|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 12, 2022 19:23:44 GMT -5
I'm good through #175, though there are some hiccups in there. As much as I criticize Shooter as EIC, I have to agree with him on Phoenix. Having her de-powered to Marvel Girl levels seems like it would have been whitewashing the destruction of an entire system. I always felt her death was justified and earned, and it allowed the team to evolve, without godlike powers around. That's why I hated when they undid all of that. It just turned the clock back on everything and not for the better. They did the same nonsense with Hal Jordan by explaining it as a yellow fear monster taking him over to become the evil person who killed off most of the Corps. Utter crap.
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Feb 13, 2022 12:37:29 GMT -5
As I said somewhere, what Kevin Dooley did polarized GL fans for at least 15 years after, and apparently more.
I seriously doubt there would have been any problem at all if editor Andy Helfer had just stuck around to see the big story he & Gerard Jones planned out for 4 whole years come to fruition.
I was very hesitent when I heard they were going to "fix" Hal Jordan. Hell, I'd figured out if there was any sense at all, they could have "fixed" him 15 years EARLIER than they did. But I bought it... and Geoff Johns' story made more sense than it deserved to. Further, it kinda flipped me out when Geoff Johns' villain in that story turned up in the live-action GL movie!
To me, GREEN LANTERN: REBIRTH wasn't crap. EMERALD TWILIGHT (as envisioned by editor Kevin Dooley & hack writer Ron Marz) was crap. It was just about 15 years TOO LATE.
It's a good thing that Dooley's not in the business anymore. My best friend told me the last anyone ever heard of him, he was managing a Blockbuster's. How the egotistical hack hath fallen.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Feb 13, 2022 13:30:06 GMT -5
I really think The Hal Jordan arc of him going crazy then seeking redemption as the Spectre was great... and make it so there was one less Green Lantern of Earth to try to find something to do with. It's was a real shame they didn't stick with it.
I've tried a couple times, but I really think the most of the things that have come since have been less good.
|
|
|
Post by Marv-El on Feb 13, 2022 15:59:27 GMT -5
This one-shot from '84 reprints UXM #137 with the ending of Jean Grey living. There's also dialogue changes, most notably in the personal scenes of the X-Men aboard the Sh'iar cruiser as they await the time of the match in the arena. Afterwards, there is a interview with Shooter, Claremont, Bryne, Salicrup, Louise, and Austin about the process and decisions that affected and lead to the classic ending of #137. Shooter admits that the creative differences and opinions of both Claremont & Bryne were a major factor in the overall strength and quality of this run. However, tensions were running high even here in this interview judging by their responses. (It's interesting that Louise's answers runs the gamut of trying to keep everyone on the same page in terms of producing the book. Apparently Claremont and Bryne's working relationship was already on the rails by the time of her arrival). Shooter does go into his diatribe about the punishment fitting the crime for Jean. Claremont and Bryne though apparently differed on the nature of the crime: was it merely Jean doing this or was it some type of entity possessing her? There's even speculation that Stern may have suggested at some point that Jean should die. Salicrup mentions that for some time, Shooter had the idea of a long-standing Marvel hero turning bad (in sort of an homage to the Silver Age stories of a Marvel bad guy turning 'good'). Salicrup thought this may have been part of what Shooter was doing with Yellowjacket over in Avengers but was unsure if this was warranted in X-Men. Plus, Salicrup said that he was against character deaths in comics in general because they never lasted long and the character's eventual return would only undermine what made their death unique in the first place. It's an interesting interview to read with all the underlying tension and suspicions that can be read between the lines. As for the OP, Colossus just went toe-to-toe with Gladiator three issues prior. And now all of sudden he has trouble ripping up a tree stump? Really??
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Feb 13, 2022 18:14:53 GMT -5
I mean, it was apparently a fully grown tree, which would have equivalent root system. Plus, we always have those instances where we usually can do something but a particular instance gives us a hard time for some reason, like that one jar you just can't get open. I got the impression that it was just this one was being stubborn, not "Colossus always has trouble pulling up stumps."
|
|
|
Post by james on Feb 14, 2022 5:38:13 GMT -5
As I look at the page again I start to wonder if the tree was securely planted in the ground how did he get the chains under the roots?
|
|
|
Post by arfetto on Feb 14, 2022 9:07:16 GMT -5
Learning later on in life that Jean Grey dying was not the original intent of the story conclusion, I was actually very surprised (baffled, even). I think I first learned of this in a Wizard Magazine interview, where either Byrne or Claremont (I think it was the Byrne interview where they photographed him holding guns haha) said something like, and I am paraphrasing here, "If only it had been left alone, the ending to the Phoenix saga would have been the greatest comic ending of all time" haha. Ok, maybe they didn't say "greatest of all time", but it was high praise whatever the quote was haha.
But even as a young kid, I was familiar with the concept of the Phoenix bird myth and its rebirth cycle (and then I read Osamu Tezuka's Phoenix/Hi no Tori manga later on which only strengthened my idea of what the immortal cycle of the Phoenix can be). So it was kind of disappointing to me to learn they created this story revolving around a Phoenix entity and there were no plans for a later rebirth of Jean Grey with remnants of the Phoenix power (I also liked the idea that it was not solely the Phoenix entity causing the problems, but the combination of it with Jean as culpable - it has been years since I last read this in a Marvel Masterworks though, so I might be wrong on some details - regardless, I didn't like the idea that everything could have been 100 percent the entity's fault and just hand waved away). Instead Jean was just supposed to live, no resurrection required haha.
So, I agree with Jim Shooter's decision in regards to the Dark Phoenix ending, or at least the basic concept. Maybe if it was any other character or entity involved, the resurrection of Jean Grey would have seemed like an eye-roll to me, but the very fact she was "The Phoenix" made, to my young mind, perfect sense that she would have a rebirth later on. It was natural story progression. Though I never actually read the comic where she comes back haha, I think it was in an Avengers? Or maybe X-Factor. So I have no clue if it was executed well.
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Feb 14, 2022 17:33:27 GMT -5
Maybe if it was any other character or entity involved, the resurrection of Jean Grey would have seemed like an eye-roll to me, but the very fact she was "The Phoenix" made, to my young mind, perfect sense that she would have a rebirth later on. It was natural story progression. Though I never actually read the comic where she comes back haha, I think it was in an Avengers? Or maybe X-Factor. So I have no clue if it was executed well. {Spoiler: Click to show}It was later revealed that Jean was never Phoenix. The Phoenix Force took on an avatar created in Jean's likeness and masqueraded as her during the Phoenix Saga; the real Jean was kept in suspended animation at the bottom of the sea. Suffice to say, I think it was executed horribly.
|
|