Shouldn't nightcrawler get his own movie?

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 6:52 pm

I would like it if NC had his own movie. However, it would have to be exceptionally well done. I think I'd rather there were no NC movie than a bad one.

digigirl02 · Post by **digigirl02** » Tue May 16, 2006 12:35 am

I would love to see a nightcrawler movie. But they would probably make one of Mystique first though.

Confizzle · Post by **Confizzle** » Tue May 16, 2006 2:58 am

I doubt Nightcrawler could carry his own movie, they'd have to team him up with someone.

chicory · Post by **chicory** » Tue May 16, 2006 3:21 am

oh ye of little faith - I think with the right director they could pull something off. Daredevil has his own movie, and Elektra. Nightcrawler's at least as interesting!

Confizzle · Post by **Confizzle** » Tue May 16, 2006 5:32 am

But Daredevil can carry his own comic, Nightcrawler has failed at that.

[Edited on 5/16/2006 by confusedelf]

Nandireya · Post by **Nandireya** » Tue May 16, 2006 6:57 am

Originally posted by confusedelf
But Daredevil can carry his own comic, Nightcrawler has failed at that.

I wouldn't say the Nightcrawler book failed...I think they didn't want it to succeed…next to zero promotion…released during a glut of less credible solo X-titles (even the fans didn’t seem to care for Rogue and Gambit’s books)…inexplicable three month hiatus…even then it was still selling better than a lot of the competition’s stuff (IIRC it was selling better than Wonder Woman…at least before the hiatus)…it had carved itself a nice little niche…but a little niche apparently isn’t enough for Marvel…if it was a DC book it’d probably still be on the stands...they seem to care as much for the fans as the do for the bucks...

[Edited on 16-5-2006 by Nandireya]

Post by **HoodedMan** » Tue May 16, 2006 11:49 am

I have to agree. Comic books succeed and fail based solely upon the confidence the publisher has in them. There was much demand for the solo series, but Marvel's executives simply decided they would end it at Issue 12 regardless. So mote it be.

NachtcGleiskette · Post by **NachtcGleiskette** » Tue May 16, 2006 2:41 pm

I've noticed that Marvel's marketing team is kinda....odd....

They seem to give up on a book far before giving it a chance, and focus alot of energy on a few things, rather than others. It just seems odd to me...and poor for business. They just really need a new marketing team...

DC on the other hand seems to know how to take care of a new book, help it get its bearings, and let it thrive....though, at the same time, DC's parent company is Time Warner...whereas Marvel doesn't have a parent company....so, DC can afford to spend a little extra to see how a book will do...

I dunno, I hate to "blame" Marvel, only because...it's business, you know? Comics aren't really as huge an industry as they were, and certainly don't bring in the dough they did....like, it sucks for the fans, but can they afford to publish a book that isn't making a profit?? Maybe they should find new ways to publish stories which doesn't cost as much..to peak fan interest and gage how well a book will sell before making a huge investment in it.....blah blah blah, if I keep talking I'm gonna start charging

Anyway, sorry..this is TOTALLY off topic...

*kinda liked the Gambit solo series

. It had ZOMBIES!*

Confizzle · Post by **Confizzle** » Wed May 24, 2006 2:50 pm

D.C.'s like the little housewife that'll do anything to please you, Marvel's the slutty girlfriend that'll dump you when something better comes along.

Violet · Post by **Violet** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:33 pm

He should have his own movie.

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:37 am

Actually, with Marvel now doing all its own production and such, I might not mind a reboot of the X-Men movies. But who knows?

I'll let you know more after I've seen the Incredible Hulk, Thor, Captain America, the Avengers, and Wolverine.

Post by **steyn** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:12 am

and Deadpool, when they make it.

Post by **Esynthia** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:16 am

EEEEEEEEE Wolverine movie! May 1st, 2009! GAMBIT!!!!! EEEEEEEEEEE

Ult_Sm86 · Post by **Ult_Sm86** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:22 am

They're even taken "creative control" of the results of Fantastic Four and Spider-Man films by saying they want to make "Invisible Woman" and "Venom" spin offs.

I'm sorry, but...isn't eddie brock dead? lol

Joe Quesada build marvel film studios, he's calling it his "baby". lol

the_lone_bamf · Post by **the_lone_bamf** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:29 am

Did anyone else get friends and family going "Look! It's Nightcrawler- THE MOVIE!" When 'Jumper' came out?

shail66 · Post by **shail66** » Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:09 pm

I dont really mind what they did to his costume design, he doesnt ahve fur but they did give him a pretty trippy background that leads back to his faith(...again.). But I really was pretty dissapointed when he didn't show up at all for the third movie.

OctoberHoliday · Post by **OctoberHoliday** » Sat May 02, 2009 5:54 pm

Yeah, the fact that he wasn't in X3 completely killed it for me. I couldn't even enjoy it the first time I watched it.

And I see what you guys are saying about the Alan Cumming look of Nightcrawler, it was very different from the comics, but I really liked it. The X2 movie was actually my first time seeing Nightcrawler, so I was a little surprised to find out that he wasn't covered with scars and had blue fur. Also, I think that his lack of tricksterness made the character more beautiful. I'd love to see Alan come through and there be a movie staring this protrayal.

Sadly, I doubt very much that Alan Cumming will be returning to the character. The make-up process was very grueling and took hours. Any actor might be put off by that. Also, who else besides the Elf would be in it? Wolverine has some characters in his background (Gambit, Deadpool, Sabertooth), but Nightcrawler grew up at a circus. All the famous and classic characters are sort of exempt.

So, no matter how much I want it to, I don't see it happening. maybe one-day, when a bored director decides to do something great, we'll get what we need, but before that? No.

[Edited on 2/5/09 by OctoberHoliday]

Ult_Sm86 · Post by **Ult_Sm86** » Sat May 02, 2009 6:21 pm

Nightcrawler has a perfect movie story.

You got already established characters such as Mystique, Rogue, Magneto, and Charles, all prominent in the life and times of Kurt.

Szardos company, and a few others and you'll have Nightcrawler story. They even did a fairly accurate portrayal of his life in the set up for the movie in the one-shot comic that Chuck Austen got to write.
Base it off that? Fuck, let Chuck and someone who doesn't rape characters write it. Like Kevin Smith ffs.
I think it has a lot of potential 'Tober, but I agree with you, it's not likely to happen.

Though is fanbase is large, like Green Arrow, he's not a spoken name. In the comic world? Sure. But to common movie goers who are used to seeing XXX and action movies and like seeing Hugh Jackman ripping into people, they won't get it and it won't work, and there's no market for it.

However; if they *did* market it right, if they *did* write a story that was both intelligent, action packed, and fairly true to story, at least in regards to timeline of the x-2 film, I think they might have something.

There's a very good chance you could have a tremendous movie here, but they'll ignore it for bigger people such as Thor, more wolverine, and Deadpool.

And I think Alan is f.o.s. when he says the make up was too hard.
First off, he's a character actor, so if he doesn't like it, he should've said no.
Secondly, he was kazzoo in Flintstones Viva Rock Vegas, which had to take make up. He was also basically the scarecrow as well in that "Tin Man" mini series, so his ramblings and excuses of being stuck as a pre-established character who everyone will recognize him as and no longer see him as an 'accomplished actor' is b.s. 'cuz the only other big movies he's been in are Spy Kids (god help us) and Josie & The Pussycats (got help us again).

I think Alan is one of those actors who's just got something up his ass and thinks he rides a high horse. I'm not saying this makes him a bad actor, but it makes him a whiner. Plus, as I've stated, his physique was all wrong and the tattooing brought the wrong part of his spiritual side out. It brought out the angst and the turbulence, and Kurt tries to make sure he balances his religious beliefs so they *benefit* him and those around him, not hurt him.

Canon Kurt would probably be taken aback, if not flat out confused, as to why anyone would do the things his movie counterpart had done to himself, and rightfully so.
The action in X-2 was cool, the effects for the teleporting were great, it just....

Kurt, should he be in another film, needs his own chance to shine.

Might I add, Kelsey Grammar took on the role of Beast and didn't complain much. And c'mon... he played Fraiser for over 20 years. (Fraiser was originally a character from the show "Cheers" for anyone who doesn't know).

OctoberHoliday · Post by **OctoberHoliday** » Sat May 02, 2009 9:46 pm

Yes, I see what you're saying. He is a character actor, yes, and he wasn't quite ready for the extent of the make-up. I just know that I wouldn't be able to sit still for hours on end with people messing with my face.

You're right about the Wolverine thing, though. Hugh Jackman been in all of them, and I suppose that many people would be reluctant without him in it, and you're right about Nightcrawler's popularity outside the comics. Also, I guess there are many good, important characters in Nightcrawler's story, but many of the more actiony and silly characters are missing, Nightcrawler being one of the only ones.

I've seen many Alan Cumming interviews and the like, and he seems alright. He's very charismatic and funny. Also, I didn't get many 'he's so full of himself' vibes, but whatever. It's not like either of us really know him, so lets forget that bit.

And I loved him in Spy Kids. Floop was the best character in that, and I'd love to live in that castle! But that's just me, and I have rather odd taste.

(Thanks for calling me Tober. It's was my nickname on the last site I was at)

love_of_bob · Post by **love_of_bob** » Sat May 02, 2009 10:05 pm

OctoberHoliday wrote: Also, who else besides the Elf would be in it? Wolverine has some characters in his background (Gambit, Deadpool, Sabertooth), but Nightcrawler grew up at a circus. All the famous and classic characters are sort of exempt.

Gambit and Deadpool were pretty much retconned into Wolverine's past because of the movie.

OctoberHoliday · Post by **OctoberHoliday** » Sat May 02, 2009 10:37 pm

Really? So Gambit and Deadpool really aren't a part of Wolverine's big story?

If that's what you mean, then cool. This could be possible yet. Maybe if they're to add a few more characters in, this Nightcrawler film might be doable.

But you know, if that's what it takes, changing his story and all that, I'd rather that they didn't make a movie. I like him how he is.

[Edited on 2/5/09 by OctoberHoliday]

Ult_Sm86 · Post by **Ult_Sm86** » Sat May 02, 2009 10:37 pm

Yeah I heard about that... that's depressing. I only cited them because I was referring to the movie, and movie-canon stories. Nightcrawlers has a movie-canon comic with most of the characters in his past in 616 starring in it. Lots of nods to the fans, but I'm sure you read that LoB.

As for Alan, I suppose you are correct in that neither of us know him, but his portrayal was based on what the directors told him and in the end, we can blame singer all we want, but it's the idiots who wrote it, or the idiots who approved it, or even worse, the idiots who changed what was written to be something they would approve. The result was X-2 and then X-3. Sadly.

I wish they would re-do the X-films, but sadly, it appears they're only going to make more. With the recent film (Origins at the time of this post), my friend and I decided to take another look at our X-4 Script idea.

OctoberHoliday · Post by **OctoberHoliday** » Sat May 02, 2009 10:49 pm

You've made a script? Well done. What's the story?

Ult_Sm86 · Post by **Ult_Sm86** » Sat May 02, 2009 11:04 pm

It's been started.

it's the introduction of the four horsemen of the apocalypse along with the revival of Jean and introductions of Alex, Gambit (at the time we suspected he'd be in Origins), Archangel (not Angel), and Essex.

Part II (a fifth movie) would be AoA.

The Drastic Spastic · Sat May 02, 2009 11:19 pm

OctoberHoliday wrote: And I see what you guys are saying about the Alan Cumming look of Nightcrawler, it was very different from the comics, but I really liked it. The X2 movie was actually my first time seeing Nightcrawler, so I was a little surprised to find out that he wasn't covered with scars and had blue fur. Also, I think that his lack of tricksterness made the character more beautiful. I'd love to see Alan come through and there be a movie staring this protrayal.

Beautiful = boring? The fact that snotty little Alan Cumming will never play Nightcrawler again is the only thing that keeps me from shuddering at that idea.

The one good thing about X-Men Origins (I mean, aside from the wicked cool explosions) was that they totally, totally changed some characters who had already been seen in the other three films. Scott Summers was a different guy! (Not just the actor, either, the whole character was changed.) Sabertooth, also different!

They could do a Nightcrawler movie and do it right this time.

Replace the religious angst, toothpick chest, and general tedium with some action, adventure, and SEX. Wooo boy.