Apocalypse Will Hugh Jackman return?

[kevork89]

The only way to recast is a reboot and Fox are working their asses off to make sure that doesn't happen. That's why they've been attempting to fix all the continuity to the best of their abilities. Recasting Wolverine so close after Hugh leaves just wont make sense and fans won't like that either. He is Wolverine. The only way he will get recast if they completely reboot everything.

They can introduce a Wolverine substitute. And that could be the case with X23

 

[Havok83]

I don't think so. How are they gonna explain all of a sudden a new younger wolverine. We know he was involved in the events of 1973. And we know he awakens in the new future and has a movie coming out then. How will they all of a sudden just explain a new wolverine?

How are they gonna explain a new younger Jubilee and Angel in this? They obviously dont care about continuity.

If its a recast, they wouldnt need to explain. New face, in an old role. Its been happening since the inception of cinema and several times in this series. With that said I dont think they have done that (doesnt make sense with HJ still in the role till next year),

 

[marvelrobbins]

I disagree.and again X-23 is rumored to be in next wolverine film set in future which may
be ignored from contunity if they do phoenix/dark phoenix for next 2 X-Men films.

Just having wolverine disappear for no reason is just as bad as killing off xavier and cyclops.

 

[kevork89]

How are they gonna explain a new younger Jubilee and Angel in this? They obviously dont care about continuity.

If its a recast, they wouldnt need to explain. New face, in an old role. Its been happening since the inception of cinema and several times in this series. With that said I dont think they have done that (doesnt make sense with HJ still in the role till next year),

Please Jubilee and Angel are barely memorable from the original trilogy that doesn't even compare to Wolverine and to Hugh Jackman. That comparison is really bad.

I disagree.and again X-23 is rumored to be in next wolverine film set in future which may
be ignored from contunity if they do phoenix/dark phoenix for next 2 X-Men films.

Just having wolverine disappear for no reason is just as bad as killing off xavier and cyclops.

Him disappearing isn't that big of a deal. And at the end of Wolverine he could go off and enjoy his life instead of being involved in more war and battles. We don't know the outcome just yet. But no way in hell they'll just completely recast their most iconic character like that. Storm, Cyclops, Professor X, Magneto etc are different they are younger in the 60s-80s movies. But Wolverine doesn't age.

 

[Havok83]

Please Jubilee and Angel are barely memorable from the original trilogy that doesn't even compare to Wolverine and to Hugh Jackman. That comparison is really bad.

Not really. It was a rherorical question anyway.

 

[kevork89]

Whether rehtorical or not there isn't a comparison. They can explain that away however, time shift or whatever. But a reason for a younger recast Wolverine won't be as simple as that. They need something concrete to convince the fans but the general audience too.

 

[kevork89]

The only true way around it would be to give that type of role to someone else. That's why X23 would make sense. It's like Iron Man. He's Tony Stark if RDJ doesn't want to do anymore Marvel won't just up and recast a new Tony, they would cast someone new to wear the suit instead.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Kevin feige was prepared to recast stark if downey didn't resign after iron man 3.

of course wolverine will be recast.Batman and james bond has been.

most of jackman's films have been erased from timeline and it's open question if new wolverine film set after DOFP future ending will be in contunity for long.

 

[kevork89]

Batman has been rebooted how many times now? And James Bond people are ok with the idea of recasting him. It happens every few movies. And they're pretty much explaining that as a code name now more then anything. Even if Kevin said that it won't be as simple as recasting Tony Stark. Like I said they probably wouldn't recast Stark and instead of finding away for someone else to wear the suit. I think you're missing my point. X-Men has managed to semi reboot itself while still working within the same story and characters. Recasting Wolverine suddenly just wouldn't make sense unless there was valid and solid reasoning behind it. They can't just cast someone newer and younger because of the fact that he has stayed looking the same from the 1930s until the rebooted future which is sometime 2023. It won't make sense.

I'm not saying that I won't support it. I'm all for it, if Hugh is done but Fox can't live without the Wolverine character then they better come up with a good way to explain it.

 

[Havok83]

I still dont get why you think it needs explanation. The audience is not that dumb. People can understand a new actor in a role. Its not like they need to come up with some convoluted story like plastic surgery or body swap.

 

[RLAAMJR.]

Hopefully and with Halle please. Even just a cameo.

 

[kevork89]

I still dont get why you think it needs explanation. The audience is not that dumb. People can understand a new actor in a role. Its not like they need to come up with some convoluted story like plastic surgery or body swap.

You're kind of contradicting yourself. In saying the audience isn't dumb can lead them to come up with whatever way and the audience will understand it. What's dumb is just recasting and not giving the audience a solid reason especially for all the reasons I stated it won't work. If they're gonna recast like a Sabretooth way or how they recast Iron Patriot that's fine but they're gonna struggle to get the audience on board with it so quickly after Hugh left. But anyway as of right now Hugh still has his next movie so I don't see why they'd recast someone in this movie and then have Hugh do the next movie. It doesn't make any sense.

 

[Havok83]

You're kind of contradicting yourself. In saying the audience isn't dumb can lead them to come up with whatever way and the audience will understand it. What's dumb is just recasting and not giving the audience a solid reason especially for all the reasons I stated it won't work. If they're gonna recast like a Sabretooth way or how they recast Iron Patriot that's fine but they're gonna struggle to get the audience on board with it so quickly after Hugh left. But anyway as of right now Hugh still has his next movie so I don't see why they'd recast someone in this movie and then have Hugh do the next movie. It doesn't make any sense.

no there was no contradiction in what I wrote.

 

[freshandclean]

Of course they can, and probably will recast. Of course they'll wait until Woverine 3 is done and maybe after a couple more XMen films, but they're not just gonna plop in X23 instead. Wolverine, the character, not just someone with his power set, will eventually be reintroduced.

And what exactly do they need to explain? I don't understand. The audience knows actors don't stay the same age forever. Hugh will have played Wolverine for damn near 20 years. When they recast it will already be big news. Do you mean they need an in-movie reason why Hugh isn't playing Wolverine?

RE: Batman

Michael Keaton
Val Kilmer
George Clooney

All 3 played the same Batman in the same universe. Val Kilmer and George Clooney even shared the same Robin.

 

[kevork89]

Am I typing to brick walls or something? Do you think Hugh Jackmans recast is going to be as easy or go down as well as the Batman ones. Don't forget those were at a time where no one had voices when it came to movies. And Batman has been played by so many different people. There's only been one wolverine and that's been Hugh. The audience isn't dumb I'm not trying to say they are. Of course characters get recast and that's it. But I'm simply stating that it's gonna be very hard for them to recast this character and that people might not be as ok with it. His Wolverine has spanned 16 years and every X-Men film plus two solos and another to come. No actor has been a superhero character as long as Hugh. As if they're gonna just recast suddenly and expect people to accept it.

Just suddenly changing the actor for this character won't cut it. That's what I'm saying. Of course they'll give it a chance and if it's comic accurate people would be happy but those are some hard shoes to fill and whoever takes on that role is always going to be compared to Hugh especially if they're keeping it all in the same universe and the same character backstory and what not. It's different if it's a reboot. But it won't be.

 

[psylockolussus]

In this movie series - Hugh Jackman is Wolverine and Wolverine is Hugh Jackman. Unless they start from scratch which is never gonna happen in the next five years, there won't be a new actor playing Wolverine.

Recasting Wolverine would just leave a bad taste in people's mouth IMO especially if the replacement doesn't live up to Hugh's Wolverine and that would hurt this film franchise.

And besides, people who keep complaining that the X-Men is always Wolverine Wolverine Wolverine and they need to focus on someone else... will finally get their wish.

 

[psylockolussus]

I really think we'll be seeing a new actor playing Logan in X-Men: Apocalypse.

IMO, thats a silly move especially Fox is releasing a Wolverine film next year with Hugh Jackman.

 

[Smilodon]

There doesn't need to be a reason to recast beyond Hugh being done with the role/over working out for 6 months to be shredded for Wolverine. This franchise will move on with Wolverine as a character. Fox may try and come up with irresistible situations to try and convince Hugh to stay on, but whether he's willing to put his body through that is another story.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Jackman can be replaced but it will be very difficult to do and fox may not want to chance rushing into it after he leaves

 

[psylockolussus]

There doesn't need to be a reason to recast beyond Hugh being done with the role/over working out for 6 months to be shredded for Wolverine. This franchise will move on with Wolverine as a character. Fox may try and come up with irresistible situations to try and convince Hugh to stay on, but whether he's willing to put his body through that is another story.

I don't think putting that much weight is a requirement to play Wolverine especially with Fox... if anyone is responsible for a hunky Wolverine - that is Hugh's desire to simply put more muscles in his body while playing Wolverine. His body wasn't even that big in the original trilogy and Fox seemed okay with it.

 

[Smilodon]

I never said it was a mandate from Fox to do that. I just said that being Wolverine is a huge commitment and that at a certain point Hugh won't be able to do that anymore. If he finds a way to minimize the commitment, then things would naturally change.

 

[psylockolussus]

He seems to be enjoying playing Wolverine in every new movie he's in. IMO, he wants to go out in a high note while people including himself aren't tired of seeing him play Wolverine for like the 15th time.

Anyway, good for him that he's getting a proper send off which is very rare for superhero films. The first two Spider-Man actors didn't even get that.

 

[kevork89]

Just personally I know it's a money making business but I would hope that Fox have enough respect for Hugh to not recast. Not immediately anyway. The marvel movies are only roughly going on about 8 years so everything is still going strong for them. But look at Spider-Man. 3 guys have played him. We've seen 2 superman as well as smallville. 2 batmans recently. 3 different actors playing Hulk, three different Catwoman, different arrows, flash etc. So many different versions of the same characters, all different actors and yes the audience is fine with it. But besides casting younger versions to set earlier Fox have generally kept the same actors. It just won't be easy but also won't feel right just recasting wolverine after the time and commitment Hugh has given to the character. Like I said if his character was younger at the right time it would work like they did with Xavier, Magneto, Mystique, Beast etc but it's different with Wolverine due to his non ageing thing and that we've seen Hugh play Wolverine in different eras. I know it's inevitable but I'm hoping Fox chose to retire the character for a while. If they include X23, and then Deadpool, Gambit as well as young Cyclops, Jean and Storm they've got plenty of great characters to focus on.

 

[psylockolussus]

They aren't gonna recast, if they do. This is gonna be an Andrew Garfield Spider-Man mess... I mean Andrew is a great actor but the public clearly didn't want a Spidey reboot and a recast and Andrew didn't last longer than Tobey as Spidey. Not only people were underwhelmed by the amazing Spider-Man films, but the back and forth comparison didn't help either.

If its not broken, don't fix it.

Wolverine is not the only cash cow in this franchise. They have Deadpool and they can potentially make Cyclops, Storm and Psylocke, the face of the X-Men if they give them a chance!

 

[Havok83]

Andrew was great as Spidey and was well recieved. The first film did well. Its the second film that was a mess but AG was most definitely not the problem with it