Alright who is in the JLA movie, debate

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

Grave

We may be dealing with my standards (which have honestly sunk passable movies before just because I didn't have the tolerance for less than steller at the time) here and a difference of opinion more than anything else. RottenTomatoes wise, IM 2 comes in behind IM1, IM3, Thor, Captain America, Spider-Man 1, Spider-Man 2, The Avengers, X-Men, and X2.

I personally get bored for extended periods in Thor, Captain America, and X-Men (interestingly, also 70's RT scores and a low 80). Iron Man 2, I never cared to see twice which is rare for me. What I remember was an unaffecting father and son story (possibly made worse by the fact that there are a LOT of great movies that have this plot angle in them), a by-the-note alcoholism sub plot, and then IM and the Patriot fight things. I remembered not caring about Mickey Rourke and then being utterly confused how that happened.

I'm not saying people can't enjoy it, and it certainly had 73% of the critics that didn't hate it, but that's middling at best for Superhero films. At 50 or 60, that's when people generally consider something bad. Low 70's for Marvel just isn't good. And perhaps not here, but on various other blogs like IO9 'n such, I haven't heard the idea that IM2 isn't a good film is an uncommon opinion, although we've never argued box office to make that point. The reason is, that's a shifting target anyway with IM2 grossing about 6 million less domestically but making up for it in the foreign market. The only problem with using foreign market as a guide is that it's been a rising tide in everything for the last four years or so. If you made less in the foreign market with a sequel recently, your movie REALLY sucked. Hell, Man of Steel will probably barely eclipse IM2's totals which is essentially what IM2 did to IM.

Now don't get me wrong, I can make cases for movies in the 50's and 70's that are good. I just don't see anything in that movie that matches the cast. In fact many of the reviews talk in terms of "saved by RDJ" or the actors which isn't shocking when you're dealing with Cheadle, Downey, Paltrow, Rockwell, and Rourke and roughly replicating the mood of the first. Had they sat around an empty room trying to guess what was in a brown paper bag for two hours, that movie probably starts with 40% critical approval.

Now honestly a lot of that may be taste. After all, we're debating movies in the 70's that you find have charm. I find them rather cynical constructions honestly and RDJ's comic beats are mind numbingly predictable for me. I found Iron Man fun. I found the Avengers fun. I found IM 2 and 3 to be meh. But at the same time, you find no charm in Batman, find him unlikable as a character in Nolan's world and find Bane meh. I actually find Bane's amused, rather sardonic reaction to the people of Gotham incredibly funny as is Kyle's unabashed pragmatism and her chemistry with Wayne. I find Bruce's lavish spending as a means to an end silly for two films silly, his relationship with Alfred fun and warm for the first two films and borderline tragic in the third. And yet both Batman Begins and TDKR are critical successes in the terms of 85 and 87%. Again, people were absolutely taking shots at Nolan for having lost it on a film that 87% of critics liked and 92% of fans tended to give a passing grade.

So maybe that's just the key. Depending on viewpoint, all films (including a Justice League film) are impossible to pin down in terms of what will work and what doesn't. You need the vision to start with and someone to execute it. Goyer and Nolan could execute Batman. Goyer and Suckerpunch couldn't execute Superman. Jon Favreau knocks it out of the park with RDJ for a single film but can't get it to the next level while Joss Whedon can. Realism or romanticism can work just fine, you just need someone that can pull it off.

[Duelist925]

Actually, I did read his wiki before posting anything to make sure I was remembering my impressions right. The wiki did nothing to change my mind about his corniness. The water vulnerability was only finally removed in 2011 and while they tried to make it more realistic, he still has the talk to sea creatures with his mind thing.

Hell, one of the plot points with his most current reboot is that the general public finds him unimpressive compared to all the more awesome people around him. I also never said that he was a bad character, just that he has a corniness to his concept that's basically a left over from the golden age that DC still seems to have trouble figuring out what to do with.

Aquaman rules literally every part of earth that is covered in salt water. That's roughly 3/4's of it. And he has the power to control some of the mightiest creatures on earth (whales, giant squid, etc) and thats without even getting into the monsters that exist in the DCU.

When his son was in danger, he willing hacked off his own hand to save him, and has since sported a hook/harpoon/something fake hand.

He is only a joke because people remember the super friends, and don't update themselves past that, and because people will make fun of any super hero.

Others have pointed out how he is still extremely powerful, beyond the whole "ruler of the seas' thing, with super strength and invulnerability.

Also, most of DC's big names have been horribly embarrassed by shows and comics. Its in no way limited to Aquaman. Aquaman didn't become a joke because of shows like Robot Chicken, but rather, shows make a joke out of him because he's rife with material for it.

Partly true--any hero can be made fun of, because they are all fundamentally ridiculous to a degree. Aquaman is no more ridiculous than Batman in fundamentals, and with a half decent writer, can tell damn good stories.

Superman is a well documented asshole ( Superdickery~ ), Batman is a hilarious lunatic ( I'm the Goddamn Batman ) and Wonder Woman was a vain, air headed moron that kept getting herself tied up. Those three have arguably been more embarrassed by writers than Aquaman ever has. But it really sticks to Aquaman because he's already down a peg from the rest of them in terms of concept and general superhero awesomeness.

Seriously?

Superdickery: The vast majory of examples come from the silver and gold ages, when shit was weird. (And cracked out LSD tripping weird when it comes to Silver). Again, in any competent writers hands, Superman is a damn fine character. Read All Star Superman sometime. It's awesome. Or Superman:Birthright. Or hell, if you want a good example of a flawed Supes, read Kingdom Come. It's brilliant.

Goddamn Batman: Allstar Batman and Robin is not about Batman. It's about a crazy hobo named Steve who stole a batman outfit. Go watch Linkara Atop the 4rth Wall reviews of them to understand why I say this. Goddamn Batman is not a well written Batman. it is an insane parody of batman, and is truly ludicrous. There are many complains that can be leveled at Batmans sanity, but citing ASBAR is weak.

Wonder Woman: Seriously, do you only read Golden Age comics? She hasn't been that for DECADES. And she kept getting tied up in the beggining because her creator was a bondage fetishist. Seriously.

Wondy has seen a lot of slings lately, thanks to the faild pilot (dear god that was awful, largely because it completely ignored just about everything about Wonder Woman that makes her Wondy other than the costume and lasso), but again, she is a damn fine character in the hands of even a competent writer.

But thanks for making several assumptions about what I think on my behalf. -.-

Dude, no one made assumptions. You made it abundantly clear what you think.

[Gravekeeper]

Yeah, they "meet" each other within the first five minutes (except WW they already all know each other), yeah their powers aren't really explained. So what? Do you really need to be told why Superman is strong, or why Batman has gadgets? Or why Flash is super fast?

Those are pretty self evident. But Green Lantern, Wonder Woman and Hawkgirl need a bit of explanation at least.

The show isn't about their powers or how they work. It's about them working as a team.

You're arguing a super hero cartoon isn't about their powers? -.-

Re: Deus ex machina- You're failing a cartoon for using the very same techniques (ex:Manhunter summoning them) that are used in the very comics the cartoon is based on?

Back up a moment, how is bad writing/pacing my fault? Just because something is a cartoon doesn't mean bad writing is suddenly okay. Kids deserve good writing as much as anyone else. Also this show aired in the early 2000s, long past the "Cartoons can be stupid they're just for kids" era. It was also preceded by fantastically written shows like the Batman animated series and obviously DC must have some talented comic writers too. Otherwise they would not be a major comics label.

Its fine if they all get summoned by Martian Manhunter. But he basically what "Lawl, oh I did that." after the fact as a toss away explanation.

This is fun escapist entertainment, not high brow drama. I think a little slack can be given.

Quality is not genre dependent.

[violiav]

Re: Justice League cartoon- yes, the first two seasons were weaker than Unlimited. Also- it's a cartoon. The kids I know/knew that watched it didn't really critically analyze it. I mean, it's a cartoon that holds up pretty well in comparison to some other cartoon fare that was on TV at the same time. Yeah, they "meet" each other within the first five minutes (except WW they already all know each other), yeah their powers aren't really explained. So what? Do you really need to be told why Superman is strong, or why Batman has gadgets? Or why Flash is super fast?

The show isn't about their powers or how they work. It's about them working as a team. Why do they just roll with WW? Because purple? Because there's some weird alien stuff going on and it's not important? Because Manhunter summoned everyone?

The first 3 episodes dealt with introducing the audience to Martain Manhunter /Jonn Jonnz, the member that the viewing audience is least likely to have knowledge of.

Re: Deus ex machina- You're failing a cartoon for using the very same techniques (ex:Manhunter summoning them) that are used in the very comics the cartoon is based on?

This is fun escapist entertainment, not high brow drama. I think a little slack can be given.

Casting Justice
Assuming they'll keep Henry Cavill as Superman
Batman- I saw a list the had Jon Hamm. Adrian Pasdar or Karl Urban
Wonder Woman- Rachel Nichols, Olivia Wilde, Anna Silk
Manhunter- Idris Elba (or anyone, really)


Flash- I really see Ryan Reynolds asFlash, rather than GL. Or Chris Pine.
Green Lantern- Chris Pine for Kyle Rainer
Green Arrow- Karl Urban or Timothy Olyphant or Jeffery Donovan
Aquaman- Benedict Cumberbatch

[Andara Bledin]

Considering I got the same exact impression, independently, I'm thinking perhaps there's something being lost in the translation.

[Gravekeeper]

You're already exposing your unfamiliarity with the character. He's as powerful as Wonder Woman on land. He doesn't need to be in water or near water; that was a schlocky vulnerability that was added after the fact. Like I said before, Aquaman's biggest problems are 1.) Poor use in Super Friends, where the writers didn't know how to use him effectively, and 2.) Shows like Robot Chicken making fun of the cheesy ways in which Aquaman was used in Super Friends.

Actually, I did read his wiki before posting anything to make sure I was remembering my impressions right. The wiki did nothing to change my mind about his corniness. The water vulnerability was only finally removed in 2011 and while they tried to make it more realistic, he still has the talk to sea creatures with his mind thing.

Hell, one of the plot points with his most current reboot is that the general public finds him unimpressive compared to all the more awesome people around him. I also never said that he was a bad character, just that he has a corniness to his concept that's basically a left over from the golden age that DC still seems to have trouble figuring out what to do with.

Also, most of DC's big names have been horribly embarrassed by shows and comics. Its in no way limited to Aquaman. Aquaman didn't become a joke because of shows like Robot Chicken, but rather, shows make a joke out of him because he's rife with material for it.

Superman is a well documented asshole ( Superdickery~ ), Batman is a hilarious lunatic ( I'm the Goddamn Batman ) and Wonder Woman was a vain, air headed moron that kept getting herself tied up. Those three have arguably been more embarrassed by writers than Aquaman ever has. But it really sticks to Aquaman because he's already down a peg from the rest of them in terms of concept and general superhero awesomeness.

But thanks for making several assumptions about what I think on my behalf. -.-

[Nekojin]

The biggest problem with Aquaman is that he's Aquaman. His origin and power set defy being used effectively to the point that he's a long running cultural punchline. He's also another DC hero that has a Marvel mirror ( Namor ) that predates him and is less corny. But they're otherwise alarmingly similar power wise. Except Namor has actual land capabilities than Aquaman. Hence the problem.

When the writers have to find an excuse to flood a skyscraper just so Aquaman can fight underwater in Justice League, there's a problem. Even with the comics it seems like the writers flail around and reboot his origin once every few years.

You're already exposing your unfamiliarity with the character. He's as powerful as Wonder Woman on land. He doesn't need to be in water or near water; that was a schlocky vulnerability that was added after the fact. Like I said before, Aquaman's biggest problems are 1.) Poor use in Super Friends, where the writers didn't know how to use him effectively, and 2.) Shows like Robot Chicken making fun of the cheesy ways in which Aquaman was used in Super Friends.

And note, Aquaman wasn't the only "victim" of bad writing in Super Friends. They created Apache Chief, Black Vulcan, El Dorado, and Samurai to pad out the ethnic diversity without really doing anything to make the characters anything more than ethnic stereotypes. None of the characters had the depth to make the jump back to the comics; they lived and died purely in the Super Friends cartoon.

The bottom line isn't that Aquaman is a bad character. The bottom line is that comedy shows (Adult Swim, South Park, Robot Chicken, and Family Guy, to name a few) aimed at a younger audience made hay out of him appearing to be a bad character. And your perception of him is colored by these same comedy routines.

Aquaman basically needs the Captain America treatment. Don't emphasize the name ( or make it an in joke with the rest of the team ) and modernize him for a mainstream audience. Drop the obviously corny bits and for the love of god don't let him wear that costume.

If they use him for the movie, they'll probably give an "X-Men" makeover, ditching the orange and green spandex for something more realistic.

If you want to actually understand the character, and how he might be portrayed in a serious movie, it might be a good idea to take a trip to Wikipedia. Short version: Your impression of the character is not the same as everyone's view of the character.

[Gravekeeper]

Justice League Unlimited relied a little bit on comics fans already knowing the characters in question (with many, many tips of the hat and cameo appearances), and a little bit on strong characterization to help people understand who the characters are.

A little bit is an understatement. Everyone literally shows up in the span of 5 minutes with zero explanation whatsoever. They vaguely give Wonder Woman some back story but its quite literally she shows up out of no where and tells them she's princess of the Amazons. Then everyone just shrugs and goes with it.

I tried to watch it after Avengers EMH, which I rather enjoyed. What an awful contrast in pacing and character development JL/JLU is with EMH. I don't know if it gets better later, but the pilot episodes were a total mess and its really full of deus ex machina plot excuses in regards to the characters powers.

Aquaman can be done well. The biggest problem with dealing with Aquaman is, sadly, the Superfriends show, where the writers literally had no idea how to use him effectively.

The biggest problem with Aquaman is that he's Aquaman. His origin and power set defy being used effectively to the point that he's a long running cultural punchline. He's also another DC hero that has a Marvel mirror ( Namor ) that predates him and is less corny. But they're otherwise alarmingly similar power wise. Except Namor has actual land capabilities than Aquaman. Hence the problem.

When the writers have to find an excuse to flood a skyscraper just so Aquaman can fight underwater in Justice League, there's a problem. Even with the comics it seems like the writers flail around and reboot his origin once every few years.

Aquaman basically needs the Captain America treatment. Don't emphasize the name ( or make it an in joke with the rest of the team ) and modernize him for a mainstream audience. Drop the obviously corny bits and for the love of god don't let him wear that costume.

[Nekojin]

Personally I liked both Ghost Riders, but I am an odd duck.

Ghost Rider is an odd duck. I used to read it before my teenage years. Looking back at it, it's really, really easy to see it as an attempt to cash in on the popularity of Evel Knievel. It's horribly dated in concept, and it's been semi-rebooted several times. Marvel doesn't really know what to do with him, and every time they try to make a comic with him as the main character, it gets cancelled due to poor readership.

Many people seem to forget that the JLA membership is not limited to the original seven, and though they very rarely talk about them, DC has a wide variety of heroes..maybe even more then Marvel.

But the problem becomes how to introduce them. You can't just go and make a Justice League movie; most of the movie-watching audience is completely unfamiliar with the Justice League as a whole. You've got a tiny segment that reads the comics (or is at least aware enough of them to know who's in it), a somewhat larger segment that has watched the animated shows (which were brilliantly done), and a much, much larger general populace who knows Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and... er... Aquaman, maybe.

Super Friends was over 30 years ago. While Cartoon Network has had bumper clips that made fun of it ("Solomon Grundy want pants too!"), it's still too far back to rely on the audience knowing these characters.

JL unlimited (cartoon series) had a ton of interesting characters that I wish they had fleshed out more. Including a bad guy(s) version of the Wonder Twins. Now I don't know how people would receive a JL with the side characters, but there is another good way to handle the JL movie. In one of the JL animated shows they discovered the Justice Lords. It was a JL from another dimension that went a little to far to have 'order'.

Justice League Unlimited relied a little bit on comics fans already knowing the characters in question (with many, many tips of the hat and cameo appearances), and a little bit on strong characterization to help people understand who the characters are. While it's a good place to showcase the hundred or so characters that have been in the Justice League over time (hell, even Vibe and Gypsy got repeated cameos, and they were two of the worst characters ever invented for the Justice League, being little more than walking stereotypes), it's not a good springboard for the movie-going audience to know who the characters are. And it also didn't hurt that the animated series had the preceding Justice League series to establish the core characters in the first place.

An invasion of the Justice Lords, disguised as the good guys (and giving them a bad name) would be an interesting hook also. While their non animated movies seem to fall flat, the JL animated movies seem to be very interesting. It would take a very good director to make the transition, but again there are dozens of very good ways to do these movies.

Justice Lords would make an exceptional second or third movie, but it would be terrible for a first movie - it would be confusing for people who have only a cursory understanding of the core characters to have to deal with their overzealous, off-the-deep-end counterparts (I don't want to say evil counterparts - it depends on which version we're talking about as to whether they're actually evil, or just "ends justify the means").

Now lets talk about the whale in the room (pun intended) Aquaman. I think, sad to say, he'd have to be sidelined for one of the other many, many heroes that has been part of the JL.

Aquaman can be done well. The biggest problem with dealing with Aquaman is, sadly, the Superfriends show, where the writers literally had no idea how to use him effectively. He's super-strong and tough (thanks to living in depths that would crush normal humans), and easily on a par with Wonder Woman for raw power. The problem comes in that his other major ability, communication/control with animals, ends up getting shoehorned in inappropriately.

In fact, bringing Aquaman in as the antagonist of the first Justice League movie could be done extremely well. He's defending his territory against the predations of people who don't even know he's there.

I think the technology exists now for a reboot of Zan and Jana (spelling) the wonder twins. A bit more edgy (for the reboot that is), and their powers would make an interesting addition to the JL movie.

The Wonder Twins (and their predecessors, Wendy and Marvin, non-powered teenagers who tagged along and got in trouble) were an embarrassment to DC for a long, long time. The editorial staff refused to have anything to do with any of those characters - they were officially persona non grata. That changed after some time, when Wendy and Marvin were added into the Birds of Prey storyline, as the children of the villain, Calculator. Marvin died; Wendy was crippled, and became an assistant for Barbara Gordon (Oracle), to fill in when Oracle wasn't available. Since the Flashpoint reboot, she hasn't been seen to the best of my knowledge, but she should still be operating as Proxy, taking over Oracle's role now that Babs is healed and fighting crime as Batgirl again.

As for Zan and Jayna, they were reintroduced in the poorly-conceived Extreme Justice comic in the '90s, which resulted in them being shelved again. The characters who showed up in Justice League (JLU S1 E9, "Ultimatum"), Downpour and Shifter, were a sideways nod to the Wonder Twins (who were still considered off the table), but that gave enough leverage to actually have Zan and Jayna appear in the live-action show, Smallville. We may yet see their return to mainstream comics, but don't hold your breath for them being part of the Justice League.

Here's a list of all of the characters that have ever been in the Justice League. It's a long list.

We can expect Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman to be in it, but only if Wonder Woman has a big-screen debut sometime before that. If a WW movie never materializes, you can expect the JLA movie to be mothballed as well.

The mediocre performance of the Green Lantern movie may end up keeping any Green Lantern from being a part of the JLA movie. However, if they DO add a Green Lantern, there are a couple of choices. From least likely to most:

Guy Gardner. Brash, obnoxious, and egotistical. If he's used, expect him to be more like his unlikeable asshole 1980's version, and less like his more tempered (but still brash and hot-headed) current version. Generally unknown to the non-comic-reading audience.

Kyle Rayner. Now a White Lantern in current continuity, Kyle was, for a while, the only Green Lantern, with all of the other rings depowered and destroyed, and most of the other GLs either dead or exiled. As with Guy, he has no cultural presence outside of the comic book audience.

Simon Baz. As the newest Green Lantern in current comics continuity, Simon Baz is a Lebanese-American Muslim. Viewed as a terrorist by the US government, Simon's trying to make a change for himself and others. He's not a bad guy, but he has been driven (and manipulated) into doing some bad things. He has no cultural presence outside of the comic book audience, but he could be used for ethnic diversity.

John Stewart. As a member of the Justice League animated series from start to finish, he has some cultural presence. As a black man, he's more likely to be used in order to make an ethnically-diverse cast.

Hal Jordan. The classic silver-age Green Lantern, who has been "The" Green Lantern for the past 40 years, barring a brief period of death. As the main character of the recent Green Lantern movie, he's the most likely choice for a Green Lantern in the Justice League movie, but if DC can't get Ryan Reynolds to reprise his role, then other Green Lanterns become more likely. If he's tapped to play Deadpool for Marvel (something he REALLY wants to do), he may have contractual issues with being GL again.

- - - - -

I've said before that Cyborg is pretty much a no-brainer, if the DC Editorial staff have any say in the casting for the movie. Since Flashpoint, Cyborg has been retconned as being a founding member of the Justice League, and is considered to be a heavy-hitter in his own right. His appearance in the JLU series helps raise his cultural presence, and DC is really pushing hard to have him Be Important. Rumor has it that they're pushing him as a major character as a response to accusations that DC is racist, since there aren't very many significant black heroes (or non-white heroes, for that matter).

- - - - -

Beyond that, the additional cast is wide open. Who they choose to use in the movie(s) can probably be guessed based on who they want to appear important in the comics.

Green Arrow is a likely choice since the TV show Arrow is quite popular right now. However, they might choose to leave him out, if they think it might bring too many comparisons to Hawkeye, and/or accusations that they're just imitating Marvel.

Flash is likely, since he's considered one of DC's anchor characters, and is a founding member of the Justice League.

Zatanna is a strong possibility for gender diversity, as is Vixen. I'd place Zatanna higher, since she's a more prominent character in the DCU.

They could use Booster Gold, and give a tip of the hat to his extreme (if unacknowledged) importance to the DC universe, as a sort of time cop, preventing villains from fucking with history. Outwardly, he's a vain, self-important showboat who wants the limelight and money. Secretly, unbeknownst to anyone other than Batman, he's actually selfless and devoted to making a difference, since he's already a hero out of his own time. With his appearance in JLU (with an entire episode focused on him), there's a non-zero chance that he'll be added.

Firestorm is middling-high importance right now. They could use Vibe to try to make up for their disastrous use of him in the 80's (and the ethnic diversity angle, as well).

- - - - -

Personally, I'd love to see a Plastic Man live-action movie, and add him to the Justice League afterward. He's a very interesting character, with a pedigree almost as solid as Batman and Superman. =^_^=

[Mytical]

Personally I liked both Ghost Riders, but I am an odd duck.

Many people seem to forget that the JLA membership is not limited to the original seven, and though they very rarely talk about them, DC has a wide variety of heroes..maybe even more then Marvel. JL unlimited (cartoon series) had a ton of interesting characters that I wish they had fleshed out more. Including a bad guy(s) version of the Wonder Twins. Now I don't know how people would receive a JL with the side characters, but there is another good way to handle the JL movie. In one of the JL animated shows they discovered the Justice Lords. It was a JL from another dimension that went a little to far to have 'order'.

An invasion of the Justice Lords, disguised as the good guys (and giving them a bad name) would be an interesting hook also. While their non animated movies seem to fall flat, the JL animated movies seem to be very interesting. It would take a very good director to make the transition, but again there are dozens of very good ways to do these movies.

As for individual hero movies there are some good possibilities there too. Martian Manhunter's background would make a great movie. How mars people were basically destroyed, how, when, why..etc. Or perhaps gets trapped in a fight between the Lanterns and the Manhunters. (Nobody escapes the Manhunters)

Wonder Woman fighting Ares, and perhaps running into one of the less popular ones that they might not be able to make a movie of (like Flash). One of the reasons the Avengers was good was their bad guy Loki. Play off of that.

Now lets talk about the whale in the room (pun intended) Aquaman. I think, sad to say, he'd have to be sidelined for one of the other many, many heroes that has been part of the JL. I think the technology exists now for a reboot of Zan and Jana (spelling) the wonder twins. A bit more edgy (for the reboot that is), and their powers would make an interesting addition to the JL movie.

[Gravekeeper]

Was Ghost Writer bad? Knowing nothing of the character otherwise, I enjoyed it.

That was an amusing mental image for a moment. >.>

Ghost Rider is sort of an odd one. I think it was kind of so bad its good territory. Both it and the sequel won them some razzies as I recall. If it wasn't for Cage, they likely would have been just bad bad instead of so bad its good.

Ghost Rider is kinda outside of the mainstream though and is an anti-hero. Its rare for anyone to pull off a good movie from an anti-hero comic character. ( Remember Dolph Lundgren Punisher? >.> )

[HYHYBT]

Was Ghost Writer bad? Knowing nothing of the character otherwise, I enjoyed it.

[Gravekeeper]

The Spiderman and X-Men franchises met the same fate.
Film 1: Great
Film 2: Good
Film 3: Crap
Film 4: Reboot

Both trilogies ended with such utter crap that they had to reboot and retcon.

I don't know why everyone remembers it that way. It wasn't. The third movie in both trilogies was the most successful out of their respective franchises. Spiderman 3 especially was hugely successful. Spiderman's least successful movie was actually #2. While X-Men's least successful movie was actually the first one.

The third ones were hugely successful. It actually goes:

Spiderman
Film 1: Amazing
Film 2: Great
Film 3: Good
Film 4: Reboot

X-Men
Film 1: Good
Film 2: Great
Film 3: Decent
Film 4: Reboot

With the third movie in both franchises being run away successes that eclipsed both movies before them. Where the third movies as good as 1/2? No, but they were no where near as bad as everyone seems to swear they were either. They were still good movies, just not AS good as the two before them critically speaking.

As for the reboots, The Amazing Spiderman was a big success. While First Class, which honestly doesn't quite count as a reboot, was also quite successful. Amazing Spiderman is more of a commercial success, while First Class is more of a critical darling.

[Andara Bledin]

They want to do a Deadpool movie, but they only way they can do one with any kind of justice would garner an R Rating.

Reynolds is still hot to do a proper Deadpool movie, and there's a script (a "hard R"), a director, and a budget. They're all ready and waiting for Fox to give them a green light.

Article at ET Online

[eta]
Oh, and the script has been leaked and apparently is awesome enough that it's gotten people even more intent on having the movie happen.

[crashhelmet]

Or in X men's case prequel with 2nd in the works, could the Wolverine origin taint cameo characters having their own films or being used in Marvel studio works?
EG I'm willing to see the Wade Williams (or whatever his name is) just happen have the same name as Deadpool, hell I share my name with a movie director and a former footballer, so there are probably more Wade's knocking around.
But sadly we may not get to have an X men/Avengers cross over due to the rights being split between two studios.

They want to do a Deadpool movie, but they only way they can do one with any kind of justice would garner an R Rating.

I heard there was a deal brokered between Fox and Marvel that any character that was both an X-man and an Avenger could be used by both parties. I'm assuming this agreement only applies to non-used characters up to the most recent movies. I HIGHLY doubt Fox would let Wolverine be in an Avengers movie.

Both Avengers 2 and X-Men: Days of Future past are set to feature Quicksilver. Understandably, yet sadly, they will not be played by the same actor. Aaron Taylor-Johnson, aka Kick Ass, will play him in Avengers 2 and Evan Peters, aka Kick Ass's friend, plays him in X-Men: DoFP

Quicksilver: One Mutant, Two Actors For 'X-Men' and 'Marvel's The Avengers 2'

The problem that Avengers 2 will have is that they can't refer to him as a mutant or mention his father Max Eisenhardt aka Erik Lehnsherr aka Magneto. They are also casting his sister, Scarlet Witch.

It's going to be interesting to see how it all plays out.