The Deaths of ... the X-Men IGN Interview w/ Brubaker

[Faded]

http://comics.ign.com/articles/820/820193p3.html

PICK APART NOOOW.

Glad he likes Layla Miller, but Bru...there are so many GREAT characters outside of the Astonishing cast, man! ;)

Note: the X-Men stuff starts on page 3, so that's why I'm linking to the middle of the interview.

I do like the mutant epiphany he revealed in the interview, but I still don't really get the impression he's all that invested. NOT TRYING TO BE MEAN OR PRESUMPTUOUS, just from what I wafted my way.

[CaptainCanada]

Interesting interview; so it looks like we'll be seeing the X-Men's relation to the Initiative dealt with post-MC. My guess would be that Cyclops is talking with Iron Man after the X-Men kick the Sentinels off the Institute and demand they be left alone. Also, perhaps this means that he gets to timeshare Cyclops with AXM now.

Also, the irony of the X-Men operating freely while every other superhuman in the country is drafted is hilarious.

Glad he likes Layla Miller, but Bru...there are so many GREAT characters outside of the Astonishing cast, man! ;)

I think he was talking more of the characters that he, as a young reader, was really a fan of, not disputing interesting ones exist beyond that (like Layla, for example, who he cites).

[Canemacar]

Whenever I read an interview with Bru, he always comes off as a prick.

[DaeJi]

I never get the since that he's a prick, only that he actually believes what he writes is good. Which is actually rare among writers. Anyway, this was my favorite bit:

So I was like, "… Huh! Well… that's actually kind of cool!" Because what he's saying is really true. Ah, I'll just tell you who he's saying it to - he's saying it to Tony Stark. He's basically telling him to shove the whole Registration Act up his ass, post-"Messiah Complex" after everything that happens. Basically he's just saying, "We aren't vigilantes. This is just who we were born as. You can't tell a guy who was born with wings that he can't fly unless he works for the government." So it's just like **** you. I was born with feet! I can walk! I don't need your permission

As much as I like Ironman, it's about @#$%ing time someone said this to him.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

Wait, did Bru just basically spoil Cyke's fate in *both* AXM and MC? :eek:

[Vaal]

I'm glad someone at at the X-office remembered the metaphor and the importance of it, even if he just learned that. It seems that the last few years, people haven't gotten it. Or at the very least didn't understand it enough to apply it.

[Vaal]

I'm glad someone at at the X-office remembered the metaphor and the importance of it, even if he just learned that. It seems that the last few years, people haven't gotten it. Or at the very least didn't understand it enough to apply it.

[Novaya Havoc]

I'm jazzed for the post-crossover stuff now! Bru is sex on legs for this quote:


What's interesting though is that, writing the book, I just wrote a line of dialogue yesterday. I realized as I was writing it that - all I was writing about was, Cyclops is yelling at someone. I don't want to say who he's talking to [but he said], "We didn't sign up for this. We didn't take anything and become this way. We don't make a choice to be these people, to put on these costumes, to do these things. It's just who we are." I realized as I was reading it again… I live in a neighborhood where 50% of the people on my block are gay. And as I was reading it I was like, "… Huh!" Like I just made a gay analogy! I realized in my mind that's how I viewed it after I had written it. I had no plans to actually make it. I hate analogies. I hate metaphors. I hate all that ****. So I never try to write allegories or political metaphors or anything like that. But then I realized… it's not up to the writer, it's up to the reader. That's where allegories and metaphors come from - things that the readers see that the authors didn't necessarily even intend to be. It's just there. It's just a truth. It reflects back on the real world whether you want it to or not.

[...]

He's basically telling him to shove the whole Registration Act up his ass, post-"Messiah Complex" after everything that happens. Basically he's just saying, "We aren't vigilantes. This is just who we were born as. You can't tell a guy who was born with wings that he can't fly unless he works for the government." So it's just like **** you. I was born with feet! I can walk! I don't need your permission. So it was a really important thing to be said and then I realized how much it can be seen as that metaphor.

Hot stuff. Blogg'd.

[dotdotdot]

Wait, did Bru just basically spoil Cyke's fate in *both* AXM and MC? :eek:

the thing that isnt really understood about axm, is that the scene in question does show us cyclops at his end and what he thinks as he's about to die......its a powerful scene, but i don't think at any point any of us are actually supposed to believe that he's going to die. it doesn't really take anything away from the scene at all to dismiss that part of it.

[Jake V]

Wait, did Bru just basically spoil Cyke's fate in *both* AXM and MC? :eek:

You actually thought he was gonna die in AXM?

Come on. He's Cyclops. He'll never die.

Too important to kill, but not important enough that his death will mean a whole lot.

[Slung]

Does anyone else think that Brubaker just doesn't sound like he knows what he's talking about?

Trying to read it as someone who hadn't read any of the X-Men comics, it was impenetrable. I had no idea who most of these characters were. Stuff jumped around from issue to issue. I'm not trying to diss those guys - that was just the style of storytelling at the time.
I didn't think that X-Cutioner's song was THAT difficult to get. It wasn't Shakespeare or anything.

He also has a huge supporting cast of bad guys. He has the Brotherhood or whatever you'd call them - an army at his disposal.
Huh? The Brotherhood or whatever you'd call them?

So, Brubaker has no idea whats going on. Nick Lowe's favorite crossover is X-Cutioner's Song. Alonso loves Cable, Bishop and Forge. Claremont ran out of good ideas. Carey is being shuffled onto a maxiseries solo book. And Joe Quesada has boner for Emma Frost and thinks Jean is boring. It just isn't sounding good to me right now. Its late, so I'm hoping I'm just tired and things look up in the morning.

[dotdotdot]

Does anyone else think that Brubaker just doesn't sound like he knows what he's talking about?


I didn't think that X-Cutioner's song was THAT difficult to get. It wasn't Shakespeare or anything.




bru sounds just extremely candid in interviews, and that comes across as apathy.
now, x-cutioner's song had stryfe, sinister, and apocalypse, each with allies or entire teams of evil mutant lackeys. it was definitely a bit much for anyone who wasn't keeping up with all the other early 90s nonsense.

[Jake V]

I didn't think that X-Cutioner's song was THAT difficult to get. It wasn't Shakespeare or anything.
The shitty dialogue made it confusing for me. If Stryfe just came out and said that he thought that Cyclops was his father instead of merely alluding to it for no reason, it would have been a lot smoother. And "Cable" tried to kill Xavier why? Maybe because it's been years since I read it, but I still don't get what went on. Except Stryfe died at the end. Sorta. Anyway, when I was 11 I thought it was really cool.

So, Brubaker has no idea whats going on. Nick Lowe's favorite crossover is X-Cutioner's Song. Alonso loves Cable, Bishop and Forge. Claremont ran out of good ideas. Carey is being shuffled onto a maxiseries solo book. And Joe Quesada has boner for Emma Frost and thinks Jean is boring. It just isn't sounding good to me right now. Its late, so I'm hoping I'm just tired and things look up in the morning.

There is so much there that is either flat out wrong or simply misguided that I don't even know where to begin. Needless to say, you'll come around when the actual comics come out.

[Slung]

The shitty dialogue made it confusing for me. If Stryfe just came out and said that he thought that Cyclops was his father instead of merely alluding to it for no reason, it would have been a lot smoother. And "Cable" tried to kill Xavier why? Maybe because it's been years since I read it, but I still don't get what went on. Except Stryfe died at the end. Sorta. Anyway, when I was 11 I thought it was really cool.
I never thought X-Cutioner's Song was good - I'm just saying it wasn't as confusing as Brubaker made it out to be.

There is so much there that is either flat out wrong or simply misguided that I don't even know where to begin. Needless to say, you'll come around when the actual comics come out.
Now, I'm not disagreeing that things will probably be exciting when the comics come out - but what exactly did I say that was "flat out wrong or simply misguided?" Now, I used a literary device known as "hyperbole" to make my statements larger than life and to the extreme - but I don't think I completely pulled random crap out of the air.

Brubaker sounded sort of clueless in his interview - he probably isn't, but comes across that way. He said Nick Lowe loved X-Cutioner's song - possibly the worst named and silliest crossover to date (still not ridiculously confusing though - less confusing then most of DC's huge crossovers). Alonso does like Cable, Bishop and Forge (which scares the bejeebus out of me - considering he also "helped along Spider-Man and was the driving force behind the Storm/Black Panther pairing). Claremont seems out of fresh ideas and a bit stagnant. All signs point to Carey being off X-Men and on to a solo maxiseries. And Quesada has said numerous times that he prefers Emma to Jean thus keeping Jean dead is a must (because that is logical sense).

So, nothing I said is entirely "misguided" or "flat out wrong." Quite contrary in fact.

If I keep my expectations low, I'll enjoy it more. :)

[Tazirai]

Whenever I read an interview with Bru, he always comes off as a prick.

I was thinking the same thing ^^.. Good read nonetheless.

[ExodusCloak]

You, know after reading this I'm kind of happy with Ed Brubaker again. I didn't mind his Deadly Genesis mini. I think it was written way better then his UXM so far. So it's possible that he just couldn't write the characters in his current roster...either way I'm looking forward to the Messiah Complex and the direction X-Men is moving in.

And agreed about the 90's Crossover thing...I never liked the dialogue either.

[Don Quixote]

Very good interview. And nice to see he was so thrilled to write about Layla knowing stuff.

I don't get the impression that he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's just frank about the fact he didn't read X-Men for a long time, and wasn't keen on a lot of the stuff he saw in X-Men books. Fair enough, and there has been plenty of dross in the X-verse over the years.

If you look at X-Cutioners Song, there are a lot of characters thrown together. Heroes and villains. It could be extremely confusing to someone who is either new to comics, or hadn't read some of the titles involved for a long time. I think X-Cutioners Song was a little overcooked. But the absolute worst thing about it was the art in the X-Factor issues. Horrible.

I like Bru's honesty about the allegorical aspect of the Mutant gene. When he was reading the book, it leapt out at him that is was a metaphor for being black, jewish, whatever. But now he's writing it, he gets that the reader is the one who interprets that meaning.

I like the comparison he makes with the Avengers as well. Why are the Avengers loved, whilst the X-Men are feared? I'd go further and ask, why haven't the Fantastic Four and the Avengers ever stood up and said "The X-Men are heroes. Here's a list of what they've done for you...."

And that stuff with Cyclops is right on the money. If that's the approach Bru is taking with the X-Men, then I'm mightily encouraged. Why should they have to have the governments permission to use the abilities that they were born (latently) with? Tony, in particular, is someone who has made a conscious choice to be a superhero, and acquired the ability through his suits. None of the X-Men chose to be what they are, they just are.

Now if Bru could only get over his Gambit-hate, I'd really be onboard with his X-Men direction.

[Porcelain]

Things seem to make more sense now. He comes across as not really having found his feet in the X-men universe - a purpose for their being/their own 'voice'/direction & doesn't really seems to have found characters he loves to draw on. He's right there is a huge leap between the logic of mutants evil and supertypes fabtabulous. To me though the difference has always been in "acceptability", a few normal people gaining powers and using them for the greater good is far easier to stomach than a whole seperate(ish) race more powerfull than ourselves where the possiblities are unlimited. However it is nice to see the balance redressed in public opinion terms with Civil War.

X-men should be accessible, but they do have a rich history to draw on for character depth & interaction without soap-light. It's a fine line to hover between the two: enough to understand the gist with a taste to leave you wanting to know more about them & enough depth for the regulars to bite into.

Cyclops stuff does need to be said, particularly as CW plays very close to many major plots from the X-men over the years but their viewpoint has been largely 'eh' on it thus far.

Willing to give him another shot if he sticks around for awhile afterwards.

[Porcelain]

(Double post, shoot me but I missed this)
I'd go further and ask, why haven't the Fantastic Four and the Avengers ever stood up and said "The X-Men are heroes. Here's a list of what they've done for you...."

Now, that's what always bugged me. Yes they're busy, yes they can't be involved if the X-men decide to go awol, yes the X-men can't go running to them to have them explain every time one of them is possessed etc, but still leaves a bad taste when I think about it because the only rational explanation I can come up with is they don't want to get involved in that debate period.

[caney]

I actually like most of what Brubaker talked about in that interview regarding the X-Men. It's got me much more excited for his upcoming stuff. Very cool!

[Christopher O]

Whenever I read an interview with Bru, he always comes off as a prick.
Does he really come across as a prick, or is your perspective colored because he doesn't like Gambit?
I'm jazzed for the post-crossover stuff now! Bru is sex on legs for this quote:



Hot stuff. Blogg'd.
Yeah, I loved that bit. It has me excited about his post-epiphany work.

[Affinity]

I'm jazzed for the post-crossover stuff now! Bru is sex on legs for this quote:

Hot stuff. Blogg'd.

<SNIP>

Yeah, I loved that bit. It has me excited about his post-epiphany work.

YEAH! Easily my favorite part of the interview. I wasn't a fan of Rise and Fall, and I'm starting to enjoy Uncanny's current arc, and it looks like post- or during MC, Brubaker is gonna make it to his real writing potential (like we see in Cap's book).

[marco19]

i enjoyed this interview and think if brubaker can get some more A list x-men characters to write his stories would be much better . I bet as much kudos and high praise Whedon X-men get...personally i hate it..that if you put Mike CArey Brubaker and the other x-writers to a lie detector test they would be extremely pissed off and upset on how much astonshing screws up their plans and writing styles and stories Looking at it they should just make Astonshing either a MK KNights title and just not even bother making it in continuity to avoid all the nonsense

[Brian M.]

Great interview...not just the X-Men stuff. Sounds like Bru is really starting to hit his stride. That dialogue with Cyclops and IM makes me excited. Can't wait to read this stuff. Also sounds like Brubaker is staying on Uncanny which is really good news.

[Beast]

Good interview. But I do agree that Brubaker comes off like he's out of his element. Not a prick, but just... somewhat clueless about what he's writing. We already know he didn't follow X-Men much before landing the job. Especially using the excuse that he didn't have any of his favorite characters to write.

I don't think that's a legitimate excuse for the fact that he ignores Nightcrawler, and short changes most of the rest of his cast. Focusing instead on Vulcan and Korvus. And yet another instance of him trying to make tired excuses for not having scenes like Scott/Xavier at the end of RAFOTSE.

He doesn't want to spoil AXM, yet all it would take is talking to his editors to know that AXM's timeline is fluid. And doesn't seem to have much of a problem with having Beast appear in his run, even though he's in AXM. And just having a talk with Scott and Xavier isn't going to spoil anything. Oh well. :p

[Brett P]

I'm excited for that super-spoiled Cyclops scene :D

[Beast]

I'm excited for that super-spoiled Cyclops scene :D
I will give him props for that. Nice to see someone whack ole Shellhead with logic. ;)

[Brian M.]

I will give him props for that. Nice to see someone whack ole Shellhead with logic. ;)

And for it to be Cyclops of all people, no Wolverine, not Storm, not Nightcrawler, not Xavier, they picked a real man.

[Hi-Fi]

Everything sounds good. I think it took a little time for Bru to feel confortable writing a team book, but now he's delivering a solid book. Can't wait for the crossover.

[Brett P]

I will give him props for that. Nice to see someone whack ole Shellhead with logic. ;)

Yeah, the "telling someone who was born with wings they can't fly unless they work for the government" is pure AWESOME-ness. I hope that means Angel survives MC!

[Christopher O]

Good interview. But I do agree that Brubaker comes off like he's out of his element. Not a prick, but just... somewhat clueless about what he's writing. We already know he didn't follow X-Men much before landing the job. Especially using the excuse that he didn't have any of his favorite characters to write.
Non sequitur much?


I don't think that's a legitimate excuse for the fact that he ignores Nightcrawler, and short changes most of the rest of his cast. Focusing instead on Vulcan and Korvus. And yet another instance of him trying to make tired excuses for not having scenes like Scott/Xavier at the end of RAFOTSE.

Where is he making tired excuses? He's flat out stated before that an exchange between Cyclops and Xavier didn't factor because he was moving on. That's hardly an excuse.

[Beast]

Non sequitur much?
Nope. It's a perfectly valid point.
Where is he making tired excuses? He's flat out stated before that an exchange between Cyclops and Xavier didn't factor because he was moving on. That's hardly an excuse.
He's making tired excuses in pretty much every interview he makes.

If it wasn't a factor, why even set the confrontation up in Issue #1. Lazy writing.

[Christopher O]

Nope. It's a perfectly valid point.
No, it's a non sequitur. It doesn't make any sense. It's not even a complete sentence.


He's making tired excuses in pretty much every interview he makes.

If it wasn't a factor, why even set the confrontation up in Issue #1. Lazy writing.

Please, point out the excuses, Beast, since you know so much. Also, no, it isn't lazy writing. I'll agree it's selective writing, but I'm OK with that. Cyclops isn't even part of his cast, and a confrontation with Xavier would do little to progress the current story.

[Canemacar]

Does he really come across as a prick, or is your perspective colored because he doesn't like Gambit?

He's a prick.

[kate-pryde]

Brubaker strikes me as not giving a darn about the characters. That's why the argument between Scott and Xavier was ignored. He doesn't get why fans want to see that because he doesn't give a darn about them. We care far more than he ever will about Scott loosing his father. Fans see the characters as people, Brubaker sees them as annoying characters he needs to retcon.

[Brian M.]

He's a prick.

You've met him? How is he a prick? Since when does confidence = prick?

[Brian M.]

Brubaker strikes me as not giving a darn about the characters. That's why the argument between Scott and Xavier was ignored. He doesn't get why fans want to see that because he doesn't give a darn about them. We care far more than he ever will about Scott loosing his father. Fans see the characters as people, Brubaker sees them as annoying characters he needs to retcon.

Your deliusional.

[Christopher O]

He's a prick.
Why? Let's see some references.

Brubaker strikes me as not giving a darn about the characters. That's why the argument between Scott and Xavier was ignored. He doesn't get why fans want to see that because he doesn't give a darn about them. We care far more than he ever will about Scott loosing his father. Fans see the characters as people, Brubaker sees them as annoying characters he needs to retcon.
Actually, some of us don't care about Scott losing his ridiculous space pirate father. It was a bad idea that never should've been introduced in the first place.

[Canemacar]

doublepost

[Novaya Havoc]

Brubaker strikes me as not giving a darn about the characters. That's why the argument between Scott and Xavier was ignored. He doesn't get why fans want to see that because he doesn't give a darn about them. We care far more than he ever will about Scott loosing his father. Fans see the characters as people, Brubaker sees them as annoying characters he needs to retcon.

Not being a complete slave to continuity -- but getting the overall gist of a character's continuity -- isn't the equivalent of "not giving a damn."

[Brian M.]

Why? Let's see some references.


Actually, some of us don't care about Scott losing his ridiculous space pirate father. It was bad idea that never should've been introduced in the first place.

It makes Corsair come off as a prick. He'd rather have space adventures than tend to his family.

[Novaya Havoc]

And that stuff with Cyclops is right on the money. If that's the approach Bru is taking with the X-Men, then I'm mightily encouraged. Why should they have to have the governments permission to use the abilities that they were born (latently) with? Tony, in particular, is someone who has made a conscious choice to be a superhero, and acquired the ability through his suits. None of the X-Men chose to be what they are, they just are.

Bam. Right there. Thank you.

This whole angle from Bru is the first thing to make me actually excited about the X-Line since The Decimation/198. I really hope it comes through on the printed page.

[Hi-Fi]

And if you think about it, why would Cyclops blame Xavier for Corsair's death? Corsair is a space pirate, he died doing his business. It was sad, sure. Scott probably cried off-panel.

Now the fact that Alex and Rachel stayed behind, even after Cyclops asked Xavier to bring them back safely, now that should be adressed. I have a feeling it will be, soon. :)

[Canemacar]

You've met him? How is he a prick? Since when does confidence = prick?

Insulting the work of the people who came before you on a project is a prickish thing to do. I don't care if you don't think it was quality stuff, you still show them a measure of professional courtesy. The guy's high on himself.

[Christopher O]

Insulting the work of the people who came before you on a project is a prickish thing to do. I don't care if you don't think it was quality stuff, you still show them a measure of professional courtesy. The guy's high on himself.
I think you're just pissed because he dissed Gambit in Wizard.

[Brian M.]

Insulting the work of the people who came before you on a project is a prickish thing to do. I don't care if you don't think it was quality stuff, you still show them a measure of professional courtesy. The guy's high on himself.

But it's ok for everyone else to insult work? I mean we have writers post on here and fans are more dickish to them than anything Brubaker has said.

[Beast]

It makes Corsair come off as a prick. He'd rather have space adventures than tend to his family.
He thought they were dead, remember. And by the time he knew they were alive, they were adults. :p

[Beast]

And if you think about it, why would Cyclops blame Xavier for Corsair's death? Corsair is a space pirate, he died doing his business. It was sad, sure. Scott probably cried off-panel.

Now the fact that Alex and Rachel stayed behind, even after Cyclops asked Xavier to bring them back safely, now that should be adressed. I have a feeling it will be, soon. :)
That's the whole point. It should have been addressed when it was relevent. Which it was, right after RAFOTSE. Yet just shrugging and saying it happened off panel is lazy. Especially when it was set up in Issue #1.

[Brian M.]

He thought they were dead, remember. And by the time he knew they were alive, they were adults. :p

So he doesn't even both trying to be a father to them? Doesn't even bother trying to get to know his kids?

"Oh...your not dead."

"Yea"

"Well that's cool, maybe I'll see ya at Christmas? Gotta run, another space adventure w/ a big green mess called 'Cho'd'."

"You know Cho'd, in english, is that little peice of skin between your balls and asshole right?"

"...bout right, see ya."

[Beast]

Not being a complete slave to continuity -- but getting the overall gist of a character's continuity -- isn't the equivalent of "not giving a damn."
You forgot to addendum that with "Unless Claremont is doing it". ;)

[Novaya Havoc]

He thought they were dead, remember. And by the time he knew they were alive, they were adults. :p

UGH! I HATE THIS KIND OF CONTINUITY!

It doesn't matter! He was a space pirate. A SPACE. PIRATE.

Is there anything right about those two words being put together? God, if I were Brubaker, I'd kill off Corsair and never mention it ever again! And I would retcon Psylocke as being always Asian. And I would retcon everything that ever happened to Dazzler post 1988.

Sometimes things need to be brushed under the rug for the sake of telling a good story. Unless we still want to bring up Candy Southern every time Angel's on a panel just because she was around 3429785489345 years ago.

I DON'T WANT EXCUSES GOD CORSAIR IS DEAD AND THANKFULLY SO JUST LET THE MAN TELL A STORY.

Sheeeeez.

[Canemacar]

I think you're just pissed because he dissed Gambit in Wizard.

And I think you're using ad homenims in place of an actual argument because you don't like the fact I called him a prick.

But it's ok for everyone else to insult work? I mean we have writers post on here and fans are more dickish to them than anything Brubaker has said.

Trash-talking with your friends and trash-talking in corporate interviews are two very different things.

[Christopher O]

But it's ok for everyone else to insult work? I mean we have writers post on here and fans are more dickish to them than anything Brubaker has said.
Aside from that, most of the crap from that period was exactly that. It was nearly incomprehensible and certainly not above scrutiny.

[Beast]

So he doesn't even both trying to be a father to them? Doesn't even bother trying to get to know his kids?

"Oh...your not dead."

"Yea"

"Well that's cool, maybe I'll see ya at Christmas? Gotta run, another space adventure w/ a big green mess called 'Cho'd'."

"You know Cho'd, in english, is that little peice of skin between your balls and asshole right?"

"...bout right, see ya."
Shows you were Scott got his wonderful "Wife Abandoning Skills" from.

[Beast]

UGH! I HATE THIS KIND OF CONTINUITY!

It doesn't matter! He was a space pirate. A SPACE. PIRATE.

Is there anything right about those two words being put together? God, if I were Brubaker, I'd kill off Corsair and never mention it ever again! And I would retcon Psylocke as being always Asian. And I would retcon everything that ever happened to Dazzler post 1988.

Sometimes things need to be brushed under the rug for the sake of telling a good story. Unless we still want to bring up Candy Southern every time Angel's on a panel just because she was around 3429785489345 years ago.

I DON'T WANT EXCUSES GOD CORSAIR IS DEAD AND THANKFULLY SO JUST LET THE MAN TELL A STORY.

Sheeeeez.
Corsair is dead? ;) :D

[Christopher O]

And I think you're using ad homenims in place of an actual argument because you don't like the fact I called him a prick.
What am I supposed to argue? You're trolling. It's hard to top that.


Trash-talking with your friends and trash-talking in corporate interviews are two very different things.

He didn't trash-talk. He leveled a criticism at a story.

[Novaya Havoc]

You forgot to addendum that with "Unless Claremont is doing it". ;)

No. Claremont just references his own continuity unless there's no way around it.

Dazzler being fabulous isn't continuity, Beast. It's a character design and angle which, IMO, suits her better.

I'm not screaming that CC fails to mention Dazzler's sister, or baby, or romance with Longshot, or what-have-you. But all his fans sure do want 2/3 things explained, smooth storytelling be damned.

I wasn't gonna bring CC up, since you did: I think the last thing you want to do when you're a CC fan is complain about a mainstream book's writer not referencing continuity enough.

Claremont self-references to high heaven, and both his books are practically out of the top 100. Obsessive continuity is lame.

[Nyssane]

I actually (FOR ONCE) agree with Beast and Canemacar a smidge. When compared to writers like Carey or Nicieza, he's not exactly the friendliest in interviews. He seems to have an arrogance about him that grates my last nerve. Yeah, the X-Cutioner's Song sucked, but dissing it in an interview is pretty unprofessional and slightly insulting to the writers of the 90's. He did say that it was good for the time, which I agree, but I don't think comics should change THAT much from what they were. Apparently Bru thinks otherwise.

Or maybe I just hate him because he doesn't like Diamondback because she has a pink costume.

[Canemacar]

What am I supposed to argue? You're trolling. It's hard to top that.

You seem to think any opinion you don't agree with = trolling.

I threw my 2 cents in, you took issue with it and made jibes at me, so here we are. You're more the troll than I am.

He didn't trash-talk. He leveled a criticism at a story.

He wasn't criticizing it, he was calling it crap. Believe it or not, it is possible to criticize a story without bashing it.

[Novaya Havoc]

I actually (FOR ONCE) agree with Beast and Canemacar a smidge. When compared to writers like Carey or Nicieza, he's not exactly the friendliest in interviews. He seems to have an arrogance about him that grates my last nerve. Yeah, the X-Cutioner's Song sucked, but dissing it in an interview is pretty unprofessional and slightly insulting to the writers of the 90's. He did say that it was good for the time, which I agree, but I don't think comics should change THAT much from what they were. Apparently Bru thinks otherwise.

Or maybe I just hate him because he doesn't like Diamondback because she has a pink costume.

I don't think he's arrogant -- just frank. I want the X-Men to go somewhere and not just tread water for once.

This is probably why I liked Morrison, Darkstar be damned.

[Christopher O]

You seem to think any opinion you don't agree with = trolling.

I threw my 2 cents in, you took issue with it and made jibes at me, so here we are. You're more the troll than I am.
Personal insults levelled at posters and creators are against the rules.

"He is a prick" isn't a valid post. It's flaming, trolling, whatever you wanna call it.




He wasn't criticizing it, he was calling it crap. Believe it or not, it is possible to criticize a story without bashing it.

Believe it or not, negative criticism can still be valid criticism.

[Beast]

Believe it or not, negative criticism can still be valid criticism.
Yet, you seem to be arguing against anyone who refuses to heap praise upon Brubaker's Uncanny X-Men.

[Christopher O]

Yet, you seem to be against anyone who refuses to heap praise Brubaker's Uncanny X-Men.
No, I'm just against silly and rude assumptions about his character. I have my own issues with his work on Uncanny X-Men, thank you very much.

[Nyssane]

I don't think he's arrogant -- just frank. I want the X-Men to go somewhere and not just tread water for once.

This is probably why I liked Morrison, Darkstar be damned.

I want the X-Men to go somewhere, also, but not to stray so far from the original idea (ie. Morrison's run). I just think, in interviews, you could at least try to be "less" frank because it just comes across as obnoxious (to me, anyways).

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

You actually thought he was gonna die in AXM?

Come on. He's Cyclops. He'll never die.

Too important to kill, but not important enough that his death will mean a whole lot.

Of course I didn't think he'd die. Check the AXM 22 thread. Been saying it since forever.

It's just that I didn't expect a writer to just spoil it like that just for the hell of saying he finally *got* the minority metaphor.

[Beast]

No, I'm just against silly and rude assumptions about his character. I have my own issues with his work on Uncanny X-Men, thank you very much.
There's no need at all to make assumptions. Much of it is clearly spelled out in his yawn-provoking interviews.

[Canemacar]

Personal insults levelled at posters and creators are against the rules.

"He is a prick" isn't a valid post. It's flaming, trolling, whatever you wanna call it.

Then why did you take issue with me saying he comes across as one in interviews? No personal insult in that, just an observation about the interview.

Admit it, you just don't like different opinions.

Believe it or not, negative criticism can still be valid criticism.

Negative criticism is an exercise in futility. No one is going to accept criticism that insults them and anyone who gives insulting criticism isn't looking to give advice, just insults.

[Novaya Havoc]

No, I'm just against silly and rude assumptions about his character. I have my own issues with his work on Uncanny X-Men, thank you very much.

Me too. Raftoise was teh lame. No me gusta.

But I see nothing "dickish" about that interview at all. X-Cutioners Song was lame and confusing. Back then I'd rather buy "X-Men Adventures" which was the cartoon in comic form over the main titles because they were such wonk.

And I LOL'd at his hate toward the spelling of "X-Cutioner."

[Christopher O]

There's no need at all to make assumptions. Much of it is clearly spelled out in his yawn-provoking interviews.
Then why do you continue to make them?

[kate-pryde]

Actually, some of us don't care about Scott losing his ridiculous space pirate father. It was a bad idea that never should've been introduced in the first place.

If Brubaker decides to kill off a character, then he needs to deal with the full repercussions of it. Otherwise killing Corsair seems like a cheap, shock value deal - a la Banshee.

Writers are dealing with a shared universe, not their own story. They should follow continuity (whether they like it or not) or get the hell away from X-books.

[Beast]

I want the X-Men to go somewhere, also, but not to stray so far from the original idea (ie. Morrison's run). I just think, in interviews, you could at least try to be "less" frank because it just comes across as obnoxious (to me, anyways).
I think it's very telling how much Brubaker beats the drums of hating the social commentary that's been prelevant as part of the X-Franchise for years. And then pats himself on the back for making social commentary. Gee, maybe he should think there's something to all of this. At least he finally grasped the point. :p

[Beast]

If Brubaker decides to kill off a character, then he needs to deal with the full repercussions of it. Otherwise killing Corsair seems like a cheap, shock value deal - a la Banshee.

Writers are dealing with a shared universe, not their own story. They should follow continuity (whether they like it or not) or get the hell away from X-books.
It's just like Banshee. Brubaker just kills for shock value, and let's someone else clean up the mess.

[Christopher O]

Then why did you take issue with me saying he comes across as one in interviews? No personal insult in that, just an observation about the interview.
You called him a prick. That's a personal insult or trash-talking, if you prefer. You could've quoted a particular statement and said it seemed a bit rude or unnecessary. Instead, you defamed his character.

Admit it, you just don't like different opinions.
Actually, I just don't like you.



Negative criticism is an exercise in futility. No one is going to accept criticism that insults them and anyone who gives insulting criticism isn't looking to give advice, just insults.

Negative criticism is integral to the development of art. That's how we (artists) grow.

[Novaya Havoc]

Ugh, SO dramatic!

[Nyssane]

But I see nothing "dickish" about that interview at all. X-Cutioners Song was lame and confusing. Back then I'd rather buy "X-Men Adventures" which was the cartoon in comic form over the main titles because they were such wonk.

Different interpretations, I guess. The correction of "X-Cutioner's Song" seemed kind of having a go at Nick Lowe, and jokingly or not (as the fans wouldn't know the difference), that particular bit did come off as arrogant.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

Not touching that feud with a ten f...

You know what, screw it. You two might dislike each other, but neither Deus or Can are trolls.

And IMO, Bru deserved something like that after basically saying that the minority metaphor which SPAWNED the f****n x-verse sucked.

[Christopher O]

If Brubaker decides to kill off a character, then he needs to deal with the full repercussions of it. Otherwise killing Corsair seems like a cheap, shock value deal - a la Banshee.
The full repercussions of any give action would be impossible for Bru to cover in one comic book or one story arc. These things can and do take longer than that. You were just looking for specific repercussions and were disappointed that you didn't get them. That part is totally fair and valid. It's the "Brubaker hates fans" and "he doesn't know what he's doing" and "that's lazy writing" and all the rest of that BS that is less valid.

Writers are dealing with a shared universe, not their own story. They should follow continuity (whether they like it or not) or get the hell away from X-books.
You hit the nail on the head here. It's shared continuity. No writer covers every ramification of their work. They leave much to others to pick up. Emperor Vulcan is a good example of that.

[Beast]

Not touching that feud with a ten f...

You know what, screw it. You two might dislike each other, but neither Deus or Can are trolls.

And IMO, Bru deserved something like that after basically saying that the minority metaphor which SPAWNED the f****n x-verse sucked.
And then realizing why it's relevant, when he made his own social commentary. :p

[Pach!]

This is quite funny.

[Canemacar]

You called him a prick. That's a personal insult or trash-talking, if you prefer. You could've quoted a particular statement and said it seemed a bit rude or unnecessary. Instead, you defamed his character.

My second post was, but my first was just my impression about his public persona. Since I don't seem to be the only one to get that impression, it's an issue.

Actually, I just don't like you.

Aww. Now you've hurt my feelings.:(

I think I'm going to cry....


Negative criticism is integral to the development of art. That's how we (artists) grow.

Criticism can be easily given without malice. If you feel it's *necessary* to be mean when you're giving advice, I can see why you'd think him trash-talking others was perfectly acceptable.

Just a difference in our paradigms I suppose.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

And then realizing why it's relevant, when he made his own social commentary. :p

No, see, the first part is reason enough to get pissed.

His 'epiphany' is more of a 'WTF-is-this-guy-for-real??!!' jaw-dropping moment. :eek:

[Christopher O]

And IMO, Bru deserved something like that after basically saying that the minority metaphor which SPAWNED the f****n x-verse sucked.

And then realizing why it's relevant, when he made his own social commentary. :p
That's the imporant part. He figured it out, which has me excited. Believe it or not, I've felt Bru's work on Uncanny X-Men, while decent, has been lacking verve. Hopefully, his epiphany will change all of that.

[Beast]

The full repercussions of any give action would be impossible for Bru to cover in one comic book or one story arc. These things can and do take longer than that. You were just looking for specific repercussions and were disappointed that you didn't get them. That part is totally fair and valid. It's the "Brubaker hates fans" and "he doesn't know what he's doing" and "that's lazy writing" and all the rest of that BS that is less valid.
It wasn't that we didn't get specific reprecussions. We didn't get any repricussions. And now Brubaker's got Hephzibah trying to crawl into Warpath's pants like nothing happened. Lazy writing. Ignoring your own continuity that just happened is even more staggaring than ignoring decades of continuity.
You hit the nail on the head here. It's shared continuity. No writer covers every ramification of their work. They leave much to others to pick up. Emperor Vulcan is a good example of that.
Emperor Vulcan is only necessary, because Brubaker was tossing characters into limbo. Pretty much because he didn't like them. Yet keeps characters that he basically ignored during RAFOTSE anyway. Such as the so-called leader, Nightcrawler. And in one issue, Chris Yost delivered a better Shi'ar Story than Brubaker did in 12.

[Novaya Havoc]

Whenever I read an interview with Bru, he always comes off as a prick.

Criticism can be easily given without malice.

Just a difference in our paradigms I suppose.

Is that some sort of DID coming through?

[Beast]

That's the imporant part. He figured it out, which has me excited. Believe it or not, I've felt Bru's work on Uncanny X-Men, while decent, has been lacking verve. Hopefully, his epiphany will change all of that.
Here's hoping. There were moments during the current arc that gave me hope.

[Omega Alpha]

Good interview. But I do agree that Brubaker comes off like he's out of his element. Not a prick, but just... somewhat clueless about what he's writing. We already know he didn't follow X-Men much before landing the job. Especially using the excuse that he didn't have any of his favorite characters to write.

I don't think that's a legitimate excuse for the fact that he ignores Nightcrawler, and short changes most of the rest of his cast. Focusing instead on Vulcan and Korvus. And yet another instance of him trying to make tired excuses for not having scenes like Scott/Xavier at the end of RAFOTSE.

He doesn't want to spoil AXM, yet all it would take is talking to his editors to know that AXM's timeline is fluid. And doesn't seem to have much of a problem with having Beast appear in his run, even though he's in AXM. And just having a talk with Scott and Xavier isn't going to spoil anything. Oh well. :p

Yeah, he just doesn't show the love. Look at how he talks about Cap. America, Winter Soldier and everyone and how he talks about the X-men.

But that scene with Tony should be great.


Actually, some of us don't care about Scott losing his ridiculous space pirate father. It was a bad idea that never should've been introduced in the first place.

I agree that he shouldn't exist, but still the death of your father isn't something minor that can be ignored, specially in the context it happened.

[Christopher O]

My second post was, but my first was just my impression about his public persona. Since I don't seem to be the only one to get that impression, it's an issue.

Criticism can be easily given without malice. If you feel it's *necessary* to be mean when you're giving advice, I can see why you'd think him trash-talking others was perfectly acceptable.

Just a difference in our paradigms I suppose.

What was so mean? He didn't call out any specific creators. He even defended them against his own criticism. You talk about him being mean and yet you still think it's OK to call him a prick. I smell hypocrisy.

[Canemacar]

Is that some sort of DID coming through?

What? I don't like Bru and I don't care about giving criticism. No big mystery.

[Canemacar]

What was so mean? He didn't call out any specific creators. He even defended them against his own criticism.

He was also massively condescending the entire time.

You talk about him being mean and yet you still think it's OK to call him a prick.I smell hypocrisy.

No thats you. Like I said before there's nothing wrong with calling people pricks in normal conversation, thats what people do. It's bashing them in mass media thats really uncalled for.

[Christopher O]

He was also massively condescending the entire time.
I didn't get that, but then you've already expressed your distaste for Brubaker. It doesn't surprise me that you'd try to impose that sort of interpretation.

No thats you. Like I said before there's nothing wrong with calling people pricks in normal conversation, thats what people do. It's bashing them in mass media thats really uncalled for.
He didn't bash anyone. You did. Get with it, dude. You're a litte behind.

[Canemacar]

I didn't get that, but then you've already expressed your distaste for Brubaker. It doesn't surprise me that you'd try to impose that sort of interpretation.

I'm not the only one who's said something about it, ergo it's not just me "imposing my interpretation". If you're going to just ignore anyone who doesn't agree with you, thats your prerogative, but don't expect others to go along with it.

He didn't bash anyone. You did. Get with it, dude. You're a litte behind.

Uh...Yes he did. Showing contempt for others generally counts as dissing them.

[Christopher O]

I'm not the only one who's said something about it, ergo it's not just me "imposing my interpretation". If you're going to just ignore anyone who doesn't agree with you, thats your prerogative, but don't expect others to go along with it.
I haven't ignored you at all.


Uh...Yes he did. Showing contempt for others generally counts as dissing them.
He didn't show contempt for anyone. You did.

[Canemacar]

I haven't ignored you at all.

I wish you would.

Not what I'm talking about though. There were other posters here who had the same view of Bru's interview as me or noticed his attitude. It's not just me twisting his words because I have a grudge.

He didn't show contempt for anyone. You did.

You've apparently lost your ability to recognize disrespect. And since you've regressed to the point where you simply refuse point blank to listen to anything anyone else has to say, I'm done talking to you. Theres only a certain degree of pointlessness I'm willing to waste my time on.

[Omega Alpha]

How about the old "talk about comics, not each other"?;)

[dotdotdot]

simply moronic. also, beast regressed to some tired opinions that we already completely debunked in another thread re: brubaker.

[Christopher O]

I wish you would.
If I'm such a bother, put me on your Ignore List.

Not what I'm talking about though. There were other posters here who had the same view of Bru's interview as me or noticed his attitude. It's not just me twisting his words because I have a grudge.
No other poster took it as far as you, which, in my mind, suggests that you might in fact have a grudge. Considering your own history on the board and Bru's feelings on Gambit, I wouldn't put it passed you. That's why I asked if that was the case right off the bat.

You've apparently lost your ability to recognize disrespect. And since you've regressed to the point where you simply refuse to listen to anything anyone else has to say, I'm done talking to you.

Oh, I listened. I also explained that criticizing a story isn't the same as trash-talking people. If anyone is refusing to listen, it's you.

[Daithi]

I don't think he's arrogant -- just frank. I want the X-Men to go somewhere and not just tread water for once.


Me too. He's quite honest in his views and I don't see what he said in that interview that people haven't said already.

Then I read Uncanny and then there's mentions of Storm being claustrophobic and then she's buried under a tonne of rubble and I'm like "sweet zombie jesus how many times have we seen that?!". Talk about treading water.

My view is that what he wants to do with the X-Men from his interviews doesn't come across in his writing. However it appears that Messiah Complex allows him to do what he wants. If his Messiah Complex and his following stuff match to what he says in the interviews I'd be on board in a heartbeat.


Not being a complete slave to continuity -- but getting the overall gist of a character's continuity -- isn't the equivalent of "not giving a damn."

Yes. However he has a tendency to just retcon stuff which is just as bad. Whether it is Qwerty or Xavier meeting Emma the stripper or ancient Shi'ar laws or whatever. Still he has the characters down pat mostly and his Storm is probably the best I've read in a long time.

[Beast]

Yes. However he has a tendency to just retcon stuff which is just as bad. Whether it is Qwerty or Xavier meeting Emma the stripper or ancient Shi'ar laws or whatever.
Don't forget the X-Men 1.5, Vulcan, and Xavier pretending to be Krakoa. :p

[Daithi]

Don't forget the X-Men 1.5, Vulcan, and Xavier pretending to be Krakoa. :p

Well from everything he's said most of Deadly Genesis was editorial driven. I'm willing to cut him a break with that mini. I mean the whole point of that mini was that there was some deep terrible secret so there was bound to be retcons.

[Beast]

Well from everything he's said most of Deadly Genesis was editorial driven. I'm willing to cut him a break with that mini. I mean the whole point of that mini was that there was some deep terrible secret of there was bound to be retcons.
Maybe the concept was editorial driven, but the execution was still lacking.

[Slung]

If Brubaker decides to kill off a character, then he needs to deal with the full repercussions of it. Otherwise killing Corsair seems like a cheap, shock value deal - a la Banshee.

Writers are dealing with a shared universe, not their own story. They should follow continuity (whether they like it or not) or get the hell away from X-books.

Exactly. If you are going to kill off someone's father (and especially if that character has guest-starred in your book before), you need to show a reaction to the death. We don't even know that Scott has learned his father is dead. Thats lazy writing. Two panels would have sufficed. It isn't exactly "moving on to tell a story" or "well, he isn't in his cast." Killing off characters has reprucussions. If a writer doesn't want to deal with those reprucussions, he shouldn't have killed off the character.

Corsair was not just some lame character. Many of us have enjoyed him over the years. "Space pirate" sounds lame on paper, but was fun in the books. "Rollerskating Mutant Disco Diva" sounds horrible on paper too. I think that Dazzler is currently a lame character but if she died, I'd hope somebody reacted to her death. I was very disappointed that Emma never reacted to Banshee's death. I think its poor writing to not show the effect a death has on the characters closest to the deceased.

[Pach!]

Exactly. If you are going to kill off someone's father (and especially if that character has guest-starred in your book before), you need to show a reaction to the death. We don't even know that Scott has learned his father is dead. Thats lazy writing. Two panels would have sufficed. It isn't exactly "moving on to tell a story" or "well, he isn't in his cast." Killing off characters has reprucussions. If a writer doesn't want to deal with those reprucussions, he shouldn't have killed off the character.

Corsair was not just some lame character. Many of us have enjoyed him over the years. "Space pirate" sounds lame on paper, but was fun in the books. "Rollerskating Mutant Disco Diva" sounds horrible on paper too. I think that Dazzler is currently a lame character but if she died, I'd hope somebody reacted to her death. I was very disappointed that Emma never reacted to Banshee's death. I think its poor writing to not show the effect a death has on the characters closest to the deceased.

She's died like 4 times actually. I don't think they ever acknowledge that she has family and friends that would be worried.

[Beast]

She's died like 4 times actually. I don't think they ever acknowledge that she has family and friends that would be worried.
Because she came back to life each time. Maybe if she really died, that would be addressed.

Banshee and Corsair both had actual deaths and were buried. So that's a flawed argument.

[Canemacar]

Damn my ornery nature! I can never walk away from an argument.


If I'm such a bother, put me on your Ignore List.

I think I'll do that. Promise me you'll do the same for me.

No other poster took it as far as you, which, in my mind, suggests that you might in fact have a grudge.

Or perhaps it's because you've been haranguing my opinion for the last couple pages of this thread? Initially I just said my peace and was done.


Considering your own history on the board and Bru's feelings on Gambit, I wouldn't put it passed you.That's why I asked if that was the case right off the bat.

I don't care what Bru thinks about Gambit. He didn't even understand the single most basic tenant of the X-men until recently. His opinion on anything X-related is worthless in my opinion.


Oh, I listened. I also explained that criticizing a story isn't the same as trash-talking people. If anyone is refusing to listen, it's you.

He wasn't criticizing. Criticism is a constructive thing. It helps people improve their efforts. Bru was just pointing out how he thought those comics sucked. Have you ever seen Mike Carey give criticism to a story? He's polite and honest about it. Bru is just crass.

[Slung]

She's died like 4 times actually. I don't think they ever acknowledge that she has family and friends that would be worried.

I'm not saying that Brubaker should go back and look at some solo series Corsair had 25 years ago and make sure he shows every character who ever loved Corsair's reaction. I'm just asking him to show Corsair's son - who is a main fixture of the current x-uninverse - (and maybe some of the other X-Men who were Corsair's friends) react to his death. And while he is at it, he could have Corsair's "lifemate" Hepzibah act like she lost her lover. Just a little.

[Beast]

I'm not saying that Brubaker should go back and look at some solo series Corsair had 25 years ago and make sure he shows every character who ever loved Corsair's reaction. I'm just asking him to show Corsair's son - who is a main fixture of the current x-uninverse - (and maybe some of the other X-Men who were Corsair's friends) react to his death. And while he is at it, he could have Corsair's "lifemate" Hepzibah act like she lost her lover. Just a little.
Not to mention, show Scott's reaction to Havok and Marvel Girl being left in space.

The same people Brubaker showed Scott warn Xavier in Issue #1, had better come back.

[Pach!]

Because she came back to life each time. Maybe if she really died, that would be addressed.

Banshee and Corsair both had actual deaths and were buried. So that's a flawed argument.

I know that, Beast. If she wouldn't come back to life she wouldn't have died four times, would she?

How is it flawed though, when people have a close to death experience they call their family. Now I don't know much about Dazzler but I'm sure her fans could tell you that she did have people that would have a reaction to that event.

I'm not saying that Brubaker should go back and look at some solo series Corsair had 25 years ago and make sure he shows every character who ever loved Corsair's reaction. I'm just asking him to show Corsair's son - who is a main fixture of the current x-uninverse - (and maybe some of the other X-Men who were Corsair's friends) react to his death. And while he is at it, he could have Corsair's "lifemate" Hepzibah act like she lost her lover. Just a little.

Now I get that she is not behaving like a human being would if she lost her life mate but Hepzibah isn't a human being. Maybe to her alien race mourning is very disrepectful to the dead.

[Faded]

LOL, guuuuys. RAFOSARASOTA was like...so six months ago!

But hell, I have nothing else to do right now(!!!).

I think he was talking more of the characters that he, as a young reader, was really a fan of, not disputing interesting ones exist beyond that (like Layla, for example, who he cites).

I just kinda got the impression that the rich, large universe of the X-Men is a little overwhelming for him as someone who isn't a big X-Men fan.

So I was just sayin' (rather playfully) that there's some cool stuff beyond CC, the 80's, and the old school group of X-Men.

If Brubaker decides to kill off a character, then he needs to deal with the full repercussions of it. Otherwise killing Corsair seems like a cheap, shock value deal - a la Banshee.

I could give two red nubby Cyclopses about Corsair, but I actually agree. I don't particularly like that storytelling method as it comes off as...

|X| Killed off lame character.

Moving on...

I think it's very telling how much Brubaker beats the drums of hating the social commentary that's been prelevant as part of the X-Franchise for years. And then pats himself on the back for making social commentary. Gee, maybe he should think there's something to all of this. At least he finally grasped the point. :p

As Chris said, that's what's great about it! It was almost beautiful, even!

This is quite funny.

LOL but it is.

[Christopher O]

I think I'll do that. Promise me you'll do the same for me.
I can't promise that, and I also can't promise that I won't call you out on the BS. It's a shame that you'll be missing it.

Or perhaps it's because you've been haranguing my opinion for the last couple pages of this thread? Initially I just said my peace and was done.
Oh, you definitely weren't done. Even now--after declaring that you're finished talking to me--you're still going. Not surprisingly, you still haven't given any specific examples of Brubaker being a prick.

I don't care what Bru thinks about Gambit. He didn't even understand the single most basic tenant of the X-men until recently. His opinion on anything X-related is worthless in my opinion.

LOL
OK...if you say so.

He wasn't criticizing. Criticism is a constructive thing. It helps people improve their efforts. Bru was just pointing out how he thought those comics sucked. Have you ever seen Mike Carey give criticism to a story? He's polite and honest about it. Bru is just crass.

Here's what Bru said:

Trying to read it as someone who hadn't read any of the X-Men comics, it was impenetrable. I had no idea who most of these characters were. Stuff jumped around from issue to issue. I'm not trying to diss those guys - that was just the style of storytelling at the time.


I see some constructive criticism in there and nothing even remotely rude. Again, where was he a prick?

[Daithi]

Now I get that she is not behaving like a human being would if she lost her life mate but Hepzibah isn't a human being. Maybe to her alien race mourning is very disrepectful to the dead.

Well the last time that Hepzibah mourned was when the Shi'ar enslaved and killed a lot of her race. I suppose make love not war is her view now.

However if it is an alien thing it shouldn't be just assumed. I'm not asking for a dialog like "As a member of X, we don't grieve like you do, we find it more honorable to shack up with a guy in the sewers"

But a reaction from Warpath to show that it's alien to him would have been nice.

[Pach!]

Well the last time that Hepzibah mourned was when the Shi'ar enslaved and killed a lot of her race. I suppose make love not war is her view now.

However if it is an alien thing it shouldn't be assumed. I'm not asking for a dialog box "As a member of X, we don't grieve like you do, we find it more honorable to shack up with a guy in the sewers"

But a reaction from Warpath to show that it's alien to him would have been nice.

Didn't we have that in UXM 487 where James talks about what Hepz should be feeling and then Hepz says that "Dead is dead, and she'll keep her grief her own way?"

[Christopher O]

Didn't we have that in UXM 487 where James talks about what Hepz should be feeling and then Hepz says that "Dead is dead, and she'll keep her grief her own way?"
Yep, I remember that. Also, after she explained about the burrowing and her instincts and stuff, James began to rebuff her advances. However, they were immediately ambushed, so the situation was cut short. I think things are definitely being addressed, just not in the way some people would like.

[Daithi]

Yep, I remember that. Also, after she explained about the burrowing and her instincts and stuff, James also rebuffed her advances right before they were ambushed. I think things are definitely being addressed, just not in the way some people would like.

Yeah I get that too. I suspect James would have pointed out how alien it is but for Hepzibah it's normal. Although can't she produce mind altering pheromes or something? If it was instinct she'd be producing them like crazy.

[Christopher O]

Yeah I get that too. I suspect James would have pointed out how alien it is but for Hepzibah it's normal.
I definitely hope we see more of how she handles things and how her ways may differ from his--and others. Otherwise, what's the point?

Edit: I never knew about those hormones, lol.

[Daithi]

Edit: I never knew about those hormones, lol.

That's because you like Brubaker hate continuity!

[Christopher O]

That's because you like Brubaker hate continuity!
LOL
I'm Wiki-ing her right now!

[Red Lotus]

I'll agree it's selective writing, but I'm OK with that. Cyclops isn't even part of his cast, and a confrontation with Xavier would do little to progress the current story.

When you make a point of starting off your arc by making Cyclops tell Xavier to bring his family back safe or else, that should have been touched on to progress that arc. But Bru didn't care enough about that point from his own arc to do that.


Now the fact that Alex and Rachel stayed behind, even after Cyclops asked Xavier to bring them back safely, now that should be adressed. I have a feeling it will be, soon. :)

I hope so. But Gage has already did more with Cyclops/Xavier in WWHXM then Bru did in Uncanny.


That's the whole point. It should have been addressed when it was relevent. Which it was, right after RAFOTSE. Yet just shrugging and saying it happened off panel is lazy. Especially when it was set up in Issue #1.

QFT, but then again Cyclops can be in Carey's book, New X-men and any other book, but Bru couldn't use him because he didn't want to mess up AXM.

Yeah, he just doesn't show the love. Look at how he talks about Cap. America, Winter Soldier and everyone and how he talks about the X-men.

But that scene with Tony should be great.


I think thats what bugs me the most about Bru, he doesn't come across very enthusiastic When he talks about the X-men, but when he talks about Cap you can tell how much he likes doing that book. Him talking about Iron Man and Cyclops was the first time I felt like he was happy writting an X-men book.

[Christopher O]

When you make a point of starting off your arc by making Cyclops tell Xavier to bring his family back safe or else, that should have been touched on to progress that arc. But Bru didn't care enough about that point from his own arc to do that.
Cyclops isn't one of Brubaker's cast members, so I don't think he's obligated to cover what could be a major, life-altering scene for the character. Someone in this thread already criticized him over his regard for shared continuity. However, when he shows a scene reflecting the tension between Xavier and Cyclops (as Whedon, Gage, and Carey have all done as well; OMG! he's using the shared continuity), it still isn't enough. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

[Beast]

Cyclops isn't one of Brubaker's cast members, so I don't think he's obligated to cover what could be a major, life-altering scene for the character. Someone in this thread already criticized him over his regard for shared continuity. However, when he shows a scene reflecting the tension between Xavier and Cyclops (as Whedon, Gage, and Carey have all done as well; OMG! he's using the shared continuity), it still isn't enough. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
Why did Brubaker bother featuring said scene with Cyclops at the start of the arc then? Lazy.

[Christopher O]

Why did Brubaker bother featuring said scene with Cyclops at the start of the arc then? Lazy.
I covered that, Beast. Did you not read my post? OH NOES! LAZY!

[Beast]

I covered that, Beast. Did you not read my post? OH NOES! LAZY!
No, I read it. It's just an increadibly weak argument. I expected better from you.

[Gene M.]

Maybe Bru isn't covering the scene with Cyclops and Xavier because it just isn't that important? A good bit of us seem like intelligent people. We don't need to have every moment of every character's existence spoon fed to us. Do we really need to be told Scott's reaction? I'm going to take a wild shot in the dark and say he was pissed. I can reach that conclusion on my own, as I'm sure most people can. If Brubaker feels like it's not going to fit his current arc, than he was probably right to not include it. He's the professional writer, not us. It's safe to say that he knows a hell of a lot more about writing comics than we do.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

I covered that, Beast. Did you not read my post? OH NOES! LAZY!

Our point is that why the hell did he bother establishing said tension if it would never come into play later?

Oh, right, save it for MC. Maybe. :rolleyes:

[Christopher O]

No, I read it. It's just an increadibly weak argument. I expected better from you.
Better? Like calling a writer lazy for not writing the scenes you wanted him to write? You know what I call that? Childish.

[Christopher O]

Our point is that why the hell did he bother establishing said tension if it would never come into play later?

Oh, right, save it for MC. Maybe. :rolleyes:
He didn't establish the tension between them in that scene. He just built on the tension that came from what happened in Deadly Genesis and Astonishing X-Men. All Brubaker did was reflect that vaunted "shared continuity" some people seem to hold in awe.

[Beast]

Maybe Bru isn't covering the scene with Cyclops and Xavier because it just isn't that important? A good bit of us seem like intelligent people. We don't need to have every moment of every character's existence spoon fed to us. Do we really need to be told Scott's reaction? I'm going to take a wild shot in the dark and say he was pissed. I can reach that conclusion on my own, as I'm sure most people can. If Brubaker feels like it's not going to fit his current arc, than he was probably right to not include it. He's the professional writer, not us. It's safe to say that he knows a hell of a lot more about writing comics than we do.
It was important enough to bother spending time setting up in Issue #1.

[Christopher O]

Maybe Bru isn't covering the scene with Cyclops and Xavier because it just isn't that important? A good bit of us seem like intelligent people. We don't need to have every moment of every character's existence spoon fed to us. Do we really need to be told Scott's reaction? I'm going to take a wild shot in the dark and say he was pissed. I can reach that conclusion on my own, as I'm sure most people can. If Brubaker feels like it's not going to fit his current arc, than he was probably right to not include it. He's the professional writer, not us. It's safe to say that he knows a hell of a lot more about writing comics than we do.
Nicely stated, Gene.

[Beast]

Better? Like calling a writer lazy for not writing the scenes you wanted him to write? You know what I call that? Childish.
Who's the one calling names? That would be you.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

He didn't establish the tension between them in that scene. The tension came from what happened in Deadly Genesis and Astonishing X-Men. All Brubaker did was reflect that vaunted "shared continuity" some people seem to hold in awe.

I didn't mention the scene, now did I?

Deadly Genesis is basically about both Gabe and Cyke getting seriously pissed off. Half of it went nowhere.

Also, hell, all Bru had to do was show Chuck with a black eye in The Extremists and have Kurt or anyone say something to effect of Scott not taking it too well.

There, one panel.

[Christopher O]

It was important enough to bother spending time setting up in Issue #1.
You're just assuming that he was setting something up. For all we know, he was merely reflecting on that shared continuity.

[Beast]

He didn't establish the tension between them in that scene. He just built on the tension that came from what happened in Deadly Genesis and Astonishing X-Men. All Brubaker did was reflect that vaunted "shared continuity" some people seem to hold in awe.
But he wasn't. There was an actual point to what Cyclops said. It wasn't just showing tension.

[Beast]

You're just assuming that he was setting something up. For all we know, he was merely reflecting on that shared continuity.
And you're just assuming that he wasn't. And he wasn't simply reflecting on shared continuity.

[Christopher O]

Who's the one calling names? That would be you.
Wait, you're allowed to expect better of me, but I can't expect better of you? That's hardly fair.

I didn't mention the scene, now did I?
I thought you were referring to that, since that's what everyone keeps going back to.

Deadly Genesis is basically about both Gabe and Cyke getting seriously pissed off. Half of it went nowhere.
What's the point you're trying to make?



Also, hell, all Bru had to do was show Chuck with a black eye in The Extremists and have Kurt or anyone say something to effect of Scott not taking it too well.

There, one panel.

Yeah, that sounds awful. I'm glad it didn't happen that way.

[Christopher O]

But he wasn't. There was an actual point to what Cyclops said. It wasn't just showing tension.
You don't know his intent, Beast. You may like to pretend you do, but you don't.
And you're just assuming that he wasn't. And he wasn't simply reflecting on shared continuity.
Well, we can play this game all day, but you're still insulting him over something you don't actually know the mechanics of. Seriously, restrict the criticism to the actual work, and stop with the insults. It is childish.

[Gene M.]

It was important enough to bother spending time setting up in Issue #1.
He wasn't setting anything up between Scott and Xavier in that scene. The tension between the two characters had already been established months prior to that issue. That scene (and this is all purely speculative) was probably meant to establish the relationship between Xavier, who is one of his core cast members, and the rest of the X-Men for any readers that were new to the X-Men and were picking up the book based on the name Brubaker being on the cover. He could have just as easily placed any number of other characters in that scene, but Cyclops was the most logical choice considering the story he was telling.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

So the character basically is gonna headline a crossover and Bru can't be bothered to have him yell at Chuck???

He pops in every freakin book rather frequently to look bad and at the one moment no one else could've replaced him he's not there??

[Beast]

He wasn't setting anything up between Scott and Xavier in that scene. The tension between the two characters had already been established months prior to that issue. That scene (and this is all purely speculative) was probably meant to establish the relationship between Xavier, who is one of his core cast members, and the rest of the X-Men for any readers that were new to the X-Men and were picking up the book based on the name Brubaker being on the cover. He could have just as easily placed any number of other characters in that scene, but Cyclops was the most logical choice considering the story he was telling.
Well, the dialogue says otherwise. You should really dig the issue back out and read it.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

What's the point you're trying to make.

Bru having one hell of a *bad* plan for Cyke?

Let's have him be the victim of Deadly Genesis and then not do a f****n thing besides EVICTING Chuck.

Let's have his father die and him not even aknowledge it on panel.

See a pattern??

It might just be part of a grand 'Cyke getting his s**t together for MC' scheme, but still, it's rather badly orchestrated. :rolleyes:

[dotdotdot]

goddamnit, havok flipping out and instantly deciding his brother deserves death and that willingness to kill makes the team not xmen for the moment, deciding to lead the starjammers, sending the message to the mansion, corsair burial scene with the starjammers and the stranded xmen................
nothing lazy. brubaker covered everything he needed to, and then moved on to a completely different arc that takes place weeks/months later. beast, you know all this. stop baiting.

[Flight]

*runs through thread naked*

[Christopher O]

Bru having one hell of a *bad* plan for Cyke?

Let's have him be the victim of Deadly Genesis and then not do a f****n thing besides EVICTING Chuck.

Let's have his father die and him not even aknowledge it on panel.

See a pattern??

It might just be part of a grand 'Cyke getting his s**t together for MC' scheme, but still, it's rather badly orchestrated. :rolleyes:
Well, Brubaker has mentioned that he wanted to use Cyclops instead of Havok but couldn't. Honestly, we don't know how much use of Cyclops has been denied him and how much is him not wanting to use him or wanting to step on Joss Whedon's toes. We just don't know. Of course, I have no problems with you having problems with not seeing Scott's reaction. That's completely fair, but that doesn't make it Brubaker's responsibility.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

Ok, let's use the Banshee/Syrin comparison, then.

Oh, wait, it was dealt with in another book.

[Beast]

You don't know his intent, Beast. You may like to pretend you do, but you don't.
His intent is clear from the scene and his comments about the scene. He chose not to follow up something he set up in Issue #1, by using the lazy excuse that he didn't want to ruin Astonishing. When all he had to do was check with his editors and find out that he wasn't going to ruin anything. And the ruin excuse is pretty weak, given he had Scott appear in the current Morlock arc. So again, it's lazy.
Well, we can play this game all day, but you're still insulting him over something you don't actually know the mechanics of. Seriously, restrict the criticism to the actual work, and stop with the insults. It is childish.
He's explained the mechanics in the various interviews he's made. He was too lazy to check with his editors, after bothering to set something up in dialogue in his very first issue of Uncanny X-Men. I don't get what you're investment in this is. Are you Ed Brubaker with a fake name, like Reggie Hudlin? Are you Brubaker's agent, trying to draw attention away from anyone who complains? What exactly do you get out of not allowing anyone to have an alternate viewpoint? Other than the jollies of arguing? And calling people names.

[Beast]

Ok, let's use the Banshee/Syrin comparison, then.

Oh, wait, it was dealt with in another book.
Of course. Because Brubaker's only looking for the shock value of the death.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

That's completely fair, but that doesn't make it Brubaker's responsibility.

Bah, Bru used the 'let's not spoil AXM' argument and then did just that with this interview. Oh, and Cyke appears in NXM and X-Factor. Yeah, that too.

I stick to the bad plan/timing theory.

He probably had some Cyke/Chuck scenes in mind for MC. It's just that the timing rather sucks in continuity, eh.

[dotdotdot]

Well, the dialogue says otherwise. You should really dig the issue back out and read it.

the fact remains that the scene was written due to tension between scott and xavier from astonishing, prompting xavier to leave the mansion to chase down the consequences of his mistake and needing to recruit particular members who were still loyal to him/have a large stake in what happens to the shi'ar.
it wasn't written for some follow-up scene that you all have in mind.

[Beast]

Well, Brubaker has mentioned that he wanted to use Cyclops instead of Havok but couldn't. Honestly, we don't know how much use of Cyclops has been denied him and how much is him not wanting to use him or wanting to step on Joss Whedon's toes. We just don't know. Of course, I have no problems with you having problems with not seeing Scott's reaction. That's completely fair, but that doesn't make it Brubaker's responsibility.
Other than the fact that he used both Cyclops and Beast, even after making excuses.

[dotdotdot]

*runs through thread naked*

you are simply wonderful.

[Beast]

the fact remains that the scene was written due to tension between scott and xavier from astonishing, prompting xavier to leave the mansion to chase down the consequences of his mistake and needing to recruit particular members who were still loyal to him/have a large stake in what happens to the shi'ar.
it wasn't written for some follow-up scene that you all have in mind.
You mean the tension between Scott and Xavier from Deadly Genesis, right?

[Christopher O]

Ok, let's use the Banshee/Syrin comparison, then.

Oh, wait, it was dealt with in another book.
Yeah, it was dealt with in the book currently featuring Siryn. That's usually how it works.
His intent is clear from the scene and his comments about the scene. He chose not to follow up something he set up in Issue #1, by using the lazy excuse that he didn't want to ruin Astonishing. When all he had to do was check with his editors and find out that he wasn't going to ruin anything. And the ruin excuse is pretty weak, given he had Scott appear in the current Morlock arc. So again, it's lazy.

He's explained the mechanics in the various interviews he's made. He was too lazy to check with his editors, after bothering to set something up in dialogue in his very first issue of Uncanny X-Men. I don't get what you're investment in this is. Are you Ed Brubaker with a fake name, like Reggie Hudlin? Are you Brubaker's agent, trying to draw attention away from anyone who complains? What exactly do you get out of not allowing anyone to have an alternate viewpoint? Other than the jollies of arguing? And calling people names.
I'm not arguing in this circle with you. We've done enough today and in the past. For the record, I don't mind differing opinions and debating comics, but I find the insults tacky and unnecessary. I'll continue to call you on them. Be sure of that.

[dotdotdot]

His intent is clear from the scene and his comments about the scene. He chose not to follow up something he set up in Issue #1, by using the lazy excuse that he didn't want to ruin Astonishing. When all he had to do was check with his editors and find out that he wasn't going to ruin anything. And the ruin excuse is pretty weak, given he had Scott appear in the current Morlock arc. So again, it's lazy.

He's explained the mechanics in the various interviews he's made. He was too lazy to check with his editors, after bothering to set something up in dialogue in his very first issue of Uncanny X-Men. I don't get what you're investment in this is. Are you Ed Brubaker with a fake name, like Reggie Hudlin? Are you Brubaker's agent, trying to draw attention away from anyone who complains? What exactly do you get out of not allowing anyone to have an alternate viewpoint? Other than the jollies of arguing? And calling people names.

he was not too lazy to check with editors, this is more ridiculous assumption and baiting.

[Flight]

you are simply wonderful. Any part of me in particular...?

[dotdotdot]

You mean the tension between Scott and Xavier from Deadly Genesis, right?

oh that too. i was specifically thinking of the time xavier was told he wasn't welcome with the xmen, but i can't remember the end of deadly genesis. it was probably in that book as well.

[Beast]

he was not too lazy to check with editors, this is more ridiculous assumption and baiting.
Yes he was. He said it himself. He didn't want to bother checking.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

the fact remains that the scene was written due to tension between scott and xavier from astonishing,

The hell...?

Due to AXM rather than Deadly Genesis, the OFFICIAL PREQUEL to Rise And Fall...?

[Beast]

The hell...?

Due to AXM rather than Deadly Genesis, the OFFICIAL PREQUEL to Rise And Fall...?
I guess that's supposed to be proof that Brubaker doesn't even follow up his own continuity. ;)

[dotdotdot]

Yes he was. He said it himself. He didn't want to bother checking.

go find the quote, beast

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

I guess that's supposed to be proof that Brubaker doesn't even follow up his own continuity. ;)

Actually, I was referring to the logic behind dotdotdot's comment. I really don't think that badly of Bru, lol.

But Dot said himself he didn't remember too well, so... *shrugs*

[kate-pryde]

His intent is clear from the scene and his comments about the scene. He chose not to follow up something he set up in Issue #1, by using the lazy excuse that he didn't want to ruin Astonishing. When all he had to do was check with his editors and find out that he wasn't going to ruin anything. And the ruin excuse is pretty weak, given he had Scott appear in the current Morlock arc. So again, it's lazy.

Exactly.

Look at what Christos Gage did with Xavier and Scott in WWH:X. That was perfect. And if Gage was allowed to use Scott, then there was absolutely no reason Brubaker couldn't.

It shouldn't be up to a newbie writer in a crossover event that's suppose to be nothing other than one big fight to handle major character development that is built up from a core book. That should have been in Uncanny. But what Gage did with WWH:X was far better than anything Brubaker did in in the whole boring, stupid Rise & Fall arc.

If Gage and the editors could figure out who was where in the WWH:X, then why can't Brubaker do that with what should be the friggin' flagship X-book!?!?

What really bothers me about this is that it's the same thing over and over again with Brubaker - he writes long whined decompressed scenes filled with nothing and forgets to include the key character moments.

[Beast]

go find the quote, beast
I'm not interested in doing tons of searches. Why don't you go find it instead.

[Erik Lehnsherr]

Ed Brubaker's scope of vision is why he's one of the very best writers in comics today and I can't wait for this to come to fruition post Messiah Complex in Feb and March: So I was like, "… Huh! Well… that's actually kind of cool!" Because what he's saying is really true. Ah, I'll just tell you who he's saying it to - he's saying it to Tony Stark. He's basically telling him to shove the whole Registration Act up his ass, post-"Messiah Complex" after everything that happens. Basically he's just saying, "We aren't vigilantes. This is just who we were born as. You can't tell a guy who was born with wings that he can't fly unless he works for the government." So it's just like **** you. I was born with feet! I can walk! I don't need your permission. So it was a really important thing to be said and then I realized how much it can be seen as that metaphor. I realized, "Ah, ****. I've really done a disservice to the X-Men by staying away from that stuff." So but at the same time I don't want to do the "Oh woe is me, we're so hated" stuff, so I want to try and take it in the opposite direction, sort of, with the post-"Messiah Complex" stuff. We'll be hearing a lot more about that later

LOL@ people still whining and complaining about that little Shiar story. It's over. It's finished. For him at least....now it's time for the main event and innovations galore.

Does anyone else think that Brubaker just doesn't sound like he knows what he's talking about?


Quote:
Trying to read it as someone who hadn't read any of the X-Men comics, it was impenetrable. I had no idea who most of these characters were. Stuff jumped around from issue to issue. I'm not trying to diss those guys - that was just the style of storytelling at the time.

I didn't think that X-Cutioner's song was THAT difficult to get. It wasn't Shakespeare or anything.
Quote:
He also has a huge supporting cast of bad guys. He has the Brotherhood or whatever you'd call them - an army at his disposal.

Huh? The Brotherhood or whatever you'd call them?

So, Brubaker has no idea whats going on. Nick Lowe's favorite crossover is X-Cutioner's Song. Alonso loves Cable, Bishop and Forge. Claremont ran out of good ideas. Carey is being shuffled onto a maxiseries solo book. And Joe Quesada has boner for Emma Frost and thinks Jean is boring. It just isn't sounding good to me right now. Its late, so I'm hoping I'm just tired and things look up in the morning.

Actually he knows exactly what he's saying...it all came off convoluted but upon second read and doing his analysis of it, it wasn't as bad. "90s Crossover done right". Works for me. Salute Ed Brubaker, top 3 writers in Marvel Comics, right now.

[Beast]

Actually, I was referring to the logic behind dotdotdot's comment. I really don't think that badly of Bru, lol.

But Dot said himself he didn't remember too well, so... *shrugs*
I was actually making a joke there. And agreed, kate-pryde.

I would adore to see Gage get the gig on Uncanny X-Men. Or at least a core X-Book.

[dotdotdot]

I'm not interested in doing tons of searches. Why don't you go find it instead.

so you can't back up this bullshit. that's pretty telling.

[Beast]

Ed Brubaker's scope of vision is why he's one of the very best writers in comics today and I can't wait for this to come to fruition post Messiah Complex in Feb and March:
Yeah, that gave me hope that we'll actually see the X-Men from Brubaker. Not just X-Men in name only.

[Beast]

so you can't back up this bullshit. that's pretty telling.
And it's not as simple a matter as talking to my editor to clear using Cyclops. Sometimes you steer clear of a character while someone else (a writer I respect a lot, by the way) is doing a major character arc with them, out of respect for their story, and so you won't spoil it in any way whatsoever. That's my policy, at least.
I.E. - I didn't want to bother checking, because I didn't want to spoil Astonishing.

Even though I used both Cyclops and Beast in both Uncanny X-Men storyarcs so far. :p

[Pach!]

A lot of selective reading going on in this thread, eh? :p

And I'm talking about the article,just to make sure.

[dotdotdot]

I.E. - I didn't want to bother checking, because I didn't want to spoil Astonishing.

Even though I used both Cyclops and Beast in both Uncanny X-Men storyarcs so far. :p

you just proved that brubaker didn't say those things, and made no comment that accounted for said laziness, you just inferred it because you can't read interviews.

continue proving my points for me in the future, because i'm too lazy to do it myself.

[Beast]

you just proved that brubaker didn't say those things, and made no comment that accounted for said laziness, you just inferred it because you can't read interviews.

continue proving my points for me in the future, because i'm too lazy to do it myself.
No, I proved my point. He outright stated that he didn't bother to check with Editorial. When he easily could have done so and been told the same thing that every writer was. That Astonishing happens after the current books, and before Messiah Complex. But I know you, you're disagreeing simply for the sake of disagreeing. His excuse doesn't even make sense, because he did use Cyclops in both storyarcs. It's just lazy.

[dotdotdot]

No, I proved my point. He outright stated that he didn't bother to check with Editorial. When he easily could have done so and been told the same thing that every writer was. That Astonishing happens after the current books, and before Messiah Complex. But I know you, you're disagreeing simply for the sake of disagreeing. His excuse doesn't even make sense, because he did use Cyclops. It's just lazy.

no seriously, he didn't say that. and you know exactly what you're doing. stop.

[Christopher O]

I.E. - I didn't want to bother checking, because I didn't want to spoil Astonishing.

Even though I used both Cyclops and Beast in both Uncanny X-Men storyarcs so far. :p
Brubaker having Cyclops deal with his father's death could, in fact, interfere with a major character arc in ways that having Cyclops and Hank make inconsequntial appearances would not.

UGH! Let it go, Chris!

[Beast]

no seriously, he didn't say that. and you know exactly what you're doing. stop.
What exactly am I doing? Other than having an opinion you don't agree with.

[Beast]

Brubaker having Cyclops deal with his father's death could, in fact, interfere with a major character arc in ways that having Cyclops and Hank make inconsequntial appearances would not.

UGH! Let it go, Chris!
Why would it? Astonishing cares even less about refrencing continuity.

There's nothing about Corsair's death that would change one iota of Astonishing.

[Novaya Havoc]

the fact remains that the scene was written due to tension between scott and xavier from astonishing, prompting xavier to leave the mansion to chase down the consequences of his mistake and needing to recruit particular members who were still loyal to him/have a large stake in what happens to the shi'ar.
it wasn't written for some follow-up scene that you all have in mind.

*swoon* <3 <3 <3

[dotdotdot]

What exactly am I doing? Other than having an opinion you don't agree with.

you're intentionally misrepresenting the actual information. also - we all know that those statements happened before this supposed cyclops "death", and that brubaker had a conversation with whedon about what should be done here. you can't explain laziness into that situation.

[Novaya Havoc]

Yeah, it was dealt with in the book currently featuring Siryn. That's usually how it works.


And it was dealt with beautifully by PAD. I loved Siryn's whole reaction and the video-DVD/pipe scene.

It gave Siryn some added character in the book she's presently in.

I love Siryn.

~Fin.

[Beast]

you're intentionally misrepresenting the actual information. also - we all know that those statements happened before this supposed cyclops "death", and that brubaker had a conversation with whedon about what should be done here. you can't explain laziness into that situation.
We know Cyclops doesn't die. And so does Brubaker. He's writing part of Messiah Complex.

So how is following up what you established in Issue #1, hurting Astonishing X-Men?

[Slung]

Brubaker having Cyclops deal with his father's death could, in fact, interfere with a major character arc in ways that having Cyclops and Hank make inconsequntial appearances would not.


How? How would having a few panels showing Cyclops upset about Corsair, Rachel and Alex have any effect on Astonishing?

And its kind of too late to show Scott's reaction to his father's death now. I'm hoping at some time we see him from of his father's memorial or something. I mean, even Mr. and Mrs. Grey's deaths get referenced and they are even more supporting characters than Corsair.

[Christopher O]

Why would it? Astonishing cares even less about refrencing continuity.

There's nothing about Corsair's death that would change one iota of Astonishing.
Well, in a perfect world, it wouldn't. However, some fans insist on this "shared continuity" and may take issue with major developments with Cyclops in a book that he isn't even featured in. Or, you know, Brubaker genuinely doesn't like the idea of doing huge things with characters that aren't officially his to do those things with. I can imagine him not appreciating Bendis or someone else introducing Winter Soldier to some long lost family members or having him fall in love with Iron Man, because those things are, you know, kinda major and not really the place of anyone else. That is, if you treat this "shared continuity" thing with some respect. Bru seems to.

[Beast]

Well, in a perfect world, it wouldn't. However, some fans insist on this "shared continuity" and may take issue with major developments with Cyclops in a book that he isn't even featured in. Or, you know, Brubaker genuinely doesn't like the idea of doing huge things with characters that aren't officially his to do those things with. I can imagine him not appreciating Bendis or someone else introducing Winter Soldier to some long lost family members or having him fall in love with Iron Man, because those things are, you know, kinda major and not really the place of anyone else. That is, if you treat this "shared continuity" thing with some respect. Bru seems to.
And in this world, it doesn't. And those are some pretty weak sauce comparisons.

[dotdotdot]

We know Cyclops doesn't die. And so does Brubaker. He's writing part of Messiah Complex.

So how is following up what you established in Issue #1, hurting Astonishing X-Men?

i didn't say its hurting anything. i did say that brubaker spoke with whedon, and now that we've seen the issue with this great scene of cyclops at the brink of death, we can infer what the two of them may have said. what this does tell us is that no one was lazy about anything, even if what they considered best for both books and continuity is something you disagree with, your character assassination bullshit is misinformed and malicious. pretty simple.

edit: and you quoted brubaker to prove it

[Beast]

i didn't say its hurting anything. i did say that brubaker spoke with whedon, and now that we've seen the issue with this great scene of cyclops at the brink of death, we can infer what the two of them may have said. what this does tell us is that no one was lazy about anything, even if what they considered best for both books and continuity is something you disagree with, your character assassination bullshit is misinformed and malicious. pretty simple.
So now you know what Brubaker and Whedon talked about in a private conversation?

You're grasping at straws. Because your argument is flawed in every way, shape, and form.

[Novaya Havoc]

How? How would having a few panels showing Cyclops upset about Corsair, Rachel and Alex have any effect on Astonishing?


And how would this affect the characters in any substantial way? Either you go through with it balls-out and have this Summers trifecta of angry VENGEANCE!, or you close the arc and move on with the story.

Chris is right. If Bru wrote this crazy angry wailing-moaning-sadness scene for Siryn after the death of Banshee, we wouldn't have received the very elegant and simple way in which PAD had her address it. Same goes for Cyclops. We saw the impacts upon the characters within the book. If someone else wants to pick up the pieces and hold out that Cyclops now has some grand vendetta against Xavier or the world because his space pirate father kicked it, it's there.

Personally, I don't find it a terribly interesting arc for Cyclops. He broods enough as it is.

But this constant screaming at Brubaker because he's not closing the arcs on other titles' characters is absolutely ridiculous.

[dotdotdot]

So now you know what Brubaker and Whedon talked about in a private conversation?

You're grasping at straws. Because your argument is flawed in every way, shape, and form.

i bet the two of them talked about cyclops and decided this is best. which destorys your "too lazy to talk with an editor" horseshit. sorry, pal.

edit: oh and i got that info from that brubaker quote. where he says: sometimes you talk with the other writer and decide what's best. that's how you read an interview.

[Beast]

i bet the two of them talked about cyclops and decided this is best. which destorys your "too lazy to talk with an editor" horseshit. sorry, pal.
Grasping at straws. Jumping to conclusions. At least my opinion has evidence to back it up.

[Novaya Havoc]

Grasping at straws. Jumping to conclusions. At least my opinion has evidence to back it up.

No. It doesn't. You didn't provide the link, instead going "YOU look for it."

Burden of proof is on you.

[dotdotdot]

Grasping at straws. Jumping to conclusions. At least my opinion has evidence to back it up.

but you pulled a quote from an interview that supports everything i said.
?

[Fatguy]

Well, Brubaker has mentioned that he wanted to use Cyclops instead of Havok but couldn't. Honestly, we don't know how much use of Cyclops has been denied him and how much is him not wanting to use him or wanting to step on Joss Whedon's toes. We just don't know. Of course, I have no problems with you having problems with not seeing Scott's reaction. That's completely fair, but that doesn't make it Brubaker's responsibility.

To be fair, unless its said specifically somewhere that he wasnt allowed to, it is Brubaker's responsibility to show the repercussions of something he wrote about. Death without any sort of emotional resonance is just a cheap tool for change, or a shock tactic.

I like Brubaker, his Cap and Daredevil are fantastic, but I havent been the biggest fan of his X-Men just yet. Though I have liked the current arc much more, so hope is building. I'm looking forward to seeing his future plans.

[Beast]

but you pulled a quote from an interview that supports everything i said.
?
No, actually it supports everything I said.

[rwsmith]

I agree with most everything Bru said about the X-books in the 90's, and I'm confident with he and Carey guiding it that this crossover will be much, much better than X-Cutioner's Song.

[dotdotdot]

To be fair, unless its said specifically somewhere that he wasnt allowed to, it is Brubaker's responsibility to show the repercussions of something he wrote about. Death without any sort of emotional resonance is just a cheap tool for change, or a shock tactic.

I like Brubaker, his Cap and Daredevil are fantastic, but I havent been the biggest fan of his X-Men just yet. Though I have liked the current arc much more, so hope is building. I'm looking forward to seeing his future plans.

right, but i posted multiple examples that prove that he showed the repercussions. just not one particular repercussion (involving someone not involved in the arc for 10 or 11 months) that you all wanted to see.

[dotdotdot]

No, actually it supports everything I said.

a. it doesn't.
b. you're being a brat about it. :crosses arms and stamps feet:
oh well, you're back on ignore.

[Beast]

To be fair, unless its said specifically somewhere that he wasnt allowed to, it is Brubaker's responsibility to show the repercussions of something he wrote about. Death without any sort of emotional resonance is just a cheap tool for change, or a shock tactic.

I like Brubaker, his Cap and Daredevil are fantastic, but I havent been the biggest fan of his X-Men just yet. Though I have liked the current arc much more, so hope is building. I'm looking forward to seeing his future plans.
Exactly. Especially when Brubaker bothered to set said scene up in the very first issue of his run. With the scene between Scott and Xavier, where Scott warned X that Havok and Rachel especially had better return. The events of leaving them and Polaris in space, and Corsiar dying affects more than Cyclops. It also due to that scene effects Xavier's place in the mansion. But it's ignored, with weak reasons and lazy excuses.

[Slung]

And how would this affect the characters in any substantial way? Either you go through with it balls-out and have this Summers trifecta of angry VENGEANCE!, or you close the arc and move on with the story.

Chris is right. If Bru wrote this crazy angry wailing-moaning-sadness scene for Siryn after the death of Banshee, we wouldn't have received the very elegant and simple way in which PAD had her address it. Same goes for Cyclops. We saw the impacts upon the characters within the book. If someone else wants to pick up the pieces and hold out that Cyclops now has some grand vendetta against Xavier or the world because his space pirate father kicked it, it's there.

Personally, I don't find it a terribly interesting arc for Cyclops. He broods enough as it is.

But this constant screaming at Brubaker because he's not closing the arcs on other titles' characters is absolutely ridiculous.
I'm not screaming at Brubaker - I'm just asking for some "simple, elegant" end to his own storyline.

Siryn in is NOT a regular guest star in a core book, so I don't expect Brubaker to deal with her. I would have liked to see him have Emma deal with the death of Banshee however.

Having Cyclops have some grand vendetta with Xavier would be pretty melodramatic. Him being hurt that his father died and concerned about his brother and his alternate time-displaced daughter would have been a perfectly acceptable denoument for me. No screaming, no yelling. Maybe no actual on panel discussion between the two characters. A panel of Xavier leaving Cyclops' office and Cyclops looking upset. Done. It was Brubaker's storyline to finish. Whedon shouldn't have to try and shoe horn that into his already disastrous continuity.

[Flight]

You guys should argue about who thinks Havok is sexier.

[Fatguy]

right, but i posted multiple examples that prove that he showed the repercussions. just not one particular repercussion (involving someone not involved in the arc for 10 or 11 months) that you all wanted to see.

Sorry, I just did a quick read-through of the thread, didnt see your examples. The problem is though, that the repercussions that most fans want to see are indeed the most important ones. Maybe the only really important ones.

[Beast]

You guys should argue about who thinks Havok is sexier.
That's easy. You do. :)

[Beast]

It was Brubaker's storyline to finish. Whedon shouldn't have to try and shoe horn that into his already disastrous continuity.
Especially when Whedon pretty much has said he's not going to bother trying to fit his book into continuity. And probably a good thing for it, considering how increasingly late that book is.

[Don Quixote]

Exactly. Especially when Brubaker bothered to set said scene up in the very first issue of his run. With the scene between Scott and Xavier, where Scott warned X that Havok and Rachel especially had better return. The events of leaving them and Polaris in space, and Corsiar dying affects more than Cyclops. It also due to that scene effects Xavier's place in the mansion. But it's ignored, with weak reasons and lazy excuses.

Well, Cyclops should be pissed at Lilandra then, not Xavier. No matter what Xavier promised, it was Lilandra who decided to leave Havok, Polaris and Rachel behind. Xavier was unconscious at the time. And what's more, Alex writes home to make it clear that they are choosing to stay and defeat Vulcan. That would knock and 'vengeance' wind out of Cyclops' sails.

I'm going to read between the lines and assume that Cyclops is intelligent enough to realise that.

Whedon couldn't fit anything about this into his book, because I'm not sure if even he knows where it falls in continuity.

[Daithi]

Well, Cyclops should be pissed at Lilandra then, not Xavier. No matter what Xavier promised, it was Lilandra who decided to leave Havok, Polaris and Rachel behind. Xavier was unconscious at the time.

That is true. Plus Havok is the one with a spaceship and can bring them back to Earth if they wanted to. Cyclops can hardly be pissed at Xavier for that.

To balance that, Brubaker should have had Rachel talk to Lilandra about the deaths of her entire friggen family. You can't go "editoral/not my character/not part of the story" on that!

[Beast]

That is true. Plus Havok is the one with a spaceship and can bring them back to Earth if they wanted to. Cyclops can hardly be pissed at Xavier for that.
Other than Scott entrusting them to Xavier. And warning him that they had better return.

[Daithi]

Other than Scott entrusting them to Xavier. And warning him that they had better return.

But it's their choice that they are staying in space. Unless you want Xavier to go back and mind control them back to Earth?

Xavier: Well I was knocked out but apparently Lilandra sent the ship home and we crash landed. Unfortunately Alex, Rachel and Lorna were left behind. However Alex's last communication states that they have joined the Starjammers.

[Don Quixote]

To balance that, Brubaker should have had Rachel talk to Lilandra about the deaths of her entire friggen family. You can't go "editoral/not my character/not part of the story" on that!

Dealt with already by Yost in the Vulcan mini. Before people crucify Bru for not writing it himself, it seems to me that there wasn't much time in the Uncanny arc for Rachel to stop and say, "oh by the way, Lil, about my family...."

[Slung]

Well, Cyclops should be pissed at Lilandra then, not Xavier. No matter what Xavier promised, it was Lilandra who decided to leave Havok, Polaris and Rachel behind. Xavier was unconscious at the time. And what's more, Alex writes home to make it clear that they are choosing to stay and defeat Vulcan. That would knock and 'vengeance' wind out of Cyclops' sails.

I'm going to read between the lines and assume that Cyclops is intelligent enough to realise that.

Whedon couldn't fit anything about this into his book, because I'm not sure if even he knows where it falls in continuity.

I don't care who Scott is mad at - I just want him to know his papa died.

*A year from now*

Emma: "How does my facelift look?"

Kurt: "Oooo...it reminds of what Corsair looked like when Vulcan burned the skin off his body."

Scott: "WHAT!?! My daddy's dead?"

Kurt: (continuing)"Which wasn't half as bad as Sean looked when he died!"

Emma: "WHAT!?! My only best friend and unrequited love-interest is dead?"

[Beast]

But it's their choice that they are staying in space. Unless you want Xavier to go back and mind control them back to Earth?

Xavier: Well I was knocked out but apparently Lilandra sent the ship home and we crash landed. Unfortunately Alex, Rachel and Lorna were left behind. However Alex's last communication states that they have joined the Starjammers.
It being their choice to stay, is probably the only reason why Xavier is still allowed in the mansion.

[Beast]

Dealt with already by Yost in the Vulcan mini. Before people crucify Bru for not writing it himself, it seems to me that there wasn't much time in the Uncanny arc for Rachel to stop and say, "oh by the way, Lil, about my family...."
However there seemed to be plenty of time for Vulcan solo issues and Korvus Von Silly-Sword. ;)

[Daithi]

Dealt with already by Yost in the Vulcan mini. Before people crucify Bru for not writing it himself, it seems to me that there wasn't much time in the Uncanny arc for Rachel to stop and say, "oh by the way, Lil, about my family...."

What the? Not enough time? There was plenty of time. Instead we got the Korvus and Rachel craporama. It should have been mentioned in Rise and Fall. Hell having Lilandra tell Rachel about the secret order would give her a bigger reason to stay behind.


Kurt: (continuing)"Which wasn't half as bad as Sean looked when he died!"

Emma: "WHAT!?! My only best friend and unrequited love-interest is dead?"

Surely Emma was at his funeral in Deadly Genesis?

[Don Quixote]

There was plenty of time for Vulcan solo issues and Korvus Von Silly-Sword. ;)

Well, Rachel wasn't in the Vulcan issues, and I assume they happen simultaneously with the X-Men bits. By not enough time, I meant that the characters weren't doing a lot of sitting about and chatting.

Korvus? I've got nothing.

[Slung]

Well, Rachel wasn't in the Vulcan issues, and I assume they happen simultaneously with the X-Men bits. By not enough time, I meant that the characters weren't doing a lot of sitting about and chatting.

Korvus? I've got nothing.

Actually, wasn't there extended time periods of them on a ship unable to do anything cause the stargates (or whatever) were broken?

[Beast]

That was another thing that sorta bugged me.

Everyone was paired off, and they really only talked to the other person in the pair the whole storyline.

Havok only really interacted with Polaris.
Rachel only really interacted with Korvus.
Xavier only really interacted with Darwin.
Nightcrawler only really interacted with Warpath.

Which is also why Nightcrawler was pretty much wallpaper the whole run.

[Daithi]

By not enough time, I meant that the characters weren't doing a lot of sitting about and chatting.


That's all they were doing! Well no, but there was plenty of sitting and chatting! Hell she even called her Empress!

Actually, wasn't there extended time periods of them on a ship unable to do anything cause the stargates (or whatever) were broken?

To be fair that was before Lilandra was on the ship.

[Don Quixote]

Actually, wasn't there extended time periods of them on a ship unable to do anything cause the stargates (or whatever) were broken?

Yeah, but Lilandra wasn't there.

[Slung]

What the? Not enough time? There was plenty of time. Instead we got the Korvus and Rachel craporama. It should have been mentioned in Rise and Fall. Hell having Lilandra tell Rachel about the secret order would give her a bigger reason to stay behind.



Surely Emma was at his funeral in Deadly Genesis?

She thought it was for Shaun Cassidy the singer and was sitting at the funeral doing her nails and humming "Da Doo Ron Ron."

[frog]

She thought it was for Shaun Cassidy the singer and was sitting at the funeral doing her nails and humming "Da Doo Ron Ron."

No, that was Guido. :D

[Beast]

And Darwin's another matter. Brubaker created him. But said he had trouble writing him. And now he's compltely vanished. Maybe Brubaker should have left him in space too. It would have been better than him coming back, and simply vanishing from existance. Sure he wasn't a very interesting character, but mostly because we weren't given a reason to care about him. He's like the new Layla Millar. Just a Plot Character. Hmm, maybe PAD should grab Darwin for X-Factor. At least he'd give him some actual development.

[Slung]

Yeah, but Lilandra wasn't there.

I was just saying there was lots of time for character development other than Korvus and Vulcan. They were travelling in a spaceship. There was time for Rachel to makeout with Korvus and time for Hepzibah to table dance. There was time for Polaris to be a cardboard cutout except when she was a sexpot. Lots of time.

Its interesting all the time Bru found to have the girl characters be sex objects for the male characters. But that has nothing to do with the current debates (ie: flame wars). :)

[Slung]

And Darwin's another matter. Brubaker created him. But said he had trouble writing him. And now he's compltely vanished. Maybe Brubaker should have left him in space too. It would have been better than him coming back, and simply vanishing from existance.

See, Darwin knew that Brubaker was having trouble writing him so he adapted to that situation by vanishing from existence. Do I get a no-prize?

[Beast]

See, Darwin knew that Brubaker was having trouble writing him so he adapted to that situation by vanishing from existence. Do I get a no-prize?
Yes, you do. It must have been the same manuever that Darwin pulled against the Hulk.

[Don Quixote]

I was just saying there was lots of time for character development other than Korvus and Vulcan. They were travelling in a spaceship. There was time for Rachel to makeout with Korvus and time for Hepzibah to table dance. There was time for Polaris to be a cardboard cutout except when she was a sexpot. Lots of time.


I'm just playing devil's advocate. I didn't even like the arc. Anything involving the words "X-Men" and "space" is a big nono for me.

Bru has had trouble finding his feet with the X-Men, no doubt about it. But I'd much rather seen him write it than some of the people who have been given the chance in the last few years. And seeing what he's capable of with other books, I'm more than happy to see where he goes from here with the X-Men.

[Trey]

I didn't really like the "Hated because we're different" metaphor too much.

That's why his run has been sub-par. The metaphor is the life-blood of the X-men.

And he finally realized that with the Cyclops /IM scene he just wrote.
You can still write modern X-men stories....blah...blah....blah or something like that. (See how prickish that comes across?)

[Don Quixote]

That's why his run has been sub-par. The metaphor is the life-blood of the X-men.

And he finally realized that with the Cyclops /IM scene he just wrote.
You can still write modern X-men stories....blah...blah....blah or something like that. (See how prickish that comes across?)

Not really. He's pointing out the difference between experiencing the X-Men as a reader, and experiencing them as a writer.

As a reader, he didn't like being smacked in the face with that metaphor. As a writer, he realises it's up to the readers how they interpret that stuff.

[CMBMOOL]

I'm glad that Cyclops is going to tell Iron Man off on how he is treating the X-men in the Initiative. :p

I'm also surprise to see how Brubaker has plans for the post Messiah Complex X-Universe. :p


I can't wait for it to start. :D

[Pach!]

But it's their choice that they are staying in space. Unless you want Xavier to go back and mind control them back to Earth?

Xavier: Well I was knocked out but apparently Lilandra sent the ship home and we crash landed. Unfortunately Alex, Rachel and Lorna were left behind. However Alex's last communication states that they have joined the Starjammers.

That would be SO Xavier.

[Christopher O]

To be fair, unless its said specifically somewhere that he wasnt allowed to, it is Brubaker's responsibility to show the repercussions of something he wrote about. Death without any sort of emotional resonance is just a cheap tool for change, or a shock tactic.
We have seen the repercussions of Corsair's death. We saw Havok's reaction and the choice that came out of it. We've also seen stuff with Hepzibah. Both of which were/are cast members of the book. Cyclops isn't. I don't see what's so hard about that.

It being their choice to stay, is probably the only reason why Xavier is still allowed in the mansion.
Actually, the fact that Xavier is owner of the property is probably the reason he's there. It's his estate and his school.

[jester1436]

I think not showing Cyclops' reaction to his father's death is a weakness in the way the X-Men is as a whole right now. There's so much going on within a fairly consistent space that even if a character isn't a regular featured member, they could feature anyway, which provides too much overlap for their to NOT be some reaction from Cyclops. He's not Bru's character, but he is an X-Man and all the characters share the same functional space, much less continuity. There's no reason for there to not have been some brief reveal somewhere, because it's a big deal. It doesn't matter if you think the character is lame or great, they should have impact.

However, the thrust of Bru's current story with the Morlocks leading into even more stuff means that was sacrificed. It doesn't logically connect, which possibly shows the need for a cushion in between, even if just to show Cyclops reacting and where the hell Darwin went. But there's no time for that.

[Christopher O]

I think not showing Cyclops' reaction to his father's death is a weakness in the way the X-Men is as a whole right now. There's so much going on within a fairly consistent space that even if a character isn't a regular featured member, they could feature anyway, which provides too much overlap for their to NOT be some reaction from Cyclops. He's not Bru's character, but he is an X-Man and all the characters share the same functional space, much less continuity. There's no reason for there to not have been some brief reveal somewhere, because it's a big deal. It doesn't matter if you think the character is lame or great, they should have impact.

However, the thrust of Bru's current story with the Morlocks leading into even more stuff means that was sacrificed. It doesn't logically connect, which possibly shows the need for a cushion in between, even if just to show Cyclops reacting and where the hell Darwin went. But there's no time for that.
Honestly, I'd just like to see us go back to one X-Men book, paired down to the essential characters with guest appearances by everyone else. Give it the Spider-Man treatment. Put an amazing creative team on it, and I'm there. It would certainly solve some of these floating cast problems. Unfortunately, I know we're stuck with a line of X-Books. It's just my pipe dream.

[Fatguy]

We have seen the repercussions of Corsair's death. We saw Havok's reaction and the choice that came out of it. We've also seen stuff with Hepzibah. Both of which were/are cast members of the book. Cyclops isn't. I don't see what's so hard about that.


I suppose, but Havok's reaction was getting mad then staying in space. There was no real substance there, to have a character say they want revenge and then take off within a couple of pages, to be dealt with by another writer. BUT, I have no real problem with that, other than I would've liked to see Brubaker deal with what he started instead of it just abruptly ending.

As for Hepzibah, we havent seen much at all, besides what amounts to "I dont wanna talk about it".

As to the Cyclops issue, it should be dealt with, and by Brubaker who did the killing. Saying Cyclops belongs to another book is very weak. The whole AXM cast shows up regularly in all the X-Books. Though there are "teams", the X-cast has always intermingled. Him being in Astonishing should have no effect on him being able to be used when he's OBVIOUSLY quite important to the two big consequences of Bru's arc.

And thats about all the explaining I can give on my personal feelings ;) I appreciate that you disagree (quite strongly I guess...) and are a big Brubaker supporter, but the unfortunate matter is that many fans wanted more from Corsair's death and Havok staying behind in space, or they wanted something different. Nothings going to change that, outside of what they want to happen actually happening.

[Christopher O]

As to the Cyclops issue, it should be dealt with, and by Brubaker who did the killing. Saying Cyclops belongs to another book is very weak. The whole AXM cast shows up regularly in all the X-Books. Though there are "teams", the X-cast has always intermingled. Him being in Astonishing should have no effect on him being able to be used when he's OBVIOUSLY quite important to the two big consequences of Bru's arc.
We've covered the fact that the Astonishing cast appears in other places. We've also covered that those appearances are never of any real consequence. This would have to be of real consequence, and I can see why Brubaker would be hesitant to do that.

And thats about all the explaining I can give on my personal feelings ;) I appreciate that you disagree (quite strongly I guess...) and are a big Brubaker supporter,
Actually, I feel more strongly about the insults being slung Brubaker's way. It's stupid. Also, I do like Brubaker, but I've had my share of problems with his run on Uncanny X-Men--as I have mentioned.

but the unfortunate matter is that many fans wanted more from Corsair's death and Havok staying behind in space, or they wanted something different. Nothings going to change that, outside of what they want to happen actually happening.
Well, we've heard the same whining and complaining for months, and it still hasn't changed what happened.

[Fatguy]

Actually, I feel more strongly about the insults being slung Brubaker's way. It's stupid. Also, I do like Brubaker, but I've had my share of problems with his run on Uncanny X-Men--as I have mentioned.

Yea, I agree, its pretty weak for a creator to be called a prick or any other name. Thats a problem with people in a creative medium, people act like they know someone based on their work or what little is seen of them in interviews. Its a bit harsh.

Well, we've heard the same whining and complaining for months, and it still hasn't changed what happened.

Exactly, which is why I dont know why there's so much to argue about in this thread. Some are pissed, some dont care, some say its fine. Its been discussed and nothing has or will change. The problem is, that some people decide to point out why the disagreeing party is wrong instead of just leaving them to their opinions.

[Novaya Havoc]

http://www.coolest-gadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/06/pushpin.jpg

[jester1436]

Honestly, I'd just like to see us go back to one X-Men book, paired down to the essential characters with guest appearances by everyone else. Give it the Spider-Man treatment. Put an amazing creative team on it, and I'm there. It would certainly solve some of these floating cast problems. Unfortunately, I know we're stuck with a line of X-Books. It's just my pipe dream.

I don't think I could deal with a single streamlined X-Men book honestly, because there are so many side characters as is, having "essential" characters and then occasional guest stars wouldn't work for me, you'd get maybe the Astonishing cast plus maybe Storm or a couple others. A lot of characters who are already ignored would be even more likely to be packed away. It's more of a task to contain a team franchise than a franchise based on the adventures of one man.

Unless the streamlined book featured a variety of X-Men teams doing a variety of tasks with different creative teams and such much like Spider-Man. Divide the big names up with the smaller leagues but with good writers and artists. I'd go for that.

[Slung]

We've covered the fact that the Astonishing cast appears in other places. We've also covered that those appearances are never of any real consequence. This would have to be of real consequence, and I can see why Brubaker would be hesitant to do that. As I've said - there aren't major consequences unless a writer decided to make it have major consequences. No one is going to use Corsair's death in a story except Brubaker. It is thus left for Brubaker to use a panel or two to convey that Scott at least knows his father is dead. It isn't too much to ask for some responsibility to a major story arcs ending. I'm not bashing Brubaker 'cause I think its fun. I'm just saying it was a mistake. So was killing off Banshee and barely giving it a second notice.

Actually, I feel more strongly about the insults being slung Brubaker's way. It's stupid. Also, I do like Brubaker, but I've had my share of problems with his run on Uncanny X-Men--as I have mentioned.
He has some heavy weakness in his writing abilities - he seems unable to wrap up his stories before jumping headfirst into his next. I don't hate Brubaker. I just don't feel his heart in the stories or that he really knows a lot about the X-Men as characters. I enjoyed pieces of his ShiAr arc (notably the first issue - which seemed very promising). But he has a cavalier attitude when it comes to killing characters and then having closure from other characters. He also struggles with his portrayal of women - his X-Women have often come across flat and/or objectified. These are not insults but critiques.

He is not a bad person. He is not a jerk. He is very competent writer and does a great job with solo titles featuring male leads with a good supporting cast. He has had a difficult time juggling multiple characters in Uncanny and many of his main characters are little more than wallpaper (Kurt and Lorna in RAFOTHSE).

Not showing Cyclops' reaction to Corsair's death was a major mistake. There is no way around that. It was a mistake to set up Scott in the opening chapter as the character the team would be returning home to reunite/face and then not following up on that. It is a basic part of fictional writing. I know you know this Chris as a theater major. Scott's reaction was critical to properly ending the story. Without it, the impact of the story is lost.

With the way characters are shared in the X-Universe, having Scott discover his father is dead would not have hurt any other current stories. In X-Men WWH, Scott dealt with his feelings for Xavier - huge beat in a mini. In Phoenix Endsong and Warsong, there were huge moments for the Emma and Scott that did not effect or ruin Whedon's stories. Huge things are happening with Beast's character in Endangered Species - this is not ruining Astonishing X-Men. Wolverine has BIG moments happening in his two ongoings and Avengers and this is not taking away from Whedon's book. Storm was just buried alive in Uncanny - this could be problematic for Black Panther and Fantastic Four books. But it still happened.

As you can see, having Scott deal with his father's death would not have been out of the ordinary in the shared X-Men universe. Actually not having Scott even acknowledge his father's death is what is so unusual. If Brubaker kills off Storm this next month, I expect to see reactions from Kitty. I don't expect to see them in Astonishing because they are currently in space fighting aliens. I would expect Brubaker to show Kitty as a supporting character mourning her dear friend. If Carey kills off Iceman, I expect Cyclops to acknowledge it in Adjectiveless as a supporting character - not in Astonishing as he is currently floating in deep space.


Well, we've heard the same whining and complaining for months, and it still hasn't changed what happened.
And it probably won't. It still doesn't make Brubaker's decision right.

[Omega Alpha]

About dealing with Cyclops' relatives deaths, Carey said he will show Scott dealing with his son's "death" (the " " are mine) in X-men #204. If Carey does it with a character that is not even dead, why Brubaker can't do it with one that is actually deceased?

And great post, Slung.

[Slung]

About dealing with Cyclops' relatives deaths, Carey said he will show Scott dealing with his son's "death" (the " " are mine) in X-men #204. If Carey does it with a character that is not even dead, why Brubaker can't do it with one that is actually deceased?

And great post, Slung.

Thanks OA. :)

[Metallurgique]

Just a couple of points relevant to the discussion.

I hear alot of "Space Pirate? What a stupid idea" and "Space Pirate? I hate that kind of story.." in regards to Corsair.

Try to remember that Corsair and the Starjammers were introduced in the later months of 1977. Can anyone think of a major cultural touchstone that revolved around space adventure and came out in 1977? Anybody? No? I'm not Chris Claremont, but I'd bet dollars to donuts that Corsair and his crew were originally meant, in part, to bring some of Han Solo's magic to the book, and at that time the X-men were still a bi-monthly franchise only recently recovered from the brink of cancellation.

Maybe the concept seems dated now, maybe Corsiar just wasn't written properly in the last couple of decades (which wouldn't really matter to Bru, because he admittedly hadn't read anything X-related in about that amount of time when he took the job of writing UXM). But the idea worked and didn't cause anybody to laugh in 1977.

Banshee and Corsair are both dead now and it would be hard to see them coming back from what Brubaker wrote for their deaths. Did these deaths serve any real purpose? Not to my eyes. We didn't even get any real shock value out of them, honestly, from the characters they effected - except for PAD's wonderful episode about Siryn's denial of Sean's death.

--

"Rise and fall" focused far too much on Vulcan and Korvus and almost not at all on the X-cast within it. We got two solo Vulcan episodes with no X-men at all, and most of the X-cast were relegated to one or two lines of dialogue an issue after the first two issues. A whole year of this flat, flat story and it still wasn't resolved at all. And people don't expect that this arc and it's creator won't come in for some criticism? Come on. After all the hollering about "The Draco" and "She lies with Angels" - at least those stories dealt with the cast, and at least they didn't drag along for a whole year, and at least they were mostly resolved. What if you'd had to read two Azazel solo issues to finish that story only to discover that they just shifted topics in the middle and went on to something completely different? And then you had to buy an Azazel mini series to finish it and get those characters back?

Bru doesn't have a feel for these characters, and yeah, he does come off prickish in the interview.

When I started reading the X-books I knew for sure that I was a minority that was hated and feared just for being who I was. There were only three X-books back then, and it sure sucked to be Gay in America. And here he is, he totally misses the metaphor of the X-men, and now he's had a great epiphany. Well welcome to 1963 Ed! Glad to see you could make it!

I think calling all his work crap is way over the line. He's very good at Cap and DareDevil and books like that. But I think a good deal of the criticism aimed at him in this thread is 100% accurate.

[Christopher O]

As I've said - there aren't major consequences unless a writer decided to make it have major consequences. No one is going to use Corsair's death in a story except Brubaker. It is thus left for Brubaker to use a panel or two to convey that Scott at least knows his father is dead. It isn't too much to ask for some responsibility to a major story arcs ending. I'm not bashing Brubaker 'cause I think its fun. I'm just saying it was a mistake. So was killing off Banshee and barely giving it a second notice.
I guess it just comes down to a difference of opinion. I don't think it was necessary to show Scott's reaction. As Gene said earlier, we can all guess how he'd react. Scott isn't one of Brubaker's main cast, and I'd much rather see the focus on those characters that are.

He has some heavy weakness in his writing abilities - he seems unable to wrap up his stories before jumping headfirst into his next. I don't hate Brubaker. I just don't feel his heart in the stories or that he really knows a lot about the X-Men as characters. I enjoyed pieces of his ShiAr arc (notably the first issue - which seemed very promising). But he has a cavalier attitude when it comes to killing characters and then having closure from other characters.
I also had my share of problems with the Shi'ar arc, but I stand by statement that it isn't his responsibility to give closure to characters that aren't part of his cast. He's not responsible for Siryn or Cyclops.

He also struggles with his portrayal of women - his X-Women have often come across flat and/or objectified. These are not insults but critiques.
I've also had some trouble with his characterization of the women in particular. I don't mind Hepzibah, and his Storm is decent, but Polaris and Rachel both ended up being disappointingly uninteresting.

He is not a bad person. He is not a jerk. He is very competent writer and does a great job with solo titles featuring male leads with a good supporting cast. He has had a difficult time juggling multiple characters in Uncanny and many of his main characters are little more than wallpaper (Kurt and Lorna in RAFOTHSE).
I don't disagree that he may be having diffulty with specific characters. His Kurt has been especially dull.

Not showing Cyclops' reaction to Corsair's death was a major mistake. There is no way around that. It was a mistake to set up Scott in the opening chapter as the character the team would be returning home to reunite/face and then not following up on that. It is a basic part of fictional writing. I know you know this Chris as a theater major. Scott's reaction was critical to properly ending the story. Without it, the impact of the story is lost.
Again, some of you guys are assuming that he was setting up for some sort of later confrontation between Xavier and Cyclops. That's all assumption on your parts. As you mentioned, I've studied theatre, and I understand conflict and resolution. I also understand that we didn't get a lot of that in the Shi'ar story. However, I won't concede on the Cyclops issue. Your assumption that he was setting something up doesnt' make it so. Your declaration that it was a mistake also doesn't make it so. Cyclops provided some initial conflict for Brubaker's actual cast. That was his purpose, and he served it.


With the way characters are shared in the X-Universe, having Scott discover his father is dead would not have hurt any other current stories. In X-Men WWH, Scott dealt with his feelings for Xavier - huge beat in a mini. In Phoenix Endsong and Warsong, there were huge moments for the Emma and Scott that did not effect or ruin Whedon's stories. Huge things are happening with Beast's character in Endangered Species - this is not ruining Astonishing X-Men. Wolverine has BIG moments happening in his two ongoings and Avengers and this is not taking away from Whedon's book.

All of this is true, but Brubaker mentioned not feeling comfortable with it. Unlike Beast, I can accept that as his reason and not just a tired excuse.

Storm was just buried alive in Uncanny - this could be problematic for Black Panther and Fantastic Four books. But it still happened.
Well, unless he plans to keep her under there for months, I don't see how. It's not like she hasn't dealt with being buried alive before, which is another criticism of mine. At this point, it's just played out. Of course, I'll wait to see how things are resolved before passing judgement.


As you can see, having Scott deal with his father's death would not have been out of the ordinary in the shared X-Men universe. Actually not having Scott even acknowledge his father's death is what is so unusual. If Brubaker kills off Storm this next month, I expect to see reactions from Kitty. I don't expect to see them in Astonishing because they are currently in space fighting aliens. I would expect Brubaker to show Kitty as a supporting character mourning her dear friend. If Carey kills off Iceman, I expect Cyclops to acknowledge it in Adjectiveless as a supporting character - not in Astonishing as he is currently floating in deep space.

Well, you're perfectly within your rights to have expectations, but that doesn't make it Bru's responsibility to handle characters that aren't part of his cast and his story. That's just not how it works.



And it probably won't. It still doesn't make Brubaker's decision right.

It also doesn't make it wrong.

[Omega Alpha]

Just a couple of points relevant to the discussion.

I hear alot of "Space Pirate? What a stupid idea" and "Space Pirate? I hate that kind of story.." in regards to Corsair.

Try to remember that Corsair and the Starjammers were introduced in the later months of 1977. Can anyone think of a major cultural touchstone that revolved around space adventure and came out in 1977? Anybody? No? I'm not Chris Claremont, but I'd bet dollars to donuts that Corsair and his crew were originally meant, in part, to bring some of Han Solo's magic to the book, and at that time the X-men were still a bi-monthly franchise only recently recovered from the brink of cancellation.

Maybe the concept seems dated now, maybe Corsiar just wasn't written properly in the last couple of decades (which wouldn't really matter to Bru, because he admittedly hadn't read anything X-related in about that amount of time when he took the job of writing UXM). But the idea worked and didn't cause anybody to laugh in 1977.

While i don't like it, i can understand. But it was unecessary for Corsair to be Cyclops' father, and didn't add anything to both characters; in fact, quite the opposite, since it lessens Cyke's relationship with Xavier to have a real father, and made Corsair pretty much the worse father of the MU, except for villainous ones, of course.

[Slung]

I guess it just comes down to a difference of opinion. I don't think it was necessary to show Scott's reaction. As Gene said earlier, we can all guess how he'd react. Scott isn't one of Brubaker's main cast, and I'd much rather see the focus on those characters that are.
As far as we know, Scott wasn't even told Corsair died. Don't you think thats a bit...odd at least?


I also had my share of problems with the Shi'ar arc, but I stand by statement that it isn't his responsibility to give closure to characters that aren't part of his cast. He's not responsible for Siryn or Cyclops.
He is responsible to his reader however to give a story that has some sort of ending.


I've also had some trouble with his characterization of the women in particular. I don't mind Hepzibah, and his Storm is decent, but Polaris and Rachel both ended up being disappointingly uninteresting.
His Hepzibah seems a bit...off to me. She is like Feral suddenly not the Hepzibah I remember.

Again, some of you guys are assuming that he was setting up for some sort of later confrontation between Xavier and Cyclops. That's all assumption on your parts. As you mentioned, I've studied theatre, and I understand conflict and resolution. I also understand that we didn't get a lot of that in the Shi'ar story. However, I won't concede on the Cyclops issue. Your assumption that he was setting something up doesnt' make it so. Your declaration that it was a mistake also doesn't make it so. Cyclops provided some initial conflict for Brubaker's actual cast. That was his purpose, and he served it.
It doesn't matter what I assume. As far as storytelling goes, Brubaker told us that Cyclops' reaction was going to be an important part of the end whether he meant to or not. If Cyclops' was only meant to serve a superficial purpose at the beginning of the arc, Brubaker did a poor job of conveying that. I've studied theater and writing as well.

My guess would be that Brubaker initially meant for Cyclops to show up at the end, but perhaps caught wind of his "fate" in Astonishing and decided not to deal with it. When next he learned that he could have dealt with it, he decided it was too late and had already moved on. Thats my guess - but its purely speculation.

All of this is true, but Brubaker mentioned not feeling comfortable with it. Unlike Beast, I can accept that as his reason and not just a tired excuse.
Whether or not it was an excuse at the time, he could still rectify the problem and give us a reaction from Scott. It would certainly appease the masses and put a little humanity in his book - which is one of the things that has sorely been lacking.


Well, unless he plans to keep her under there for months, I don't see how. It's not like she hasn't dealt with being buried alive before, which is another criticism of mine. At this point, it's just played out. Of course, I'll wait to see how things are resolved before passing judgement.
Sure, but being buried alive is certainly something that should have longterm effects on a claustophobic individual - not to mention she can't have escaped that without a scratch.

Well, you're perfectly within your rights to have expectations, but that doesn't make it Bru's responsibility to handle characters that aren't part of his cast and his story. That's just not how it works.
His responsibility, as I said above, is to give the reader a full story. So far he has given readers pieces of stories and left it up to other writers to pick up those pieces and make them work for his audience.

It also doesn't make it wrong.
From a storytelling stand point: yes it does. :)

[dotdotdot]

i just want to say that the issues with vulcan, shi'ar intrigue, and not a single x-man were ballsy and fantastic. this is the sort of epic feel the book used to have, and it's a huge return to the sort of drama and moxie at the height of claremont's run with the series, and if his name were attached to this instead of brubaker, most of you wouldn't be complaining about who is or isn't in the damned issue.

[Christopher O]

As far as we know, Scott wasn't even told Corsair died. Don't you think thats a bit...odd at least?
Honestly, I just don't care. I never liked Corsair, and I'm really not interested in Scott being forced into a book simply to appease a subset of fans.


He is responsible to his reader however to give a story that has some sort of ending.
Well, we did have an ending with some resolution--not a lot but some. Cyclops not making an appearance doesn't change that, since it wasn't his story to begin with.

His Hepzibah seems a bit...off to me. She is like Feral suddenly not the Hepzibah I remember.
I don't get that at all. She seems nothing like the rude and crude Feral.

It doesn't matter what I assume. As far as storytelling goes, Brubaker told us that Cyclops' reaction was going to be an important part of the end whether he meant to or not.
No, he didn't. That's what you read into it. You imposed your own expectations, as we all do.

If Cyclops' was only meant to serve a superficial purpose at the beginning of the arc, Brubaker did a poor job of conveying that.
I think he did fine. I had no trouble discerning Scott's purpose in this.

I've studied theater and writing as well.
Cool.

My guess would be that Brubaker initially meant for Cyclops to show up at the end, but perhaps caught wind of his "fate" in Astonishing and decided not to deal with it. When next he learned that he could have dealt with it, he decided it was too late and had already moved on. Thats my guess - but its purely speculation.
That's possible, and it's something I'm OK with. It doesn't change the fact that Scott did indeed serve a purpose in the beginning, even if there was a plan for more.

Whether or not it was an excuse at the time, he could still rectify the problem and give us a reaction from Scott. It would certainly appease the masses and put a little humanity in his book - which is one of the things that has sorely been lacking.
Well, I hope he does, if only to end all of the moaning.


Sure, but being buried alive is certainly something that should have longterm effects on a claustophobic individual - not to mention she can't have escaped that without a scratch.
Well, aside from the initial event that caused her claustrophobia, being buried alive has never had any real longterm impact on Storm. In fact, she usually overcomes it. Besides, Bru mentioned that Storm is back indefintely. She's part of the cast, so perhaps he's more comfortable dealing with her more directly than he was with Cyclops.

His responsibility, as I said above, is to give the reader a full story. So far he has given readers pieces of stories and left it up to other writers to pick up those pieces and make them work for his audience.
No, I think he definitely gave us a complete story. It didn't have a whole lot of resolution, but all of the elements were there. Of course, this is a serial medium, so most stories generally don't have absolute finality.

From a storytelling stand point: yes it does. :)
No, it doesn't. We can do this all night, but this isn't something you can actually prove.

[Pach!]

As far as we know, Scott wasn't even told Corsair died. Don't you think thats a bit...odd at least?



He is responsible to his reader however to give a story that has some sort of ending.



His Hepzibah seems a bit...off to me. She is like Feral suddenly not the Hepzibah I remember.


It doesn't matter what I assume. As far as storytelling goes, Brubaker told us that Cyclops' reaction was going to be an important part of the end whether he meant to or not. If Cyclops' was only meant to serve a superficial purpose at the beginning of the arc, Brubaker did a poor job of conveying that. I've studied theater and writing as well.

My guess would be that Brubaker initially meant for Cyclops to show up at the end, but perhaps caught wind of his "fate" in Astonishing and decided not to deal with it. When next he learned that he could have dealt with it, he decided it was too late and had already moved on. Thats my guess - but its purely speculation.


Whether or not it was an excuse at the time, he could still rectify the problem and give us a reaction from Scott. It would certainly appease the masses and put a little humanity in his book - which is one of the things that has sorely been lacking.



Sure, but being buried alive is certainly something that should have longterm effects on a claustophobic individual - not to mention she can't have escaped that without a scratch.


His responsibility, as I said above, is to give the reader a full story. So far he has given readers pieces of stories and left it up to other writers to pick up those pieces and make them work for his audience.


From a storytelling stand point: yes it does. :)
I think it's safe to assume that he did find out, and he got mad. In fact James mentions that Hepz should talk to Scott about Corsair's death. So I guess he knows.

[Christopher O]

i just want to say that the issues with vulcan, shi'ar intrigue, and not a single x-man were ballsy and fantastic. this is the sort of epic feel the book used to have, and it's a huge return to the sort of drama and moxie at the height of claremont's run with the series, and if his name were attached to this instead of brubaker, most of you wouldn't be complaining about who is or isn't in the damned issue.
I actually hated the Vulcan issues. I thought they were uninteresting and prolonged an already too long story. I much preferred the issues focusing on the X-Men.

[Omega Alpha]

i just want to say that the issues with vulcan, shi'ar intrigue, and not a single x-man were ballsy and fantastic. this is the sort of epic feel the book used to have, and it's a huge return to the sort of drama and moxie at the height of claremont's run with the series, and if his name were attached to this instead of brubaker, most of you wouldn't be complaining about who is or isn't in the damned issue.

Your post= saying that, if Martin Scorcese directed The Bad Boys, people wouldn't complain about it being a brainless and dull action movie or if Hitchcock directed that flight movie with Jodie Forster, people wouldn't be complaining about it being a mediocre thriller. I'm going to give you sometime to figure it out why.

[Slung]

We can do this all night, but this isn't something you can actually prove.
All night? I think we should have a least a precursory date first, don't you?

(I'm stubborn, your stubborn. I suggest a truce :)).

[Slung]

Your post= saying that, if Martin Scorcese directed The Bad Boys, people wouldn't complain about it being a brainless and dull action movie or if Hitchcock directed that flight movie with Jodie Forster, people wouldn't be complaining about it being a mediocre thriller. I'm going to give you sometime to figure it out why.

Hitchcock did direct that lame flight movie with Jodie Foster - except it was on a train and the little girl was an old lady and it was actually good. "The Lady Vanishes" is a classic. Stupid Hollywood remaking everything. :)

And I'm guessing if Claremont wrote RAFOTSE that MANY more people would be complaining and talking about how he was ignoring continuity and he left people in limbo again (like in Revolution) and he didn't understand Lorna and Alex and he made Rachel a lesbian who thought Korvus was a chick. The moaning would go on and on. Fortunately Brubaker wrote it and we now only have to hear a little complaining.

[Christopher O]

All night? I think we should have a least a precursory date first, don't you?

(I'm stubborn, your stubborn. I suggest a truce :)).
LOL
I can dig a truce. We're obviously approaching this from different angles. I did enjoy your nicely articulated posts that kept the criticism on the work itself. It was refreshing and appreciated.

[Slung]

LOL
I can dig a truce. We're obviously approaching this from different angles. I did enjoy your nicely articulated posts that kept the criticism on the work itself. It was refreshing and appreciated.

Sweet. So, uh, I'm free next Friday night. But you've got to promise to keep your wandering hands wandering in your own pockets.

[Christopher O]

Sweet. So, uh, I'm free next Friday night. But you've got to promise to keep your wandering hands wandering in your own pockets.
Ha! My wandering hands? I believe you'll discover your own hands doing the wandering, if I even agree to this little dalliance, that is.

[Slung]

Ha! My wandering hands? I believe you'll discover your own hands doing the wandering, if I even agree to this little dalliance, that is.

Now you are trying to make this my idea? After you wanted to go at it all night long. Jeesh. Hot. Cold. Hot. Cold.

[Christopher O]

Now you are trying to make this my idea? After you wanted to go at it all night long. Jeesh. Hot. Cold. Hot. Cold.
Yeah, that's me. I'm crazy like that.

[Fatguy]

Again, some of you guys are assuming that he was setting up for some sort of later confrontation between Xavier and Cyclops. That's all assumption on your parts. As you mentioned, I've studied theatre, and I understand conflict and resolution. I also understand that we didn't get a lot of that in the Shi'ar story. However, I won't concede on the Cyclops issue. Your assumption that he was setting something up doesnt' make it so. Your declaration that it was a mistake also doesn't make it so. Cyclops provided some initial conflict for Brubaker's actual cast. That was his purpose, and he served it.


I totally agree actually, I dont think he was setting anything up, I think he was just touching on the tension between the two that had been previously established.