the vynsane asylum

This article is mostly pretty spot-on. But the way #4 was worded, giving SOLE credit to the "all-new, all-different X-Men" to Chris Claremont, bugged me so much... I had to do something I generally hate doing: log on and become "that guy" who complains about factual errors.

Why is Bill Finger not on the list?

Heh. Steve Kirby. You suck.

Another thing about Lucas is that he hires a hundred talented young artists to bend over backwards designing every kind of spaceship, creature, environment, costume, etc imaginable, then walks thru the room, picks his five favorite designs out of the thousands, and then takes credit for ALL of them. What a shithead.

I didn't get the "Steve Kirby" and had to scour through the comments. I see that, had I actually sifted through all 300 earlier, I would've seen someone else brought it up. Maybe I missed it because someone claiming to know comic book history and misnaming Jack Kirby (without a "holy shit, I meant JACK Kirby!" comment) may as well not exist and my browser hid it from me because it was a waste of bandwidth.

(I used a different name there. I dunno why I do that. But if you know my favorite animal, and look up the craziest extreme extinct version of that animal, you'll get my cracked.com name.)

Most of that article is bullshit.

From everything I've read/heard Lindelof gets a ton of credit for Lost.

The Lucas bit was typical Lucas bashing. The things that happened behind the scenes are the type of thing that happens with any movie. Changes made during production are nothing new. Lucas could have easily said "no" to the Threepio voice change and kept his original plan, but he liked the suggestion and used it.

Gene Roddenberry, Matt Groening and Stan Lee (with Kirby) deserve all the credit for creating Star Trek, The Simpsons and X-Men because they fucking did. It was those that came later that deserve a ton of credit for reinvigorating the franchises or helping to shape each thing into what they eventually became.
Very few long running properties nail everything right out of the gate. There is a natural progression where characters and things change, expand and evolve. Without these changes, things get pretty stagnant and wither fast. Someone has to instigate these changes, and so what if it isn't the "God" of the series?

And I love how they say X-Men was so bad that it only lasted 6 years.

X-Men was pretty unpopular in the 60s. Quite a few of the first 93 issues are reprints, and there were a few long hiatuses (I think it may have actually been cancelled once or twice, but came back, too). It wasn't bad; it just didn't sell. I think someone (probably Lee himself) really liked the book, which is why it kept going as long as it did.

Re-reading it, the Groening one is off. He not only created the cartoon, but he made it so popular that it spun off another show. He also had Life in Hell prior to The Simpsons, and Futurama after, and I've heard it argued that either is better than The Simpsons. (I myself might argue that Futurama is superior to everything Simpsons after maybe the 13th season. In fact, I think I shall do that.)

Not to mention the article chooses to rob Conan O'Brien and Brad Bird of their sizable contributions.

1-68 were new issues. The book actually picked up steam with some amazing Neal Adams art over the last few issues before the book got put on the back burner. Bi-monthly reprints with new covers were created until #93.

Regardless, Claremont & Byrne together were the reason the book sailed. The issues between 108 & 143 plant all the seeds that will forever been drawn upon to create great X-stories (though Adams has been known to say that the Byrne run borrowed from his).

But enough. I'm trying to quit buying fucking X-Men and I'm finding it really god damned hard with them cheating & using Chris Bachalo as one of the artists. At least the story did nothing for me - especially the part where someone I don't approve of kissed Ms. Pryde (who's also answering the fan letters now as well - did you fucks rat me out as trying to quit???).

I haven't read any of the new Uncanny yet, but will get to that. I'm REALLY quitting Wolverine after #3, and Uncanny at the end of its first story arc.

No, really. I mean it.

I've thought the first new Uncanny Arc has been pretty weak, considering its Gillen writing.

The first Wax-Men arc is absurd and fun, but fundamentally Wolverine's entire team/reason for existing is obnoxious, wrong, sad, and naive.

The other 19 X-Men titles are fluff. I don't think even Marvel knows what their purposes are. They just keep them around and hope they sell enough copies every month to justify the next month's issue.

Funny how there's a trillion X-books again - Wasn't the whole 198/No more mutants supposed to streamline things?



There should be no more than 4 X-titles at most: 2 teams of X-Men, then 2 other X teams. I don't give a shit what those other two are since they'll be made of X-Men castoffs and rejects.

Hell, the entire Marvel Universe needs to be streamlined. Each team and big hero should each have 1 book and 1 book only, with a priority on making that book the best it can be.

Perhaps this could have gone in the EIC thread...

Supported. No hero/team/vein(?) of the Marvel U needs to be represented any more than weekly. X-Men & Avengers can pull that off - 3 series followed by an issue of a limited or a special on the off week. Every other character/team should be monthly - even Cap & the FF who seem to be pulling off bi-weekliness with aplomb.... it won't last.

So here's a fun fact. Wolverine reverts to its Legacy Numbering with 300 next month. And if you do the math it's seems kosher. His first series went to 189 issues, his second series went to 90, and his current series just hit 20.

189 + 90 + 20 = 299. Right?

Except Wolverine's douchebro son took over the second series with issue 75 until it ended. So Marvel doesn't consider those 'Wolverine' issues. Instead, the difference is made up by the Wolverine:Weapon X ongoing which lasted 16 issues before being replaced with the current ongoing. It's just a coinky-dink that Dark Wolverine 75-90 and Wolverine:Weapon X 1-16 happened to be 16 issues long. So really, it's

189 + 74 + 16 + 20 = 299

Just a fun little bit o' bar trivia for ya.

They won't get me this time. I've never thought Wolverine's ongoing was a necessary part of the Marvel U anyhow - he's so much the focus in X-men it just becomes silly after awhile. Kinda like the current Spider-Man.

Something just occurred to me.
Now that Kitty is Headmistress, Anybody want to wager how long before we get a splash page with a student yelling "Professor Pryde is a Jerk!!"

I'm surprised we haven't yet.

Does X-Men still deal with the daily lives of the mutants, or is it all a virtual handjob for Wolverine?

Yeah, I grew up reading comics in the 80s and 90s. And I still think Wolverine is more overexposed now than ever. That's really damned bad.

I have no regard or care for the "young troubled" mutants who have been around the x-books in the last few years. They do deal with those issues however.