red snow Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 10 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: That's like saying an MMA fighter who keeps getting his ass kicked is the fittest simply because he sticks around and keeps continuing his dissappointing career. If he's having kids, it's all good. No point being the champ and dying young. But all supervillains suffer from this ultimately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 21 minutes ago, red snow said: If he's having kids, it's all good. No point being the champ and dying young. But all supervillains suffer from this ultimately. Oh off course, but that's why I consider it moronic to make the very foundation of a villainous character to be survival of the fittest, because it in essence is based on being top-dog and being massively succesful, which you know, Apocalypse is not. This being said, I know of one villain who would be deserving of the Survival of the fittest label due to winning a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Quote (you could use this argument for pretty much every character, one of the problems with works of superhero fiction) Yes, that's my point. Arguing that a character is distinctive or interesting because of story events he was part of, rather than his characteristics, is generally a bad idea. Quote (disagree, always felt he was an even bigger underachiever than even somebody like say Kilgrave, considering his means and powers and the underlying principle he is based on is being the strongest, which he constantly fails to live up to) Sure, but that's the execution, not the concept. Quote (I dont, you cant convince me Red Skull, The Joker, Bullseye, Killgrave, Copperhead, Dormammu, Obadiah Stane, Apocalypse or wolfgang Von Strucker among others are redeemable). When I say 'irredeemable' I mean 'can't be made into an interesting character that people want to read about'. I'm not speaking morally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 40 minutes ago, mormont said: Yes, that's my point. Arguing that a character is distinctive or interesting because of story events he was part of, rather than his characteristics, is generally a bad idea. But the atrocities he commited is an extension of who he is as a character. Good luck selling genocide with Magneto. But hey if they can make the Mutant Massacre work with somebody else, im down with it. 40 minutes ago, mormont said: Sure, but that's the execution, not the concept. To make the underlying concept on which Apocalypse is made work, he basically has to win or at least be highly succesful, this puts a ton of writers in a jam from the start. It is a crippling concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 4 hours ago, Morpheus said: Is Apocalypse really any less ridiculous than Sinister? His powers are even more ill defined, he is the apex of the trend of making villains more and more ridiculously OP so that they lose all bite when they continually fail to live up to those powers and their goals. Outside of Age of Apocalypse, Poccy has amounted to little more than a wet fart. At least if this were taking place in the MCU, they could stick to canon and show that Apocalypse is really just the Celestials' bitch. Yeah, I basically agree there. Apocalypse was basically the first in a long line of ridiculously over-powered X-baddies that Claremont more or less pulled out of his ass half formed. At least Apocalypse was the first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 49 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: But the atrocities he commited is an extension of who he is as a character. Good luck selling genocide with Magneto. But hey if they can make the Mutant Massacre work with somebody else, im down with it. I liked the Mutant Massacre storyline, but I can't say I even remember Mr. Sinister's part in it. I think Sabretooth was probably the most memorable villain in that arc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 40 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: I liked the Mutant Massacre storyline, but I can't say I even remember Mr. Sinister's part in it. I think Sabretooth was probably the most memorable villain in that arc. Its true Sinister didnt do much of anything, he just gave the order. Sabretooth was definitely the most memorable villain, it truly gave us a view of how truly savage and psychotic he truly was. Riptide and Harpoon were pretty damn brutal too and watching Colossus snap Riptide's neck was very satisfying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 I wouldn't mind seeing them draw from some of the Whedon stuff at this point, especially for villains. Cassie Nova and Danger (a Shiar virus infected Danger Room in physical form) both come to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Just now, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: I wouldn't mind seeing them draw from some of the Whedon stuff at this point, especially for villains. Cassie Nova and Danger (a Shiar virus infected danger room in physical form) both come to mind. Im one of those nutjobs who considers Whedon's run overall to be better than Claremont's. He made a world involving a ridiculous amount of mutant work, especially considering he didnt have nearly as many issues out. Cassandra Nova is the perfect metaphor, she wasn't around long, yet she ultimately did more damage than pretty much any villain in Claremont's run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 17 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: Im one of those nutjobs who considers Whedon's run overall to be better than Claremont's. He made a world involving a ridiculous amount of mutant work, especially considering he didnt have nearly as many issues out. Cassandra Nova is the perfect metaphor, she wasn't around long, yet she ultimately did more damage than pretty much any villain in Claremont's run. Not sure I would go that far, but I really enjoyed Whedon's run. I'd say he managed to recapture much of the feel of the old Claremont/Cockrum/Bryne era X-Men, and managed to put his own mark on it as well. Cassie Nova was an awesome villain, without having to be this over-powered, ill defined Big Bad. She had one power really, and was just very creative (and insidious) with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 19 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: I wouldn't mind seeing them draw from some of the Whedon stuff at this point, especially for villains. Cassie Nova and Danger (a Shiar virus infected danger room in physical form) both come to mind. I definitely think they need to embrace the cosmic side of X-men. Starjammers could be a great X-men version of GOTG. Cassie Nova was fun but a bit weird. I'm still a big fan of Morrison's concept of humans going extinct and mutants being a bit counter culture/hipster. Danger was ok but the same character was done earlier by some other x-writers. The problem with a lot of tent-pole films is they tend to think the villain has to be an extinction level threat. There's plenty of cool X-men villains who are just out to make a quick buck (Juggernaut) or have a personal beef with a member of the X-men (usually Wolverine) but the movies seem to treat them as bit players if they aren't going to destroy the planet. I can sort of see why they avoid it as the approach never worked with Wolverine's solo movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 This, IMO, is one of the things that Cap3 does really well - that the threat isn't something huge, it's something personal. More Xmen stories would benefit from that too. Xavier having to save Magneto from humans (or other mutants) because he cares would be a perfect example of both the xmen mythos and how it differs from a lot of other superheroes and a way to differentiate in general. It's also why DoFP worked when it did. When it was about Xavier and Magneto both trying to save Mystique instead of stop the end of the world calamity, things worked. They were charming and interesting and fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 1 minute ago, Kalbear said: This, IMO, is one of the things that Cap3 does really well - that the threat isn't something huge, it's something personal. More Xmen stories would benefit from that too. Xavier having to save Magneto from humans (or other mutants) because he cares would be a perfect example of both the xmen mythos and how it differs from a lot of other superheroes and a way to differentiate in general. It's also why DoFP worked when it did. When it was about Xavier and Magneto both trying to save Mystique instead of stop the end of the world calamity, things worked. They were charming and interesting and fun. Couldn't agree more. That's why to me some group like The Hellfire Club is always going to be a more interesting choice as an adversary than say Apocalypse. It's personal. You've got a group of bionic henchmen, who are the way they are because Wolvie chopped them to pieces at one point. You've got a guy who mind-fucked Jean into becoming Dark Phoenix. There's a history there that adds a lot more flavor than the World Ending Baddie of the Year can bring to the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Dark Phoenix, IMO, is another excellent story that they could do - if they didn't fuck it up so badly in X3. It's kind of why I think Sinister can be good. He doesn't need to be trying to take over the world; he can simply be trying to fuck with the XMen and get something from them. Magneto on trial is another one that they could have done that would be cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Just now, Kalbear said: Dark Phoenix, IMO, is another excellent story that they could do - if they didn't fuck it up so badly in X3. It's kind of why I think Sinister can be good. He doesn't need to be trying to take over the world; he can simply be trying to fuck with the XMen and get something from them. Magneto on trial is another one that they could have done that would be cool. We had the first 3 films with Magneto as a focus one way or the other, then in First Class he was basically the MVP, then in DOFP he is once again the guy who's actions almost lead to the death of all the mutants and from what I read this new film will have him play a huge part as well. Please, by all that is holy in comic book land, enough of the Magneto. 15 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Not sure I would go that far, but I really enjoyed Whedon's run. I'd say he managed to recapture much of the feel of the old Claremont/Cockrum/Bryne era X-Men, and managed to put his own mark on it as well. Cassie Nova was an awesome villain, without having to be this over-powered, ill defined Big Bad. She had one power really, and was just very creative (and insidious) with it. Morrison and Whedon did a great job of showing a world with a large amount of mutant, yet making them work by showing how human they are. They also did well by pointing out that not all mutant have glorious powers (Beak, Angel, Wither). Id like to see Wolverine in the next couple of films, not Logan/James Howlett though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 35 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: I wouldn't mind seeing them draw from some of the Whedon stuff at this point, especially for villains. Cassie Nova and Danger (a Shiar virus infected Danger Room in physical form) both come to mind. They drew from Whedon's run for X3. Yeah, that worked. No, it would be nice to see them take some inspiration from it, yeah, but an awful lot of Whedon's story depends on X-Men history that just hasn't happened in the films (The Cassandra Nova plot depends heavily on both past relationships in the team and her having previously been defeated, Danger can't really work when we've seen the Danger Room for all of thirty seconds, in the shittest film, they can't focus on the aftermath of the Genosha tragedy without, you know, Genosha...). So it'd need a lot of prelim work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 2 minutes ago, polishgenius said: They drew from Whedon's run for X3. Yeah, that worked. X3 was a mess from start to finish though, and was a hopeless jumble of a bunch of different X-plots from the book. I don't think you could hang that failure on Whedon's door. You're right in that Danger would have to be set up properly. The Danger Room really should be a bigger part of the movie franchise. I think it's made more than one appearance, but it certainly hasn't been emphasized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: X3 was a mess from start to finish though, and was a hopeless jumble of a bunch of different X-plots from the book. I don't think you could hang that failure on Whedon's door. No, I wasn't being serious. We should never forget that Joss Whedon was responsible for the worst line in the first X-Men movie, though. And, apparently, nothing else in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Just now, polishgenius said: No, I wasn't being serious. We should never forget that Joss Whedon was responsible for the worst line in the first X-Men movie, though. And, apparently, nothing else in it. What line was that? Not familiar with that bit of lore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: What line was that? Not familiar with that bit of lore. Toad. Struck. Lightning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.