Your Unpopular/Controversial Opinions on the X-Universe

[TheDeadSpace]

This is fair and you have every right to think it. I too was, and is, a fan of revolutionary 'clops, and I do want to see a more proactive stance from him, but I don't view the current Scott as a "Stepford Scott". Part of it has to do with my own background and interpretation of events. In my opinion, from M-Day forward the mutants in general and Cyclops in particular have been operating more or less in a state of perpetual psychological (and frequently physical) trauma. Again in my opinion, Scott, more than most, as a result of the stress of leading during decimation and all of the things he felt he needed to do to keep his people alive. That trauma never really got better and usually just got worse, between extinction threats, cosmic threats, and the deeply personal wounds caused by deadly genesis, schism, AvX, and so on.

Now we get to Krakoa, and this doesn't wipe out that trauma like it never happened, but he's not constantly living in it. In fact, I would argue that if you look the cause of nearly every major trauma he's suffered has been "fixed". His people are back, protected and have what appears to him to be a bright future. His reputation has been restored (IvX was dog sh*t but it did wipe out the "mutant Hitler" crap), his wife and son have been restored (a young son who needs him, not old man cable), his father figure is back with a grand plan that fixes everything that Scott believes went wrong, the divisions in schism are forgotten, and most importantly he is still needed but not to be the grand leader.

Before we go overboard about all the fallacies keep in mind that I'm only talking about Scotts perspective, not the readers. He's like Atlas finally being able to put down his burden. This plays into my own background as I've spent the last 15 years working with people (kids) many of whom have suffered from significant trauma. I've seen that type of reaction, a lot, from people I've worked with trauma histories. It makes perfect sense to me that current Scott appears to be merrily whistling his way through without a care in the world. The thing is though that the trauma is still there, waiting for a trigger. Its not that he has suddenly gotten better, all of the issues, pain and trauma are still there but there's a metaphorical coat of paint obscuring them. A little bit more to remember, people who lived with trauma know how painful it was and generally don't want to feel that way and will frequently grasp on tenaciously to anything that makes them feel better. (One of the reasons people who have suffered trauma are so susceptible to drug and alcohol abuse)

This is true for way more than just Scott, its one of the reasons I had very little problem with how easily the X-Men went along with Xavier's plans. It really is a textbook trauma response. However, it won't last, cracks will start to show. I think we've started to see that in the X-line between Scott and Jean reforming the X-Men and Nightcrawler's exploration in way of X.

Like I said, it's just my own interpretation, could be wrong, but it does make sense to me.

I think this is a nice breakdown. Thanks for the post, it definitely gives an interesting perspective.

That being said, I'm fine with Scott being more happy and easygoing considering everything he's done so far, but he seems off to me. A lot of what makes Scott himself seems absent. Being more optimistic makes sense, but he feels too overconfident and clueless than normal at times. Hellions feels like the best representation of the character for me so far. With Duggan, it's early, but he seems to be presenting Scott more like Cap than himself.

That's just me, though.

[Grinning Soul]

Now we get to Krakoa, and this doesn't wipe out that trauma like it never happened, but he's not constantly living in it.

Check my post (#7565) on the previous page, please. Who is to say the same hasn't been done to Scott?

https://community.cbr.com/showthread...=1#post5630478

[Hizashi]

This is fair and you have every right to think it. I too was, and is, a fan of revolutionary 'clops, and I do want to see a more proactive stance from him, but I don't view the current Scott as a "Stepford Scott". Part of it has to do with my own background and interpretation of events. In my opinion, from M-Day forward the mutants in general and Cyclops in particular have been operating more or less in a state of perpetual psychological (and frequently physical) trauma. Again in my opinion, Scott, more than most, as a result of the stress of leading during decimation and all of the things he felt he needed to do to keep his people alive. That trauma never really got better and usually just got worse, between extinction threats, cosmic threats, and the deeply personal wounds caused by deadly genesis, schism, AvX, and so on.

Now we get to Krakoa, and this doesn't wipe out that trauma like it never happened, but he's not constantly living in it. In fact, I would argue that if you look the cause of nearly every major trauma he's suffered has been "fixed". His people are back, protected and have what appears to him to be a bright future. His reputation has been restored (IvX was dog sh*t but it did wipe out the "mutant Hitler" crap), his wife and son have been restored (a young son who needs him, not old man cable), his father figure is back with a grand plan that fixes everything that Scott believes went wrong, the divisions in schism are forgotten, and most importantly he is still needed but not to be the grand leader.

Before we go overboard about all the fallacies keep in mind that I'm only talking about Scotts perspective, not the readers. He's like Atlas finally being able to put down his burden. This plays into my own background as I've spent the last 15 years working with people (kids) many of whom have suffered from significant trauma. I've seen that type of reaction, a lot, from people I've worked with trauma histories. It makes perfect sense to me that current Scott appears to be merrily whistling his way through without a care in the world. The thing is though that the trauma is still there, waiting for a trigger. Its not that he has suddenly gotten better, all of the issues, pain and trauma are still there but there's a metaphorical coat of paint obscuring them. A little bit more to remember, people who lived with trauma know how painful it was and generally don't want to feel that way and will frequently grasp on tenaciously to anything that makes them feel better. (One of the reasons people who have suffered trauma are so susceptible to drug and alcohol abuse)

This is true for way more than just Scott, its one of the reasons I had very little problem with how easily the X-Men went along with Xavier's plans. It really is a textbook trauma response. However, it won't last, cracks will start to show. I think we've started to see that in the X-line between Scott and Jean reforming the X-Men and Nightcrawler's exploration in way of X.

Like I said, it's just my own interpretation, could be wrong, but it does make sense to me.

I appreciate your response, I can see where you're coming from. I guess for me, I would be able to accept your perspective if there were an undercurrent of that feather-trigger.

As for the AvX and the rest, etc. I sometimes struggle to believe that Marvel can just throw all of that continuity away, like nothing.

[Hizashi]

I think this is a nice breakdown. Thanks for the post, it definitely gives an interesting perspective.

That being said, I'm fine with Scott being more happy and easygoing considering everything he's done so far, but he seems off to me. A lot of what makes Scott himself seems absent. Being more optimistic makes sense, but he feels too overconfident and clueless than normal at times. Hellions feels like the best representation of the character for me so far. With Duggan, it's early, but he seems to be presenting Scott more like Cap than himself.

That's just me, though.

Yeah, there's been something missing.

Check my post (#7565) on the previous page, please. Who is to say the same hasn't been done to Scott?

https://community.cbr.com/showthread...=1#post5630478

That's all the evidence I need to see.

[BESTXMAN]

I hate that there are two Hawkeyes and two Wolverines. Why can't the female characters have their own autonomy and character?

[jwatson]

It's funny how things work out. There have been several points when i question ben percy run but it was still intriguing enough not to jump off. But at no point did i think he would become the most consistent writer of this era for me. He has questioned krakoa from the beginning in his stories and also supported it so it's kind of funny to me that i rely on his voice in this era. Like it has been the most consistent despite all the changes so i actually believe what his characters say even when i don't agree.

[Spiderfan001]

I hate that there are two Hawkeyes and two Wolverines. Why can't the female characters have their own autonomy and character?

And people of colour
Miles was Spiderman in 1610, why not something new in 616.We already have the og and the best
And Laura as X-23 was *chef's kiss*

[Chris0013]

And people of colour
Miles was Spiderman in 1610, why not something new in 616.We already have the og and the best
And Laura as X-23 was *chef's kiss*

Didn't Laura also go by Talon?

Also...maybe go back to the Fang costume

[Ambaryerno]

Didn't Laura also go by Talon?

Also...maybe go back to the Fang costume

[IMG]https://***********/comicbookinvest.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/8636546.jpg[/IMG]

IIRC the only time we ever saw Laura called Talon was in a threat analysis by the Nimrod that became Bastion. So from an AU future.

And GOD the Fang costume looked bad on her. Also, it’s just be another example of Laura wearing Logan’s old clothes so I’m not sure how that’s supposed to be an improvement if you don’t like her in the Wolverine suit.

[Chris0013]

IIRC the only time we ever saw Laura called Talon was in a threat analysis by the Nimrod that became Bastion. So from an AU future.

And GOD the Fang costume looked bad on her. Also, it’s just be another example of Laura wearing Logan’s old clothes so I’m not sure how that’s supposed to be an improvement if you don’t like her in the Wolverine suit.

Talon defines her as her own person....and Logan wore that for pretty much one story line. He had his clothes burned off, stomped on Fang and stole his clothes, then went back to his own thing when he got back to Earth.

[Ambaryerno]

Talon defines her as her own person....and Logan wore that for pretty much one story line. He had his clothes burned off, stomped on Fang and stole his clothes, then went back to his own thing when he got back to Earth.

Laura was called Talon in a single panel by an AU Future character, so I’m not entirely sure what your point is supposed to be and how it’s supposed to “define” her. The name was even less relevant to her than the Fang suit was to Logan (and Laura only wore that one for like half a dozen issues in Claremont’s Uncanny, which has almost entirely been retconned out by later writers anyway).

[skyvolt2000]

I hate that there are two Hawkeyes and two Wolverines. Why can't the female characters have their own autonomy and character?

Lets see if FANS and STORE OWNERS would support original characters along with employees at the COMPANIES-do the same instead of giving up or trashing or handing into the hands of writers who don't care for them-you would not have two Hawkeyes or Wolverines.

Falcon, Wanda, Jean, Iceman, Black Bolt, Starbrand, Storm, America, Ironfist, Luke Cage, Solo, Doom, Mockingbird, She Hulk, Foolkiller and others had solos.

And what did we see before the FIRST issues with many of them? Boycotts, death threats to creators, calls for employees to be fired and some book not even reaching a store shelf.

Steel held a book for 5 years. His reward to be tossed away and be an after thought.
Cyborg and Static had their books RUINED by the same editor. With folks saying Static should NEVER be in comics again.
Duke Thomas-folks boycotted Batman over his one panel cameos.
Black Panther handed to a bad writer. Whose run survived off of variants.

Not Miles's fault his book was not ruined by certain editors and writers.

But FANS have to stop crying about why can't (blank) get a shot and then don't support them.

[Wiccan]

The problem is that Laura is too known as X-23 for a new codename to catch on, but at the same time it hasn't made sense for her as a character to use that for years now. So Wolverine, which is something that's considered somewhat of a promotion and/or "honor" to take on, was a mantle she took on before giving it away, and defines her powers as much as it does Logan's, is really the most viable option when taking both in-story and meta reasons into consideration.

[Wolverine12]

The problem is that Laura is too known as X-23 for a new codename to catch on, but at the same time it hasn't made sense for her as a character to use that for years now. So Wolverine, which is something that's considered somewhat of a promotion and/or "honor" to take on, was a mantle she took on before giving it away, and defines her powers as much as it does Logan's, is really the most viable option when taking both in-story and meta reasons into consideration.

I’m fine with multiple people using the Wolverine code name but in Laura’s case I think she was a popular enough character to have deserved/developed her own code name. Her being a legacy hero works great but I wouldn’t say it’s the only option for her both in story and from a writers perspective.

[Kisinith]

The multiple character with the same name thing usually bugs me, but there are cases where it doesn't. In cases where the name was also a rank or a job, I never had an issue, for example, Green Lantern, Nova, heck even Robin I was fine with. Other times I was ok was when a legacy character assumed the mantle and kept the name, Wally West Flash and Laura for example. I think they earned it and it fits better than any other (unpopular opinion, I prefer Wally to Barry).

Other characters... I'm not a fan. I don't like having 2 people named Spider-Man or Hawkeye etc.