Where Is Gambit, Bishop, Cable, & Apocolyspe (sp) In This Movie?!?!?

Jplaya2023

Superhero
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
5,313
Reaction score
0
Points
31
I heard Gambit is going to be playing a small role, but why. He is one of the better X-men why have the flim directors left him off now 2 movies in a row, whats the problem?

Where Bishop Or Cable, some of the Xmen's greatest friends/foes where is their place in the movie.

Finally apocolyspe, their greatest foe of all most powerful being in the xmen world why isnt he in the movie. Magneto is a good villian, but that frog toad, that fire guy, and those other villians dont cut it.

Where is Onslaught at????????? X3 better be big because the first 2 xmen were average at best
 
I freaking hope Cable isn't in any movie. You seem to have no concept of what makes a good movie, the first two were great. You can't have time-traveling characters or weird crap like that. Apocalypse would be cool, but they would have to change a lot of his story to be realistic in the movies. I don't like to stereotype anyone to this but... FANBOY!
 
nightcrawler07 said:
I freaking hope Cable isn't in any movie. You seem to have no concept of what makes a good movie, the first two were great. You can't have time-traveling characters or weird crap like that. Apocalypse would be cool, but they would have to change a lot of his story to be realistic in the movies. I don't like to stereotype anyone to this but... FANBOY!

what makes me a fanboy, because i want to see different chars for a movie, besides the same boring ones???????????

The fact of the matter is the first 2 men movies were subpar with plot, and character development. The flims were rushed and didnt have the story line like a spiderman or a batman. They just lumped people togethor and used the name to make money.
 
Jplaya2023 said:
I heard Gambit is going to be playing a small role, but why. He is one of the better X-men why have the flim directors left him off now 2 movies in a row, whats the problem?

Where Bishop Or Cable, some of the Xmen's greatest friends/foes where is their place in the movie.

Finally apocolyspe, their greatest foe of all most powerful being in the xmen world why isnt he in the movie. Magneto is a good villian, but that frog toad, that fire guy, and those other villians dont cut it.

Where is Onslaught at????????? X3 better be big because the first 2 xmen were average at best

Apocalypse, Bishop, Cable, and their overly contrived plotlines, are by the wayside where they belong. Their character arcs are ridiculous in the comics, let alone in the movies. I'm not even going to touch Onslaught . . . and the first two X-Men movies are great. Without them, we wouldn't be discussing the possibility of future X-films.
 
BMM said:
Apocalypse, Bishop, Cable, and their overly contrived plotlines, are by the wayside where they belong. Their character arcs are ridiculous in the comics, let alone in the movies. I'm not even going to touch Onslaught . . . and the first two X-Men movies are great. Without them, we wouldn't be discussing the possibility of future X-films.

why are their chars so ridiculous??????? Whats wrong with onslaught??? The first 2 x movies underachieved as far as chars and plot not what we xfans expected from that franchise
 
Jplaya2023 said:
what makes me a fanboy, because i want to see different chars for a movie, besides the same boring ones???????????

The fact of the matter is the first 2 men movies were subpar with plot, and character development. The flims were rushed and didnt have the story line like a spiderman or a batman. They just lumped people togethor and used the name to make money.

It is NOT 'the fact of the matter'. It is your opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion, but why suddenly emerge now, six years after the first movie was cast? Why are you speaking up about it SIX YEARS later?

The 'fact of the matter' is that two movies have already been made and have established a specific feel, theme and world. You cannot suddenly change all that in this third part of the trilogy, you have to build on what has already been seen and expand it to its conclusion.

Realistically, you cannot expect to see Gambit, Cable, Apocalypse (please learn to spell the name if you are such a fan of the character) and Onslaught all packed into the third movie when there are many other loose ends that need tying up - Jean/Phoenix being a major one.

Aren't you at least happy that Angel, Beast, Shadowcat, Avalanche, Juggernaut and Cannonball are included? All those aren't enough for you so you want four others included? Gambit may well have a part anyway.

You offer excellent proof of why fanboys do not make good movies. By fanboy, we mean someone who just wants comicbooks put straight on the screen, who has no idea of bridging the gaps between comicbook fantasy and film-making reality.
 
X-Maniac said:
It is NOT 'the fact of the matter'. It is your opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion, but why suddenly emerge now, six years after the first movie was cast? Why are you speaking up about it SIX YEARS later?

because i wasnt on this board six years ago.
smile.gif


The 'fact of the matter' is that two movies have already been made and have established a specific feel, theme and world. You cannot suddenly change all that in this third part of the trilogy, you have to build on what has already been seen and expand it to its conclusion.

Your right but still those chars would be nice to see.

Realistically, you cannot expect to see Gambit, Cable, Apocalypse (please learn to spell the name if you are such a fan of the character) and Onslaught all packed into the third movie when there are many other loose ends that need tying up - Jean/Phoenix being a major one.

Atleast i spelled the others right
smile.gif
but thats water under the bridge. The phoenix isnt bad though its pretty decent


Aren't you at least happy that Angel, Beast, Shadowcat, Avalanche, Juggernaut and Cannonball are included? All those aren't enough for you so you want four others included? Gambit may well have a part anyway.

Angel is a minor char. Im happy about beast Shadowcat, and Avalanche are minors as well as cannonball. Im happy for juggs hopefully he gets to fight collasus (sp) in the next 1

You offer excellent proof of why fanboys do not make good movies. By fanboy, we mean someone who just wants comicbooks put straight on the screen, who has no idea of bridging the gaps between comicbook fantasy and film-making reality.

Lol @ fanboy its just my opinion like you said, no need for label. I was going off the show more than the comics because i was never a big comic fan but i been reading more lately.

...
 
only bishop and gambit would make it to an x-men movie and become members of the team but there are qays to put apocolypse and cable in it (cable being a baby the child of scott and jean)
 
The whole cable/Apocalypse/Days of Future Past thing needs its own movie, its own trilogy probably!

I'd have liked to have seen Bishop, but maybe he is also best kept for a Days of Future Past movie. It's so complicated and has a whole new feel to it from the current movies.
 
noo keep him away form that make him a normal character in the movie verse he would work perfectly in a movie (he could be a cop for the nypd who hides his powers from everyone)
 
You can't F'ing have Phoenix/Dark Phoenix and Apocalypse in the same movie.

And the only time they should bring cable in is if they have Apocalypse for him to fight, since those 2 are arch enemies. But even if they do have Apocalypse it's still not reason enough since having Cable would require introducing the additional suspension of disbelief of time travel into this movieverse and that might be impossible if you want the franchise to continue to feel right and not turn off moviegoers.

You can do alot more in a comic than a 2 hour movie franchise where you get 1 every 3 years and none can be a failure or else you're done.
 
Jplaya2023 said:
why are their chars so ridiculous??????? Whats wrong with onslaught??? The first 2 x movies underachieved as far as chars and plot not what we xfans expected from that franchise

I notice you and your opinions are getting slammed in here, which seems a bit unfair. In order to shed some light, here are my reasons why the aforementioned characters would be too difficult to translate on screen (if one is trying to remain faithful to their comic counterparts).

Apocalypse:

Apocalypse does very little within the standard X-Men comic continuity (this is very true if you think about it). He is best known for his creation of the four horsemen, most notably Archangel, as well as his involvement in the X-Cutioner's Song and the Twelve story arc (and that's it). The X-Cutioner's Song, however, would be too difficult to translate onscreen. There's too much backstory concerning Jean, Cable, Cyclops, Rachel Summers, Stryfe, The Askani, etc. Also, The Twelve storyline, which is awful in so far as X-Men arcs are concerned, would be ridiculously complicated given it's involved backstory.

Actually, Apocalypse is at his best in X-Men related mini-series, such as The Age of Apocalypse, The Adventures of Cyclops and Phoenix, etc. While these are interesting tales, one must remember they are tales of an alternate X-Men universe and it would make no sense to make an X-Men franchise based on an alternate X-Men universe (at least not right now, if ever).

Cable:

Cable is simply provided too much backstory. He is the son of Madelyne Pryor and Cyclops. Madelyne Pryor and her history (especially in relation to Cyclops and Jean) would have to be explained, which is an entire franchise unto itself. Cable is then taken to the future where he is raised by his sister (who has also done her fair share of time traveling), the clan Askani, and Summer's clan (which, again, is a whole other time travel scenario involving Cyclops and Jean). He is infected with a techno organic virus (needs explaining). He has an evil clone doppleganger in the form of Stryfe, as well as a bitter rivalry with Apocalypse . . . not to mention his involvment with X-Force and the standard X-Men universe, etc.

Bishop:

Bishop is essentially used as a plot device for the alternate futures and realities of the X-Men. His characterization includes his traveling to the future as well as the infamous traitor to the X-Men story arc. Like Apocalypse, Bishop's more interesting moments are during alternate realities. For instance, his role in the Age of Apocalypse (which would be too difficult to do).

Also, the Onslaught arc is insane. It would need a ridiculous amount of explaining (such as Xavier taking Magneto's mind from him). Not to mention it would look a bit silly to have a Godzilla-sized villain running around downtown Manhattan after a little boy (Franklin Richards) and Patrick Stewart.
 
Jplaya2023 said:
Where Bishop Or Cable, some of the Xmen's greatest friends/foes where is their place in the movie.
Quite simply, they aren't the X-Men's greatest friends in the movie universe. It's not the same as the comic universe. The movie plants it's foundations in realism, and therefore steers clear of time travelling and overly convoluted storylines. There isn't enough room for them, and storyline wise they don't fit.

Finally apocolyspe, their greatest foe of all most powerful being in the xmen world why isnt he in the movie.
The greatest foe? I don't think so. The most powerful maybe, but power doesn't equate to the best villian. In my opinion he's a horrible villian. Nothing worse than someone who can never be stopped. The beauty of Magneto and Mystique etc is that they can be stopped with a little skill. Apocalypse borders on god like invulnerability. He's a tacky, horribly overdone character, and I'd like him as far away from X3 as possible.

Magneto is a good villian, but that frog toad, that fire guy, and those other villians dont cut it.
Oh, the fire guy would be Pyro :rolleyes: . He was a brilliantly done character in X2, and with some development in X3 he'll make a great villian too. More depth to him than an impossibly tough Apocalypse who is hell bent on destroying the earth.
 
BMM said:
I notice you and your opinions are getting slammed in here, which seems a bit unfair. In order to shed some light, here are my reasons why the aforementioned characters would be too difficult to translate on screen (if one is trying to remain faithful to their comic counterparts).

Apocalypse:

Apocalypse does very little within the standard X-Men comic continuity (this is very true if you think about it). He is best known for his creation of the four horsemen, most notably Archangel, as well as his involvement in the X-Cutioner's Song and the Twelve story arc (and that's it). The X-Cutioner's Song, however, would be too difficult to translate onscreen. There's too much backstory concerning Jean, Cable, Cyclops, Rachel Summers, Stryfe, The Askani, etc. Also, The Twelve storyline, which is awful in so far as X-Men arcs are concerned, would be ridiculously complicated given it's involved backstory.

Actually, Apocalypse is at his best in X-Men related mini-series, such as The Age of Apocalypse, The Adventures of Cyclops and Phoenix, etc. While these are interesting tales, one must remember they are tales of an alternate X-Men universe and it would make no sense to make an X-Men franchise based on an alternate X-Men universe (at least not right now, if ever).

Cable:

Cable is simply provided too much backstory. He is the son of Madelyne Pryor and Cyclops. Madelyne Pryor and her history (especially in relation to Cyclops and Jean) would have to be explained, which is an entire franchise unto itself. Cable is then taken to the future where he is raised by his sister (who has also done her fair share of time traveling), the clan Askani, and Summer's clan (which, again, is a whole other time travel scenario involving Cyclops and Jean). He is infected with a techno organic virus (needs explaining). He has an evil clone doppleganger in the form of Stryfe, as well as a bitter rivalry with Apocalypse . . . not to mention his involvment with X-Force and the standard X-Men universe, etc.

Bishop:

Bishop is essentially used as a plot device for the alternate futures and realities of the X-Men. His characterization includes his traveling to the future as well as the infamous traitor to the X-Men story arc. Like Apocalypse, Bishop's more interesting moments are during alternate realities. For instance, his role in the Age of Apocalypse (which would be too difficult to do).

Also, the Onslaught arc is insane. It would need a ridiculous amount of explaining (such as Xavier taking Magneto's mind from him). Not to mention it would look a bit silly to have a Godzilla-sized villain running around downtown Manhattan after a little boy (Franklin Richards) and Patrick Stewart.

thankyou for answering the question that was very well written. But i still think they should have more villians or more major villians. Toad and pyro arent really super villians per say merely pauns in magneto's game
 
Jplaya2023 said:
thankyou for answering the question that was very well written. But i still think they should have more villians or more major villians. Toad and pyro arent really super villians per say merely pauns in magneto's game
Pyro has yet to even be a villiant yet. He was with the X-Men right until the end of X2, and merely escaped with Magneto. He did nothing to rank him as a villian. Aside from that, in X2 we'll have Magneto, Mystique, Pyro, Avalanche, Cannonball and possibly Gambit. There'll be a large Brotherhood. Plenty of villians to go around. And yes, they will be Magneto's pawns, but then, they can't each be villians in their own right. Someone has to take the lead, and Magneto is the most powerful and experienced.
 
Jplaya2023 said:
thankyou for answering the question that was very well written. But i still think they should have more villians or more major villians. Toad and pyro arent really super villians per say merely pauns in magneto's game

That's understandable. I'm sure as the franchise continues (if and when it does after X3) there will be more villains aside from Magneto.
 
Avalanche said:
Pyro has yet to even be a villiant yet. He was with the X-Men right until the end of X2, and merely escaped with Magneto. He did nothing to rank him as a villian. Aside from that, in X2 we'll have Magneto, Mystique, Pyro, Avalanche, Cannonball and possibly Gambit. There'll be a large Brotherhood. Plenty of villians to go around. And yes, they will be Magneto's pawns, but then, they can't each be villians in their own right. Someone has to take the lead, and Magneto is the most powerful and experienced.

pyro is a cheap jonny storm AKA human torch what is his place with this. I hope gambit is gonna be on the good side, didnt he use to be with magneto or something????????? AV is a ok villian i guess i never heard of cannonball got any pics?????

They should just have an all out brawl

the x-men vs magneto, juggernaut, the blob,mystique, that robot from the arcade game, and those 3 villians from the temple board
 
Jplaya2023 said:
pyro is a cheap jonny storm AKA human torch what is his place with this. I hope gambit is gonna be on the good side, didnt he use to be with magneto or something????????? AV is a ok villian i guess i never heard of cannonball got any pics?????

They should just have an all out brawl

the x-men vs magneto, juggernaut, the blob,mystique, that robot from the arcade game, and those 3 villians from the temple board



...:confused:
 
pyro and human torch's powers are totally different, human torch can turn into flames while pyro can only manipulate flames, he can't create it.
 
kol_lover said:
pyro and human torch's powers are totally different, human torch can turn into flames while pyro can only manipulate flames, he can't create it.

they didnt want them to be the exact same but u can clearly see pyro is a human torch ripoff oh well
 
no i dont think so. are u talking about in the movies?
 
kol_lover said:
no i dont think so. are u talking about in the movies?

movies comic's wherever

human torch can turn into fire and use it at his dispense. Pyro can manipulate fire but doenst have a fire body
 
i'd like to see bishop as a cameo. i was think either professor x shows all the mutants like he did in x2 and name some of them. He says " Now heres an African American man form New York whose a police officer. He also happens to be a powerful mutant" and then you here someone say "Officer Bishop...." Or the NYPD try to stop the brotherhood or juggernaut and the x-men are down and then the police force and then, bishops uses his powers and saves them or something. And then we would see him as a supporting or mian character in X4.
 
gap5ewl said:
i'd like to see bishop as a cameo. i was think either professor x shows all the mutants like he did in x2 and name some of them. He says " Now heres an African American man form New York whose a police officer. He also happens to be a powerful mutant" and then you here someone say "Officer Bishop...." Or the NYPD try to stop the brotherhood or juggernaut and the x-men are down and then the police force and then, bishops uses his powers and saves them or something. And then we would see him as a supporting or mian character in X4.

nice :up:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,620
Messages
21,773,624
Members
45,612
Latest member
picamon
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"