Death of X leak (HEAVY SPOILERS)

[Kisinith]

Sorry Ambaryerno, but thats not actually totally correct. In the dictionary definition (which is what I was using) all serialized means is that its published or broadcast in regular installments (monthly, bi-weekly etcetera). In television or radio its a show that has a continuing plot that unfolds in a sequential episode-by-episode fashion.

And while it is increasingly more common for some works to have overarching plots and dramatic changes its not implicit in the definition. In fact frequently in some serials at the end of the arc everything returns to the status quo, or the illusion of change is given but genuine plot progress is not a necessary component.

American Superhero Comics like Marvel and DC are totally in keeping with either definition, but in both of the big 2 the Status Quo is king. Sooner or later a writer or editorial is going to reset the clock.

[DDD]

Pixie will need the helmet back to do hunt down Inhumans.

[Carabas]

Sorry, but this is just wrong. Serialized storytelling by its nature is ALL ABOUT progress. Contrast Deep Space Nine and the original Star Trek. DS9 is the most serialized iteration of Star Trek since the franchise was established. From Emissary to What You Leave Behind it had a very clearly defined primary arc, and multiple secondary arcs which saw characters constantly evolving and the status quo changing (Dukat in particularl changed RADICALLY over the course of the series — from antagonist, to noble demon, back to antagonist, to outright maniac). There was VERY little reset to generic starting positions.

I think that 'serialized storytelling', like many other terms, gets a completely different definition when they're applied to the field of corporate superhero comics.

In comics the term simply means "goes on forever and ever and ever or until canceled because it isn't selling, with at best there being an illusion of change".

Sorry Ambaryerno, but thats not actually totally correct. In the dictionary definition (which is what I was using) all serialized means is that its published or broadcast in regular installments (monthly, bi-weekly etcetera). In television or radio its a show that has a continuing plot that unfolds in a sequential episode-by-episode fashion.

You're wrong. Television network people HATE serialised storutelling because what then they have to start paying attention to the order they are the episodes in.
Now, the battle between episodic and serialised (yes, those are opposites) seems to have been won firmly by the serialised faction, but that's a recent thing.
Listen to any interview with a tv producer/showrunner, or commentary tracks, from a while back; and you'll likely to get complaints about the studios wanting more stand-along episodes and vastly less arc stuff.

[Carabas]

I'd argue that the struggle is implicit in the concept, not a conclusion. In the real world analogs there have not been conclusions on the issue so why would there in a fictional take on it?

A struggle that is locked in place isn't a struggle. It's just a status quo masquerading as a struggle.

I'll be honest, I really don't get the logic behind this line of thinking. Using the analog of civil rights in the real world in the USA alone, this was a struggle that has taken centuries and consumed generations. Then despite of all of the progress made, the USA still suffers from serious and significant inequalities. Thinking that it could be solved in a "15 year span" (sliding timescale) or even significantly abated is not really logical.

Using analogues to real life events is a terrible idea because the real world and fiction follow vastly different rules. Stories don't work like reality.

Superhero comics in general and Marvel comics in specific are a serialized form of storytelling that abhors the notion of genuine progress.

That's just comics people not understanding what the word "serialised" means.

you can only go so far before editorial will slam the brakes and reset back to a generic starting position. This is one of the issues that Claremont himself had with Marvel, he wanted to progress the story but eventually sooner or later editorial will slam the brakes and reset the board. Look at the original formation of X-Factor, How many times has the school been blown up only to be rebuilt and repopulated with children, The extremely hard reset post Morrison, Parker luck, OMD, how many times has Daredevil been 'outed' yet somehow always ends up back practicing law and secretly a vigilante?

And all of these are a big reason why superhero comics are not as popular as they could be. All of the stuff you just mentioned? Those are things that seriously piss readers off. It's one of the main readers I pretty much quit superhero comics almost completely.

The fact is that anyone somehow thinking that there will ever be genuine and lasting progress on on one of the central and founding themes of the comic book seems incongruous with the perniciousness of similar genuine real world struggles or the editorial practices of Marvel comics and the cyclical nature of its storytelling.

There isn't because Marvel and DC are scared of altering their precious IPs too much and lose readers, in the process losing readers.
There is absolutely no reason why they couldn't allow natural story progression and definitive endings. Every other comicbook industry in the world does it, and they tend to be bigger than America's (comics, not movies or merchandising, just comics).

Wanting genuine progress is one thing, actually expecting it is kind of naive. That progress... reset you spoke of is the nature of American Superhero comics wanting it to be something else is really just looking for a different medium.

It's most certainly not an inalienable part of the medium. It's merely a part of one genre in that medium.

And if you doubt that, just look at all of the most popular X-Men runs over the decades. They're the ones that changed things or tried their best to do so, and the stories that reset things tend to be not all that well loved.

[Bl00dwerK]

Magneto and the original X men have been around since 1963. They aren't going anywhere long term. No chance. Storm and Wolverine are super icon characters..they aren't going anywhere. It will never fly

Wolverine is dead so, yeah, that blows that theory out of the water. If the X-Men are moved to their own "universe", or whatever, one could argue that, even though they are leaving Earth Prime, they aren't really "going anywhere"...

[Carabas]

Wolverine is dead so, yeah, that blows that theory out of the water.

Limited list of superheroes that died for 'real' and got better: Captain America, Superman, Nightcrawler, Hal Jordan, Supergirl, Green Arrow, the Punisher, Kitty Pryde, Hawkeye, Thor, Carol Danvers, Spider-Man, Colosus, the Wasp, Northstar, Nico Minoru, Moondragon, the Flash, practically every X-Man ever...

[Jesse-James]

Yeah, another thread devoted specially for complex conspiracy thinkers. We really needed a thread for that. There are some fans who do not think that way.

[ExodusCloak]

Can we stop posting threads with misleading titles or promoting crap from 4chan and passing it off as "heavy spoilers"?.

Heavy spoilers: its a Wolverine event in which X-23 dies and Wolverine returns. (Nah I just made that up.)

[Sardorim]

So...

Heroes Reborn.

And I swear they better not kill Rachel off-panel like they did with Cyclops... Still not happy over Cyclops's fate.

[motherofpearl1]

Limited list of superheroes that died for 'real' and got better: Captain America, Superman, Nightcrawler, Hal Jordan, Supergirl, Green Arrow, the Punisher, Kitty Pryde, Hawkeye, Thor, Carol Danvers, Spider-Man, Colosus, the Wasp, Northstar, Nico Minoru, Moondragon, the Flash, practically every X-Man ever...

Jean Grey hasn't come back. And I suspect she never will.

[Kisinith]

I think that 'serialized storytelling', like many other terms, gets a completely different definition when they're applied to the field of corporate superhero comics.

In comics the term simply means "goes on forever and ever and ever or until canceled because it isn't selling, with at best there being an illusion of change".

You're wrong. Television network people HATE serialised storutelling because what then they have to start paying attention to the order they are the episodes in.
Now, the battle between episodic and serialised (yes, those are opposites) seems to have been won firmly by the serialised faction, but that's a recent thing.
Listen to any interview with a tv producer/showrunner, or commentary tracks, from a while back; and you'll likely to get complaints about the studios wanting more stand-along episodes and vastly less arc stuff.

I made no judgements on how much network likes or doesn't like serialized vs episodic I was literally just giving the definition.

A struggle that is locked in place isn't a struggle. It's just a status quo masquerading as a struggle.

A struggle can be the status quo, the terms are not mutually exclusive.

Using analogues to real life events is a terrible idea because the real world and fiction follow vastly different rules. Stories don't work like reality.

I disagree, while it is true that fiction and real life do follow different rules, fiction follows real life. The whole point of the X-Men metaphor is a call out to similar real life experiences.

That's just comics people not understanding what the word "serialised" means.

No all serialized means is that it comes out in regular parts,

And all of these are a big reason why superhero comics are not as popular as they could be. All of the stuff you just mentioned? Those are things that seriously piss readers off. It's one of the main readers I pretty much quit superhero comics almost completely.

There isn't because Marvel and DC are scared of altering their precious IPs too much and lose readers, in the process losing readers.
There is absolutely no reason why they couldn't allow natural story progression and definitive endings. Every other comicbook industry in the world does it, and they tend to be bigger than America's (comics, not movies or merchandising, just comics).


It's most certainly not an inalienable part of the medium. It's merely a part of one genre in that medium.

And if you doubt that, just look at all of the most popular X-Men runs over the decades. They're the ones that changed things or tried their best to do so, and the stories that reset things tend to be not all that well loved.

I’m not defending the practice, in point of fact I completely agree that stories with a defined beginning, middle and end are inherently superior to just keeping it going on endlessly. That fact though is irrelevant, that is not what Marvel does. In Marvel and DC at the end of the day the status quo is king and will inevitably be restored. Criticizing them for that at this point is kind of pointless, and ignoring who and what they are, its Don Quixote tilting at windmills.

[Carabas]

Jean Grey hasn't come back. And I suspect she never will.

Well, she did, and then she died again.

[silence.]

Personally wouldn't mind this. If the only thing that's hurting X visibility in comics is MCU. Rip em out to another timeline and let them have proper stories again. But that's just me, I can also see the other side of the argument being laid out here.

[Harpsikord]

Well, she did, and then she died again.

And not only that, but whether you want to accept the teenage Jean or not, she's still Jean.

I'd sure like adult Jean back, but I'm not going to deny the one we've got now that she's started acting like herself.

[yogaflame]

Personally wouldn't mind this. If the only thing that's hurting X visibility in comics is MCU. Rip em out to another timeline and let them have proper stories again. But that's just me, I can also see the other side of the argument being laid out here.

Even if they get shunted to their own universe, Marvel will never let them have great stories again to feed to Fox, their competition. I say a clean death is better.

The X-Men are dead.

Long live the X-Men!