Channing Tatum: Will he take on a role in the 'X-Men' franchise?

Will Channing Tatum take on a role in the 'X-Men' films? Channing Tatum recently expressed an interest in playing one of the characters, though the role was already cast in a previous movie.

John Shearer/Invision/AP
Channing Tatum (l.) and Jenna Dewan-Tatum (r.) attend the 2013 Academy Awards.

The X-Men film franchise may be entering its teenage years, but Marvel’s mutant roster has never been hotter. This summer’s The Wolverine (more or less) made up for the disappointing entry that was X-Men Origins: Wolverine and essentially jumpstarted buzz for next year’s X-Men: Days of Future Past.

Beyond that film, the future of the X-Men franchise is a bit more uncertain. Fox seems keen on pushing an X-Force film (written by Kick-Ass 2 writer/director Jeff Wadlow) out next, though what shape or form that project will take remains to be seen. The X-Men universe has such a rich array of characters that it has already introduced on the big screen, and given the limitless possibilities, any of those could potentially return in a future film. Now, one star has spoken out about which character he’d like to play.

According to Slash Film, Channing Tatum mentioned at a recent press event that he wants to bring Cajun mutant Gambit to life on the big screen. Here’s what the White House Down and Magic Mike star had to say:

“I would like to play Gambit. Gambit’s my favorite. I’m from New Orleans, around that area. My dad’s from New Orleans, and I like to do a Cajun accent. I could do it for real. No knock on Taylor Kitsch [who played the character in 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine'], though, ’cause I actually like his Gambit, but I’ve always lived around Cajun people. [...] Gambit was always like the woman-loving, cigarette-smoking, drinking [guy]. He was the punk rock of all the superheroes. He’s a thief. He kind of rode the line.”

Many X-Men fans share Tatum’s love of the character, but as he mentions, the role was already filled by Kitsch in a previous film. Kitsch’s portrayal of Gambit did receive mixed reactions from fans, largely because the character’s long-awaited appearance was so brief. There’s also the problem of his placement within the timeline of the X-Men films. X-Men Origins: Wolverine takes place roughly sometime in the late 1970s, before Wolverine loses his memory and long before he ever becomes a bonafide X-Man.

If Fox really wished to bring Gambit back into the picture, there’s no doubt they could find a way to do so (after all, they’re about to bring time travel into the mix in Days of Future Past). However, the studio has already gotten enough flack from hardcore fans regarding the series’ already-convoluted continuity, and director Bryan Singer has revealed that he plans to clean some of that up in Days of Future Past.

If Fox ever decided to reboot the Gambit character (retconning or ignoring his Origins appearance), Tatum does sound like a viable choice, as he would bring a touch of star power and seems to have a genuine love of the character. Plus, the fact that Kitsch had back-to-back box office disappointments in John Carter and Battleship means that re-casting is a more likely option.

However, the bigger question isn’t whether or not Tatum would make a good Gambit, but whether or not Fox would go back to an element of the franchise that didn’t quite work the first time rather than expanding their burgeoning X-Men cinematic universe. In other words, don’t hold your breath for a Gambit return just yet.

Robert Yaniz Jr. blogs at Screen Rant.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Channing Tatum: Will he take on a role in the 'X-Men' franchise?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today