Dark Phoenix X-Men: Dark Phoenix News and Speculation Thread - - - - - - Part 15

[SumT]

sequence is too much to hope for. an action shot is more accurate

 

[Jh7058622]

Even taking away the surrounding circumstances of their respective franchises, Homecoming made $340 million more than Apocalypse on a similar budget. It was a bigger success no matter what way you look at it.

Thanks for missing the point entirely about things being relative and needling to look at the full picture in context.

Iron Man is easily Marvel's biggest cash cow which is why they spread him liberally on any Marvel film they can a la a Captain America sequel which uses Tony/IM's visage equally to the main character of the film for marketing. Even asking the audience to choose a side because that isn't trite at all. Anyway adding him makes films significantly more profitable usually. This was unfortunately not the case for the latest Spidey film.

My point is that both Spider-Man: Homemade LemonadeHomecoming (I'm sorry I couldn't resist such silly names for these things) was a disappointment not a failure. The same goes for Apocalypse it should have done better but it didn't. It wasn't a bomb though as some are making it out to be.

 

[psylockolussus]

It would be the basic optic blast and you will all deal.

The Cyclops v Storm fight scene in Apocalypse was so underwhelming.

 

[SumT]

you cant ask a non-too creative person to be creative, u know?

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I made a poll because I'm genuinely interested in how people feel on the question of whether or not they want Dark Phoenix released in theaters. Obviously the argument against it is because A. It could be bad and B. It could set back Marvel's own X-men plans.

Yes, I think it should be and no I don't think it will negatively impact the MCU reboot much. X-Men isn't Fantastic Four. It isn't even Spider-Man where there was over a decade since the last one most people liked. There have been good X-Men films. Several of them. And in recent memory. They just had one in May. Even if Dark Phoenix sucks, I don't think it impacts Marvel much.

 

[psylockolussus]

Which character is gonna get knocked out by a head butt? Juggernaut, Pyro, Archangel and Psylocke would be proud.

As for Dark Phoenix in theaters, I personally want it to be released in theaters. I just prefer watching films in a big theater and this is a sequel. It just feels so cheap for the sequel to be a direct to DVD release lol. New Mutants though shouldn't hit theaters.

But for the best of the property/MCU, its smarter in the long run to just release it (both films) straight to DVD.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Well if we are talking about what we would personally prefer, I'd prefer it to be on Netflix. That way I can sit in the comfort of my own home watching it essentially for free on a service I already subscribe to rather than paying to go out and see it with a bunch of idiot moviegoers that bring their screaming kids and play on their cellphones the whole movie.

I don't think it is what Disney should do, but it would work out better for me.

 

[Phoenix_Flare]

Which character is gonna get knocked out by a head butt? Juggernaut, Pyro, Archangel and Psylocke would be proud.

As for Dark Phoenix in theaters, I personally want it to be released in theaters. I just prefer watching films in a big theater and this is a sequel. It just feels so cheap for the sequel to be a direct to DVD release lol. New Mutants though shouldn't hit theaters.

But for the best of the property/MCU, its smarter in the long run to just release it (both films) straight to DVD.

I am just wondering why Fox hasn’t released a small synopsis/press release, 1/2 min teaser trailer or cast poster yet? They skipped out on SDCC so you will think they want to keep the fans and GA interested and excited for the next chapter in the series.

 

[Kuwolski]

Thanks for missing the point entirely about things being relative and needling to look at the full picture in context.

Iron Man is easily Marvel's biggest cash cow which is why they spread him liberally on any Marvel film they can a la a Captain America sequel which uses Tony/IM's visage equally to the main character of the film for marketing. Even asking the audience to choose a side because that isn't trite at all. Anyway adding him makes films significantly more profitable usually. This was unfortunately not the case for the latest Spidey film.

My point is that both Spider-Man: Homemade LemonadeHomecoming (I'm sorry I couldn't resist such silly names for these things) was a disappointment not a failure. The same goes for Apocalypse it should have done better but it didn't. It wasn't a bomb though as some are making it out to be.

Homecoming was anything but a disappointment unless you unrealistically expected it to make a billion. The character was on a downward spiral from a franchise perspective, particularly domestically.

Iron Man wasn't even in the film for more then 10 min and people knew that after the first weekend, if not before based on the reviews. The legs were very strong after the first weekend too, some of the best the MCU has seen. I don't see disappointment.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Thanks for missing the point entirely about things being relative and needling to look at the full picture in context.

Iron Man is easily Marvel's biggest cash cow which is why they spread him liberally on any Marvel film they can a la a Captain America sequel which uses Tony/IM's visage equally to the main character of the film for marketing. Even asking the audience to choose a side because that isn't trite at all. Anyway adding him makes films significantly more profitable usually. This was unfortunately not the case for the latest Spidey film.

My point is that both Spider-Man: Homemade LemonadeHomecoming (I'm sorry I couldn't resist such silly names for these things) was a disappointment not a failure. The same goes for Apocalypse it should have done better but it didn't. It wasn't a bomb though as some are making it out to be.

If you think Homecoming was a BO disappointment, then I am sorry, you are not showing an understanding of how BO works. Spider-Man: Homecoming was actually one of the cheapest Spider-Man films to make (if you account for inflation, it very well might be the cheapest), yet it grossed the 2nd most. Relative to the series, Homecoming is actually one of the most profitable entries in the series (2nd only to the original SM1 if you adjust for inflation). These are not disappointing statistics. These are things Marvel is more than happy about. If your base point was 1 billion dollars for Homecoming, then you had a false expectation. Experts never saw that as a possibility (from the big trades I mean). Sony/Marvel are more than happy with Homecoming's performance. To argue otherwise is foolish. Fun fact on Spider-Man: no film in the series has grossed 1 billion dollars (unadjusted). Again, expecting it to suddenly do so on their 2nd reboot is foolish.

 

[kevork89]

Agreed. Comparing Ant-Man and the X-men is apples and oranges. Ant-Man is a B-lister and it's kinda amazing that he is getting movies at all...much less a movie that will clear 400 million.

Fox had the rights to the X-men....one of the most popular comic book properties in history. And somehow they could never get them on the same level as Spider-Man, Superman, Batman, and Iron Man with movie audiences. Telling that the movie they cared the least about....Deadpool...was the one that finally broke big for them.

Just comparing X-men with Ant-Man is kind of an insult to the X-men really. This is what it's come to? It's like comparing the box office of Batman with Ghost Rider.

If you go back and read what I originally said it was not comparing the two I was merely replying to a comment when I said that Apocalypse return wasn’t all that bad and someone said it was the lowest grossing comic book movie of 2016. To which I replied pretty much saying that at this stage Ant Man would be the lowest grossing CBM of this year. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s done bad right? But as usual people blow it out of context on here and act as if I killed a dog in front of them or something.

 

[Lip]

If you go back and read what I originally said it was not comparing the two I was merely replying to a comment when I said that Apocalypse return wasn’t all that bad and someone said it was the lowest grossing comic book movie of 2016. To which I replied pretty much saying that at this stage Ant Man would be the lowest grossing CBM of this year. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s done bad right? But as usual people blow it out of context on here and act as if I killed a dog in front of them or something.

I think people got what you meant. You brought up AMATW, currently the lowest grossing CBM, saying its BO result doesn't mean a movie is bad, and also brought up BvS and SS, which grossed more.

I just think there are many differences between all of them. AMATW hasn't debuted yet in other markets like UK and China. And the movie was critically a hit. BvS and SS were critical failures, but at least they got a pretty big BO return. And, wanting or not, SS got an Oscar.

You can argue that 500 million something isn't that bad, but when you put all in context, XMA grossed much less than the previous movie, which is a disappointment, it was a critical failure, it didn't get any important award or anything, it was the lowest grossing CBM movie... The movie just has a collection of failures.

 

[SumT]

and even made less in Usa than X-Men from year 2000!!

crazy talk. seriously. the third part of the prequels (with ticket inflation) didnt even outgross the very first x-men movie from 18 years ago. Thats a big problem and clear indication of Fox's bad treatment.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

Which is bad.... X-MEN shouldn't be able to be compared to Ant-Man. That's the whole point. That's how much X-MEN had fall off that it can be compared with Ant-Man

 

[kevork89]

I think people got what you meant. You brought up AMATW, currently the lowest grossing CBM, saying its BO result doesn't mean a movie is bad, and also brought up BvS and SS, which grossed more.

I just think there are many differences between all of them. AMATW hasn't debuted yet in other markets like UK and China. And the movie was critically a hit. BvS and SS were critical failures, but at least they got a pretty big BO return. And, wanting or not, SS got an Oscar.

You can argue that 500 million something isn't that bad, but when you put all in context, XMA grossed much less than the previous movie, which is a disappointment, it was a critical failure, it didn't get any important award or anything, it was the lowest grossing CBM movie... The movie just has a collection of failures.

I agree completely true and I understand what you are saying.

Obviously the two aren’t comparable. Essentially X-Mem has no business not grossing upwards of 700 million. But all problems point in the direction of Fox on this one and whatever the outcome of Dark Phoenix is Fox messed up their franchise and I can’t wait for Marvel to take over

 

[kevork89]

and even made less in Usa than X-Men from year 2000!!

crazy talk. seriously. the third part of the prequels (with ticket inflation) didnt even outgross the very first x-men movie from 18 years ago. Thats a big problem and clear indication of Fox's bad treatment.

I think we can all agree on that

 

[SumT]

I mean.... how is it possible than basically all franchises got bigger with time, or keep similar numbers (Fast and furious, Harry potter, Star Wars, Jurassic World, Avengers...) yet X-Men got smaller and smaller with the prequels? (aside from Dofp, the all stars movie).

well, I guess my quote kind of give us the answer.

 

[kevork89]

I mean.... how is it possible than basically all franchises got bigger with time, or keep similar numbers (Fast and furious, Harry potter, Star Wars, Jurassic World, Avengers...) yet X-Men got smaller and smaller with the prequels? (aside from Dofp, the all stars movie).

well, I guess my quote kind of give us the answer.

Can I just add Mission Impossible to that list. Damn I’m excited to see that this week.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I mean.... how is it possible than basically all franchises got bigger with time, or keep similar numbers (Fast and furious, Harry potter, Star Wars, Jurassic World, Avengers...) yet X-Men got smaller and smaller with the prequels? (aside from Dofp, the all stars movie).

well, I guess my quote kind of give us the answer.

easy.. people got tired of it being about the same 4 or 5 characters ( xavier, magneto, mystique, wolverine) and no one else felt remotely like the characters they grew up knowing and loving. the Decade hopping was also non-sensicle, what one film would set up, the next would ignore almost completely. and writing just got sloppy in favor of power sets and a predictable story. the majority got tired of being let down.

 

[SumT]

not to mention the action pieces looked prettty boring/uninspired in trailers and tv spots.

nothing from Apocalypse trailers looked really epic. At least to me. and lets not talk about the teaser trailer, seeing the shots of Angel and Storm I was like "wth is this? who directed this?". It looked totally fake and static

 

[Lip]

easy.. people got tired of it being about the same 4 or 5 characters ( xavier, magneto, mystique, wolverine) and no one else felt remotely like the characters they grew up knowing and loving. the Decade hopping was also non-sensicle, what one film would set up, the next would ignore almost completely. and writing just got sloppy in favor of power sets and a predictable story. the majority got tired of being let down.

Superhero movies in general evolved a lot over the years. Singer's first X-Men movies basically started it all, but they had that "grounded" version because people didn't take costumed heroes seriously enough. Things started to change, other franchises popped up, they started to explore more the fantasy and sci-fi elements, we got talking racoons and talking trees, the concept of shared universe, (cliches) big bads as Thanos, cosmic elements and gods...

Yet, while other studios were exploring the world of characters they have, FOX stood with only a few of them even tho they have a huge world of characters too. Even tho GoTG proved to be a huge success, FOX was reluctant to in even color their characters hair. And even after all those years, now with Dark Phoenix were back 18 years with a grounded take into their most fantastical story they have. And yet, we're still stuck with Charles/Raven/Eric.

It's disappointing.

 

[Charzhin0]

I mean.... how is it possible than basically all franchises got bigger with time, or keep similar numbers (Fast and furious, Harry potter, Star Wars, Jurassic World, Avengers...) yet X-Men got smaller and smaller with the prequels? (aside from Dofp, the all stars movie).

well, I guess my quote kind of give us the answer.

Bigger does not mean better.

 

[Charzhin0]

And even after all those years, now with Dark Phoenix were back 18 years with a grounded take into their most fantastical story they have. And yet, we're still stuck with Charles/Raven/Eric.

It's disappointing.

False.
Dark Phoenix will be more fantastical. The grounded approach is in their drama centric story. And we dont know how much screentime Raven, Eric and Charles are getting.

 

[SumT]

did you read Kinberg's script?
tell us more, please

 

[Lip]

False.
Dark Phoenix will be more fantastical. The grounded approach is in their drama centric story. And we dont know how much screentime Raven, Eric and Charles are getting.

Kinberg said himself. His words: "[We must] find a way to ground it so it's not too intergalactic.". The only "fantastical" detail he shared is that there'll be extraterrestrial characters. And if Chastain is indeed one of them, they'll look like humans. In the Entertainment Weekly magazine, there are details about Raven, Charles, Eric and Jean. Nothing about anybody else. The FC trio is their biggest and most expensive stars, and Kinberg himself said they're the biggest resources they have and he will give them relevant roles to play and keep them interested. And we know the Phoenix will be treated as mental illness.

All of that above are evidences we have released offically, even tho the movie is not out yet. If you have evidence that the movie will be as fantastical (or close to it) as it is in the source material, feel free to post it.