It’s Beast vs…Beast in new ‘X-Force’ #48 teaser

[Keno]

I wonder if Brevoort wanted to inherit a more heroic Beast.

Of course he does. He is Avengers dude

[EldonMaguan]

I hope you're right.

So much for actual authentic Character Growth Development eh? No wonder why the Global Intelligentsia views Marvel's Cinematic Universe movies as being mere "amusement parks"-level FLUFF (American popular-cultural junkfood) only , just look at their Original Source Material, where and when there's not even the so-called "illusion of change" anymore eh? Tsk tsk tsk

There's a reason why Breaking Bad is already universally objectively considered to be a Modern Classic Work of Art For All The Ages Peak Fiction after all

[Hakka84]

So much for actual authentic Character Growth Development eh? No wonder why the Global Intelligentsia views Marvel's Cinematic Universe movies as being mere "amusement parks"-level FLUFF (American popular-cultural junkfood) only , just look at their Original Source Material, where and when there's not even the so-called "illusion of change" anymore eh? Tsk tsk tsk

There's a reason why Breaking Bad is already universally objectively considered to be a Modern Classic Work of Art For All The Ages Peak Fiction after all

Beast isn't a case of authentic Character Growth Development. The change in Beast was treated as ridiculous, not realistic, and shouldn't count.

There are other characters who are culprit of this.
For example, point your fingers on Betsy, who for the last 10 years has been an hardened killer (with a killing addiction) and for the first Krakoan year Tiny wrote her as a perfect baby hero scared of everything. TH wiped out 30 years of Betsy editorial life, in order to paint her Betsy as the direct following of the 80s Betsy who had just debuted in the X-Men (not the Betsy from the Siege Perilious-era, mind you, but the Betsy with the pink costume just returned from Mojo world).
At least Warren is(was) saddled with the whole "I'm scared about Archangel's thirst for blood" - but he too has never been made accountable for what he did during X-Force/Uncanny X-Force. It's when you hide the "hideous" things a character did under a carpet and pretend nothing happened... that's the crime.
In the case of Beast they don't hide it. They kill off the character who did it and replace him with an older, "ethically better" character. Which is different than, say, pick current!Hank and pretend he didn't do the things he did in the last 3 years.

Now, what it would be important IMHO, should be the X-Men keep tabs on new!Hank to make sure he never follows the same path as current!Hank.
(But that would mean remember the readers about Krakoa!Hank, and fans might not want that, so it's easier to not hint at Krakoa!Hank anymore).

[Nicoclaws]

I wonder if Brevoort wanted to inherit a more heroic Beast.

I think it was the endgoal anyways, change in editorial or not. It was hinted very early in the run

[Mungho]

Beast isn't a case of authentic Character Growth Development. The change in Beast was treated as ridiculous, not realistic, and shouldn't count.

There are other characters who are culprit of this.
For example, point your fingers on Betsy, who for the last 10 years has been an hardened killer (with a killing addiction) and for the first Krakoan year Tiny wrote her as a perfect baby hero scared of everything. TH wiped out 30 years of Betsy editorial life, in order to paint her Betsy as the direct following of the 80s Betsy who had just debuted in the X-Men (not the Betsy from the Siege Perilious-era, mind you, but the Betsy with the pink costume just returned from Mojo world).
At least Warren is(was) saddled with the whole "I'm scared about Archangel's thirst for blood" - but he too has never been made accountable for what he did during X-Force/Uncanny X-Force. It's when you hide the "hideous" things a character did under a carpet and pretend nothing happened... that's the crime.
In the case of Beast they don't hide it. They kill off the character who did it and replace him with an older, "ethically better" character. Which is different than, say, pick current!Hank and pretend he didn't do the things he did in the last 3 years.

Now, what it would be important IMHO, should be the X-Men keep tabs on new!Hank to make sure he never follows the same path as current!Hank.
(But that would mean remember the readers about Krakoa!Hank, and fans might not want that, so it's easier to not hint at Krakoa!Hank anymore).

I fully agree. A 'fall of Beast' could have been interesting if done right(though I still wouldn't like it). This run has been anything but done right. If they could have had him wrestling with his conscience over his actions or questioning himself, but no, he gleefully goes full speed off the slippery slope. Not to mention all of his schemes or activities have blown up in his face, making him a colossal failure. He's just a generic mustache-twirling villain, no, even a mustache twirling villain would have more subtlety. And not to mention how literally EVERYONE is made breathtakingly stupid to ignore his crimes. The best thing to do is to kill off bad!Hank and replace him with good!Hank, reveal this is the real one's soul, and sweep this whole awful storyline under the rug and never mention it again.

I think it was the endgoal anyways, change in editorial or not. It was hinted very early in the run

Huh? Where?

[Nicoclaws]

I fully agree. A 'fall of Beast' could have been interesting if done right(though I still wouldn't like it). This run has been anything but done right. If they could have had him wrestling with his conscience over his actions or questioning himself, but no, he gleefully goes full speed off the slippery slope. Not to mention all of his schemes or activities have blown up in his face, making him a colossal failure. He's just a generic mustache-twirling villain, no, even a mustache twirling villain would have more subtlety. And not to mention how literally EVERYONE is made breathtakingly stupid to ignore his crimes. The best thing to do is to kill off bad!Hank and replace him with good!Hank, reveal this is the real one's soul, and sweep this whole awful storyline under the rug and never mention it again.



Huh? Where?

From the notions of possible changes via ressurection protocols, old saves of characters, Beats himself erasing himself from the Cerebros... I do think bringing back an older version of Beast was in the plot way before Brevoort was announced.

Personnaly I'm still ambivalent on this. I do love Beast and his old ways. I dislike the dark evolution but unlike most posters here I think it has always been a complete possibility and the character arc works for me. I don't like the idea of an absolution via resetting the character to an earlier state. I think it's a cheap trick and one of the BIG ethical issue with the Ressurection Protocols whic SHOULD have been narratively adressed way before.

[Jackraow21]

Not gonna lie... I really do dig this X-Force lineup here at the end. Just wish someone else was writing the book. It's sales are still solid, despite some pretty lackluster writing... just imagine what it could do with someone like Deniz Camp writing it, Joshua Cassara back on art duties, and maybe throw Greg Capullo on variant covers. Boom. $$$

Krakoa_XF.jpg

[Mungho]

From the notions of possible changes via ressurection protocols, old saves of characters, Beats himself erasing himself from the Cerebros... I do think bringing back an older version of Beast was in the plot way before Brevoort was announced.

Personnaly I'm still ambivalent on this. I do love Beast and his old ways. I dislike the dark evolution but unlike most posters here I think it has always been a complete possibility and the character arc works for me. I don't like the idea of an absolution via resetting the character to an earlier state. I think it's a cheap trick and one of the BIG ethical issue with the Ressurection Protocols whic SHOULD have been narratively adressed way before.

I know, they have been pushing Hank in this direction for a long time, so I agree it was a possibility. But it's been completely mishandled. I remember vague hints early on that something was very wrong with Hank, especially after he went through the resurrection protocols for the first time("I feel like something's been lost"). He did sell his soul to an evil entity in Rosenberg's run and never got it back(and Xavier made everyone forget it happened), so that makes an easy explanation. They're just taking the real Hank's soul after he was lost and stuff him back into one of bad!Hank's spare clones. But then, no one seemed to like Rosenberg's tenure so I don't know how many even read that story.

But yes, the resurrection protocols should have been explained better, as they bring up uncomfortable questions. There's the stuff with the two Lauras going on.

But I think this kind of reset is necessary. They have made bad!Hank too irredeemable, and with the amount of hate he's getting, they'll need to kill off the bad one, and even then I don't know if it will satisfy anyone. I've heard some say that the character is just too tainted by what Percy's done to him, even with an older version of Hank and retcons. I hope they're wrong.

[Nicoclaws]

I know, they have been pushing Hank in this direction for a long time, so I agree it was a possibility. But it's been completely mishandled. I remember vague hints early on that something was very wrong with Hank, especially after he went through the resurrection protocols for the first time("I feel like something's been lost"). He did sell his soul to an evil entity in Rosenberg's run and never got it back(and Xavier made everyone forget it happened), so that makes an easy explanation. They're just taking the real Hank's soul after he was lost and stuff him back into one of bad!Hank's spare clones. But then, no one seemed to like Rosenberg's tenure so I don't know how many even read that story.

But yes, the resurrection protocols should have been explained better, as they bring up uncomfortable questions. There's the stuff with the two Lauras going on.

But I think this kind of reset is necessary. They have made bad!Hank too irredeemable, and with the amount of hate he's getting, they'll need to kill off the bad one, and even then I don't know if it will satisfy anyone. I've heard some say that the character is just too tainted by what Percy's done to him, even with an older version of Hank and retcons. I hope they're wrong.

I agree with you if they want to make Beast a hero again, resetting is the only way. This version could get to the "villainous ally" MAYBE at some point in the future, but he's too far gone to be redeemed.
(I like "villainous allies" roles, to be honest. Like clear enemies begrudgingly allying to the heroes, while still hostile and spiteful. If you had former comrades connection, I could eat it all day - see the TINY dialogue between Moira and Nightcrawler in A.X.E)

[Vegeta]

Beast vs. Beast, whomever wins, we ALL lose.

J/k I hope this redeems the character for Hank McCoy fans, even if they must erase or retcon 10+ years of his history. While I am honestly not a fan of the character, I have disliked the direction they took for a founding X-Men hero.

[Kingdom X]

Beast vs. Beast, whomever wins, we ALL lose.

J/k I hope this redeems the character for Hank McCoy fans, even if they must erase or retcon 10+ years of his history. While I am honestly not a fan of the character, I have disliked the direction they took for a founding X-Men hero.

I’m very interested to see how the dust settles with the Hank situation. While a reset is the most viable way to erase the past 5 years of story, going back to Avengers Beast is closer to erasing about 30 years of character history. I know *some* fans have said that Beast has been on a decline since the late 90’s or Morrison’s run but I personally don’t think his characterization was consistently rough until the 2010’s. Even then some writer’s, like Kelly Thompson, still wrote him with a heart of gold.

They could do a Loki season 1 situation, where Avengers Beast is able to witness the past 30 years of his character history and choose to pick a different path BECAUSE of it. That would be a nice compromise and you eventually forget that the character hasn’t actually experienced a bulk of the stories we’ve previously seen them in.

[Thievery]

I know, they have been pushing Hank in this direction for a long time, so I agree it was a possibility. But it's been completely mishandled. I remember vague hints early on that something was very wrong with Hank, especially after he went through the resurrection protocols for the first time("I feel like something's been lost"). He did sell his soul to an evil entity in Rosenberg's run and never got it back(and Xavier made everyone forget it happened), so that makes an easy explanation. They're just taking the real Hank's soul after he was lost and stuff him back into one of bad!Hank's spare clones. But then, no one seemed to like Rosenberg's tenure so I don't know how many even read that story.

But yes, the resurrection protocols should have been explained better, as they bring up uncomfortable questions. There's the stuff with the two Lauras going on.

But I think this kind of reset is necessary. They have made bad!Hank too irredeemable, and with the amount of hate he's getting, they'll need to kill off the bad one, and even then I don't know if it will satisfy anyone. I've heard some say that the character is just too tainted by what Percy's done to him, even with an older version of Hank and retcons. I hope they're wrong.

Beast likely isn't too tainted to be fixed. Readers thought the same thing about Bishop when he was murdering whole planets and AU's full of people when he was chasing down Cable and Hope. Bishop did a lot of nasty stuff in order to try and assassinate a baby. If he can come back from that than I'm sure that Beast can recover in the minds of the readership. He probably wouldn't be thought of as a hero or trusted very far by the other characters, though.

[Nicoclaws]

Yeah, they can always go to the "Sublime or something possessed him like in that Morrison story" and it would work.
The "Cassandra Nova is a giant owl spirit at war with the demon bear through time and we used them in that story where NONE of the characters linked to these foes are present" was weird and we ended up accepting it after all.

[Mungho]

The "Cassandra Nova is a giant owl spirit at war with the demon bear through time and we used them in that story where NONE of the characters linked to these foes are present" was weird and we ended up accepting it after all.

Whoa, what story was that?

[JB]

I’m very interested to see how the dust settles with the Hank situation. While a reset is the most viable way to erase the past 5 years of story, going back to Avengers Beast is closer to erasing about 30 years of character history. I know *some* fans have said that Beast has been on a decline since the late 90’s or Morrison’s run but I personally don’t think his characterization was consistently rough until the 2010’s. Even then some writer’s, like Kelly Thompson, still wrote him with a heart of gold.

They could do a Loki season 1 situation, where Avengers Beast is able to witness the past 30 years of his character history and choose to pick a different path BECAUSE of it. That would be a nice compromise and you eventually forget that the character hasn’t actually experienced a bulk of the stories we’ve previously seen them in.

Agreed, I would find this very interesting. Beast getting a second chance at life so to speak and watching him navigate as he tries to do things better this time. I think there's a lot of story potential there.