REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004

In message <3nUDc.9127$OR4.415124@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, KB
<kevin.bee.TakeThisOut@snet.net> writes
 >
 >There was a *6 month* time gap before Revolution started. Betsy and
 >Jean had swapped powers (never explained), Kitty had a complete
 >transformation into a short-haired chick with claws (never explained)
 >and so on.

To be fair to Chris, he may well have had concrete plans to explain
those later on. His run was cut short after less than a year - it
really wasn't very well received at all.

--
Paul O'Brien

THE X-AXIS - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.thexaxis.com" target="_blank">http://www.thexaxis.com</a>
ARTICLE 10 - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.ninthart.com" target="_blank">http://www.ninthart.com</a>
LIVEJOURNAL - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien" target="_blank">http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

In message <3fk0e09t88q88nvl9cukijuj2nboh0tueh.DeleteThis@4ax.com>, Christian Smith
<christian.DeleteThis@jasdigital.com> writes
 >
 >Actually, thinking about it, why the hell didn't they get her to work
 >at the X-mansion as a Doctor instead of just having Nurse Annie?

Er, because Cecilia has completely the wrong personality for the Havok
role, and doesn't have a psychic child. Leaving aside whether Austen's
story is a GOOD idea, it's certainly one that required a new character
rather than just reusing Cecilia.

--
Paul O'Brien

THE X-AXIS - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.thexaxis.com" target="_blank">http://www.thexaxis.com</a>
ARTICLE 10 - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.ninthart.com" target="_blank">http://www.ninthart.com</a>
LIVEJOURNAL - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien" target="_blank">http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:10:21 +0100,Paul O'Brien
<paul RemoveThis @SPAMBLOCK.esoterica.demon.co.uk> wrote

>In message <3fk0e09t88q88nvl9cukijuj2nboh0tueh RemoveThis @4ax.com>, Christian Smith
><christian RemoveThis @jasdigital.com> writes
>>
>>Actually, thinking about it, why the hell didn't they get her to work
>>at the X-mansion as a Doctor instead of just having Nurse Annie?
>
>Er, because Cecilia has completely the wrong personality for the Havok
>role, and doesn't have a psychic child. Leaving aside whether Austen's
>story is a GOOD idea, it's certainly one that required a new character
>rather than just reusing Cecilia.

I meant alongside Annie as a member of the faculty (hence the *just*
rather than simply "instead of")
Just me, but I'd prefer a Doctor being on staff with a nurse rather
than just a nurse when I come in with Sabretooth sized clawmarks down
mu gut or reveresed bloodflow because of nutso-Lorna

Christian
--
"The Dark Phoenix may have been a threat to all life in the universe...
But she had great taste in costumes." (Rachel Summers Excalibur #65)
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

Paul O'Brien <paul RemoveThis @spamblock.esoterica.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: In message <3fk0e09t88q88nvl9cukijuj2nboh0tueh RemoveThis @4ax.com>, Christian Smith
: <christian RemoveThis @jasdigital.com> writes
: >
: >Actually, thinking about it, why the hell didn't they get her to work
: >at the X-mansion as a Doctor instead of just having Nurse Annie?

: Er, because Cecilia has completely the wrong personality for the Havok
: role, and doesn't have a psychic child. Leaving aside whether Austen's
: story is a GOOD idea, it's certainly one that required a new character
: rather than just reusing Cecilia.

Well, she could have been involved in bringing back Havok in some way
without the psychic child, or the sappy love story. She could have done
it out of duty of some sort, and the psychic connection might have been
her "secondary mutation."

If they'd used her, I'd definitely have wanted her in character, as a
somewhat reluctant mutant more loyal to her medical work than her powers.
That is somewhat analagous to Annie being phobic about mutants but
treating them out of duty and because she had a mutant son.

Shawn
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

In message <2kal62F2d9rU1 DeleteThis @uni-berlin.de>, Patrick McClue
<mcclue DeleteThis @hotmail.com> writes
 >
 >To be fair to Claremont and Austen, the return of Magneto and Xorn are
 >totally editorially mandated.

Austen has said that HE was mandated to do it. I don't believe
Claremont has made any similar claims, and an editorial mandate, in this
case, could very well mean "Chuck, Chris has come up with this story
idea. Play along."

--
Paul O'Brien

THE X-AXIS - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.thexaxis.com" target="_blank">http://www.thexaxis.com</a>
ARTICLE 10 - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.ninthart.com" target="_blank">http://www.ninthart.com</a>
LIVEJOURNAL - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien" target="_blank">http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

In message <7eYDc.33$uK.16@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, KB
<kevin.bee DeleteThis @snet.net> writes
 >
 >I mean the point of "Reload" was "BRINING BACK CHRIS CLAREMONT."

The point of "Reload" was bringing in Joss Whedon and shuffling around
the other two X-books to try and boost their sales. Chris was writing a
monthly X-Men book before. He's still writing one now. But now it's
called UNCANNY X-MEN, so readers are treating it as a core title again.

--
Paul O'Brien

THE X-AXIS - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.thexaxis.com" target="_blank">http://www.thexaxis.com</a>
ARTICLE 10 - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.ninthart.com" target="_blank">http://www.ninthart.com</a>
LIVEJOURNAL - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien" target="_blank">http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

In message <Xns95162463C55FEwhacholookinat DeleteThis @207.69.154.204>, Billy
Bissette <baines DeleteThis @coastalnet.com> writes
 >
 > Well heck, since Xavier claims said the dead imposter has the
 >secondary mutation of coming back from the dead, he will eventually be
 >alive again anyway if he isn't already.

That's based on a throwaway line of dialogue from Grant. It was, fairly
obviously, a joke.

--
Paul O'Brien

THE X-AXIS - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.thexaxis.com" target="_blank">http://www.thexaxis.com</a>
ARTICLE 10 - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.ninthart.com" target="_blank">http://www.ninthart.com</a>
LIVEJOURNAL - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien" target="_blank">http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

In message <LpydnYUVZ65e30Ld4p2dnA.DeleteThis@nildram.net>, teepee
<no-email.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> writes
 >
 >I say this is overly generous. What redeeming feature did it have?

Aaron Lopresti's pencils. They can't save the book, but they certainly
don't merit a D-.

--
Paul O'Brien

THE X-AXIS - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.thexaxis.com" target="_blank">http://www.thexaxis.com</a>
ARTICLE 10 - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.ninthart.com" target="_blank">http://www.ninthart.com</a>
LIVEJOURNAL - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien" target="_blank">http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

In message <Xns951671BA3525carlhendersondotnet.DeleteThis@151.164.30.94>, Carl
Henderson <jch.DeleteThis@carlhenderson.net> writes
 >
 >I think Claremont has a perfect right to be arrogant and petulant
 >towards other X-Men writers, if they don't treat the characters with
 >respect.

The Claremont of 1985, perhaps. The Claremont of 2004? You must be
joking. Seriously, when was the last time Chris did anything of any
real significance? A few years of low-selling comics for Image and DC,
and a return to undermine his legacy with pale echoes of his earlier
work. At his best he can still be fairly entertaining, but his day is
still long in the past.

--
Paul O'Brien

THE X-AXIS - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.thexaxis.com" target="_blank">http://www.thexaxis.com</a>
ARTICLE 10 - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.ninthart.com" target="_blank">http://www.ninthart.com</a>
LIVEJOURNAL - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien" target="_blank">http://www.livejournal.com/~paulobrien</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

Paul O'Brien (paul@SPAMBLOCK.esoterica.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: In message <3fk0e09t88q88nvl9cukijuj2nboh0tueh.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>, Christian Smith
: <christian.TakeThisOut@jasdigital.com> writes
: >
: >Actually, thinking about it, why the hell didn't they get her to work
: >at the X-mansion as a Doctor instead of just having Nurse Annie?
:
: Er, because Cecilia has completely the wrong personality for the Havok
: role, and doesn't have a psychic child. Leaving aside whether Austen's
: story is a GOOD idea, it's certainly one that required a new character
: rather than just reusing Cecilia.

Also, I believe at one point either Claremont or Austen were planning on
using Cecilia for something, but found out they were 'claimed'. I think
she wound up in Weapon X briefly, didn't she?

Peter Dimitriadis
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

 >
 >Actually, thinking about it, why the hell didn't they get her to work
 >at the X-mansion as a Doctor instead of just having Nurse Annie?
 >

Probably because Annie is human, and they couldn't do an arc around Cecilia
being uncomfortable around mutants since she happens to be one.

And Annie is loco, while Cecelia is not (at least when she's not in a bad story
about drug addiction any way).<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

Johanna Draper Carlson <johannaNOSPAM DeleteThis @comicsworthreading.com> wrote in
news:johannaNOSPAM-80D706.07163428062004@individual.net:

 > [Followups to rac.dc.vertigo removed.]

 > jch DeleteThis @carlhenderson.net (Carl Henderson) wrote:

  >> Chris Claremont--more than any other person--created the X-Men that
  >> were for two decades the most popular comic book in the country.

 > That doesn't mean his work today is automatically good.
 > Comics is very much a "what have you done for me lately" business.

That's a matter of taste, I suppose. I enjoy most of what Claremont writes.
While I was very please with most of the Grant Morrison run on NEW X-MEN, I
was often pulled out of the story because characters seemed "off" to me. And
the most "off" was Magneto.

  >> I think Claremont has a perfect right to be arrogant and petulant
  >> towards other X-Men writers, if they don't treat the characters with
  >> respect.

 > There's a difference between "respect" and "I wouldn't have done that".
 > Do you think the Morrison storylines with Magneto were disrespectful, or
 > just something Claremont didn't or wouldn't think of?

Yes, they reduced a character that Claremont had developed into a three-
dimensional, interesting person into a sterotypical comic book villian who's
sole motivation seemed to be EVIL for EVIL's sake. I understand the thematic
reasons that Morrison chose to do this--and they work in the context of
Morrison's story. None the less, the guy tearing up New York and shoving
helpless people into an incinerator didn't _act_ like Magneto.

--
Carl Henderson © 2003 by Carl Henderson
jch DeleteThis @carlhenderson.net

This post is intended solely for the Usenet rec.arts.comics* newsgroups.
If you are reading it on the "Comics-N-Such" message boards, you should
know that it has been copied onto that forum without my permission.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004 

Shawn H <shill#@fas.harvard.edu> wrote in
news:cbpe84$r4n$7@us23.unix.fas.harvard.edu:

 > In rec.arts.comics.marvel.xbooks Carl Henderson <jch.RemoveThis@carlhenderson.net>
 > wrote:

 >: I think Claremont has a perfect right to be arrogant and petulant
 >: towards other X-Men writers, if they don't treat the characters with
 >: respect.

 > But how was Magneto disrespected by going on one of his greatest
 > rampages ever?

Because Magneto had grown beyond being a simplistic "EVIL for EVILs sake"
supervillian. Because his actions in "Planet X" were inconsistant with what
had been previously established about the character. (In all fairness to
Morrison, he understood this, and attempted to handwave the charcter
inconsistancy away by having Magneto use Kick and implying that he may have
been under the control of Sublime.) Because his "greatest rampage ever" was
fundamentally stupid (even by super-villian standards) and not likely to
accomplish much of anything.

And finally, because the "Planet X" Magneto got killed by a guy with _metal_
claws.

 > You'd think Byrne at least would approve, but maybe
 > Morrison touches everybody's "patriarchal authority" button.

I'm not clear on what you mean here.

 > Morrison
 > always lampoons or overturns the big daddies, but I suppose more
 > conventional writers actually depend on such stereotypes.

I'm really confused now. Are you saying that by reverting Magneto to the
most cardboard of super-villian sterotypes, Morrison was overturning a
sterotype?

 >: When the average person says they enjoy the X-Men, whether they know
 >: it or not, they are responding to Claremont's work. His were the
 >: stories and characters that took the X-Men from being a bunch of
 >: perennial second stringers, to an international multi-media franchise.

 > They are not, however, creator-owned characters, and never were.

So what? Does that mean that a creator's work should not be treated with
respect? The fact that Claremont's X-Men aren't creator-owned, means that
Marvel doesn't _have_ to treat his work and characterizations with respect.
I doesn't mean they can't do so.

 >: To be fair, when Morrison was outselling Claremont two to one,
 >: Morrison was on the flagship book (NEW X-MEN) with Phil Jimenez, and
 >: Claremont was on X- TREME X-MEN with Igor Korday (who while a very
 >: good artist, isn't a good superhero artist).

 > Morrison actually had musical artists (including Kordey). CC had
 > Larocca for most of his run. The art wasn't the major seller for either
 > title.

Irrelevant. Paul was comparing X-MEN to X-TREME X-MEN sales for a particular
point in time. And at that time, the art situation was as I described above.
Furthermore, the fact remains that Morrison was on one of the two "core" X-
books, while Claremont was on X-TREME. Note that UNCANNY also outsold X-
TREME; is that because Austen was the better writer?

--
Carl Henderson © 2004 by Carl Henderson
jch.RemoveThis@carlhenderson.net<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: REVIEWS: The X-Axis - 27 June 2004