Apocalypse X-Men Apocalypse News and Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 42

[DavidHaller]

I said it before, I think my problem with the idea of bringing the original cast back is the current nostalgia movie fatigue. The whole nostalgia/remake trend is getting quite stale at the moment, bringing the original cast back could quickly backfire because audiences could relate this decision to the remake hype and I doubt they will be up for it any longer. Star Trek, Ninja Turtles, Ghostbusters, Independence Day etc. etc. all of these movies underperformed...

Just use the new young cast and make the X-Men fresh and exciting again! Revamp the aesthetic entirely, no more Cerebro scenes, the change the basement look, diversify the cast, shift the focus to new characters, cast some big sellable stars if you need to, re-cast a new Wolverine which get people hyped, etc. etc. etc.

After "XN:A" and "DoFP" they can start a new universe. Everything is possible now! I don't get the point for nostalgia!

 

[X-Maniac]

I said it before, I think my problem with the idea of bringing the original cast back is the current nostalgia movie fatigue. The whole nostalgia/remake trend is getting quite stale at the moment, bringing the original cast back could quickly backfire because audiences could relate this decision to the remake hype and I doubt they will be up for it any longer. Star Trek, Ninja Turtles, Ghostbusters, Independence Day etc. etc. all of these movies underperformed...

Just use the new young cast and make the X-Men fresh and exciting again! Revamp the aesthetic entirely, no more Cerebro scenes, the change the basement look, diversify the cast, shift the focus to new characters, cast some big sellable stars if you need to, re-cast a new Wolverine which get people hyped, etc. etc. etc.

After "XN:A" and "DoFP" they can start a new universe. Everything is possible now! I don't get the point for nostalgia!

Nostalgia did work for Star Wars and Jurassic World - let's face it, neither of those movies were good.

However, both those had a long gap after the previous movies.

But I agree there could be a danger in relying on nostalgia for the X-Men as they seemed to do a lot of re-treading in Apocalypse and it didn't really work. It needs to be fresh and dynamic and approach the socio-political stuff in a more simple, bold fashion (like Civil War did with the idea of vigilante accountability).

 

[psylockolussus]

For me since I started watching X-men from the very first one, featuring OT cast is not a problem at all. But by doing so, I am not sure if the new fans who were attracted to this series by watching new trilogy would be so eager to watch OT cast movie.

The problem with this series, with XMA is not the cast, but the story, the script. Actually at the end of the day, no matter which cast will be used, the quality of the movie determines the outcome of the box office.

I like XMA a lot, for me, it is more entertaining than DoFP, but I would not say it is a great movie. DoFP is the best movie out of the new trilogy for me.

The thing with these X-Men films can't really rely on the cast. Its either the films before it HAS to be good so there would be goodwill for the series (people kept blaming X3/Origins for the lack of interest for First Class) OR the film has to be good. The film can't just be successful because of the star power/pull of the cast. X3 dodged the bad reviews and still became the highest grossing X-Men film - infact without Apocalypse's China release, Apocalypse wouldn't even out gross X3's worldwide gross and there was no 3D/IMAX back in 2006 for X-Men.

And before someone makes a point again about Nostalgia doesn't work, thats DOFP success for you! Its safer to play the nostalgia again than to gamble by bringing back the cast (for the third time or 2nd) that doesn't really appeal a lot to the mainstream. And when I say nostalgia, its not about copying the things that already happened in the original trilogy and just recycle it.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Nostalgia did work for Star Wars and Jurassic World - let's face it, neither of those movies were good.

However, both those had a long gap after the previous movies.

But I agree there could be a danger in relying on nostalgia for the X-Men as they seemed to do a lot of re-treading in Apocalypse and it didn't really work. It needs to be fresh and dynamic and approach the socio-political stuff in a more simple, bold fashion (like Civil War did with the idea of vigilante accountability).

nostaglia can work if people want to see films.with ghostbusters many didn't like the gimick.With star wars being first star wars film in 10 years and return of original cast that was the hook.now if you want to critize bryan singer for riping off or homaging X-Men and X2 with apocalypse J.J. Abrams is even more guilty of it with the force awakens.

I still haven't seen seen jurasic world so i don't know how they handled it.

with star trek now that disney is putting out a star wars film every year GA intrest in trek is dwlinding.If you look at box office mojo the adjusted for inflation domestic earning trek 1-4,VI,Generations,and first contact got bigger audence than beyond did.even motion picture and voyage home got bigger audence adjusted for inflation than Into darkness.nutrek has been declining with each film.It's similar to how the original trilogy had much better audence than First Class/Apocalypse.Apart from deadpool which is
higher than even adjusted last stand and X2 numbers only DOFP comes close.

fact remains new cast doesn't have appeal original cast did.let's remember even after last stand which at best can be described as mixed from audences and critics origins did better than eather first class or Apocalypse.

ignoring fact fox is limited because of problems with marvel/disney on how they can promate they could defently do better job with how they promate with what they do have.fox had better promatiol campagin with origins than they did with first class,the wolverine,and apocalypse.

if you look at rt audence score even though i have no love for last stand or origins they had a 62% and 59% liked.so not everybody hated those films.just like apocalypse has a 70% liked.though GA had more intrest in those films than apocalypse.

the biggest problem is return of original cast isn't fesable with jackman now done as wolverine.while odds are eventully wolverine will be recast i feel that is more likely to be done with younger cast.They might even try to get recqonable actor to try to create intrest.return of original cast got GA attention for DOFP.

DC films may eventully too like X-Men and Star Trek run into trouble.if films keep getting panned while they continue to be films audences rush to see.While audences liked all 3 DCeu better than critics will that hold out.

Fox,Kinberg,and Donner for next X-Men film may decide going into outer space and quickly recasting wolverine may be way to get people's attention.

 

[DavidHaller]

And before someone makes a point again about Nostalgia doesn't work, thats DOFP success for you! Its safer to play the nostalgia again than to gamble by bringing back the cast (for the third time or 2nd) that doesn't really appeal a lot to the mainstream. And when I say nostalgia, its not about copying the things that already happened in the original trilogy and just recycle it.

"Days of Future Past" maybe brought the orginal cast back, but there was NOTHING nostalgic about this movie (besides the 70s setting ). These characters suddenly lived in a post-apocalyptic future and became hopeless war-weary victims of mechanic Sentinel monsters. That was very much new for the franchise and not nostalgic at all. mmmh, one might even label this 'futuristic'. :-p

but "DofFP" was also released way before this new onslaught of horrible, horrible remakes! Maybe Jurassic World and Star Wars have been financially successful but they also helped to increase the fatigue of the nostalgia trend because both movies where not particularly good! This trend is clearly not working anymore how the boxoffice of all these movies this years shows.

honey, we get it. You want the old cast back but you are not capable to make any valid argument besides boxoffice numbers of former movies.

 

[Havok83]

To add to that, they barely focused on the older cast. It was primarily Wolverine in a new setting

 

[BeholdMe]

Nostalgia did work for Star Wars and Jurassic World - let's face it, neither of those movies were good.

However, both those had a long gap after the previous movies.

But I agree there could be a danger in relying on nostalgia for the X-Men as they seemed to do a lot of re-treading in Apocalypse and it didn't really work. It needs to be fresh and dynamic and approach the socio-political stuff in a more simple, bold fashion (like Civil War did with the idea of vigilante accountability).

So true now this I agree with. It's truly time for something fresh in the XFranchise, also as someone stated the older movies revolved around Wolverine with exception to Xavier no one really got development. I don't want them to go back to that.

 

[Legion]

"Days of Future Past" maybe brought the orginal cast back, but there was NOTHING nostalgic about this movie (besides the 70s setting ). These characters suddenly lived in a post-apocalyptic future and became hopeless war-weary victims of mechanic Sentinel monsters. That was very much new for the franchise and not nostalgic at all. mmmh, one might even label this 'futuristic'. :-p

but "DofFP" was also released way before this new onslaught of horrible, horrible remakes! Maybe Jurassic World and Star Wars have been financially successful but they also helped to increase the fatigue of the nostalgia trend because both movies where not particularly good! This trend is clearly not working anymore how the boxoffice of all these movies this years shows.

honey, we get it. You want the old cast back but you are not capable to make any valid argument besides boxoffice numbers of former movies.

That's not true at all. Magneto's prison break (X2), Wolverine going through the metal detector (X1), and Magneto vs Wolverine (X3) are examples of scenes that call back to the original series to bring out those feelings of nostalgia and familiarity.

Let's not forget about all the scenes where Wolverine is getting reacquainted with the younger versions of his mentor and colleagues, the pep talks, and the favor he asked of Xavier to find the OT X-Men and not forget them. Then you have the return of the OT in the good future which is very nostalgic.

I mean the movie is about a character traveling back in time. Of course they were going to make nostalgic.

 

[henzINNIT]

Comparable franchises have shown mixed results, but generally if the film follows previous history and is good, it works out okay. You have films like Force Awakens, Jurassic World, Creed and recent films in the Fast & Furious series (apparently) that have followed on from established continuity, brought back familiar faces and universes, generally pleased critics and audiences alike, and made a ton of money. If the film sucks and looked bad from the beginning, a returning star won't help. See Terminator Genisys. It's kind of a moot point to discuss whether or not similar treatment would work with X-Men, because it already happened and it worked out very well. The question is whether or not FOX followed through on it, and if they made a mistake in the direction they took.

(I see people saying the new cast was not the problem with the film, but that is only really demonstrable in terms of its quality. Whether the new guys were good in their roles is not the same as whether they got people into theatres.)

"Days of Future Past" maybe brought the orginal cast back, but there was NOTHING nostalgic about this movie (besides the 70s setting ). These characters suddenly lived in a post-apocalyptic future and became hopeless war-weary victims of mechanic Sentinel monsters. That was very much new for the franchise and not nostalgic at all.

Simply not true. Their setting had drastically changed, but the characters were familiar, and many, many beats in the film (in both periods) were familiar too. You could argue the past sequence was more laced with nostalgia, because it relied heavily on foreshadowing and in-jokes.

 

[X-Maniac]

Audiences don't want familiarity.

At least, not during this current cycle of cinema.

The stuff that's fresh and different is what's doing well.

Serving up 'more of the same' is not going to get people rushing to the cinema.

 

[henzINNIT]

Audiences don't want familiarity.

At least, not during this current cycle of cinema.

The stuff that's fresh and different is what's doing well.

Serving up 'more of the same' is not going to get people rushing to the cinema.

Not really. A successful sequel is a balance of the new and the familiar. If audiences wanted fresh and different then new ip's would be the cash cow.

It's also a false argument to presume that wanting familiar characters is asking for more of the same.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Comparable franchises have shown mixed results, but generally if the film follows previous history and is good, it works out okay. You have films like Force Awakens, Jurassic World, Creed and recent films in the Fast & Furious series (apparently) that have followed on from established continuity, brought back familiar faces and universes, generally pleased critics and audiences alike, and made a ton of money. If the film sucks and looked bad from the beginning, a returning star won't help. See Terminator Genisys. It's kind of a moot point to discuss whether or not similar treatment would work with X-Men, because it already happened and it worked out very well. The question is whether or not FOX followed through on it, and if they made a mistake in the direction they took.

Technically Jurassic world only had one returning cast member and I'd be surprised if anyone remembered who he was in the original movie, the rest of all new cast.

As for terminator Genesis, it's Arnold's most famous role that he returned too after what 12 years? No one cared really, all that talk that salvation didn't do well because it didn't have Arnold probably wasn't the case at all

I see people saying the new cast was not the problem with the film, but that is only really demonstrable in terms of its quality. Whether the new guys were good in their roles is not the same as whether they got people into theatres.)

Well a lot of actors dont have an amazing box office appeal, Ryan Reynolds hasn't had a huge streak of box office successes while deadpool was a huge success but was that people rushing to see Reynolds or The material? Or for an extra option did the 2 just compliment each other so well that people liked what they see?

 

[def28]

Well a lot of actors dont have an amazing box office appeal, Ryan Reynolds hasn't had a huge streak of box office successes while deadpool was a huge success but was that people rushing to see Reynolds or The material? Or for an extra option did the 2 just compliment each other so well that people liked what they see?

It's a mix of the two. People always liked Reynolds but wanted to see Reynolds in a good role. Deadpool and his humor go hand in hand with how he sold in the past. Much like RDJ and IM, this was perfect casting and audiences responded to that.

http://deadline.com/2016/02/deadpoo...gle-valentines-weekend-box-office-1201699895/

Not to mention, audiences are responding to Ryan Reynolds’ transcending turn as Deadpool (47% cited the actor as the main reason why they bought tickets this weekend).

The new cast for X-Men was good but audiences have no idea who most of these kids are outside of Sansa and they are not written as scene stealers like say Quicksilver, Deadpool, Spidey or Iron Man. They are written and advertised as supporting/minor players.

So I think ultimately these new kids are not advertised well and still don't have enough to do with the franchise as a whole to pull any weight. That needs to change. Fox has to make them the focus, and there's no other way around it. X-Men only gets one films for all these characters so keep pushing them to the back or side and that's how audiences will see them.

 

[psylockolussus]

Audiences don't want familiarity.

At least, not during this current cycle of cinema.

The stuff that's fresh and different is what's doing well.

Serving up 'more of the same' is not going to get people rushing to the cinema.

Do you have a big source about that? Because first you claimed that people doesn't care about Rotten Tomatoes. And now you are claiming that "audience doesn't care about familiarity". And isn't familiarity the reason why movies get merchandizes, theme parks, comic-books and TV spin-offs especially when they ended up so successful at the box-office?

Isn't familiarity the reason why there are so many movie sequels? And there's a lot of characters in the MCU popping up in different Marvel films, which build more hype and excitement for the viewers? And thats why you are getting Iron Man in a Spider-Man movie next year!

Yeah familiarity doesn't sell!

 

[MadVillainy]

Regarding bringing back the old cast
1) I dont think many of them would be interesting in coming back "full time"
2) They might have to do it without Jackman
3) Has already lost it's novelty because they did it with DoFP

I dont know what the X-Men franchise can do moving forward successfully box office wise other than DeadPool. But I dont think bringing back the old cast is it.

 

[psylockolussus]

Regarding bringing back the old cast
1) I dont think many of them would be interesting in coming back "full time"
2) They might have to do it without Jackman
3) Has already lost it's novelty because they did it with DoFP

I dont know what the X-Men franchise can do moving forward successfully box office wise other than DeadPool. But I dont think bringing back the old cast is it.

Its not only the fact that they are the original cast and appeared in "more successful" X-Men movies. But the fact that they are in the present period is a big thing to consider! It makes a Deadpool/X-Force crossover easier. And do you want Cyclops, Jean and Storm to appear as teenagers or 20 something mutants forever?

And just looking at the box-office numbers. I just don't get why continue to make movies with the cast that already underperformed at the box-office TWICE to the cast that have yet to underperform at the box-office. And people keep saying that its hard to get the OT cast ssince 2006 and why the heck did they appear in the DOFP's ending? Yeah hard!

 

[BeholdMe]

Its not only the fact that they are the original cast and appeared in "more successful" X-Men movies. But the fact that they are in the present period is a big thing to consider! It makes a Deadpool/X-Force crossover easier. And do you want Cyclops, Jean and Storm to appear as teenagers or 20 something mutants forever?

And just looking at the box-office numbers. I just don't get why continue to make movies with the cast that already underperformed at the box-office TWICE to the cast that have yet to underperform at the box-office. And people keep saying that its hard to get the OT cast ssince 2006 and why the heck did they appear in the DOFP's ending? Yeah hard!

I wouldn't mind them being forever 20ish since that's basically how they are in the comics so it's no big deal. If they decide to come to future and use the young cast I really wouldn't mind and if that's the argument some are making so they can do crossovers then that's fine. I wouldn't mind if they decide to stay in the past or find a way to bring them to the present either is fine with me. As long as I get a good story with all the characters involved playing a part then it's no issue for me.

 

[psylockolussus]

To add to that, they barely focused on the older cast. It was primarily Wolverine in a new setting

They were very prominent in the marketing, a lot of them did promo, just look who they sent to MTV Movie Awards and who got the biggest cheers at San Diego Comic Con when they had a presentation. And the whole new future - everybody is alive scene was a crowd pleaser.

 

[MadVillainy]

But can they get the original cast back is a big question no one is answering or even will the original cast big as big of a draw without their big hitter Jackman

Obviously DoFP made money but that was for the novelty of the original cast returning. Will people really be that interested in seeing the original cast again? I'm not saying they won't I just haven't seen evidence for it.

The people who are saying bring the original cast back seem to mostly be the people who have been championing bringing the original cast back for years. Which is fine, but I don't think they have the evidence to back up their claims
Deadpool is the highest grossing movie and that didn't have any of the original cast back other than magazine cameos

Apocalypse didn't do poorly because it didn't have the original cast. It did poorly because most people seemed to think it was a sucky movie.

 

[psylockolussus]

But can they get the original cast back is a big question no one is answering or even will the original cast big as big of a draw without their big hitter Jackman.

A lot of them have expressed to return to the series, if only you read what they said when they were asked if they are willing to do more.

Obviously DoFP made money but that was for the novelty of the original cast returning. Will people really be that interested in seeing the original cast again? I'm not saying they won't I just haven't seen evidence for it.

The people who are saying bring the original cast back seem to mostly be the people who have been championing bringing the original cast back for years. Which is fine, but I don't think they have the evidence to back up their claims
Deadpool is the highest grossing movie and that didn't have any of the original cast back other than magazine cameos

So you'd rather stick to the cast that is only pulling 155 million this 2016? Than the cast that had a huge push in the highest grossing X-Men film since X3? A writer for Forbes already claimed that films that featured the OT cast tend to perform better at the box-office. And you go over to the box-office mojo, you would see there's a box-office growth from X1 to X3 then a very noticable decline when Fox decided to do spin-offs, then growth happened when the OT cast came back. That is not a coincidental.

And sure, some X-Men films can survive and can gross bigger than the films that featured the OC which Deadpool achieved - but X-Men: Apocalypse also showed that doesn't apply to all films because if thats the case, Apocalypse should have at least outgrossed X1 and Origins in North America especially with price inflation and 3D.

I just don't see why they need to keep coming back to the past setting when after Apocalypse... they are already heading back to the present period once again with Deadpool 2 and Wolverine 3. Even Gambit is supposed to be set in the present.

 

[MadVillainy]

A lot of them have expressed to return to the series, if only you read what they said when they were asked if they are willing to do more.



So you'd rather stick to the cast that is only pulling 155 million this 2016? Than the cast that had a huge push in the highest grossing X-Men film since X3? A writer for Forbes already claimed that films that featured the OT cast tend to perform better at the box-office. And you go over to the box-office mojo, you would see there's a box-office growth from X1 to X3 then a very noticable decline when Fox decided to do spin-offs, then growth happened when the OT cast came back. That is not a coincidental.

And sure, some X-Men films can survive and can gross bigger than the films that featured the OC which Deadpool achieved - but X-Men: Apocalypse also showed that doesn't apply to all films because if thats the case, Apocalypse should have at least outgrossed X1 and Origins in North America especially with price inflation and 3D.

I just don't see why they need to keep coming back to the past setting when after Apocalypse... they are already heading back to the present period once again with Deadpool 2 and Wolverine 3. Even Gambit is supposed to be set in the present.

You know... wanting to return and being able to return are completely different things. Sorry I haven't read every interview theyve done but besides that they might have other obligations. And I dont just mean the work kind

And I never said they should stay in the past. Read what Ive typed. I just said I don't see how the franchise can move forward. I dont think bringing back the original cast will be the end all solution of the problem. I think the novelty is gone and if it's not gone now, it will be after a film or 2. And then the franchise will be in the same place.
And still the point is ignored, what if they don't get Jackman back. If Wolverine 3 is his last go, I don't think the OC will be as big without Jackman.
More than movies with the OC do the best, team movies with Jackman do the best

I think if you bring back the OC without Jackman you might get the same thing that happened with Independence Day Resurgence

 

[jaymes_e06]

I wouldn't mind them being forever 20ish since that's basically how they are in the comics so it's no big deal. If they decide to come to future and use the young cast I really wouldn't mind and if that's the argument some are making so they can do crossovers then that's fine. I wouldn't mind if they decide to stay in the past or find a way to bring them to the present either is fine with me. As long as I get a good story with all the characters involved playing a part then it's no issue for me.

But.. but that makes too much sense...

 

[psylockolussus]

I think if you bring back the OC without Jackman you might get the same thing that happened with Independence Day Resurgence

I've already pointed this out a long time ago and yes I know Hugh Jackman is done after Wolverine 3. Hugh Jackman leaving could be a blessing in disguise because this could lead to Halle/James Marsden/Anna Paquin getting bigger roles and if star power is a problem... they could always bring new faces like Channing Tatum as Gambit.

I don't think it'll be as bad as bringing back the FC cast and the younger version. I'm tired of Nicholas' take on Beast. James McAvoy is never a big seller and I don't want to see that romance with Moira to continue. Surely, we want more of Jennifer Lawrence's Mystique and Michael's Magneto? I don't (and I'm not asking for Rebecca/Ian to comeback too). And we already got the ID: Resurgence of the franchise, its X-Men: Apocalypse but worse because it was a sequel to a 2014 film, not a 1996 film.

 

[MadVillainy]

Tatum isn't a proven draw yet and more screen time for Cyclops, Jean, etc. do not necessarily mean a more successful film financially or critically.

No, Jackman leaving is not a blessing in disguise. It's not necessarily a bad thing either. He had to move on at some point

 

[psylockolussus]

Tatum isn't a proven draw yet and more screen time for Cyclops, Jean, etc. do not necessarily mean a more successful film financially or critically.

No, Jackman leaving is not a blessing in disguise. It's not necessarily a bad thing either. He had to move on at some point

When I meant blessing in disguise, it was for those actors in the OT that didn't get much role. I was NOT referring to box-office potential. While Channing Tatum definitely has a following and had success in the past but no actor is really guaranteed when it comes to box-office success even Jennifer Lawrence (the highest paid actress of 2016) couldn't stop Apocalypse from underperforming.

Anyway, Apocalypse already killed the momentum. Its not like the First Class cast and the younger version proved that they could keep the momentum or at least have a big opening weekend like X3 did in 2006. That didn't happen @ all. Apocalypse not outgrossing X1 is a big red flag. And I just don't see why yFox would want to reward that cast another film when there's another cast that is more marketable and more tested.

And do you still want Jennifer Lawrence/Michael Fassbender back in the another film? Because without those two, I don't think they can hold a candle over the Halle, James Marsden, Famke, Patrick (if his character isn't killed in W3), Anna, Kelsey and Ellen.