RACHEL GREY/SUMMERS, the Phoenix/Mother Askani Appreciation

**PsychoEFrost** · 08-01-2018, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by Knives

Agree but this does not necessarily mean forgetting your origins or giving up on people you care about. The truth is that Gold was a waste of time for Rachel they first cut off any relationship from her to Phoenix, then cut off her relationship with Scott and Jean (though Red says otherwise), give her a new retro uniform and make a point of saying each issue her powers are getting stronger however she is controlled by a third-category villain.

Even the relationship with Kurt was over (probably better this way) and Rachel Dark saga was a bad joke.

Seriously. Calling her time in Gold as a waste of time would be too kind to waste. It's borderline character assassination, and this only made it worse.

It was an out-of-character moment for Jean to be that bitchy. That's something I would expect Emma to tell Esme, not Jean to tell Rachel.

**Askani's Flame** · 08-01-2018, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by PsychoEFrost

Seriously. Calling her time in Gold as a waste of time would be too kind to waste. It's borderline character assassination, and this only made it worse.

It was an out-of-character moment for Jean to be that bitchy. That's something I would expect Emma to tell Esme, not Jean to tell Rachel.

All of this. I feel like the sole purpose of Gold was to character assassinate all of it characters. No one, outside of OML, came out of this unscathed. But Rachel and Kitty are essentially unusable unless someone really grasps their character and writes them well per this book. It's partially why I fear Rachel (as well as Bloodstrom) won't be making it out of Extermination.

**tornshattered** · 08-01-2018, 12:46 PM

Gold (apart from the wedding, which was hilarious) is non-canon. End of story.

**butterflykyss** · 08-01-2018, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by tornshattered

Gold (apart from the wedding, which was hilarious) is non-canon. End of story.

I can rock with this lol

**Havok83** · 08-01-2018, 12:49 PM

whats sad is that Guggs wrote those cute scenes between Rachel and the Jeans at the wedding only to write this bitchy exchange between them here. It was unnecessary for Jean to correct her like that.

**butterflykyss** · 08-01-2018, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by Havok83

whats sad is that Guggs wrote those cute scenes between Rachel and the Jeans at the wedding only to write this bitchy exchange between them here. It was unnecessary for Jean to correct her like that.

I thought jean was her mom, what did i miss?

**Havok83** · 08-01-2018, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by butterflykyss

I thought jean was her mom, what did i miss?

An alternate reality version of Jean is her mother. 616 Jean didnt birth her. She's barely claimed her in the past. Their reunion in Red Annual was the most solid reaction they've ever had and that should be the standard for them now. This exchange did feel rather regressive

**theoneandonly** · 08-01-2018, 02:09 PM

it seems that guggs is writing this run in a trance and forgets what he himself has written unless the wedding issue where the panel appears was mostly written by Kelly with guggs contributing only a page or two in protest against his "ship" drowning in favour of rombit.

**Havok83** · 08-01-2018, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by theoneandonly

it seems that guggs is writing this run in a trance and forgets what he himself has written unless the wedding issue where the panel appears was mostly written by Kelly with guggs contributing only a page or two in protest against his "ship" drowning in favour of rombit.

Kelly Thompson didnt write that issue; Guggs did

**butterflykyss** · 08-01-2018, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by Havok83

An alternate reality version of Jean is her mother. 616 Jean didnt birth her. She's barely claimed her in the past. Their reunion in Red Annual was the most solid reaction they've ever had and that should be the standard for them now. This exchange did feel rather regressive

oh I see. thanks. jeans response seemed unnecessarily cold to me still.

**theoneandonly** · 08-01-2018, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by Havok83

Kelly Thompson didnt write that issue; Guggs did

yep you see his name on the issue but it seems he himself isn't paying particular attention to what he writes.

Kelly said she suggested some inclusions which may be the panels which doesn't feel like his writing. lol anyways its a jocular speculation

**ClanAskani** · 08-01-2018, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by Havok83

whats sad is that Guggs wrote those cute scenes between Rachel and the Jeans at the wedding only to write this bitchy exchange between them here. It was unnecessary for Jean to correct her like that.

I said something to Guggs at the signing for the wedding issue and he nodded that he wanted to include little character pieces but I can totally see that being written by someone else. I got the impression Guggs really did like X-Men when he was a kid but I don't think he has any inclination to put Cable & Jean in the background of a scene.

But I suspect the issue here is that he has to try to explain their relationship with dialogue whereas Claremont could have used though bubbles or captions. As a tv producer, he's probably concerned about new readers than what we think and doesn't want a new reader all confused that Jean has a daughter who is in her 20s.

**LordAllMIghty** · 08-01-2018, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by raidensix

It was out of character for Jean specially since she sought Rachel out after her resurrection. The line should have been reworded as:" I'm not your mom "mom", Rachel" to add some familiarity.

Anyway, Rachel has been demoted to the most powerful telepath during the Xavier's will arc to an on-the-way-out-dont-let-the-door-hit-you telepath.

Right. It felt like it was a step backwards in Jean and Rachel's relationship. I'm thinking "Damn, Jean give the girl some slack, she just been through a traumatic event".

Plus, I feel like they should have moved passed all this. It's also funny how Jean is accepting of Cable, her son from a cloned version of herself, then a actual daughter from a different time line.
RCO015_1469691425.jpg
RCO016_1469691425.jpg

**Havok83** · 08-01-2018, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by LordAllMIghty

Right. It felt like it was a step backwards in Jean and Rachel's relationship. I'm thinking "Damn, Jean give the girl some slack, she just been through a traumatic event".

Plus, I feel like they should have moved passed all this. It's also funny how Jean is accepting of Cable, her son from a cloned version of herself, then a actual daughter from a different time line.
RCO015_1469691425.jpg
RCO016_1469691425.jpg

She raised Cable from infancy to preadolescence. Its not the same thing. She's had 12 years worth of personal bonding time with Nathan which she never had with Rachel. The most time she's ever spent alone with Rachel was the couple of hours we got in Red. Its not that hard to see why she would be closer to Nathan over her.

Originally Posted by butterflykyss

oh I see. thanks. jeans response seemed unnecessarily cold to me still.

No doubt. I found it uncharacteristically bitchy of her

**LordAllMIghty** · 08-01-2018, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Havok83

She raised Cable from infancy to preadolescence. Its not the same thing. She's had 12 years worth of personal bonding time with Nathan which she never had with Rachel. The most time she's ever spent alone with Rachel was the couple of hours we got in Red. Its not that hard to see why she would be closer to Nathan over her.

No doubt. I found it uncharacteristically bitchy of her

I know she raised Nathan but she should have some sympathy for Rachel and at the very least try to understand where the girl is coming from.

Thread: RACHEL GREY/SUMMERS, the Phoenix/Mother Askani Appreciation

Thread Tools

Display

Posting Permissions