X-Men: The Paragon Factor

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

So here’s me getting in really early on a movie…

 

Since Q4 last year, Marvel have been taking open script pitches for a new X-Men flick. So far, nobody has been appointed; and Marvel needs an out and out hit.
 

If I’m already disappointed in this, it’s simply because the release date is supposed to be already scheduled and marketing budgeted, without even a concept in place. That seems… unwise.

 

So if you fancied giving it a go…

…what would you do? 
Would you adapt a classic arc or do something completely new? Who would be in your squad, your leads, and your antagonist(s)?

Edited March 24 by ThaOGDreamWeaver

[Ghost]

I’ve always thought the best way to go was to plan out a 6 movie arc.

The first 3 featuring the original members.  
The fourth would kick off with the originals having disappeared between the 3rd and 4th movie - forcing Prof X to put together a new team - basically a reimagining of Giant Sized #1.  With a different villain of course (a living island just isn’t going to cut it).

 

 

 

[BrandX]

Just remember, whatever they do, they're likely to mess it up.  😛

[Techwright]

On 3/24/2024 at 1:02 PM, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

Since Q4 last year, Marvel have been taking open script pitches for a new X-Men flick. So far, nobody has been appointed; and Marvel needs an out and out hit.

 

This is for MCU?  Not an unrelated function like The New Mutants or X-Men '97?

 

Assuming MCU...wow...they're this far along, past bringing X-men back to the fold and they don't have a plan?

 

As to what I'd do, one of the defining factors of an epic is that the story starts in the middle.  While we've not actually seen a live action X-men that started with purely the original team, and I'd love to see that, we don't really need to.  It can be reference in wall photos and flashback bits.  So, start in the middle, preferrably with an incoming character.  Someone without insider knowledge to act as a surrogate for the audience's discoveries.  I strongly suggest this be a character not yet seen in live action.  The X-men mythos is huge as is their roster.  It's time other characters got a chance to show.  Jubilee would be a natural, stepping in for the "new kid" role that Rogue occupied in X1.  Gambit would be an important one to consider.  He's been seen before, in a shoddy interpretation in the forgettable Wolverine film, so we've never seen him proper, and at one time he was the second most popular X-men character besides Wolverine.  Not sure if its still true, but he's likely the biggest name not to have a proper live screen appearance as an X-man (this is assuming he wasn't in Age of Apocalypse or the Dark Phoenix movies, the two of which I avoided after seeing the reviews). I also have a soft spot for Dazzler, probably due to the old coin-op game, and would love to see her given a proper due.

 

However, I think Bishop is probably the one to kick off an epic in the middle.  Start with a future firefight and Bishop diving through time to change things.  This grabs the audience's attention and sets stakes high early on: can we change that terrible future?  Discovering the steps to succeeding at that (not just a single act) will be a driving force behind the X-men story as battle-hardened Bishop tries to adapt to "quiet" in the decades before his firefight, while prodding the past to action.  Complicating matters is that with each small change, he's less sure of the results and the next steps, so long as he's stuck in the past.  Xavier recognizes Bishop's truth (how could a mind reader not) and decides the original members are not enough to fight the future.  He begins recruiting the second team based on the fragments of information regarding others that Bishop's memories can offer. (This gets us past the obstacle of a living island being what forces a new team to emerge.) The memories of future selves being compelling, this will allow a team to coalesce from people he'd normally not recruit, such as Rogue and Gambit, due to their criminal pasts, and Wolverine, due to his violent nature and Weapon X past.  Harder will be trying to convince old foes, namely Magneto but others too, to strive for a common cause without turning on humans due to future info, and thus creating the self-fulfilling nightmare scenario they're trying to avoid. Some may see reason, many will not, and their own agendas will act as a counter to the efforts to change the future. This played out through several movies (and likely Disney+ series) will be driving towards the X-men's version of Infinity War/Endgame, with each small change over time acting the equivalent of Dr. Strange surrendering the Time Stone in an effort to set the Avengers on the single path to victory.  Yes, there'll be a war, but it might just be winnable.

 

EDIT:  Whatever X-men's Endgame ends like would set stage for the next saga. Possibilities:

•   Infinity War introduced outer space to the Avengers (not Guardians of the Galaxy of course), so X-men's culmination movie might introduce the Dark Phoenix as a possible Deus Ex Machina, but that will be a siren call to the Shi'ar Empire.
•   X-men's Endgame kills Xavier and awakens/draws the attention of Apocalypse, starting a new saga as an adaptation of the Age of Apocalypse (the comics arc, not the movie).  Bishop's efforts did change the future, but replacing one of a robot ragnarok with a genetic war.  Without Xavier, it will be Magneto who leads the fight, resulting in a darker, more violent effort to change the timeline once more.
•  X-men's Endgame catches the attention of one Mr. Essex who will see the Summers family as the key to unlocking the next stage of mutant evolution resulting in an arc where Mr. Sinister is the threat and the Summers family faces potential disaster.

 

I'd also add, if they bring Disney+ into this, it would be quite possible to bring other X groups to the public, such as X-Factor or X-calibur.  Like Guardians joining Avengers, these groups would join the main X-men in the big showdown.

 

 

Edited March 27 by Techwright
Grammatical corrections

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

5 hours ago, Techwright said:

Assuming MCU...wow...they're this far along, past bringing X-men back to the fold and they don't have a plan?

Yes. There are varied dates on the rumour mill for a movie, but Thanksgiving 2025 was one of them - which would be one hell of a rush if true.

 

This isn't entirely Kevin or anyone's fault. I sometimes talk boringly about the biz side of things, but one of the pressures the Mouse is under right now is a chap called Nelson Peltz. He is a high-profile "activist investor" - someone who deliberately stirs around companies to extract "shareholder value", ie dividends or increased stock price - and is less than shy about trashing the management publicly and privately to get their way. If he succeeds in persuading shareholders to vote two of his minions onto the Disney board, expect some major changes, quite a lot of sell-offs, and Disney a much leaner but lesser company afterwards.

 

Amongst many, many other things, he has started to Have Opinions about what kind of movies Marvel should be making. I'll admit he's not wrong that Marvel have had a pretty awful run of form at the box office the last few times out, but I'd focus on... well... poor story choices and rushed development, rather than... erm... casting choices. Making better movies, with plot, and characters, and heart and soul, would get better results.

 

It's possible that they'll begin the crossover in the Secret Wars arc, assuming that the DPvWolvie movie doesn't rewrite canon of its own accord, or in another Marvels movie: and given the Kang Dynasty has come to an abrupt end, anything could happen. 

 

I do like the idea of Jubilee and/or Gambit as your "introducing the audience" focus characters. I'm assuming there are some expectations (audience and otherwise) that Wolvie will be in it somewhere, though probably not Hugh. Kamala has also been flagged as a mutant, first half-jokingly, then as canon. I'd quite like to see them pull in some really leftfield ones as well, like X-Stacy, Sunspot or Honey Badger.

[BrandX]

30 minutes ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

Yes. There are varied dates on the rumour mill for a movie, but Thanksgiving 2025 was one of them - which would be one hell of a rush if true.

 

This isn't entirely Kevin or anyone's fault. I sometimes talk boringly about the biz side of things, but one of the pressures the Mouse is under right now is a chap called Nelson Peltz. He is a high-profile "activist investor" - someone who deliberately stirs around companies to extract "shareholder value", ie dividends or increased stock price - and is less than shy about trashing the management publicly and privately to get their way. If he succeeds in persuading shareholders to vote two of his minions onto the Disney board, expect some major changes, quite a lot of sell-offs, and Disney a much leaner but lesser company afterwards.

 

Amongst many, many other things, he has started to Have Opinions about what kind of movies Marvel should be making. I'll admit he's not wrong that Marvel have had a pretty awful run of form at the box office the last few times out, but I'd focus on... well... poor story choices and rushed development, rather than... erm... casting choices. Making better movies, with plot, and characters, and heart and soul, would get better results.

 

It's possible that they'll begin the crossover in the Secret Wars arc, assuming that the DPvWolvie movie doesn't rewrite canon of its own accord, or in another Marvels movie: and given the Kang Dynasty has come to an abrupt end, anything could happen. 

 

I do like the idea of Jubilee and/or Gambit as your "introducing the audience" focus characters. I'm assuming there are some expectations (audience and otherwise) that Wolvie will be in it somewhere, though probably not Hugh. Kamala has also been flagged as a mutant, first half-jokingly, then as canon. I'd quite like to see them pull in some really leftfield ones as well, like X-Stacy, Sunspot or Honey Badger.

 

I don't know.  Casting choices has started to make me think twice 😛

 

But yes...Gambit and Jubilee AND they can become the new IT couple in MCU!  *continues to ship these two*

[Ghost]

22 minutes ago, BrandX said:

 

I don't know.  Casting choices has started to make me think twice 😛

 

But yes...Gambit and Jubilee AND they can become the new IT couple in MCU!  *continues to ship these two*

Unfortunately his comments weren’t about specific actors/actresses.  

It was more about Black Panther and The Marvels having a lack of “diversity” in a strange sort of way.

[BrandX]

8 minutes ago, Ghost said:

Unfortunately his comments weren’t about specific actors/actresses.  

It was more about Black Panther and The Marvels having a lack of “diversity” in a strange sort of way.

 

o.O  The Marvels (and I enjoy the movie and have watched it multiple times) did not lack for diversity.  So I would want to know what he was smoking.

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

1 hour ago, BrandX said:

So I would want to know what he was smoking.

Probably a cigar made from the dried and rolled leaves of stolen human lives, like most billionaire investors.*

 

EDIT: reminds me of one of my favourite gags from The Mentalist:

PAT: ...surely you don't think she's a witch?

KIM: If dark forces did exist, stands to reason there could be people who control them for their own ends.

PAT: They're called investment bankers, and they don't live around here, I assure you.

 

Being in startups, I know two billionaires realtime. And yes, one's a bit of a pillock with a taste - or lack thereof - for sparkly things he likes to own but not use: and the other is a genuinely terrifying character I don't like being in the company of for multiple reasons. Neither shows an interest in the appropriate things I feel they should be doing, such as donating to hospitals, helping out the arts, building new technology, or patrolling the streets of London in high-tech armour while nursing multiple psychoses. Though given how scary the latter one is, I think he might make a fine Joker or Kingpin.

 

And m'learned coll' Ghost is correct, I was just trying not to use the "W" word.

 

_{*bonus points if you know that reference}

 

Edited March 26 by ThaOGDreamWeaver

[InvaderStych]

Unpopular opinion in ...

3 ...

2 ...

1 ...

 

As long as production executives keep trying to replicate the multi-property/multi-year arc that culminated in Endgame/Infinity War they're basically doomed to fail. Trying to do so with X-Men is an exercise in futility. Despite the comics being ripe with characters and intermingling arcs, the effort will be forever doomed to death by comparison. Even if they pulled off something amazing, John and Jane Q. Public is still going to feel shorted; nostalgia for the first time through the ride simply being too strong for any amount of writing talent, technical acumen, performance perfection, or narrative deftness to overcome.

 

For the time being they'd be much better served with deep-dive one-offs in various story lines existing in a shared narrative universe that only hints at co-mingling through subtlety.

 

As for what I'd do?

 

Years ago I had a notion about Longshot (yeah, I always loved that character, Fight Me) portrayed in late-middle age from an angle more allegorical than literal, then leaning so hard into the surreal nature of the MojoVerse as to be a borderline Dadaist exploration of the nature of modern media madness.

 

What did you expect from the guy who's hands-down, by-far, no-competition favorite adaptation to date is Legion?

 

But the moment for that has most likely passed for [Reasons].

 

Edited March 26 by InvaderStych

[UltraAlt]

On 3/24/2024 at 1:02 PM, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

adapt a classic arc

 

Is the way that I would always go.

 

18 hours ago, BrandX said:

Just remember, whatever they do, they're likely to mess it up.  😛

 

... because "they" always think that what made the comics popular isn't as important as "modernizing" and "selling" the movie to a general audience.

 

I would seriously like to see a classic comic movie done with everything from a series of comics done as it was done in the comics.

Keep all the scripting and action from the comic ... and, then ... add in extra embellishment and dialog.

In general, I have this feeling about retcons as well. The original were popular because the readers enjoyed them.

Back when I was actively seeking out comics in the early days (early for me at least) -either on the "Hey, Kids! Comics!" or in a comic book store -, there wasn't polybagging, hologram cards, multiple covers, restarts to sell issue #1's, etc. Comics sold because people were interested in the story, characters, and/or the cover looked cool.

 

 

To me, there seems to be far too much "adulting" of superheroes in movies ... and, it appears, in comic books in general these days (if not, simply deconstruction which to me is a juvenile attempt at "adulting" superheroes. It is always easier "to tear something down" than it is to "build something up")

The flashy colors in comics were to promote sales which were targeted at adolescents and not adults.

X-men under Chris Clairmont was highly targeted toward pointing out the prejudice of people toward those that are "different", how those that are "different" deal with that prejudice, and how that prejudice against those that are "different" is a villain that has to be confronted.

 

[Coming back to insert this: In effect, how as a "nerdy" kid that reads comics am I to deal with the dressers, jocks, and bullies in the "in crowd"? - aka how do I deal with being an outsider (mutant)?]

 

They tried to handle this in some of the X-men movies, but I think they were off-target because they "think" they know what's "better" than the original.

I do think that the X-men movies were enjoyable and some of the better superhero movies out there (However, I have not enjoyed the handling of Dark Phoenix in the movies. Far too truncated and far too retconned for my tastes ... Dark Phoenix was a slow-boil thing in comics. plenty of foreshadowing for a long time before the ultimate solar system - if not galaxy spanning - confrontation.)

 

I didn't really know where I was going with this, but it seems to be rounding out to pointing to a storyline with Sentinels in it. We have seen the advancement in Kaiju films - the technology can do a good job on Sentinels at this point. I would definitely think a Sentinels storyline should stretch out over at least two movies. 1) so that the first one can have a cliffhanger and 2) so that the VFX (hopefully, used properly for abbreviation purests) could be used over the course of 2 or more films for budgetary concerns.

Edited March 26 by UltraAlt

[Techwright]

On 3/26/2024 at 8:21 AM, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

...and given the Kang Dynasty has come to an abrupt end, anything could happen. 

 

I do like the idea of Jubilee and/or Gambit as your "introducing the audience" focus characters. I'm assuming there are some expectations (audience and otherwise) that Wolvie will be in it somewhere, though probably not Hugh. ...

 

I still hold out hope, futile though it may be, that they'll let the boil cool then recast the character of Kang, perhaps tightening their story in the process.  They did it successfully with Hulk, and with Rhodey, it can be done again.

 

Hugh has been phenomenal, but reality being what it is, it is time to pass the torch.  Wolvie (Logan movie aside) is a slow ager, and Hugh is not.  I've heard people pitch Daniel Radcliffe for the role, though I believe it is just fan wishes.  Radcliffe is 5 ft 5 in. (1.651 meters) which is definitely moving in the right direction from Hugh's 6 ft 2 in.  (1.88 meters), but just a bit taller than Wolverine's bantam 5 ft 3 inches (1.6 meters).

 

On 3/26/2024 at 8:52 AM, BrandX said:

 

I don't know.  Casting choices has started to make me think twice 😛

 

Frankly, I wish all casting everywhere were done on the basis of who best inhabits the role, not on the basis of Who's Who.  Some of the greatest actors rose to fame from being little known or completely unknown before being cast in a major role because they were the perfect choice.  While I'll always enjoy seeing a favorite actor take on a new role, I really enjoy going into a movie knowing an unknown cast was used.  It'd be like holding a pack of rookie sports cards:  Who among these will demonstrate their worth and become the breakout star?

[BrandX]

8 hours ago, Techwright said:

 

I still hold out hope, futile though it may be, that they'll let the boil cool then recast the character of Kang, perhaps tightening their story in the process.  They did it successfully with Hulk, and with Rhodey, it can be done again.

 

Hugh has been phenomenal, but reality being what it is, it is time to pass the torch.  Wolvie (Logan movie aside) is a slow ager, and Hugh is not.  I've heard people pitch Daniel Radcliffe for the role, though I believe it is just fan wishes.  Radcliffe is 5 ft 5 in. (1.651 meters) which is definitely moving in the right direction from Hugh's 6 ft 2 in.  (1.88 meters), but just a bit taller than Wolverine's bantam 5 ft 3 inches (1.6 meters).

 

 

Frankly, I wish all casting everywhere were done on the basis of who best inhabits the role, not on the basis of Who's Who.  Some of the greatest actors rose to fame from being little known or completely unknown before being cast in a major role because they were the perfect choice.  While I'll always enjoy seeing a favorite actor take on a new role, I really enjoy going into a movie knowing an unknown cast was used.  It'd be like holding a pack of rookie sports cards:  Who among these will demonstrate their worth and become the breakout star?

 

I think the problem with the casting of the unknown, is can they find the unknown who can act and really fit the role.  Think of one's main character and try casting it?  Can someone who isn't basing it on an actor already?

[Ghost]

12 hours ago, Techwright said:

 

I still hold out hope, futile though it may be, that they'll let the boil cool then recast the character of Kang, perhaps tightening their story in the process.  They did it successfully with Hulk, and with Rhodey, it can be done again.

 

Hugh has been phenomenal, but reality being what it is, it is time to pass the torch.  Wolvie (Logan movie aside) is a slow ager, and Hugh is not.  I've heard people pitch Daniel Radcliffe for the role, though I believe it is just fan wishes.  Radcliffe is 5 ft 5 in. (1.651 meters) which is definitely moving in the right direction from Hugh's 6 ft 2 in.  (1.88 meters), but just a bit taller than Wolverine's bantam 5 ft 3 inches (1.6 meters).

 

 

Frankly, I wish all casting everywhere were done on the basis of who best inhabits the role, not on the basis of Who's Who.  Some of the greatest actors rose to fame from being little known or completely unknown before being cast in a major role because they were the perfect choice.  While I'll always enjoy seeing a favorite actor take on a new role, I really enjoy going into a movie knowing an unknown cast was used.  It'd be like holding a pack of rookie sports cards:  Who among these will demonstrate their worth and become the breakout star?

Rumors are that Kang will play a part in Avengers 5 (recast of course), but will be relegated to a secondary villain.

Which makes sense, since that’s how he’s been treated thus far in the MCU

Edited March 28 by Ghost