X-Universe >> View Post
·
Post By
askani

In Reply To
Evil G:DR

Subj: Re: I don't know where he is, but he's still not in prison.
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 at 02:48:01 pm CDT (Viewed 87 times)
Reply Subj: Re: I don't know where he is, but he's still not in prison.
Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 08:55:04 pm CDT (Viewed 137 times)

Previous Post

> Well, this happened a long time ago. Perhaps I'm not remembering all the details/quotes correctly. I thought I remembered reading that Jemas wanted him back. I thought he and Quesada took over summeriah 2000 and SEARCH came out at the end of 2000. Issue 4 might have come out in early 2001? Lobdell's interim run was, I'm pretty sure, all in 2001. May, was it, that Morrison and Casey started?

I've taken a look through the archives, and #1 of Search for Cyclops was out in October 2000, but was announced at least as early as June, #3 was out in January 2001, and #4 in March (we don't seem to have talked about #2 back in the day, so I'm not entirely sure what month it was out in), and #4 was so far behind schedule that the miniseries finished after Scott's 'return' in UXM #391 came out in February (Lobdell's interim run was from January to April 2001, then the Dark Age began in May, and continues to this day).

And Harras to Jemas/Quesada regime-change seems to have been in late August 2000, so Search for Cyclops was already planned by then.

> Joseph Harris wrote SEARCH. He also wrote that Bishop series in that era. He had a website back then. Never saw him mention the ending being changed. I remember he called Scott and Jean Marvel's greatest couple. I'm guessing he probably didn't have in mind what wound up happening with them. Anyway, on his site, he answered a bunch of questions on the mini. Nothing about editorial changing things, though. Not arguing he didn't say it. Hell, I have no recollection of Tieri saying what you say he said either.

I can't remember where Tieri talked about not being allowed to use those characters, but chances are it would've been on the message board he had on the X-Fan forums (I have no idea if that site even still exists). But I can clearly remember that this news about Apocalypse's 'death' wasn't something that came out at the time, but years later, possibly closer to the time when Apocalypse came back.

> Not sure what this accomplished with a character like Apocalypse. I mean given the nature of his powers. I know I didn't read SEARCH and think, this guy is definitively dead. We saw him escape or we saw what we saw. Either way I thought we'd be back. But the characters believe what the plot calls for them t5o believe.

Well, what we saw was "Jean forcibly remove Apocalypse from Cyclops' body, then Cable stab his disembodied spirit to death", it really read like that was supposed to be The End for Apocalypse. I didn't _want_ to believe he'd stay dead, but it wasn't one of those "ambiguous supervillain deaths where he'll clearly be back".

It took over 4 years before he just showed up out of nowhere. But that seems to be how Apocalypse rolls, when he's been gone so long you're starting to think he's really dead and never coming back, just when all hope is lost, he just walks back in like he was never dead at all.

> We saw Cyclops merge with Apocalypse and escape, not die. But the other X Men spent 9 months acting like he was dead.

While I could just about suspend disbelief and accept that Xavier would immediately write Scott off as dead after the merge with Apocalypse, and not even question it, because the plot required them to think he was dead, that story ended with Apocalypse teleporting away right in front of everyone, yet after that, everyone talks as if Apocalypse and Cyclops were both dead, and I suspect there was some kind of mis-communication between writers and/or editors as to what had happened, or 'Ages of Apocalypse' was just one of those stories which didn't actually end in the way that the long-term-plan called for it to end, but the books somehow managed to pretend it did end with them dying.

> Regarding villains and rest. Couple years before this I would read how Sinister and Apocalypse were supposedly overused and needed a rest. And I never got it. Never thought either ever was. I always thought that Sabretooth was the X villain that applied to back then, if it applied to any of them.

I can't remember who said it, but it was one of the guys working on and/or writing for Doctor Who, about how some older viewers complain about the Daleks being over-used, and he justified it in terms of "if you're a kid, waiting to see them again, that year-long wait between episodes with them in seems like an eternity, and you're super-excited to see them again". And to this day, I still feel like that when we get to see guys like Magneto, Apocalypse, Sinister, Stryfe, Exodus, Bastion and Onslaught in their proper versions.

I'd suspect Sabretooth felt particularly over-used in the 1990s due to the long-running, misguided attempt to turn him into some kind of anti-hero. The whole thing with him being locked up in the X-Men's basement seems to have been born out of a thankfully-aborted plan for him to actually join the team, but after it twice ending in him getting out of his cell and the X-Men having to take him down, he moved over to become a regular on X-Factor. It was total Sabretooth overkill for anyone not wild about Victor Creed.

> I do remember all the cancelled books. Every book had to have it's own message, a distinct purpose. Something like that, anyway. And that they were way too complicated. Morrison and Casey talked about that a bunch in the WIZARD special leading into their runs. Then, a decade later, weren't there more X books then ever?

It didn't even take that long. Even in periods where there were less ongoing books than before, the ever-increasing numbers of miniseries tended to make it look like there were still more X-books than ever, and few of them lived up to that "distinct purpose" mandate. Somehow, even after the X-Men haven't been Marvel's 'top franchise' in many a year, they still insist on publishing far more X-books than it makes any sense to be publishing, when they really do need to cut the line down to a handful of books and get back to basics.

Generally, I tend to dismiss the "too complicated" gripe as the whining of people who'd be better off reading something more aimed at their comprehension-level, like 'See Spot Run',. For most of the time, the books fed you most of the information you needed to know. But the Claremont books in '00? That's a time when that gripe did have some merit.

> I don't remember anything about Quesada ordering deaths. More like dead means dead. That he stopped letting creators bring characters back. wasn't that what happened with psylocke in XTREME? Later on, it was amended to unless some has a good story to bring them back.

The 'dead means dead' thing was something that did mess up Claremont's plans, he'd 'killed' Psylocke, intended to quickly bring her back (in her original body?) only to be told that they weren't allowing any resurrections. They completely backtracked on this 'rule' within a year or so, and I think they eventually admitted it was done purely so that a planned death-and-return would seem like a shock (this may have been Magneto's return in that Xorn debacle that was so awful they revealed it wasn't really him barely 6 months later).

But I can remember writers on various X-books talking about how they'd been told to kill off guys like Stryfe and X-Man because of Jemas' dislike of characters from the future, alternate timelines, etc. This means it's hardly a surprise if he'd demanded the big blue guy from the ancient past be killed off too.

> And they did wind up doing stuff that tried to make the books more like the movies. Just took awhile. Toad and Mystique's appearances changing in FOREVER. those miniseries that came out. The Rogue one reads like movie Rogue. I think Jean was a doctor in it. Not that it ever gets them more readers longterm. The movies would spike the sales short term. Then they'd slowly drop down again.

Historically, comic-movies have seldom had any noticeable effect on comic sales, no matter whether they go out of their way to make everything resemble the movie, to be more accessible to that audience, or not.

And that Rogue miniseries, yeah, that was a weird thing that seemed to be set after she just joined the team, but no-one knew if it was meant to be in-continuity or not, then Jean showed up alive and well near the end to prove it wasn't.

As for the comics making themselves like the movies, in November of 2000, the Cerebro chamber was re-designed into the movie-style "big round room", but by May 2001, it was redesigned again, and renamed 'Cerebra', in one of the many, many, random, pointless and arbitrary changes of the Dark Age. I don't think it's ever been changed back to 'Cerebro' either, and that still bothers me.

> While I'm no huge fan of this era, I can't say it drove me off the books. Nor am I going to blame SEARCH for what Morrison did. I think he still would have turned Jean Phoenix and still broken up Scott and Jean. With ot without Apocalypse. He would have just gone about it a different way. Provided he'd used the characters. If they had kept Cyclops "dead" he would have used someone else like he didn't use colossus.

Oh, I'm not blaming 'Search for Cyclops' for any of the inexcusable crap that followed. Aside from Apocalypse's 'death', I did enjoy that miniseries, and considered it, and Lobdell's brief return to the core books, to be two of the few enjoyable moments of the '00s.

> Been a very long time now. Morrison is ancient history. The characters are what they've become. They are not going back to the Cyclops that I liked. Or the X Men. Doesn't mean I won't go see the movies, but reading the books? No way. That would require the mother of all retcons.

I'm almost 3 full years behind on my comics reading, and I'm honestly not sure why I'm still bothering the X-books, the characters aren't who they were anymore, and it's not even about what it used to be about anymore, it increasingly feels like it's celebrating the kind of division that the X-Men used to be against, and there's clearly an audience for that, but more and more it feels like at some point they just threw in the towel, decided Magneto was right all along, and embraced a bargain-basement version of his dream.

But then every time I wonder if I'm done, I learn that someone like Joseph or Stryfe is coming back and I think "yeah, I want to see that".

And then it turns out that Joseph comes back brainwashed and evil.

> Believe me, I'm not doing a lot of lurking here at this point. But when I am, and I see you posting, I take a look.

Well, thanks. It always means a lot to me if people make a point of reading what I have to say (Well, aside from the ones who hate what I have to say).

Not going to even try quoting. I'll just take your points one by one. Well, sure looks like the dates you listed support Jemas not ordering any return. Thought I remembered reading it back the, though.

Mark Powers said in a chat, not long after he disappeared, that it would be a long time before we saw Cyclops in the X books again. He wasn't gone very long. Read to me like the idea might have changed midstream.

Was issue 4 of SEARCH that delayed? I remember it coming out the same month as UXM 391. When I think of ridiculously delayed minis from that era I think of CHILDREN OF THE ATOM.

Again, Apocalypse's powers didn't leave me thinking he was gone for good. Is his death that much more definitive than X FACTOR 68? He's a shapeshifter who can jump from host body to host body. How much of his psychic essence is required to revive him. To me, an out was that Cable thought he destroyed all of it but didn't. I don't know. I don't recall thinking he's really gone for good as I read it.

How did they explain it when he did come back? Has there ever been interaction between him and Scott about what happened between them? Not that it matters much at this point. Scott is what he is.

Sabretooth was just in a lot of books over a fairly long period. Even putting aside and idea of redemption. He had limited series. He would than appear in WOLVERINE some as well. Meanwhile, Sinister and Apocalypse, who are supposedly so over exposed could go a couple years doing pretty much nothing. I'm talking doing something. Not Apocalypse with a one page cameo lurking in the background.

The way I look at it is this. If you are tired of Superman vs Luthor, the FF vs Doom, you've outgrown the books. Find something else to read.
My tastes didn't change. I didn't drop the books because I was tired of Xavier and Magneto and wanted something new. Scott and Jean and wanted something new. I wasn't looking for radical change. For me, change the trappings, not the characters. And the integrity of the characters. That goes out the window as soon as they need another event. What's the latest, ORIGINAL SIN ? Look, look at all the dirty secrets all these characters have. Wolverine, someone of that ilk, fine. I don't want to read about Spider Man, Mister Fantastic, Captain America's dark secrets. That's not why I liked those characters. I don't want to read about an adulterer, kill squad forming, mutant revolutionary Cyclops. That is not what made him my favorite X Man.

TOO MUCH change. But to each his own. Is it character assassination or character development? Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Me, they could have never driven off with reasonably safe stories without radical shifts in character. I'd rather have 90s Cyclops, I thought reasonably in character, but not at the center of it all as he seems to be now. Spotlight firmly on him. Doing things with the character all too often means pushing the envelope too much for my tastes.

Thing is, the radical stories are often the ones that spike sales. So, can you really blame DC and Marvel for telling them? It's just not for me. You are 3 years behind reading X books? Do you avoid spoilers or just wind up rading them knowing what will happen?

SEARCH was the best Jean Grey depiction I recall reading since 2000, and the last time I thought a comic did the Scott/Jean couple justice. Mind you I have read very little X Men the last decade. One complete series, ENDSONG.

There used to be a poster on another board, maybe CBR. This was also several years back, at least. Used to blame what happened with Cyclops on THE TWELVE and SEARCH. As if one cryptic message meant the character HAD to be changed.

You have one question posed. Can something be touched by Apocalypse and remain pure? I used to say this all the time. It isn't bad writingfor Cyclops to come out unchanged in the end. Questionable writing would have been for him to come back unaffected. There was going to be a process where he reaclimates himself. But in the end he didn't have to come out radically changed. Lots of heroes have been deeply traumatized without changing. Others have been changed, but it doesn't always happen. More often it doesn't

As I said, though, I don't think Morrison was saying Apocalypse really changed him as much as opened his eyes. And any interview I've seen with creators since I stopped reading, same thing. I never saw Apocalypse mentioned. I read a lot of Scott grew ups.

Your humor belies your posting acumen. You argue your points very logically(and a hell of a lot more coherently than I do) even if I don't always agree. Although we tend to with the X books. Speaking of humor, how about another micro adventure? Those were hilarious.


Posted with Google Chrome 11.0.696.77 on Linux
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2018 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2018 Powermad Software