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

[DACrowe]

For the devaluation of the franchise, I think the fact the X-Men movies are getting rebooted and that's been widely reported for well over a year (initially as "probably" but now officially) probably has hurt Dark Phoenix's box office prospects. But not nearly as much as the fact that the movie has bad buzz because of the reshoots and the trailers have promised a mostly very familiar movie.

When I heard they were making Dark Phoenix, and I guess before I knew Kinberg was directing, I thought that is crazy enough to just work. Go cosmic, go big, do everything Singer was afraid to do. And then... it was more of the same.

The Disney deal hurt, also in no small part because a lot of nerd media (not to be confused with traditional entertainment journalism) has their knives out, which is odd. Trades and critics are not in the "tank" for anyone, but fanboy sites are so beholden to the Disney line-up, and Apocalypse was so meh, any sign of weakness was an excuse to eviscerate this project.

However, Fox did show signs of weakness unrelated to Disney: hiring Kinberg, multiple delays, and marketing that only has started to look interesting about two months from release. I hate admitting it, but the X-franchise built this problem for themselves, and Disney might've just made it slightly worse with the Disney-Fox deal. Conversely though, the fact it's ending might be its biggest selling point in the trailer I'm sure we get right around Endgame's release.

I still think it has a shot of being pretty good (I also don't think it can be worse than other mediocre superhero movies that have strangely gotten a pass recently like Captain Marvel and Aquaman), but it is going to flop now and that is mostly on the choices they made with direction right after Apocalypse. It's more the shame though since the young cast is actually quite good.

 

[Iceman]

I think it was too soon for Dark Phoenix, both in time since TLS and also with not enough time with the new characters together to deliver an emotional payoff worthy of the story. I’m all up for a cosmic story but would have preferred they chose a different one.

 

[psylockolussus]

China will save this movie.
even if it doesnt reach 150m in USA, China will likely bring 120-140m there and the final numbers will end around XMA or maybe more.
And Fox execs will end pleased, saying "hey, we did fine signing Simon Kinberg to direct this one". meh

Like it saved Alita. China's numbers don't mean a thing unless the movie also performs in a lot of countries. China numbers would just boosts whatever Dark PhoeniX numbers would get but it wouldn't be enough. American studios also get a small percentage from Chinese theaters.

 

[Marvel united]

I think it was too soon for Dark Phoenix, both in time since TLS and also with not enough time with the new characters together to deliver an emotional payoff worthy of the story. I’m all up for a cosmic story but would have preferred they chose a different one.

If I was writing TLS, I would not have done the Phoenix story. I would have focused 100% on the cure and how that affects the X-Men, building up to the collision course humanity and mutants have in the climax (led by Magneto). Angel here is the POV since his company is directly administering the cure and plus the intro set him up. That would have fit much better fit thematically with the first two films. Dark Phoenix could have been X4, complete focus on that story without having to juggle several subplots. Scott and Jean are the lead (Scott doesn't have to get killed, no scheduling conflicts with Marsden), Charles and Logan are dead post-X3. Emma Frost is introduced into the movie (playing a similar role as W&TXM) Scott and Storm are leading the school now

This movie however, they're just jumping straight into it. Why? I have no fricking clue. Kinberg's ego, I guess? I mean, they hinted at Mr. Sinister in XMA post credits, what happened to that? They should have done that instead. Mutant Massacre -- following the events of Apocalypse, mutants are once again in political hot water and this opens the door to Essex industries being able to operate under the shadows and fund the Marauders. This could have been a great way to develop the team with Charles in the background. Mystique would be killed in this movie too.

But instead, Dark Phoenix again...

 

[SumT]

Its just a selfish movie. Kinberg was a fan of this particular arc and this was his perfect chance to direct a X-Men movie, now that Singer was gone (finally for Simon), so Simon jumped straight to the story he wanted, not caring a damm about character development, the Scott-Jean needed love story first, Jean-Storm friendship and Jean being a x-men for some time before going dark. This movie is the perfect example of a rushed story. and the audience already saw Jean going dark years ago, so more reasons yet to NOT do this story this soon. Kinberg just doesnt care about anything, but his personal goals, even if he f**** up the x-men once again.

 

[Marvel united]

Its just a selfish movie. Kinberg was a fan of this particular arc and this was his perfect chance to direct a X-Men movie, now that Singer was gone (finally for Simon), so Simon jumped straight to the story he wanted, not caring a damm about character development, the Scott-Jean needed love story first, Jean-Storm friendship and Jean being a x-men for some time before going dark. This movie is the perfect example of a rushed story. and the audience already saw Jean going dark years ago, so more reasons yet to NOT do this story this soon. Kinberg just doesnt care about anything, but his personal goals, even if he f**** up the x-men once again.

See, that would have been awesome. That would have been a nice change of pace. Maybe even bring a new director onboard with a fresh vision if Singer didnt want to come back. If they had done that, made an X-Men-centric story, developed these characters and relationships and gave us some new villains, Dark Phoenix would have been a lot stronger for it. There would have been a lot more weight to this movie & they would have earned a lot more goodwill.

The sky was the limit with how Apocalypse ended. They could have went anywhere but like you said, Simon doesn't care about good storytelling and what makes sense for these characters and the franchise. Sounds exactly like Matt Tolmach/Avi Arad in the leaked emails post-TASM2

 

[The Guard]

When I heard they were making Dark Phoenix, and I guess before I knew Kinberg was directing, I thought that is crazy enough to just work. Go cosmic, go big, do everything Singer was afraid to do. And then... it was more of the same.

But Singer did go big. In many respects, he went a lot more "comic book" and "cosmic" than the X-Men films had previously been.

And critics didn't go for it. Some of the core audience didn't go for it. APOCALYPSE was derided for being too comic booky, big for the sake of big, and seen as a sillier entry in the franchise. For better or worse, X-Men movies are seen as the more grounded of the comic book offerings, and they're generally received better when they are. So the studio went back to that, and they've been telling everyone that since development of this movie started.

 

[EnDz0n3]

But Singer did go big. In many respects, he went a lot more "comic book" and "cosmic" than the X-Men films had previously been.

And critics didn't go for it. Some of the core audience didn't go for it. APOCALYPSE was derided for being too comic booky, big for the sake of big, and seen as a sillier entry in the franchise. For better or worse, X-Men movies are seen as the more grounded of the comic book offerings, and they're generally received better when they are. So the studio went back to that, and they've been telling everyone that since development of this movie started.

Job number one after a disappointing entry in a franchise is to NOT to hire the writer of that disappointing previous movie and get him to direct. That's a no-brainer.

 

[Legion]

But Singer did go big. In many respects, he went a lot more "comic book" and "cosmic" than the X-Men films had previously been.

And critics didn't go for it. Some of the core audience didn't go for it. APOCALYPSE was derided for being too comic booky, big for the sake of big, and seen as a sillier entry in the franchise. For better or worse, X-Men movies are seen as the more grounded of the comic book offerings, and they're generally received better when they are. So the studio went back to that, and they've been telling everyone that since development of this movie started.

Apocalypse wasn't good. That's what critics and fans didn't like about it.

You can't do a shoddy job and then turn around and say "We've been telling fans for years embracing the comics just doesn't work for the X-Men. Well we gave it a shot...now back to our very dated grounded and realistic formula that fans love"

 

[Frankeh]

This movie however, they're just jumping straight into it. Why? I have no fricking clue. Kinberg's ego, I guess? I mean, they hinted at Mr. Sinister in XMA post credits, what happened to that? They should have done that instead. Mutant Massacre -- following the events of Apocalypse, mutants are once again in political hot water and this opens the door to Essex industries being able to operate under the shadows and fund the Marauders. This could have been a great way to develop the team with Charles in the background. Mystique would be killed in this movie too.

FWIW, in my opinion they already kinda shot themselves in the foot with Apocalypse. This franchise wants to have it both ways, bragging rights for not rebooting but at the same time wants to have the freedom to retcon as if they rebooted. It doesn't work like that. They just introduced Cyclops and had his brother killed. Jean Grey just introduced and already undermined by the looming Phoenix. Angel and Psylocke as villains with no association to X-Men and no signs of return. The team was just set up at the climax of the previous movie and now they're already at one of their most important, game changing events. As I've always said, it's BvS all over again.

 

[The Guard]

Apocalypse wasn't good. That's what critics and fans didn't like about it.

Which is all well and good...except that things aren't just "not good" for no reason. And except that many critics didn't just leave it at: "it's not good". A chief and very complaint common among critics was that it was too big, too effects heavy, and too comic booky without more grounded, intimate stakes.

Almost all the top critics negative reviews spotlight this, and the actual Rotten Tomatoes summary singles out the "overloaded action" first.

It's not an accident that the studio almost immediately started saying "Yeah, we didn't tell an intimate enough story last time, we went too big with it". People complained loud and long about how big and ridiculous APOCALYPSE was compared to other series entries that were considered quality outings.

You can't do a shoddy job and then turn around and say "We've been telling fans for years embracing the comics just doesn't work for the X-Men. Well we gave it a shot...now back to our very dated grounded and realistic formula that fans love"

They have never said that, so I don't know what that's about.

Now, critics on the other hand, plenty of them said things that sounded a lot like that. It seems many of them appreciated the stripped down somewhat more grounded take on the superhero.

 

[EnDz0n3]

Boxoffice.com were completely wrong about Deadpool

"At the end of January 2016, the film was projected to earn $55–60 million over its opening weekend in the United States and Canada. It ultimately opened at No. 1, making $132.4 million for the weekend, and $152.2 million over the long Presidents' Day weekend."

Boxoffice.com are not omniscient.

That quote is NOT from boxoffice.com. A quick google search tells me that "$55–60 million over its opening weekend in the United States and Canada" Long Range Forecast quote is from TheHollywoodReporter. It even says that on the (wiki!) page you are quoting.

Why are you passing off wrong information to prove a point?

If you really wanted to say that boxoffice.com has been wrong about their Long Range predictions, you can quote them on their forecast for Apocalypse, which they pegged, 2 months before its release, to open at $124Million. But their over-estimation probably doesn't fit the narrative you're selling.

 

[Iceman]

But Singer did go big. In many respects, he went a lot more "comic book" and "cosmic" than the X-Men films had previously been.

And critics didn't go for it. Some of the core audience didn't go for it. APOCALYPSE was derided for being too comic booky, big for the sake of big, and seen as a sillier entry in the franchise. For better or worse, X-Men movies are seen as the more grounded of the comic book offerings, and they're generally received better when they are. So the studio went back to that, and they've been telling everyone that since development of this movie started.

I thought DofP was the Fox franchise going big and getting ambitious and also being well received. One look at Apocalypse himself and you know they either didn't go big or there were some very poor craftsmen in a crucial area. Even IW wouldn't work with Thanos looking like that. Many complain about Ultron dragging down AoU and Apocalypse was a similar drag on that film. Silly is silly regardless of how big something is (and I don't mind either film outside of my disappointment with the main villain in each case).

 

[Iceman]

If I was writing TLS, I would not have done the Phoenix story. I would have focused 100% on the cure and how that affects the X-Men, building up to the collision course humanity and mutants have in the climax (led by Magneto). Angel here is the POV since his company is directly administering the cure and plus the intro set him up. That would have fit much better fit thematically with the first two films. Dark Phoenix could have been X4, complete focus on that story without having to juggle several subplots. Scott and Jean are the lead (Scott doesn't have to get killed, no scheduling conflicts with Marsden), Charles and Logan are dead post-X3. Emma Frost is introduced into the movie (playing a similar role as W&TXM) Scott and Storm are leading the school now

This movie however, they're just jumping straight into it. Why? I have no fricking clue. Kinberg's ego, I guess? I mean, they hinted at Mr. Sinister in XMA post credits, what happened to that? They should have done that instead. Mutant Massacre -- following the events of Apocalypse, mutants are once again in political hot water and this opens the door to Essex industries being able to operate under the shadows and fund the Marauders. This could have been a great way to develop the team with Charles in the background. Mystique would be killed in this movie too.

But instead, Dark Phoenix again...

Yeah they tried to fit too much into TLS and then cut the runtime! DP would have been great for X4 with even more buildup, and this would have allowed the cure storyline to breathe. And as you say this would have avoided the petty scheduling conflicts with Marsden and Rothman throwing his toys out of the pram and forever leaving his ****stain on the franchise and its continuity.

And now would have been a good time to do Sinister, but at least he can still be kept fresh for the future.

 

[Manasrepublic]

I always thought the X-men films could go big... i’ve always wanted to see the x-men fighting on a space station or space base like in the awesome arcade game from the 90s.

A grounded more mature approach can and has worker before, but the new MCU X-men really need the vibrant and rich color scheme of the costumes. I also hope Wolverine is shorter and has more martial arts and highly acrobatic type fighting scenes. I know that is such a random thing to want but it would be pretty bad ass

DP seems to have some really well thought out and superbly crafted action scenes if the previews are to be believed. I hope for better fight scenes!!

The Apocalypse movie couldn’t decide if it wanted to remain in the more grounded and personal take and more close up shooting style like the prior movies versus being more comic booky. It felt like it switched from a few scenes to another was pretty choppy and jarring.

The Apocalypse make up also did not help at all. He didn’t look menacing in the least. CG was the way to go. Apocalypse looked like some strange turquoise reject from the Orville or one of the aliens in the general background of a Star trek TNG episode

 

[Mutant 77]

The Apocalypse movie couldn’t decide if it wanted to remain in the more grounded and personal take and more close up shooting style like the prior movies versus being more comic booky. It felt like it switched from a few scenes to another was pretty choppy and jarring.

The Apocalypse make up also did not help at all. He didn’t look menacing in the least. CG was the way to go. Apocalypse looked like some strange turquoise reject from the Orville or one of the aliens in the general background of a Star trek TNG episode

First of all, I think "Apocalypse" was very comic-bookish from start to finish, and it has been the most X-Men-ish movie so far. It's a great sci-fi movie with a genuine comic book tone, without sounding too "distant" from the early entries of the series anyway.

Second, Apocalypse's make-up is 100% brilliant. I'm tired of CGI. CGI sounds fake as hell. I don't like CGI characters like Hulk. Enough.

 

[Charzhin0]

The Apocalypse make up also did not help at all. He didn’t look menacing in the least. CG was the way to go. Apocalypse looked like some strange turquoise reject from the Orville or one of the aliens in the general background of a Star trek TNG episode

Na not necessarily. I think practical costume design with enhanced CG is the way to go. Thanos looked good close up but zoomed out shots still looked clunky.

This cosplay imitation looks freakishly menacing and intimdating. Given a Hollywood budget and CGI touch ups would have made him complete

 

[Mutant 77]

Another interesting point about Movie Apocalypse is that he doesn't look "imponent", but mysterious, creepy and powerful.
He didn't need to look "ostensibly menacing" like Thanos. Instead, he looks like he comes off from a Cronenberg movie, and that's what I absolutely love.
Comic Book Apocalypse looks like a Darkseid rip-off anyway.

 

[Iceman]

I always thought the X-men films could go big... i’ve always wanted to see the x-men fighting on a space station or space base like in the awesome arcade game from the 90s.

A grounded more mature approach can and has worker before, but the new MCU X-men really need the vibrant and rich color scheme of the costumes. I also hope Wolverine is shorter and has more martial arts and highly acrobatic type fighting scenes. I know that is such a random thing to want but it would be pretty bad ass

DP seems to have some really well thought out and superbly crafted action scenes if the previews are to be believed. I hope for better fight scenes!!

The Apocalypse movie couldn’t decide if it wanted to remain in the more grounded and personal take and more close up shooting style like the prior movies versus being more comic booky. It felt like it switched from a few scenes to another was pretty choppy and jarring.

The Apocalypse make up also did not help at all. He didn’t look menacing in the least. CG was the way to go. Apocalypse looked like some strange turquoise reject from the Orville or one of the aliens in the general background of a Star trek TNG episode

DOFP had future and past timelines in a time travel story so I think you can go big and succeed with the Fox style. I only wish they had given more focus to the non-Wolverine X-Men over the last 2 decades.

As for your Wolverine preferences, I wouldn’t be surprised if most fans were on board with that and I don’t think it’s a strange thing to want. Jackman has been totally dedicated and a great servant to the X-franchise over such a long time. But for the future it would be interesting to see something that resembles comics Wolverine even more.

I hope what we’ve heard on DP is true and we get a good film to go out on.

Such a shame Apocalypse couldn’t capitalise on DoFP’s good will, especially with Deadpool and Logan around it. But this (along with Apes and Thanos) is one of the best examples of prosthetics in this day and age not being superior to CGI. It is terrible for the actors and Oscar Isaac was totally wasted.

 

[Mutant 77]

But this (along with Apes and Thanos) is one of the best examples of prosthetics in this day and age not being superior to CGI. It is terrible for the actors and Oscar Isaac was totally wasted.

I absolutely disagree. Movie En Sabah Nur/Apocalypse looks mysterious, fascinating, genuinely creepy and definitely powerful. He's not Thanos or Darkseid, he doesn't need to look imponent or bulky at all.

 

[Flint Marko]

Which is all well and good...except that things aren't just "not good" for no reason. And except that many critics didn't just leave it at: "it's not good". A chief and very complaint common among critics was that it was too big, too effects heavy, and too comic booky without more grounded, intimate stakes.

Almost all the top critics negative reviews spotlight this, and the actual Rotten Tomatoes summary singles out the "overloaded action" first.

It's not an accident that the studio almost immediately started saying "Yeah, we didn't tell an intimate enough story last time, we went too big with it". People complained loud and long about how big and ridiculous APOCALYPSE was compared to other series entries that were considered quality outings.



They have never said that, so I don't know what that's about.

Now, critics on the other hand, plenty of them said things that sounded a lot like that. It seems many of them appreciated the stripped down somewhat more grounded take on the superhero.

Go look at RT and see how many people nail the villain and the story before the action. The action is certainly brought up (because yes, it was terrible) but looking at that and deciding that going big just isn't right for the X-men franchise is either deliberately missing the point or just making excuses. Probably both.

Said it before to the excuse brigade: this is you looking at a chef serving people overcooked steak and then arguing that people just don’t like red meat when they send it back. No ones buying it.

 

[Iceman]

I absolutely disagree. Movie En Sabah Nur/Apocalypse looks mysterious, fascinating, genuinely creepy and definitely powerful. He's not Thanos or Darkseid, he doesn't need to look imponent or bulky at all.

Cool, but I think this is a big part of the reason why Apocalypse did considerably worse at the box office than DofP, when it could have built on that success with the good will generated. What is your opinion of the reason if not Apocalypse himself?

 

[Mutant 77]

Cool, but I think this is a big part of the reason why Apocalypse did considerably worse at the box office than DofP, when it could have built on that success with the good will generated. What is your opinion of the reason if not Apocalypse himself?

En Sabah Nur is innocent, trust me.
"Apocalypse" underperformed (but was a global hit anyway) because the X-Men embraced the comic book tone and flavour this time, and the movie was much less "grounded". This coupled with the fact that third chapters has always been bashed for the sake of it, see "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome".

The movie is wonderful. Critics just chose to demolish it in advance...

 

[SumT]

Lol at XMA underperforming because it was "comicbookie"
it underperformed because the general audience just wasnt hype with another prequel, period.

Dofp looked like an event, with an all stars cast (and original cast returning). Once Fox dropped the original cast and recasted with young X-Men (new faces to general audience), the hype dropped. That and the apocalypse first image that started poor word of mouth, and adding the so-so marketing, the opening weekend was really poor. It wasnt about the quality of the movie, because the audience goes on first weekend without really knowing how its the movie. There just wasnt hype that time around. Thats the key factor.

This movie doesnt have the hype of Dofp either. So whats the common factor of both XMA and DP?:

its a "prequel" movie with a young cast. So basically general audience is more interested in an adult X-Men cast, with all the familiar actors from the original trilogy. Its pretty simple, even if some fans try hard to dismiss the hype with the adult cast. But numbers are out there, cherie.

 

[Frankeh]

When even the actor trashed the experience you know they did the villain wrong. This should be a character fun to play.

En Sabah Nur was not accurate visually at all. It's 2019 and some are still pushing this idea? He was drawn as bulky and menacing. In the movie he's shorter than Magneto, come on.