Monday Movie Roundup...4/3/2017

Monday already Pepe?

Okay.

Logan made another $6.2 million in the U.S. over this past weekend. That kept it within the 10 top grossing films in the States.

Speaking worldwide, Logan is now at $585.4 million. So how does that rank?

It is the #1 Wolverne-based film of all time. Second place The Wolverine made $414.8 million worldwide.

Logan is also the third grossing film worldwide in the X-Men franchise. Only X-Men: Days of Future Past and Deadpool have made more.

As for the House of Ideas that Stan Built, Logan is 18th overall, beating Iron Man by a measly $200,000. 

As for the "Distinguished Competition", Logan is still behind all three DCEU films. Man of Steel is the closest, at $668 million worldwide. 

We'll see if Logan stays in theaters until May 5th...when Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 comes out.

Have a good week Pepe!

WTF? Friday...3/10/2017

Mornin' Joe...

So as I was telling Pepe, Logan made $237.8 million worldwide over opening weekend. Well, that number has risen to $300,649,174 over 6 days. That puts it firmly in ninth place within the X-Men franchise. It's about $53 million away from taking #8 away from X-Men: First Class, and roughly $73 million more is needed to beat X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

You heard me - X-MO:W made more worldwide than X-M:FC.

But...getting back to Logan...

What I didn't know was that this film is the third collaboration between Jackman and director James Mangold. I mean yeah, he directed The Wolverine waaaaay back in 2013, but even waaaaay-er back in 2001 he directed Kate and Leopold. 

So Mangold knows his Jackman.

And no. I haven't seen it yet. I'm waiting for a weekday off so I can see it before picking Adorkette up after school. One More Week...One More Week!

Have a good weekend Joe! 

Monday Movie Roundup...3/6/2016

Hey Pepe...

So. Logan.

According to boxofficemojo.com, the film made about $85.3 million in the States over opening weekend. It also made roughly $152.5 million everywhere else, making the total worldwide $237.8 million. 

Now, where does that put it in the grand pantheon of Jackman's career?

Well...it's already done better worldwide than Swordfish, and Pan (to no one's surprise) but also better than The Prestige and Kate and Leopold (which surprises me). But did you know that it hasn't made more than Van Helsing? Did you know that Van Helsing made over $300 million worldwide? The original X-Men only made 296.3 million!

Speaking of the X-Men (and Wolverine) Franchise...

...it's in tenth place right now. Out of ten films. This includes all tie-ins including Deadpool.

...and how about that trailer eh?

Logan has about another $60 million to make to take the #9 spot from X-Men. I give it about a week and a half. And no - I haven't seen it yet. I'm waiting for a matinee when my work schedule allows. I'm also trying like hell to avoid all reviews. Even spoiler-free ones. 

So keep your stuff to yourself.

Have a good week Pepe!

So. Logan (2017)...

Here are my thoughts - 

1) The "bad guys" are Reavers.

No. Not those Reavers.

Those Reavers.

I know, but stay with me here...

2) 

That actress, Dafne Keen, is indeed X-23.

I know this is all common knowledge. But again, stay with me.

3) It's been made clear in the trailers that this film takes place in Texas...

...as opposed to the Australian Outback. Which would have been cooler.

4) 

Stewart's Xavier appearance tells me this is taking place before Days of Future Past.

Which means one of two things:

5a) The movie ends with this timeline being wiped out of existence, making it moot, and a new timeline begins with a new, younger Logan (played by a new, younger actor) growing up.

OR...

5b) The movie ends with this timeline being wiped out of existence, making it moot, and a new timeline begins with a new, younger X-Men team watching "The Incident" in New York on television.

Damn right.

Either way, we're gonna see a LOT more X-23 on the screen.

But you know what will most likely happen?

The film will end with some lame-ass tie-in with Legion.

'Cause desperate times...

So...Bobby's gay now?

I clearly have no idea what Marvel is doing.

It sounds like Bobby Drake has come out of the closet...

Ramifications ensue.

Homosexuality in comics is an ongoing issue, and one that I hope continues to happen more and more. There's nowhere nearly enough LGBTQ representation in comics. Certainly not in Marvel and DC. 

 

Having long-term characters reveal their sexual orientation? Fine. 

But must Marvel use mutant characters? 

Stan Lee's creation of the X-Men allowed readers from all walks of life to relate to them. These were the "misfits" of society. These were the people treated unfairly by those in power. Every minority could relate to them: people of different ethnicities, religions...and sexual preferences. 

So why beat us all over the head by making another mutant character gay?

I remember Northstar.

His big revelation came when I was reading the series, and I thought it was about damn time. If you read the early John Byrne stuff it's obvious, and it bugged me that it took roughly 100 issues to bring him out.

Then there was Shatterstar...

...and Rictor.

This was after I stopped reading, but I remember the characters from when I was reading, and I thought "well, Marvel does need to bring more variety into their universe". 

This, unfortunately, feels like a grab for media attention.

It's not the fact that it's Bobby, a character going back to the Stan Lee era, that bothers me. It's because he's a mutant. I honestly don't know if there are any LGBTQ characters in the Marvel Universe that aren't mutants, and that's the problem. 

Revealing a non-mutant character would tell a better story - some established hero (or villain) who hasn't had to deal with being "different" their entire lives...learning to deal with being "different". Mutants are used to being hated, feared, distrusted, and alone. 

Why not have someone who's never gone through that, go through that?

And now, some not quite Monday Movie news...

I know it isn't Monday, but I just love using this pic.

So I found out a couple of interesting things:

X-Men: Apocalypse...or whatever the hell they call it...will take place in the '80's.

I've always been on the fence with the X-Men film franchise. There's a feel to it that's unique, and separate, from the Marvel Studios Avengers stuff. I get that. The books were the same way back when they were written by Mutant Guru and Soap Opera Aficionado Chris Claremont. Most of the casting has been dead-on, and a few I deemed "okay". X-Men: The Last Stand and Origins: Wolverine looked great on paper, but we all know how they turned out. I can get past a misstep, an attempt to tell a story that fell short of execution. I can even get past two missteps. Then X-Men: First Class came out, and I felt like I was watching a Dr. Who series with all this wibbly-wobbly. It looks like Singer et al. have chosen a direction and are going down that path. Fine. Just give all of us fans the opportunity to understand just where the f**k we're headed! Is that too much? I mean, do X-Men and X2 still count? Are they the On Her Majesty's Secret Service of the X-Franchise? Or are they more like Superman: The Motion Picture and Superman II? I don't have a preference one way or the other, I just wanna know.

Having said that,

I like the idea of an X-film set in the '80's. I'll see it, no question. And I'll drag Adorkette with me and geek out over all the references.

The other bit of movie news I heard was that Man of Steel will be released the same day as Captain America 3. (Can I just say how awesome it is to hear news about comic films coming out two years from now?) I'm all for this, and can't wait for other publishers (Valiant) to come out with their own film franchises (X-O Manowar) someday. 

Also - Sebastian Stan has signed a nine picture deal. I'm not sure if that includes what he's done so far, or any appearances on AoS, but either way - this is fantastic news. Why?

* It means Marvel Studios has big plans for more movies beyond 'Phase 3'.

* It opens up the possibility that they'll do a variation on the storyline where Steve abandons the Captain America persona and roams the country as 'The Captain', leaving Barnes to take up the mantle. (Yeah, I know there's been a more recent story about Steve getting "killed" and Barnes becoming this all-new, all-different Cap, but that's just silly.)

* It proves that Marvel Studios knows that while actors will come and go as time moves on, their characters will be around for a helluva long time.

In Marvel Studios I Trust

I don't know man...I just don't know...

So, Mark Millar is now consulting with Fox about the X-Men and Fantastic Four franchises.

It’s a smart move. Fox obviously needed one person who had knowledge and experience with these characters in their original comic-book form on their team.

Especially if there’s no way Fox will smarten up and sell the rights back to Marvel where they belong.

Having one person involved with both franchises will meld them together. It worked with Whedon and the Avengers, Jim Shooter and Valiant (VH1) and of course – Stan Lee and Marvel Comics.

But is Millar the right choice?

I’m not familiar with his work. I loved the Kick-Ass and Wanted movies, but haven’t read any of the books.

I’m not saying Millar’s a terrible writer. In fact, he was one of the creative people behind The Ultimates for Marvel...which like it or not was one of the founding elements behind Marvel Studios getting off the ground. He was also invited to the set of Iron Man to hash out ideas while they were working on the script. So he’s got experience with not just the comics, but the “Hollywood” aspect of comics.

That being said… Millar is simply not a writer I gravitate towards. Or Bendis, or Ellis. These guys are love-or-hate. There’s little in between, except for people like me who want to read only one or two specific works. These guys have a specific - somewhat mature - feel to their writing that can easily turn off a lot of people. In comics that’s no big deal. The fan base is vocal, but (still) relatively small. However, as loud as haters may get, lovers will spend all their money.

Movies, on the other hand, have a universal fan base, and their haters are exponentially loud. Plus, they won’t just not spend their money…they’ll actively spend their money against a film.

So this is “make-or-break” time for Fox.

It could work, but since I’d prefer Marvel to get the rights back, I’m just not sure I want it to.

So, the sequel to X-Men: First Class has a name...

I'll start by saying that I liked X-Men: FC better than I thought I would. It totally screwed with comic continuity, but stayed true to the continuity of the other films. 

I also liked the cameos by Hugh Jackman and Rebecca Romijn.

And now it seems that this classic Chris Claremont/John Byrne/Terry Austin masterpiece is the basis for the next film.

If you've never read this, shame on you. It is fantastic!

But it's set in an alternate Escape From New York type future (very similar to the beginning of X-Men: The Last Stand when they're in the Danger Room) that is overrun by Sentinels, and most of Marvel's mutants have died.

It introduces Rachel Summers...

Wolverine dies...

The Brotherhood of Evil Mutants are in it, but this team is lead by Mystique, and includes Blob, Pyro, Avalanche and Destiny...

Magneto isn't in it at all...

Neither is Xavier (except near the end)...

So my feeling is that while the "jist" of this movie is based on this story, some significant changer will be made. 

Which is fine, but I wonder if Fox will agree to set it in the MMU...

Marvel Studios + Sony + Fox = Happiness...

One of my lingering curiosities regarding Marvel Studios, now that they’ve proven to Hollywood what dorks like me have known for over twenty years, is how Sony and Fox might react to the success of The Avengers..

Here’s how I think it would play out:

1) The Amazing Spider-Man will come out later this summer – and while not being nearly as successful as The Avengers will still be a profitable hit – but after paying back what they spent making the film, what they spent promoting the film and what they owe Marvel for use of their product, Sony will look at their revenue and realize that they’ve got less than Paramount and of course Disney.

2) Wanting more money, Sony will approach Marvel Studios and propose a deal…$100 million (or some other outrageous amount) to give Spider-Man back free-and-clear, or $25 million (or some other significantly smaller amount) for Spider-Man but with a percentage of future movie profits.

Only in Hollywood…

3) Marvel Studios would want to take the $25 million deal, but Disney would step in and choose the $100 million option.

4) Seeing this – Fox would get into the action and offer a similar deal for Fantastic Four. But knowing that the FF aren’t enough to seal the deal, Fox would also throw in Elektra and Daredevil (unless they’ve already been sold back, I honestly don’t know) and various elements of X-Men to “sweeten the pot”. Fox would be stupid to let Wolverine, Xavier, Emma Frost, Magneto and Deadpool go, but possibly The New Mutants, maybe Cable and the Shi’ar.

5) Disney would again step in, and with Fox hammer something out eventually.

Not sure how it would work, but anything that brings more characters back into Marvel Studios’ hands is a win because…

In Marvel Studios I Trust

The whole "Avengers Vs. X-Men" thing...

Hate to break it to you, but this has been done before, albiet slightly differently.

Back in 1993, just about when I stopped collecting, there was a crossover between The Avengers, X-Men, Avengers West Coast (remember them?), and Uncanny X-Men.  The story was called Bloodties and it has since been collected in a TPB.



It took place on Genosha, and involved a child torn between both sides. The child in question was Luna - daughter of Quicksilver and Crystal...Magneto's granddaughter - who was kidnapped by Fabian Cortez who wanted to rule Genosha by any means necessary.

In this case, the Avengers and X-Men fought together, but many elements are the same.

So what does this mean?

1) I'm getting too old...like Silver Age readers who threw up their hands when Post-Crisis happened.

2) I really shouldn't complain, and I don't feel that I am, but if AVX gets "the kids these days" to read comics, I'll take it. But I hope they (eventually) look back past their dates of birth and realize there's a whole lot of comics out there to catch up on reading too.

3) Anything that promotes The Avengers movie, I'll also take. Plus, if Marvel is asking me which film franchise to see...if I had to choose...I pick The Avengers.

In Marvel Studios I Trust