I believe they might introduce mystique in either thunderbolts or captain america brave new world. In brave new world she could be disguised as someone close to president ross. This way she can try influence laws that mutants might have to deal with in the future. In thunderbolts she might be valintina trying to get rid of all these assassin's and soilders that could be a problem to mutants.
I can almost guarantee, and would put money on it, that we won't see any X-Men characters in either Brave New World or Thunderbolts. There might be a reference at most, like a name drop, but we won't see any actors as X-Men characters.
Holy sh** I never even thought of a live action Atlantis!!! That would be so sick!!! I remember being blown away by the animation as a kid. The story and characters inhabiting a very ancient and mystical world full of tech powered by that same force... I think anyone would be interested and hope they do it soon. .
Introducing Beast now wouldn't make any sense because he's an obvious mutant due to his huge body and a world famous scientist who is an obvious mutant, turning himself into a furry blue monster would be huge news, even in the MCU.
Not necessarily. Hank McCoy in earlier days was not a world renowned scientist and his mutation wasn't blue and furry at first (he just had large hands and feet and lots of muscle). That's assuming we'd be being introduced to a grown Hank at that. We have to stay open to the possibilities of his appearance. Are they going with the one from the end of the Marvels coming over? Are they taking a peak into another non-616 world? Are they introducing a 15-19yo Hank coming into his power for the first time recently? Are they rescuing a bunch of established mutants who have been unseen in the MCU because they were in captivity? We don't know how each of them coming in the next few films will fit into the story, but keep in mind they played Mr. Immortal like he was just always around this entire time.
I think they should focus their whole X-Men story around mutation and the mutant gene, its origins, etc., which would loosely tie it to several existing storylines, like Eternals, but also puts the movie on strong sci-fi grounds. The Fox X-Men just sidelined the whole sci-fi aspect by writing off Marvel mutants as the product of Darwinian evolution (which doesn't make any sense and is poor sci-f). Mr. Sinister would be a good antagonist if they go that direction.
There are different camps. Some like thinking mutants are pure evolution, others like the idea something of the Celestials led to a mutant offshoot, and others just want them by any means necessary even if that means they're a mass product of the snap. Regardless of the science behind their mutation the important thing in the movie will be the interpersonal dynamics, suspense, action, display of powers, etc.
@@bajansamurai I agree, those things are very important, but I also think the actual sci-fi concept they're writing the story around is pretty important.
@@rso_media The sci-fi concept is almost a throwaway. Those Fox films weren't made any better or worse because Darwinian evolution was their explanation. It literally used to be the case in the comics (as well as assuming it was the result of rising radiation) before they linked it to Celestial affecting the development of humanity, Mutants resulting and a link to Deviants. Basing something around what made a mutant a mutant wouldn't drive the plot as much as "Due to what makes a mutant a mutant, Mr. Sinister did X, Y and Z, causing the X-Men to do X, Y and Z, and humans to blah blah blah." It would honestly be an interesting tidbit, and sure, an excuse to tie into Eternals or some such thing, but that's less "basing it around the sci-fi concept and more wanting it to tie back to something like the Eternals and Celestials. Nothing wrong with that, but in movie terms that's not basing something around the sci-fi.
@@bajansamurai It did make the movies worse for me. I'm interested in science fiction. And yeah, I meant that it's the backdrop for all of their films, i.e., investigation into the origin of mutants leads to the more intricate plots and conflicts within each specific movie. But to just ignore the sci-fi premise, the foundation of your story, is lame.
Now that I know that one of the writers & co-creators of Shrinking is Brett Goldstein, with Harrison Ford's character being based on his father, I'm more tempted to watch it. Love Brett's literary sense of humour.
Sabra is a mutant and an Israeli super spy that's in Captain America: Brave New World. Could be an opportunity to just start liberally acknowledging mutants in action in that film.
The only problem I would have with the “snap” theory for mutants is that there would be no history of mutants. Mutants should be dated way back like apocalypse
Well technically Namor is a mutant, he might be the first mutant in the 616. I think in the 616 we just get different mutants than the OG team we're used to. And then when we combine all the universes after Secret Wars we'll have all the mutants in one universe. We get Namor, Ms. Marvel, Sabra, etc in the 616, and then all the others in other universes.
@@brickstudmanThis or we see a little bit of this AND that mixed. A modest number have always been around, but generally out of public view for various reasons, while others get introduced in mass activations. To elaborate: imagine that some worlds (in this case the 616) had some external factor suppressing mutant activations for a century. The rare mutant who still activates exists but may be secluded (Namor in Talocan, Apocalypse in hibernation, Mr. Immortal just being polygamous but not known as having powers until all the wives figure out his exit scam, Logan/Sabes/Maverick all in Winter Soldier-like hidden service to Weapon Plus, Magneto and others preserved in cryo unable to be controlled by Weapon Plus, the X-Men trapped in amber on a living mutant island, other random mutants abducted by Shi'Ar to make into Imperial Guard soldiers, etc.) but the story is basically what undoes what was stopping them from being a larger population (whether that was the Blip, or some story of someone undoing a spell or airborne pathogen or nanotech). There are many creative ways to give them a bit of history, but start the one we "know" from humble beginnings. We don't need a world that simply always had massive mutant representation. These stories could be about the world starting to hate and fear them because they're now becoming public and growing in numbers rapidly.
One thing doesn't necessarily mean the other. A way both can happen. And regardless. We dont know anything yet. So for anyone to be upset or anything is absurd. Just wait till we have facts.
@@Magdalena8008s My earlier post seems to have disappeared stating basically this. You're spot on that they could imply a history of mutants with several being undiscovered but around since ancient times. They can easily give us a reason for 616 having less manifest their powers all these years of the MCU (gene suppression, a spell, abductions), and start the other dynamics of "hated and feared" in the present as the mutant population increasing starts to worry humans.
The whole backstory behind Wanda & Pietro in the 616 is still a little wonky. We learned that Wanda was born a witch so she always had some level of power, but what about Pietro? They never explained what he was. Did he have any power before the stone? Are they both technically mutants in the 616 or no?
They're no longer even mutants in the comics, so it doesn't really matter. Wanda is a certified witch and currently "dead" and Pietro is dead so we're really looking at other characters for where that matters or a reboot that deals with what Pietro is from the ground up.
@@bajansamurai They've gone back and forth from mutants to non-mutants in the comics for years. Doesn't make any sense to explain what Wanda is while ignoring what her brother was. Either she's a witch, meaning all witches are mutants, and Pietro was also a mutant, or Pietro wasn't born with any powers and they all came from the stone.
@@brickstudman Why would it be so important to go back and explain Pietro? It doesn't negate that he was a fast character who was experimented on by Hydra and was her brother. Her being a witch does not make all witches mutants automatically either. The way mutant biology always worked was that it was possible a family could have a mutant child with siblings who were not. Same with witches. The bloodline could produce a witch with non-witch siblings. If they revealed Pietro to be a latent mutant activated by the Mind Stone, it would simply align with Wanda being a latent witch activated by the Stone, but it could just as well be given a gobligook explanation that activating Wanda's witch birthright subconciously led to her empowering her brother with speed (it would also make sense that she recreated that dynamic by giving Billy magic and Tommy speed powers). I do understand wanting more of an explanation because many people came up with the animated shows only knowing them as mutants, but the options you posed are not the only possibilities. I say this fully wanting Pietro to be reestablished as a Mutant in the comics but accepting that he may not be revisited (at least not the MCU Aaron TJ version) prior to a reboot.
I think why suits got a resurgence was because the girl that mike was gonna marry in the show was actually gonna marry the prince of England in real life
I guess Marvel could introduce all the x-men if ms marvel (with the help of her tablet) keeps looking to cast the young avengers and ends up looking for jubilee (as an entry point like the original animated show), (jubilee, who is xavier's student), and then realizes everyone in that school is like her. But choses to make her own path in young avengers, knowing she's got friends and allys in that school.
I think Nathaniel Essex would be a good one as he could be the reason we no little or nothing about mutants or it’ll be fantastic four as it’s an alternate reality
HeyI grew up with "Goonies" and I hated that movie when I went to see it with my friends, lol I was the only one who didn't like it.And I tried to watch it a couple more times when it came on cable, but I couldn't stand it still. Monster squad, on the other hand I loved.
I do believe Rock being in movies impacts ppl going to watch it. My friend who is a big Rock fan started saying that after Black Adam because of the things that happened behind the scenes same with WWE so I do believe he affects Movies. I don’t think he’ll affect Moana 2 tho
I know John loves wolverine but I hate that dull bland character. Give me storm, gambit, iceman, legion, magneto, nightcrawler. There has never been a nightcrawler fight that was less thrilling than a wolverine fight. Even in the team up fight in xmen 97, nightcrawler was way more interesting to watch. Barbarians love wolverine, but there are a lot of meathead loving barbarians out there.
Yea, I think this shows how little John actually knows about comics or the fandom (really any fandom in my opinion) Wolverine is not the most popular xmen... and he's only so popular in the movies because Hugh Jackman is a good actor. Pretty much everyone hates last stand and the first solo wolverine movie, but we came back for Hugh
@@BLers-sd9rk The way you phrased it isn't necessarily true. Wolverine is not my favorite mutant by a long stretch, but the reason Spider-Man and Wolverine were constantly guest starring in various titles for decades was literally because of their popularity. Popularity didn't have to equal best or favorite, they were just *best known* and something about their dynamic as and with characters resonated. Failing title? Do a Wolvie cameo. Launching a title? Wolvie variant cover. Pushing a character? Wolvie team up. The oversaturation backfired for some, but it didn't stop the practice. It also wasn't simply because Hugh did a good job, they focused on Hugh's Wolverine because the character wss already the most popular X-Man, then that snowballed from there. When other characters rose in status (e.g., Iron Man, Cap, etc. due to their MCU popularity), they too became guest star fodder.
@@bajansamurai spiderman is different so if Glenn Danzig had taken the job, who was offered before hugh, would they of made 10 movies with him... and yea, my point, they become more popular, or guest star fodder, when they become popular in the movies, because of the performance. Most of the mcu was built off of less popular characters
@@BLers-sd9rk Here's what I'm getting at. You're basing your opinion that John knows little about comics on stating Wolverine is not the most popular X-Man and adding that he got popular from the movies. I'm pointing out that Wolverine has always been the most popular X-Man and one of the most popular Marvel heroes [possibly second to Spider-Man] long before Raimi's Spidey, FoX-Men or the MCU were ever a thing. When Hugh came along, the writing of Fox's X-Men 1 was centered on Wolverine because they were going with what they already knew about the appeal of the character. It is not to say Cyke, Prof X, Jean and Mags weren't very popular or anything, nor even more liked than him, but Wolverine was that character they threw in others' books to help boost sales. We don't know if Glenn played Wolverine if he would have blown up like Hugh did because we don't know if he might have struck gold in his performance. All the push back on Hugh being too tall meant his success was not predetermined. Having been so successful we are now at the point Wolverine is even more popular. A lot of people cannot stand Deadpool. He's literally often written to be annoying. Deadpool was still one of the most popular characters in Marvel. A character that was ridiculed by then being misrepresented in a Wolverine movie no less. Still popular / still not necessarily everyone's favorite. When John says Wolverine is the most popular X-Man, that's backed by longevity, sales, appearances, creatives' choices to center projects around him, cross media appeal like arcade games, animation, articles, being on underoos, and lunchboxes, cosplay frequency, all of that. Adding Spidey into the conversation wasn't to say anything negative about him, that was to qualify what Marvel Comics have always done with their most popular comics: use them in guest appearances, crossovers, events and variant covers to help prop up other books, characters and events. Even he can get oversaturated, but we like him for his personality more than people like the gruff Logan. They can even flat out dislike Logan and still want to be him. We dislike Last Stand because it was a poorly executed film riddled with script decisions that tied into real world contract issues, director changes/drama behind the scenes and more, but that's not a reflection on the Wolverine character. The first solo movie was bad because they didn't make a good movie. That doesn't take away that Wolverine was the most popular X-Man. In fact it underscores that after those debacles they persisted in making projects with him (and yes, give Hugh his flowers for owning the role, but the fact characters were even chosen to lead off several comic book films was about them starting off as popular in other mediums already). That's why for the longest time DC was giving us Batman and Superman films, and why they were giving us Spidey. Same logic applies to going with the X-Men and skipping ahead to Wolverine from day one instead of giving us the direct OG roster of Cyke, Jean, Beast, Angel and Iceman with Prof X vs Magneto and the OG Brotherhood. Something like Blade is a better example of a less popular character being vaulted to the spotlight by the awesome Snipes portrayal.
And to be clear, I don't think there's any world where Danzig would be considered a great actor. Sure they spoke to him about the role (reportedly) but that never materialized to an offer. I was posing a hypothetical that would have had no one else to compare Wolverine against and if he happened to do well, the studio could easily have kept going because clearly they had more ideas about delving into the mystery of Wolverine than any other X-Man.
that "I'll just wait until both movies hit streaming" guy is just someone who thinks they sound smart all the time and want to go against everyone else way of doing it lol nothing else..you know dam well he gonna go see the first Wicked 😂
I doubt any kids even know who or what Batman Beyond is because it's a show from 20 years ago. It was definitely mature for the time and target audience but all of the kids who watched it as it aired are in their 20s and 30s now so it's definitely for adults.
Yeah, my biggest pet peeve with John is the “no one is asking for X” That makes no sense. You can make a movie about anything. It is not about what people are asking for, it’s about what’ll make a cool story. Batman beyond has rich opportunities for cool stories the same way Spiderverse introduced a new flavor of Spiderman
@@alexp601 and have you played minecraft? i havnt seen the play or played the game and i wont be seeing either in theater (Im not a theater fan tho, 99% of movies id rather watch at home) but i will watch both when they are on a streamer. But Les Misérables (the second most popular broadway show behind Wicked) made under 500,000 Super Mario Brothers, which is the 8th most popular video game (Mario Cart is at 5 tho) of all time made 1.3 billion Minecraft is the number one video game on the planet and has been for like a decade.... Mario made almost a BILLION dollars more than Les Misérables.... lol
@@BLers-sd9rk Pokemon is the highest grossing franchise in the world and Detective Pikachu made $450m worldwide. Taylor Swift is the biggest popstar in the world and none of her films have made tons of money or even been really well received. Right now, the Minecraft trailers look like trash and Wicked is being talked about for Oscars, and early reactions have been very positive, even from those who aren't fans of the musical or weren't previously interested in the film.
No one is still thinking about Black Adam lol Only industry people care about the numbers. What a dumb question. Fast X literally did $700+ million in 2023 and so did Jumanji II and Hobbs and Shaw. Red One was just a bad concept for movie goers. Moana was a hit because of him too so taking him out would be a dumb decision. What he needs is a franchise to lead again. Moana might be it but He'd need a Hobbs and Shaw 2 or Jumanji 3.
dear John,
we're not watching Shrinking because no one has apple+.
Sincerely,
Most People
I believe they might introduce mystique in either thunderbolts or captain america brave new world. In brave new world she could be disguised as someone close to president ross. This way she can try influence laws that mutants might have to deal with in the future. In thunderbolts she might be valintina trying to get rid of all these assassin's and soilders that could be a problem to mutants.
I can almost guarantee, and would put money on it, that we won't see any X-Men characters in either Brave New World or Thunderbolts. There might be a reference at most, like a name drop, but we won't see any actors as X-Men characters.
Holy sh** I never even thought of a live action Atlantis!!! That would be so sick!!! I remember being blown away by the animation as a kid. The story and characters inhabiting a very ancient and mystical world full of tech powered by that same force... I think anyone would be interested and hope they do it soon.
.
Introducing Beast now wouldn't make any sense because he's an obvious mutant due to his huge body and a world famous scientist who is an obvious mutant, turning himself into a furry blue monster would be huge news, even in the MCU.
Not necessarily. Hank McCoy in earlier days was not a world renowned scientist and his mutation wasn't blue and furry at first (he just had large hands and feet and lots of muscle). That's assuming we'd be being introduced to a grown Hank at that.
We have to stay open to the possibilities of his appearance. Are they going with the one from the end of the Marvels coming over? Are they taking a peak into another non-616 world? Are they introducing a 15-19yo Hank coming into his power for the first time recently? Are they rescuing a bunch of established mutants who have been unseen in the MCU because they were in captivity? We don't know how each of them coming in the next few films will fit into the story, but keep in mind they played Mr. Immortal like he was just always around this entire time.
I think they should focus their whole X-Men story around mutation and the mutant gene, its origins, etc., which would loosely tie it to several existing storylines, like Eternals, but also puts the movie on strong sci-fi grounds. The Fox X-Men just sidelined the whole sci-fi aspect by writing off Marvel mutants as the product of Darwinian evolution (which doesn't make any sense and is poor sci-f). Mr. Sinister would be a good antagonist if they go that direction.
There are different camps. Some like thinking mutants are pure evolution, others like the idea something of the Celestials led to a mutant offshoot, and others just want them by any means necessary even if that means they're a mass product of the snap. Regardless of the science behind their mutation the important thing in the movie will be the interpersonal dynamics, suspense, action, display of powers, etc.
@@bajansamurai I agree, those things are very important, but I also think the actual sci-fi concept they're writing the story around is pretty important.
@@rso_media The sci-fi concept is almost a throwaway. Those Fox films weren't made any better or worse because Darwinian evolution was their explanation. It literally used to be the case in the comics (as well as assuming it was the result of rising radiation) before they linked it to Celestial affecting the development of humanity, Mutants resulting and a link to Deviants. Basing something around what made a mutant a mutant wouldn't drive the plot as much as "Due to what makes a mutant a mutant, Mr. Sinister did X, Y and Z, causing the X-Men to do X, Y and Z, and humans to blah blah blah." It would honestly be an interesting tidbit, and sure, an excuse to tie into Eternals or some such thing, but that's less "basing it around the sci-fi concept and more wanting it to tie back to something like the Eternals and Celestials. Nothing wrong with that, but in movie terms that's not basing something around the sci-fi.
@@bajansamurai It did make the movies worse for me. I'm interested in science fiction. And yeah, I meant that it's the backdrop for all of their films, i.e., investigation into the origin of mutants leads to the more intricate plots and conflicts within each specific movie. But to just ignore the sci-fi premise, the foundation of your story, is lame.
I loved jungle cruise....I rewatch it all the time
18:50 There are 9 seasons of Suits
Wolverine already exists it was in the article on a bad show😂I think storm is one of the first ones we see
HEY!! It was in the article in a pretty good show 😅
Now that I know that one of the writers & co-creators of Shrinking is Brett Goldstein, with Harrison Ford's character being based on his father, I'm more tempted to watch it. Love Brett's literary sense of humour.
YES! The Holiday! Top Christmas movie.
I can vouch that Public Rec is a really good brand and great company, I've been buying their clothes for years now
Sabra is a mutant and an Israeli super spy that's in Captain America: Brave New World. Could be an opportunity to just start liberally acknowledging mutants in action in that film.
The only problem I would have with the “snap” theory for mutants is that there would be no history of mutants. Mutants should be dated way back like apocalypse
Well technically Namor is a mutant, he might be the first mutant in the 616. I think in the 616 we just get different mutants than the OG team we're used to. And then when we combine all the universes after Secret Wars we'll have all the mutants in one universe. We get Namor, Ms. Marvel, Sabra, etc in the 616, and then all the others in other universes.
@@brickstudmanThis or we see a little bit of this AND that mixed. A modest number have always been around, but generally out of public view for various reasons, while others get introduced in mass activations.
To elaborate: imagine that some worlds (in this case the 616) had some external factor suppressing mutant activations for a century. The rare mutant who still activates exists but may be secluded (Namor in Talocan, Apocalypse in hibernation, Mr. Immortal just being polygamous but not known as having powers until all the wives figure out his exit scam, Logan/Sabes/Maverick all in Winter Soldier-like hidden service to Weapon Plus, Magneto and others preserved in cryo unable to be controlled by Weapon Plus, the X-Men trapped in amber on a living mutant island, other random mutants abducted by Shi'Ar to make into Imperial Guard soldiers, etc.) but the story is basically what undoes what was stopping them from being a larger population (whether that was the Blip, or some story of someone undoing a spell or airborne pathogen or nanotech).
There are many creative ways to give them a bit of history, but start the one we "know" from humble beginnings. We don't need a world that simply always had massive mutant representation. These stories could be about the world starting to hate and fear them because they're now becoming public and growing in numbers rapidly.
One thing doesn't necessarily mean the other. A way both can happen. And regardless. We dont know anything yet. So for anyone to be upset or anything is absurd. Just wait till we have facts.
its more likely Dr Strange 2 post credit scene. the incursion is already happening
@@Magdalena8008s My earlier post seems to have disappeared stating basically this. You're spot on that they could imply a history of mutants with several being undiscovered but around since ancient times.
They can easily give us a reason for 616 having less manifest their powers all these years of the MCU (gene suppression, a spell, abductions), and start the other dynamics of "hated and feared" in the present as the mutant population increasing starts to worry humans.
i saw Red One last wkend , I WAS THE ONLY ONE in the theater, i had fun watching it
wow so 100% of your theatre loved it!?? 😱
The Equalizer franchise has made a combined box office of 573 million ww on a budget totalling 187 mill.
Chris pines as cyclops
Too old
Jason Mamoa had Chris Carr bangs lmao😅
The whole backstory behind Wanda & Pietro in the 616 is still a little wonky. We learned that Wanda was born a witch so she always had some level of power, but what about Pietro? They never explained what he was. Did he have any power before the stone? Are they both technically mutants in the 616 or no?
They're no longer even mutants in the comics, so it doesn't really matter. Wanda is a certified witch and currently "dead" and Pietro is dead so we're really looking at other characters for where that matters or a reboot that deals with what Pietro is from the ground up.
@@bajansamurai They've gone back and forth from mutants to non-mutants in the comics for years. Doesn't make any sense to explain what Wanda is while ignoring what her brother was. Either she's a witch, meaning all witches are mutants, and Pietro was also a mutant, or Pietro wasn't born with any powers and they all came from the stone.
@@brickstudman Why would it be so important to go back and explain Pietro? It doesn't negate that he was a fast character who was experimented on by Hydra and was her brother. Her being a witch does not make all witches mutants automatically either.
The way mutant biology always worked was that it was possible a family could have a mutant child with siblings who were not. Same with witches. The bloodline could produce a witch with non-witch siblings. If they revealed Pietro to be a latent mutant activated by the Mind Stone, it would simply align with Wanda being a latent witch activated by the Stone, but it could just as well be given a gobligook explanation that activating Wanda's witch birthright subconciously led to her empowering her brother with speed (it would also make sense that she recreated that dynamic by giving Billy magic and Tommy speed powers).
I do understand wanting more of an explanation because many people came up with the animated shows only knowing them as mutants, but the options you posed are not the only possibilities. I say this fully wanting Pietro to be reestablished as a Mutant in the comics but accepting that he may not be revisited (at least not the MCU Aaron TJ version) prior to a reboot.
I think why suits got a resurgence was because the girl that mike was gonna marry in the show was actually gonna marry the prince of England in real life
It happened after she got married
I bet that had something to do with it, even though the resurgence was quite a while after the engagement/marriage
No. We're one month from The Lion King.
Imagine if they reveal sentry is “weapon 9”
*Sentry
gaytry @@OrangeHand
John, i'm not watching shrinking cuz i don't apple tv plus, tryin to save money
Just buy a new iPhone and you'll get an Apple TV free trial 😅
@alexp601 apparently you missed the save money part
@@StonerWatchproductions And I guess you missed the joke...
Red Dead Redemption isn't Naughty Dog, its Rockstar Games
Denzel is doing a lot of stringing, and he seems to be enjoying it. Truly one of the last movie stars.
If you're gonna adapt Red Dead, I say go straight to Undead Nightmare. Not enough zombie cowboy content.
Yessssssss more 🎉Equalizer
minecraft trailer looks amazing! Can't wait to see it
I guess Marvel could introduce all the x-men if ms marvel (with the help of her tablet) keeps looking to cast the young avengers and ends up looking for jubilee (as an entry point like the original animated show), (jubilee, who is xavier's student), and then realizes everyone in that school is like her. But choses to make her own path in young avengers, knowing she's got friends and allys in that school.
And in secret wars everybody fights themselves
Scarlett Witch is the key to bring in the mutants.
Because she's coming back
Why is she the key?
and don't say comics. because mcu doesn't follow comics accurately
People have been saying she'll be the key to mutants for over 5 years now
@@Phoenix-ti6tx just a thought... it was confirmed shes returning and her character has the power to place them in time line..just a thought
could be weapon x program
Always shocked whenever someone says the documentary on Pakistan history and culture is good.
We know that they are mentioned adamantium in the cap America trailer. So I say William Stryker
But that's if they stick with the Fox canon of Stryker being involved in the Weapon Plus program. In the comics he was an anti-mutant preacher.
Death Wish went on to long....maybe Equalizer should finish up with # 4
I don’t get the Calvin and Hobbs question and then John said he’s not going to address it? This is from another uk person
That guy is annoying and is for some reason obsessed with asking questions about Calvin and Hobbs
Hope you could also watch and react a Filipino film "hello, love, again" now showing
I think Nathaniel Essex would be a good one as he could be the reason we no little or nothing about mutants or it’ll be fantastic four as it’s an alternate reality
HeyI grew up with "Goonies" and I hated that movie when I went to see it with my friends, lol
I was the only one who didn't like it.And I tried to watch it a couple more times when it came on cable, but I couldn't stand it still. Monster squad, on the other hand I loved.
The whole premise and story direction of the minecraft movie looks ridiculous. It should have been a Tron like premise.
Minecraft trailer was great
Sup Kris!
I do believe Rock being in movies impacts ppl going to watch it. My friend who is a big Rock fan started saying that after Black Adam because of the things that happened behind the scenes same with WWE so I do believe he affects Movies. I don’t think he’ll affect Moana 2 tho
45:36 *10005
I know John loves wolverine but I hate that dull bland character.
Give me storm, gambit, iceman, legion, magneto, nightcrawler.
There has never been a nightcrawler fight that was less thrilling than a wolverine fight. Even in the team up fight in xmen 97, nightcrawler was way more interesting to watch.
Barbarians love wolverine, but there are a lot of meathead loving barbarians out there.
Yea, I think this shows how little John actually knows about comics or the fandom (really any fandom in my opinion)
Wolverine is not the most popular xmen... and he's only so popular in the movies because Hugh Jackman is a good actor.
Pretty much everyone hates last stand and the first solo wolverine movie, but we came back for Hugh
@@BLers-sd9rk The way you phrased it isn't necessarily true. Wolverine is not my favorite mutant by a long stretch, but the reason Spider-Man and Wolverine were constantly guest starring in various titles for decades was literally because of their popularity. Popularity didn't have to equal best or favorite, they were just *best known* and something about their dynamic as and with characters resonated.
Failing title? Do a Wolvie cameo.
Launching a title? Wolvie variant cover.
Pushing a character? Wolvie team up.
The oversaturation backfired for some, but it didn't stop the practice. It also wasn't simply because Hugh did a good job, they focused on Hugh's Wolverine because the character wss already the most popular X-Man, then that snowballed from there. When other characters rose in status (e.g., Iron Man, Cap, etc. due to their MCU popularity), they too became guest star fodder.
@@bajansamurai spiderman is different
so if Glenn Danzig had taken the job, who was offered before hugh, would they of made 10 movies with him...
and yea, my point, they become more popular, or guest star fodder, when they become popular in the movies, because of the performance.
Most of the mcu was built off of less popular characters
@@BLers-sd9rk Here's what I'm getting at. You're basing your opinion that John knows little about comics on stating Wolverine is not the most popular X-Man and adding that he got popular from the movies. I'm pointing out that Wolverine has always been the most popular X-Man and one of the most popular Marvel heroes [possibly second to Spider-Man] long before Raimi's Spidey, FoX-Men or the MCU were ever a thing.
When Hugh came along, the writing of Fox's X-Men 1 was centered on Wolverine because they were going with what they already knew about the appeal of the character. It is not to say Cyke, Prof X, Jean and Mags weren't very popular or anything, nor even more liked than him, but Wolverine was that character they threw in others' books to help boost sales.
We don't know if Glenn played Wolverine if he would have blown up like Hugh did because we don't know if he might have struck gold in his performance. All the push back on Hugh being too tall meant his success was not predetermined. Having been so successful we are now at the point Wolverine is even more popular.
A lot of people cannot stand Deadpool. He's literally often written to be annoying. Deadpool was still one of the most popular characters in Marvel. A character that was ridiculed by then being misrepresented in a Wolverine movie no less. Still popular / still not necessarily everyone's favorite.
When John says Wolverine is the most popular X-Man, that's backed by longevity, sales, appearances, creatives' choices to center projects around him, cross media appeal like arcade games, animation, articles, being on underoos, and lunchboxes, cosplay frequency, all of that.
Adding Spidey into the conversation wasn't to say anything negative about him, that was to qualify what Marvel Comics have always done with their most popular comics: use them in guest appearances, crossovers, events and variant covers to help prop up other books, characters and events. Even he can get oversaturated, but we like him for his personality more than people like the gruff Logan. They can even flat out dislike Logan and still want to be him.
We dislike Last Stand because it was a poorly executed film riddled with script decisions that tied into real world contract issues, director changes/drama behind the scenes and more, but that's not a reflection on the Wolverine character. The first solo movie was bad because they didn't make a good movie. That doesn't take away that Wolverine was the most popular X-Man. In fact it underscores that after those debacles they persisted in making projects with him (and yes, give Hugh his flowers for owning the role, but the fact characters were even chosen to lead off several comic book films was about them starting off as popular in other mediums already). That's why for the longest time DC was giving us Batman and Superman films, and why they were giving us Spidey. Same logic applies to going with the X-Men and skipping ahead to Wolverine from day one instead of giving us the direct OG roster of Cyke, Jean, Beast, Angel and Iceman with Prof X vs Magneto and the OG Brotherhood. Something like Blade is a better example of a less popular character being vaulted to the spotlight by the awesome Snipes portrayal.
And to be clear, I don't think there's any world where Danzig would be considered a great actor. Sure they spoke to him about the role (reportedly) but that never materialized to an offer. I was posing a hypothetical that would have had no one else to compare Wolverine against and if he happened to do well, the studio could easily have kept going because clearly they had more ideas about delving into the mystery of Wolverine than any other X-Man.
Sorry John, i think the new Minecraft trailer looks fun. Maybe if you were a player, you would feel differently.
As someone who does not play Minecraft and has never understood the hype, I will admit the new trailer looks pretty good. It piqued my interest.
that "I'll just wait until both movies hit streaming" guy is just someone who thinks they sound smart all the time and want to go against everyone else way of doing it lol nothing else..you know dam well he gonna go see the first Wicked 😂
Jhon I care about Batman beyond and it’s not just for kids
And Kris agrees that Animation is for everyone
I doubt any kids even know who or what Batman Beyond is because it's a show from 20 years ago.
It was definitely mature for the time and target audience but all of the kids who watched it as it aired are in their 20s and 30s now so it's definitely for adults.
Yeah, my biggest pet peeve with John is the “no one is asking for X”
That makes no sense. You can make a movie about anything. It is not about what people are asking for, it’s about what’ll make a cool story. Batman beyond has rich opportunities for cool stories the same way Spiderverse introduced a new flavor of Spiderman
I disagree, this new Minecraft trailer made me more hyped
You're either the demographic for the film, or you won't like anything about the trailers
Rage bait used to be good 😢😢
I don't love no goddamn Jack Black 🙄
im pretty big in mincraft and i think the mincraft movie looks like Crap
Im gonna guess right now.
Minecraft does better then Wicked
LOL absolutely no way, what a ridiculous guess
@@alexp601 have you seen the play?
@@BLers-sd9rk yep, loved it (although I haven’t seen that many musical plays)
@@alexp601 and have you played minecraft?
i havnt seen the play or played the game and i wont be seeing either in theater (Im not a theater fan tho, 99% of movies id rather watch at home) but i will watch both when they are on a streamer.
But Les Misérables (the second most popular broadway show behind Wicked) made under 500,000
Super Mario Brothers, which is the 8th most popular video game (Mario Cart is at 5 tho) of all time made 1.3 billion
Minecraft is the number one video game on the planet and has been for like a decade....
Mario made almost a BILLION dollars more than Les Misérables.... lol
@@BLers-sd9rk Pokemon is the highest grossing franchise in the world and Detective Pikachu made $450m worldwide.
Taylor Swift is the biggest popstar in the world and none of her films have made tons of money or even been really well received.
Right now, the Minecraft trailers look like trash and Wicked is being talked about for Oscars, and early reactions have been very positive, even from those who aren't fans of the musical or weren't previously interested in the film.
No one is still thinking about Black Adam lol Only industry people care about the numbers. What a dumb question. Fast X literally did $700+ million in 2023 and so did Jumanji II and Hobbs and Shaw. Red One was just a bad concept for movie goers. Moana was a hit because of him too so taking him out would be a dumb decision. What he needs is a franchise to lead again. Moana might be it but He'd need a Hobbs and Shaw 2 or Jumanji 3.
Anytime I hear Denzel and equalizer…🥹