PREVIEW: X-Men: The Exterminated #1

[Grey]

The Marvel Universe takes place during the course of like 10+ years. There is no forumula to break down time because certain eras like the Silver Age have to be longer or shorter because of stuff like characters being in school. The O5 X-Men are barely older than Spider-Man, who is right below 30, and are all younger than the Human Torch considering his Negative Zone time. Any inconsistencies created by the sliding timeline like out of date cultural stuff are explained by the in-universe explanation for how time works in Marvel Prime from Ultimates, which is that significant events have weight that literally drag them down further in time. It's actually all pretty simple...

...Until editors allow writers to say specific words like years when referring to stuff that really can't be years and even worse, allow them to put specific numbers on it that by default can't make sense unless it's pocket stuff like "Illyana was in Limbo for 10 years" or "The FF were exploring the universe for 5 years."

So in summary, and JDW agreed with me on this, don't use specific time measurements in a sliding timeline. And remember how old your characters actually are. Cyclops was the Lil' B The Based God of mutantkind while in his mid-late 20's.

I’m confused, you mention a few time measurements but also say you and someone agree that time measurements shouldn’t be used, lol.

Anyway I never found a problem with this. I just go with whatever the story ensenuates (sp?) even if it’s contradictory sometimes. With comics ya just gotta roll with it sometirmes. But I do agree it’s best to avoid using specific numbers.

[Grey]

Also wanted to agree with a previous poster that writers/editors making comments on social media and that being taken as canon can be very good or very bad. I can see it being useful to clear things up but then it really just makes what continuity exists even lesss firm, imo.

[salarta]

What writers/editors say on social media (or in interviews, or whatever) can't really be trusted anyway. For one, a lot of times that's actually just the person presenting their own biases toward a particular character or story. For another, a person can claim something on social media, only for a different writer to say something else entirely in the actual fiction.

There's also just, y'know, all the times J.K. Rowling says something about a character from the Harry Potter books after the fact.

In the end, what a writer/editor says can only be trusted for what they intended with their work, and/or to get an idea of what you can expect from them based on how they perceive the story and characters.

[Snoop Dogg]

I’m confused, you mention a few time measurements but also say you and someone agree that time measurements shouldn’t be used, lol.

Anyway I never found a problem with this. I just go with whatever the story ensenuates (sp?) even if it’s contradictory sometimes. With comics ya just gotta roll with it sometirmes. But I do agree it’s best to avoid using specific numbers.

When a span of time is outside of the normal universe in another dimension or whatever, being specific about it doesn't matter because it doesn't effect anything else.

"Wow, Cyclops! I can't believe you left this dimension and spent 30 years traveling an alternate universe watching and reviewing various Hamilton performances! To us, it's only been a little while!"

Like that.

[Starrius]

The Mystery Science Theater mantra is needed here. There is no logic or consistency to the ages in the Marvel universe.

the same with DC universe too

[Uncanny X-Man]

I enjoyed the interaction between Jean and Hope in this issue, getting a bit of meat around the bones for those character relationships has been sorely missing from the X-books. I must say though, I used to like Hope quite a bit back in the day, but as editors, creators as well as the characters themselves lost interest in her, so did I. I now fail to see the point of her.

The second story by Claremont was really great. I always enjoyed Chris' Scott Summers and this was no exception. The art was a bit weird in places and somewhat unclear in showing what was happening (like in that panel when Scott injures his head during the earthquake) but overall I'd say it was serviceable enough.

[MyriVerse]

Since when was Jean on a first name basis with Bishop? "Lucas"

They ALL should be on first name basis with each other.

[WhiteQueenEmmaFrost]

Also wanted to agree with a previous poster that writers/editors making comments on social media and that being taken as canon can be very good or very bad. I can see it being useful to clear things up but then it really just makes what continuity exists even lesss firm, imo.

that was me and I agree with you. It was helpful when Leah wrote the Emma story because she gave her intentions which you would not get from the book itself, but it also built up (at least my) expectations and they weren't met.

What writers/editors say on social media (or in interviews, or whatever) can't really be trusted anyway. For one, a lot of times that's actually just the person presenting their own biases toward a particular character or story. For another, a person can claim something on social media, only for a different writer to say something else entirely in the actual fiction.

There's also just, y'know, all the times J.K. Rowling says something about a character from the Harry Potter books after the fact.

In the end, what a writer/editor says can only be trusted for what they intended with their work, and/or to get an idea of what you can expect from them based on how they perceive the story and characters.

There are people like myself that dont follow writers/artists on social media I just don't care to use my time on all that. Like I said above it can be helpful, but then it also creates this "well so and so said this on this platform"....but if they're willing to say so on social media....why not put that in the book on the page?

[Havok83]

They ALL should be on first name basis with each other.

IKR? This is a character she's been interacting with since 1991. It would feel more odd if she only ever referred to him by codename. Using first names is more natural when not on a mission

I'm going by what was printed:

Scott and Jean were 24 during the DPS.
After that, at least a year and more passed since Maddie gave birth to Cable. So Scott and Jean were about 26 when she came back.
They were 27 when Jean died during the Morrison run.
Scott and Emma were together for just over 4 years before AvX, with Messiah Complex and Second Coming, making Scott 31 at AvX
He was still 31 (6 months passed), when the Bendis run started.
He was 32 when he died of M-Pox
6 months pass from that for IvX
Jean returns, and assuming the Phoenix made her the age she was supposed to be, she's 33.
About a year has passed since her return in Marvel time, making her 34.

?
That doesnt sound right at all. Scott and Emma were a couple longer than Jean and Scott were as adults? 4 years of Scott/Emma and about 1 year of Scott and Jean (X-Factor through New X-men)? Theres no amount of twisting and reaching to make this claim make sense

[Grey]

When a span of time is outside of the normal universe in another dimension or whatever, being specific about it doesn't matter because it doesn't effect anything else.

"Wow, Cyclops! I can't believe you left this dimension and spent 30 years traveling an alternate universe watching and reviewing various Hamilton performances! To us, it's only been a little while!"

Like that.

I gotcha now.