Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 109
  1. #61
    Mighty Member Doombot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hybrid View Post
    So... what do you think of Latveria rejecting Krakoa's offers? That has some implications.
    I'm both excited and worried about this story dragging Doom into things. It could be amazing, but I'm not looking forward to another Doomwar situation where two fan bases are freaking out because their favourite character did or didn't look bad, get jobbed, overpowered etc etc.

    I'm more interested to see if Hickman remembers that Doom has the ability to turn off the X-gene.

  2. #62
    Extraordinary Member BroHomo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Da Souf
    Posts
    6,740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doombot View Post
    I'm both excited and worried about this story dragging Doom into things. It could be amazing, but I'm not looking forward to another Doomwar situation where two fan bases are freaking out because their favourite character did or didn't look bad, get jobbed, overpowered etc etc.

    I'm more interested to see if Hickman remembers that Doom has the ability to turn off the X-gene.
    I doubt Hickman even remembers Doom is around in the 616
    GrindrStone(D)

  3. #63
    Mighty Member Hybrid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    1,547

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BroHomo View Post
    I doubt Hickman even remembers Doom is around in the 616
    Is this a reference to something? Why would not remember? He put Latveria on the chart!

  4. #64
    Extraordinary Member BroHomo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Da Souf
    Posts
    6,740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hybrid View Post
    Is this a reference to something? Why would not remember? He put Latveria on the chart!
    lNo I think Doom is quite boring and it'd be silly to have him sully the X-Mens winning streak...I'm just being sassy lol
    GrindrStone(D)

  5. #65
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    House of M happened because Quesada didn't feel like Mutants were an actual minority with so many of hem running around. It wasn't a rights issues thing. Though that did start affecting the line more seriously later in regards to the Inhumans push.
    The whole "mutants don't feel like a real minority" thing is just hogwash that Quesada is spouting to sell his spin.

    The fact was that X-Men was the biggest team in the Marvel Universe and it was in the interest of Quesada and others to make Avengers the biggest team. To do that they needed to cut X-Men down to size and the way for that is "no more mutants". That's why the entire story revolved around characters (Wanda, Pietro) who were long-time Avengers characters. It was very much "new sheriff in town".

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukmendes View Post
    "If" is the big problem here, because we may get a writter after him who, if we assume Hickman makes the future look brighter, said next writter may hate it for not being "real X-Men" and make them miserable again.
    If they write a bad run, like Chuck Austen they did, nothing they do will last.

    Not saying that it will happen, just that it's a possibility, comic books do love their status quo after all, it'd be nice if a change happened, a good one of course lol.
    Eventually I think the X-Men will go back to the mansion, danger rooms and all. That I think will happen. It might even happen in Hickman's run somewhere down the line.

  6. #66
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    612

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Force de Phenix View Post
    "Fascinating" and "bland". I see what you did there. Well, they don't mix as much as I would like them to, and many X-Men fans don't care for anything outside of X-Men books. They had their own cartoons, video games, and comics alone when they didn't need to, and no one complained then or now.

    They just complain about having better movies and more comics, not them actually mixing with MU elements.
    Nobody complained because they outdrew the FF, Hulk, Daredevil, and Avengers with ease.

  7. #67
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,040

    Default

    My problem with the X-Men is just that they really aren't like most minorities in the real world. Their experiences are almost too extreme and their powers too fantastic.

    And as we see, Hickman is sort of offering a reason for why people might be afraid of mutants.

  8. #68
    MXAAGVNIEETRO IS RIGHT MyriVerse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,113

    Default

    There's already reason. Hickman doesn't need to add anything for that. What Hickman is doing is turning them into outright villains.
    f/k/a The Black Guardian
    COEXIST | NOEXIST
    ShadowcatMagikДаякѕтая Sto☈mDustMercury MonetRachelSage
    MagnetoNightcrawlerColossusRockslideBeastXavier

  9. #69
    Astonishing Member Force de Phenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    2,576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    In what sense? I re-read Morrison's run recently and I didn't get that sense of things at all. It opens with the genocide of Genosha. Then we have internal schisms in mutantkind leading to the riot at Xavier's mansion and the death of a student on campus, and then the finale, Here Comes Tomorrow is very much a DOFP-style rumination and the way to avert it is apparently...Cyclops snogging Emma on Jean's grave. Basically Morrison's run peaks at Riot at Xavier's. And the rest of his run while having moments here and there is a poor and weak finish.

    There was stuff like Mutant Town and a sense of mutants forming culture and identity and so on. But Morrison didn't exactly show that as utopian or without complications.



    Again, rights issues. And so on.



    Based on his run on FF and Avengers, I think he'll put the Merry Mutants through the ringer but eventually have them land on their feet and recover and reclaim themselves. His run on FF begins with the phrase 'Solve Everything', and the Avengers begins with the phrase 'Everything Dies" and the conclusion of Secret Wars 2015 is "Everything Lives". So ultimately there was a solution to everything.



    Not if Disney sell the rights of X-Men to someone else, which they are not likely to do so.

    The reasons for House of M and the moratorium that Quesada declared on the X-Men corner was transparently and brazenly a case of the rights issues with Marvel handicapping an IP whose rights they didn't have full control over in favor of IP which they fully controlled.

    Now that this isn't a problem, I don't see any need for "no more mutants".

    If Hickman writes an awesome run one which writers after him want to pick up and follow threads on, then I don't see why there would be similar reversals.
    "E for Extinction" and "House of M" happened before Disney ever bought Marvel, and Marvel didn't have any movies. That alone basically nulifies your argument.

  10. #70
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Force de Phenix View Post
    "E for Extinction" and "House of M" happened before Disney ever bought Marvel, and Marvel didn't have any movies. That alone basically nulifies your argument.
    No it doesn't. (https://web.archive.org/web/20051125...conference.htm)

    This is the original Press Conference where Quesada said that. Read-between the lines "Too many x-books" "moratorium on new mutants being created". This is quite transparently an attempt to fence the X-Men IP.

    The plan all along was for Marvel to found its own studios and develop properties based on IP that they entirely own and didn't license out to anyone. That happened after the successes of the Raimi Spider-Man movies and the X-Men movies, where Marvel wasn't making as much profits from these licensed adaptations as they would have liked. So the financial chiefs put a moratorium on stopping the lending of licenses and instead finding capital to develop their studios. They manage to attract a lot of capital for Marvel Studios thanks to shareholder interest in Marvel rising after the successes of those licensees (Spider-Man especially). What Marvel entirely owned was the rights to the Avengers and the big Three - Iron Man, Cap, Thor as well as other Avengers, so that became their focus of corporate/creative/editorial interest combined.

    What that meant was that there was strong financial and editorial interest in building the Avengers up in the Marvel Universe. To build the Avengers up, that meant that the X-Men had to be taken down. The X-Men were Marvel's biggest team at the time, not the Avengers. They had all the spinoff titles too. So the attempt was to reverse that and replace that in favor of the Avengers. Then you had CIVIL WAR which made the entire Marvel Universe center around the Avengers which is how things have been since then.

    Now of course...it must be said if the 2007 Iron Man movie with Robert Downey Jr. tanked. If that happened then Marvel Studios and "Avengers Initiative" is dead on arrival. So what could have happened is that House of M and Decimation gets reversed then and there. But more or less Marvel went all-in on Marvel Studios and the success of Marvel Studios led to the Disney buyout and then Perlmutter trying to replace the X-Men with the Inhumans.

    But already before that Marvel replaced the X-Men with the Avengers.

  11. #71
    Astonishing Member Electricmastro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    2,671

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosebunse View Post
    My problem with the X-Men is just that they really aren't like most minorities in the real world. Their experiences are almost too extreme and their powers too fantastic.

    And as we see, Hickman is sort of offering a reason for why people might be afraid of mutants.
    And I suppose mutants like The Vanisher calling humans inferior doesn't help matters either.



    I very much get the feeling that the human/mutant relations paralleled closer towards reality in the 60-80s comics than later on. Just showing more complexities in the relations and addressing topics like the topic of mutants in camps is the sort of writing that resonates with me more than having a very aggressively one-sided hopeless world and having religious fanatics like Stryker appear more often to scapegoat all the mutants on biblical proportions.




  12. #72
    Astonishing Member Force de Phenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    2,576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    No it doesn't. (https://web.archive.org/web/20051125...conference.htm)

    This is the original Press Conference where Quesada said that. Read-between the lines "Too many x-books" "moratorium on new mutants being created". This is quite transparently an attempt to fence the X-Men IP.

    The plan all along was for Marvel to found its own studios and develop properties based on IP that they entirely own and didn't license out to anyone. That happened after the successes of the Raimi Spider-Man movies and the X-Men movies, where Marvel wasn't making as much profits from these licensed adaptations as they would have liked. So the financial chiefs put a moratorium on stopping the lending of licenses and instead finding capital to develop their studios. They manage to attract a lot of capital for Marvel Studios thanks to shareholder interest in Marvel rising after the successes of those licensees (Spider-Man especially). What Marvel entirely owned was the rights to the Avengers and the big Three - Iron Man, Cap, Thor as well as other Avengers, so that became their focus of corporate/creative/editorial interest combined.

    What that meant was that there was strong financial and editorial interest in building the Avengers up in the Marvel Universe. To build the Avengers up, that meant that the X-Men had to be taken down. The X-Men were Marvel's biggest team at the time, not the Avengers. They had all the spinoff titles too. So the attempt was to reverse that and replace that in favor of the Avengers. Then you had CIVIL WAR which made the entire Marvel Universe center around the Avengers which is how things have been since then.

    Now of course...it must be said if the 2007 Iron Man movie with Robert Downey Jr. tanked. If that happened then Marvel Studios and "Avengers Initiative" is dead on arrival. So what could have happened is that House of M and Decimation gets reversed then and there. But more or less Marvel went all-in on Marvel Studios and the success of Marvel Studios led to the Disney buyout and then Perlmutter trying to replace the X-Men with the Inhumans.

    But already before that Marvel replaced the X-Men with the Avengers.
    It's cynism, neophobia, and conspiracy theories.They wanted to have quality over quantity and avoid making the X-Men a cliché. Avengers vs. X-Men repopulated the Earth with mutants in the millions, and people still think they were non-existant in the Disney Era.

    Ike Perlmutter is still in charge of Marvel and he's brought the X-Men to the forefront in their new push.

  13. #73
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Force de Phenix View Post
    It's cynism, neophobia, and conspiracy theories.
    Claremont, Hickman and others have all said numerous times that X-Men have been handicapped by Marvel to stick-it-to-Fox.

    They wanted to have quality over quantity and avoid making the X-Men a cliché.
    They published Spider-Man three-times-a-month, and went full-length into Avengers stuff. The idea of quantity-over-quality only seems to apply to X-Men.

    Avengers vs. X-Men repopulated the Earth with mutants in the millions, and people still think they were non-existant in the Disney Era.
    Which happened very late in the day and isn't representative of that period.

    Ike Perlmutter is still in charge of Marvel and he's brought the X-Men to the forefront in their new push.
    After he got demoted and kicked out of Marvel Studios, the most profitable part of Marvel, giving him no power and so no interest in the issue of movie rights and so on.

  14. #74
    Astonishing Member Force de Phenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    2,576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Claremont, Hickman and others have all said numerous times that X-Men have been handicapped by Marvel to stick-it-to-Fox.



    They published Spider-Man three-times-a-month, and went full-length into Avengers stuff. The idea of quantity-over-quality only seems to apply to X-Men.



    Which happened very late in the day and isn't representative of that period.



    After he got demoted and kicked out of Marvel Studios, the most profitable part of Marvel, giving him no power and so no interest in the issue of movie rights and so on.
    I don't get where you debunk the cynicism, neophobia, and conspiracies. Perlmutter is still CEO of Marvel, so if was responsible for the comics then, he's responsible for the comics now during the X-Men push which began before the Fox buyout.

    Even if it happened late, it happened, and when Fox still had the movie rights. It didn't "benefit" Disney to have the world repopulated by mutants at that time, but they did it.

  15. #75
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,040

    Default

    I mean, I don't think it was just Perlmutter or Disney that held the X-Men back.

    I do think that there was this genuine feeling that the X-Men had gotten too big and complicated. The Avengers push was always something that had needed to happen and downplaying the X-Men allowed it to.

    But part of the issue with the Inhuman push was that it always felt sort of...well, half-assed. It was clear that everyone-besides one very delusional person-knew it wasn't going to work. There was just this feeling that the X-Men were going to make a come back

Posting Permissions

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