Apocalypse X-Men: Apocalypse Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 6

[JEM]

That's frankly what they need to do. Fox needs to find their Gunn and Russo Bros, not try and rely on Singer forever. That's what makes a universe stale. Try and build up their bullpen. Miller/Wernick/Reese are an incredible group to bring into the Fox fold and hopefully Mangold can deliver something incredible now (something as well made as Girl Interrupted, 3:10 or Walk the Line) that he will no longer be constricted by anything. Boone seems to have a good head on his shoulder so I hope he does Revival well so he won't screw up New Mutants.

Snider hasn't really accomplished much judging by those articles that covered her recent ascension, stating how she kinda moved into a well oiled machine. If she helps gets more X-films going, good for her and all of us I suppose.

IMO, i don't think universe stale because the second trilogy (FC, DOFP, Apoc) was about redemption for Xavier and the universe in general.
The second trilogy tries to fix some franchise mistake (reset timeline) and show a new vision of Xavier (more confident, less naive, colorful costume, no afraid wiht powers).

In some ways, this trilogy is a transition for more optimist and bright X Men world.

 

[BeholdMe]

http://www.fandango.com/movie-news/the-next-x-men-movie-may-take-place-in-outer-space-750859

I stand corrected, I heard hearsay about them moving in this direction I'm wondering if this is still what they are planning on doing if Singer is leaving for a little while and I thought he said he wanted to tackle Proteus next. I'm all confused but either way I would so love if they did the space part of things and introduce the Shiar Empire, I've been waiting forever to see them and have an all out battle between the XMen and The Imperial Guard, they seems like a movie like that would be a massive scale movie though but they can hopefully make it work and not feel convulted and rushed.

 

[X-Maniac]

Yeah, she is a queen right now.

Kinberg and Donner have the keys to the castle and maybe Emma Watts.
They were producer on Deadpool and every X Men film. I don't get the Tim Miller VS Singer/Kinberg/Donner. They are in the same team.
In the end, great movie is good for X Men Universe.

It's Kinberg who is the overlord of the movieverse these days. Everyone else isn't as hands on as you might think, despite any credits on screen.

Deadpool writer Paul Wernick said:

" Fox has a list of characters that they own and that we can use, and Simon Kinberg, who is a producer on the project, is the keeper of the X universe. So he was a great source for us in knowing what we can use, how it’s going to play into the larger story, and overall arching stories of the X universe. So between Simon and legal, they kind of guided us to what we can and can’t do or have access to, and then it was up to us to see how we were going to use those characters creatively, once we knew we really did have the rights."

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Marv...egally-Wasn-t-Able-Use-Did-Anyway-112417.html

 

[X-Maniac]

I stand corrected, I heard hearsay about them moving in this direction I'm wondering if this is still what they are planning on doing if Singer is leaving for a little while and I thought he said he wanted to tackle Proteus next. I'm all confused but either way I would so love if they did the space part of things and introduce the Shiar Empire, I've been waiting forever to see them and have an all out battle between the XMen and The Imperial Guard, they seems like a movie like that would be a massive scale movie though but they can hopefully make it work and not feel convulted and rushed.

There's no certainty about where they are going next. We don't know and I rather suspect they don't know for sure yet either. All eyes are on the Apocalypse box office and also on Wolverine 3, as well as on Deadpool 2 (no surprise it's moving forward fast, money talks).

A space epic may be deemed financially risky if XM:A is seen as underperforming.

If they are thinking of returning to the original cast, they have to take into account Wolverine 3 was planned as Jackman's last movie.

If they are continuing with the new young cast, they have to make a much bolder, fresher start in the next movie.

In either scenario, they need a new director.

 

[ApophènX]

IMO, i don't think universe stale because the second trilogy (FC, DOFP, Apoc) was about redemption for Xavier and the universe in general.
The second trilogy tries to fix some franchise mistake (reset timeline) and show a new vision of Xavier (more confident, less naive, colorful costume, no afraid wiht powers).

In some ways, this trilogy is a transition for more optimist and bright X Men world.

Exactly, the all point of XMA was to bring a new version of X3 and to carry on the changes that happened in DoFP in repercusion to the centrl characters. XMA was supposed to be messy, have too much character, set up from the dark paranoid to a more fun goofy tone, but still keeping this intimist touch and the sensitiv emotion this saga has. This movie is pure emotion, it is supposed to be a redemption, a new world, a rebirth from the ashes of the old trilogy.

The movies people keep asking about is the movie that are about to come and XMA just set up. They cleared the way and now they're free to just give us full X-Men. I don't take XMA responsible for not giving that full potential, i love the movie with its flaws, now if the next movie don't take the best out of all those six movies and horizon that is beggining to be seen they have no more excuze.

XMA was both a closure and a sort of reboot, the second trilogy is nothing i ever saw in films, one movie of spy, next of time travel, next of goofy dramaturgic-thirdactreboot. I think it's bold. I hope they keep bold now that Xavier's bald, he achieve the ultimate sate, psychic connection to the infinite, no excuses to hold up, full power. That's the freakin message of Apocalypse.

 

[Smilodon]

IMO, i don't think universe stale because the second trilogy (FC, DOFP, Apoc) was about redemption for Xavier and the universe in general.
The second trilogy tries to fix some franchise mistake (reset timeline) and show a new vision of Xavier (more confident, less naive, colorful costume, no afraid wiht powers).

In some ways, this trilogy is a transition for more optimist and bright X Men world.

I agree with that, but when I mean it stale it's more in the variety of the films. Just getting similar X-Men films every few years isn't good and they'll need to throw in different X-films like Wolverine or Deadpool or X-Force or whatever in between to keep things expanding and people interested.

 

[superweirdo87]

At this point it shouldn't be a debate that comic accuracy leads to better box office returns.
.

It should not be a debate if you want to reach hasty conclusions that may not be entirely right.

The highest grossing X-Men team movie was X3, despite being unfaithful to the source material. Iron Man 3 agitated a lot of people because the Mandarin was NOT the Mandarin, and it made 1.3B at the global box office. Watchmen recreated the graphic novel panel for panel and it was not a huge box office success.

One thing that I find troubling about comic book movie fans is all of this talk about accuracy. In general, adaptations can be more or less faithful to their source material. The Pulitzer prize winning critic Wesley Morris remarked upon reviewing "Up in the Air" that more movie adaptations should take liberties. "There Will Be Blood" is deemed by some to be the best film of the 21st century, and it is a loose adaptation of an Upton Sinclair novel.

Writer John Green puts it best, "I would rather it be good than faithful."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOWTeQiaFv0

It would be nice to imagine that fidelity is all and storytelling and audience zeitgeist do not matter, but that does not mean it is true.

 

[superweirdo87]

I agree with that, but when I mean it stale it's more in the variety of the films. Just getting similar X-Men films every few years isn't good and they'll need to throw in different X-films like Wolverine or Deadpool or X-Force or whatever in between to keep things expanding and people interested.

Right. And the movies are kind of going in circles and recycling the same tropes. Professor X and Magneto disagree. Raven is conflicted about her blue natural form. Professor X thinks Raven sounds too much like Erik. Professor X is captured. Magneto switches sides.

We need to explore new terrain and tell different kinds of stories.

New writers and directors to help make that happen.

 

[GuestStar2004]

At this point it shouldn't be a debate that comic accuracy leads to better box office returns.

Yes the character, yes the humor... but that all comes down to Deadpool in the comics, which they decided to faithfully adapt. They didn't just make him up.

Comic accuracy doesnt garantee better box office, otherwise watchmen should have broke the bank while the dark knight and the dark night rises truggled.

 

[YoungBlood]

It should not be a debate if you want to reach hasty conclusions that may not be entirely right.

The highest grossing X-Men team movie was X3, despite being unfaithful to the source material. Iron Man 3 agitated a lot of people because the Mandarin was NOT the Mandarin, and it made 1.3B at the global box office. Watchmen recreated the graphic novel panel for panel and it was not a huge box office success.

One thing that I find troubling about comic book movie fans is all of this talk about accuracy. In general, adaptations can be more or less faithful to their source material. The Pulitzer prize winning critic Wesley Morris remarked upon reviewing "Up in the Air" that more movie adaptations should take liberties. "There Will Be Blood" is deemed by some to be the best film of the 21st century, and it is a loose adaptation of an Upton Sinclair novel.

Writer John Green puts it best, "I would rather it be good than faithful."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOWTeQiaFv0

It would be nice to imagine that fidelity is all and storytelling and audience zeitgeist do not matter, but that does not mean it is true.

But,But..........We use comic book accuracy as reference for arguments to say that our movie is better.t:

At the end of the day, "comic book accuracy" still don't make a movie any better than a movie that is not "comic book accurate", no matter how much money they make.

 

[YoungBlood]

Comic accuracy doesnt garantee better box office, otherwise watchmen should have broke the bank while the dark knight and the dark night rises truggled.

And Watchmen translated almost all the comic panels to the film.

 

[Smilodon]

Obviously you have to make a good film on top of being faithful to the source material. But the two are not mutually exclusive, we can have our cake and eat it too.

 

[superweirdo87]

This is pertinent:
http://screencrush.com/green-lantern-movie-what-went-wrong/

 

[X-Maniac]

I sometimes wonder if Watchmen would do better if released today. It came out back in 2009 when audience awareness of the genre (and social media coverage of the genre) was far more limited.

 

[marvelrobbins]

I think Miller will have Deadpool/X-Force, Josh Bonne New Mutant and other director for X-Men movie. Kinberg/Donner will drive the universe and Singer, nobody know.

what makes you think miller is doing X-force.Did singer,ratner,or vaughn ever do a wolverine solo film? IS mangold doing an X-men solo film.

people complained about X-Men films as wolverine and the X-men but they now
want deadpool and X-force films.

Miller is only set for deadpool II

Kinberg is overseer of X-Men universe.Donner hasn't be heard from all year.

Singer's involvement is unknown at present.

 

[fallenAngel]

I'd say the only comic arc I can think of that would pretty much write itself and could stand to be faithful would be the Dark Phoenix Saga. They could swap out Hellfire or Shiar if need be, but the plot/story progression is right there.

Other than that, has there ever been a "faithful" adaptation of any comic arc? Winter Soldier felt exactly like the comic in terms of tone, but both it and Civil War had nothing to do with the comic versions. Dofp kept many key elements, but obviously took it in a different direction. Bane broke Batman's back but that was it. I don't think there has ever been a direct adaptation outside of Watchmen. Key elements and keeping characters consistent maybe, but even then the MCU's versions of Starlord, Iron Man, Cap, Hawkeye and others are quite different.

They just happen to work within context of the filmverse with out directly challenging preconceived notions of who these people are. But I'd argue Deadpool is the first and only truly faithful adaptation of any character from a comicbook outside of half the cast of Watchmen, but that isn't the same since it's more like a novel.

I remember when Sin City came out and people were wondering why not every comic book movie could be like that. But who cares about Sin City now?

 

[GuestStar2004]

Obviously you have to make a good film on top of being faithful to the source material. But the two are not mutually exclusive, we can have our cake and eat it too.

I hear star lord in the guardians of the galaxy comics isn't actually like chris pratts character is that right? all i seen was a disney spider-man cartoon where the guardians showed up and star lord seemed abit dull and serious compared to chris pratts version

in that respect they made a change to the source material and in the end they may have made more money from doing that then going the comic accurate route of the character

 

[Kanon]

I hear star lord in the guardians of the galaxy comics isn't actually like chris pratts character is that right? all i seen was a disney spider-man cartoon where the guardians showed up and star lord seemed abit dull and serious compared to chris pratts version

in that respect they made a change to the source material and in the end they may have made more money from doing that then going the comic accurate route of the character

An adaptation can be better than the source material, and a lot of times it was (Jurassic Park IMO)

 

[GuestStar2004]

I stand corrected, I heard hearsay about them moving in this direction I'm wondering if this is still what they are planning on doing if Singer is leaving for a little while and I thought he said he wanted to tackle Proteus next. I'm all confused but either way I would so love if they did the space part of things and introduce the Shiar Empire, I've been waiting forever to see them and have an all out battle between the XMen and The Imperial Guard, they seems like a movie like that would be a massive scale movie though but they can hopefully make it work and not feel convulted and rushed.

I imagine they don't know what the next story will be which is probably why we haven't heard anything about a next film.

i have a feeling space won't be a guarantee though, not because of how apocalypse did at box office but purely because the film universe in itself

 

[henzINNIT]

I have very mixed feelings on the epilogue. It makes Dofp a complete package, and felt so good to have that ending after 7 years of waiting for something after Last Stand (The Wolverine helped with this a bit too). But indeed it makes me wonder what the point is continuing on in the past is sometimes. Like, just because a moment was nice and happy, doesn't mean that all dramatic tension is lost. Not all suffering comes from character deaths, but I don't take stock in people who argue that the why is interesting, not the what. I like not knowing what will happen.

But yeah, DOFP sort of ruined the ending of First Class as well. I like that the X-men had a couple of false starts, it feels true to life, but it also does feel a bit like a long road just to get back to where we were.

I've also wondered about the Fast & Furious model. It's really the only other continuous franchise around that rivals the X-men (both are about the same age) and it's bigger than ever. It also can sort of keep doing the same thing however and get away with it.

Max Landis slated X-Men: Apocalypse before it came out because he couldn't give a crap about kids after finally getting the OG team together. I'm not saying he's right, but he reflects a pretty reasonable view that many have. It's a frustrating place to be in. Years of doubt, years of waiting after TLS crushed the series, then Singer manages to redeem everything in one swing. Every time someone announces their desire to see the old faces again, they are met with resistance and a barrage of reasons why it can't happen, age being the most frequent.

But it can happen. It really can. Fox just won't do it.

The cast have been "too old" for a long damn time. McKellen is pushing 80 now. While his Magneto has been sat on the bench, his Gandalf kicks all kinds of ass in a Hobbit trilogy. Jackman's Wolverine is the only character that can actually age out, because he's not supposed to age at all. And he's put in 17 years as the character. 17 YEARS. Crazy.

It's a painful irony that as myself and others sit and watch the clocks tick on our favourite actors, hoping against hope that we can see them again, knowing that with every passing year it becomes more unlikely; we are instead watching a new cast of characters that can't age fast enough to keep up with continuity.

OT vs FC is a debate that looms over most topics on this board. Personally, I wish we could just have both.

Stewart and McKellen are two I wouldn't have a problem with. Magneto is a Holocaust survivor and Xavier is supposed to be his contemporary. They have to be old if the story is going to be set in the present.

As for RDJ, Iron Man is a rich business who gets all his powers from his suit and who's best friend is old enough to reach the rank of Colonel. He can be 50 and it isn't an issue. A middle-aged Jean Grey, Storm, or Cyclops is a problem. These characters started as teenagers and while they have gotten older with time, if it gets to the point where Jean Grey is 50 you are getting too far removed from the original concept and characters.

I don't think it's a big deal to age the characters. Storm works as a more mature character for me in particular. I don't want them to exist in that weird comic flux where they don't change. The films have actors and they age. In an ideal world, I'd have had a few more adventures with the old cast before now of course. I think it would benefit the franchise to have more generations at the school, which is as it should be for an institution that has been around since the 70's.

It's also why I think "New Mutants" should be a contemporary series. New blood would be fun, but I would enjoy it more if they really followed the footsteps of the characters we know.

BTW, when you said no-one is older than RDJ, that isn't actually true. Kelsey Grammer, Famke Janssen, and Alan Cumming are all older than RDJ. It doesn't really matter, because like I said, it all depends on the character. Just pointing that out.

My mistake. I forgot about Cumming and Grammar. Famke is only a couple of months out from RDJ, but yeah I didn't mean to misrepresent the facts.

 

[fallenAngel]

Max Landis slated X-Men: Apocalypse before it came out because he couldn't give a crap about kids after finally getting the OG team together. I'm not saying he's right, but he reflects a pretty reasonable view that many have. It's a frustrating place to be in. Years of doubt, years of waiting after TLS crushed the series, then Singer manages to redeem everything in one swing. Every time someone announces their desire to see the old faces again, they are met with resistance and a barrage of reasons why it can't happen, age being the most frequent.

Ugh, Max Landis.

People wanting to see the original cast again is fine. I would love it too. However, I take issue with those who hold it against Apocalypse when the filmmakers were very upfront about the followup being in the 80's with the FC cast. So while it may be not what some wanted, it is kind of a lame reason to criticize something.

There is obvious reason to give people "what they want", but the problem is the fanbase seems split three ways.

One third wants them to continue with the new cast - I found the new cast endearing and love new Scott and Jean.

One third wants a true sequel to Dofp with the Original Cast - I would love to see Rogue and Kitty again, but have no interest in Halle Berry's Storm, and Iceman was meh.

and then the rest will only be satisfied with a MCU reboot - This is my least favorite option, maybe later.

I could live with any option personally, but I do fear throwing out the baby with the bathwater. While MCU has a track record hard to argue with, but belated sequels and reboots don't fair very well most of the time and believing that either would be an automatic success isn't warranted.

Spider-Man: Homecoming may very well do better than the last few movies, but there isn't a guarantee it'll match the height of the first film.

And I don't think the original cast is inherently too old. But for Scott, Jean, Storm, Nightcrawler fans, new cast is a better bet

 

[henzINNIT]

Ugh, Max Landis.

People wanting to see the original cast again is fine. I would love it too. However, I take issue with those who hold it against Apocalypse when the filmmakers were very upfront about the followup being in the 80's with the FC cast. So while it may be not what some wanted, it is kind of a lame reason to criticize something.

There is obvious reason to give people "what they want", but the problem is the fanbase seems split three ways.

One third wants them to continue with the new cast - I found the new cast endearing and love new Scott and Jean.

One third wants a true sequel to Dofp with the Original Cast - I would love to see Rogue and Kitty again, but have no interest in Halle Berry's Storm, and Iceman was meh.

and then the rest will only be satisfied with a MCU reboot - This is my least favorite option, maybe later.

He has a pretty ugly online reputation but I find myself agreeing with Landis more often than I'd like haha.

"I wanted OT" is a weak criticism of Apocalypse for sure. And redundant. There's more than enough things to point to if you want to criticise that film. I won't deny I'd have been more satisfied with an OT sequel to DOFP, but I always assumed Singer would deliver regardless. Me not liking Apocalypse - a Bryan Singer X-Men film - was a shock.

 

[fallenAngel]

He has a pretty ugly online reputation but I find myself agreeing with Landis more often than I'd like haha.

"I wanted OT" is a weak criticism of Apocalypse for sure. And redundant. There's more than enough things to point to if you want to criticise that film. I won't deny I'd have been more satisfied with an OT sequel to DOFP, but I always assumed Singer would deliver regardless. Me not liking Apocalypse - a Bryan Singer X-Men film - was a shock.

Yeah, it's not what he says (I agree a fair amount of time too), it's how he says it. There is a reason why most people in the industry aren't very vocal about their opinions on other people's work (unless it's really positive), it comes back to bite you.

Apocalypse's own joke about the third one being the worse fell flat for this exact reason. No one bats a hundred. I liked the movie, but there is no mistaking it soured the momentum of both FC and Dofp, which is of course why we're all discussing what's next with uncertainty

 

[henzINNIT]

Apocalypse's own joke about the third one being the worse fell flat for this exact reason. No one bats a hundred. I liked the movie, but there is no mistaking it soured the momentum of both FC and Dofp, which is of course why we're all discussing what's next with uncertainty

Indeed. It's fortunate that even a sub-par Singer film can wrap up with promise. The film took it on the chin from critics and BO, but the right pieces are in place for another good entry. This isn't another TLS situation by a long way.

 

[Frankeh]

I think Max Landis makes good points now and then. I liked his video on Ghost in the Shell.