[Powerman293]

For the new X-men Apolcalypse trailer, is the hinted Wolverine actually Hugh Jackman? Or are they gonna pull a fast one and introduce a younger actor to pick it up once Wolverine 3 is done with and Jackman says goodbye?

[Matrixbeast]

Nah. They already confirmed that Jackman has a small role in Apocalypse, so it's him.

[GreenPsychoRanger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Powerman293

For the new X-men Apolcalypse trailer, is the hinted Wolverine actually Hugh Jackman? Or are they gonna pull a fast one and introduce a younger actor to pick it up once Wolverine 3 is done with and Jackman says goodbye?

All I can hope for is that whomever takes Hugh's place as Logan is equally handsome and has that raw, animalistic, feel to them.

[Matrixbeast]

Honestly, after Wolverine 3, I would be fine with them kind of just...Excluding Wolverine.
The X-Men have plenty of really nice and interesting stories that don't involve Wolverine, or have him in a non-vital role (At least, not important enough that excluding him would alter the story).

[Paladin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Powerman293

For the new X-men Apolcalypse trailer, is the hinted Wolverine actually Hugh Jackman? Or are they gonna pull a fast one and introduce a younger actor to pick it up once Wolverine 3 is done with and Jackman says goodbye?

lot of places are suggesting they'll bring in X-23 to pick up the slack now that Jackman's almost finished.

[Dr Kain]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matrixbeast

I can only really watch AoS as it comes on Netflix (Since I don't have the drive to find it streaming online )
Though it seems Inhumans has been removed from Marvel's current movie line up with no scheduled release date, so you might not have to worry about it anymore.
(Though they are being adamant in saying it's not cancelled, but Marvel Studio's head has allegedly said he never really had interest in the project, so we'll see where this goes)

Well there is no point in doing a movie on the Inhumans when they are doing them in the TV show.

[Electric Turahk]

*sigh* Except the movie would clearly have been about the royal family. Which is an entirely different thing. The "no point because the show is" argument is a dumb one.

And I swear we must be watching different shows Kain. All the things you're complaining about I'm loving. The FitzSimmons relationship, for one, is not anywhere near as bad as what's happening over on Arrow. It's not taken over the show entirely for starters. It's just some pretty sensible advancement that's happened over a couple years for two characters. And I've rather enjoyed Brett Dalton as Hive.

As for taking out Hydra off screen - pretty sure that was a reference to something that goes down in Civil War. It's probably a pretty nondescript "the government" taking action bit, so the show writers were able to make it Talbot calling the shots. Like the scene last season that showed Coulson supplied the helicarrier to Fury we see him with in Age of Ultron.

[Dr Kain]

Except the royal family are Fantastic Four characters, so Fox owns them.

As for the Hydra thing, I hope you are right.

[ZeoRangerV]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Kain

Except the royal family are Fantastic Four characters, so Fox owns them.

No they don't.

[Kiryu]

Y'know I keep forgetting Hydra is even a thing in sheild what with the whole inhuman nonsense going on.

Though how crazy would it be if coulson becomes new cap?