Anyone else hate the Wolverine and Jean romance from the Films in comparsion to the comics??

[HeSoSlim]

..."its important" because his relationship with Jean and being leader of the x-men was THE ONLY THING THAT DEFINED cyclops under claremont, so if he isnt the definite leader and totaly owns Jean in a claremont-inspired film, he ends up overshadowed.

say what you will. i've read CC, and whenever he wanted to give cyclops some spotlight to avoid making him wallpaper he didnt know what to do(because claremont WAS a good writer and knew that wallpaper characters are a lame concept even if he didnt like scott). he either made a good speech , or had some chick drooling for him. in CC's good days, he had some moments with jean. but as a personality, he never realy got any character development.

So basically...Jean has to be owned by Cyclops and Cyclops has to be the leader in order for it to be an X-Men film?

I don't t think that is true in any context, especially not in an alternate reality movie universe. Perhaps Jean Grey could own herself?

That wouldn't make Cyclops less of a leader.

[The Jeeper 2.0]

So basically...Jean has to be owned by Cyclops and Cyclops has to be the leader in order for it to be an X-Men film?

I don't t think that is true in any context, especially not in an alternate reality movie universe. Perhaps Jean Grey could own herself?

That wouldn't make Cyclops less of a leader.

It's the status quo of the X-Men for years and usually when we have comics transitioned to film we see the purer aspects make it there. That's been true of Batman (with Alfred) and Superman (with Lois Lane). If you remove these aspects of their character then you water down what made them so compelling in the first place.

Wolverine with Jean Grey is a horrible idea and even Teen Jean herself was repulsed at it when she arrived in the present day MU.

[Kikaze]

what i'm saying is, it would make cyclops fans complain. wolverine has all these interesting things going for him (love triangle, being a black ops badass dude, mysterious past, all these special enemies like weapon X and sabertooth, powers weak but acceptable for a high-end superhero, etc), and cyclops has absolutely nothing(boring personality for most audience, ubelievably weak and limited powerset, no personal storylines) except jean and leadership. take one thing away and he is left with next-to-nothing. the only things that make cyke interesting in the comics(the tangled family tree of uber badass post-apocalyptic time traveling kids, and the Revolution) will NEVER EVER be explored in the films(too complex), so... its either keep these 2 things for cyclops,(jean & leadership) or better not to use him at all, it'll be insulting.

too bad people didnt see it when claremont was writing him, how limited the team leader's use in the story was. it was "barely acceptable", thats why taking ONE aspect away leaves him with nothing.

[ariwl1]

The original X-Men film in my opinion is ok to kind of meh. Marvel/Fox were still trying to figure out how to make superhero movies work and in a team dynamic that's a bit tougher. Obviously the films were going to focus on Wolverine, him being the moneymaker that he is, so by default the roles of the rest of the cast played out as they relate to his character. Rogue becomes his Kitty Pryde/Jubilee, the possible Jean attraction gets turned up a factor of ten, Scott's in the way of Logan getting with Jean (and the audience would much rather see simmering forbidden romance than two dudes bro-ing out) so he gets written out of two movies, first by mind control and second by off-screen death, and Storm becomes his second-in-command.

Quite honestly the Apocalypse movie has the best potential to be a truly decent X-Men movie by virtue of the fact that they'd really have to stretch to make it about Logan at this point.

[HeSoSlim]

It's the status quo of the X-Men for years and usually when we have comics transitioned to film we see the purer aspects make it there. That's been true of Batman (with Alfred) and Superman (with Lois Lane). If you remove these aspects of their character then you water down what made them so compelling in the first place.

Wolverine with Jean Grey is a horrible idea and even Teen Jean herself was repulsed at it when she arrived in the present day MU.

Teen Jean will say whatever she is written to say...

what i'm saying is, it would make cyclops fans complain. wolverine has all these interesting things going for him (love triangle, being a black ops badass dude, mysterious past, all these special enemies like weapon X and sabertooth, powers weak but acceptable for a high-end superhero, etc), and cyclops has absolutely nothing(boring personality for most audience, ubelievably weak and limited powerset, no personal storylines) except jean and leadership. take one thing away and he is left with next-to-nothing. the only things that make cyke interesting in the comics(the tangled family tree of uber badass post-apocalyptic time traveling kids, and the Revolution) will NEVER EVER be explored in the films(too complex), so... its either keep these 2 things for cyclops,(jean & leadership) or better not to use him at all, it'll be insulting.

too bad people didnt see it when claremont was writing him, how limited the team leader's use in the story was. it was "barely acceptable", thats why taking ONE aspect away leaves him with nothing.

So basically...it would be unwise to base a movie around Cyclops because he doesn't have any interesting plots besides "my girlfriend is interesting"?

[Juggernaut Punch]

Meh, they were always about the same. Wolverine being a creepy stalker obsessing over another man's wife. They adapted it faithfully.

[Kikaze]

Teen Jean will say whatever she is written to say...



So basically...it would be unwise to base a movie around Cyclops because he doesn't have any interesting plots besides "my girlfriend is interesting"?

exactly. i SERIOUSLY mean that.

post-cyclapocalypse was kinda interesting.
post-AvX, revolutionary cyclops is interesting.
in general, dark cyclops is interesting.

Rachel and Cable are interesting.

but NORMAL,CLASSIC CYCLOPS? i agree with you completely. his only interesting plot is that his girlfriend was jean... oh, and that he is the x-men's leader. except for them, normal classic cyclops has NOTHING.

[HeSoSlim]

I actually think Cyclops was better and more unique before they started the "pretending to be hardcore and an anti-hero" thing with him.

I mean, even now he's still not really interesting at all, but classic Cyke at least had the noble hero thing going, which would make him stand out in today's fake-cynical Marvel.

As for Jean and Wolverine, their inner wild-sides and potential explosiveness just match up better. In discussions, it usually sounds like people dig Jean Grey/Scott out of nostalgia and also as a sort of booster for Cyclops, kinda like you said.

[Sardorim]

I hated it. Cyclops was completely ruined in the films due to that forced pairing and it made both of the "lovers" look terrible and Jean into a big old cheater who didn't have any loyalty for her boyfriend and making Cyclops's entire role being "Stay away from my girlfriend whose fantasizing about sleeping with you ALL THE TIME" and treating her like she's property. If she didn't want Cyclops than she should have dumped him, not have many cheating moments with Logan.

Comic 616 Jean only slipped up when she was confused and frustrated that her husband wouldn't touch her since he returned and when she threw herself at Logan he was a complete gentleman about it.

While Ultimate Jean only slept with Logan when she was single than never got back with him and remained with Cyclops until he died.

[Kikaze]

the thing is, nobody wanted to write about that cyclops, so he has ZERO PLOTLINES. pretty much the only writer that i know of that has worked in marvel and (with his many other flaws) knows how to handle ANY straight-laced character is Joss Whedon -not saying that due to him doing a good job with cyke ina stonishing, which he did; but mainly because of the AMAZING job he did with angel:the series. he is the only marvel writer that gets the essence of a true straight-laced hero: their crazy BALLS, that they see the world and how awful it is and how impractical their ways are, and they keep with it to change the world in their image.

i'll tell you a story that taught me WHAT a true straight-laced hero is: "sir gawain and the green knight".
the green knight challenged: "one of you(knights of round) will pick up that axe, i will receive the blow, and in one year, he will actively search to find me in the green chapel(unknown place) so that he will receive that same blow. " sir gawain picks up the axe, green knight asks him to chop his head off! amazed, they see the green knight was immortal from the start. sir gawain easily accepts his end of the deal! he searches for the green chapel (so that he can get his head choped off and die BECAUSE HE GAVE HIS WORD) for MONTHS. days before, a married woman tries to seduce him. for three nights straight. he REFUSES, even if its the last sex of his life, because thats not the honorable thing to do. she then gives him a belt , and when he DOES meet the green knight, after the green knight makes sure gawain sits there to honorably get his head chopped off, he tells gawain that it was all a test and the belt is magical and he can keep it.

THAT is why relatable straight-laced heroes dont work: cause they dont seem realy that straight-laced to the viewer, they come off as just too gay(racist, i know but its other people's word about cyclops specificaly, not my fault) or too boring to become antiheroes. what makes a straight laced hero is not that "he is relatable but brave". quite the contrary. its that he has SUCH COMBO OF HONOR AND BALLS that its absolutely unrealistic and totaly, completely superhuman, so you admire him for how unrelatably superhuman his psyche is(like "that guy cannot possibly ever exist, he's too brave and honorable, nobody could ever be THAT brave and honorable)

unfortunately, i havent seen anyone write that except for whedon for angel:theseries(mostly) and cyke. cap should be written as this too. yet marvel just cant handle these heroes.

[gurkle]

I was never a big fan of the triangle anyway. I thought it was there because the classic Marvel/Stan Lee style demands a lot of Betty and Veronica love triangles (Scott is Betty, Wolverine is Veronica). Plus maybe his infatuation with Jean proved that Wolverine had a soft side.

[elgrey]

So basically...it would be unwise to base a movie around Cyclops because he doesn't have any interesting plots besides "my girlfriend is interesting"?

It's more that it would be impossible to base a movie around Scott that included his childhood that wouldn't make very uncomfortable viewing and be very casual film-goer unfriendly. Realistically, how many male film-goers want to watch a comic book film in which a twelve year old boy gets taken down into the basement and has sexually ambivalent things done to him by an older guy who is pathologically obsessed with him before he is mentally messed around with so he doesn't remember and the pattern can be repeated the following night? I really can't see your average comic book fan queuing around the block for that somehow.

It's not really Scott's fault, though, that Hollywood are never going to have the testicles to tackle his backstory. As the guy who had to overcome all the horrors of Sinister's orphanage, having a roommate creepily obsessed with him, a group of boys constantly bullying him, an an early adolescence that involved being taken down into the laboratory to be experimented on by a mad scientist - who has remained his obsessive stalker to this day - and who escaped from the orphanage only to end up being abused by Jack Winters, Scott's absolutely fascinating. He has the childhood of a serial killer and yet for years was the most morally upright hero imaginable. The constant conflict between the damage done to him by his multiply abusive father figures and the facade he presented to the world, with only telepaths - Jean and Xavier, mostly, in his case - knowing just how badly damaged he was and responding to him accordingly, while his oblivious teammates expected him never to reveal a crack is gripping stuff. Every time Scott led a mission, the reader knew that he was actually riddled with self-doubt and five minutes away from a nervous breakdown, and yet he couldn't afford to let that show because there were always lives dependent upon him. He was always the WWI officer trying to ward off incipient neurasthenia for long enough to do his duty. It's just that after House of M, he was the WWI officer trying to ward off incipient neurasthenia for long enough to do his duty while now having joined the dirty tricks department.

But the films that have committed so completely to Logan as the most damaged person in the room because of the horrific abuse he suffered as an adult with healing factor are not going to find a role for Scott as a teenager who suffered equally horrific abuse as a child without healing factor yet who has chosen to take the path of repressing his trauma, obsessing about control, and taking the moral high road, as opposed to stabbing things a lot, because, frankly, to do so could make Logan look like a drama queen.

On topic: I didn't like the Jean/Logan thing in the comics either. It made Logan look bad for no reason and, after Claremont started retconning Jean to have completely different responses, it made her look like a man's idea of a woman instead of an actual woman, with her irritating dithering over which guy she liked best. That's such a mainstay of male-audience-focused bodice rippers - westerns and bad 80s action movies - but it doesn't have a lot to do with how real-life women tend to react to short, hairy guys, unaccountably convinced of their own irresistibility, trying to get them to cheat on their younger, taller, better-looking husbands, whom they have known since they were teenagers, and who has long been their best friend. At least not unless the short, hairy guy is being a writer avatar at the time.

As MarvelMaster616 has pointed out, the film Jean/Logan is particularly ludicrous because Logan has only known Jean for a few days, all of which time she was involved with someone else, which makes his emo-moping look like complete self-indulgence instead of heartfelt grief. Logan goes off at the end of XM1 on Scott's bike to visit Alkali Lake in Canada from Westchester - not the longest journey in the world - and then comes back at the beginning of X2 from Alkali Lake, returning Scott's bike. He has no other interaction with Jean we haven't seen because there isn't any sense of random time having passed until we get to X3, after Jean is dead, making Film!Logan in his interactions with Film!Jean, just an irritating creep who can't take 'I'm dating someone else' for an answer for the entirety of his interaction with Film!Jean, whose character gets thrown under the bus to make Logan look better because obviously, her telling him to take a hike, as she did in the comics, would not work for a series of films where Logan is the guy the male audience members are supposed to be identifying with, and no one particularly wants to identify with a guy who is always going to be second choice to another guy. Especially another guy who has actually had it just as hard as he has, and at a much younger age, but makes a lot less fuss about it.

So, realistically, I can see no way, while Film!Logan is being written as a tragic hero who has terrible luck with women that Film!Scott is ever going to have more than passing resemblance to Comic!Scott; essentially, there is no way for Film!Scott to be Comic!Scott without treading on Film!Logan's toes, and although Scott, and his childhood trauma, came first in the comics, Logan is very much the character around whom the films revolve. Which is no bad thing in many ways, because Hugh Jackman is amazing as Wolverine, and has made him as complex, compelling, and sympathetic a character as he is in the comics with a lot less time for stabbitying and flashbacks. It's just a pity that they didn't find a way to stick a little more closely to original comic canon with the real relationship between Scott, Jean, and Logan, as it's a lot more complicated and interesting in the comics than it ever seems likely to be in the films.

[MrMcMuffin]

I just hate Jeanxlogan full stop.

[antiochene]

You know, I could go a long, long time without ever hearing anyone talk about Cyclops "owning" Jean again. I really could. A very long time.

And I say that as a Scott fan.

[DakenGirl]

I just hate Jeanxlogan full stop.

I admire the succinctness of your phrasing and second your opinion.

You know, I could go a long, long time without ever hearing anyone talk about Cyclops "owning" Jean again. I really could. A very long time.

And I say that as a Scott fan.

It's a tiresome straw man phrasing that only gets used by people who dislike Cyclops/Jean as a relationship and - generally - want Jean to be with Wolverine instead. I agree completely that it's repugnant. Emma might have referred to Cyke as her property but I don't think Jean ever did or Cyke ever did in reverse.