Channing Tatum discusses the possibility of portraying the 'X-Men' character Gambit

Channing Tatum is currently in talks to portray the character of Gambit in the 'X-Men' universe. 'I would do anything to be in those movies,' Channing Tatum said of the 'X-Men' films.

Lucas Jackson/Reuters
Channing Tatum is reportedly in talks to star as Gambit in the 'X-Men' films.

Twentieth Century Fox, banking heavily on the financial and critical success of the latest X-Men team-up, had already planned a followup for 2016 (X-Men: Apocalypse) as well as another Wolverine movie the following year – but that’s not all the producers are planning.

In addition to having a screenplay ready to go for a long-in-development Deadpool movie starring Ryan Reynolds and directed by Tim Miller, and a script in the works by Jeff Wadlow for an X-Forcemovie, X-Men franchise producer Lauren Shuler Donner has been in talks with Channing Tatum about bringing him into the franchise as a key player down the road – to star in his own Gambit movie and eventually join the superhero team as well.

For Tatum, he’s hoping for a solo standalone origins movie first, to flesh out the questionable history of the thief Remy LeBeau, before he turns a leaf and becomes a big part of the X-Men.

It’s just talks at this stage, and while the producers have essentially confirmed Tatum’s involvement, nothing is signed just yet. Our own Kofi Outlaw chatted with Channing Tatum earlier today for 22 Jump Street and brought up Singer’s desire to include Gambit in X-Men: Apocalypse.

“I would do anything to be in those movies. I mean, I love the Marvel world and what they’ve created as a real brand and they’ve sort of changed the face of the industry. I would be in anything they put up, especially Gambit.”

In X-Men Origins: Wolverine, we met a young Remy LeBeau (played by Taylor Kitsch) who existed outside of the X-Men team and rocked a long leather jacket, a purple vest and a bowler hat. He had his staff to use as a weapon and his introductory scene involved his trademark throwing cards, but we can expect to get a little more as the character is re-introduced in future films.

‘He’s kind of really known for having this headpiece that you gotta figure out,” says Tatum when asked about the costume he might eventually sport, building off of Jonah Hill’s mention of the leather jacket. Tatum warns that you can’t just introduce him in his full costume from the books as that wouldn’t quite make sense. “It’s gonna be a slow figuring out of the design,” he warns of the planning of his outfits:

“You kind of have to slowly massage it into a world you believe and that is honest to what the actual property and what the history of the character was… People know and love this character so you have to be honest to what it was in the comics, and you also have to give them something they believe and that they’re not expecting. And so, it’s a really delicate line to walk on and we’re just going to take our time and figure it out.”

At the moment, no Gambit movie has been scheduled or even announced, the same story for Deadpool, X-Force and Mystique – all of which have been a talking point from the franchise producers and writers. There is however, an unannounced X-Men project coming in 2018, two years after X-Men: Apocalypse (which of course is two years after Days of Future Past) and producer Donner did tease a “secret” project she was excited to talk more about in the future while promoting this year’s X-Men installment.

If Tatum gets his way and has a solo effort first as the Ragin’ Cajun, it could be a few years down the road, possibly 2018 at the earliest unless the studio adds to its schedule and aims for two X-movies per year. With how the story of X-Men: Days of Future Past concluded, there are endless possibilities for future installments, in various time periods or with various teams. Would you like to see Gambit get his own movie before joining the X-Men? What costume should he wear as a thief, before joining the team?

Rob Keyes blogs at Screen Rant.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

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