Cyclops/Scott Summers Appreciation 2024

[NearlyEnough]

Apocalypse hasnt been portrayed as an evil monster in quite some time. Not since Blood of Apocalypse almost 20 years ago. His morality is neutral these days and has been for quite some time, even before Krakoa. He was made a part of the QC bc of his age and extensive knowledge base. The nation was built on mutant unity and to exclude a major figure like him would be to declare him as an enemy which goes against what they wanted to accomplish. If anythin keeping him close was a means to watch him and well he proved himself loyal

No Scott trying to murder Apocalypse now would be more character assassination than anything. Scott is not a cold blooded killer and would not do so unprovoked. Apocalypse aint provoking him

And no one is giving Apocalypse a free pass and just sh-tting on Xavier. Apocalype hasnt been doing anything worth condemning. Xavier just murdered Rachel and betrayed the X-men. OBVIOUSLY he is getting criticized for that and rightfully so. To ignore that would be giving him a free pass that he quite frankly dosnt deserve given the severity of the plot.

Scott is not a cold-blooded killer but Apocalypse is the guy who infected his son with a deadly disease and forced him to send Cable to a shitty future, robbing him of the possibility of growing up the way he should have, he also took Scott's body and used it as a weapon against his friends leaving him extremely traumatized in addition to many horrible things, just glossing over their history to make him part of the council is bad writing, Scott would never forgive him or be fine with such a horrible person who has done so much damage to him and his family being part of Krakoa, let alone a member of the council, having Scott (the guy who saved mutantkind from extinction against all odds) report to a council that has Apocalypse, Mr Sinister, Shaw, Mystique, Selene, Destiny, etc is not only character assassination but also quite insulting and disgusting.

Everyone is giving Apocalypse a free pass, he's a horrible person with a ridiculously stupid philosophy who's always been antagonistic toward the X-Men and mutantkind yet somehow he gets to be part of the government of the nation HIS VICTIMS fought so hard to get, as if he were some kind of admirable figure instead of a genocidal loser, they didn't even let him prove himself, Xavier just offers him to be part of the government since the beginning of Krakoa, I think that's way more questionable than whatever Xavier is doing right now but no one complained when he formed a council full of some of the most horrible people of all time, Xavier betrayed the X-Men the moment he gave evil monsters positions of power.

Xavier also deserves to be criticized but you can't criticize Xavier but praise Apocalypse, both are bad, and Apocalypse is considerably worse.

[Gray Lensman]

Apocalypse is not an anti-villain, he is an evil monster, and will never be anything but that. If Cyclops is gonna fight/kill someone I'd rather see him kill Apocalypse than Xavier because Apo being part of the council was **** writing and Scott having to report to him was disgusting and character assassination, I'd like to see a sort of redemption for Scott's character by showing that he had planned to kill him and was just waiting until Krakoa's inevitable failure.

Sure, Xavier has done some bad stuff too, but seeing people praising Apocalypse while shitting on Xavier is funny because he's still nowhere near as bad as Apocalypse and for some reason, he gets a free pass.

First, understand the difference between saying he IS an anti-villain and is AT BEST an anti-villain.

Second, this is the X-Men. Rehabilitation of villains and monsters is What They Do. Magneto, Emma Frost, Frenzy, Juggernaut, the list doesn't end there, but they are all examples of a long running trend in the franchise.

And Xavier again, has done a lot of shady, even terrible things while people mistake him for a saint because of the movies. Xavier has been a manipulative bastard for a long time while pretending he isn't, and Scott has been on the receiving end of Charlie's second face for decades of our time. Meanwhile Apocalypse has mostly been honest about what he is (which isn't nice to say the least).

But I will put out a reminder that this is the Cyclops Appreciation Thread, not the Apocalypse Hate Thread. Let's keep our eyes on how things relate to Scott in here.

[Havok83]

Scott is not a cold-blooded killer but Apocalypse is the guy who infected his son with a deadly disease and forced him to send Cable to a shitty future, robbing him of the possibility of growing up the way he should have, he also took Scott's body and used it as a weapon against his friends leaving him extremely traumatized in addition to many horrible things, just glossing over their history to make him part of the council is bad writing, Scott would never forgive him or be fine with such a horrible person who has done so much damage to him and his family being part of Krakoa, let alone a member of the council, having Scott (the guy who saved mutantkind from extinction against all odds) report to a council that has Apocalypse, Mr Sinister, Shaw, Mystique, Selene, Destiny, etc is not only character assassination but also quite insulting and disgusting.

Everyone is giving Apocalypse a free pass, he's a horrible person with a ridiculously stupid philosophy who's always been antagonistic toward the X-Men and mutantkind yet somehow he gets to be part of the government of the nation HIS VICTIMS fought so hard to get, as if he were some kind of admirable figure instead of a genocidal loser, they didn't even let him prove himself, Xavier just offers him to be part of the government since the beginning of Krakoa, I think that's way more questionable than whatever Xavier is doing right now but no one complained when he formed a council full of some of the most horrible people of all time, Xavier betrayed the X-Men the moment he gave evil monsters positions of power.

Xavier also deserves to be criticized but you can't criticize Xavier but praise Apocalypse, both are bad, and Apocalypse is considerably worse.

Well the funny thing is its not Scott's choice. Krakoa has hundreds of thousands of citizens and his personal feelings dont dictate how it run. He's overruled and we've seen him object to several things. He had one of two choices. Stay and go with the flow or leave and do his own thing. We saw him choose to do a variation of latter, forming the X-men specifically so he wouldn have to report to the QC.



Thats very much in line with him and not the character assasination you keep repeating.

Apocalypse hasnt always been antagonistic. He wasnt in Messiah War nor was he in X-men Disassembled which preceded House of X. He saved and protected Bishop from killing Hope and had he not done so mutantkind likely would have gone extinct. He joined forces with the X-men and helped them against Nate Grey when he went crazy. Up until recently he had been gone for over 2 years bc he fought for all the mutants and chose to sacrifice himself to a hell dimension in order for Krakoa to be spared

Its not about criticizing one vs praisin he other. Its about what is CURRENTLY happening in the books. Xavier is still being written as shady and what he did in the most recent issue was one of the worse acts from this era. With Apocalypse, you are hapring on stuff from like 30 years ago. What is he doing now? No one is getting amped up about him like you bc there really arent any examples of him doing anything shady like Xavier just did these days.

[NearlyEnough]

Well the funny thing is its not Scott's choice. Krakoa has hundreds of thousands of citizens and his personal feelings dont dictate how it run. He's overruled and we've seen him object to several things. He had one of two choices. Stay and go with the flow or leave and do his own thing. We saw him choose to do a variation of latter, forming the X-men specifically so he wouldn have to report to the QC.



Thats very much in line with him and not the character assasination you keep repeating.

Apocalypse hasnt always been antagonistic. He wasnt in Messiah War nor was he in X-men Disassembled which preceded House of X. He saved and protected Bishop from killing Hope and had he not done so mutantkind likely would have gone extinct. He joined forces with the X-men and helped them against Nate Grey when he went crazy. Up until recently he had been gone for over 2 years bc he fought for all the mutants and chose to sacrifice himself to a hell dimension in order for Krakoa to be spared

Its not about criticizing one vs praisin he other. Its about what is CURRENTLY happening in the books. Xavier is still being written as shady and what he did in the most recent issue was one of the worse acts from this era. With Apocalypse, you are hapring on stuff from like 30 years ago. What is he doing now? No one is getting amped up about him like you bc there really arent any examples of him doing anything shady like Xavier just did these days.

It should be Scott's choice because he was mutantkind's leader before Krakoa and he had to earn that position by leading them during their lowest point, him being beneath anyone from that council is bad, most of them are not only ridiculously incompetent but also really shitty people.

Accepting to be part of a nation that has Apocalypse and Sinister as part of the government is character assassination, I already named the things Apocalypse did but Sinister... he psychologically tortured and experimented on him when he was a child and is a literal nazi, having Scott report to them was disgusting and an insult to his character, and don't bring the resurrection protocols thing because they could've gotten all they needed without giving Sinister so much power.

Going from mutantkind's leader to not even having enough power to make any decisions regarding Krakoa's future (he wanted to allow non-mutants refugees on Krakoa but the council of evil incompetent assholes refused) is character regression and again, incredibly disrespectful.

I'll tell you what's not in line with him, someone with his sense of responsibility would never allow the mutant nation he fought so hard to achieve, to become a corrupted mess and it's been that way since the beginning, Hickman didn't write him well because Krakoa would never work with an in-character Cyclops, that's it. He wouldn't have allowed the likes of Apocalypse and Sinister on the council, I doubt he'd be fine with Xavier having so much power given that he knew that he wasn't trustworthy, and again, feels like **** writing that after all his character development and both Xavier and Magneto recognizing that he's a way better person and leader than them to have him beneath them again, it's not good writing.

[Havok83]

It should be Scott's choice because he was mutantkind's leader before Krakoa and he had to earn that position by leading them during their lowest point, him being beneath anyone from that council is bad, most of them are not only ridiculously incompetent but also really shitty people.

Accepting to be part of a nation that has Apocalypse and Sinister as part of the government is character assassination, I already named the things Apocalypse did but Sinister... he psychologically tortured and experimented on him when he was a child and is a literal nazi, having Scott report to them was disgusting and an insult to his character, and don't bring the resurrection protocols thing because they could've gotten all they needed without giving Sinister so much power.

Going from mutantkind's leader to not even having enough power to make any decisions regarding Krakoa's future (he wanted to allow non-mutants refugees on Krakoa but the council of evil incompetent assholes refused) is character regression and again, incredibly disrespectful.

I'll tell you what's not in line with him, someone with his sense of responsibility would never allow the mutant nation he fought so hard to achieve, to become a corrupted mess and it's been that way since the beginning, Hickman didn't write him well because Krakoa would never work with an in-character Cyclops, that's it. He wouldn't have allowed the likes of Apocalypse and Sinister on the council, I doubt he'd be fine with Xavier having so much power given that he knew that he wasn't trustworthy, and again, feels like **** writing that after all his character development and both Xavier and Magneto recognizing that he's a way better person and leader than them to have him beneath them again, it's not good writing.

Did he start Krakoa? No, then its not his choice. This is something that was being worked on the background for years, long before he was ever an X-man. The fact is Krakoa only existed bc of people that did not include him. Xavier backing up the minds. The Five resurrecting everyone. Sinister and his DNA library. Cypher being able to communicate with Krakoa. Moira's 500+ year lifespan and advising Xavier on the right allies to bring in for this to work. Sorry but Cyclops wasnt key to any of that. He was placed in a position to lead in battle as Captain Commander. Now I have issues with how that was executed, but that being a war captain suits him better than seated and involved in political affairs. Going out in the world and fighting as co-leader of the X-men on his own terms suits him better than arguing his points as 1/12 of a vote

Having Scott as the lead power wouldnt have made sense going into this era. Krakoa was built on unity and no one person had power. He may have opposed Sinister and Apocalypse but again he'd onlyhave been 1/12.a vote and couldn't override that and choose whom he wants and doesnt want on the QC. The initial QC was chosen to represent different sides of mutantkind, the good and the bad. Those were checks and balances put in place and it seems if you had it your way, there wouldnt be

You are arguing a moot point anyway. This era is about to end so none of that is gonna matter in a couple of months

[NearlyEnough]

Did he start Krakoa? No, then its not his choice. This is something that was being worked on the background for years, long before he was ever an X-man. The fact is Krakoa only existed bc of people that did not include him. Xavier backing up the minds. The Five resurrecting everyone. Sinister and his DNA library. Cypher being able to communicate with Krakoa. Moira's 500+ year lifespan and advising Xavier on the right allies to bring in for this to work. Sorry but Cyclops wasnt key to any of that. He was placed in a position to lead in battle as Captain Commander. Now I have issues with how that was executed, but that being a war captain suits him better than seated and involved in political affairs. Going out in the world and fighting as co-leader of the X-men on his own terms suits him better than arguing his points as 1/12 of a vote

You are arguing a moot point. This era is about to end anyway so none of that is gonna matter in a couple of months

Yeah, I know about all the retcons and bad writing but again, Scott would never accept to be part of a nation with such a shitty government, let alone accept to follow orders from the likes of Sinister and Apocalyse, heck, after all his character development he wouldn't take orders from anyone, he had surpassed Xavier long ago before Krakoa, so he shouldn't have been part of it, being dead for the entirety of the Krakoa era would've been much better than Hikcman and Duggan shitting on all his character development and disrespecting him. Forming the X-Men was fine I guess (regardless of how bland the X-Men runs were) but he still was part of Krakoa and had to follow orders from the council which goes against his principles and moral code, and is an insult to his character.

As for Xavier, he should not only be judged for whatever he's doing right now with Orchis but for creating such a stupid corrupt council and allowing so many horrible people on Krakoa, which includes mass murderers, rapists, psychopaths, nazis, etc. And for acting like mutants are superior and promoting mutant supremacist ideology, but he's not the only one, everyone from that council should be criticized and they shouldn't lead anything ever again.

[H-E-D]

Scott is a field leader. The Quiet Council is a desk job. It wouldn’t have suited him.

[NearlyEnough]

He was the leader of mutantkind before and did a way better job than the QC, he's more competent both as a field leader and as a politician than any of the members of the council. My point was that he wouldn't be part of a nation rooted in mutant supremacist ideology, in which it doesn't matter how horrible you are as long as you're a mutant and its government consists of some of the most evil people of all time.

[Havok83]

He was the leader of mutantkind before and did a way better job than the QC, he's more competent both as a field leader and as a politician than any of the members of the council. My point was that he wouldn't be part of a nation rooted in mutant supremacist ideology, in which it doesn't matter how horrible you are as long as you're a mutant and its government consists of some of the most evil people of all time.

Cyclops led an island of less than 200 mutants. Krakoa consists of hundreds of thousands of mutants. Utopia was not a country but rather a temporary solution for that current status quo and under his leadership, he lost half that population with Schism and ultimately it fell as well. I dont think you can directly compare the two bc Krakoa has an actual infrastructure, which Utopia did not. Krakoa is far more bigger and has presented itself as a nation. it required multiple people in positions of power

[H-E-D]

He was the leader of mutantkind before and did a way better job than the QC, he's more competent both as a field leader and as a politician than any of the members of the council. My point was that he wouldn't be part of a nation rooted in mutant supremacist ideology, in which it doesn't matter how horrible you are as long as you're a mutant and its government consists of some of the most evil people of all time.

He lead mutantkind when the were a group of less than 200. A refugee population mixed with a guerrilla resistance.

That is not really transferable experience to running a nation of 200,000.


There’s no nation in history or on Earth that is without leaders who would fit the superhero standard of “evil”. That was part of the point of the Quiet Council. It wasn’t about mutants as superheroes. It was mutants as nationstate.

Being a part of a nation is not the same thing as agreeing with everything it does or stands for.

[Darth_Caedus]

Good riddance to the Krakoan era. Bring back the real Cyclops

[xiyon]

He was the leader of mutantkind before and did a way better job than the QC, he's more competent both as a field leader and as a politician than any of the members of the council. My point was that he wouldn't be part of a nation rooted in mutant supremacist ideology, in which it doesn't matter how horrible you are as long as you're a mutant and its government consists of some of the most evil people of all time.

Cyclops led an island of less than 200 mutants. Krakoa consists of hundreds of thousands of mutants. Utopia was not a country but rather a temporary solution for that current status quo and under his leadership, he lost half that population with Schism and ultimately it fell as well. I dont think you can directly compare the two bc Krakoa has an actual infrastructure, which Utopia did not. Krakoa is far more bigger and has presented itself as a nation. it required multiple people in positions of power

I actually agree that an in-character Scott wouldn't willing work with and especially report to Apocalypse and Mr Sinister. That said, I don't think Scott would've made a very good -er- politician? Leader of a nation?

At his best, he's the head of a military so Hickman got at least one thing right. Maybe if we saw more animosity between Scott and the council-- specifically, to Sinister & Poccy, the Krakoa stories would've been more interesting. Hickman ignored a lot of character history to setup his era-- prolly because the X-Men was in a desolate state because of bonehead decisions during the 2010s.

For me, the only reason Utopia worked was because of the underlying context of mutantkind facing extinction. It's why I don't jive with the Krakoa era, as I find a lot of it built on soft retcons. It's also why I'm a bit apprehensive if '97 will attempt to tackle the post-HoM storylines without HoM itself.

[Gray Lensman]

I actually agree that an in-character Scott wouldn't willing work with and especially report to Apocalypse and Mr Sinister. That said, I don't think Scott would've made a very good -er- politician? Leader of a nation?

At his best, he's the head of a military so Hickman got at least one thing right. Maybe if we saw more animosity between Scott and the council-- specifically, to Sinister & Poccy, the Krakoa stories would've been more interesting. Hickman ignored a lot of character history to setup his era-- prolly because the X-Men was in a desolate state because of bonehead decisions during the 2010s.

For me, the only reason Utopia worked was because of the underlying context of mutantkind facing extinction. It's why I don't jive with the Krakoa era, as I find a lot of it built on soft retcons. It's also why I'm a bit apprehensive if '97 will attempt to tackle the post-HoM storylines without HoM itself.

I was always toying with a fanfic where someone tells Scott that his tragedy (as part of that Utopia to AvX era) was that he was forced to rule when he was merely meant to lead.

[Havok83]

I actually agree that an in-character Scott wouldn't willing work with and especially report to Apocalypse and Mr Sinister. That said, I don't think Scott would've made a very good -er- politician? Leader of a nation?

At his best, he's the head of a military so Hickman got at least one thing right. Maybe if we saw more animosity between Scott and the council-- specifically, to Sinister & Poccy, the Krakoa stories would've been more interesting. Hickman ignored a lot of character history to setup his era-- prolly because the X-Men was in a desolate state because of bonehead decisions during the 2010s.

For me, the only reason Utopia worked was because of the underlying context of mutantkind facing extinction. It's why I don't jive with the Krakoa era, as I find a lot of it built on soft retcons. It's also why I'm a bit apprehensive if '97 will attempt to tackle the post-HoM storylines without HoM itself.

Hickman didnt tackle that diretly but we saw it brought up in Hellions. Scott openly defied the QC, specifically Sinister when it came to Alex. He was dismissed bc he wasnt on the QC so he recruited Kwannon to be his mole and to keep an eye on Sinister for him

[Darth_Caedus]

Apocalypse is literally the mutant version of Adolf Hitler. His ideology is basically National Socialism but with mutants as the master race instead of the Germanic peoples. There's no way you could ever redeem a character like that and Scott and Jean of all people being ok with him as one of the mutant leaders was total character assassination.
Don't let me even talk about how Krakoa mirrors Heinrich Himmler's vision of a pagan society in tune with nature and plants, reproducing more Nordic looking superhumans while abolishing Christian laws of marriage etc.
Simply put, Hickman turned X-Men into villains.