Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Reading Uncanny X-Men #1 felt like reading four different books that you've already read before

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

hope and vaseline posted:

Has Rosenberg gotten any better? I remember being very bleh at his Secret Warriors run and the Phoenix mini.
Doubtful. I have no idea why they keep putting this guy on the X-books, he's been consistently bad at writing X-Men.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I felt like Uncanny #2 was the exact same brand of nonsense nothing that the first issue was.

Game time! Take a shot every time that a telepath loudly proclaims that they can't read Madrox's mind because he's so confused!

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
So far the plot of Uncanny is that a bunch of Madrox clones were attacking because Legion made them do it because he wanted to warn them about...a bunch of random Horsemen who we've never seen before. I mean we've seen these characters before but the fact that they're Horsemen is completely new.

It's...not the worst or most boring X-event that Marvel has been farting out at us lately, though absolutely not for lack of trying.

(Also, take two more "A telepath loudly declares that they can't read Madrox's mind" shots)

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Also the X-Mansion gets destroyed again, literally out of nowhere, because zero people at the pen have any self-awareness anymore I guess.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I am convinced, and have been convinced for a long time, that Matthew Rosenberg really dislikes the X-Men. Even if he's so completely non-self-aware that he thinks of himself as an X-Men fan, everything he's actually written about them reads as if he thinks they are the most unpleasant, repellent group of characters around. I genuinely think that his take on them has been at least as incompetent as someone like Austen's, despite being technically better written and without, y'know, being as laughable.

(And yeah I know there are three writers on this book (lmao) but Rosenberg's voice definitely comes across most distinctive to me)

This issue does the thing that bad books and writers do where they'll pinpoint a recognizable flaw in these characters and this franchise and then, instead of fixing or developing that flaw in any way, they'll hammer in on that flaw and blow it up unironically so that, at the end of the day, the thing that you disliked about the characters is an even bigger problem now than it was before. This is the "Why don't the Avengers help mutants?" problem, it's also the "Why doesn't Batman kill the Joker?" thing, and it's the "Steve Rogers is so out of date he doesn't know what Myspace is" problem. As in, they're not genuine character flaws, they're just examples of lazy writing repeated often enough that it becomes a problem for the setting.

Like, the X-Men do treat their younger members badly. This is objectively true, this is canon, this consistently happens over time. This series seems to recognize that this is a problem that the X-Men have. So then, instead of addressing the problem so that it might not be a problem anymore, all it does is double down on the situation until it practically turns into a parody of how things were in the first place. They don't seem to recognize that people do not like it when the adult X-Men treat the younger ones like poo poo, and that the way to fix this is not to keep on doing the thing people don't like, but just...y'know...stop doing it.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
X-Men Red was too good for this world. Welp pack it up, time to rope it into whatever the cock is happening in Uncanny instead.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Meh. Why get excited about a team handled by the exact same mind behind Uncanny X-Men right now? I'm not hopping in without a writer change.

Speaking of which, Age of X-Men so far just looks like...an entire litany of writers I haven't heard of before...writing about the X-Men being fascists I guess.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
At this point being a Horseman is like being in the Hellfire Club: it's been done, boyos.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
What a weird thing to go to bat for. No one's forcing him to have to defend his bad comic.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
After reading the latest Uncanny...like, you all get it, right? You get what I mean when I say it feels it's written by someone who really dislikes the X-Men as characters and as concepts? This was basically a drawn-out story about a bunch of mutants loving up the entire world and then we get a lengthy cap-off about how everyone couldn't be happier now that they're gone. That's it. That's all that happened. It's as if they intentionally set out to write a story that makes you hate the X-Men.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Android Blues posted:

I didn't really like the story, but certainly I got the impression that the writers cared about the (old guard) characters.
Yeah I don't get that at all. Like I physically cannot perceive any elements of the story that are intended do indicate love or endearment towards any characters involved. A character or two might get a cool moment every once in a while...but, for the most part, the more highlighted you were by the events of this series, the worse off you seem. Nate Grey and Legion, in particular, were both decent enough characters before this story, but are now reduced to obnoxious crazy people making trouble for everybody.

Again, the way that most of this was written feels like it intentionally wants you to like these characters less.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
The Uncanny Annual was really quite good, which further cements my opinion that the problem with the weekly series is not Brisson or Thompson.

The only complaint I have about the issue is when Cyclops said, in reference to his radicalism days, that "I was wrong." :colbert: Nuh uh, disagreed.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
The actual in-canon explanation is that the Phoenix, aka Jean, constantly splits into many fragments and so the Jean in the cocoon was still Jean, even if the Jean that was the Phoenix was also Jean. Madelyne Pryor was also a fragment of Jean. Eventually, near the end of the first X-Factor run, all of these fragments joined back together and that was the Jean who slowly grew in power through the 90s and into Morrison's run.

But the current Marvel mindset/direction for Jean is that she isn't the Phoenix and the Phoenix Force is a totally separate thing and has no actual connection to Jean other than wanting her to host it a lot so obviously they aren't fragments of each other or anything like that, obviously.

So officially the answer is to not think about it that much.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Synesthesian Fetish posted:

Was Winter's End just a off issue to hand wave away how lovely Bobby has been treated the last few years? And yet another event that took place before disassembled.
A lot of Sina Grace's Iceman stories have been like this, pretty much just constantly diving into the deep end of Bobby's issues and addressing all of the longterm and shorterm anxieties that have made him the person that he is. I thought this was a nice cap-off of all the work Grace has been doing on this character; he knows Bobby inside-out at this point so of course he was gonna address the Teen Jean stuff and the Teen Bobby stuff before his time was up.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Dawgstar posted:

How did Rosenberg get the gig?
This is a question I've been asking for the past three years

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Dear Mr. Hickmannn please bring back Sammy the Fish Boy

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I have some problems with Hickman's arcs as well, and to this day his mainline Avengers book contains some of the most irritatingly shite storytelling that I'd ever laid hands on. But his sort of Morrison-esque focused, grandiose vision for superhero stories is the exact sort of thing the X-books need right now after the last however many years of them being completely unfocused and unwilling to strive for the epic stories that they deserve and being shuffled out to writers who absolutely do not deserve to be helming this franchise. (with several exceptions, of course)

Hell. Uncanny is so loving terrible right now that I'm halfway convinced they are intentionally making it this bad so that Hickman comes across even better when he does arrive.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Hey who wants to see Chamber murder a bunch of people and then just die!

anyone? !

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I've always had the impression that Rosenberg wrote as if he didn't actually like the X-Men, but it wasn't until recently that I felt like he wrote as if none of his readers like the X-Men either.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
He's right, though.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
So the latest issue of Uncanny...I wanna say ironically?...indulged in some heavy anti-vaxx rhetoric.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Basically there's a mutant cure around, and nowadays every parent is taking their kids to the doctor to get a shot to prevent them from becoming mutants. Cyclops has asked Dark Beast to figure out a way to...cure this cure.

He succeeds and distributes this anti-cure everywhere but, being Dark Beast, he makes it so that if you're actually a mutant, getting the cure will probably kill you, the rationale being that now only the most monstrous parents will be taking their kids to get this cure and doing so will expose them as the hateful people that they are..

The opening pages of this issue, incidentally, is a scene of a mom taking their son to get a shot, asking the nurse if this is "safe" and being reassured that it is, and then the kid coughs up blood and dies from the vaccine. Here it is btw

I really want to say that this is Rosenberg's attempt at dark humor or him poking fun at the vaccine paranoia nowadays, except that the way the scene comes across, taken at face value, feels like a weird endorsement of anti-vaxx talking points: vaccines are actually super dangerous! You don't know what'll happen if you get them! You'll probably die or something!

I don't know. The most charitable conclusion to draw right now is that he didn't give it the slightest bit of thought and it's just unintentionally doling out weird lovely rhetoric, but we saw how that all went with the Wolfsbane thing.

Oh yea and then Illyana teleports Dark Beast's head into solid stone.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

JordanKai posted:

I just finished the issue and I can't believe what you posted is the entire scene. The kid starts growing massive puss bubbles and vomiting up blood and that's it. I'm sure Rosenberg didn't intend to write an anti-vaxx storyline, but the vibes are certainly there.
I mean, if we insert any context into the situation whatsoever it's obviously not a story about how real life vaccines don't work and cause autism or whatever, and obviously I think this run is poo poo and probably went into the issue looking for something to dislike about it.......but I promise that I didn't go traipsing into the issue thinking "let's see if I can find anything in this here X-Men book that comes across like some anti-vaccine paranoia writ large!"

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I'm in the minority for sure, but at this point I would genuinely prefer to have Austen back if the choice was between him and Rosenberg.

Say what you will about Austen...namely, that he's a poor writer with one bewilderingly-bad idea after another, but at no point in his run did I ever get the impression that he didn't like these characters or that he wasn't, in fact, having the time of his life writing them.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Rosenberg writes the X-Men like he can't loving stand the X-Men. It's how he's written them even when he first started at Marvel, even before he was ever placed into this franchise for god knows why. If you come at his stories with the thesis statement that he despises everything about the X-books and genuinely believes the Marvel universe would be better off without them, all of a sudden the way he writes makes a hundred times more sense.

Sure, Austen's ideas for his stories were so bad that they could almost come across like deliberate sabotage...and yet, I know that they weren't. Rosenberg, on the other hand, feels genuinely like he's trying to make these books and characters as unlikable as possible before anyone figures out that's what he's trying to do.

sammyv posted:

I love trying to work out how Havok's opponents perceive his power when he blasts them. Is it flat circles coming at you no matter where you are, or do they bend at some point? I prefer the former, it's such a great comics-only idea. I wonder if they ever tried to attempt adapting it for the films?
The Fox films? Havok actually appears in three of them. His blasts look...exactly like Cyclops' optic blasts. :v:

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I feel like most people just aren't reading Rosenberg's current run because of all the poo poo they've heard about it, as opposed to how everyone still read Austen's stories back in the day no matter how bad it was 'cuz those were still the halcyon days of X-books selling by the droves. Which has the weird side-effect of Rosenberg's run not actually being regarded as badly as it should be because the specifics of its badness just aren't as truly appreciated by the masses. Because yeah, I honestly feel like Rosenberg's run would be even more further disliked than it already is, if only more people were reading it...which I don't actually want to happen because haha no :xd:

And yeah, everything ArchyDuchess said too.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Okay so but like so on the upside like...at least the Hickman X-previews are looking really darn good?

This new Krakoa haven for mutants looks and sounds pretty awesome. But then, I'm not sure how this is supposed to be that big of an upheaval from the same old approach of mutants living in some secret refuge away from the real world approach that Xavier has always had.

Also, I can't help but think -- like this was the literal first thought that came to me after seeing it -- "It's sure gonna suck when someone inevitably destroys this place for shock value!"

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
loving Vulcan hahhaha what

poo poo the possibility of me buying all of these is...really loving high tbh

Parallax posted:

is marvel girl jean? is there a reason she's back to that
Yes, and no reason given yet. I suppose Hickman's gonna come up with a rationale for it, and it better be a good one considering that's easily Jean's worst costume :sweatdrop:

Alaois posted:

at the end of Mystery in Madripoor, after Betsy regenerated her original body using Sapphire Styx's psychic energy, the final page of the series was the Kwannon body holding a dude up at knifepoint and asking him a question but I don't know if anything that followed ever established if that actually was Kwannon's original consciousness or whatever
Sort of. "Psylocke" appeared in the recent Rosenberg run that no one should read, complete with the pink blades. Logan thought she was Betsy at first, but realized quickly that it was actually Kwannon.

The idea of splitting Psylocke into Betsy and Kwannon is...actually kinda cool? Now we have Glowing Sword Woman, British edition and Japanese edition.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I seem to recall the number of characters that got killed off in X-Men: Red being
like
zero

sooo

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Yeah I dunno what to make of it all yet...it ain't quite the "WOO YEA THE X-MEN FINALLY STAND TRIUMPHANT!" issue I'd been hoping for. A lot of it is coming across as very, very sinister, and it's hard to say just how much of it is intentional. You really couldn't find more appropriate ambassadors for your people than...Magneto and a Cuckoo? There's such a thing as a display of power and then there's just intentionally antagonizing your guests for a reaction, and then blaming them when they react exactly as badly as you wanted them to.

Hell, even if we take (what little we know of) Xavier's newfound experiment at complete face value instead of treating it like some...evil dastardly plan made up by creepy island spores or what have you, it's still kinda needlessly creepy and sinister. Whatever happened to the dream of peaceful coexistence? Got a bit bored of it, decided to just gently caress off to some walled-off mutant paradise forever then? I'd really like to hear what the more down-to-earth, run-of-the-mill X-Men or mutants think about all this Krakoa stuff because so far it ain't painting anyone in a great light.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
On the face of it, (it's been 24 hours, I'm hoping we can dispense with spoiler tags?) the Krakoa experiment is not all that different from the position of Wakanda in the Marvel universe: it's a secluded culture that just so happens to have a priceless natural resource, and it is willing to trade with these resources...under its own terms and no one else's. Which isn't all that unreasonable.

But the uncomfortably sinister part of it all is coming from just how very dickishly antagonistic the mutants are being about all this. And they're obviously entitled to do so, but...the whole stuff about not wanting human names anymore, flaunting the fact that they're openly reading minds, Cyclops' [brilliant] parting shot to the Richardses after sending literal terrorists to attack people...like, there's such a thing as wanting your due, but then, again, there's also such a thing as intentionally acting like an rear end in a top hat and then blaming other people when they don't like it.

And the other problem is that, unlike Wakanda, mutantkind has never been an ancient isolated nation. They've tried to build plenty of those, sure, but the very point of mutants is that they come from the nominal human culture. They're your brothers, sisters, teachers, students, grocers, uber drivers, etc. Make them too distinct from that and then they're just...ugh...then they're just Inhumans. [shudder]

Yeah, I know, I know...the whole point right now is that we're supposed to be saying "What's going on? Why is it like this?" and that's the big ol' mystery of this book. I get it. The thing though is that I'm really trying to figure what is going on and why it is like this and, to be honest, I'm not coming up with any answers I like.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I got a kick out of the text referencing "the constant evasion-relocation confrontation cycle." So Hickman is well aware of how often these mutant sanctuaries keep getting blown up.

I will say, it's really annoying how in a lot of these distant-future storylines, the surviving elderly remnants of the Marvel universe always end up being a bunch of old white dudes; Logan, Thor, Hawkeye, Banner, Frank Castle, et al. I mean there's a tree here, and the tree is a dude. :geno:

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
There's definitely some weird time travel-ly thing going on, or going to go on, or having been gone on. That Moira scene is.........perplexing.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Northstar was a professional athlete and author, so he probably at least has a wiki page.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
X-Men: Red was great all the way through. Luckily* for you, it's only eleven issues!





*:smith:

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Endless Mike posted:

There was no intention to support LGBTQ people at all. His statement to Trish was entirely to hurt her, which he openly states. He treats it entirely as a joke.

Oh christ, rereading this scene in context today just gives me hives. :gonk:

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Well alrighty then.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I'm actually more miffed that Jean is specifically stated to have omega-class telepathy but not telekinesis, considering she's usually always had more focus on her TK.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Skwirl posted:

Jean's telekinetic powers are only at what I'd call an omega level when she's possessed by The Phoenix, and even then Rachel's Phoenix backed telekinesis was way more impressive.

I know this is being retconned all the time but I will never let it go so here is me not letting it go:woop:: being the Phoenix was, originally and for a huge swath of canon, the manifestation of Jean’s true power and potential. In fact, the original comic that first revealed Jean (and Bobby) to be omega-class mutants specifically cites the Phoenix as part of her omega-ness.

Even if we’re going with the current retcon of the Phoenix being just some outside thing possessing her, Jean all on her own was able to hold back Cyclops’ eyepunch as lately as the final issue of Uncanny. I mean, it’s Rosenberg so unfortunately very ignorable on that basis alone :sweatdrop:, but the point being she’s always been known for her OP TK — pretty much more so than any other character — so it was weird for Hickman to lean more on the side of her telepathy being stronger. Heck, it was a little weird that Hickman felt the need to put one above the other at all.

I do agree that I miss seeing Rachel be powerful. It just feels like she hasn’t had anything to do lately but to get jobbed.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand

Skwirl posted:

Aside from the last issue of Rosenberg's Uncanny are there examples of no Phoenix Jean doing really amazing TK tricks
None that I can remember off the top of head, but see like, this is sort of an unfair question because, again, all the amazing TK tricks that Jean has done as the Phoenix -- intricate manipulation at the atomic level -- was supposed to be, in canon, her own actual power and potential. So when a big ol' retcon comes along and is like "Oh no, see, those don't count anymore because we wanna pass the Phoenix Force around like a party trick to like Magik or whoever"...I mean, imagine someone going to the Hulk and being like, hey, remember all those times you did something super strong and cool? Well that was actually the Hulk Force and now we're giving it to umm let's see Rick Jones so now there's a bunch of Hulks running around aaand hmmmmm maybe the Hulk isn't the best example but you get what I mean :v:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply