I think the most telling reaction to the new film is that my local cinema had cut Endgame showings down to just a single 3pm slot to make room for Dark Phoenix, and now after a week Endgame is showing at multiple times in the evening again.

I look forward to seeing this movie!

...Probably on FX, playing in the background, when I’m trying to vacuum the living room.

Amerikatt wrote:

Lockheed FTW!

I didn't see this Lockheed:
[Img=400x600]http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/51/5126/SNYEG00Z/posters/salvador-larroca-x-treme-x-men-no-44-cover-pryde-kitty-and-lockheed.jpg[/img]
Or even his sidekick Kitty Pryde, in the Dark Phoenix movie. :(

But they should get one. ^_^

Exciting news!

Dawn of X initiative announced to put the X-Men on top.

[img]https://i.imgtc.ws/DmD6Hpe.jpg[/img]
[img]https://i.imgtc.ws/cB9JPIF.jpg[/img]
[img]https://i.imgtc.ws/E3MrWyG.jpg[/img]
[img]https://i.imgtc.ws/SaHKd8e.jpg[/img]
[img]https://i.imgtc.ws/wopPqzh.jpg[/img]
[img]https://i.imgtc.ws/rbjiT04.jpg[/img]

Oh, and the first part of Phase 4 was announced today. No X-Men... [i]yet[/i]. At the end, Feige stated them and the Fantastic Four are coming, very clearly hyping people for what's to come. It looks like he's just as excited as us.

Oh yeah, I should mention. Betsy got her body back, which was very controversial for a variety of reasons I don't care to get into right now. All in all, Caucasian Psylocke just didn't take. Marvel caught on to this, and while Betsy is still white, she's no longer Psylocke. She's now the new Captain Britain, while her original identity of Psylocke is now taken by Kwannon who she swapped bodies with and spent many years as Psylocke.

God, I love comics.

Anyways, to answer some other questions:

- It appear Dani Moonstar is Mirage and thus a mutant again.
- The younger version you see in Fallen Angels is Kid Cable.
- Those two are Black Tom and Kid Omega.

The Hybrid wrote:

Oh yeah, I should mention. Betsy got her body back, which was very controversial for a variety of reasons I don't care to get into right now. All in all, Caucasian Psylocke just didn't take. Marvel caught on to this, and while Betsy is still white, she's no longer Psylocke. She's now the new Captain Britain, while her original identity of Psylocke is now taken by Kwannon who she swapped bodies with and spent many years as Psylocke.

God, I love comics.

Anyways, to answer some other questions:

- It appear Dani Moonstar is Mirage and thus a mutant again.
- The younger version you see in Fallen Angels is Kid Cable.
- Those two are Black Tom and Kid Omega.

Dani Moonstar was a mutant called Mirage when she was accepted by the Valkyrior; didn't change her powers but she got a cool flying horse.
So, a younger version of Cable from not as far into the dystopian future.
And since the kid on the right has an Omega symbol, and I know of Black Tom (Cassidy) as Banshee's brother, I presume that makes then the far right and far left, respectively. What about the woman with dark hair, whose face is between that of Black Tom and Jean Grey?

That’s definitely Black Tom.

[img]http://www.marveldirectory.com/pictures/individuals/b_1d/blacktom.gif[/img]

So, that leaves one guy unidentified in the EXcalibur cover, between Betsy and Rogue, two of the New Mutants (one looks like an earth elemental, and the other's head is wreathed in flame), and the woman on the left side of the X-Force cover, with her black hair up in a bun, behind Jean and in front of Hank and Tom.

House of X is out now, and boy they weren't kidding when they said it would be different and change up the status quo.

What do you guys think?

Fortunately, TVTropes has the list.

Jamie Braddock/Monarch — Reality Manipulation (Quantum)
Robert Drake/Iceman — Temperature Manipulation (Negative)
Joshua Foley/Elixir — Biokinesis
Jean Grey/Marvel Girl — Telepathy
David Haller/Legion — Power Manifestation
Erik Lehnsherr/Magneto — Magnetism
Kevin MacTaggert/Proteus — Reality Manipulation (Psionic)
Absolon Mercator/Mister M — Matter Manipulation
Ororo Monroe/Storm — Weather Manipulation
Bennet du Paris/Exodus — Telekinesis
Quentin Quire/Kid Omega — Telepathy
Franklin Richards/Powerhouse — Reality Manipulation (Universal)
Gabriel Summers/Vulcan — Energy Manipulation
Hope Summers — Power Manipulation

The chart also gives us a solid definition of what an Omega-level mutant is. Before, it was a vague term meaning "powerful mutant" and was used inconsistently. Example: Psylocke was once called Omega-level, while Magneto was Alpha-level. Psylocke isn't even as powerful as Spider-Man, much less Magneto and that's not even the only comparison I could make.

The definition is someone who's the utmost top-tier of their ability, and cannot be surpassed in that ability. It uses two examples to illustrate this: Magneto and Forge. While both are the top-tier of their powers (magnetism and technopathy), Magneto is Omega while Forge isn't, because Magneto's magnetism cannot be surpassed while Forge can, and has, by non-mutants like Reed Richards and Tony Stark.

So there you go. Honestly, I'm already really liking this run. It's instantly between than Uncanny X-Men 2018, and we're just getting started. That bit of world-building right there is something I appreciate.

Also, are these limits theoretical or observed? If theoretical, then there is reason to believe that (for instance) Magneto's power will never be surpassed, or at east not by a significant amount. But if they are only observed limits, then they only describe what is known about current mutants, and each new generation will bring the potential to rewrite portions or even all of this list.

[img]https://i.imgtc.ws/483VLSX.jpg[/img]

Just how overpowered is Betsy Braddock as Captain Britain going to be?

We all know that Betsy will become the new Captain Britain in the upcoming Excalibur series. What's also interesting is that she's not just taking the name, but it's confirmed that she's getting the Amulet of Right aka the thing that first powered her brother Brian. She's also shown to retain her mutant powers.

If this sounds right: she'll be a Superman-esque powerhouse with advanced telekinesis and telepathy abilities that few can match. In fact, I think it's entirely possible that the empowerment won't just affect her physical abilities, but her already potent innate powers could theoretically receive a massive boost as well, but we don't know if they'll go that route.

I'm not particularly versed with Captain Britain, but I know from what I have seen that he's very OP even without Betsy's additional abilities. He can lift an incredible amount of weight (such as when he landed a 600 ton jumbo jet by himself and that's not an isolated instance of his strength), fly at superhuman speeds (catching up to people hours away in mere minutes), no-sell attacks that would decimate other strong people (not even phased by Pete Wisdom stabbing him with a hot knife with the temperature of the sun), and can manipulate a powerful forcefield to his advantage (when just being nigh-invulnerable isn't enough). I know that his power is based on confidence (I guess similar to the Hulk with anger?), and at his most confident he's even more OP. He once held back the Phoenix, something not even Thor has been able to do.

Now keep in mind that Betsy, without the above augmentation, is still the third most powerful telepath in the world, can create powerful forcefields, psionic weapons, read minds, control minds, and use a variety of special TK-based abilities. I didn't list everything, because she has a lot. Her biggest weakness was no super strength or inherent durability, and that's no longer a problem.

Now, she has the above physical powers, and the mental powers that could receive a boost from becoming Captain Britain. I mean, Brian was OP enough as it is, and he doesn't have any innate mutant powers.

Damn. Betsy has suddenly became one of the scariest people in the Marvel Universe.

Good cover song, interesting take on the franchise. I'm in.

Wolfgang8565 wrote:

**Spoilers** (maybe?)

Well given that Captain Marvel is a god-like "superwoman" character I could see where Rogue could end up being an effective "Kryptonite" against her.

Not entirely sold on the idea that Rogue could/would be the "main bad guy" versus Captain Marvel as the premise of an entire movie but I'd agree that it might be an interesting way to slowly merge the "X-Men cinematic universe" into the current MCU.

Maybe the MCU folks are truly worried that the upcoming WW1984 is going to be an awesome movie so they wanted to come up with their own version of a "woman vs. woman" movie. ;)

Wolfgang8565 wrote:

Lothic wrote:

Wolfgang8565 wrote:

**Spoilers** (maybe?)

Maybe the MCU folks are truly worried that the upcoming WW1984 is going to be an awesome movie so they wanted to come up with their own version of a "woman vs. woman" movie. ;)

Honestly? I don't think Marvel even cares what DC is doing. They've got a great formula.

Honestly? Did you notice my "winky" face? ;)

But I do think it's predictably funny that when one Hollyweird studio does something plot-wise (like WW1984 doing a "woman vs. woman" theme) that another Hollyweird studio has to run out and do the exact same thing. This has nothing to do with "comic book" movies or the rivalry between Marvel and DC - Hollywood has been doing this kind of "copy-catting" for decades because in general they have no new ideas and are constantly copying each other.

Wolfgang8565 wrote:

I feel like Hollywood is more rebooting and making sequels/prequels more than copying.

I'd agree they are doing a bunch of that [b][i]as well[/i][/b]. Like I said they rarely have any truly -new- ideas. But studios are constantly ripping ideas off of each other and have been doing it since the beginning of the film industry.

Just saying if people end up paying hundreds of millions to see Wonder Woman fight Cheetah then you can be pretty sure the MCU will give us their version of a "girl fight" soon enough. Heck we're already getting the Black Widow movie as MCU's "counter-programming" to WW1984.

P.S. BTW you could ask yourself why WW1984 was set in "retro" 1984... Was it because the first Captain Marvel movie was set in the "retro" 1990s? Why "retro" at all?

Backing up what lothic is saying and not disproving wolfgangs point at all I present two movies. Armageddon. Deep Impact. These two movies had the same premise. A lot of times a script will be shopped around to multiple studios. Every sees and reads the script. EVERYONE. If studio A passes and studio B buys in. Studio A gets jelly and tries to preempt or cash in on guerrilla marketing by releasing a "different" movie based loosely on the same script.

I don't think WW1984 is "following" Captain Marvel. The throwback 80's theme has been ongoing for awhile, and probably started with some of the branding for the newer Thor movies but I haven't been following closely enough to say for sure. It's showing up in a lot of mass media. If anything C.M. was bucking the trend by shooting in the "90's" So WW1984, is "on trend." it may be peak 80s throwback. I think a lot of interest in the theme is driven by...unfortunately millennial. Who started getting into comics and appreciating mass media in the late 80s and early 90s. Our parents (I'm a millennial) old comics and movies would be the first things we partook in the genre. Now that we have money, Hollywood is trying to cash in by appealing to that nostalgia. I hate using that word because the connotation/association isn't quite right. Anyway, as we get older and have kids, and less time, that trend will start to fade. That's why I think WW1984 is going to be the peak. It's hitting the nail a little too hard on the head. The studios will start pursuing probably go through a muddled period where the next wave of 20-40 somethings decide where their interests from youth collectively landed.

Where was I going? Where did I come from? Who the hell am I? It's bed time, good night folks.

Wolfgang8565 wrote:

As for who will they cast as Rogue, who knows - but one of the suggestions is Lyndsy Fonseca:

Which I think is spot on!

Yes... she certainly looks like she could at least properly fill out a spandex outfit. ;)

[img=300x300]https://i.pinimg.com/originals/41/d7/d9/41d7d9facc44182f1cd74b73fe5771b2.jpg[/img]

rookslide wrote:

Yeah I wasn't suggesting the same actress reprise the role (though I wouldn't be opposed to it, albeit an older version) but just that the character could come back is great for me.

Well now that Disney has "assimilated" the X-Men franchise they've already stated they are going to recast basically everyone in future movies except for Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool. Things could always change but as far as I know that's pretty much a done deal.

rookslide wrote:

The actresses suggested thusly all seem to have the right look for it but that is only part of it.

Obviously. For instance I think Sophie Turner looked good as Jean Grey but let's face it, she's not really the best actress in the world. She certainly has more acting talent than I do but that's not really saying much. ;)

rookslide wrote:

I always thought [Rogue] was one of the most powerful characters created by Marvel, at least at the time. Given the right conditions she could take down nearly anyone.

A good story can take any preexisting characters and do fun things with them. We can only hope they can figure out a story to make an entertaining full movie out of this scenario.

Wolfgang8565 wrote:

I wouldnt say she can take down anyone..I mean, all you have to do is keep your distance. ;)

Yeah this is part of the reason why I'm a tiny bit dubious about how an entire "Captain Marvel vs. Rogue" movie could seriously work.

Don't get me wrong - I think Rogue is a cool character. I just don't see this scenario of Rogue taking Captain Marvel's powers as being something that an entire 90+ minute movie could be primarily based on unless they dealt with it like some kind of superhero version of Freaky Friday or some-such.

Wolfgang8565 wrote:

I mean, they made a trilogy of successful movies based on Thanos snapping his fingers so i'm sure they can do the same thing with Rogue needing to hold onto CM long enough to drain her.

Of course the mere fate of the universe was based on whether or not Thanos managed to snap his fingers so there was that.

Rogue draining Captain Marvel could make for a cool standalone scene that lasts for a few minutes... then what? At best Rogue might be able to accomplish something with Captain Marvel's powers that Captain Marvel herself could have done assuming Rogue never showed up. OK...

I'm not going to assume they [b]can't[/b] build a movie around this set piece idea. Just pointing out that such a movie could literally be about anything (good or bad) because nothing obvious comes to mind as to what could be accomplished by this pairing of characters.

Grimfox wrote:

I think they could do something decent with it. Consider that By chance these two run into each other and rogue gets a taste. She then sets about trying to accomplish some goal with CMs power. While CM goes about trying to reverse that outcome in a weakened state. Then the power dynamic reverses where Rogue is weak and CM is strong again. Rinse lather and repeat for 90 minutes.

I'm not a hollywood writer. But based on certain hollywood flops, neither are some hollywood writers.

Sure theoretically a [b][i]good[/i][/b] script writer could cook up a [b][i]good[/i][/b] movie out of almost any idea. But as you alluded to Hollywood doesn't seem to have too many of those to spare. I think that's the part that worries me about this - this sounds like a relatively challenging idea that an average hack would probably fumble pretty easily.

Wolfgang8565 wrote:

They definitely need to change it up. As good as the Marvel movies are, I can see people getting tired of their formula.

Well hopefully the people running the MCU will continue their good run of movies regardless. I can say there's really only been a couple that I would rank as "sub-par" so far.

I think the MCU has worked well for the most part because they've managed to take the original comic book canon established over decades and "respectfully translate" it into a workable movie-based canon that they've stuck to for internal consistency. Sure plenty of die-hard comic book nerds still quibble about how the movies "ruined" the comic book plotlines. But I figure you can't deny 20+ multi-million dollar movies without acknowledging that the MCU has done something right.

On the other hand I can say as a die-hard Star Trek nerd that pretty much all Trek made since 2009 has been absolute rubbish with very few redeeming bits-n-pieces. I guess it took JJ Abrams to show us that Voyager and Enterprise weren't actually that bad after all. Go figure. Things like "Nu-Trek" is what you get when you completely disregard (or choose to remain willfully ignorant of) what made the franchise great in the first place. Basically the insipid children in charge of making new Trek shows today are idiots who don't have a clue what they're doing. I desperately wanted to like Discovery but sadly gave up on it after a few episodes. The only reason they brought back Sir Patrick Stewart is because they know their new crap is crap and are hoping he'll save their collective asses with Star Trek Picard.

Anyway I'm not trying to de-rail this thread into a Star Trek rant but I did want to mention it as a cautionary tale for what could possibly happen to the MCU in the future if they stop paying attention to the original canon that made the MCU great in the first place.

Wolfgang8565 wrote:

But.. But..i liked the star trek movies..

Well I suppose somebody did - they did make a decent amount of box office money at the very least. I'll also state for the record that I didn't mind the new, young actors playing the original roles so my problems with the new movies had nothing to do with that. Obviously they needed to re-cast the roles for the new movies and I generally thought the new actors 'acted' the roles well enough. TBH, I thought Urban's version of McCoy was particularly well handled.

But after you get past the new actors practically EVERYTHING about JJTrek blows donkey balls bigly. Sure the movies had great CGI but what major Hollywood Sci-Fi movie has -not- had decent CGI in the last 10-20 years? As someone who's seen every Trek movie (old and new) as well as 600+ TV episodes prior to Discovery it's relatively easy to see just how absolutely horrible Trek has become in the last 10 years. Again the folks running the various JJTrek movies and new TV shows not only don't have a clue about the canon they've been entrusted with but actively go out of their way to crap all over it and "reimagine" it into something completely unrecognizable. Abrams himself has admitted that he hated Trek growing up and always wanted it to be more like Star Wars. Well sadly what he created wasn't even as good as the latest crap Star Wars movies he was ALSO involved with ruining. Abrams basically took Trek out back and put a bullet it its head all to make a quick buck...

Not that I have strong feelings about it or anything. ;)

And don't get me going on the Discovery/Picard TV abominations. Like I said I've happily watched over 600+ episodes of TV Trek (which technically means I'll watch almost anything) and I couldn't even make it past the first few episodes of Discovery. I almost couldn't make myself sit through the first Picard ep although again I desperately wanted to like it.

Oh well, at least the idiots currently running Trek into the ground can't take my DvDs of "real" Trek away from me. ;)

P.S. It's sad that an uber-fan of Star Trek (Seth MacFarlane) has made a better version Star Trek ([url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orville][i]The Orville[/i][/url]) than the current -actual- Star Trek showrunners. Heck truth be told The Orville is actually better than a lot of the older Trek that Abrams never got the chance to defile...

Fireheart wrote:

I've not been to a movie theater in over a decade and I'm not certain I'm missing anything. The same is true for TV. I occasionally pick up a DVD from the Library.

Granted, that means I've not eaten Pop-Corn in a very long time. I may be neglecting my health... or not. *grin*

Sadly I'd have to agree you haven't missed much movie-wise. We go to see maybe 8-10 movies a year and while the "going out" part is fun there's really only been one or two a year that's been worth remembering for years to come. The rest are forgotten almost as soon as we've seen them. *shrugs*

The TV situation is a little better now that streaming is a big thing. At least you can cherry-pick exactly what you want to watch without having to be locked into what the "networks" want you to see.

To put a cap on my recent Star Trek rant (that I completely blame Wolfgang8565 for encouraging) it's fairly easy to pretend that no new official Star Trek has been made since 2005. I even consider fan-based efforts like [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_Continues]Star Trek Continues[/url] to be more "official" than the crap Paramount's been spewing lately. ;)