Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 282
  1. #166
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Londo Bellian View Post
    You mean like how he possibly "exploited" the Otherworld situation to place Brian Braddock in a situation that would spur Betsy to take his Captain Britain powers and thus put it at the "disposal of Krakoa"? Or that he may also "possibly" have set up Shogo being brought to Otherworld to be balefully poly-morphed and set him up to be eliminated (and thus remove the one element - mothering a human - that has made Jubilee come off as less-approachable to the Krakoans)?
    Your Shogo assertion is a stretch. It could just be a contrivance to have some fun with a human baby in a comic that is clearly supposed to be fun and entertaining.

    Your [A] assertion is certainly one way of reading the premise, but by no means the only one. It's not an 'obvious' plot line, its a theory.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  2. #167
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Domino_Dare-Doll View Post
    I'm disagreeing with the open ended interpretation you seem to be able to garner from his speech. To me, it isn't so ambiguous, especially considering Apocalypse's past characterisation: He see's mutants as superior, therefore dominant, therefore he's happy to see mutants claim dominion over said lands and plans to reach further. In his view, mutants genetics make them inherently superior and, by default, humans are a dead-weight he's happy to shed. He told us that.
    Well we won't end up with the same interpretations just by arguing about it. I agree he has a long history of mutant superiority and he seems to have joined Krakoa because he sees potential and promise in the nation. But I think it is stretching the point to say he is entirely focused upon genetics.

    He has often been portrayed (incorrectly IMO) as a Mutant Supremacist, but that entirely removes the nuance. If he was he would have saved the two mutants in the prologue. It's not as if he knew they would come in useful as dead magical carbon crystals in the far future. By not saving them he demonstrates two things. He is interested in mutants not related to him, but he wont intervene to further a blind 'mutant first' philosophy.
    Last edited by JKtheMac; 11-21-2019 at 04:23 AM.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  3. #168
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    1,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    He has often been portrayed (incorrectly IMO) as a Mutant Supremacist, but that entirely removes the nuance. If he was he would have saved the two mutants in the prologue. It's not as if he knew they would come in useful as dead magical carbon crystals in the far future. By not saving them he demonstrates two things. He is interested in mutants not related to him, but he wont intervene to further a blind 'mutant first' philosophy.
    Ok, now I'm just weirdly fascinated by how you can see him as anything but a Mutant Supremacist. Age of Apocalypse was built on "Survival of the fittest," there was nuance in there, sure, but that was mostly based on to what 'level' of fitness each attainted. Humans were weakest by default, then mutants; but then depending on the power-level and skill of said mutants he determined the 'fittest' and was happy to let them destroy the weakest.

    That's superiority; breeding out the weak by letting them die. Eugenics, even; that's why he didn't save those two mutants in the prologue, because even though they were genetically superior to those they were fleeing from, he saw their death as a result of their weakness. They didn't know better or have what it took to survive drowning, therefore they were out of the gene-pool, and rightly so in his eyes.

    That's how Supremacy works. Even white nationalists will decry an autistic person or gay person who shares their skin colour, because though they share a race one is still 'weaker' than the other (For clarification, I'm merely summarising that view point in a rhetorical fashion, I do not agree with it.)

  4. #169
    Incredible Member FIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    743

    Default

    Apocalypse most likely does think the mutants are stronger and fit to inherit the earth. However he desires conflict to prove it. If he is right then great. If not then so be it.

    He also takes a step back and view things on an individual level when he feels like it. Testing mutants, humans, gods, etc. Since Hox/Pox he seems more pro mutant.
    I only continue to read X-books because I don't spend any money on it.

  5. #170
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Domino_Dare-Doll View Post
    Ok, now I'm just weirdly fascinated by how you can see him as anything but a Mutant Supremacist. Age of Apocalypse was built on "Survival of the fittest," there was nuance in there, sure, but that was mostly based on to what 'level' of fitness each attainted. Humans were weakest by default, then mutants; but then depending on the power-level and skill of said mutants he determined the 'fittest' and was happy to let them destroy the weakest.

    That's superiority; breeding out the weak by letting them die. Eugenics, even; that's why he didn't save those two mutants in the prologue, because even though they were genetically superior to those they were fleeing from, he saw their death as a result of their weakness. They didn't know better or have what it took to survive drowning, therefore they were out of the gene-pool, and rightly so in his eyes.

    That's how Supremacy works. Even white nationalists will decry an autistic person or gay person who shares their skin colour, because though they share a race one is still 'weaker' than the other (For clarification, I'm merely summarising that view point in a rhetorical fashion, I do not agree with it.)
    I am saying that I have always had a problem with the simplification of his philosophy as one of genetic purity and supremacy because he is supposed to be an experienced scientist and it is inherently lazy from a writing perspective. Are we supposed to believe that a scientist that has studied genetics and evolution for longer than our society has, has somehow settled on an incorrect interpretation our science moved on from in the forties? It doesn't make any sense.

    I am positing (not asserting) that the current [A] interpretation may be an attempt to move him from this entirely illogical position to one more nuanced and more in keeping with some other interpretations we have seen. A philosophy of allowing the various genetic variations to survive and find their feet in the real world. Yes he is still interested in power, family and his own inherent superiority, but just maybe he knows those things to be what they are and not scientific.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  6. #171
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    1,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    I am saying that I have always had a problem with the simplification of his philosophy as one of genetic purity and supremacy because he is supposed to be an experienced scientist and it is inherently lazy from a writing perspective. Are we supposed to believe that a scientist that has studied genetics and evolution for longer than our society has, has somehow settled on an incorrect interpretation our science moved on from in the forties? It doesn't make any sense.

    I am positing (not asserting) that the current [A] interpretation may be an attempt to move him from this entirely illogical position to one more nuanced and more in keeping with some other interpretations we have seen. A philosophy of allowing the various genetic variations to survive and find their feet in the real world. Yes he is still interested in power, family and his own inherent superiority, but just maybe he knows those things to be what they are and not scientific.
    Are you thinking of genetic purity in an IRL sense or in the mutant vs human sense?

    IRL, yes, it is short-sighted and incorrect; we know variation in genetics between different groups of people generates stronger offspring.

    In the marvel universe, however, there's a much different split. Mutant genetics are seen as the leap forwards from human genetics and they, in themselves, are much, much more varied. Everyone and anyone can be a mutant, therefore we're not limited to one cultural or racial gene-pool. Therefore, what Apocalypse see's therein is not from a racial purity standpoint, it's from a genetic superiority, as in "This telepath is stronger than this telepath, therefore the stronger should pass on those genes," and so on and so forth about everyone's powers. It's not purity, so much as power; how he can breed stronger abilities and weed out the weaker one's. He does allow variations to survive, however, they must prove their worth if they want a place in the gene-pool, hence the eugenics. That's where his nuance lies, how far he's willing to go vs what 'allowances' he's willing to grant. That's not oversimplification; that's what drives him.
    Last edited by Domino_Dare-Doll; 11-21-2019 at 05:05 AM.

  7. #172
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Domino_Dare-Doll View Post
    Are you thinking of genetic purity in an IRL sense or in the mutant vs human sense?
    Both.

    IRL, yes, it is short-sighted and incorrect; we know variation in genetics between different groups of people generates stronger offspring.
    Actually that is a disputed area of science at present. The problem with the way you phrase it is the word "stronger". The science suggests a better resistance to disease and a higher uptake of nutrition resulting in more growth (height and body weight in humans). You could use the word "thrive" but thriving in nature has absolutely nothing to do with power and dominance because those are human cultural terms not genetic terms.

    Quote Originally Posted by Domino_Dare-Doll View Post
    In the marvel universe, however, there's a much different split. Mutant genetics are seen as the leap forwards from human genetics and they, in themselves, are much, much more varied.
    But was that correct? Hickman has thrown a spotlight on these assumptions. He almost certainly knows as well as us that Marvel has relied on non-scientific ideas of evolution and I think he is partially addressing some of these.

    Quote Originally Posted by Domino_Dare-Doll View Post
    Everyone and anyone can be a mutant, therefore we're not limited to one cultural or racial gene-pool. Therefore, what Apocalypse see's therein is not from a racial purity standpoint, it's from a genetic superiority, as in "This telepath is stronger than this telepath, therefore the stronger should pass on those genes," and so on and so forth about everyone's powers. It's not purity, so much as power; how he can breed stronger abilities and weed out the weaker one's.
    And that itself is about breeding a directed selection of traits. Yes he has done such things, but those things are again nothing to do with evolution, they are just a from of genetic engineering. We will see if that is how he is portrayed in the coming books but I suspect he has different approaches for different ends.

    Quote Originally Posted by Domino_Dare-Doll View Post
    He does allow variations to survive, however, they must prove their worth if they want a place in the gene-pool, hence the eugenics. That's where his nuance lies, how far he's willing to go vs what 'allowances' he's willing to grant.
    And again, we may be moving away from him espousing this philosophy as scientific and based on "survival of the fittest". As I said before, not revolutionary change in his character or philosophy, but instead a course correction. It may be played as "You people have always misunderstood my agenda."
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  8. #173
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    1,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    Both.

    Actually that is a disputed area of science at present. The problem with the way you phrase it is the word "stronger". The science suggests a better resistance to disease and a higher uptake of nutrition resulting in more growth (height and body weight in humans). You could use the word "thrive" but thriving in nature has absolutely nothing to do with power and dominance because those are human cultural terms not genetic terms.

    But was that correct? Hickman has thrown a spotlight on these assumptions. He almost certainly knows as well as us that Marvel has relied on non-scientific ideas of evolution and I think he is partially addressing some of these.

    And that itself is about breeding a directed selection of traits. Yes he has done such things, but those things are again nothing to do with evolution, they are just a from of genetic engineering. We will see if that is how he is portrayed in the coming books but I suspect he has different approaches for different ends.

    And again, we may be moving away from him espousing this philosophy as scientific and based on "survival of the fittest". As I said before, not revolutionary change in his character or philosophy, but instead a course correction. It may be played as "You people have always misunderstood my agenda."
    Look, we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this because, as far as I can tell, we're just splitting hairs here.

    To address a few things:

    --Yes, as far as I'm aware my original statement as Mutant genetics being the step beyond human one's in the marvel context, i.e, the evolution of one form to another is correct. Magneto said as much in HOX/POX, hence why he views mutants as inheritors of the earth and why, in the past, he's sought to hurry it along. The different backgrounds of each mutant from each walk of life poses just as much, if not more, genetic variation if you take into consideration how strands of powers can be inherited and further mutated.

    --Yes, Apocalypse has been a selective breeder, however I'm not saying that was all he did, that's an oversimplification of my point: though he might seek to change his tactics, he still believes in genetic superiority and how that makes those with said superior genetics more fitter than others to thrive/survive. He might well relax his standards now that mutants are united, however, that is still his driving force; survival of the fittest, regardless of what 'makes' those fittest. It could be smarts, it could be skill, it could be power-set, but he'll still view mutants as superior to humans and set to prove that. Hence his line in Excalibur #1 about expanding Krakoan reach into other realms and to what cost.

    Personally, I don't see what further nuance you could get from that other than going on to teach him further life lessons about challenging his notions, but even then that's already proven to be as such; he see's use in humans but they'll never be equal to mutants, hence the coven's destruction on panel there.
    Last edited by Domino_Dare-Doll; 11-21-2019 at 05:28 AM.

  9. #174

    Default

    Waaaaaaay better than the first issue. This felt more like a fantasy issue to me and I feel everything was much better presented that the first issue.

    Jubilee is becoming a little one note with the "my baby" if she is going to keep whining about it just stay on krakoa with your baby.

    Gambit got one more issue before he becomes annoying but I love he is stepping up with concern and showing rogue doesn't always have to play the worrier in the couple.

    I think apoc is trying to turn shogo into the new King Arthur with him being his Merlin.

    I think rogue us absorbing the magic into krakoa via her powers and as this is proably weakening human magic while strengthening mutant magic.

    I give it a 7.5 out of 10.
    Don't let anyone else hold the candle that lights the way to your future because only you can sustain the flame.
    Number of People on my ignore list: 0
    #conceptualthinking ^_^
    #ByeMarvEN

    Into the breach.
    https://www.instagram.com/jartist27/

  10. #175
    Incredible Member RD155's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwatson View Post
    Waaaaaaay better than the first issue. This felt more like a fantasy issue to me and I feel everything was much better presented that the first issue.

    Jubilee is becoming a little one note with the "my baby" if she is going to keep whining about it just stay on krakoa with your baby.

    Gambit got one more issue before he becomes annoying but I love he is stepping up with concern and showing rogue doesn't always have to play the worrier in the couple.

    I think apoc is trying to turn shogo into the new King Arthur with him being his Merlin.

    I think rogue us absorbing the magic into krakoa via her powers and as this is proably weakening human magic while strengthening mutant magic.

    I give it a 7.5 out of 10.
    I think the problem with Gambit is how completely one dimensional he is right now. Every single thing out of his mouth is “Rogue this and Rogue that”. I love both characters but Tini doesn’t need their personalities attached at the hip. That’s not how you make it work. Mr and Mrs X did an amazing job at writing them as a married couple and as strong individuals as well. You strip away their strengths as characters by having every single moment they’re in a panel be about each other.

    Like I’ve mentioned before....Loving every thing else about this title. If Tini can get a handle on them the this will instantly be my favorite DOX title.

  11. #176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RD155 View Post
    I think the problem with Gambit is how completely one dimensional he is right now. Every single thing out of his mouth is “Rogue this and Rogue that”. I love both characters but Tini doesn’t need their personalities attached at the hip. That’s not how you make it work. Mr and Mrs X did an amazing job at writing them as a married couple and as strong individuals as well. You strip away their strengths as characters by having every single moment they’re in a panel be about each other.

    Like I’ve mentioned before....Loving every thing else about this title. If Tini can get a handle on them the this will instantly be my favorite DOX title.
    i'm okay with it right now because in the first issue they are going from a point where they are happy and in paradise and him talking about a family and boom, shes in some sort of magical coma that no one but him seems that concerned about. It would bother me too if i don't know what's going on with my wife and everyone is just telling me "she'll be fine." it's like "Well can we run a test or two before ya'll start acting like i'm crazy." So i actually get it, i just think we aren't use to seeing this more serious side of gambit since he was left in anartica and maybe circa when he was apocalypse death. Which now that i think about it i wonder if his time as death will resurface.

    But right now, to my eyes at least, it looks like Rogue is being used as a generator to accumulate magic into krakoa. Fully expecting magical beings to start showing up on the island.
    Don't let anyone else hold the candle that lights the way to your future because only you can sustain the flame.
    Number of People on my ignore list: 0
    #conceptualthinking ^_^
    #ByeMarvEN

    Into the breach.
    https://www.instagram.com/jartist27/

  12. #177
    Jubilant Member Dementia5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Canadia
    Posts
    3,273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Knightmare View Post
    So far, this title is a mess! I think we can all agree, it's not off to the best start.
    No, I don’t think we can all agree on that at all.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fokken View Post
    Yer bonkers and you need a sandwich.

  13. #178
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,965

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Knightmare View Post
    So far, this title is a mess! I think we can all agree, it's not off to the best start.

    The roster, is still a mystery to me and only baffles we further the more I read. Rouge and Gambit, why is Rouge being taken to an active battlefield? And why is Gambit allowing it? Considering how he's being portrayed at the moment, it doesn't seem like something he'd sign off on. Feels like it's just there to setup some future story plot points, but done in a really sloppy way.
    Jubilee and Shogo, they seem to have even less reason to be on this team than Rouge and Gambit. If you're so worried about your child, be a responsible parent and take care of him. If this was the real world Jubilee would be in court fighting for custody of Shogo, for being so irresponsible.
    Apocalypse and Captain Britain feel like the only ones relevant to this current arc and the title would probably be more coherent if it just focused on there dynamic. I'll make a prediction that Apoc is the one causing all the trouble(obvious I know) for some future evil goal, which will likely be not as impressive as it's built up to be.

    This title could have been so much better, however I'm losing faith with each issue.
    While I understand the complaints and agree with some I'm really still enjoying these issues. Mind you we're still only on the second issue an considering the heavy lifting that the first issue had to deal with I'm ok with the pace of issue 2. This seems like a title that will read better in trade simply because each members role on the team hasn't been fleshed out yet. But like I said we're still only on issue 2.

  14. #179
    Fantastic Member SchismOfMadroces's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    490

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MechaJeanix View Post
    What are Apocalypse's powers these days?
    Stonks.jpg

    /10char

  15. #180
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Domino_Dare-Doll View Post
    Look, we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this because, as far as I can tell, we're just splitting hairs here.

    To address a few things:

    --Yes, as far as I'm aware my original statement as Mutant genetics being the step beyond human one's in the marvel context, i.e, the evolution of one form to another is correct. Magneto said as much in HOX/POX, hence why he views mutants as inheritors of the earth and why, in the past, he's sought to hurry it along. The different backgrounds of each mutant from each walk of life poses just as much, if not more, genetic variation if you take into consideration how strands of powers can be inherited and further mutated.

    --Yes, Apocalypse has been a selective breeder, however I'm not saying that was all he did, that's an oversimplification of my point: though he might seek to change his tactics, he still believes in genetic superiority and how that makes those with said superior genetics more fitter than others to thrive/survive. He might well relax his standards now that mutants are united, however, that is still his driving force; survival of the fittest, regardless of what 'makes' those fittest. It could be smarts, it could be skill, it could be power-set, but he'll still view mutants as superior to humans and set to prove that. Hence his line in Excalibur #1 about expanding Krakoan reach into other realms and to what cost.

    Personally, I don't see what further nuance you could get from that other than going on to teach him further life lessons about challenging his notions, but even then that's already proven to be as such; he see's use in humans but they'll never be equal to mutants, hence the coven's destruction on panel there.
    See right there embedded in that comment is the fallacy of evolution as not “survival of the fittest” as in the closest fit to the environmental conditions available but “survival of the strongest/cleverest/most skilful” that just isn’t evolution. That’s a supremacist mission statement.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •