Topic: Gambit Watch 2022

[hairlesscat]

Who Zac Efron Could Play in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (cbr.com)


Can I just say that I don't want Zac Efron anywhere NEAR Gambit? Kthanks.


I didn't think it was possible, but this would be an even worse casting choice for the character than Channing Tatum.

[DonPriceTag]

Who Zac Efron Could Play in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (cbr.com)


Can I just say that I don't want Zac Efron anywhere NEAR Gambit? Kthanks.


I didn't think it was possible, but this would be an even worse casting choice for the character than Channing Tatum.

I can see him being a kick-ass Cyclops, Havok, or Cannonball.

[Icefanatic]

Also Jon Hamm as Sinister and Gambit’s nemesis…? I’m super into Hamm because he played one of my favorite characters ever - Don Draper (I have a type, okay?). He’s also got great delivery, and can play a comedic role. I think his acting range would be perfect for whatever version of Sinister we get. And Hamm in a Gambit movie? I’d die of happiness. Can he do a British accent though? If Tim Curry was younger, I’d pick him for Sinister. He looked great in a cape and corset.


https://www.cbr.com/jon-hamm-open-mr-sinister-mcu-x-men/

I miss Mad Men. I remember Hamm said he did one for "A Young Doctor's Notebook" where he played the older version of the same character also played by Daniel Radcliffe. I wanted to see it but I'm not sure it ever aired here in the States. If it did I missed it. 

Here's a link where Hamm talked about struggling with the accent. https://younghollywood.com/news/daniel-radcliffe-recorded-jon-hamm-s-lines-to-help-perfect-british-accent.html

[andresa]

https://mobile.twitter.com/DavidNakayama/status/1525734585887170560?cxt=HHwWgICp1bXhv6wqAAAA

[NicoPony]

I miss Mad Men. I remember Hamm said he did one for "A Young Doctor's Notebook" where he played the older version of the same character also played by Daniel Radcliffe. I wanted to see it but I'm not sure it ever aired here in the States. If it did I missed it. 

Here's a link where Hamm talked about struggling with the accent. https://younghollywood.com/news/daniel-radcliffe-recorded-jon-hamm-s-lines-to-help-perfect-british-accent.html

oooh, of course anything i wanna watch is not on the half-dozen streaming services i subscribe to! but i do want to see this. i love a dark comedy. also daniel radcliffe is hilarious - Miracle Workers is a fantastic series.


Hamm already has some marvel chops as the narrator on FX's Legion.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DavidNakayama/status/1525734585887170560?cxt=HHwWgICp1bXhv6wqAAAA

hawt hawt hawt.


also, can we talk about the end reveal of X-Men #11?



another iteration of sinister shows up and instead of a diamond on his forehead, he's got a club.



we have diamonds and clubs. we simply CANNOT have a card motif and not involve gambit.  between destiny's weird comments to rogue about gambit, her connection to sinister, and the legacy issue with sinister and homo unitus...c'mon! i don't know what to think that means for gambit, but it has to be better than anything that happens to him in KoX.

[Miss Misery]

Jon Hamm...🥰🥰🥰

I looked it up and it's available in the US on Tubi, which is free but has ads. Gonna check it out there and see just how much I've been spoiled by ad-free content. 😆 I'll give it 10 minutes, probably.

[hairlesscat]

Question guys: Would you be okay with an MCU Gambit who wasn't a thief/career criminal? I had a pretty interesting conversation with someone on another forum about that a few days ago. This person insisted that an adaption didn't have to include this portion of him to capture the spirit of the character. If you ask me, Gambit without his criminal life is not Gambit. His association with the Thieves' Guild has shaped the entire trajectory of his life and who he is as a person. It's like Wolverine without Weapon X. It makes no sense to me. But I'm curious to see other people's opinions.

I can see him being a kick-ass Cyclops, Havok, or Cannonball.

Can't see him playing Cyclops either. But possibly the other two. I would really love for the MCU to look at actors who aren't as well-known to play the more prominent X-Men characters - especially Gambit. Kind of like what Fox did with Hugh Jackman. He only became a household name AFTER he started playing Wolverine. I think that ensures that you choose people who are right for the role.

[Miss Misery]

I agree it should be included because like you said, it's a major part of who he is. Even if it's in his (supposedly) in his past, like on XTAS, it still is a foundation of the character. Any iteration for me has to have that sense of mystery and craftiness about him for it to work.

[NicoPony]

I can see that with Lang already being introduced as the thief with a heart of gold, that Gambit being a thief in the MCU might seem redundant. I would be sad if he weren’t a thief, bc let’s face it, comic thiefs are sexy as heck. But if he were a grifter/hustler/con man it would be a more Ultimate Gambit, which is still Gambit-y enough for me. He needs some kind of seedy past for certain. Maybe part of a crime family where, for reasons outside of his control, he finds himself on the outs.

[hairlesscat]

It's funny you mention Ant-Man. I remember waaaaayyyyy back in 2006 saying that Gambit should have a solo heist movie set in the larger mutant universe and people saying "Nah. It won't work. It's not that different from a regular heist movie." Bottom line, people lack imagination. LOL! Fox could have easily used Gambit like that, but Bryan Singer et al were too obsessed with Wolverine to focus on any other characters!


*A-HEM* Sorry.


Anyway, I think the MCU is big enough for more than one professional thief. And I think that Gambit can be distinguished enough from Lang for several reasons. One being his connection to the Guilds and all the supernatural/old world elements that brings into his narrative. And as Gambit says, he is at least a 10-bit thief. So even if he is a conman, it doesn't stop him from also being the badass, master thief he is in the comics.


Finally, Scott Lang is a bit of a goody-two-shoes. They didn't really let him be seedy or morally ambiguous. Gambit is. And while I know he LIKES to steal from criminals, I'm not entirely convinced that the Guild cares who they steal from so long as they get their money in the end. I think Gambit needs to have a character arc in which he goes from a more self-interested thief (think WATXM) to a more heart-of-gold one.


That's just my opinion though.

[anya]

Scott not a ‘professional’ thief, he was a computer programmer who stole from a corrupt company when he found out they were corrupt, but got caught. Then he tries stealing again when he got fired from Baskin-Robbins and got caught again.


So that’s already very different background, with gambit becomes a professional thief, because he was a abandoned, homeless kid with no other options. Which would make him something of a unique character in marvel and other movies, because that would be more of origin story for a tragic, sympathetic villain rather than a ‘hero’. Especially if they keep the ‘he was born with eyes’ angle, then he a abandoned, homeless, disfigured kid. And in movie, facial disfigurement is almost always the hallmark of a bad guy, lol

[hairlesscat]

Scott not a ‘professional’ thief, he was a computer programmer who stole from a corrupt company when he found out they were corrupt, but got caught. Then he tries stealing again when he got fired from Baskin-Robbins and got caught again.

I would say Scott was a professional in the sense that he had been using his know-how to steal for years undetected and even planned and executed a heist for money. He definitely isn't as good of a thief as Gambit though since he gets caught a lot.

So that’s already very different background, with gambit becomes a professional thief, because he was a abandoned, homeless kid with no other options. Which would make him something of a unique character in marvel and other movies, because that would be more of origin story for a tragic, sympathetic villain rather than a ‘hero’.

Very true. Nicieza once said that Gambit is a good study in nature vs. nurture and I agree. He is fundamentally a good person. He's kind, he loves deeply and is even nurturing. But he was raised in the underworld to cheat, steal and lie, so he rarely got the chance to show that side of himself.

Especially if they keep the ‘he was born with eyes’ angle, then he a abandoned, homeless, disfigured kid. And in movie, facial disfigurement is almost always the hallmark of a bad guy, lol

That reminds me of when Blade attacked Gambit assuming he was a vampire because of his eyes. Fun times.

[NicoPony]

hairlesscat how have you not changed your avatar to sinister's cat yet?


your reminisces of FabNic have made me nostalgic.


totally agree with your guys' points. though, be prepared, if gambit is intro'd as a thief in the mcu, he's gonna get caught. they are probably not going to show him on his best day when all goes smoothly and he gets away scott free.


i'm trying to think back on the other mcu movies... tony is a playboy warmonger jerk who becomes a hero. cap starts off noble nerd and becomes a hero. thor is a self-absorbed turd who comes around and becomes a hero. strange, same. turd-to-hero tale. lang and peter are both screw-ups, but not bad, who kind of inadvertently become heroes. gambit needs a new angle from all that. the extremely reluctant hero, maybe. like: i really really want to be having sex and stealing things, but FINE i guess i'll go save the world. geez. someone pour me a drink.

[DonPriceTag]

Removing Gambit's connection to crime would mean ignoring what makes him unique amongst the X-Men. Other than characters like Cable and Wolverine - Gambit is X-Man with an established universe all his own. He could (and has) maintained a story WITHOUT involving any specific X-Men lore. He has his own social circles, rogues gallery, recurring characters, and motivations. Most of which exist BECAUSE of his criminal connections and personal background. You don't fall in with mad scientists, mercenaries, assassins, gangsters, spies, and government agents by way of accounting (you can use Iceman as an example of this lol).

I agree. Gambit's criminal background is essential to his character. He needs to be a hero with a chip on his soldier. He needs to feel unworthy while being one of the X-Men's most reliable BECAUSE of that reason. He needs to WANT to be an X-Man in search of becoming a better man - not just become one because he's scared, can't control his powers, has nowhere to go, or is forced to stay against his will. It's what makes him so multi-dimensional and why we hate it when writers ignore it and make him arm-candy.

[anya]

That is a very good explanation and very persuasive…


Not trying to change the subject (because it is interesting) but Marvel announced a new mobile game card called Snap. Gambit is in it (a bunch of characters are, but still…). There a picture of his card on the CBR gambit page  [size=78%]https://community.cbr.com/showthread.php?155985-The-King-of-Thieves-Gambit-Appreciation-2022/page47[/size]
(I am too lazy to try to find the image by itself. ;p)


Back to the previous subject, I do think the MCU will keep his ‘criminal background’ at least to some extant. They always make changes…