Does anyone want to see Scarlet Witch and the X-men team up ?

[AcesX1X]

Okay, so why does Jean get a pass on her crimes and Wanda doesn't?

jean doesn't get a pass for anything - she was made to pay the ultimate price for her horrors in dark phoenix saga, and then killed again (for over a decade) when phoenix resurrected inside her during morrison's run.

nor does jean roll her eyes on the graves atop those her (or her imposter) murdered. wanda did, and gleefully so.

[Iron Maiden]

It just felt like you didn't like what AcesX1X was saying, so you tried to dismiss it by pointing out how fruitless the activity was. The problem with that is that this entire hobby is unproductive, so why point out the futility of his statements but not all other comments on this MB? (Besides, who is to say that Aces did not already contact Marvel? I don't know how he spends his waking hours, do you?)

It's really long past time that readers move on from this controversy about House of M and how it was just the instrument editorial used to make mutants more singular and unique in the MU. Was it badly executed? I'd say yes. But I don't place blame on characters. That's what gets tiresome and unproductive. I blame writers.

[Iron Maiden]

jean doesn't get a pass for anything - she was made to pay the ultimate price for her horrors in dark phoenix saga, and then killed again (for over a decade) when phoenix resurrected inside her during morrison's run.

nor does jean roll her eyes on the graves atop those her (or her imposter) murdered. wanda did, and gleefully so.

Then I'd blame the writer of that story where Wanda rolled her eyes. That's bad writing and OOC for her.

[AcesX1X]

Then I'd blame the writer of that story where Wanda rolled her eyes. That's bad writing and OOC for her.

i certainly do.

as for ooc, i am not sure anymore. she's been a cypher since bendis, her personality changes with everyone that pens her. inconsistency is her one consistent trait since house of m.

that, and her desperate desire to move on from house of m and decimation, regardless of who she's harmed or maimed.

[Iron Maiden]

i certainly do.

as for ooc, i am not sure anymore. she's been a cypher since bendis, her personality changes with everyone that pens her. inconsistency is her one consistent trait since house of m.

that, and her desperate desire to move on from house of m and decimation, regardless of who she's harmed or maimed.

Your answer is in bold. IMO Bendis doesn't consider the entire story of Darker than Scarlet but used that as the basis to conclude that Wanda has always been unstable. The ending showed that it was Immortus and his scheming that was the true villain of the piece. So his characterization of Wanda is based on lack of knowledge or just ignoring the conclusion altogether.

[Hizashi]

Hizashi said:

I just don't feel that she was handled properly after Quesada and Bendis did what they did

I emphasized that part, because it seems you are blaming writers 'after' Q and B, rather than them - and they are actually the ones who did what we find regrettable.

Yeah, sure, but that also doesn't change my statement; of course Quesada and Bendis screwed up, but why should the following writers/editors get a free pass?

[AcesX1X]

Your answer is in bold. IMO Bendis doesn't consider the entire story of Darker than Scarlet but used that as the basis to conclude that Wanda has always been unstable. The ending showed that it was Immortus and his scheming that was the true villain of the piece. So his characterization of Wanda is based on lack of knowledge or just ignoring the conclusion altogether.

well, she married a synthezoid and thought she had children with it, so bendis was right to examine her with a harsh lens. and regardless of what he regarded or discarded, every writer since him has propelled his interpretation forward in the canon.

so we must now accept it as a larger part of her history, warts and all. as we do with all characters.

[Marvell2100]

I don't see why Scarlet Witch and the X-men can't work together again.

On paper yes they could.

But those fans who are still angry at Wanda would only see another opportunity to vent.

They worked together in Children's Crusade and AvX. Some weren't satisfied that Wanda didn't get flayed alive for House of M.

So to go down this road again isn't wrong depending on what kind of story is being told. But they don't need to rehash this stuff again.

[Marvell2100]

You may not be understanding this. A writer did it, to a character that *would not * do that. Character destroyed by bad writing. That is all.

*your* writers could restore these folks . . . why won't they? You should be pestering them, instead of Wanda fans.

Yeah, if anything be mad at the writer. Being pissed at Wanda isn't going to hurt her feelings.

[Iron Maiden]

well, she married a synthezoid and thought she had children with it,

In the world of sci fi and comics, humans and artificial beings having relations isn't all that odd. Examples, Blade Runner, Westworld (the hookers and concubines were robots)

It was more than just Wanda imagining she had children. She did have children and Doctor Strange helped with the process.

so bendis was right to examine her with a harsh lens. and regardless of what he regarded or discarded, every writer since him has propelled his interpretation forward in the canon.

I think it's Steve Englehart that should be examined with a harsh lens since he was the one that came up with the idea of the magical children. For his part Byrne gets rid of the children rather harshly, which Englehart wished didn't happen. IMO it's a story that should never have happened in the first place. I'm not that fond of the Vision/Wanda marriage either. They should have left it in the category of unrequited/unfulfilled love.

so we must now accept it as a larger part of her history, warts and all. as we do with all characters.

Yet many fans who are against Wanda refuse to accept the conclusion of Children's Crusade. I'm not that happy about Doom being brought in as the scapegoat and could give detailed reasons why. But that doesn't change things.

[Marvell2100]

We're all here for thoughtful and intelligent discussions about the stories and characters.

Agreed 100%.

[AcesX1X]

Yet many fans who are against Wanda refuse to accept the conclusion of Children's Crusade. I'm not that happy about Doom being brought in as the scapegoat and could give detailed reasons why. But that doesn't change things.

it certainly doesn't. i referenced children's crusade a few pages back.

that's the only story post-m day where she showed any form of remorse towards her victims. but what happened in uncanny avengers directly following it? she became vengeful and vindictive when she learned that she still hadn't been completely forgiven.

so no, it doesn't change things. nor does her terrible attitude since she didn't fully get her way during that time. the writers have chosen that path for her, not you or i.

[Michael Watkins]

It was Doom's fault, anyways. and it went unanswered. the mutants should retaliate.

[Michael Watkins]

Okay, so why does Jean get a pass on her crimes and Wanda doesn't?

Jean was killed.

[Iron Maiden]

it certainly doesn't. i referenced children's crusade a few pages back.

that's the only story post-m day where she showed any form of remorse towards her victims. but what happened in uncanny avengers directly following it? she became vengeful and vindictive when she learned that she still hadn't been completely forgiven.

so no, it doesn't change things. nor does her terrible attitude since she didn't fully get her way during that time. the writers have chosen that path for her, not you or i.

Which is why I choose not to read any comic coming from the X-Men side of Marvel. I thought Wanda's solo title was wonderful and infinitely more insightful that anything coming out of there. And she got a great new look out of it.