If there was a problem with X-Men: First Class, it was that it didn’t quite jibe with the Bryan Singer X-Men films. Even though the film was supposed to take place in the same continuity as the X-Men films that came before it, but there were glaring changes (the Beast being a beast far earlier than 2003, Xavier getting crippled in 1962 yet walking in 1980, Mystique losing a personality) that made the connection very shaky.

That shouldn’t be a problem with the film’s sequel, X-Men: Days of Future Past, because it’s quickly turning out that most of the cast will be made up of actors from the first three X-Men films. Singer has announced via Twitter that three more of the cast members from those films will be joining Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, and Ian McKellen in Days of Future Past.

Very excited to welcome #annapaquin, @ellenpage & @shawnrashmore to #XMen #DaysofFuturePast – thank you @brettratner for letting them live!

— Bryan Singer (@BryanSinger) January 26, 2013

Anna Paquin (Rogue) and Shawn Ashmore (Iceman) were cast by Singer for the first X-Men film and appeared in all three. Ellen Page, however, was cast by Brett Ratner as a replacement for Katie Stuart in X-Men: The Last Stand when the role of Kitty Pryde was made larger. Good to see Singer isn’t holding that against her.

The only question we have is, “who’s next?” Let’s run down who’s left from the original films who as of yet have not been confirmed as having a role in the film.

• James Marsden and Famke Janssen: While both Cyclops and Jean Grey died in Last Stand (uh, spoilers), they could both show up here. Marsden is a Singer favorite (he brought the actor with him when he did Superman Returns) and his death technically was off screen. Janssen is another story entirely. Although the actress is rumored to have a cameo in The Wolverine, most of the press for that movie makes a point of saying that it follows Last Stand. I think, and this is just blind speculation, her cameo will be in a flashback to the end of that third film where Wolverine killed Jean Grey to save the world (uh, more spoilers?). So, as it stands, I think Jean Grey is dead in this continuity, and Cyclops might still be alive. So Marsden is more likely than Janssen. Of course, with time travel, you could make it so both are alive. Anyway…
• Halle Berry: Rumor has it that she will be reprising her role as Storm in this film. Rumor also has it that she and Singer didn’t get along in those first two films. From a plot aspect, it seems like she is a no brainer to return considering who else is coming back. And it is not going be a large time spent with Singer. But if she was coming back, it should have been officially announced by now, don’t you think?
• Tyler Mane/ Liev Schreiber:  The two men that played Sabretooth. Odds are the scenes these actors appear in will be dystopian future (present?) where all mutants have to band together to fight off extinction. So, bad guys and good guys will come together. Whether or not Sabretooth makes the cut is anybody’s guess, and who would play him is an even bigger mystery. Will it be Mane, who Singer cast yet played the character as a monosyllabic brute, or the charismatic Schreiber, who played the character in a film producers are pretending never existed? Probably option three: avoid the problem and keep him out of the film.
• Ray Park: Toad didn’t have that big of a part in the first film, but the character did make it quite far into the process in X2: X-Men United. That might show that Singer has an affinity for the character. Or not.
• Rebecca Romijn: Romijn already had a cameo in First Class playing and adult version of Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique. Also, if the film wants to follow the comic book story, a member of the X-Men in the future will have to have their consciousness sent back in time to inhabit a younger version of themselves. In the comics, it was Kitty Pryde. That doesn’t play here. Odds are it won’t be either Xavier or Magneto sent back. So, the most likely candidate would be Mystique. I can’t see why Romijn won’t be coming back.
• Alan Cumming: He was cast by Singer to play Nightcrawler in X2 and planned to have a cameo in Last Stand. However, the cameo was scrapped supposedly because the cost of the makeup against the amount of screen time didn’t make sense, budget wise. Unless the cost has gone down considerably in seven years, Cumming is dubious at best.
• Aaron Stanford: He played Pyro in X2 and Last Stand. His rivalry with Iceman played a big part in both those films. Now that Ashmore is on board, could he be added to the cast? Maybe.
• Daniel Cudmore: Colossus plays a big part of the comic book story the film is based on, but a lot of that plays on the relationship the character had with Kitty Pryde in the comics, one that didn’t carry over to the film. Still, having Colossus in the film would be a nice bit of fan service, and Cudmore was the only one to play him.
• Kelsey Grammer: Beast is one of the few characters to appear in both the original trilogy and First Class. However, Grammer is two years away from being 60-years-old. Not to be ageist, but that might be a little too old for him to reprise his role as a bouncy furry monster.
• Ben Foster: He’s a good actor who would not be above doing a cameo. But his character of Angel in Last Stand was essentially a MacGuffin–not give much development other than what was need to move the plot along. Foster and the character deserved better, but as it stands, I doubt they’d bother to bring either back. See also Cameron Bright (Leech from Last Stand)
• Vinnie Jones, Dania Ramirez, Eric Dane or the rest of Magneto’s crew in Last Stand: While there are recognizable names in the mix, their characters were even less developed than Angel or Leech. Their involvement would only be as cannon fodder, and I doubt the actors would come back just for that.
• Taylor Kitsch and Ryan Reynolds: As I see it, these guys have three strikes against them. 1). They are all fairly major stars (even Kitsch, whose horrible 2012 hasn’t stopped him from getting prominent roles); 2) neither Gambit nor Deadpool has appeared in the main franchise, instead they 3) appeared in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, the film producers of The Wolverine have stated their movie was essentially rebooting. Doubtful they’d make an appearance here.

We’ll see how this all plays out in the coming weeks and months. X-Men: Days of Future Past arrives in theaters on July 18, 2014.

1. Katy Perry: Part Of Me (Opened Yesterday, Paramount, 2,730 Theaters, 95 Minutes, Rated PG):I have to admit, I am a fan of Katy Perry. This is an embarrassing fact to admit because A) I am not a tween and B) I am not a girl. And I am not a fan of hers because of her obviously attractive physical attributes, I am a fan of her music. She is a rarity in today’s music scene–a pop songstress that writes her own music and manages to have her songs be both catchy and unique. “I Kissed a Girl” doesn’t sound like “E.T.” which doesn’t sound like “Part of Me.”

This would be enough to build a documentary/concert film around, but Perry’s rise to fame is an interesting story all in its own. Starting as a gospel musician named Katy Hudson and going through one name change, several genre shifts,and being dropped by no less than three record labels in the nine years before her “overnight success,” the pot holes on her road to fame would have disabled many a less determined person.

So, this might be a cut above the typical film of this type. And it’s in 3D, so those remarkable physical attributes will come popping right out at you.

2. Savages (Universal, 2,627 Theaters, 130 Minutes, Rated R): Do you get the feeling that Taylor Kitsch is cursed. In January, 2012 appeared to be a big year for him, as he was set to star in three major releases. However, John Carter was such a big disappointment that people were tripping over themselves calling it a flop, Battleship, while a success overseas, wasn’t the Transformers level hit that Hasbro expected. And now this film, which had a lot of buzz going for it, will likely be trounced at the box office by Spider-Man, Katy Perry and a talking stuffed bear.

The film centers on a pair of pot dealers (Kitsch and Aaron Johnson) who won’t play ball when a Mexican cartel muscles in on their territory. The war of wills gets nasty when their girlfriend (Blake Lively) gets kidnapped. The film was co-written and directed by Oliver Stone and also stars John Travolta and Benicio Del Toro.

Maybe the film will get lucky. Maybe a bunch of confused pre-teens will see Salma Hayek’s picture on the poster and think its the Katy Perry movie. After all, they have the same wig, only a different color.

If there are moments in John Carter where you feel a twinge of deja vu, don’t be surprised. The original pulp novels by Tarzan creator Edgar Rice Burroughs that the new Disney film is based on have served as inspiration for writers, comic book creators and filmmakers for a century, so there is bound to be somethings that will look or feel familiar. But director Andrew Stanton’s sprawling epic spectacularly shows us that sometimes there can be no substitute for the original.

John Carter (Taylor Kitsch) is a disillusioned former Confederate soldier who has moved out to the American west to be alone. Fleeing conscription by the US Cavalry and some rather irate Apaches, Carter stumbles across a mysterious from which he is transported to Mars or as its inhabitants call it, Barsoom. There he encounters the four-armed, green-skinned tharks led by Tars Tarks (William DeFoe) and finds himself rescuing the lovely and humanoid Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins), a princess from one of two warring cities. Carter is drawn into the conflict only to discover that it is secretly being manged by a mysterious group of clerics (led by Mark Strong, is making a career out of epic science-fiction villains). Carter must find a way to defeat them and bring peace to Barsoom before the clerics turn their attention towards Earth.

There is plenty spectacle on display here and it isn’t just a series of action sequences for the sake of having action sequences. Stanton gives them each their own emotional weight, allowing us to become invested in their outcome for the sake of how it will affect the characters rather than  just the prurient interest of visually cool, but ultimately vacuous visual effects porn.

For one fight sequence in the middle of the film Stanton intercuts between Carter fearlessly facing off against an army of tharks armed only with a sword and flashbacks to Carter’s life with his wife and child and him tragically finding them dead after their frontier home was burned to the ground by Union soldiers. The fight becomes more than just another action beat in the plot but a pivotal moment for the character, providing him with the emotional closure he needs for his old life in order to embrace his new life on Mars.

Much like Peter Jackson brought J. R. R. Tolkien’s detailed Middle Earth to life in his Lord Of The Rings films, Stanton has plumbed the depths of Burroughs’ novels to bring Barsoom to cinematic reality. He presents a world that has long been in decline, where complex flying machines are manned by sword-wielding soldiers and where scientific study appears to be pursued in ways that recall the monks of the middle ages.

If the film suffers at all, it is right at its center. While Stanton does some good work in delineating Carter’s character, it turns out that for a good chunk of the movie, he is not the most likeable hero for much of that time. Sure, he swings into action to save Dejah Toris a number of times but he does so with a grim expression and a certain reluctance that makes it hard to root for. We need our pulp heroes to embrace their heroics, to be swashbuckling with a smile on their face and we don’t really get that until close to the end of the film. At least if we get a sequel we know that this won’t continue to be a problem.

1. John Carter (Disney, 3,749 Theaters, 132 Minutes, Rated PG-13): Schadenfreude is the pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others. I don’t know if a movie can qualify as one of those “others,” but if it can, then this film is a shining example of the term in action. There’s a lot of pre-schadenfreude going on here. A lot of people are actively rooting for this film to fail.

To be fair, the film is calling a lot of the schadenfreude upon itself. It is a $250 million dollar film based on a character celebrating his 100th birthday this year. It has a writer/director with no live-action film experience, an unproven lead, and it’s a sword-and-sorcery concept melded with science-fiction that doesn’t usually set the world on fire.

However, that writer/director is Andrew Stanton, who has two, count’em, two Oscars for his work at Pixar (for Wall*E and Finding Nemo) and four other Oscar nominations.  That unproven lead is Taylor Kitsch, an actor who is playing a lead or co-lead in three huge pictures this year (this one, Battleship in May, and Savages in July), so it’s not that Hollywood doesn’t have faith in him. And that character and concept was created by Edgar Rice Burroughs (of Tarzan fame) who has lasted this long by building generation after generation of fans.

I’m typically negative here, but I’ll tell you what–I’m pulling for this film. I’m rooting for it. I hope it’s great and it pulls the audiences in. Try anti-schadenfreude sometime. It’s fun.

2. Silent House (Open Road Films, 2,124 Theaters, 85 Minutes, Rated R): For a horror film, this one has a lot going for it. It has Elizabeth Olsen, who probably should have gotten an Oscar nomination last year for her work in Martha Marcy May Marlene. And the film was shot as one continuous take–no editing. That is a great technical accomplishment.

However, it is a horror/suspense film. So, not being edited might not be the best thing for the film. You can build a lot of tension with a jump cut here and there. And the plot–a young women is sent to close up her familiy’s lakeside retreat, but while she is there, evil things starts to happen, would be totally conventional if it wasn’t for the continuous shot gimmick.

Who knows? The gimmick might work. But it might not.

3. A Thousand Words (Paramount/Dreamworks, 1,890 Theaters, 91 Minutes, Rated PG-13): Remember a couple months ago, when Tower Heist came out? You couldn’t swing a dead cat without hitting some article stating that Eddie Murphy was back to his raunchy comedy film self. Those writers should have held off on publishing those articles until this film came out, because it has more in common with The Nutty Professor than 48 Hours or Trading Places.

Murphy plays a man who screws over a guru and becomes cursed. Whenever he says a word, a leaf falls off a tree in his yard. When the last leaf falls, he dies. The rest of the film involves him trying to make amends as quietly as he can so he can save his own life.

Doesn’t seem as bad as some of Murphy’s worst movies, but that’s not saying much.

In advance of a new trailer that should hit sometime tomorrow, Disney has released a new poster for the upcoming John Carter. As you can see below, the film capitalizes on the  film’s Martian setting with a big red tint. The art work recalls, as others have also pointed out, science-fiction paperback covers from the 1970s. Although, not particularly the ones that featured the adventures of the Edgar Rice Burroughs pulp hero being adapted in this film.

Click on the poster for a much larger version.

Director Andrew Stanton’s John Carter stars Taylor Kitsch, Lynn Collins, Samantha Morton, Mark Strong, Ciaran Hinds, Dominic West, James Purefoy, Daryl Sabara, Polly Walker, Bryan Cranston, Thomas Hayden Church, and Willem Dafoe. It opens on March 9th.

With its release about four months away, it appears that Disney is starting to ramp up promotion for their big Edgar Rice Burroughs adaption John Carter. Earlier this week we saw one new photo featuring the titular hero as being played by Taylor Kitsch in a gladiatorial arena against a great martian white ape. Now we have six new pictures giving us a better idea of the epic scope of the story. (As always, click on each photo for a slightly larger view.)

John Carter also stars Lynn Collins, Samantha Morton, Mark Strong, Ciaran Hinds, Dominic West, James Purefoy, Daryl Sabara, Polly Walker, Bryan Cranston, Thomas Hayden Church, and Willem Dafoe.

In these days were studio executives don’t see movies so much as entertainment as revenue streams, it’s not enough for a film to make enough at the box office to turn a profit. It needs to make enough to justify a sequel if not the launching of a full-fledged, multi-installment franchise that will bring in the box office bucks for years to come.

The problem with that thinking is that box office returns have to be at a level even higher than just the “break even” point. And the more you’ve spent on your film, the bigger the risk a studio is taking, meaning that they’ll invest even more money in its marketing to insure that it will earn all of its money back once the film is released. It’s a slippery slope, and one down which many a film has slid.

Disney is looking at this problem with director Andrew Stanton’s fantasy adventure John Carter which is set for release next March. Based on the series of pulp novels written by Tarzan creator Edgar Rice Burroughs, the film is sporting a reported budget in the neighborhood of $250 million and stars Taylor Kitsch, Lynn Collins and Willem Dafoe, three names that don’t necessarily drive business at the box office.

So how much will this film have to make to give the studio the reassurance that they should make a sequel? According to a profile of Stanton in the issue of New Yorker magazine (available online for the magazine’s subscribers only) –

John Carter … will have to earn about $700 million to justify a sequel.

Earning $700 million at the box office would put John Carter into the top 50 earners of all time. Stanton has done that before with Finding Nemo, but, with apologizes for the pun, this is a different kettle of fish altogether. Finding Nemo had the luxury of being a PIXAR film, thus it had a certain amount of brand name power that drove ticket sales even though the story was original with no pre-existent recognition factor of its own. As a live action film, even with ads blaring “From the creator of Tarzan and the director of Finding Nemo!”, John Carter is still a tough sell to the non-geek public.

Disney’s marketing department is going to have their work cut out for them in not only generating awareness for the film over the next six months, but in also educating the general public about the character and creating the desire that this will be an epic fantasy adventure that should be seen on a big screen and not on home video late next summer. I imagine that word of mouth among the geek community will be important as well. Disney’s absence from this coming weekend’s New York Comic Con, the last big geek event before the film gets released, is glaring and a little bit troubling.

Of course, if the movie does earn enough for Disney to give the go-ahead for a follow up, there are almost two dozen more John Carter books that they could dig into for material. Hopefully, the studio will get the chance to do so.

Next year will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the debut of writer Edgar Rice Burrough’s seminal hero John Carter of Mars. Director Andrew Stanton has been hard at work on bringing the character to the big screen for Disney and is currently shepherding the film through post-production for its March premier.

Late this week we got our first couple of looks at how Stanton has envisioned the amazing world the Civil War vet John Carter discovers when he is magically transported to Mar, or as its four-armed inhabitants refer to is as

The first thing that Disney released was a teaser poster featuring star Taylor Kitsch, at left. I have to say, though, I’m not that enthralled by it. There’s no real visual pizzazz to it. And for another thing, I’m wondering why the letter “M” is on the poster given that Disney shortened the film from its original title of John Carter Of Mars to the far more generic John Carter.

A bit more intriguing are the two pieces of concept art that appeared in an interview with Stanton in the LA Times’ Hero Complex blog. (See below, click for a larger view of each.) Well, this is a little bit more like it – a sprawling, alien city and a mystery airship rising out of the mists.

In the interview, Stanton discuss the challenges in adapting the century old pulp hero for a modern audience who are probably more familiar with the multitudes of films like Star Wars, Dune and Avatar who have drawn inspiration from Burrough’s series. It’s a read that’s well worth your time.

John Carter hits screens on March9, 2012.

Since Bryan Singer started work on the first X-Men films, fans of the Marvel Comics numerous comic book series have been clamoring for their various favorite mutant hero to appear on the big screen. While some of had their wish granted, one fan favorite never made the transition to the big screen- the card-throwing cajun hero Gambit. That’s about to change, though, when the character will appear in next summer’s X-Men Origins: Wolverine. The kinetic energy manipulating mutant will have a small role in the feature and from the first picture released of actor Taylor Kitsch, it looks like he might not be sporting Gambit’s trademark long, duster coat.