• Like Us On Facebook
    • Like us on Facebook

  • +1 Us on Google
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Facebook
    • Follow us on tumblr.

  • Search

After watching a video concerning Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine standing in for Ellen Page’s Kitty Pryde, I suddenly felt an unrelenting frustration and confusion with regard to the choice made by the writers of X-Men: Days of Future Past.

In the video, we see one of the screenwriters, Simon Kinberg, explain to Total Film that Wolverine is “the protagonist of the franchise, and probably the most beloved character to a mass audience,” but he went on to say “obviously in the book it’s Kitty… But you’re talking about an actress who, in the age of Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy, would have been negative 20 years old. So we started thinking again, and the first reflex response to that was a character who doesn’t age. Wolverine is the only character who would look the same in 1973 as he does in the future.”

After listening to this, one can’t help but wonder if they telling us, of all the changes that have been made to the film already (i.e. Gambit existing in the wrong time line in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, when he’s supposed to be part of the infamous relationship between he and Rogue), that the filmmakers are simply incapable of handling the issue of Kitty Pryde not existing in the film’s 70′s era? They could have, perhaps, enabled her to travel back in time by the same means Bishop arrives to the present, thus accommodating the use of her character?

Seeing as how Bishop is going to be introduced into the present day X-Men anyway, could that not be one of many other ways in which to depict Kitty as the main protagonist, as opposed to ending up with Wolverine as the main character again?

If that seems unsatisfactory, then perhaps the writers could alter the timeline a little further, showing her character as a slightly more mature woman, currently married to Colossus.

Using Wolverine again sounds a little nonsensical and, to be honest, a little lazy at this point when you consider the creative liberties many adaptions have taken in the past for various reasons. An example of such changes occurring in adaptions would be the Harry Potter films in which Dobby is absent (between Chamber of Secrets and Deathly Hallows) when, in fact, he is present in the books, mentioning Winky the House Elf and her drinking problem, among other things.

The writers were given a golden opportunity to expand on Kitty Pryde’s character, a female no less, but instead it feels as though they chose what appears to be the easy way out by opting for Wolverine to take centre stage once again. Considering Cyclops is, at times, thought of as the “leader” of the X-Men (yet the whole group seem to be individual leaders, enabling them to work effectively as a collective group), why Wolverine was initially chosen to be the protagonist of the whole series is beyond me.

While he is a complex enough character with a unique past, he is not, in my opinion, so interesting to deserve the spotlight once again after receiving so much of it already.

Looking through a retrospective eye on things, the first film is the only exception with the introduction of his character; the second film was not as good because his backstory and his feelings for Jean Grey were given a little more attention, in addition to the general mutant-capture-and-rescue plot line. In the third film, he receives the spotlight again after the death of Cyclops, giving him more camera time to act as more of the tortured soul while his mind is plagued by Jean’s voice. Finally, there were two stand-alone films to add to the list of many other male superhero films which exist today.

These films, and others like Man of Steel and The Avengers, will continue to overshadow the overwhelmingly small amount of superheroine-centric films that are badly needed. Not just for more female representation for younger audiences, but simply because films which follow the usual tropes and consist of male-dominated casts are becoming increasingly boring, i.e. The Avengers, merely consisting of one superheroine and (the immediate) Justice League, in which a lot of the time the men outweigh the women in numbers depending on what issue you’re reading.

I thought X-Men: First Class was much better than its three predecessors (not a perfect product but better than the others), and was hoping it was a starting point for the franchise to move into a more updated and improved direction from then onward. I still am hopeful about this upcoming film, but I’m starting to think that hoping is all that I’ll ever be able to do for a good while until, by some miracle, the X-Men films are rebooted.

Please bear in mind that this is strictly my two cents on the issue of underrepresentation of female characters.

This article was written by a Hypable user! Learn more and write your own right here.

  • Esmeblabbed

    I was disappointed when I heard that Wolverine would be replacing Kitty in the movie. I love Wolverine, but I also love Shadowcat. I’m getting a little tired of seeing everything centred around Wolverine when it comes to X-Men. That’s why I loved First Class, and I thought this sequel would be just as good. Don’t get me wrong, I’m still super excited, I just hope they pay attention to other characters too.

    • FinnM

      I totally agree, Esme! I certainly hope they do that, especially with all the new mutants…also, seeing as how Rogue was given her own Empire cover, perhaps there is a slight chance she *will* be in the film after all :D Even if only for a little bit

  • David

    See? This is why Bryan Singer shouldn’t have returned. I liked how First Class was in the whole, a reboot of the franchise, with a fresh approach.

    • James

      Jesus Christ. The STUDIO made them make Wolverine the main character. He’s the most bankable actor in the whole cast.

      • Paloma

        I think Jennifer could be seen as pretty bankable too.

        • bkirk

          id bank all over jennifer

      • Liderc

        Technically Jennifer Lawrence is the most bankable actor in the cast, but Wolverine is the most bankable character.

      • FinnM

        How do you know? Would it not be down to Singer and the writing crew to determine what they’re going to do with the story..?

    • Enelya

      I agree. First Class was supposed to be a reboot, then they let Singer in and he’s just making it about his cast, not the reboot cast. It would be like Rami taking over the next Spiderman and sneaking Franco and Dunst back in. It’s no longer a reboot.

      • alazear2

        You are aware that Singer was a producer on First Class, right? He had a ton of involvement. In fact he was the original director, meaning he had a lot of involvement in the creation of ideas for the movie (he dropped out to make Jack the Giant Killer, which is what allowed Vaughn to come on). Also Matthew Vaughn, the director of First Class, is one of the writers of the movie, meaning he probably gave a lot of time to the actors from his film.
        As for making it about his cast, all signs point to the bulk of the movie taking place in the 70′s with flashes to the present, meaning that the main cast is the First Class one. It even appears that the majority of the original cast are only doing brief appearances, with Jackman, Stewart, and McKellen having more that just cameos. The fact that Anna Paquins’ role was cut, due to it being only one scene, should tell you how small the original casts roles were.

  • Ultron

    I’m getting tired of Wolverine. I’m disappointed he gets all the attention. They’re a team and I want more of storm and shadowcat. But in avengers 2 there will be two women so that’s a plus! Finally more women superheroes! There still should be more…but most of them would need solo movies first like Ms. Marvel. (Give her to us!)

    • A Guy

      I think a three film arc for captain marvel would be awesome. In the first film have carol become ms marvel after meeting mar-vell. In the second one marvel dies and in the third carol becomes captain marvel.

      • FinnM

        I never really gave much attention to Captain Marvel (Carol) but I’d still watch the heck out of it!

    • FinnM

      Yeah, I’m so happy superHEROINES are getting more attention that they deserve! I mean, 3 Wonder Woman films?! Count me in :D

  • gcw07

    This is Singer’s obsession. It really has been since his first X-Men movie. My favorite character was always Shadowcat and it sucks to have her storyline replaced by Wolverine.

    • FinnM

      I agree wholeheartedly. I loved the films when I was really young but after watching them again, I realise they’ve been treated pretty poorly and the timeline is kind of screwed up now so some of the characters *cough cough Rogue and Gambit cough cough** can’t canonically get together in the present…although, that’s obviously the least of the franchise’s problems but that’s just an example…

  • http://hypable.com John Thrasher

    I’m in total agreement with this thought. All of this aside, Wolverine hasn’t really changed much since the first movie. It would be nice to see him develop as a character if we’re going to be forced to watch 90% of the movie be about him.

    • FinnM

      I don’t know, I guess he has developed more of a sensitive side, perhaps? But I agree, some more character development would be great if we’re stuck with him ¬_¬

  • Jordan

    What bothers me more is that they have soooooo many characters they could use if they didn’t want to use Kitty, so many, but they continue to rehash Jackman. It’s putting me off the movies :/

    • FinnM

      I know what you mean :( They could have used a different character or they could have used altered the future year so that Kitty is/older and go back to the late 80′s maybe or SOMETHING >.< Just stop with the whole Wolverine thing

  • Shadowstare

    The Marvel went through this in the comics a number of years ago. Wolverine a solo book, Origin, then was in about 7 different teams books at the same time. It got ridiculous.
    I see why using Wolverine as the “bridge” between the past and present makes sense in this upcoming movie, but Wolverine REALLY doesn’t need to be in every X-movie going forward. There are ALOT of X-men with compelling stories to tell.

    • FinnM

      You’re right, SO MANY more X-Men! Any you have in mind to see?

      • Marcus

        I would love to see Cyclops. The real Cyclops. THe multi-layered character we got to see in Whedon’s Astonishing X-men run.

        • FinnM

          That would be a breath of fresh air

  • alazear2

    The simple fact of the matter is that Wolverine is the mutant that most of the general populace is familiar with, in part because of his appearance in the animated versions of the characters, and in part because the X-men comic arc that is most well known outside of comic book fans is the Japanese arc (the one which the Wolverine was based on). There is also the fact that Hugh Jackman plays the role so memorably that it pretty much captured all the attention when the first movie came out. I agree that I would like to see one of the other mutants get some screen time but I also agree with their assessment of reasons not to use Kitty. Right now I’m not worried. It looks like a pretty significant portion of the movie is set in the 70′s so a good chunk of the screen time will be for the cast of First Class that is returning, or to those new actors like Evan Peters (who I still dislike as a choice for quicksilver) or the guy they’re bringing in to play a young Toad. On the bright side Jackman probably only has one or two more movies in him, meaning that they’ll either recast immediatly (unlikely due to the fits that would be thrown), or they’ll retire the character for awhile (seems more likely).
    As for the lack of Female Superheros, its very delicate situation (even though it shouldn’t be). The studios run the risk of pissing off one of two groups, The comic book fans/superhero fans who are essentially the core audience, and Female viewership, which they are desperately trying to appeal to. Comic fans are finicky bunch. If you change one thing that they don’t approve of then you’ve got the internet filled with complaints, leading to bad press, and the possibility of a bad box office. Remember when it was first revealed that Superman in Man of Steel wouldn’t have his trademark red underwear? The fans had a hissy fit. Hell X-men fans still complain about the uniforms in the movies, even though the movies are generally really good. But if you do the original version of a female hero you run the risk of pissing off the female audience. Take Wonder Woman for example. She is usually viewed as the perfect example of a Feminist hero, when in all actuality she would be viewed by most feminists as the definition the perfect male version of a female hero. Between her costume and her Weakness (if a man binds her wrists she loses her powers) she is the definition of the sexualization of a female hero. It’s a problem with a lot of Female comic characters (Black Widow, Hawk Girl, Mrs. Marvel, Scarlet Witch). They are all sexualized, whether it be in their costume or their powers. And when those two groups come into conflict with one another it isn’t pretty. Just look at the recent casting of Gal Gadot for Batman vs. Superman. Comic fans took to the internet screaming that she wasn’t right for the role, because she wasn’t right physically, causing conflict when people stepped up to defend the casting (for the record I really like the casting, I just feel she deserves her own movie, instead of being shoehorned into what is essentially becoming a Justice league movie). It happens even with non-hero female characters. Remember when photos of Shailene Woodley as Mary Jane Watson hit the internet. Comic fans once again had a fit that she wasn’t pretty enough (In my opinion she was pretty enough but I couldn’t see her acting like MJ, since all of her roles are far more serious than MJ is when she’s first introduced).
    The simple fact that is that until studios are willing to piss off either one or both of these groups, they’re going to be reluctant to do a movie with either a solo Super heroine or with one with more of an emphasis on a female hero. It is getting better though, since Gadot’s contract includes a solo Wonder Woman movie, and there have been plenty of rumors of female hero over at Marvel (Most likely Mrs. Marvel/Captain Marvel).
    P.S. sorry for the long comment.

    • FinnM

      Huh, you bring up very valid and interesting points there :o But it seems a little naive to consider female viewership to be separate from the comic fans though, don’t you think? Correct me if I’m wrong if I have misinterpreted what you were trying to say though. I mean, comic fans definitely consist of females as well as males and, to be honest, a lot of the complaining with regard to, for example, Wonder Woman’s casting seemed to be coming from a lot of the male fans of the comic fans group which, as you rightly said, is down to the over-sexualization of superheroines ingrained in these men’s brains due to the way in which they are depicted with large breasts and narrow waists and so on. It basically looks as though Hollywood are trying and succeeding to satisfy the male ratio with male leads getting the action but providing the female ratio with female side characters or, at least, very little female main characters in order to to keep the female fans quiet because they think that’s sufficient enough or something. My point is, filmmakers should stop trying to attract male audiences with these current methods of film making and CHANGE said methods. They could also take some much needed time to analyze their demographic in order to get a better idea of WHO is actually watching their films; this would be of much benefit to the crew because that would mean better writing, better representation thus better box-office income. Not only would it be beneficial to the movie business but also to us, the viewers! As I just mentioned, there would be much better representation, enabling people to better relate with the characters they’re seeing on the big screen and finally see people like them! The fact is, no matter what comic book adaption will be made, there will ALWAYS be fans disagreeing with the choices the filmmakers make and spreading unnecessary hate and enduring that is a small price to pay when you’re making a film with the potential not only entertain but to make a real impact to its viewers. Just look at the Hunger Games franchise, granted there are very, VERY minor things that are worthy of changing, it, as a whole, is pretty damn amazing. It has a strong and very human female protagonist who leads a rebellion against a corrupt government. It’s living proof that a film, an adaption or not, has the potential to satisfy the fans as well as everyone else. It’s so good that both films made so far have more than exceeded their initial budgets by millions. Some filmmakers need to take note of what the people over at Lionsgate are doing because they would do well in doing so.

  • Trevor

    The focus placed on Wolverine in X1, X2, X3, and Wolverine: Origins has been nothing but a disservice to the franchise and to Wolverine’s character and cinematic storyline. And I say that as a gigantic Wolverine fan. The first movie that I saw get Wolverine right was James Mangold’s The Wolverine, but by the time it was released there had been so many Wolverine-centric X-Men movies that this film wasn’t truly appreciated. The problem I have is that they are just now getting Wolverine right. Hugh Jackman finally is to the point where I can say that nobody could play a better Wolverine. I don’t think Bryan Singer ever understood Wolverine, but James Mangold does. They are so close to making the perfect Wolverine movie. I think if James Mangold and Hugh Jackman team up one more time, they can make the Wolverine movie that shoulda been made long before Wolverine’s character became an X-Men black hole. I hate what’s been done, but I’m not ready for Wolverine to step aside, not until one more movies is made, not until that perfect Wolverine movie is made. And I think we are only one movie away.

    • Riana-Tiana Menezes

      Are you seriously suggesting they should make ANOTHER Wolverine movie? Did you miss the entire point of this article?

    • FinnM

      While I do appreciate your opinion on Wolverine, I just can’t help but think I’d be bored with yet ANOTHER Wolverine-centered film. Even if I saw character development, while I would be pleasantly surprised, somewhat, I’d still be so painfully bored and disappointed; I am now, that was the reason behind making this article :/

      • Trevor

        Oh don’t get me wrong, I think audiences everywhere will groan when they see that a new Wolverine is coming out. When I said that Wolverine has become a cinematic X-Men black hole, I meant that his storyline is literally devouring other great X-Men storylines, basically agreeing with your article. And thats not right. Story elements from Cyclops, Storm, and now Kitty Pryde have all been thrown onto his back, and its a massacre of the X-Men canon as well as Wolverine’s character. Wolverine is not meant to be this guy. The first movie that actually understood Wolverine was James Mangold’s Wolverine, which is tragic because it happened in a time where Wolverine’s character had long already been over exposed. So I do agree, another Wolverine movie may be beating a dead horse, and it may be taking the place of an X-Men movie that has fresh characters and ideas, but as a Wolverine fan I just want that one that gets it right. They were so close with the James Mangold movie, and I think they are going to completely miss with Days of Future Past IMO, so just one more tiny spin off from James Mangold and I will be forever happy. All of the X-Sins past, and the overexposed Wolverine, and the botched storylines will be forgiven in my eyes as long as I get a chance to see this in action:

        • FinnM

          Ahhhh, okay, I see what you mean and I can appreciate your admiration for the character! For all we know, they might very well make one more Wolverine-centric film :P Although, I probably wouldn’t watch it ¬_¬

          • Trevor

            And I totally respect that! :) Now what we could use is a New Mutants/X-Force movie! Or if not that, perhaps the rumored Apocalypse movie will finally give some of the other X-Men their due justice.

          • FinnM

            Okay, I just googled X-Force to see who was in it and apparently it’s actually being development into a film already :O I thought it was the Age of Apocalypse!!!

          • Trevor


  • quangtran

    The answer to this is simple: people like making money. Wolverines sells, hence the reason why they put on in everything, front and center. I don’t like it, but it’s the truth. Wolverine guest stars in every book. Wolverine usually stars in at least 3 solo titles in a given month. Wolverine was eventually placed on the cover of every issue of Wizard magazine. “X-Men” was rebooted as “Wolverine and the X-Men.” At first I annoyed, but then realized that the blame falls mostly on the consumer for being so taken in by the cool white dude with the claws. As a kid my fave was Cyclops, but saying that out loud would have dubbed me a huge lame-o. The writers also have other favorite mutants, but do you think an executive will risk a 200 million dollar movie on a film starring Kitty? I doubt it.

    • Dan

      Wolverine’s last film movie was the lowest grossing X-Men in the U.S.

      The X-Men movies should be on sold on the entire team. That’s one of the reasons why the movies were never as popular as the Avengers.

  • Brendan

    Yes, obviously sequels make more money, and Wolverine makes this feel like a return to something that more people will recognize. Obviously Wolverine’s last two movies weren’t great, but it had nothing to do with the character. Hugh Jackman as Wolverine is the best casting decision in Marvel history. X-men 1 and 2 were fantastic, and it’s no coincidence that they both happened to be directed by Brian Singer. This could be an amazing movie, and Wolverine’s presence isn’t just some evil corporate decision that taints the movie’s legitimacy…he’s a great character (that also happens to be more interesting, dynamic, and relevant to other characters than Kitty).

  • Liderc

    The clear answer is that the studio isn’t going to risk $200 mil on a female lead that isn’t Jennifer Lawrence. If they were going to make a female lead the focus they’d make Mystique the focus, but for whatever reason they feel Wolverine is still going to bring in the most money.

    The writers either didn’t think the studio would give them the money with her in the lead or they actually wanted Wolverine to go back in time. Scripts go through so many changes before a studio will green light the script, they may have had Kitty going back in time in an earlier version but the studio probably said “okay if you want to go that route with Ellen we’ll give you $60 million, but we’d give you $200 million with Hugh Jackman.”

    That’s just the way the film industry works, and it’s all our fault. We go see more movies with male leads and we’ve gotten used to Jackman being the lead role in X-Men movies.

    We also don’t know if we’re right in saying that he’ll be the main focus, but the reason Kitty was cut from being the one who gets sent back in time is based on money and could also be the fact that she wouldn’t exist in this timeline.

    Do I think the movie would have worked with Ellen Page as the lead? Probably, but not a $200 million dollar movie, she just doesn’t have the star power yet. She makes indie films and despite her popularity (and talent) from Juno and Inception, she’s no Jennifer Lawrence in terms of box office pull.

    Hopefully they spread the love and we see what we saw in First Class, which was a fairly balanced movie with male and female leads getting equal screen time.

    • Caroline J.

      unfortunately, i think you’re totally on point here. we could talk all day about the movies vs the comics and all kinds of specific intellectual stuff, but it really does come down to money. FOX is going to put a hell of a lot more money down on a male protagonist (and a proven one at that) than a female one. in fact, i’m almost positive they wouldn’t approve a script in this franchise that centered around an “x-woman”, not even jennifer lawrence’s mystique. there’s a reason Wonder Woman hasn’t made it onto the big (or small) screen yet….

  • Kara

    I get why Kitty isn’t the star of this movie – she’s a peripheral character in the least popular X-Men film (if we ignore Origins, which we should). I think making Wolverine the center of this story speaks to a larger problem in the X-Men cinematic world: there’s no diversity. They had the potential to make an Avengers-style universe for themselves, something I’m sure FOX would have loved, and instead of developing multiple characters and then potentially spinning them off, they invested pretty much in one character only – Wolverine. Don’t get me wrong, I like the character and I like Hugh Jackman, but I’m tired of him. We’ve spent 5 movies with him, that’s enough. Give me something else.

    Another issue Kitty Pryde’s omission brings up is the problematic nature of women in this franchise. Between their core female cast, they have four Oscar nominees (three of whom are winners) and an Emmy nominee. Yet they can’t seem to create one compelling female character from that. Jean, Kitty, Storm, Rogue, Emma, Kayla, and the love interest from The Wolverine are all more defined by how they relate to the men in the story than by how they function as characters. For a comics line that is known for its diversity and female-friendly world, these films have failed almost completely on that front in my opinion. None of those characters would be on the top of my favorite characters list, which is sad because I remember loving Rogue, Storm, and Jean in the cartoon as a kid. Then again, FOX only seems to want us caring about three characters anyway (Wolverine, Charles, and Magneto).

    • FinnM

      With regard to Kitty being a secondary character, I do see what you mean but the fact that she was supposed to be the central character in this story but pushed aside is what irks me, which is what I’m sure you are think as well after reading the second paragraph, which I totally agree with and I never realised how almost all the women you listed are defined by the men in their lives and that just makes even more frustrated >.< Rogue was portrayed horribly, especially, and I LOVE Rogue and this independence and spunkiness she exudes :/ Gosh, I'd love a reboot right about now; the only one I'd actually approve of…

  • Kadma Sixx

    If they’re going to keep using Hugh Jackman for every single coming X-Men movie they should at least give the character a nice developement, PLEASE.

    • FinnM


  • Daniel

    I feel like storm has been overshadowed and would love to see a movie about her, she is one of the main x-men after all, anyone have any thoughts to this? Loved all the conversation so far and I agree, I’m over the x-men always being focused on wolverine.

    • FinnM

      I agree, I would also LOVE to see more of Storm (better yet, Angela Basset as Storm instead of Halle Berry). You’re right, she is one of the main X-Men but continues to be treated as the supporting character :/

      • Daniel

        I’m so glad someone agrees with me! They have made main characters supporting characters behind wolverine when it’s about the whole team, not just wolverine

        • FinnM

          True, so very true

      • Krystina Arielle Glenn

        I had never thought of Angela Bassett in that role. How fantastic she would be as Ororo! I understand that Halle Berry was pregnant during filming. However, I don’t understand why they would get peoples hopes up with an amazing comic cover to movie poster translation, only to turn around and gut the entire plot.
        I’m personally fond of Kitty as a character. Who doesn’t love a perky girl? Its ridiculous and doesn’t at all get my spirits up about them optioning “Age of Apocalypse.”

        • FinnM

          Yeah, I saw the fan-casting of Angela Basset and at first I was a bit skeptical (unfairly though, really just because I hadn’t seen her in anything) but after seeing her portray Marie LeVeau in American Horror Story I was sold on the idea! She can DEFINITELY do Storm justice, not just appearance-wise but personality-wise as well; Basset showed she can act as an intimidating and powerful force not to be reckoned with and seeing as how nice and approachable she comes across as in interviews, it says a lot about her acting abilities being able to transform into different people so convincingly so I think she’d absolutely be able to exhibit the warmer side to Ororo :3 I just think Halle Berry’s Storm didn’t seem to exude the same level of toughness and intimidation that Basset’s Marie LeVeau effortlessly gave off. I recall from seeing other interpretations as well as reading peoples’ descriptions of the character that she is a striking woman with features to match who speaks in a strong-spirited almost Shakespearean manor with an African tinge to it (seeing as how she grew up there with her native tribe).

          Yeah, I’m quite fond of Kitty and her mutant ability as well and, as you can tell from the article, I would have LOVED to have seen her on the big screen again :/ If she was slightly perkier in ‘The Last Stand’ that would have been cool but I still quite liked her… Besides I don’t think she’ll need that kind of attitude since we’ll be seeing her in pretty dystopian surroundings, wouldn’t you agree? :P

          Well, regardless, I still have somewhat high hopes for ‘Age of Apocalypse’ and ‘X-Force’ :3 All we can do is wait and see at this point, after all!

  • Bryan

    It bothers me when they give the excuse “Well, Kitty’s not very well-known or bankable.” You know who else wasn’t all that well-known or bankable? Iron Man. If a good character isn’t popular, you find a way to MAKE them popular.
    This habit of taking the easy way out is why the X-Men franchise will stagnate while the Marvel Cinematic Universe continues to grow.

    • FinnM

      Agreed! Katniss Evderdeen wasn’t exactly well-known prior to the The Hunger Games films. She was only really known through the book community but when the films came out, she basically became a household name! Some people just can’t seem to change their ways and broaden their minds, it’s as though filmmakers are horses wearing those blinders that don’t allow them to see more of what’s around them.

    • cetrata

      Even wolverine wasn’t considered that bankable when the first film came out.

      If marvel were to be doing these films, wolverine would be sharing the screentime with others.

  • Shumi

    Hearing that Wolverine is the main character made my interest in the movie drop. He’s had two whole movies already, why does he have another? X-men =/= Wolverine, we need variety. What are they thinking? When an artist thinks more about what would make money and forces themselves to create what they think others will like they are doing it wrong.

Hypable encourages the community to use our Comments feature to hold thoughtful, polite, and critical discussions. We do NOT tolerate inappropriate, rude, or downright mean discussion towards the news story's subject matter or towards other Hypable users. We reserve the right to delete or ban comments and users who violate these guidelines.