-
[QUOTE=WhiteQueenEmmaFrost;2829604]Weapon X is just that only characters associated with Weapon X and adjacent programs. There aren't any Xmen besides Wolverine and he's already in two other Xbooks. Also the next issue of Weapon X is taking place in the Hulk series.
The phoenix force is coming for Jean Grey and that began in Thor.
I don't. I want a series like one Kyle & Yost wrote were they were on a book for 45(+?) issues. The writers (Except for Bunn) have other projects that they're focused on more than the titles. Gold is lazy writing.[/QUOTE]
I'd argue with you but I remember you said Gold would be cancelled because there weren't a ton of replies on the thread for issue #4.
So I'm not sure how much good your opinion does.
-
Saddened yeah..but I think disgusted is probably the word I would use for how I feel about the state of x-men comics..Gold actually makes me sick
I said this in another thread..but the Claremont era is what it is because it was modern, it was of it's time, and the ideas were original..they were telling original stories..that's what the x-men needed...not nostalgia, rehashed stories and retro looks..they need books that look like they're made in 2017 not the 1987..books that reflect the time in which they are being created..modern looks, modern costumes..new, original ideas and stories...forward moving character development..new threats, new villains.. time to move on past Sentinels and the Brotherhood and the Phoenix, retro costumes and "hope you survive the experience" and all the same shit we've seen and heard over and over ad nauseam...
Instead of just copying the past I wish Marvel would take a look at why the Claremont stuff is so highly regarded in the first place..original ideas, original stories, of it's time, etc etc... That's what the x-books need..not this RessurXion garbage
-
[QUOTE=ColossusFan;2829947]Saddened yeah..but I think disgusted is probably the word I would use for how I feel about the state of x-men comics..Gold actually makes me sick
I said this in another thread..but the Claremont era is what it is because it was modern, it was of it's time, and the ideas were original..they were telling original stories..that's what the x-men needed...not nostalgia, rehashed stories and retro looks..they need books that look like they're made in 2017 not the 1987..books that reflect the time in which they are being created..modern looks, modern costumes..new, original ideas and stories...forward moving character development..new threats, new villains.. time to move on past Sentinels and the Brotherhood and the Phoenix, retro costumes and "hope you survive the experience" and all the same shit we've seen and heard over and over ad nauseam...
Instead of just copying the past I wish Marvel would take a look at why the Claremont stuff is so highly regarded in the first place..original ideas, original stories, of it's time, etc etc... That's what the x-books need..not this RessurXion garbage[/QUOTE]
The problem is Marvel is damned if they do, damned if they don't.
If they try to do something new, let characters develop, and allow stories to move forward, the traditionalists get up in arms because things aren't the way it was when they started reading. The Church of Claremont (many of whom congregate on this board) are particularly bad about that; Claremont is the Alpha and Omega, and god forbid you don't adhere to what he set down.
And when Marvel caves to the traditionalists (and not just readers, but creators as well. Lookin' at you, Quesada) an entirely different set gnashes their teeth about how stale and beholden to the past things are.
-
[QUOTE=Ambaryerno;2830357]The problem is Marvel is damned if they do, damned if they don't.
If they try to do something new, let characters develop, and allow stories to move forward, the traditionalists get up in arms because things aren't the way it was when they started reading. The Church of Claremont (many of whom congregate on this board) are particularly bad about that; Claremont is the Alpha and Omega, and god forbid you don't adhere to what he set down.
And when Marvel caves to the traditionalists (and not just readers, but creators as well. Lookin' at you, Quesada) an entirely different set gnashes their teeth about how stale and beholden to the past things are.[/QUOTE]
There is a middle ground though. They don't need to replace the 05 adults with their younger counterparts. That's an extreme move. Same thing with OML. He was cool when used in moderation, but keeping him here and now Jimmy instead of the original Wolverine is hard to older fans to accept.
Marvel didn't just make minor adjustments, they basically threw everything out.
-
What is needed are books that reflect and honor the past, while building new arcs and new characters for the future. Marvel hasn't been able to do that very well in about 15 years, as far as I am concerned. Basically Claremont's run was so great because he was pretty thoughtful and considerate of the characters, and how they changed over time. Because Marvel will never be able to retain creators for the same kind of run Claremont had, they(the editors particularly) need to be the shepherds that carefully tend to the flock. Of course, hot shot writers don't want to be infringed upon by editors, so they just come in and do what they do anyways. That is why it has been a no-win situation for so long.
-
[QUOTE=yogaflame;2830431]What is needed are books that reflect and honor the past, while building new arcs and new characters for the future. Marvel hasn't been able to do that very well in about 15 years, as far as I am concerned.[/QUOTE]
The same can be said for DC, unfortunately. As has been mentioned, the big two have been stuck in a quagmire. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
The propensity for family crossovers and linewide events (while keeping the lights running or more likely corporate overlords content with the profits) probably doesn't help them keep new readers. Meanwhile on the other side of the fence, if someone buys Invincible (Kirkman), they don't need to buy The Walking Dead or Outcast.
-
[QUOTE=yogaflame;2830431]Because Marvel will never be able to retain creators for the same kind of run Claremont had, they(the editors particularly) need to be the shepherds that carefully tend to the flock. Of course, hot shot writers don't want to be infringed upon by editors, so they just come in and do what they do anyways. That is why it has been a no-win situation for so long.[/QUOTE]
I feel like there would be creators willing to stick on the title for while (look at Slott, yeah he isn't super popular now, but my understanding is that it has more to do with OMD/newer ideas that haven't been as well received). The bigger issue is the editors. They're either coming up with shitty ideas, or letting them get approved. The whole point of them being there is to try and keep things coherent between books and to prevent things from getting out of hand. Writers have a bad idea, tough shit, editor vetoes it. If they aren't able or willing to do that the situation needs to be rectified.
-
[QUOTE=Ambaryerno;2830357]The problem is Marvel is damned if they do, damned if they don't.
If they try to do something new, let characters develop, and allow stories to move forward, the traditionalists get up in arms because things aren't the way it was when they started reading. The Church of Claremont (many of whom congregate on this board) are particularly bad about that; Claremont is the Alpha and Omega, and god forbid you don't adhere to what he set down.
And when Marvel caves to the traditionalists (and not just readers, but creators as well. Lookin' at you, Quesada) an entirely different set gnashes their teeth about how stale and beholden to the past things are.[/QUOTE]
To an extent I do agree.
That being said I do feel Fans would be more accepting of gradual changes that build characters.
For instance I would suggest looking at Cyclops (ever since Apocalypse take over).
He went from 'Boy Scout' to 'Revolutionary' while keeping (and even gaining) fans due to the fact that his characterization was developed steadily over many years, step by step.
That is what is missing in Marvel.
Gradual build up and change. This is even true regarding the introduction of new characters.
[QUOTE=The Whovian;2830403]There is a middle ground though. They don't need to replace the 05 adults with their younger counterparts. That's an extreme move. Same thing with OML. He was cool when used in moderation, but keeping him here and now Jimmy instead of the original Wolverine is hard to older fans to accept.
Marvel didn't just make minor adjustments, they basically threw everything out.[/QUOTE]
Marvel didn't just make minor adjustments, they basically threw everything out.[/QUOTE]
I do agree that Marvel should not make such extreme moves but instead focus on moderation.
Extreme and particularly sudden changes do not exactly generate reader approval.
[QUOTE=yogaflame;2830431]What is needed are books that reflect and honor the past, while building new arcs and new characters for the future. Marvel hasn't been able to do that very well in about 15 years, as far as I am concerned. Basically Claremont's run was so great because he was pretty thoughtful and considerate of the characters, and how they changed over time. Because Marvel will never be able to retain creators for the same kind of run Claremont had, they(the editors particularly) need to be the shepherds that carefully tend to the flock. Of course, hot shot writers don't want to be infringed upon by editors, so they just come in and do what they do anyways. That is why it has been a no-win situation for so long.[/QUOTE]
Agreed here.
See what I wrote about gradual changes above.
The other issue is that writers who only stick around for one year or so are not interested in building characters.
They want to tell stories.
More particularly they want to tell THEIR story.
And if THEIR story needs character A to behave in a manner character A would never do then it sucks for Character A (and A's fans) because THEIR story is the most important thing.
-
I can see it from both sides. The creators want to get some shine in the field with a huge property. The editors want to exploit indie talent for quarterly profits. The creators don't want to give too many awesome ideas to Dis-Marvel, a huge entity that will profit of of their creativity forever(licensing, movies, shows, etc) and toss them to the curb when it suits them(like they played Jack Kirby or Claremont back in the day), when they can just save their best stuff for their creator-owned projects. The editors don't want to change the characters too much and loose brand integrity/give Fox any more content to compete with the MCU franchises.
It's really the fans who loose out in the crossfire.
-
[QUOTE=TitanMax;2829469]Oh god do people make threads for something other than whining nowadays?[/QUOTE]
And here I thought I was the only one thinking like this.
I thinks it’s good to discuss the new vibe of the X-books, however the tone of some threads are really negative. While ResurruXion has just started.
In all honesty I think the current books are quite an improvement to the recent books (never ever want to read a series like Extraordinary again). Of course I would love to see a youngster book by Kyle and Yost, or a Legacy team with Rogue, Cannonball etc, written by Mike Carey. But considering how it was, I am very pleased with the current changes.
-
[QUOTE=rui no onna;2830445]The same can be said for DC, unfortunately. As has been mentioned, the big two have been stuck in a quagmire. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.[/QUOTE]
That said, they've "Done" with Superman; given him and his wife Lois a biological ten-year old son; and the general consensus is that this run in Superman and Action is probably the best Superman has been in decades.
Sure, there's a bit of nostalgia in play, Superman's greatest villains just decided to team up to take him down and Manchester Black is back with his own agenda, but all through the prism of a Superman who's a husband and father which is new territory for the Man of Steel to cover.
There's no reason the X-Men titles couldn't do the same in going forward. Marvel's biggest problem is that won't LET that great push forward happen, because they're stuck on not letting anything that can't be undone without a deal with the devil or cosmic reset button actually happen with any of their properties and they've made death such a revolving door that the audience isn't even shocked and treats it like a 'time out' instead of what should be a permanent change for a title.
Heck, its been more than a decade now and Jean Grey fans still believe its only a matter of time until the adult version pops up again, just as they're convinced the real Professor-X, Wolverine and adult Cyclops are going to be back among the living again at some point soon-ish too. And the problem from a storytelling perspective is that they're probably right. Because Xavier, Scott, Jean and Logan all staying dead would actually mean something of lasting consequence happened in the story that they'd have to live with going forward and that's just not how Marvel rolls.
-
[QUOTE=Chris24601;2831000]That said, they've "Done" with Superman; given him and his wife Lois a biological ten-year old son; and the general consensus is that this run in Superman and Action is probably the best Superman has been in decades.
[/QUOTE]
You're forgetting that Marvel has some weird aversion to stable, healthy relationships. ESPECIALLY if they're classic romances (Scott/Jean, Peter/MJ, etc.). Swear to god they'd be trying to bust up Reed and Sue if they were actually appearing in the books these days.
-
[QUOTE=Ambaryerno;2831030]You're forgetting that Marvel has some weird aversion to stable, healthy relationships. ESPECIALLY if they're classic romances (Scott/Jean, Peter/MJ, etc.). Swear to god they'd be trying to bust up Reed and Sue if they were actually appearing in the books these days.[/QUOTE]
Well, i think that was more because Quesada had to have some kind of trauma involving redhead women.
-
[QUOTE=yogaflame;2830431]What is needed are books that reflect and honor the past, while building new arcs and new characters for the future. Marvel hasn't been able to do that very well in about 15 years, as far as I am concerned. Basically Claremont's run was so great because he was pretty thoughtful and considerate of the characters, and how they changed over time. Because Marvel will never be able to retain creators for the same kind of run Claremont had, they(the editors particularly) need to be the shepherds that carefully tend to the flock. Of course, hot shot writers don't want to be infringed upon by editors, so they just come in and do what they do anyways. That is why it has been a no-win situation for so long.[/QUOTE]
This. All of this.
-
[QUOTE=TitanMax;2829735]I'd argue with you but I remember you said Gold would be cancelled because there weren't a ton of replies on the thread for issue #4.
So I'm not sure how much good your opinion does.[/QUOTE]
The gold thing was more of a joke, but still think it will get cancelled.
and I really doubt Marvel cares about mine, or any other reader's opinions. Just like I don't care about yours.
