• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

GAMBIT MOVIE MADE OFFICIAL (2016)...GOTTA GET X-MEN 266
0

Started by The_Investor,

317 posts in this topic

Darkowl

Darkowl

Posted
Posted

In your opinion, why is Ryan Reynolds a bad choice for Deadpool? Because he's a well known actor?

 

He's great in rom-coms, terrible in everything else. Green Lantern (or wolverin origins, blade 3 if you like), is all that really needs to be said about his superhero resume

 

I actually really enjoyed him in Wolverine when he was just Wade Wilson, and I think he's going to bring the same kind of energy to the Deadpool film, but probably even more spastic. Never saw Blade 3 (though I want to), and I thought he was decent in GL. I definitely wouldn't say he's great in rom-coms, and terrible in everything else. Ever see Buried? I thought he was superb in that movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MusterMark

MusterMark

Posted
Posted

Scarlet Jo was a HUGE actor prior to Marvel. And I mean Huge.

 

Ryan Reynolds was excellent in Green Lantern, a movie I very much like.

 

Ed Norton was an A-list actor MUCH before Marvel.

 

Paul Rudd was a Huge actor already - doesn't matter what genre he did a lot of.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheLiamSturgess

TheLiamSturgess

Posted
Posted

In your opinion, why is Ryan Reynolds a bad choice for Deadpool? Because he's a well known actor?

 

He's great in rom-coms, terrible in everything else. Green Lantern (or wolverin origins, blade 3 if you like), is all that really needs to be said about his superhero resume

 

I actually really enjoyed him in Wolverine when he was just Wade Wilson, and I think he's going to bring the same kind of energy to the Deadpool film, but probably even more spastic. Never saw Blade 3 (though I want to), and I thought he was decent in GL. I definitely wouldn't say he's great in rom-coms, and terrible in everything else. Ever see Buried? I thought he was superb in that movie.

 

I urge everyone to wait until they've seen Deadpool to judge RR in the part. From everything I've heard from my colleagues working on the movie, he's an absolute star in the role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darkowl

Darkowl

Posted
Posted

In your opinion, why is Ryan Reynolds a bad choice for Deadpool? Because he's a well known actor?

 

He's great in rom-coms, terrible in everything else. Green Lantern (or wolverin origins, blade 3 if you like), is all that really needs to be said about his superhero resume

 

I actually really enjoyed him in Wolverine when he was just Wade Wilson, and I think he's going to bring the same kind of energy to the Deadpool film, but probably even more spastic. Never saw Blade 3 (though I want to), and I thought he was decent in GL. I definitely wouldn't say he's great in rom-coms, and terrible in everything else. Ever see Buried? I thought he was superb in that movie.

 

I urge everyone to wait until they've seen Deadpool to judge RR in the part. From everything I've heard from my colleagues working on the movie, he's an absolute star in the role.

 

I honestly wouldn't want anyone else to play Deadpool. I think Reynolds to Deadpool is Jackman to Wolverine. If you ask me, Reynolds already nailed it in the cgi teaser/promo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted

Channing Tatum Talks GAMBIT; Confirms Origin Story Plans And Possible X-MEN Ties

 

"I love Gambit," Tatum says in the latest issue of Empire Magazine. "I grew up in the South; my father's from Loiuisiana. We'd go to New Orleans and I heard all the dialects. It felt so different from the rest of America; it has its own ancient culture. So I identified with that. And he always felt the most real of the X-Men to me. He's kind of a tortured soul and he's not a good guy. But he's not a bad guy, either. He walks his own path. And of course he plays cards and drinks and is a martial-arts badass!" It sounds like the movie is going to be pretty faithful to the comic books then, but that's not a huge surprise what with X-Men scribe Chris Claremont writing its treatment.

 

As for the current status of Gambit, the actor added: "Josh Zetumer just turned in the first draft of the -script, and it's killer. None of us were sure how he was going to deal with the X-Men world. But we're going to be changing some of the tropes of these movies. It's always about saving the world (Laughs), but maybe we're going to shift things a liittle but. There's so many ways you can take [an origin story]. You could do it like Batman Begins, or a different take and go the Guardians of the Galaxy route. All I can say is, I'm super excited."

 

It's good to see an actor fired up over a comic book character like that. But I am still trying to picture him as Gambit.

 

DHRNXYRl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted

Rupert Wyatt Set To Direct Channing Tatum As GAMBIT

 

According to EW, 20th Century Fox has hired Rupert Wyatt (The Gambler, Rise of the Planet of The Apes, The Escapist) to helm their solo Gambit movie, which will star Channing Tatum as Cajun mutant, Remy LeBeau.

 

This won't be the character's first live-action incarnation of course, as he was played by Taylor Kitsch in X-Men Origins: Wolverine - but fans were left underwhelmed by both the movie and that interpretation of Gambit, and have been looking forward to seeing some justice done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
paperheart

paperheart

Posted
Posted
Wow. That list of names had some pretty huge star power before they were in Marvel movies. Saying that Paul Rudd, Scar-jo, Ed Norton etc were not household names prior to their Marvel roles is just inaccurate.

 

For example, Ed Norton had one of the memorable screen debuts in history and had two Oscar nominations on his resume before he ever heard of the Hulk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CBT

CBT

Posted
Posted
Wow. That list of names had some pretty huge star power before they were in Marvel movies. Saying that Paul Rudd, Scar-jo, Ed Norton etc were not household names prior to their Marvel roles is just inaccurate.

 

For example, Ed Norton had one of the memorable screen debuts in history and had two Oscar nominations on his resume before he ever heard of the Hulk

 

The definition being used for these discussions, was having films headlined for you. i.e. Chris Pratt, being made a super star from his marvel film, and then getting Jurassic Park Trilogy.

 

Ed Norton was cut from Hulk, which says enough, and has not and will not be headlining any blockbuster films. Same with Paul Rudd.

 

It was not said about scarlett Johansson, just that her profile was furthered/cemented by it. (Lucy doesnt happen, without Black Widow, etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kimik

kimik

Posted
Posted
Wow. That list of names had some pretty huge star power before they were in Marvel movies. Saying that Paul Rudd, Scar-jo, Ed Norton etc were not household names prior to their Marvel roles is just inaccurate.

 

For example, Ed Norton had one of the memorable screen debuts in history and had two Oscar nominations on his resume before he ever heard of the Hulk

 

Maybe a more accurate description would be that Ed Norton was a former star that was on the decline? lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joe_collector

joe_collector

Posted
Posted
The definition being used for these discussions, was having films headlined for you. i.e. Chris Pratt, being made a super star from his marvel film, and then getting Jurassic Park Trilogy.

 

That is simply not physically possible and I don't think you understand the logistics of how movies are made.

 

Jurassic World started production in early-2014, and casting was completed long before that. Chris Pratt obviously had some "heat" on him well before Guardians was released in August 2014 and this multiple-movie deal happens to a lot of "rising actors". It just "happens" and when it does, it happens quick.

 

Look at Shia LaBeouf, Sam Worthington and Taylor Kitsch (to name just a few), they came out of co-star obscurity to headline multiple big budget movies in a very short period of time. No one movie (due to years needing for casting and production) led to another, it just "happened" for them.

 

Why Jurassic World's Director Wasn't Initially Sold On Chris Pratt

 

When an up-and-coming star is being looked at for a big budget project, it’s usually because a filmmaker has been arguing for their case in front of the studio – but that wasn’t the situation behind the casting of Chris Pratt in Jurassic World (long before the release of Guardians of the Galaxy).

 

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Why-Jurassic-World-Director-Wasn-t-Initially-Sold-Chris-Pratt-71950.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CBT

CBT

Posted
Posted
The definition being used for these discussions, was having films headlined for you. i.e. Chris Pratt, being made a super star from his marvel film, and then getting Jurassic Park Trilogy.

 

I don't think you understand the logistics of how movies are made.

 

Yes, in fact I do. Take one look at Evans, Hemsworth, etc. At this point studios know exactly what Marvel's leading men will become. Watch Boseman's movie slate, and you'll see the same, including castings before BP's release date no doubt.

 

Pratt would not have gotten JW without Guardians, the release date is not relevant. His casting, profile increase, and move to action hero/muscular guy are all due to Guardians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheLiamSturgess

TheLiamSturgess

Posted
Posted
The definition being used for these discussions, was having films headlined for you. i.e. Chris Pratt, being made a super star from his marvel film, and then getting Jurassic Park Trilogy.

 

I don't think you understand the logistics of how movies are made.

 

Yes, in fact I do. Take one look at Evans, Hemsworth, etc. At this point studios know exactly what Marvel's leading men will become. Watch Boseman's movie slate, and you'll see the same, including castings before BP's release date no doubt.

 

Pratt would not have gotten JW without Guardians, the release date is not relevant. His casting, profile increase, and move to action hero/muscular guy are all due to Guardians.

 

Zero Dark Thirty came out long before GOTG hm though in fairness, he was merely supporting. But I would definitely call him a muscular hero in that movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0
Go to topic listing