Magneto issue #5 Summary & Review (Spoilers)

[remydat]

There never was any sugar coating. Magneto's history is what it is, as it has appeared in the comics. He never went on rampages, and never did anything like is shown in this fantasy in MAGNETO #5. If a writer wants to insert an atrocity into Magneto's history, and change Magneto's characterization to do it, I don't think it's right, but it's a retcon, and not revealing anything that was already there.

You may believe what you want, but Magneto's mental health issues are continuity. And they were added to his history to indeed flesh out his character and explain the Silver Age maniac (who was always described as "crazy" by the other characters in the 1960s). They are facts of his character, and Cullen Bunn assured us he was respecting the history of this character. There is no "fantasy" -- that is Magneto's history and continuity. Making up a scene of utter destruction and calling it "one of his rampages" when nothing like that ever appeared in the comics before, and Magneto has never done anything like that before, even at his worst, is not "quitting a fantasy" but inventing one.

Bunn has been making a lot of things clear. Like in the last issue, which was beautifully written, that Magneto sees himself as a man, that he is devoted to bringing his own kind of vigilante justice to those who would threaten mutants. And now he sees himself as a monster who goes on rampages? That isn't Magneto looking at himself, there's no subtlety there, no way for people to see their own version of the character. It's just a one way street.

Why do you need to control all these Magneto threads, by the way, remydat? Why is it so important to you to see the MAGNETO series take this swerve? The promise of the series was, it was supposed to walk the line, to present Magneto's complexity. That readers like me were supposed to come away satisfied as well as you. The series isn't supposed to be making Magneto haters happy, giving you giddy moments of victory because your version of the rat-bastard Magneto is being born again. It is supposed to present Magneto as hero, anti-hero, and villain all at the same time.

Compared to MAGNETO #4, issue #5 seems almost like it was written by a different person. And judging by the solicitations, #8 is going to give Magneto back his full powers. What happens to the brilliance of this series? Magneto using his brains, his skills, his strategic genius, to get things done instead of the big whomping magnetic car throwing ****. I hope I'm wrong, but this series is taking a swerve, and I feel Magneto fans are going to be stabbed in the back.

Magneto's mental issues were a retcon added by Claremont to explain away some of his actions during the Silver Age. All you are basically saying is that you accept retcons that make Magneto look good while decrying retcons that make Magneto look like more of a villain. Either way it is still canon but the point is some fans overuse it as an excuse. When Claremont wanted us to believe that his powers were making him do crazy things, he told us that. While I may not like that development, that's fair game. However, some of his fans harken back to those stories and then act like anytime Mags does something they don't like it must be because of his powers even when the current writer has no intent to blame anything on his powers. That is the difference.

I am a fan of the original Magneto so no I am not a hater. I just laugh at all of these nu-Mags fans who act like the Claremont version or the version that bowed down to Cyke was the original version and get upset with people like me that loved Mags as he was originally conceived. I liked that Claremont added depth to the character but you guys tend to act like that version of Mags is the only version that a true Mags fan should like. I am a paying customer like anyone reading this book and have every right to post a review thread especially when I am enjoying the story which I am.

And Bunn never promised that every issue would tow that line. He said that the series overall would. We have already had 4 issues that largely were more sympathetic to Mags and his mission so having an issue that explores the darker side of that is more than appropriate. So yes I love that this issue shows us the other side because it's absurd to think Mags has done all the things he did with no collateral damage and again I think people are confusing what collateral damage means. It does not mean you purposefully target innocent people. It means innocent people get swept up in violence that is an outgrowth of you trying to fulfill your mission. That's the downside of Magneto's methods and that downside has to be shown IMO otherwise the conflict inherent in his approach is meaningless.

[remydat]

He's not saying that Magneto deliberately hurt those people. Collateral damage is damage that is incidental to the real target, and it can often be accidental or unintentional. Magento becomes so focused on his targets that he doesn't always consider what will happen to the people who are just unlucky enough to get caught in the crossfire. But he's deliberately setting out to hurt them, so it doesn't take away any of his complexity as a character.

Exactly. Maybe with you saying it that idea will sink in to people. I don't think the point of the red scenes was to say, "Oh look at crazy Mags dropping a car on Briar's leg and killing her family." I think the point of the red scenes were to say, "Let's take a look at the little people and what happens to them when Mags declares war on the world or attacks some target and a public battle ensues."

The comics don't show the people whose pacemakers stopped working or planes that fell out of the sky when Mags EMP'ed the world so his more generous fans can pretend no one got hurt. The obvious reality though is that people probably did die and Marvel just didn't want to bog down the story which isn't an excuse for people to be blissfully ignorant of the collateral damage that comes with his actions.

[Lucyinthesky]

He's not saying that Magneto deliberately hurt those people. Collateral damage is damage that is incidental to the real target, and it can often be accidental or unintentional. Magento becomes so focused on his targets that he doesn't always consider what will happen to the people who are just unlucky enough to get caught in the crossfire. But he's deliberately setting out to hurt them, so it doesn't take away any of his complexity as a character.

Agreed, I assumed Briar was hurt during a past fight or something. In comics collateral damage is not always talked much about except when it can help make a compelling story. I read one of those in Spider-man once with the death of Gwen Stacy father during a fight with Doc Oct. , in Hulk this is also talked about most of the time.

Now if the story was assuming he was out of the blue attacking a city just because they are humans, then yes, it can be called OC for Magneto. But seeing what Bunn wrote in Magneto on issue 1 and 2 in which we could see both Magneto intention and ppl reaction I don`t think is the second case IMO.

But I have noticed something about the flashback to the past, some are done with blue/grey color and others with red/dark yellow. The first ones are often used when talking about a memory of something that happened(the waiter from the first issue, Magneto`s WW2 memory), the red/orange/drak yellow is often used more as the perception one character has of a certain event( Genosha`s memory, witness at the police station, Briar) . I think this`s significant to the story.

[Rivka]

Magneto's mental issues were a retcon added by Claremont to explain away some of his actions during the Silver Age. All you are basically saying is that you accept retcons that make Magneto look good while decrying retcons that make Magneto look like more of a villain. Either way it is still canon but the point is some fans overuse it as an excuse. When Claremont wanted us to believe that his powers were making him do crazy things, he told us that. While I may not like that development, that's fair game. However, some of his fans harken back to those stories and then act like anytime Mags does something they don't like it must be because of his powers even when the current writer has no intent to blame anything on his powers. That is the difference.

Every story added to every character bothers some people. But it's been 32 years. You need to get over it. Magneto is one of the most complex, interesting characters in comics, and part of his history and characterization is the way his powers affected his mind as he was aging and after he abused and misused his powers. Once he was de-aged and re-aged, he had a second chance. And no, no Magneto fan I know of has ever blamed every negative thing Magneto does on his mental imbalance caused by his powers. That is precisely the point I was making. There are many reasons Magneto acts the way he does. MAGNETO #5 seemed to suggest a kind of pressure-valve escape mechanism for "rage" and "hatred" as the sole reason Magneto makes decisions and goes on "rampages." He has never gone off on "rampages." This is Briar's point of view, as Lucyinthesky pointed out. Magneto himself says he sometimes "cuts loose" -- I have no idea what that means, or what he's referring to. But the comic structure, the way the narrative boxes overlay Briar's memories-- which I think makes the comic confusing--makes it seem that he is in complete agreement even without him knowing it, with Briar's point of view.

I am a fan of the original Magneto so no I am not a hater. I just laugh at all of these nu-Mags fans who act like the Claremont version or the version that bowed down to Cyke was the original version and get upset with people like me that loved Mags as he was originally conceived. I liked that Claremont added depth to the character but you guys tend to act like that version of Mags is the only version that a true Mags fan should like. I am a paying customer like anyone reading this book and have every right to post a review thread especially when I am enjoying the story which I am.

Dude, "nu-Magneto" --- LOL! It was 32 years ago that Claremont gave Magneto his history. He appeared as a one-dimensional Silver Age nutcase for 19 years, and part of that time X-MEN was on hiatus. You really need to get over it. There is one Magneto, and he has one history in the Marvel Universe, in the continuity of the Marvel Universe. You are a paying customer indeed, who doesn't like the character, since the three-dimensional Holocaust survivor who spent most of his life as a good man trying to stay on the path of righteousness, is the character. There aren't "two" versions of the character, any more than there are two versions of Emma Frost, or Wolverine, or a host of other characters who have been developed and elaborated upon and given more dignity and complexity over the years. I prefer Emma Frost as the White Queen; I never liked her becoming a member of the X-Men, or Scott's girlfriend. But I stopped griping about it a few years ago when the Emma fans pointed out to me how rude and stupid it was, to be interrupting threads and complaining about Emma's progress as a character just because I DIDN'T LIKE IT.

I suppose you won't mind then, if I go into the Gambit threads and tell everyone that I think Remy is a rapist, a creep, and being a thief is about as noble as a rectum. I'm entitled to my opinions too, of the character, despite the fact that you and other Gambit fans love Remy, have studied every appearance of him in the books, know his personality and his history inside and out. What does that matter, right? I'm a paying customer, and I can voice my opinion too, over and over, despite not liking any of his more noble development and rejecting it outright.

And Bunn never promised that every issue would tow that line. He said that the series overall would. We have already had 4 issues that largely were more sympathetic to Mags and his mission so having an issue that explores the darker side of that is more than appropriate. So yes I love that this issue shows us the other side because it's absurd to think Mags has done all the things he did with no collateral damage and again I think people are confusing what collateral damage means. It does not mean you purposefully target innocent people. It means innocent people get swept up in violence that is an outgrowth of you trying to fulfill your mission. That's the downside of Magneto's methods and that downside has to be shown IMO otherwise the conflict inherent in his approach is meaningless.

Bunn indeed did promise a balanced approach, and he's kept his word until now. The first 4 issues of MAGNETO were not soft on the character, they were accurate, balanced. #5 doesn't appear to be accurate or balanced. Although I'm taking the advice of fellow Magneto fans who've posted in this thread that the man isn't finished telling this particular story, and we may be able to reinterpret the events of this particular issue. The downside of Magneto's history has been shown a lot, already. Collateral damage is a legitimate topic to explore. A really good idea for a writer to explore. What I saw in MAGNETO #5 was Briar's memories clearly limned in red, and that's cool, but Magneto's narration was brought over and superimposed on those panels, giving the impression he was thinking about the same memories as she was, and his narration about himself was out of character in general, but especially jarring and out of character in contrast to where we left Magneto in MAGNETO #4. The writing had no gravitas, no grip to it. It was Silver Age clap-trap, like a psychotic Magneto would say, I'm not a weak human, I'm this god-like Magneto and when I remove the mask I'm going to make people scream and blood will run in the streets. Regressing Magneto to this between issue #4 and issue #5 makes no sense to me. It is out of balance, and the writer has slipped into cliche.

[Rivka]

Exactly. Maybe with you saying it that idea will sink in to people. I don't think the point of the red scenes was to say, "Oh look at crazy Mags dropping a car on Briar's leg and killing her family." I think the point of the red scenes were to say, "Let's take a look at the little people and what happens to them when Mags declares war on the world or attacks some target and a public battle ensues."

The comics don't show the people whose pacemakers stopped working or planes that fell out of the sky when Mags EMP'ed the world so his more generous fans can pretend no one got hurt. The obvious reality though is that people probably did die and Marvel just didn't want to bog down the story which isn't an excuse for people to be blissfully ignorant of the collateral damage that comes with his actions.

The actual narration, Briar's mostly, is saying, Magneto goes on "rampages" repeatedly because his "hatred" and "rage" bubble up like a pressure cooker and he explodes. That's what was actually said. Magneto doesn't go on rampages. He's never gone on rampages. His behavior has never been solely governed by hatred and rage bubbling up and exploding. He is far more complex than that. When Mags declared war on the world in the "Magneto War" comics, he used a machine to break down the magnetosphere, which would have caused the entire planet to suffer, plants and animals and people alike. He didn't go on a rampage. When he intended to do so, in one of his psychotic states (for example, when he was full of manic Silver Age plans like using a nuclear powered machine to turn all the humans into mutants and the Inhumans stopped him), others stopped him.

But you are right, the effects of the EMP were exactly what I expected to see! That is exactly my problem with #5. That's what we should have seen; the fallout from a previous story about one of Magneto's actions. Instead we get (1) a new attack on Seattle that he never did in previous comics, (2) a narrative of why he did it that describes Magneto as a pressure-cooker filled with hatred and rage who goes on periodic "rampages," and (3) Magneto himself turning 180-degrees from how we last saw him at the close of MAGNETO #4, describing himself as wearing a sheepskin, not being human, being the mutant avenging angel, so to speak, who brings screaming and blood. Number 1 didn't happen, Number 2 is not the character's psychological profile; certain it's part of it, as a PTSD reaction, but that's not why he does what he does without thought, without an understandable motive, and Number 3 makes no sense, since if Magneto were really a monster he wouldn't be describing himself as one, and if he's trying NOT to lose control of himself, he wouldn't describe himself proudly as a god-like being who brings terror and blood. Not after issue #4 just two weeks ago, where he sees himself as needing a reminder that he is only a man, where he shows us in a very moving way his motivation as the names of all the mutants killed float around him in his hidden sanctuary.

Isn't the premise of the MAGNETO series that he is motivated to protect mutants, by any means necessary? That he is angered and dismayed and saddened by what happens to mutants, and even by how simple non-mutants are caught up in the whole "war"? MAGNETO#4 established his motivation, his basic humanity but his ruthlessness in achieving his goals. A really good comic book, almost perfect by modern standards. But two weeks later, in #5, Magneto has rampages, because his hatred and rage bubble up, and he doesn't have the motivation to save mutants by himself any more--he wants to throw cars and tear up infrastructure so people will scream and be terrified of him--except that Briar shows up and shows him the way to "channel" his "evil" impulses. This is a completely new comic, and seems hardly related to the first four issues of the series.

But yes, we need to read the next two issues to see how this will play out, and if there is indeed a change in direction, style, and depiction of Magneto.

[remydat]

I don't like excuses. The mental issues thing came off as an excuse. I like it when Magneto accepts the fact he is a necessary evil and I am under no obligation to see Magneto as others see him or as he sees himself sometimes. Again, the guy routinely uses violence and fear to achieve his goals which is the very definition of terrorism. One man's terrorist is another man's revolutionary so yes there are two Magneto's because he is a polarizing character and people will perceive him differently because of that.

And again, I think you are completely misreading Bunn's point and I have said why several times. The US Government doesn't purposely try and kill civilians in wars. That doesn't mean they don't die as a result of those wars. Mags has waged war in one form or another for most of his life and people die as a result whether that is his intent or not. Not sure why you seem to keep equating collateral damage with psychotic Mags but until you address that distinction, I suppose there is no reason to continue with that train of thought.

You can be filled with anger and rage and still choose to channel it in a productive way such as joining the military where the government will sign off on you killing people of their choosing. So I don't consider this any new revelation here. I always viewed Mags as a character filled with anger and rage who channeled that anger and rage into defending mutants. I think where you and I likely differ is I don't think anyone that comfortable with killing or harming people does it solely because of said cause. They do it because a part of them needs to. The only difference is whether they find a way to do so in a manner that is acceptable to the rest of society or not and in Mags case he lives by his own rules which often conflicts with society's. Hence why Briar says that war is essentially a state of being and what she wants to ensure is that the casualties are on the right side. That is also why I brought up the Genosha thing. Even when his goals were seemingly achieved, he simply was not satisfied and had to then kidnap Xavier to rub it in his face and to also declare war on other nations before the dust had even settled with the Civil War he had just won. You are free to have a different opinion of course but there is enough in the source material to make this take on Mags ring true to me. As you said every story that adds to a character bothers some people so maybe this is just that story for you.

As for Gambit, by all means do so. Not sure where the rapist thing comes from but Gambit can certainly come off as a creep and I don't think being a thief is noble in the least. Furthermore, you are talking to a Gambit fan that would have preferred he willingly aided in the killing of the Morlocks and regretted it later rather than this half assed story where the connection was so tenuous that it just fell flat. I much prefer a proper redemption story as opposed to a faux redemption. So I think you are talking to the wrong Gambit fan if you think I would take issue with your take.

[remydat]

BpUQyzeIYAAnTSf.jpg

Pretty awesome cover.

[Ant-manic]

I am a fan of the original Magneto so no I am not a hater. I just laugh at all of these nu-Mags fans who act like the Claremont version or the version that bowed down to Cyke was the original version and get upset with people like me that loved Mags as he was originally conceived. I liked that Claremont added depth to the character but you guys tend to act like that version of Mags is the only version that a true Mags fan should like. I am a paying customer like anyone reading this book and have every right to post a review thread especially when I am enjoying the story which I am.

the original X-men run was aimed at small children and was unsuccessful sales wise. Claremont brought some class to the concept/made them a marketable franchise. his Magneto is the one that because A-list. in other words, i wouldn't brag about being an OG-Magneto fan. far as i'm concerned, Claremont's his creator.

[Ant-manic]

Exactly. Maybe with you saying it that idea will sink in to people. I don't think the point of the red scenes was to say, "Oh look at crazy Mags dropping a car on Briar's leg and killing her family." I think the point of the red scenes were to say, "Let's take a look at the little people and what happens to them when Mags declares war on the world or attacks some target and a public battle ensues."

The comics don't show the people whose pacemakers stopped working or planes that fell out of the sky when Mags EMP'ed the world so his more generous fans can pretend no one got hurt. The obvious reality though is that people probably did die and Marvel just didn't want to bog down the story which isn't an excuse for people to be blissfully ignorant of the collateral damage that comes with his actions.

that makes him as much of a monster as Ben Grimm (see: current Fantastic Four storyline). we don't often see the casualties of fights between super-powered individuals; period. a consequence of slugging it out in public is often property damage and injured civilians. Magneto doesn't strike me as someone who is indifferent to collateral damage. i think he pays more attention than most.

[Ant-manic]

If canon is changed all the time then Bunn has as much right to change canon as any writer so what are people complaining about?

you're confusing me with Rivka. go back and read my posts. i'm liking Bunn's take.

[remydat]

the original X-men run was aimed at small children and was unsuccessful sales wise. Claremont brought some class to the concept/made them a marketable franchise. his Magneto is the one that because A-list. in other words, i wouldn't brag about being an OG-Magneto fan. far as i'm concerned, Claremont's his creator.

It's got nothing to do with bragging. It's got to do with some Mags fans acting like people should only love Mags for the reasons they do. I only brought it up because it was suggested that I am a hater just because I like a different version of Mags than others do.

that makes him as much of a monster as Ben Grimm (see: current Fantastic Four storyline). we don't often see the casualties of fights between super-powered individuals; period. a consequence of slugging it out in public is often property damage and injured civilians. Magneto doesn't strike me as someone who is indifferent to collateral damage. i think he pays more attention than most.

Ben Grimm, the FF, or the X-men are responding to a threat that Mags as a villain is initiating. That will always have Mags positioned as the monster relative to a Ben Grimm who is trying to stop him. It would be like saying if there is a shootout between the police and criminals that the police is a monster for trying to stop the criminal.

you're confusing me with Rivka. go back and read my posts. i'm liking Bunn's take.

Fair enough

[Ant-manic]

It's got nothing to do with bragging. It's got to do with some Mags fans acting like people should only love Mags for the reasons they do. I only brought it up because it was suggested that I am a hater just because I like a different version of Mags than others do.

try saying something positive about the character every once in awhile. i remember your posts from before the big board evolution. you only turn up to talk about the hypocrisy of some Magneto fans not seeing him as a hypocritical terrorist.

Ben Grimm, the FF, or the X-men are responding to a threat that Mags as a villain is initiating. That will always have Mags positioned as the monster relative to a Ben Grimm who is trying to stop him. It would be like saying if there is a shootout between the police and criminals that the police is a monster for trying to stop the criminal.

so i'm guessing that you didn't read this week's Fantastic Four comic? it involved Grimm going on a casual rampage and the results of it.

[remydat]

try saying something positive about the character every once in awhile. i remember your posts from before the big board evolution. you only turn up to talk about the hypocrisy of some Magneto fans not seeing him as a hypocritical terrorist.

so i'm guessing that you didn't read this week's Fantastic Four comic? it involved Grimm going on a casual rampage and the results of it.

I have been saying positive stuff since this book started because I like this version of Mags. I don't have to say anything positive about his characterization when I actually don't like said characterization which I didn't for a long time previous to this book. Mags is a terrorist because of his actions. He has used violence and terror to achieve his goals which by definition makes him a terrorist. Should I pretend the definitions of words change just because I like a character?

I don't read Fantasic Four, Avengers, or Spider Man. Thor God of Thunder was the first Avenger book I ever read in full and I only did so because of the God Butcher arc and once that was done I dropped it. The only other Marvel book I read outside of X-men is Loki. So I don't know what Ben Grimm is doing and was speaking generally about the difference between a hero and a villain and how their actions are perceived. If he is running around casually fucking **** up with no regard for human life then sure he is a monster too. That is different than the situation I was talking about where a villain attacks and the hero has to stop him. In that instance obviously the villain is the one that has put people at risk.

[sureshot]

Liked the issue for the most part. Agree with Rivka that some new retcon was inserted that hurts the character in term of development imo. That being said unless Mags becomes a one-dimensional villain again I'm going to keep reading. I wonder if Briar works for Sinister? Or some other mutant hate group. Mags going around doing his own thing. Suddenly a character shows up pointing him towards the Marauders and possibly Sinister. kind of surprised that Msgs was not portrayed as being a little suspcious imo. As well you think after what sinister and his Marauders did in Mutant Massacre he would have targeted them first instead of humanity when he was a villlian.

[remydat]

"Casualties, victims, enemies, targets. All masks worn by the members of the very herd I've tried to lose myself within. Those disguises last only so long before the mask is torn away. And the screaming starts. The screaming, the panic and the blood. And when the true nature of the flock is uncovered, will a shepherd rise among them? And do I dare let such a shepherd live?"

Mags says the above as we see Briar's back story. I thought the implication was that he does suspect her as she is the potential shepherd and so he is questioning whether he should kill her or see how this all plays out.