Which X-men should get solo origin movies like the Avengers?

[Flinkman]

set in the X-Men First Class canon, I'd like to see:

set in the 70's at the height of the disco craze, the film would chronicle the Dazzler's meteoric rise to fame and subsequent outing as a mutant at a televised event...revealing to the general public for for the first time the existence of mutants, and sparking what would become a widespread mutant panic.

At the end of the film Dazzler is approached by Professor Charles Xavier (or hell, why not Magneto to spice things up?) which directly leads into....the next entry in the X-Men First Class film series!

[MartinRedmond]

Jean Grey solo.

[Ian Pressman]

I just can't see any of these team-book characters as having what it takes to be bankable in a solo feature. I think a general rule of thumb is if they can't carry a solo book, they can't carry a movie.

[Papa Moai]

I just can't see any of these team-book characters as having what it takes to be bankable in a solo feature. I think a general rule of thumb is if they can't carry a solo book, they can't carry a movie.

True. Most of these characters work best as parts of an ensemble cast. I wouldn't mind seeing some of them show up on a possible First Class-sequel but I can't imagine them getting their own movies. Not even Gambit even though he actually works as a solo character.

[remydat]

remy didn't mention the Green Lantern movie, which is generally thought to have "failed" at the box office. Let's hope that Marvel doesn't make stupid origin movies for the sake of making stupid origin movies out of some naive belief that we need to make them. If they do, Marvel will lose money and it will negatively affect the comics industry.

The only DC character I care about is Batman. I didn't mention Green Lantern because I didn't even remember he had a movie until you mentioned it. And Fox has the movie rights to the X-men not Marvel. I am assuming it being a copy cat industry that they would think about it because the Avenger Solo movies made the Avengers movie feel more like an all star team. The problem with the X-men franchise is you have a large cast of characters and the movies essentially turned didn't have an all star feel to it. It was basically Wolverine and JG with some other mutants and then with XFC, it was essentially Xavier and Mags with some other mutants. Those movies were solo/duet movies in disguise and you could pretty much swap out all the other mutants around them with little impact. If you want to make money you need to make the audience feel like the other people matter which Avengers did and which the X-men movies currently don't.

[OmniAural]

My vote would go to Bishop. His story is interesting enough to stand on its own although it would require a number of key x-men in supporting roles to give it the right weight.

For one sooner than that then I would choose Cable and Rachel and merge elements from their stories. It would introduce apocalypse and the askani as the main protagonists. the askani rescue them both from scott and Jean, after poccy sends the horsemen to the past to take them to the future, only to lose them to him by the end of the first act. In the second act poccy choose Nathan as his heir and casts rachel aside only to be picked up by one of his minions to be raised as a hound to hunt out new mutant births in the population. They grow up not knowing each other, poccy helps Nate to reach the edge of his potential of both his powers and power itself before attempting to take his body meanwhile an askani breaks through to Rachel to reveal who she really is. In the third act they lead a rebellion against Poccy which results in cable becoming infected with a techno organic virus intended for poccy. Cable is then cast aside as worthless too. The askani help him to find a balance at the expense of much of his power and with Poccy's body starting to fail him cable and rachel team up to take him down. After defeating him they are about to be overwhelmed by an army of clones of the four horsemen (established earlier in the movie) and find the only way to escape is the time device that originally brought them there and they scoot off to be greeted by their astonished parents. The end credit establishes that poccy is not quite dead and is instead just barely alive. It then cuts to a room full of clones of Nathan at various ages. fin.

[remydat]

None of those poll options are particularly good for this approach, although I do enjoy that you combined Jean Grey with Cyclops, while the rest of the options are individuals.

Part of the point of Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor having their own origin movies is that they all take place in vastly different settings for the most part, and approach their ideas of heroism and the means of their heroics very differently.

To do this in the X-Men universe, you would have to similarly start at the different sides of the conflict.

You might want a teenage character whose mutation has just manifested and see how it affects their life, the choices they make, the side(s) they take, their rise to the challenge and it how lands them with the X-Men.

You would want someone who is not interested, at least initially, in making any kind of difference, but is experienced and relatively comfortable being a mutant. They would get caught in the middle of the greater conflict, and we would see why they make the choices they do, and ultimately join the X-Men.

Then there is someone who is there at the beginning of the conflict, who is one of the forefront mutants of the boom during the nuclear age, and not only takes a stand, but forms the side.

These are the compelling stories that bring you into the greater story, or the universe. Interestingly enough, they have already been executed, but not in the way some fans would like to see in the wake of the Avengers movie release.

As I said in another post, a Gambit/Storm movie would be good because you could show how they lives from similar thief backgrounds diverged based on Gambit meeting Sinister and Storm meeting Xavier. You also have two popular characters whose powers would play well on the big screen. There is a variety of ways you can have Gambit blow shit up spectacularly and a variety of ways you can show Storm controlling weather spectacularly. You also have the movie climax with them being involved in the MM on opposite sides and ending with Gambit saving Storm minus her being a kid like in the comic.

The idea here is a movie that can be an action movie blockbuster and not simply be a good story.

[remydat]

I just can't see any of these team-book characters as having what it takes to be bankable in a solo feature. I think a general rule of thumb is if they can't carry a solo book, they can't carry a movie.

Not sure I agree with this. The comics just provide a ready made audience to help market the movie if you will but fundamentally you need a character that can be a movie action hero. Plenty of movie action heroes never made their start in the comics and what drives their being big is how good the actual movie and coolness factor of the movie and protagonist. Storm for example is essentially a black female version of Thor which with the right movie could easily be bankable. Gambit has the cool power set that visually is good for an action movie.

Again, I think Fox's problem is treating the X-men characters beside Xavier, Mags and Wolverine as relatively interchangeable which does not help the movie goer connect with them. To some extent that has always been a problem with the comics as well as the X-men have always been more defined by their affiliation with the X-men while a lot of the Avengers had considerable time devoted to them outside of the Avengers. In fact most of them started out as solo characters who only later became Avengers so that is how people identified them while most of the X-men were defined as X-men first and their solo adventures came off the back of them being X-men. It is that perception that has to change for the X-men as individual characters to gain traction and it is easier to do that in a movie not necessarily tied to comic continuity and where a large portion of the audience will have only a casual knowledge of the character.

[xhx23x]

Again, I think Fox's problem is treating the X-men characters beside Xavier, Mags and Wolverine as relatively interchangeable which does not help the movie goer connect with them. To some extent that has always been a problem with the comics as well as the X-men have always been more defined by their affiliation with the X-men while a lot of the Avengers had considerable time devoted to them outside of the Avengers. In fact most of them started out as solo characters who only later became Avengers so that is how people identified them while most of the X-men were defined as X-men first and their solo adventures came off the back of them being X-men. It is that perception that has to change for the X-men as individual characters to gain traction and it is easier to do that in a movie not necessarily tied to comic continuity and where a large portion of the audience will have only a casual knowledge of the character.

I don't think that's completely true. I thought the movie did great Exploring Rogue individually (She may not be a popular version with the fanbase, but we pretty much got personal with her), sam with Bobby in the second movie in his coming out scene. I think Kurt was introduced nicely and had Alan signed for the Third one he would've had a bigger role. Jean also had a lot of character work done. Some did slip through the cracks of the team aspect (Storm, Cyclops), but not to the extend that I would think people didn't connect with them. To me, the biggest flaw in the X-Movies is that it lacked the family aspect of the X-Men. Yes, they talked about training since they were children and stuff, but we never really got to see them as a family. The closest we got was Scott's Xavier's "death bed" scene. and beast and storm's hug. Even Jean and Storm sharing lots of scenes in X2 didn't really provide much friendlyness between them. First Class however, did feel like they all built a bond with each other.

So I think if there was another origing if should realy be a team instead of more solo stuff.

however, push comes to shove, Storm and Gambit would provide an entertaining movie.

[Aquamarine11500]

A Storm origins would be nice.Showing how her parents died,her being orphaned on the streets of Cairo, becoming a thief,encountering Xavier for the first time. Roaming the plans and running to T'challa, becoming a goddess, and maybe fighting off some Apartheid Forces,poachers, rival Tribal enemies along the way or Shadow King coming back for revenge by inhabiting a powerful mutants body body or what not. Deluge would make great Villain too

I'm for a Storm and Gambit movie also.

[Scarlet Silence]

My vote would go to Bishop. His story is interesting enough to stand on its own although it would require a number of key x-men in supporting roles to give it the right weight.

For one sooner than that then I would choose Cable and Rachel and merge elements from their stories. It would introduce apocalypse and the askani as the main protagonists. the askani rescue them both from scott and Jean, after poccy sends the horsemen to the past to take them to the future, only to lose them to him by the end of the first act. In the second act poccy choose Nathan as his heir and casts rachel aside only to be picked up by one of his minions to be raised as a hound to hunt out new mutant births in the population. They grow up not knowing each other, poccy helps Nate to reach the edge of his potential of both his powers and power itself before attempting to take his body meanwhile an askani breaks through to Rachel to reveal who she really is. In the third act they lead a rebellion against Poccy which results in cable becoming infected with a techno organic virus intended for poccy. Cable is then cast aside as worthless too. The askani help him to find a balance at the expense of much of his power and with Poccy's body starting to fail him cable and rachel team up to take him down. After defeating him they are about to be overwhelmed by an army of clones of the four horsemen (established earlier in the movie) and find the only way to escape is the time device that originally brought them there and they scoot off to be greeted by their astonished parents. The end credit establishes that poccy is not quite dead and is instead just barely alive. It then cuts to a room full of clones of Nathan at various ages. fin.

These movies would be complete and utter disasters at the box office.

As I said in another post, a Gambit/Storm movie would be good because you could show how they lives from similar thief backgrounds diverged based on Gambit meeting Sinister and Storm meeting Xavier. You also have two popular characters whose powers would play well on the big screen. There is a variety of ways you can have Gambit blow shit up spectacularly and a variety of ways you can show Storm controlling weather spectacularly. You also have the movie climax with them being involved in the MM on opposite sides and ending with Gambit saving Storm minus her being a kid like in the comic.

The idea here is a movie that can be an action movie blockbuster and not simply be a good story.

So you said in another post.

[Washout]

A Mystique movie would be fun because you could tell Nightcrawler and Rogue's origins, too, and who doesn't want to see Jennifer Lawrence make out with an old lady?

[jarrod]

lolnone. Just give me XMFC2 (Brotherhood, Polaris & Dazzler) and XMFC3 (DOFP, Sentinels).

[xhx23x]

A Mystique movie would be fun because you could tell Nightcrawler and Rogue's origins, too, and who doesn't want to see Jennifer Lawrence make out with an old lady?

Right!?

1010

[Sanji]

Something like her solo (but working for Mag instead of Xavier) would be cool. She'd be working as a spy/thief with Shortpack and fall in love with Irene. We could also get Nightcrawler's true origin!