the vynsane asylum

Rollo Tomassi wrote:especially in recent light of what Prof X has done all this time ( Prof X is one of the biggest douches in the Marvel Universe. had the X-Men known about his two faced, duplicitous, hypocritical ass, they would've sided with Magneto years ago.)

He's been lying about not being able to walk all these years, hasn't he?

Well, first off, in general he's always going on about how he would never intrude on people's thoughts uninvited, but every other fucking issue, he's busting into somebody's room with the old "I couldn't help but overhear your psychic voice. It was really loud. Is everything all right?" Please. Fuck you with your intrusive busybody telepathy.

Second, in the past couple of years it's come to light that he was part of some "morally questionable" events and organizations. The two that come immediately to mind are secretly joining the Illuminati, eletist Super-hero assholes, and the disastrous psychic training of Vulcan's X-Men to go rescue the original squad. The repercussions of both of those poor choices far outweighed whatever initial idea he had going in.

And then there's the whole Onslaught thing, for which he seemed inversely unapologetic compared to the amount of emotional and percerptional damage he did to the Marvel Universe and Human/Mutant relations.

I know early in his career, he was making shady choices dealing with the likes of Magneto, but my memory is fuzzy about exact details.

In short, Professor Charles Xavier is one ginormous hypocritical douche. if I ever write for Marvel, I'm making him X-Baddie Numero Uno. Scott is going to say something to the effect of "I was raised to live life by a set of ideals. The man who taught me those ideals has never once followed his own teaching. Get the fuck out of my X-Mansion."

And that's interesting... in as much as I'm pretty much 100% in the opposing camp. To me, the Illuminati are douchey just because they've decided on their own that they're the best and brightest - kinda like politicians being able to legislate their own pay raises.

To question Charles' motives and morals would be the same as questioning Reed Richards'. Both are guilty of possessing egos that allow them to believe that they themselves are the only people that can understand (let alone solve) certain problems that arise. As a result, they drag others along for the ride, always failing to provide all the pertinent information because how could they ever hope to understand what it's like to have a brain like mine? Many have suffered the consequences of these types of decisions - the other members of the Fantastic Four and the Summers family to name a few.

I don't call Reed's morals into question. Much like politics, I don't necessarily need to know that everything is being done "by the book" or "above the table" as long as I know the people in charge have my best interests at heart. In both these mens' cases, their followers believe that (well, not so much for Charles' right now, but overall they have and will again). To me, Scott would be an excellent choice to go offside and start acting like a bad guy - it's his world that has had the carpet pulled out from underneath it more than anyone else's.

I think Reed Richards is an eletist douche too.

I agree - but he acts in good faith, as does Charles. Tony Stark on the other hand, is a calculating punk-ass ho who uses his big brain and influence to further his own agenda, both politically and financially. The Hulk should kill him.

Remember that Simpsons episode where the Springfield MENSA chapter took over the town because they thought they could do better because they were smarter?

Yeah...something like that.

Alright, I finally caught up on a stack of Wolverine back issues, leading up until the end of the Jeph Loeb arc where &&&&&&&&& dies at the end (again).

We know he won't stay dead. Why do they bother? Honestly, the more X-stuff I read, the more of it gets filtered through my "That didn't really happen in the X-Universe" filter... which isn't really supposed to to have to be working when I read the core titles.

In my mind, the only X-Adventure really happening right now is Astonishing - the other stuff is "nice to read" at best. Before Astonishing, the last "real" arc ended with Morrison's finale in New X-Men, which was actually not a bad place to leave the X-Universe if one was looking to do that.

I almost wish I had the motivation of our gracious host Vynnie - I'd start up my own X-Men site and judge every X-story ever as either "Real" or not. Period. In or out. Not that anyone else would care (and not that I'd want to go and read a HUGE pile of x-carp that I've passed on over the years)...... but I think such a thing could be useful in steering new readers away from the hundreds (thousands?) of cow patties that litter the X-History meadow.

Anything by Larry Hama, John Byrne, Grant Morrison, Peter David, or Chris Claremont (the first go-round only) is canon. Everything else is questionable.

Y'know, that's pretty clearly defined. If I had read the entire Larry Hama run on Wolverine (and thus felt it would be fair to comment), I might agree with you.

Did Chris write any of X-Force? If so, would that be considered part of his first go 'round? I know he left X-Men after about 6 issues (wasn't the first Magneto arc on "New" X-Men touted as the last Chris Claremont X-Men story?), but where did he leave New Mutants/X-Force?

Should we automatically include Walt & Louise Simonson on X-Factor? That book rocked ass out of the gate.

Yeah, I forgot the Simonsons. Anything they touch automatically rocks. Especially when both of them touch it. Fuck, even Walter's signature is cooler than a lot of artists' whole portfolios.

Claremont didn't write X-Force, at least when I was reading. Nicieza had the last couple of issues of New Mutants (along with Liefeld), and was on X-Force from the onset. As I remember, Marvel tried to hype the hot artists (who would, unknown to them, soon be jumping ship for Image) by allowing them to plot stuff. Claremont had the first six (?) issues of adjectiveless, and I think Byrne took over after that for an issue or two.

God, Fabian Nicienza.... some barf just went into my mouth. Jeph Loeb did a good job on Uncanny around the Onslaught era - there was also a good artist named Joe Madureira that left for independent books after a nice stint on Uncanny. Not that they automatically make the list, but I was enjoying Uncanny in and around that time (starting with Age of Apocalypse, as a matter of fact). Not sure if it would still hold up now though.

jjreason wrote:I almost wish I had the motivation of our gracious host Vynnie - I'd start up my own X-Men site and judge every X-story ever as either "Real" or not. Period. In or out. Not that anyone else would care (and not that I'd want to go and read a HUGE pile of x-carp that I've passed on over the years)...... but I think such a thing could be useful in steering new readers away from the hundreds (thousands?) of cow patties that litter the X-History meadow.

i think i smell a column at comics-database.com... i should really get off my ass and create the x-men section...

I've begun to realize (again) that Nicieza isn't the antichrist. At one point, I really liked him. Then he seemed to overextend himself--remember when he was writing just about every non-Spidey book at Marvel? The quality shot straight to hell, especially on the X-Men. His X-Men sucked balls, and he was writing or co-writing all the books except X-Factor at one point or another.

But in reading interviews with other writers about how the X-books work, it could've been a lack of motivation. I mean, I'd have a hard time writing an ensemble book with editors breathing down my neck and other people coming up with stories, all of which have to be wedged in between massive crossovers every six months.

In any case, Nicieza's better work (especially New Warriors) is still good stuff. When he's on, he's really on. But he does have a definite tendency to be off, especially when writing multiple books at once.

Chux, Fabian Nicienza isn't the only good, creative writer to have been stifled by Marvel when writing the X-books. For YEARS, the status quo has been held (Jeph Loeb was hemmed in very tightly - no one getting killed without a plan to bring them back, no major shakeups) to avoid from having any decline in interest for the franchise. The originality and unpredictability that made X-Men great in the 80's has been reigned in so tightly, that any true departure is VERY noticeable (and usually great - Grant Morrison, of course, fits in here). I think that over the last couple of years they've been a bit more "risky" (again thinking of Morrison, but also allowing Joss Whedon to do whatever he wants on Astonishing) and the stuff has been better.

Why the FUCK they wouldn't have given Uncanny to Whedon and Cassaday is beyond me.

I was actually referring to the converse: Nicieza mainly sucked on the X-books because of "editorial input." I know Peter David was, at his prime (which he apparently ain't at no more) also pretty stifled. Hell, John Byrne quit after, what, two issues back in the early days of Adjectiveless.