Dark Phoenix X-Men: Dark Phoenix News and Speculation Thread - - - - - Part 14

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nothing changes here. ...:funny:
always the same few people trying to turn the topic into Marvel vs Fox
 
Last edited:
I'm not so sure. Fox seemed to have no stock in Cyclops from the start. It was a fight to even include him at all in X3. Singer's films represent the best treatment he's gotten in the franchise, so it's unclear whether he was a positive or negative influence on the character. Worth noting that Singer gave that Superman role to Marsden after short-changing him in X2 as well.

You would presume that Scott is getting some meat this time around. Will be fun to see.
From the beginning, the rewritten first film's final script was based on Singer's story treatment along with DeSanto that placed the focus on Rogue and Wolverine, which Fox believed was "perfect". Singer drove the story as director.

As for X3,
"Killing Cyclops was Fox's decision, based on the availability of actor James Marsden, who was cast in Singer's Superman Returns."
Sounds like they were wondering whether it was worth the effort to include him in the movie since he would have so little screen time. And he was still killed off screen anyway even with the little bit he shot.

Singer's films are pretty much the ONLY treatment of Cyclops, so if people want to complain about his screen time, that's the culprit.
 
Nothing changes here. ...:funny:
always the same few people trying to turn the topic into Marvel vs Fox

same can be said about those that have to comment about it, when they arent even a part of the discussion, instead of adding their own topic :yay:

:cwink:

I guess you dont have anything else to talk about, ha. dark phoenix maybe?
 
Hopefully the franchise does end on a good note. I don't want the MCU burdened with the memory of a bad Fox-Men film before they reboot it.
 
no doubt about it, Betsy :woot:

Marvel studios will destroy half Fox's X-men versions. (Rogue, Cyclops, Emma and Angel being the most likely improvements, then Storm. Iceman too, I mean.... 8 x-men at the very least :funny:)

I think that depends on how you look at it. There were two versions of Spider Man before he appeared in the Avengers but they didn't necessarily destroy anything. They actually brought the character to life for a lot of people.

We can always go back to Fox's films if we miss their versions, but one thing I will say: I never liked what Fox did with Rogue. She especially represents people who feel cursed and isolated because of who they were born to be. Fox decided to "cure" her of all that and never followed up on the character after X3, at least on the big screen. There are people like her all over the world who could have been inspired by seeing Rogue overcome this and become a superhero.

Now I don't know if there'd be any way to have a show of hands, how many people keep watching the the original Spider-Man films, the reboot and MCU Spiderman?
 
Last edited:
Do you think they changed the ending to this film? Just to maybe give the series a good send off since Disney will likely take over this and reboot.
 
Honestly i do not think that was the reason behind his casting. infact wasn't Hugh Jackman also offered a role in Superman Returns? or am i getting my information wrong...

My belief is that Singer offered Marsden a role hoping it would force FOX to have to wait for him to finish directing Superman Returns.

It backfired though if thats the case.

Wasn't Hugh Jackman rumored to play Johnathan Kent in SR flashback before it was actually made? I feel like I remember this rumor.
 
Yes, and Shawn Ashmore was rumored to play Jimmy Olsen. He may have even been offered the role.
 
if Fox leaves X-Men out this year..... a great start for the marketing of this movie :funny:

poor souls. They just dont give a damm anymore, lol.
 
4do9c.jpg
 
I think there are several ways to look at Dark Phoenix as a film...

1) Is it a good movie?

2) Is it entertaining and enjoyable to watch (lots of crappy movies can still be fun to watch - Transformers, Jurassic World, even X3, etc)

3) Is it a good X-Men movie? Does it do justice to the material from which it's adapted and the characters on which it is based? And, more specifically:

4) Is it a good adaptation of the Dark Phoenix Saga

I'm expecting this to be a well-made movie, given Kinberg's supposed producing skills, the talents of the crew he assembled and the length of the post-production process.

But whether it satisfies criteria 2, 3 and 4 is another matter.
 
2 is pretty easy. 3 and 4 are harder to achieve, taking into account people involved.
 
Some of you here are so bitter about the success of the MCU that you are making declarations about Apocalypse being the best cbm of 2016!!! LOL!!!! Not even Singer would rate Apocalypse like that. That is a whole new level of spite over your rival's success. Stop blaming Marvel for Fox mishandling and wasting the material.

You are embarrassing yourselves and you are making your opinions completely unreliable.

As for Dark Phoenix people just cling on the possibility of this universe ending on a high note that they are willing to ignore Kinberg's track record. Sorry but track records are verything in this business. It's why WB/DC is considered such a joke in making cbms.
 
Ah yes the track record of Kinberg having directed exactly 0 films.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,304
Messages
22,082,684
Members
45,882
Latest member
Charles Xavier
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"