Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 259
  1. #151
    The King Fears NO ONE! Triniking1234's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,021

    Default

    The best combo work of Hickman and Yu was the Original Sin story in Avengers. I want that Yu back.
    "Cable was right!"

  2. #152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gifted View Post
    I was going to post this in the X-Men #3 thread, but didn't want to detail it. So I'm posting it here, where probably no one will care to read it.

    I wonder if some people who are showing a lot of hatred toward Hickman, this new direction, and/or adjective less X-Men have actually read some of Claremont's stuff from the '70s and '80s. I'm not falsely accusing anyone of anything (especially because I hold Claremont with much high regard as well and absolutely love his era of X-Men); however, I'm currently rereading all of his back issues on Marvel Unlimited and there is some cringe-worthy stuff.

    And if you look back at it, his stuff really reads well when you read them all together (like a TPB), but if you're reading it in a single-issue format, it's a lot of random fluff. Yes, I'll admit that I'm a Hickman fan, but he's a scribe just like Claremont. He's writing for a longer and bigger picture that will ultimately pan out.

    I get the criticizing his characterization because they feel as if it's cold and distant, but I want to attribute most of that to Yu's art. Art sends a subconscious message out to us. There are plenty of examples out there where the art changes and people's opinions about the book suddenly changes around the same time.

    What Hickman is doing is just having fun and creating new stories and characters. Let's give him some slack. I watched the Claremont's X-Men documentary and after, I tried my best to find some more articles and interviews. People were just as critical of his stuff back then, but it still sold REALLY well. It's just that it didn't seem like there was any negative commentary because there wasn't the internet and social media back then.

    It's just disheartening to see so many people (and yes, I know CBR isn't an accurate representation of all comic fandom as a whole) so angry and so upset and so belittling nowadays. If you're not enjoying something, there are 80 decades of comics you can go back and read. Marvel Unlimited is only $10/month. If you can afford to buy 2 issues a month, you can afford to subscribe to Marvel Unlimited.
    The big difference between Claremont and Hickman, though, is that one actually seems to put heart into the characters and, thus, makes them feel distinct.

    Claremont is great at dialogue: he had big plans and big ideas, but he was able to properly channel them through character focussed narratives, rather than data pages. He told us what we needed to know through the mouths of the characters, had them reflect and with differing points of view between each. Kitty could often be on the opposite line of thinking to Logan, who in turn might have been that to Scott, but each had a point to make and each were allowed the time to actually lay it out for us.

    And not just lay it out; it was introspective, it was challenged, it wasn't treated as 100% right or wrong either way and, as such, you developed a much more personal investment into how it all played into the overall narrative. That's why we love Magneto so much, not because he's 'evil,' but because you could understand just why he was doing what he was doing and where it was coming from exactly--you didn't always agree with how far he took it, mind! But you understood.

    Hickman, in my opinion, doesn't have that approach. He has big ideas, but he doesn't treat it in the same manner; the characters are mouth-pieces for that, just the plot. There's no nuance of emotion, no actual reflection or introspection on what they're doing or what's going on. They're just like dolls being moved about the page: Scott's here and says this, Emma says this, Jean says this. Everyone's here, but there's no chemistry of any sorts between them, meaning the dialogue doesn't flow particularly naturally and, as such, the whole plot can be easily dismissed.

    If the characters aren't engaged in what they're doing then why should I, as a reader be, ya know?
    Last edited by Domino_Dare-Doll; 12-05-2019 at 11:21 AM.

  3. #153
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    43

    Default

    I’ve been rereading Hickman’s Marvel stuff since he was announced to be taking over All things X and I see a lot of parallels to what he’s doing here. All of his early FF and Avengers stuff includes random world building stories early on. The pay off comes near the middle and end of the arcs he’s planned. His FF run, death of Johnny Storm and the return of Johnny Storm was beautifully set up and written. Full of great character moments and character interactions. If he’s even close to that here, I’m on board until he stops. It’s only three issues in, I think we’re in for some great things.

  4. #154
    Extraordinary Member spirit2011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    9,926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M. View Post
    I’ve been rereading Hickman’s Marvel stuff since he was announced to be taking over All things X and I see a lot of parallels to what he’s doing here. All of his early FF and Avengers stuff includes random world building stories early on. The pay off comes near the middle and end of the arcs he’s planned. His FF run, death of Johnny Storm and the return of Johnny Storm was beautifully set up and written. Full of great character moments and character interactions. If he’s even close to that here, I’m on board until he stops. It’s only three issues in, I think we’re in for some great things.
    I think Hickman could do very entertainment one shots, instead of what we have

  5. #155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M. View Post
    I’ve been rereading Hickman’s Marvel stuff since he was announced to be taking over All things X and I see a lot of parallels to what he’s doing here. All of his early FF and Avengers stuff includes random world building stories early on. The pay off comes near the middle and end of the arcs he’s planned. His FF run, death of Johnny Storm and the return of Johnny Storm was beautifully set up and written. Full of great character moments and character interactions. If he’s even close to that here, I’m on board until he stops. It’s only three issues in, I think we’re in for some great things.
    Fair enough, but the main problem I'm having here is that these initial adventures aren't remotely fun, engaging or...anything. (In my opinion, not out to pick a fight here.) I don't fault him if that's his preferred structure/style but like...doesn't make it immune to criticism. Nor does guarantee success just based on past work! Look at Claremont and how bad his newer stuff was compared to the old!

  6. #156
    Amazing Member Chessboxer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M. View Post
    I’ve been rereading Hickman’s Marvel stuff since he was announced to be taking over All things X and I see a lot of parallels to what he’s doing here. All of his early FF and Avengers stuff includes random world building stories early on. The pay off comes near the middle and end of the arcs he’s planned. His FF run, death of Johnny Storm and the return of Johnny Storm was beautifully set up and written. Full of great character moments and character interactions. If he’s even close to that here, I’m on board until he stops. It’s only three issues in, I think we’re in for some great things.
    The same criticisms I read here are the same ones I read on this very same board during his Avengers run eg(characterization, too much decompression etc). It literally feels like I'm in 2015-2016 when I read the comments here. I agree, that the payoff comes in the middle/end of the arc. Granted I didn't read his FF run, but during Avengers, BOOM, he hits you with a left hook and your'e on canvas wondering WTF just happened.

  7. #157
    homo superior gifted's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,214

    Default

    Wow, thanks everyone. For all the opinions and insight without putting anyone else's opinions down. Personally, after reading some of the reviews for X-Men #3, I wasn't too excited to read it. My best friend, who is actually on here as well, said he hated it. But I read it and it was one of the more enjoyable issues I've read of DoX. Such a new and different concept. It's like Poison Ivy + The Golden Girls and I was all for it. Yu's art actually worked better here too.

    But yes. I'm not saying Hickman's run is perfect, but I do think he deserves a lot of credit for all the good he is doing. Which definitely overshadows the negatives, at least for me. Domino, I get your post. I totally understand what you're saying and agree that Claremont has the upper hand in that sense.

    I also wonder if Hickman has a disadvantage because there are SO many toys in the sandbox and he has to balance them all out. Whereas Claremont had full control over what he was doing, there was only one book back then, and, while still having a lot of characters, there were still overall a less amount of characters than there are now.
    I like boys, comics, Disney, and traveling. // follow me @ itsnickmen
    “Have courage and be kind. Where there is kindness there is goodness, and where there is goodness there is magic.”
    Cinderella

  8. #158
    Chris-chan of X-fans Maestroneto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    6,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Triniking1234 View Post
    The best combo work of Hickman and Yu was the Original Sin story in Avengers. I want that Yu back.
    That terrible arc was the nadir of his terrible Avengers run.

  9. #159
    The King Fears NO ONE! Triniking1234's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maestroneto View Post
    That terrible arc was the nadir of his terrible Avengers run.
    Not his fault Jason Aaron decided to derail everyone's plans with his "Nick Fury BAD" story.

    I liked it. Got to see Iron Lad, the Kangs and Super Franklin.
    "Cable was right!"

  10. #160
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Domino_Dare-Doll View Post
    The big difference between Claremont and Hickman, though, is that one actually seems to put heart into the characters and, thus, makes them feel distinct.

    Claremont is great at dialogue: he had big plans and big ideas, but he was able to properly channel them through character focussed narratives, rather than data pages. He told us what we needed to know through the mouths of the characters, had them reflect and with differing points of view between each. Kitty could often be on the opposite line of thinking to Logan, who in turn might have been that to Scott, but each had a point to make and each were allowed the time to actually lay it out for us.

    And not just lay it out; it was introspective, it was challenged, it wasn't treated as 100% right or wrong either way and, as such, you developed a much more personal investment into how it all played into the overall narrative. That's why we love Magneto so much, not because he's 'evil,' but because you could understand just why he was doing what he was doing and where it was coming from exactly--you didn't always agree with how far he took it, mind! But you understood.

    Hickman, in my opinion, doesn't have that approach. He has big ideas, but he doesn't treat it in the same manner; the characters are mouth-pieces for that, just the plot. There's no nuance of emotion, no actual reflection or introspection on what they're doing or what's going on. They're just like dolls being moved about the page: Scott's here and says this, Emma says this, Jean says this. Everyone's here, but there's no chemistry of any sorts between them, meaning the dialogue doesn't flow particularly naturally and, as such, the whole plot can be easily dismissed.

    If the characters aren't engaged in what they're doing then why should I, as a reader be, ya know?
    Glad to know I'm not the only one feeling confused. It's like I'm reading a wikipedia article / Hickman's bullet points than an actual story.

    I'm hoping the storytelling will pick-up, though.
    Don't like? Don't read. Let your wallet talk.

    When will Logan call out Jean for putting his clone and his clone's underage clone in an X-Squad?

  11. #161
    Sarveśām Svastir Bhavatu Devaishwarya's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    2,479

    Default

    Why are some of you still trying to compare HiX-Man with Claremont?
    Not the same writers.
    Not the same skill-sets.
    Not the same intents.
    Not the same eras.
    Not the same X-Editorial Office.
    We are MUTANT...One people. One tribe. One family...Krakoa, FOREVER!!!

  12. #162
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,371

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Devaishwarya View Post
    Why are some of you still trying to compare HiX-Man with Claremont?
    Not the same writers.
    Not the same skill-sets.
    Not the same intents.
    Not the same eras.
    Not the same X-Editorial Office.
    I can kind of understand it but i feel Hickman has the harder job and is doing a good job. Claremont had two decades to create amazing material writers used for decades going forward. I feel Hickan and co right now are trying to create potential decades of future new material for the x-men right now in just under a year. It's a big task and i think they are doing amazing so far just from the grand idea standpoint of it imo.
    Don't let anyone else hold the candle that lights the way to your future because only you can sustain the flame.

  13. #163
    Sarveśām Svastir Bhavatu Devaishwarya's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    2,479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwatson View Post
    I can kind of understand it but i feel Hickman has the harder job and is doing a good job. Claremont had two decades to create amazing material writers used for decades going forward. I feel Hickan and co right now are trying to create potential decades of future new material for the x-men right now in just under a year. It's a big task and i think they are doing amazing so far just from the grand idea standpoint of it imo.
    I agree. Completely.
    The "X-chips" are stacked pretty much against H and Co. by having to use long-pre-established characters and why I can understand and appreciate a desire change to a new game and go in a new direction.
    It's been only three issues as per D0X plus the 12-issue introduction that was HoX/PoX...I'm giving HCo. kudos for not trying to re-create the "Claremont Magic" and do what the X-fans expected.
    Last edited by Devaishwarya; 12-06-2019 at 08:59 AM.
    We are MUTANT...One people. One tribe. One family...Krakoa, FOREVER!!!

  14. #164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Devaishwarya View Post
    Why are some of you still trying to compare HiX-Man with Claremont?
    Not the same writers.
    Not the same skill-sets.
    Not the same intents.
    Not the same eras.
    Not the same X-Editorial Office.
    It's more a comparison of quality than any of that. Claremont might have had decades to work with, but he knew how to engage the reader as far as making us feel for the characters he introduced; we were invested enough in that to stick around to watch the world build around them. not the same execution here so it's coming off a little stale for some. Opinion.

    Like; Ok, nobody's reacting to anything it feels like...why do you want me to care, Hickman? Show me from their mouths, not a data page. Like, not in a broader context or meta commentary anything; from him, as an author, for this story.

    In fact, it was the meta commentaries that turned me off of Claremont's later writing: X-Men forever was a complete mess because of that and he fell into much the same pitfalls as I'm criticising Hickman for, so ya know.
    Last edited by Domino_Dare-Doll; 12-06-2019 at 10:15 AM.

  15. #165
    Sarveśām Svastir Bhavatu Devaishwarya's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    2,479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Domino_Dare-Doll View Post
    It's more a comparison of quality than any of that. Claremont might have had decades to work with, but he knew how to engage the reader as far as making us feel for the characters he introduced; we were invested enough in that to stick around to watch the world build around them. not the same execution here so it's coming off a little stale for some. Opinion.

    Like; Ok, nobody's reacting to anything it feels like...why do you want me to care, Hickman? Show me from their mouths, not a data page. Like, not in a broader context or meta commentary anything; from him, as an author, for this story.

    In fact, it was the meta commentaries that turned me off of Claremont's later writing: X-Men forever was a complete mess because of that and he fell into much the same pitfalls as I'm criticising Hickman for, so ya know.
    Being very familiar with HiX-Man's previous works, I think the quality is as expected...but that's me comparing it to his previous works and not to that of other, previous X-writers.

    As a reader (since the 80's) who's been enjoying the DoX books...I am fully engaged. I am fully entertained. I feel for these characters and I remain fully invested in the stories HCo. is bringing to the table...because they are NOT the same types of stories/characters I became familiar (and eventually bored) with from decades of complacent, stale and rehashed storytelling. I am being forced to see these characters in a different light and I'm very happy with that.

    (Not) Taking those 'differences' I listed into account...the general arguments, against this new status-quo in general and HiX-Man specifically, I've read throughout these threads since HoX/PoX started, come down to two basics and obviously personal truths (in lieu of: "The story is crap. The writing is bad. The art is trash")

    1: These are not My X-Men/the X-Men I know/The (insert single character here) I love.
    2: These are not the kinds of stories involving My X-Men, I want to read.

    Some readers just cannot come to terms with those truths or with the idea that they have to now alter their personal visions and expectations of these stories and characters.
    And when looked at from that perspective, the fault(s) does not lie with the creatives.
    Last edited by Devaishwarya; 12-06-2019 at 11:13 AM.
    We are MUTANT...One people. One tribe. One family...Krakoa, FOREVER!!!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •