X-Universe >> View Thread
1 2  >> All
Author
thuggernaut


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 525


Two jumps for me:

1) bone claws (x-men 25/wolv 75)

2) Origin/James Howlett (I feel like a tool just typing that name!)


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 7
The Black Guardian 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 21,227


Yes. That's the reason I say Wolverine died for me in 1993. It may have actually been a bit before that. I loved the Logan that was a struggling ronin aiming for samurai. In 1992, Mariko died, and that sort of ended that. After 1993, things just take a turn for awful.

Origin certainly didn't help. They should have kept it mysterious. Plus, I think it was a pretty lame origin.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 10
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,214



When he joined the X-Men.



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 7
America's Captain 

Maintainer

Location: Bayville New Jersey
Member Since: Mon Aug 06, 2012
Posts: 9,794



    Quote:
    Two jumps for me:



    Quote:
    1) bone claws (x-men 25/wolv 75)


I hated the bone claws. Pure and simple, I hated Logan with no adamantium.


    Quote:
    2) Origin/James Howlett (I feel like a tool just typing that name!)


I didn't read that stupid story. Before I could make the mistake of doing so, I got advance warning (probably on these boards) that Logan was depicted as having been a cry baby before the Weapon X program transformed him. Why in the world would Marvel want to publish such a thing?

My own entry in the "jump the shark contest" is the ridiculous scene depicted in the photo I've attached.







Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 10
Stupid Baby


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,042


Id say, when marvel started putting him in EVERYTHING




"I would never want to be a member of any club that would have me as a member" - Groucho Marx
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 52.0 on Windows XP
Comicguy1


Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 655


The time that he was on about 3 or 4 different teams. Jason Aaron did a fantastic job with him, from most of his stuff that I read.


Posted with Google Chrome 48.0.2564.116 on Windows 10
Comicguy1


Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 655


There were good stories after, and of course he got his adamantium back.


Posted with Google Chrome 48.0.2564.116 on Windows 10
Menshevik


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,451


Wolverine despite the overexposure and everything remains an interesting character. Of course I simply refused to read many of his appearances such as the IMO unnecessary origin stories (and here I include Barry Windsor-Smith's "Weapon X" series). But I never had a problem with the bone claws and there were other characters whose retoolings and revised origins bothered me more, and there are now few X-characters left who don't have at least one story I'd really prefer to forget...



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 7
Grey Gargoyle


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,760


The story of X-Men Vol 2 #4-7 is only about badass Wolverine fighting badass Omega Red with the other X-Men around as sidekicks & spectators.

Back then, everybody bought the book because Jim Lee was the most popular penciller of Marvel Comics.

John Byrne is a good writer but, curiously enough, I didn't recognize his style. I am not certain that he contributed a lot to the story.



Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
America's Captain 

Maintainer

Location: Bayville New Jersey
Member Since: Mon Aug 06, 2012
Posts: 9,794


You didn't like Larry Hama on the book? He's the only Wolverine writer (aside from Claremont) I was thinking I might be interested in reading more from.






Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 10
The Black Guardian 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 21,227


"Jumping the shark" is defined as a point where far-fetched events become novelty and quality declines. In Wolverine's case, that "far-fetched novelty" is more often than not his out of control healing factor. Back in the day, he was easily subdued, but then it got way amped up to where he was healing from nuclear ground zero in minutes. Quality has suffered because of this.

Overexposure is novelty, in itself. And there's zero question that the overexposure has lead to a decline in quality.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 10
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,214






    Quote:
    I didn't read that stupid story. Before I could make the mistake of doing so, I got advance warning (probably on these boards) that Logan was depicted as having been a cry baby before the Weapon X program transformed him. Why in the world would Marvel want to publish such a thing?


Personally I have no problem with the Origin story.

1. I hate Logan.

2. I hated the "mystery" around Logan even more. I got sick of hearing about his mysterious past. He's just such a bad character.

They gave him an origin. It was a sucky origin. Even better. It's what he deserves.




Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
thuggernaut


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 525


Why don't you like Wolverine?


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
Unstable Molecule


Location: Calgary, AB Canada
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 2,686


I'd say it happened after Fatal Attractions. Without adamantium, Wolverine should have been relegated to a supporting character in the X-Men. It would have been interesting to see him dealing with PTSD and licking his wounds. They had an opportunity to deepen and humanize the character.

Instead, the super-charged his healing abilities and had him attacking with bone claws. Bone claws, by the way, which should have snapped off whenever he fought anyone with greater than average durability. Removing the adamantium somehow made him unstoppable (instead of vulnerable), which combined with overexposure, killed my love of the character.

I'd also say joining the New Avengers was also a low point for the character, as well as for the Avengers. In no way does it make sense for Wolverine to be an Avenger, then or now.




And a lean, silent figure slowly fades into the gathering darkness, aware at last that in this world, with great power there must also come -- great responsibility!
Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 10
Grey Gargoyle


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,760



    Quote:
    You didn't like Larry Hama on the book?


I prefer him on GI Joe. \:\-\)

About Wolverine, Larry Hama totally lost me in 1992 when Silver Fox came back as a Madame Hydra and we learned that Wolverine's memory problems were not due to brain injuries fixed by his healing factor but due to a guy named Psi-Borg who was working for the Weapon-X Program.

Then, as if it was not absurd enough, Sabretooth kills Silver Fox because of Psi-Borg but in nearly the same way that she supposedly died the first time.

(Still, I liked Albert & Elsie-Dee but their time travelling adventures were a bit hard to follow)


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,214




    Quote:
    Why don't you like Wolverine?


Oh how I hate Wolverine. Let me count the ways.

1. He's overexposed

2. Better characters than him are reduced to jobbers when they fight Wolverine

3. He smokes...and in general just looks...unclean.

4. The X-Men used to pretend to care about not killing their opponents but often looked the other way when Logan kills someone

5. He's the Fonz from Happy Days. They make too much of an effort to show how cool he is.

6. His hazy memory and murky past that they just keep adding to.

7. His healing factor

8. Anytime he says the word "bub" or anything about him being the best about anything.

9. He was always trying to cock block Scott with Jean

10. He's ugly as hell but usually pulls top shelf women

11. He's a spy

12. The berserker spells he used to have

13. Those dumb metal claws...that's all he really is. A guy with metal claws.

14. Those dumb bone claws.

15. His costumes are always ugly

16. He's so old

17. Too hairy

18. He's another mass murderer that Marvel wants to push as an ultimate bad ass like Punisher or Venom.

19. I think his psycho loner shtick is tired.

20. He's connected to almost everyone

21. He killed the Hornet a character I actually liked.

22. People defer to him like he's wise. He's an amnesiac mass murderer with a drinking problem and anger management issues. He shouldn't be a role model for young mutants.







Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
The Black Guardian 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 21,227



    Quote:
    3. He smokes...and in general just looks...unclean.

See, if anything, him not smoking is part of his ruination.

Marvel needs to bring back smoking characters-- him, Nick, Ben, Sean, Howard, JJJ, Kingpin, etc. Heck, even Reed loved the pipe, once upon a time.


    Quote:
    5. He's the Fonz from Happy Days. They make too much of an effort to show how cool he is.

Sit on it! The Fonz IS cool. Aaayyyyy!


    Quote:
    9. He was always trying to cock block Scott with Jean

Not true. There was some initial flirting, but he never chased her, and totally stopped giving a damn after the marriage.


    Quote:
    10. He's ugly as hell but usually pulls top shelf women

Never saw him as ugly.


    Quote:
    15. His costumes are always ugly

I really don't get why they brought back the yellow one.


    Quote:
    16. He's so old

There aren't enough old heroes.


    Quote:
    17. Too hairy

There aren't enough hairy heroes.


    Quote:
    21. He killed the Hornet a character I actually liked.

Bah! Blame Elektra for that. She's the one who decapitated him to prevent his return. Were it not for that, he could have come back like Northstar did. Elektra's a freaking idiot. How does she think she's still walking around? Because no one was stupid enough to cut her head off.


    Quote:
    22. People defer to him like he's wise. He's an amnesiac mass murderer with a drinking problem and anger management issues. He shouldn't be a role model for young mutants.

He hasn't been amnesiac since House of M. He doesn't really have a drinking problem. But yeah.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 10
Comicguy1


Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 655




Posted with Google Chrome 48.0.2564.116 on Windows 10
Quantum


Member Since: Sun Dec 21, 2008
Posts: 1,714




Posted with Apple iPad 603.1.30
Grey Gargoyle


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,760




Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 7
Grey Gargoyle


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,760




Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 7
Menshevik


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,451


...the fact that their best works (in your opinion) were on other titles does not necessarily mean that their Wolverine work (like e.g. John Byrne's work on the FF, Alpha Flight, Superman etc., or PAD's work on Spider-Man, Supergirl, Young Justice etc.) was to sneeze at or that they couldn't write a good Wolverine.

Also, wouldn't writing a good "old school" Wolverine be the opposite of "jumping the shark", so why should adding something new to Wolverine even be a necessary criterion? Finally, the Claremontian Wolverine is to a large extent John Byrne's baby due to his co-plotting during the CC/JB run. It was due to Byrne's influence that his fellow Canadian Logan gradually took centre stage and developed his familiar personality (Len Wein wanted to make Colossus the star of the book and Dave Cockrum obviously favoured Nightcrawler).


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
America's Captain 

Maintainer

Location: Bayville New Jersey
Member Since: Mon Aug 06, 2012
Posts: 9,794



    Quote:
    Also, wouldn't writing a good "old school" Wolverine be the opposite of "jumping the shark", so why should adding something new to Wolverine even be a necessary criterion?


Your question confuses me. Writing a good "old school" Wolverine would seem to POSSIBLY exclude the adding of something new to Wolverine. Granted, the two concepts - old school versus novelty - can certainly be combined organically, but only by a careful and thoughtful writer. Handled recklessly, the element most likely to jump the shark would be the novelty, not the old school elements.


    Quote:

    Finally, the Claremontian Wolverine is to a large extent John Byrne's baby due to his co-plotting during the CC/JB run. It was due to Byrne's influence that his fellow Canadian Logan gradually took centre stage and developed his familiar personality (Len Wein wanted to make Colossus the star of the book and Dave Cockrum obviously favoured Nightcrawler).


True. And Claremont favored Sprite. Byrne had the right instincts here. Wolverine was undeniably the natural star. But he needed a foil, which Scott provided. Scott was a very important element in Wolverine's early success as a character.








Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 10
The Voice of Reason


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 464


While bone claws, fluxuating power sets, and impossible survivals all led up to it I feel like Origin was the point of no return. When they shoe-horned in this ridiculous story into how Logan became himself was the end for me.

A close second was when they washed away or watered down the whole Weapon X story by Barry Windsor-Smith.


Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on MacOS X
emerick-man

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 54,655




Those are good examples given - as are the others'. But yeah, that jpeg America's Captain posted, with Nitro vaporizing his flesh was pretty darn bad and worth spitting on. Even though that whole Azrael Curse thing helped a smidge with the no prize fix.

Here's a neat THE EVOLUTION OF WOLVERINE infographic to jar more memories for more examples.



Support Cancer Research and Alzheimer Research.




I miss you, Dan. I miss you, Dad. I miss you, Dan.
I miss you, Dad & Dan. I miss you Dad and Dan. Support Cancer Research.
Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
The Black Guardian 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 21,227


I'm reminded that Byrne always wanted to take Wolverine in a direction that grossly conflicted with Claremont's.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 10
Menshevik


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,451



    Quote:

      Quote:
      Also, wouldn't writing a good "old school" Wolverine be the opposite of "jumping the shark", so why should adding something new to Wolverine even be a necessary criterion?



    Quote:
    Your question confuses me. Writing a good "old school" Wolverine would seem to POSSIBLY exclude the adding of something new to Wolverine. Granted, the two concepts - old school versus novelty - can certainly be combined organically, but only by a careful and thoughtful writer. Handled recklessly, the element most likely to jump the shark would be the novelty, not the old school elements.


Exactly. But it is not my question that causes the confusion, Grey Gargoyle's argument does. The common denominator of the various definitions of "jumping the shark" is the introduction of one or more unwanted novelties, in the case of Wolverine e.g. an origin story where there used to be none. So if you don't add anything to Wolverine's character it would be self-evident that there is a smaller likelyhood for Wolverine to jump the shark than if you did. Claiming that Byrne, Davis and David did not add anything to Wolverine's character is IMO a bizarre tactic to adopt in the context of this thread and when griping that they did not know how to write Wolverine and simultaneously contending that only Chris Claremont did know. If CC got it right the first time round, his successors did not need to change anything, to make any additions.


    Quote:

      Quote:

      Finally, the Claremontian Wolverine is to a large extent John Byrne's baby due to his co-plotting during the CC/JB run. It was due to Byrne's influence that his fellow Canadian Logan gradually took centre stage and developed his familiar personality (Len Wein wanted to make Colossus the star of the book and Dave Cockrum obviously favoured Nightcrawler).



    Quote:
    True. And Claremont favored Sprite. Byrne had the right instincts here. Wolverine was undeniably the natural star. But he needed a foil, which Scott provided. Scott was a very important element in Wolverine's early success as a character.


You must the only person I know who still thinks of Kitty as "Sprite" (even when she still had that as her official code-name most people in-story and most readers referred to her by her civilian ID). \:\-\)

But seriously, I would say that one of Claremont's strengths as a writer was that he did not have one obvious favourite but managed to stay interested in most of the characters he wrote. One can say that he tended to favour the female characters, but that did not mean that he neglected the male ones (just look at what he did with Charles and Magnus) and the objects of his concentrations of effort tended to change. During the first run with Cockrum and also the one with Byrne he thus switched the focus of attention between Jean (whom he made the first cosmic-level heroine of the Marvel Universe), Ororo and later also Kitty Pryde. One very noticeable Claremontism for instance was to allow most newcomers to shine (often at the expense of the established X-Men) pretty soon after their introduction, which is one of the reasons why some of the later characters became enduringly popular and more prominent than many of the older ones in many X-adaptations.

I'd also say that the foil thing worked both ways, even if it ultimately benefitted Wolverine more. But Cyclops also needed a foil, someone to have disagreements and arguments with to be interesting, and there Wolverine came in handy when Professor X was out in space or believed to be dead. And lest we forget, the Professor and Logan also acted as each other's foils during the 1980s...





Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
Menshevik


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,451



    Quote:
    I'm reminded that Byrne always wanted to take Wolverine in a direction that grossly conflicted with Claremont's.


It has been said that the success of the Claremont/Byrne run was born of the conflict-ridden synergy of the two creators, and it is not for nothing that Byrne unlike most of Claremont's other artistic collaborators was officially listed as co-plotter in the credits. And since they were working according to the "Marvel method" Byrne could often add (or at least try to) stuff that Claremont hadn't intended to a story.



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
Grey Gargoyle


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,760



    Quote:
    Quote

    ...the fact that their best works (in your opinion) were on other titles does not necessarily mean that their Wolverine work (like e.g. John Byrne's work on the FF, Alpha Flight, Superman etc., or PAD's work on Spider-Man, Supergirl, Young Justice etc.) was to sneeze at or that they couldn't write a good Wolverine.

    Also, wouldn't writing a good "old school" Wolverine be the opposite of "jumping the shark", so why should adding something new to Wolverine even be a necessary criterion? Finally, the Claremontian Wolverine is to a large extent John Byrne's baby due to his co-plotting during the CC/JB run. It was due to Byrne's influence that his fellow Canadian Logan gradually took centre stage and developed his familiar personality (Len Wein wanted to make Colossus the star of the book and Dave Cockrum obviously favoured Nightcrawler).


Please, if you don't mind, try to answer no more to any of my posts.

Many thanks in advance.

I promise that I won't bother you and I won't make any harsh comment about one of your messages.

I have absolutely no hard feeling against you but it is better that way. I might lose my temper and you are not responsible of my bad temper & susceptibility, of course.

Best Regards


Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 7
Comicguy1


Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 655


Especially issue #9 (Of the first ongoing series.). That was one of my favorites. Also, Warren Ellis did a really good story as well after Larry Hama` left.


Posted with Google Chrome 48.0.2564.116 on Windows 10
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,214



I have no Wolverine related point to contribute.





Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
1 2  >> All

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2017 Powermad Software