinister like that. Which brings me to:



Just because Feige sees it that way on 1 villain doesn't mean he sees it that way on all of them. Feige will have them introduce the X-Men however they and/or the filmmaker will see best at the end of the day. But to assume he feels that Magneto needs to be sidelined for a long time just because he opted to do a Sinister Six story for Spider-Man I think is faulty.

I'm using the same logic that Feige used when he said he didn't want the Goblin. "We've seen him before. Why not try something new?" Him wanting to do Sinister Six was born out of a desire to do something different. That's what I'm getting at. I'm connecting Feige's line of thinking for Osborn to Magneto because it makes more sense than ever. How many people have complained about seeing Magneto over and over again? It's not just me. Nobody wants to see his story done over again. You can't even use the same argument that Wolverine fans use to justify why he'll be in the first movie because Erik is not selling tickets like Logan is. The only incentive to have him in the first trilogy/movie is that he's the X-Men's most popular villain. That's it. But if Marvel wanted to, they could easily build Sinister as the main villain of this trilogy and close it off with an epic Apocalypse showdown in X4. Unlike Erik, En Sabah Nur has not been done 37383 times at this point. I'd argue that using new villains would only boost interest in the X-Men because people are tired of seeing the same stuff out of this franchise done over and over again.. Flip audience expectations on it's head and use Sinister instead.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I'm using the same logic that Feige used when he said he didn't want the Goblin. "We've seen him before. Why not try something new?" Him wanting to do Sinister Six was born out of a desire to do something different. That's what I'm getting at. I'm connecting Feige's line of thinking for Osborn to Magneto because it makes more sense than ever. How many people have complained about seeing Magneto over and over again? It's not just me. Nobody wants to see his story done over again. You can't even use the same argument that Wolverine fans use to justify why he'll be in the first movie because Erik is not selling tickets like Logan is. The only incentive to have him in the first trilogy/movie is that he's the X-Men's most popular villain. That's it. But if Marvel wanted to, they could easily build Sinister as the main villain of this trilogy and close it off with an epic Apocalypse showdown in X4. Unlike Erik, En Sabah Nur has not been done 37383 times at this point. I'd argue that using new villains would only boost interest in the X-Men because people are tired of seeing the same stuff out of this franchise done over and over again.. Flip audience expectations on it's head and use Sinister instead.

I understand what you're doing. I understood that several posts ago when you first attempted to make that point. My point is that line of thinking applied to Norman Osborn and Spider-Man. Feige never said "I have no interest to villains used in other movies, period." So to make the assumption that he would approach it the same as Spider-Man is faulty because he never said that applied for EVERYONE. Will Feige approach it with using a new villain? Possibly he might, but just looking at his position on Norman Osborn is not enough evidence, IMO.

 

[Dark Raven]

At this point we should get a Superman/ X-Men crossover. Superman and the X-Men vs Zod and Magneto, with Lex Luthor thrown in for good measure! Bryan Singer can do a mish-mash of Superman Returns and one of his X-Men films.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

How many people have complained about seeing Magneto over and over again?

This is a real problem. It's not just that we've seen him before, but he's been so overused by Fox in so many stories that it's becoming almost laughable.

The biggest problem with the Dark Phoenix trailer isn't that it looks 'bad', but it's the same characters doing the same things and Magneto is a huge part of that "been there, done that" feeling.

While I expect Marvel's characters will be much better and much more interesting than Fox's, I also think they have to mix things up regarding which characters are featured.

 

[Darkprime]

Personally I think the whole "everyone's tired of seeing magneto" is way overblown. You really cant do X-Men without Professor X and Magneto. They are core to that story. Sure you can try and push them to the side but they will always be there. You could say the same about Iron Man after 22 MCU films. Are people tired of Iron Man? The X-Men franchise has 12 films. Magneto was in 6.

 

[Marvel united]

I understand what you're doing. I understood that several posts ago when you first attempted to make that point. My point is that line of thinking applied to Norman Osborn and Spider-Man. Feige never said "I have no interest to villains used in other movies, period." So to make the assumption that he would approach it the same as Spider-Man is faulty because he never said that applied for EVERYONE. Will Feige approach it with using a new villain? Possibly he might, but just looking at his position on Norman Osborn is not enough evidence, IMO.

It wasn't just aimed at Osborn. He was the focal point of Feige's argument, yes. Because he had done the most. But it extended to all of Spidey's villains that had been done before. He specifically said that he wanted to use new villains before revisiting the old ones. Why would this same philosophy NOT apply to the X-Men when it's a stale franchise in need of rejuvenation? What argument is there to use Magneto again when nobody wants to see him again so soon for the 8th time? Because he contextualizes the X-Men's struggle? Um, yes but so does Senator Kelly. He can be the human political commentator who contextualizes the mutant problem. We can have a mutant bad of misfits that contextualize the struggle. Magneto does not need to be there in order for the themes to ring true. They need to be done in a different way that does not use Erik as a crutch to deliver a speech about intolerance and mutant racism.

If the only merit to Magneto hijacking the MCU X-Men is "he's one of the most popular villains" then I can easily see Feige bypassing him and making someone else one of the most popular villains. After Feige is done with Sinister or Cassandra Nova or Bastion or the Acolytes etc they will be JUST as popular as Magneto.

This is a real problem. It's not just that we've seen him before, but he's been so overused by Fox in so many stories that it's becoming almost laughable.

The biggest problem with the Dark Phoenix trailer isn't that it looks 'bad', but it's the same characters doing the same things and Magneto is a huge part of that "been there, done that" feeling.

While I expect Marvel's characters will be much better and much more interesting than Fox's, I also think they have to mix things up regarding which characters are featured.

What's probably going to happen is Erik will want Jean dead for possibly destroying Genosha and the X-Men try to stop him. DOFP called and said hello. Bring on new villains and characters we've never before. What's the point of rebooting If you're just going to do the same thing again?

Personally I think the whole "everyone's tired of seeing magneto" is way overblown. You really cant do X-Men without Professor X and Magneto. They are core to that story. Sure you can try and push them to the side but they will always be there. You could say the same about Iron Man after 22 MCU films. Are people tired of Iron Man? The X-Men franchise has 12 films. Magneto was in 6.

Yes you can because the story of the X-Men franchise is not Charles vs Magneto. That's not the core philosophy that the franchise is built on. The theme of "Protecting those that hate and fear you" can be contextualized in a myriad of ways that doesn't include Magneto. There are dozens of X-Men stories and runs with no Magneto in it. He's not a quintessential element like Charles.

 

[Dark Raven]

What's probably going to happen is Erik will want Jean dead for possibly destroying Genosha and the X-Men try to stop him. DOFP called and said hello. Bring on new villains and characters we've never before. What's the point of rebooting If you're just going to do the same thing again?

We should have Magneto sent to earth from Krypton only to see his foster parents gunned down in front of him. Then, as he decides to become a vigilante and take revenge, he gets bitten by a magnetic spider.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

The major thing I just wanna know is will MCU Sue Storm be introduced as the Invisible Girl or the Invisible Woman.

Malice would be an interesting villain...

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

And even though I know it would mean making the Dark Phoenix Saga again, I really want to see the MCU do justice to the Hellfire Club.

https://******************.com/files/2019/02/2019.02.28-04.25-******************-5c780b82e38d9.png

They are so badass.

 

[Darkprime]

Invisible Woman most likely. Despite the Fantastic Four having 2 average movies and one really bad movie. We've seen the origin story. I think theyll go the spider-man route and have the team already put together. We might get flash backs to their origin. Maybe if they do the Doom movie they could include the Fantastic Four origin with the Fantastic Four being the "villains".

 

[Marvel united]

Feige was true to his word. Maybe Moondragon will indeed appear in GOTG 3.

 

[Dark Raven]

Feige was true to his word. Maybe Moondragon will indeed appear in GOTG 3.

Is he supposed to be a gay character though or just a gay person playing? Because what's the difference between that and the likes of Ian McKellan as Magneto or many others in the X-Men franchise?

 

[Marvel united]

Is he supposed to be a gay character though or just a gay person playing? Because what's the difference between that and the likes of Ian McKellan as Magneto or many others in the X-Men franchise?

Well, considering they're actively seeing gay actors, I'm guessing the former