MCU X-Men to be called The Mutants? Gender neutral name

[Castle]

I don't know who said all that to you, but I don't see how tbat makes your point.

it makes my point. you can have real racism and metaphors.

[Jewel Runner]

What X-Men books y'all been reading?

The ones featuring Hank McCoy.

[CosmiComic]

it makes my point. you can have real racism and metaphors.

I don't think so. While it's possible to have both, you haven't shown that.

I don't know if you understand metaphors aren't the same social commentary as the real thing.

Plus, you dismiss others examples as superficial when yours barely make sense, if at all

[Castle]

The ones featuring Hank McCoy.

Which one? issue numbers, titles and most entire run of the writer? for instance was that Hank in the entire Whedon run or the entire Mike Carey endernaged species run?

Please also provide Beast's entire story overview in those runs in comparison to his start from 1963?


In the comics, we X-Fans read , Hank is mostly seen as one of the smartest, gentlest characters, who only likes to fight when he has no choice. he is an accomplished scientist above everything and a doctor first not some big dumb beast.

Hank is one of the few characters that is not only a superhero but he has a job as PHD in science

LOL. The problem with falsehoods is that it can easily debunked. I don't think this is helping MCU X-men either.

[Castle]

I don't think so. While it's possible to have both, you haven't shown that.

I have shown that.

I don't know if you understand metaphors aren't the same social commentary as the real thing.

that does not seem true as proven.

Let me give you another example. Take the legacy virus , it was suppose to be a commentary and metaphor for AIDS in the xmen, however AIDS itself is mentioned and exist in xmen and has been socially addressed.

Here is a third example.



Magneto does not have to be a mutant in this scene, we can all just look at him as jewish boy fighting for freedom. the fictional metaphor is born when we see his mutant powers shown for the first time. both serves as commentary for a mutant in prison getting abused as we see in first class and just this scene where he is just a jew.

Plus, you dismiss others examples as superficial when yours barely make sense, if at all

I don't dimiss other examples as superficial is they are not superficial, what I did was give other example that address some themes in a far more compelling and complex manner beyond the generic.

[Jewel Runner]

I'd like to know exactly what I said was false.
Are you telling Hank McCoy isn't called Beast, that he doesn't occasionally run around on all fours, that he did not transform into a furry creature?
Are you telling me that I just imagined all these things?

[Castle]

I'd like to know exactly what I said was false.
Are you telling Hank McCoy isn't called Beast, that he doesn't occasionally run around on all fours, that he did not transform into a furry creature?
Are you telling me that I just imagined all these things?

It is false to think that is what all beast is all about and it is such a bad light that it would not be good for race bending.

Beast is more than that. If you think this is what defines Beast as a character in stories, then that is not correct.

Making it all about his appearance. read grant morrsion new xmen run, when beast experiences secondary mutation and turns less into a beast and more like a polished feline cat, he is not on four legs anymore. His face features was more like Alsan from Chronicles of Narnia, again another smart wisdom character like Beast, although has a fearful animal appearances as a lion ....see the reoccurring themes?

[numberthirty]

Which one? issue numbers, titles and most entire run of the writer? for instance was that Hank in the entire Whedon run or the entire Mike Carey endernaged species run?

Please also provide Beast's entire story overview in those runs in comparison to his start from 1963?


In the comics, we X-Fans read , Hank is mostly seen as one of the smartest, gentlest characters, who only likes to fight when he has no choice. he is an accomplished scientist above everything and a doctor first not some big dumb beast.

Hank is one of the few characters that is not only a superhero but he has a job as PHD in science

LOL. The problem with falsehoods is that it can easily debunked. I don't think this is helping MCU X-men either.

Politely, this simply is not the case.

While I'm not sure just who this "We..." is?

I can name and quote folks who actively disagree with that take on Hank as a character.

[Castle]

Politely, this simply is not the case.

Politely that is case on beast's overall character and I am not saying he does not fight. Do you know what made Kesley Grammer so acclaimed in the role despite the mixed-negative reception for X3

lol.so let me be objective, this is the same character who is probably mostly known in all of comics for quoting Shakespeare?.

I cant assure you that any attempt to drastically rewrite xmen for the mcu in such a way that is so dumbed down that beast is just a beast that punches people while ignoring the other part of the character as one of the smartest fictional characters will be a big joke, rejected by everyone and that will also include movie critics because they wont be able to lie after praising the fantastic performance Kesley Grammer gave as Beast.This Beast



No offence but this is the first time I have heard anyone just claim beast is nothing more than a beast. however while I am not surprised it is said on a XMEN MCU related thread but I am sorry, I cannot still lower the standard that much, that would be me lying.

[numberthirty]

Politely that is case.

Do you know what made Kesley Grammer so acclaimed in the role despite the mixed-negative reception for X3


lol.so let me be objective, this is the same character who is probably mostly known in all of comics for quoting Shakespeare?.

I cant assure you that any attempt to drastically rewrite xmen for mcu in such a way that is so dumbed down that beast is just a beast that punches people while ignoring the other part of the character will be a big joke, rejected by everyone and that will also include movie critics because they wont be able to lie after praising the fantastic performance Kesley Grammer gave as Beast.

This Beast




No offence but this is the first time I have heard anyone just claim beast is nothing more than a beast. however I am not surprised it is said on a XMEN MCU related thread but I am sorry, I cannot still lower the standard, that would be me lying.

You said...

...



In the comics, we X-Fans read , Hank is mostly seen as one of the smartest, gentlest characters, who only likes to fight when he has no choice. he is an accomplished scientist above everything and a doctor first not some big dumb beast.

...

Which would have nothing to do with an actor or movie critics.

To repeat, it is simply not the case.

Most anyone taking part in discussing the actual comics over in the "X..." sub-forum can tell you that.

[Castle]

[QUOTE]

You said...



Which would have nothing to do with an actor or movie critics.

/QUOTE]

it's called compare and contrast. see Andrew Garfield vs Tom Holland vs Tobey Maguire or the James Bond actors

To repeat, it is simply not the case.

To repeat by providing factual evidence , I just remembered another one. this one is good since Wanda has just had a tv show.

During engendered species which was because of wanda's own doing, beast was one of the few who took a more scientific way to explore the consequences of house of m . when he finally approached her, he never tried to fight or assault her, instead they have a chat in riddles and more in a cafe bar about what the future holds for the mutant race. this is the comic we read.

Most anyone taking part in discussing the actual comics over in the "X..." sub-forum can tell you that.

They won't. why would people on the sub X-Forums say something as untrue that beast appearance as a monster is what defines his character? LMAO.. The irony would be rich since Beast is officially the smartest character in X-Men with an IQ of genius.

Here is another truth from the comics. Beast is not even ranked among the best xmen fighters compared to Wolverine, Cable, Bishop, Psylocke, Rogue or Gambit.

[CosmiComic]

Hank is one of the few characters that is not only a superhero but he has a job as PHD in science.

I don't think that's true.

I don't dimiss other examples as superficial is they are not superficial, what I did was give other example that address some themes in a far more compelling and complex manner beyond the generic.

What exactly are you saying is generic? I don't understand what you're saying.

I cant assure you that any attempt to drastically rewrite xmen for the mcu in such a way that is so dumbed down that beast is just a beast that punches people while ignoring the other part of the character as one of the smartest fictional characters will be a big joke, rejected by everyone and that will also include movie critics because they wont be able to lie after praising the fantastic performance Kesley Grammer gave as Beast.This Beast

Why do you act like he'll be dumbed down in the MCU?

[Brian B]

C’mon folks. Nothing the MCU does with “the Mutants” could possibly be any worse than how Fox did ‘em.

[CosmiComic]

C’mon folks. Nothing the MCU does with “the Mutants” could possibly be any worse than how Fox did ‘em.

I agree. They focused more on Prof. X, Magneto, Wolverine, and Beast to the exclusion of many characters. Plus Quicksilver, who's an Avenger, gets the best scenes in two movies and then is promptly wasted in DP

I liked many of those movies but won't miss that universe too much.

[Castle]

I agree. They focused more on Prof. X, Magneto, Wolverine, and Beast to the exclusion of many characters. Plus Quicksilver, who's an Avenger, gets the best scenes in two movies and then is promptly wasted in DP

I liked many of those movies but won't miss that universe too much.

C’mon folks. Nothing the MCU does with “the Mutants” could possibly be any worse than how Fox did ‘em.

LOL. All now in the past since fox is gone but l see it more as best of what fox did, it will be a miracle if MCU xmen even gets the same reception as X-Men 1 after 21 years, I am not even sure marvel can run with the light and fun reception any longer. the cat is out of the bag after films like Joker and wonder woman 84.

This is turning way to much into a superficial debate of marvel vs fox than xmen stories now part of the mcu.

what we have now is MCU and the xmen universe trying to merge , and from what i can tell here so far, things are not looking all that good because. what I have seen so far .....people are not even talking about the real x-universe, which is the give away. I have already made peace that mcu xmen will suffer even worse from the same problems as their spiderman but i think it may be worse reading some comments here.

I agree. They focused more on Prof. X, Magneto, Wolverine, and Beast to the exclusion of many characters. Plus Quicksilver, who's an Avenger, gets the best scenes in two movies and then is promptly wasted in DP

The Quicksilver issue was already discussed on a thread about cinematic film making.

Also don't you find it strange that brought in quicksilver to be in wandavison when it was not necessary, he is the biggest take away from wandavison ? that kind of stuff is never necessary for any xmen live action, its shallow at best and serve no purpose than meaningless hype that will die out in 2 weeks. In a complex and intellectual show like Legion, the writer and producers said no to that type of gimmick. All what the mutants have to be is to be 1/1000th of legion and all will be okay, that is a low bar that may still be too high for the mutants.