Your Unpopular/Controversial Opinions on the X-Universe

[Frobisher]

Why can't comics appropriate some concepts from movies? One major one I see is the sentinels from DoFP. Now those are some of the most menacing killing machines to grace the screen.I know Sentinels of comics at 20 feet may be iconic , but for many reasons they just seem incredibly obsolete and straight up impractical .I would rather they update the sentinels to what they were in the film, 9 ft tall ,lithe and super deadly and I don't mean adding power mimicry-that is overkill but just keep them body morphers to a degree and that's ok.Alternatively they could at least do them more like the MJJ furies(of Xenogenesis arc in AXM-those are way more menacing than legacy sentinel models)

Why not UWU Nimrod?

[Grunty]

I strongly doubt we'll ever see anything that happened after Morrison, but before Hickman. Decimation wouldn't be done because the MCU isn't really interested in all that violence that naturally would follow, and it was really made by a non-sense Deus Ex Machina anyway.

Don't like saying it, but since this is unpopular/controversial opinions, i really doubt the current Hickman's stuff is ripe for adaptions either. It depends too much on retcons and longtime continuity and is just too alien compared to what the general non-comic reading audience might be aware of regarding the X-men.

While it might be a breath of fresh air for many longtime comic readers, it's just a mess to explain to people who aren't into reading the comics or willing to read up long wikipedia entries regarding 15 years of misserable directions in said comics.

So i wouldn't put Hickman's run at any end point for a timespan of storylines unsuable for adaptions yet. Especialy since we don't know how the current run and storyline will even end.

Mind you parts of it could be adapted in some form or another. But that could also be said about a lot of the good parts in the previous 15 years of X-men comics.

Luckily, I think we can at least be assured that we won't get any adaptions of the IvX era.

I agree. It seems unlikely.

Though it makes me wonder if kids who watched the current Marvel cartoons will eventualy wonder where the Inhumans have gone after they had an increased prominence in the cartoons too for a while?

Also once again reminding me that we really need a new proper X-men cartoon. The last was 11 years ago. At least TAS and Evolution do seem to still get enjoyed though.

[Woozie]

I could easily see them pulling stuff from whedon's run, Bendis' run and Utopia.

The fact folks think the last 15 or so years got nothing shows how incredibly limited in scope a lot of readers are in terms of what can work on the big screen.

[Ambaryerno]

I could easily see them pulling stuff from whedon's run, Bendis' run and Utopia.

The fact folks think the last 15 or so years got nothing shows how incredibly limited in scope a lot of readers are in terms of what can work on the big screen.

It's just more Claremont/Byrne/Lee worship in action.

[gonnagiveittoya]

The movie Sentinels are awesome, except for the fact that they somehow revolve around Mystiques DNA or something despite the fact that they have Darwins abilities.

Also Darwin was robbed so badly in First Class, which I otherwise adore.

[Agent Z]

Cyke’s portrayal as the villain in IvX was some of the worst writing I’ve seen from Marvel. The dude is trying to save his people from extinction and sterilization and he’s the bad guy? Okay.

Cyke wasn't the villain in IvX. That was Emma.

[Hizashi]

Cyke wasn't the villain in IvX. That was Emma.

Nah, it was the Inhumans. Or really, Marvel.

[Omega Alpha]

Well isn't that why a lot of Cyclops fans loved the Utopia era because Scott was front and center and the most pivotal character. If Cyke was removed or sidelined in favor of another character how many of his fans would have be raving about that era. So it's easy to say readers should read and enjoy books regardless of one's fave being prominent. Especially if your particular fave (Cyclops) is getting all the focus and spotlight.

With regards to hating fictional characters, that seems to only apply to certain characters (usually one's favorites). Some will say its insane to hate Cyclops or Emma or Magik; their only fictional characters, but will then turn around and strongly hate on Hank or Logan or Xavier. People will defend their faves from getting hate but if a character they can't stand is getting hate they could care less. Hank gets rabid hate on these boards much more venomous and vitriolic than Scott, so did Xavier and even Logan for awhile though he has his defenders as well. How irrational is that? Some readers/posters are more passionate than others and expresses that passion in ways both for and against certain characters.

It's irrational to hate any character, period.

Complaints about Beast is because his portrayal in the last 10 years or so, including present X-force, is just atrocious, but he has very few haters- if Marvel stopped portraying him as an hypocrite and a whiny one to boot, no one would have a problem with him; in fact, he used to be one of the most beloved X-men characters. Logan granted has his haters because of his popularity, though most fans are happy with his portrayal now that he's not pretending to be a sanctimonious schoolteacher while running a black ops squad.

And again you hate for Cyclops makes you insist on the idea that all the spotlight was on him on all the books around the Decimation era, which is just plain false.

Also, it's not like fans are only happy with him being in the spotlight- there were many times when he was just one of the members of the team and not the most important character narrative wise (hell most of the time, one can argue) and no one complained about that- hell, the period from post DPS to until Marvel decided to break up the marriage with Madelyne is one where most people like his portrayal and he wasn't even a regular. Most people are not just driven by irrational hate or love of one character alone, you know.

Don't like saying it, but since this is unpopular/controversial opinions, i really doubt the current Hickman's stuff is ripe for adaptions either. It depends too much on retcons and longtime continuity and is just too alien compared to what the general non-comic reading audience might be aware of regarding the X-men.

While it might be a breath of fresh air for many longtime comic readers, it's just a mess to explain to people who aren't into reading the comics or willing to read up long wikipedia entries regarding 15 years of misserable directions in said comics.

So i wouldn't put Hickman's run at any end point for a timespan of storylines unsuable for adaptions yet. Especialy since we don't know how the current run and storyline will even end.

Mind you parts of it could be adapted in some form or another. But that could also be said about a lot of the good parts in the previous 15 years of X-men comics.
.

Oh, I doubt we'd see a straight adaptation, but some elements- I don't think the X-men are going back to the mansion, for example.

[FluffyCyclopsRLZ]

Can't believe no one's joked about/lamented the inevitable adaptation of X-Men Gold.

[sunofdarkchild]

Can't believe no one's joked about/lamented the inevitable adaptation of X-Men Gold.

If it happens, instead of Kitty being the leader it'll be Logan and the movie will end with him walking away from Jean at the alter realizing he's no good for her.

[Grunty]

Oh, I doubt we'd see a straight adaptation, but some elements- I don't think the X-men are going back to the mansion, for example.

It has been part of their popular image for a long time, so i would argue it's still quite on the table as option for their base of operation. Especialy if the writers want to focus on the school aspects again.
Not that i would mind for them to operate from a different location for a change. Like the austrailian outback or indeed a base in the middle of the ocean.

[Omega Alpha]

It has been part of their popular image for a long time, so i would argue it's still quite on the table as option for their base of operation. Especialy if the writers want to focus on the school aspects again.
.

But I don't see why they would want to do that. Marvel tried to change as much as they could with Spider-Man (no origin story, younger and hot Aunt May, villains that weren't used before, a very different take on the love interest and supporting cast, etc), and the franchise wasn't coming from a complete box office disaster like Dark Phoenix nor was heavily associated with a rapist like Brian Singer, not to mention there's less room to change with Spidey.

[Hizashi]

But I don't see why they would want to do that. Marvel tried to change as much as they could with Spider-Man (no origin story, younger and hot Aunt May, villains that weren't used before, a very different take on the love interest and supporting cast, etc), and the franchise wasn't coming from a complete box office disaster like Dark Phoenix nor was heavily associated with a rapist like Brian Singer, not to mention there's less room to change with Spidey.

I don't like the no origin thing or the reliance on Iron Man/mentor figures. I'd welcome a more basic approach to the X-Men from Marvel. Just leave the Phoenix alone though - and that goes for the comics and movies.

[Omega Alpha]

I don't like the no origin thing or the reliance on Iron Man/mentor figures. I'd welcome a more basic approach to the X-Men from Marvel. Just leave the Phoenix alone though - and that goes for the comics and movies.

Like I said, they have no reason to repeat what Fox already did, and every reason not to. I'm not saying it will be drastic changes, though-Spider-Man wasn't so different after all- just will probably start with a new villain and new location, with a few different touches here and there.

[Agent Z]

The whole point of being popular is having commercial success even when it's a critical failure.

And Cyclops solo had writer change, was shoehorned in a poor crossover that made it lose all the momentum and was starring one of the most disliked versions of Scott.


No, they didn't. They just pretended that they did. They didn't actually put any effort in making him whiny or a jerk. At best they had other characters, no scratch that, just Wolverine being irritated with him for absolutely no in-universe reason. People think Scott is whiny in the movies not because he's portrayed that way, but because the audience point of view character thinks that way. Protagonist centered morality.

It's kind of worse than actually making him whiny.

Here's something I wrote some time ago about movie Scott if anyone's interested: The bizarrely bad portrayal of Cyclops in X-Men movies.

X-Men Origins didn't make Cyclops look like a jerk. It is never stated how often he is in detention and the only reason he got in trouble was for wearing his glasses in class.