Dark Phoenix X-Men: Dark Phoenix News and Speculation Thread - Part 9

[Legion]

To be fair The Wolverine came after Origins. And this first Wolverine solo movie left a very bad taste for the audience, and that movie had a few fan favorites. Also Jean, Eric and Charles were only cameos and if I remember correctly only Jean was used to help promote the movie.



DoFP was a great movie and the great reviews certainly helped. But FC had great reviews too. I think it's quite undeniable that the "crossover appeal" played a huge role in DoFP box office sucess.

And about what you said about Paquin, Berry and Cudmore... no, I don't think they can guarantee box office sucess, but don't underestimate the characters they were playing and how beloved they are. FOX actually made an alternative version of the movie and named it the Rogue Cut.

The "crossover appeal". That's one way to describe the reason for DoFP's success. Another would be to say that it featured the actual X-Men and not just the founder or the familiar villains. The future scenes also made it seem more like a sequel to X3 rather than just a straight up prequel like First Class and Apocalypse.

 

[EnDz0n3]

X-Men has never really resonated with the American audience.

I agree with BMM. This is totally revisionist history.

In 2000 in the US, X-men made the most money opening weekend for a non sequel. I remember this little trivia because Mission Impossible II, a sequel, made $3Million more it's opening weekend, 2 months prior. In 2003 in the US, X2 made $85Million which was a fairly big number back then (still is today). In 2006 in the US, X3 (with horrendous reviews) made over $100Million it's opening weekend.

The previous trilogy broke all kinds of records during its time. They were kinda a big deal...

People on here are so ready to give a pass (read: excuses) for First Class' and Apocalypse's failure at the box office that they are willing to downplay how well the previous trilogy has done at the US box office.

The Wolverine has Logan & Jean (and Professor X + Magneto cameo).

They didn't even advertise Professor X and Magneto's cameo.

Logan has Logan & Professor X.

LOL why would you even include this here? Logan made $230Million in the US alone, $88Million on it's opening weekend.

 

[Ryan1210]

LOL why would you even include this here? Logan made $230Million in the US alone, $88Million on it's opening weekend.

But it only made 616 mil or something at ww box office.

I got all of your points but I don't think X-Men: Apocalypse with the original cast would even cross 600 or 700 mil. Poor marketing, bad reviews 2 weeks before its premiere iirc. It just can't.

 

[kevork89]

I agree with BMM. This is totally revisionist history.

In 2000 in the US, X-men made the most money opening weekend for a non sequel. I remember this little trivia because Mission Impossible II, a sequel, made $3Million more it's opening weekend, 2 months prior. In 2003 in the US, X2 made $85Million which was a fairly big number back then (still is today). In 2006 in the US, X3 (with horrendous reviews) made over $100Million it's opening weekend.

The previous trilogy broke all kinds of records during its time. They were kinda a big deal...

People on here are so ready to give a pass (read: excuses) for First Class' and Apocalypse's failure at the box office that they are willing to downplay how well the previous trilogy has done at the US box office.

I don’t think X-Men was that record breaking when you compare it to Spider-Man trilogy at the same time. And again X-Men has never gotten to any of the same heights as Spider-Man, all Marvel properties and Batman. I’m not taking away any credit from X-Men but I still stand by the fact that X-Men hasn’t resonated with American audiences as much as all the other major comic book franchises. And also the international market was smaller back then. X-Men’s international markets are stronger overall then domestic. Also the first X-Men was a different type of comic book movie, the appeal for it was coming off of the sci fi boost that Matrix brought and the animated series nostalgia.

I definitely think Marvel can turn around the X-Men franchise and turn it into bigger profits but they’re smarter and will handle the property better then Fox.

 

[Electrix]

2000 - 2006 was a different time. An X-Men trilogy + Wolverine spin-offs made business sense because by the time X3 rolled around the cast was so damn expensive. An X4 & X5 could have been just as big as X3 at the box office, maybe even more so, but cast salary would have eaten into profits. Hence throwing money at Hugh Jackman for Wolverine solo adventures and hoping for similar returns. It finally did with Logan.

Marvel learned from this and got actors in 5-9 movie contracts from the beginning. The cast bill is still huge (Downey Jr. getting $50+ million for The Avengers) but because they've built up momentum it pays off at the box office (and merchandise sales which Fox doesn't benefit as much from).

X-Men could have been an inter-connected movie universe spanning 18 years with spin-offs and team-up movies, but that just wasn't the norm back then. Marvel broke the mold and Fox are playing catch-up now.

Fox has an opportunity with Dark Phoenix. If they can't improve basic things such as giving characters individual costume then I'll be fully be on-board the Marvel reboot train.

 

[Aximili86]

X-Men has never resonated in America? What the hell? Lay off the giggle-juice there, buster.

 

[marvelrobbins]

The "crossover appeal". That's one way to describe the reason for DoFP's success. Another would be to say that it featured the actual X-Men and not just the founder or the familiar villains. The future scenes also made it seem more like a sequel to X3 rather than just a straight up prequel like First Class and Apocalypse.

apocalypse was not a prequel.fox "rebooted" with time travel by erasing original trilogy as well as most of origins and the wolverine.a prequel means you take place before film or tv and led into it.star wars episodes 1-3,rogue one,underworld rise of the lycans,star trek enterprise,first class,origins are
prequels.apocalypse isn't.

 

[marvelrobbins]

2000 - 2006 was a different time. An X-Men trilogy + Wolverine spin-offs made business sense because by the time X3 rolled around the cast was so damn expensive. An X4 & X5 could have been just as big as X3 at the box office, maybe even more so, but cast salary would have eaten into profits. Hence throwing money at Hugh Jackman for Wolverine solo adventures and hoping for similar returns. It finally did with Logan.

Marvel learned from this and got actors in 5-9 movie contracts from the beginning. The cast bill is still huge (Downey Jr. getting $50+ million for The Avengers) but because they've built up momentum it pays off at the box office (and merchandise sales which Fox doesn't benefit as much from).

X-Men could have been an inter-connected movie universe spanning 18 years with spin-offs and team-up movies, but that just wasn't the norm back then. Marvel broke the mold and Fox are playing catch-up now.

Fox has an opportunity with Dark Phoenix. If they can't improve basic things such as giving characters individual costume then I'll be fully be on-board the Marvel reboot train.

you do realize oriignal trilogy and origins had merchandize to help promate the films.since 2010 marvel has been doing all possable to bury x-men since fox had live action rights.

because of the murdocks,iger,and feige dark phoenix is ilrelvent except as final full x-men fr fans of xmcu.reboot is happening anyway.by june 2019 inless government steps in disney buys fox then donner then whenever
feige decides to use x-men donner gets meaningless executive producer credit and everyone else gets pinkslip when X-men is rebooted.

 

[marvelrobbins]

edit

 

[Flint Marko]

The X-men have clearly resonated with American audiences. That’s a ridiculous statement.

However, basically every other superhero franchise has resonated more.... and therein lies the problem.

 

[1627523]

by taking away akk the prejudice allegary,drama,and uniquness about x-men and turning them comedic so regie-men will make money at box office.

people around here who maoned on fox making changes will cheer on all the changes feige makes to fit avengers comedic universe.reaction to mcu films starting with homeocming prove this.and anyone online who critizes the marvel brand will be attacked like those who critzed last jedi.

dude i think u need calm down. Your borderline trolling. I doubt feige will make them super comedic, but that said i do like the tone of the FOX movies more than the average MCU one. I think FOX has set the bar for a good balance of comedy and drama that i think no other comic book franchise has reached but thats just my opinion.

 

[marvelrobbins]

edit

 

[marvelrobbins]

dude i think u need calm down. Your borderline trolling. I doubt feige will make them super comedic, but that said i do like the tone of the FOX movies more than the average MCU one. I think FOX has set the bar for a good balance of comedy and drama that i think no other comic book franchise has reached but thats just my opinion.

i am trolling but psy isn't ok then.

feige's track record says otherwise.if it is ok for people to declare dark phoenix failure based on simon kinberg's track record then i can make judgements based on feige's.and because of that dark phoenix will be last full x-men film to have a lot of drama.

it's funny how some think i should be happy with end of xmcu.

 

[SumT]

But it only made 616 mil or something at ww box office.

I got all of your points but I don't think X-Men: Apocalypse with the original cast would even cross 600 or 700 mil. Poor marketing, bad reviews 2 weeks before its premiere iirc. It just can't.

simple: general audience knows more the original cast, since its a much bigger roster, so one way or another, general viewers is more familiar with the likes of Hugh, Halle, Anna, James, Patrick, Ellen and co.

and isnt it ironic how you say Logan with just Hugh and Patrick made "616 mil", yet all the cast together, which means Hugh and Patrick MORE HAlle, Famke, James, Anna, Kelsey, Ellen and co. wouldnt make more?

yeah, sure. 2 actors make more than 600, but a bigger cast with even more familiar faces wouldnt make 700. Apply some logic, mate.

if Apocalypse had the present day X-Men, half the movie wouldnt be the same because Singer wouldnt have spent 40 min introducing young versions and their origins, neither Mystique would be leading the team.

So: a different movie would have had different trailers and different marketing, with different faces on posters and spots, aka, more familiarity, aka more interest from general audience.

common sense its needed. Hugh, Halle, Anna, James, Ellen, Shawn, Kelsey, Patrick... sells more than Sophie, Tye, Kodi, Alexandra. (as much as I love them). Its called basic logic.

 

[Legion]

apocalypse was not a prequel.fox "rebooted" with time travel by erasing original trilogy as well as most of origins and the wolverine.a prequel means you take place before film or tv and led into it.star wars episodes 1-3,rogue one,underworld rise of the lycans,star trek enterprise,first class,origins are
prequels.apocalypse isn't.

I know what was intended with DoFP. It didn't work though and they squandered the potential. They went right back to familiar territory where we had to learn how Xavier lost his hair, how Storm's hair turned white, that Wolverine still got his adamantium from Stryker, etc. That's a prequel.

If you hadn't seen DoFP and you watched Apocalypse, you would view it as a prequel to the original films. The only head scratcher would be Mystique leading the X-Men at the end.

 

[kevork89]

The X-men have clearly resonated with American audiences. That’s a ridiculous statement.

However, basically every other superhero franchise has resonated more.... and therein lies the problem.

Yes you’re correct. That’s what I’m meaning to say. X-Men has consistently come behind everything else and it’s due to the way Fox have handled the properties that’s for sure. But I think Marvel will change that.

 

[EnDz0n3]

I don’t think X-Men was that record breaking when you compare it to Spider-Man trilogy at the same time.

Raimi's trilogy is in the upper echelon when one talks about Hollywood franchises. So of course the X-men franchise would lose out to it

Doesn't take away from the FACT that the first X-men trilogy was still a big deal back then and broke box office records before the Spidey films broke those records. Yes the X-men films had (and still do have) terrible legs at the box office, but without fail, AMERICAN (and Canadian) audiences still showed up in droves that opening weekend.

In 2000, in 2003, in 2006 the X-men films were always in the top 10 Top Grossing films in the US.

So how were they not "resonat[ing] with the American audiences?"

And again X-Men has never gotten to any of the same heights as Spider-Man, all Marvel properties and Batman. I’m not taking away any credit from X-Men but I still stand by the fact that X-Men hasn’t resonated with American audiences as much as all the other major comic book franchises.

I bet more tickets were sold in the US for those early X-men films than most early MCU movies.

And also the international market was smaller back then. X-Men’s international markets are stronger overall then domestic.

That's most franchises today...

I definitely think Marvel can turn around the X-Men franchise and turn it into bigger profits but they’re smarter and will handle the property better then Fox.

This we can both agree on.

 

[Lip]

Since we're talking about BO and critical success and how Studios should be handling that...

I haven't seen Black Panther yet, I intend watching this week, but the enormous critical success and massive box office opening, it really set the bar high for Marvel Studios. It isn't a secret that there was a lot of creative control over Marvel, and it isn't a secret either that things started to change with both Guardians of Galaxy movies and also Thor Ragnarok, and there was a huge pay off. Now there is this impressive (and positive in so many ways) success of Black Panther that it makes me wonder about the future of MCU movies.

Although I believe there will still be a little more creative control over a huge property like the X-Men, I am happy that Guardians, Thor 3 and Black Panther are paving the way for a very interesting future.

 

[Tymminator]

Edit.

 

[Davidstorm]

Clearly saying that x-men does not have a large audience in the US, it's something wrong.
the franchise has a good audience
I think the question that should be discussed is why it seems to have a local limit at the box office
in my view, was the wrong strategy of fox, I think every world knows that, x-men is a franchise with great characters, who have never had opportunities to film solo, logically make only films of main characters of a group, creates more public for the next film of this team, fox never bothered to do this, fox's logic is / was to make team films to try to create audience for the next wolverine movie, did not bother making movies for the well-known "xmen team ' , without a shadow of a doubt that limited the franchise locally, because the fox was in an eternal loop of fixing mistakes and trying to strengthen single character, currently we are seeing new super hero franchises doing what fox should have done, and achieving great results, it is only now fox seems to be starting to follow the strategy ..

 

[psylockolussus]

simple: general audience knows more the original cast, since its a much bigger roster, so one way or another, general viewers is more familiar with the likes of Hugh, Halle, Anna, James, Patrick, Ellen and co.

and isnt it ironic how you say Logan with just Hugh and Patrick made "616 mil", yet all the cast together, which means Hugh and Patrick MORE HAlle, Famke, James, Anna, Kelsey, Ellen and co. wouldnt make more?

yeah, sure. 2 actors make more than 600, but a bigger cast with even more familiar faces wouldnt make 700. Apply some logic, mate.

if Apocalypse had the present day X-Men, half the movie wouldnt be the same because Singer wouldnt have spent 40 min introducing young versions and their origins, neither Mystique would be leading the team.

So: a different movie would have had different trailers and different marketing, with different faces on posters and spots, aka, more familiarity, aka more interest from general audience.

common sense its needed. Hugh, Halle, Anna, James, Ellen, Shawn, Kelsey, Patrick... sells more than Sophie, Tye, Kodi, Alexandra. (as much as I love them). Its called basic logic.

Oh absolutely!

 

[Lip]

in my view, was the wrong strategy of fox, I think every world knows that, x-men is a franchise with great characters, who have never had opportunities to film solo, logically make only films of main characters of a group, creates more public for the next film of this team, fox never bothered to do this, fox's logic is / was to make team films to try to create audience for the next wolverine movie, did not bother making movies for the well-known "xmen team ' , without a shadow of a doubt that limited the franchise locally, because the fox was in an eternal loop of fixing mistakes and trying to strengthen single character, currently we are seeing new super hero franchises doing what fox should have done, and achieving great results, it is only now fox seems to be starting to follow the strategy ..

If you're talking about investing in new franchises like Deadpool, New Mutants and the (weird) new projects like Gambit, Multiple Man and Kitty Pryde, then yes, I think they're startiing a new strategy. Now if you're talking about turning the X-Men movies into real ensamble and investing in different characters, then no.

For the X-Men films they don't follow the "every character has potential" strategy. They follow the "the contract our stars will end soon, what do we do now?" strategy.

 

[Sithborg]

The X-men have clearly resonated with American audiences. That’s a ridiculous statement.

However, basically every other superhero franchise has resonated more.... and therein lies the problem.

Why is it a problem? If the movies are profitable, then what is the issue if they aren't hitting a billion per movie?

 

[psylockolussus]

The X-Men used to be the top dogs. One of the factors that Fox leaned on making cheaper films in the recent years is they know they wouldn't earn much profit from making films with a budget of above $150 million. Especially after the debacle that was X-Men Apocalypse.

Deadpool was made on the cheap and the fan reaction to the leaked test footage triggered production, not because Fox was so confident with what they have. Hugh Jackman had his salary cut just so the film would proceed with Rated R content. New Mutants look hella cheap. Gambit can't start production and the budget is probably one of the factors. Kitty and Jamie probably won't be made over $100 million.

In an era in which, Gotg, Black Panther, Ant-Man and Dr. Strange are out grossing X-Men and getting a production budget of $140 to $200 million. Fox relying on Low budgeted spin offs is a sad realization that the property won't fully flourish under Fox.

 

[def28]

The argument for that has been they have not been using their true potential plus losing (not gaining) their audience since X3 in America.

For example people want to see Rogue, a Rogue that fights and has her known attitude will sell more then a Rogue that does not for obvious reasons. Pretend they did that for Wonder Woman, the results would not be the same. Taking away character traits and their powerful abilities that are a staple to the franchise removes one of the most marketable and beloved aspects.

I think most believe X-Men can hit those high numbers if the treatment of these characters is handled stronger and show why they have gained a fanbase and are respected in the first place. Or at least until they do that we will never know. It worked for Deadpool, Black Panther, Wonder Woman etc and a majority of other properties.

So why wouldn't this be the case with X-Men? Or why would it be an issue to bring to the screen what these characters have to offer. Obviously circling around Prof X, Mystique and Magneto over and over will not bring in audiences or sell the tickets this series was prior.