Sequels X-Men Sequel (2017 film)

[X-Maniac]

I imagine logically they would want to keep Jlaw first and foremost because she has been mystique for the last 3 movies, aka keeping the same casting moving forward, but depending how much they want the character there they certainly could recast if they don't negotiate something with with Jlaw.

It's not as simple as wanting to 'keep the same cast going forward.'

All sorts of factors can influence the characters and casting of these films.

Emma Frost, Banshee, Azazel and also Angel Salvadore and Riptide were written out in DoFP despite expectation that at least some of those would be in the follow-up. After all, First Class ended with Magneto saying they would form their own society (a big hint at Genosha if ever there was one) and breaking Emma out of her cell.

Cyclops, Rogue and Mystique had limited and very concluding arcs in The Last Stand largely due to actor availability (and Ratner deciding he wanted someone to be shown taking the cure). Singer had tried to get many of the X-Men cast to join Superman Returns, but only James Marsden went for it. In addition, Nightcrawler was expected to feature in X3 but it was such a limited role that it was cut (and Alan Cumming said he did not like the make-up or get on with Singer).

So it's far from as simple as 'keeping the same cast going forward.'

Actor availability, the needs of the screenplay, and even editing (as with Rogue and Jubilee) can affect if someone is in a movie and how much they are in it.

If J-Law decides not to come back (she may be advised against it by her reps based on critical reception of XM:A which is now Time's worst movie of the year), they will handle it in some way. Maybe they will write her out. Maybe they will persuade her into a (cheaper) limited role by having Mystique undercover/in disguise as someone else (which would mean another actress for much of the movie).

I do think people blind themselves when it comes to the character and the actress in this respect because people ain't seeing it as the producers want the character involved they are seeing it as they are obviously forced to because its Jlaw and that seems more like a bias view of things.

And yet no one said bad things about Rebecca Romijn's portrayal. That's because she committed to the role and nailed it - after enduring about eight hours of make-up back then.

With J-Law, she doesn't have that commitment and it shows. That's on top of the very soft version of Mystique they have written (though i doubt J-Law could do the cold-blooded edgy malicious version Romijn showed us anyway). So neither the portrayal nor the casting seem very satisfying.

 

[NotNickFury]

If Mystique were to appear again, given how she looks to be helping guide this new X-Men team, the only capacity I could see for her is just guiding them from the mansion while they're out in the field...but the problem is you can do that exact same thing with Xavier.

 

[magneto23]

(she may be advised against it by her reps based on critical reception of XM:A which is now Time's worst movie of the year)

Really? If they wanted to take down a tent pole, they could have picked on Suicide Squad. It's not like that film wasn't a complete train wreck or anything.

 

[GuestStar2004]

If J-Law decides not to come back (she may be advised against it by her reps based on critical reception of XM:A which is now Time's worst movie of the year), they will handle it in some way. Maybe they will write her out. Maybe they will persuade her into a (cheaper) limited role by having Mystique undercover/in disguise as someone else (which would mean another actress for much of the movie).

There are many possibilities yeah, although if they recast they will simply recast they won't pretend she is hiding as someone else for a movie because whats the point of that?

As for changes between movies yeah its fair to say creative decisions change whats expected of a sequel but there will likely be a limit to that after 3 movies of set up and chances are that limit isn't going to be based on comic to screen fan expectation

And yet no one said bad things about Rebecca Romijn's portrayal. That's because she committed to the role and nailed it - after enduring about eight hours of make-up back then.

That would be ok if rebecca had the same sorta role and purpose, she would basically be mystique but played the same way she plays her librarians tv show character, so just watch that show but imagine her blue.

Although for the first 2 seasons of that show her characters wasn't all that well liked from what i can remember reading on imdb and she gets a fair bit of criticism for her acting also.

(though i doubt J-Law could do the cold-blooded edgy malicious version Romijn showed us anyway).

I dunno whether Jlaw could or not because i very much doubt she had that direction even in DOFP, heck I think it was empire magazine in 2014 that mentiond Jlaw suggested Mystique use a gun to wound someone or something like that for a certain action scene which bryan was apparently not fond of the idea but they filmed it anyway to try it out but it wasn't used.

Best guess they don't want mystique to be cold-blooded, they wanted to hint to that direction in DOFP where you could see she was heading that way but obviously they didn't want to turn her into that anymore.

I remember Jlaw was also disappointed she had no action in FC also but she had no choice in the matter.

 

[Stan Lee]

she may be advised against it by her reps based on critical reception of XM:A which is now Time's worst movie of the year

Who care about TIME? Saying its worse than 50 Shades of Black because it "wasted" actors made it lose all credibility. Do you know that was Florence Henderson last movie before she died? Did they see the role she was in? That was the worst waste of an actor in not only 2016 but in history.

 

[CyclopsSummers]

Agreed with henzzinit


Jennifer Lawrence sucked as Mystique

Mystique Romjin was the best one !!

with all due respect spider-man homecoming is making my case why X_Men
shouldn't be In MCU.fox should only make deal if MCU is rebooted.Now obviously marvel is starting to back away from having inhumans replace mutants.Tone is the biggest problems with having X-Men in MCU.plus they would force avengers characters Into X-Men films.

Agreed !! We constantly repeat that X-men cant fit with MCU. Quiksilver and Wanda are in Avengers as ihnumans, not as mutants, they are not Magneto's children

 

[Mike Murdock]

Agreed !! We constantly repeat that X-men cant fit with MCU. Quiksilver and Wanda are in Avengers as ihnumans, not as mutants, they are not Magneto's children

They aren't Magneto's children in the MCU (or, sadly, the MU), but they aren't Inhumans.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Its interesting to look at WB universe currently since i don't visit the WB forums so i dunno what the reaction is to alot of the decisions like [BLACKOUT]mixing the Doomsday story with BVS or jimmy olsan dying a few minutes in[/BLACKOUT] But like fox it doesn't seem like a universe that plays to any rules.

 

[def28]

2 wrongs don't make a right. Nobody was happy about the Jimmy Olsen thing, it was disrespectful.

DC needs to fix their problems just like Fox does. I do not want Gotham City Sirens going the way of Suicide Squad, I don't think anyone does.

 

[Erzengel]

I think as long as it's done well people will accept and praise deviations from the original. See X2(God Loves Man Kills), DOFP, Civil War, The Winter Soldier, Batman Begins (Year One) etc.

Meanwhile Dark Phoenix Saga, Weapon X, Doomsday, BvS (Dark Knight Returns) are examples when things aren't done right.

 

[NotNickFury]

And Dark Phoenix Saga could potentially be done wrong again so long as Kinberg is the one potentially writing, worse if he ends up directing as well.

 

[GuestStar2004]

And Dark Phoenix Saga could potentially be done wrong again so long as Kinberg is the one potentially writing, worse if he ends up directing as well.

In the long run it depends what "doing it wrong" is? as there is doing it wrong but doing it well and there is doing it wrong and doing it badly.

When people hear something is being adapted often they feel it can't be done unless its exactly like the source material but often that isn't the case, most the time its changed up in some way or another but that doesn't mean it can't be a good movie.

If you wanted to use DOFP as an example of a very different adaptation but one thats fairly well rated then there ya go.

 

[marvelrobbins]

And Dark Phoenix Saga could potentially be done wrong again so long as Kinberg is the one potentially writing, worse if he ends up directing as well.

I seriously doudt Kinberg will be directing next X-Men film.Him directing reshoots for FF was so fox could try to keep quiet how bad Trank actully
was.

I am sure fox will get another director to replace singer and work with kinberg.

 

[Legion]

In the long run it depends what "doing it wrong" is? as there is doing it wrong but doing it well and there is doing it wrong and doing it badly.

When people hear something is being adapted often they feel it can't be done unless its exactly like the source material but often that isn't the case, most the time its changed up in some way or another but that doesn't mean it can't be a good movie.

If you wanted to use DOFP as an example of a very different adaptation but one thats fairly well rated then there ya go.

I don't really consider DoFP to be very different though.

The DoFP story is about a dystopian future where mutants have been wiped out by Sentinels. An X-man travels back in time to prevent an assassination that triggers the event. That's just what the film was. The fact that they used different characters and time periods is kind of irrelevant.

Now if you had told me back in the early 2000s that Bryan Singer was helming a DoFP film I would have expected that the film wouldn't include time travel or sentinels. Xavier or Jean would have just had a vision of a catastrophe (kind of like in Apocalypse). Instead of sentinels it just would have been a reconstructed dark cerebro that could be used to kill all mutants or something that would have brought us back to alkali lake again. I would have called that a "very different adaptation".

What was really missing from the X3 adaptation for me that I consider it "wrong" is that it was missing key elements. There needed to be a faction that wanted to destroy Jean because of the danger she posed. The X-Men needed to be there to fight for her because they're her family and Cyclops needed to by her side until the end.

 

[Frankeh]

When people hear something is being adapted often they feel it can't be done unless its exactly like the source material but often that isn't the case, most the time its changed up in some way or another but that doesn't mean it can't be a good movie.

If you wanted to use DOFP as an example of a very different adaptation but one thats fairly well rated then there ya go.

Sure, but The Last Stand and Apocalypse are still a precedent of Kinberg doing an X-Men story all sorts of wrong, and DOFP is not comparable to TLS at all, it didn't make the struggle to stop the Sentinel future a sideplot, for starters.

Not to mention the bad movies he's written outnumber his good ones. If you want to be confident on him, good for you but don't force it on everyone else.

 

[Frankeh]

What was really missing from the X3 adaptation for me that I consider it "wrong" is that it was missing key elements. There needed to be a faction that wanted to destroy Jean because of the danger she posed. The X-Men needed to be there to fight for her because they're her family and Cyclops needed to by her side until the end.

She needed to be the main driving force of the plot, period. None of that cure stuff. Although admittedly, the cure fits in better with the grounded, non-fantastical tone and stories of the OT than Dark Phoenix, so maybe they should've waited. The point is they shouldn't have mixed them.

Ideally for me, the whole team should've been as you say conflicted about what to do with her because of the relationship each member has with her, although, as is the case with the current X-Men lineup, pre-The Last Stand the members hadn't been portrayed to be that close with her, we only saw her interact in a relaxed manner with Cyclops and Wolverine, we see no hint of friendship or otherwise with Storm, or Rogue, or Iceman, etc. As Endzone has said, outside of the romantically involved members, everyone seems to treat each other as acquantainces/co-workers at best.

And of course she should be going through her own trials as well. In TLS this is reduced to her briefly gaining control of herself in like two moments and saying "please kill me!", I mean damn. Not to mention, after they have her murder Cyclops and the Professor, no one gives a crap about her except for Logan.

All that said, I think it could've worked in the OT had they focused on Jean's struggle and the X-Men's (not just Logan) dilemma over what is right to do with her. Whether the Hellfire Club or Magneto wanted to gain control of her could've been secondary, just to add meat to the plot, just like having to find Quicksilver and breaking Magneto out of prison in DOFP, not necessary (the point was to stop Mystique), but it worked to add meat and conflict, or in the case of Quicksilver, simply spectacle.

 

[Stan Lee]

Sure, but The Last Stand and Apocalypse are still a precedent of Kinberg doing an X-Men story all sorts of wrong, and DOFP is not comparable to TLS at all, it didn't make the struggle to stop the Sentinel future a sideplot, for starters.

Not to mention the bad movies he's written outnumber his good ones. If you want to be confident on him, good for you but don't force it on everyone else.

A lot of the bad decisions made in The Last Stand were made by Studio Executives at the time. The cure plot, Scott's death, Jean not being god-like, etc.

As far as Apocalypse being a X-Men story goes: its pretty much an Apocalypse story come to life. Perhaps too much, as it even had some of its flaws.

 

[EnDz0n3]

In other news, Michael Dougherty (X2) is directing the new Godzilla film. Good for him.

 

[marvelrobbins]

A lot of the bad decisions made in The Last Stand were made by Studio Executives at the time. The cure plot, Scott's death, Jean not being god-like, etc.

As far as Apocalypse being a X-Men story goes: its pretty much an Apocalypse story come to life. Perhaps too much, as it even had some of its flaws.

Exactly right.although people should remember the X-Men films use the ultimate version of jean for phoenix.

Apocalypse is very true to being an apocalypse story.it's influenced heavily by fall of mutants.some don't want to admit that.

Lots of problems from last stand and origins comes from tom rothman's time running fox.

Kinberg isn't the best writer we can all agree on that.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

This is basically what I want from a new X-Men movie:

Continuity reboot or not, I think they could treat the next X-Men movie as a fresh start, like a relaunch, or a new #1.

Tap into the appeal of the iconic 90's run (the highest selling comic of all time). Get the 90's costumes, lineup, and tone exactly right. Recast Xavier if need be (Ralph Fiennes?) and Wolverine, who's already on the team, just a minor character who mostly shows up in action scenes, wearing the mask. He should have a thing for Storm too, not Jean this time around. Beast should always be blue. Who cares if Hoult comes back. Mystique doesn't need to be there. Nor does Quicksilver. It's years later. No explanation needed.

To signify a fresh start, call the movie "X-Men: Next Evolution", "X-Men: Reborn" or simply "The X-Men". Don't use the old title fonts or musical themes. Instead use a variation of the cartoon theme. And get a new director. Someone like a Justin Lin with really slick visuals and fresh sensibilities.

Have Sinister as the mastermind, with Omega Red as a henchman and Proteus as his weapon. Have Gambit and Rogue come to the mansion at the start the film, bringing a warning about Sinister's plot. Scott, who was ready to propose to Jean, finds out his own relation to Sinister, complicating things. Gambit and Scott don't get along and have different ideas about how to deal with Sinister.

 

[psylockolussus]

That is never gonna happen. The GA is aware that the ones that would appear in the 90s are just the younger version of the X-Men that we saw at the end of X-Men. Probably no Wolverine. Then will Fox recast Rogue when we already saw Rogue in her teen years in X1 and that Anna was in Dofp? Then there's Channing who looks much older than the younger version of Jean and company.

Also, the 90s setting wouldn't benefit the story. It surely didn't help apocalypse with its 80s setting. You want the classic line-up without retconning anything. A reboot is the only answer for that.

 

[Stan Lee]

The only reason Apocalypse was set in the 80s is because the X-Men started out as a team of teens in the comics.

 

[psylockolussus]

Actually in the comics, it was the 60s.

 

[Stan Lee]

In the films the X-Men were teens during the 80s.

 

[psylockolussus]

You said the comics. Though I do get the reason of wanting to see a film with the teen version of Storm, Cyke and Jean but a trilogy? That is just too much. Go back to the present you know where there's more established characters like Icemsn, Rogue, Kitty, Colossus, Deadpool, Domino, Cable and even X-23.