Jean Grey: Marvel Girl, Phoenix Appreciation 2019

[Portsian]

Jean herself has redemption from genocide. So has the Scarlet Witch.

Obviously in the context of the comics if a character kills a bunch of people who have nothing to do with the book's core cast, it doesn't matter. Jean killing off an entire planet or Bishop slaughtering a bunch of people in an alternate future means nothing because both killed people the X-Men and the audiences don't care about and so there's no emotion there.

Quick question, i don’t know much about Bishops “recent” history apart from what has been on these pages. But, are people saying that Bishop caused genocide by killing bilions of people, but how did he do this? From the posts, it seems that he stopped them being born / wiped them out before they were born, is that correct?

How is that any different from Jean when she was Phoenix / at one with Phoenix?

I don’t mean the DP Saga, I’m talking about the conckusion to Here Vomes Tomorrow, the GM story line where Jean in the future. Completely changes / cuts off a future timeline, and changes the past so that future does not happen, on a universal scale? The stiry did seem to be couched in terms of Jean “healing” a timeline.

What is the difference (maybe their motives were different, but the loss of future (potential life) was the same.

[ExodusCloak]

Quick question, i don’t know much about Bishops “recent” history apart from what has been on these pages. But, are people saying that Bishop caused genocide by killing bilions of people, but how did he do this? From the posts, it seems that he stopped them being born / wiped them out before they were born, is that correct?

How is that any different from Jean when she was Phoenix / at one with Phoenix?

I don’t mean the DP Saga, I’m talking about the conckusion to Here Vomes Tomorrow, the GM story line where Jean in the future. Completely changes / cuts off a future timeline, and changes the past so that future does not happen, on a universal scale? The stiry did seem to be couched in terms of Jean “healing” a timeline.

What is the difference (maybe their motives were different, but the loss of future (potential life) was the same.

Bombs

10char

[Del torro]

Quick question, i don’t know much about Bishops “recent” history apart from what has been on these pages. But, are people saying that Bishop caused genocide by killing bilions of people, but how did he do this? From the posts, it seems that he stopped them being born / wiped them out before they were born, is that correct?

How is that any different from Jean when she was Phoenix / at one with Phoenix?

I don’t mean the DP Saga, I’m talking about the conckusion to Here Vomes Tomorrow, the GM story line where Jean in the future. Completely changes / cuts off a future timeline, and changes the past so that future does not happen, on a universal scale? The stiry did seem to be couched in terms of Jean “healing” a timeline.

What is the difference (maybe their motives were different, but the loss of future (potential life) was the same.

[Del torro]

Here comes tomorrow, by then end of that storyline, sublime had already taken over the world and most of the people were dead. He manipulated an out of her mind Jean grey to destroy one of the last cities, and as the final battle was being waged took over the last free city and infected everyone's minds.
Jean preventing this timeline is more of a merciful thing.

Bishop here, was bombing, poisoning and infecting people because he wanted to kill Hope and Cable. Using "they're from the future, they haven't been born yet" as an excuse, which is hypocritical, since he's from the future.

It's like, the O5 being brought to the present, then O5 beast blows up a school full of kids. But the Xmen accept him because to O5 Beast, those kids haven't been born yet.

[Portsian]

Bombs

10char

I dont understand your resoonse.

[Portsian]

Here comes tomorrow, by then end of that storyline, sublime had already taken over the world and most of the people were dead. He manipulated an out of her mind Jean grey to destroy one of the last cities, and as the final battle was being waged took over the last free city and infected everyone's minds.
Jean preventing this timeline is more of a merciful thing.

Bishop here, was bombing, poisoning and infecting people because he wanted to kill Hope and Cable. Using "they're from the future, they haven't been born yet" as an excuse, which is hypocritical, since he's from the future.

It's like, the O5 being brought to the present, then O5 beast blows up a school full of kids. But the Xmen accept him because to O5 Beast, those kids haven't been born yet.

So it was about intent / motive, but the loss of life was still huge? Know its more of a pseudophilisophical point, but some people can justify one massive genocide, because of good intentions?

It’s like a universiry essay, now compare and contrast! I suppose Jean did safe loads of lives by getting rid kf the Sublime timeline...... it’s like that old question of if you could go back and kill Hitler before the destruction etc...... does an end justify the means!?

[spirit2011]

http://www.adventuresinpoortaste.com...inity-watch-1/

Jeannie has an appearance in this.
I think this book has Phoenix Wolverine and not 616 Wolverine, so their interactions should be interesting.

It's 616 Logan

[TheCape]

http://www.adventuresinpoortaste.com...inity-watch-1/

Jeannie has an appearance in this.
I think this book has Phoenix Wolverine and not 616 Wolverine, so their interactions should be interesting.

I still think than the sequence is just Logan dreaming, but i could be wrong.

[5cents]

Wonder if the whole issue will involve Jean? I would think the Jean/Scott meeting would happen first.

[spirit2011]

Wonder if the whole issue will involve Jean? I would think the Jean/Scott meeting would happen first.

Logan and Jean already meet briefly on return of wolverine. I think Jean will make only a cameo on this too.

Jean and Scott gonna meet for last, for more drama effect

[Del torro]

So it was about intent / motive, but the loss of life was still huge? Know its more of a pseudophilisophical point, but some people can justify one massive genocide, because of good intentions?

It’s like a universiry essay, now compare and contrast! I suppose Jean did safe loads of lives by getting rid kf the Sublime timeline...... it’s like that old question of if you could go back and kill Hitler before the destruction etc...... does an end justify the means!?

Is it genocide if sublime has basically killed everyone on earth already and you go to the past to prevent that?

Anyway time travel/changing the future isn't usually seen as genocide, because all it does is just create a divergent timeline, while the original timeline continues. Otherwise you'd be here arguing if Legion committed genocide in Legion Quest before Age of Apocalypse
or if Kitty Pryde committed genocide in Days of the Future Past
or if Tempus commited genocide by preventing Matthew Malloy from being born,
Or if Sending the O5 back was committing genocide, since Extermination future will never happen
Or teen Jean changing her mind caused genocide, since It stopped Battle of the atone future of her joining the brotherhood from happening

since one small change to the past can cause a butterfly effect. Or is Beast committed genocide by bringing the O5, since the Watcher revealed that his actions that some possible futures will never come true.

The Hitler comparison doesn't really work, because mostly people are talking about killing him as a baby when he was innocent. Here comes tomorrow, Jean didn't do anything to sublime, she gave Scott the courage to continue instead of giving up on the Xmen.
The Hitler scenario is usually used to talk about the morality of killing someone who might be guilty in the future, not the morality of time travel and changing time.

If we're going to talk about the morality of using time travel to prevent a future where Sublime kills everyone on earth, then I'm all for it.

So, 1) Bishop's killing has to do with both mindset and the numbers. Even if it was one person he killed as collateral damage of trying to kill a baby, it would still be a problem.

2) You really can't compare Bishop's actions to those of the Phoenix or Galactus. Those two have their roles to play in the universe and act on a scale of that cannot be interpreted by humans. To the Phoenix death doesn't really register. Because when people die they go to the white hot room, but to the Phoenix they were alway in the white hot room waiting for themselves to arrive. To the Phoenix, the dbari are alive living in a tower in the after life having the time of their life. It's why Nightcrawler could leave paradise because he got bored. To the Phoenix, Nothing matters and everything matters, what may look like a woman's death by planterary stroke today, may be part of a longterm plan to save the universe 150 years, what may look like a woman burning in a solar flare, may be part of a bigger plan for her to save the multiverse from a Neutron Galaxy.
We don't debate about cosmic beings, because we like to believe that they are without autonomy. Like the universe is a system, or a Petri dish, and they are factors like temperature, pressure, time, Media etc. We on the other hand are the living growing organisms.

Humans operate in a limited scope, and for Bishop to wantonly kill other humans without remorse for no good reason is a problem, not a problem with hot the universe works and that those people are living on somewhere else. But a problem with Bishop and how he views/respects the life of fellow humans. Because how can you claim you are trying to save the future by killing billions in multiple futures.

God, I've gone way off track at this point and probably jumbled everything with weird and random thoughts that popped into my head.

Anyway, my problem with Bishop is they've not addressed it or dealt with. They just brought him back and expected us to just roll over. It's really more annoying, another Xman was called Hitler for doing something far less. It makes the Xmen look like hypocrites

[ExodusCloak]

I dont understand your resoonse.

He placed nukes on each continent

[Devaishwarya]

I don't think current writers would know how to even begin to address Bishop's past (or even care to, for that matter).
At this point, I'm hoping they never address Bishop's murderous transgressions because we (fans of the character) can all agree that that characterisation and story was complete and utter rubbish and is best left forgotten and ignored.
Speaking for myself only, I'm quite happy to "just roll over".

[Havok83]

I don't think current writers would know how to even begin to address Bishop's past (or even care to, for that matter).
At this point, I'm hoping they never address Bishop's murderous transgressions because we (fans of the character) can all agree that that characterisation and story was complete and utter rubbish and is best left forgotten and ignored.
Speaking for myself only, I'm quite happy to "just roll over".

Lonnie and Zac are the ones that created this Bishop/Jean thing and they are the ones that acknowledged Bishop's past in the Exterminated issue. If they continue to write the characters post AOX, its going to be addressed

[Devaishwarya]

Lonnie and Zac are the ones that created this Bishop/Jean thing and they are the ones that acknowledged Bishop's past in the Exterminated issue. If they continue to write the characters post AOX, its going to be addressed

Addressing it and addressing it in a satisfactory way are two separate things.
For your sakes...I hope they do resolve it in a satisfactory manner but...1) I don't have that much faith in the current writers. 2) Going by what I've seen/read of the (CBR) fan-dom, you guys are never appeased easily.
So...good luck with that (I mean that sincerely)