If the mutants do not suffer a schism every three months, it is because they are mentally controlling them, I understand.
If the mutants do not suffer a schism every three months, it is because they are mentally controlling them, I understand.
There are so many options available to Hickman here, he could pick one or have more. Or they could plant doubles created by Krakoa? Who knows. But when super-heroes act like super-villains its bad writing when characters who share doubts don't start fighting back - its' why Stark kept on fighting people he recruited in Civil War when he went mad. And I don't see any "bad writing" by Hickman here.
Because no one is a mind controlled zombie. Its possible that a level of mental influence is being exerted but when its divided amongst hundreds to thousands of beings, its not going to be as strong as if it were on just one. Some characters are just less prone to being influenced and/or experience triggers to shake it off. None of these characters have really opposed Krakoa yet and are going along for the ride even if they may have some doubts
You are all missing the point that, right now, no mutant hás a serious reason to oppose Krakoa. It's not like the X-men never allied with evil mutants temporarily, and they didn't get free food, free health, security and, you know, IMMORTALITY. Plus, as far as everyone knows, the villains are behaving themselves right now.
Would you be able to find peace so quickly working for numerous people who have tried to murder you and tortured you for years, who have harmed not only humanity but scores of mutants? At least the Morlocks are angry about Scalphunter being there, more incidents like that should be popping up including from X-men. Scott has had more reasons than not to be upset by the people there for putting him, his friends and family though hell. Apocalypse possessed him for a while, as well. That was not a pleasant experience.
There are serious privacy concerns with Xavier having recorded all their memories for years without their consent. That has not been touched on at all and is a big WTF to me. The X-men do have a history of working with villians in the past but its almost always met with friction. I think back to when Rogue came to the mansion and they tried to fight her or the 90s when Xavier tried to rehabilitate Sabretooth or heck even Rogue's squad which was primarily villians and the trouble that caused. Things are too nice and easy here and this has never been the case
Apocalypse also infected his infant child with the TO virus which forced him to give him up. This also resulted in living in a hellish future for 12 years ruled by A. Now he and Jean are sipping cocktails with him as if nothing ever happened.
Last edited by Havok83; 04-20-2020 at 07:46 AM.
I also felt it was a bit much for Scott and Jean to be sipping their drinks in so close proximity to Apocalypse after all that he has done to them (turning Angel into Archangel, being a prominent villain to OG X-factor, infecting Nathan, the experience in the future, trying to use Nate Grey as a host, merging with Cyclops, Jean ripping the Apocalypse essence out of Scott, etc). There should be a lot of bad blood between Apocalypse and Scott and Jean. Same with Sinister.
They have all moved on and working together for the good of mutant kind is the likely explanation from the writers/editors but it is a bit far fetched considering their history (though the X-men have worked with Apocalypse before like in the X-cutioner's Song but there was conflict).
I do think some characters are hesitant with working with the likes of Apocalypse and the others (Gambit in Excalibur isn't trusting of Apocalypse, Wolverine doesn't always seem comfortable with the new status quo, etc).
"Should I allow myself to be dominated by my old hatreds or support the project in which mutants can survive, be happy and live with dignity? Difficult question."
Saying that they need to work together while showing animosity during public events (which constant avoidance would be interpreted as) isn't a good look for two leaders of the mutant community. Scott is one of the first people who I think would suck stuff up for the greater good of mutants as a whole, and Jean isn't far behind (largely because she has less history to judge by with all that time being dead) - although having him say on panel that he finds Poccy distasteful would go a long way.
Dark does not mean deep.
This is one of my favorite panels with Scott
DC27B85F-94F0-4B1F-B849-E7EBF5375166.jpg
For all the good work Percy has done, having Scott and Jean sitting at the same table as Apocalypse doesn't sit right and probably never will. I understand them working with him, for the greater good, but in HoX/PoX/X-Men neither of them addresses Apocalypse directly, ever. Even in X-Men #4 Scott only interacted with Xavier, Magneto and Gorgon, not a word to Apoc. Wells also got it right, having Scott get pissed at the Council letting Sinister handle his brother and the other dangerous mutants. These two are Scott's biggest enemies, and Jean should share the same feelings. Going further than a willingness to work with him, without any groundwork, is stupid. It would be the same if the scene in HoX #6 went any further than Wolverine just handling Gorgon a beer and watching the fireworks together.
I can imagine Scott and Jean trying to make an effort to have a cordial relationship with Apocalypse, just as Betsy in Excalibur is trying to make him learn to show compassion.
You can't found a nation with infected wounds like that, it's a time bomb. It is obvious that Jean and Scott hate Apocalypse but I don't think it is the same kind of hatred they feel towards Sinister. Sinister is just pure evil incarnate, with nothing to redeem him. Apocalypse has a practically alien ideology for normal people, it is almost a force of nature.
I don't know, for me it is clear that Sinister and Apocalypse are different.