|
Post by wickedmountain on Jan 7, 2017 9:49:30 GMT -5
I don't think any of the original characters need to be "fixed". They just need a writer that knows what to do with the years and years of development, both good and bad, and make something interesting from that. Cyclops was the perfectly boring "Boy Scout" who grew up following and never questioning his mentor and surrogate father while eventually marrying his HS sweetheart. Then she left (died, true, but left makes this work better) and he had other relationships, and when she came back, he tried to pick up where they left off, only they weren't the same people as before. Along comes Emma, who taps into something in Scott that Jean never did, and they start an adult relationship far different than the fairy-tale idealized one he had with Jean. On the Xavier front, Scott realized that Charles wasn't the perfect role model he'd always thought he was. Xavier lied, kept secrets, and used his abilities to manipulate others (all while claiming he wouldn't cross that line), and his vision, which appealed to teenage Scott, no longer agreed with the man Scott became. To me, that character progression for Scott is pretty much perfect. He stopped being the wild-eyed idealist and grew into a realist because life happened to him, as it does for most of us. Agreed 100%!!! Scott is the only old Marvel character to have had any serious development in the past decades. There was a whole lot of material to cover regarding his change in philosophy and how he embraced Cable's views even if he had strongly opposed them in the past. Given his propensity to introspection, it can't just have been a case of "meh! I changed my mind". I would have loved to see him struggle with this dichotomy. He had just accepted the fact he had undergone a nervous breakdown when they began the big universe-changing events that eventually killed him. His recovery, too, should have deserved several issues. That would of been cool like he had a breakdown went bad and now he's back as Cyclops that could of worked they should have done that.
|
|
|
Post by wickedmountain on Nov 17, 2017 12:19:11 GMT -5
What is everyone's opinions on the newer Xmen books gold and blue both look good. I need to check them out,.. I'm still wayyy behind in comics more so now with the life has gone for me lately.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Nov 17, 2017 15:20:54 GMT -5
I have no interest in Blue (I'll read about the 60s X-Men in the 60s, thank you), but Gold has been decent. It's mostly about Kitty, so be warned if you're not a fan, you're not going to like it.
|
|
|
Post by String on Nov 18, 2017 12:26:04 GMT -5
Hint: They are no longer the 60s X-Men.
Really, between what Hopeless accomplished in their previous title and Bunn here in Blue, the Original 5 (the O5) feel like brand-new distinctive characters in their own right with new directions for them and slight twists to their dynamics as a team and students. Plus, Bunn has been working in remnants of Ultimate X-Men that have fallen through the cracks of SW.
Generally, I would put Blue above Gold for that reason but both titles have been real solid since their launch, the renewed sense of family, team, and purpose has been long overdue. I've been really surprised by how well Guggenheim has shown Kitty as a leader and I don't even mind the re-kindling of her relationship with Peter.
|
|