|
Post by Mormel on Jul 10, 2017 15:11:34 GMT -5
I don't recall if there was actually a moment when Scott and Jean were explicitly established as being a couple in the pre-reprint era. Maybe it was implied toward the end of the run. The closest we get to a confirmation that they're at last an item, is Uncanny X-Men #48, when the team has temporarily split up. Scott and Jean have decided to stay together, and there's a whole page on which Arnold Drake lets both of them fight off potential suitors. It's incidentally also the first issue Drake scripted by himself, so I guess he was eager to get rid off the "will they or won't they" stuff as well, and get some resolution. Jean is seen telling some other girls "You're poaching on MY reserve" and Scott refers to himself as Jean's "boyfriend".
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Jul 10, 2017 22:16:30 GMT -5
I don't recall if there was actually a moment when Scott and Jean were explicitly established as being a couple in the pre-reprint era. Maybe it was implied toward the end of the run. The closest we get to a confirmation that they're at last an item, is Uncanny X-Men #48, when the team has temporarily split up. Scott and Jean have decided to stay together, and there's a whole page on which Arnold Drake lets both of them fight off potential suitors. It's incidentally also the first issue Drake scripted by himself, so I guess he was eager to get rid off the "will they or won't they" stuff as well, and get some resolution. Jean is seen telling some other girls "You're poaching on MY reserve" and Scott refers to himself as Jean's "boyfriend". Ah, yes, Jean the model and Scott the disc jockey. And Jean gets hit on by her boss.
|
|
bran
Full Member
Posts: 223
|
Post by bran on Jul 11, 2017 14:40:53 GMT -5
wildfire2099 ... it's has one of my favorite splash page in that story and here it is. probably the first panel in super-heroes comics history with superhero's birthday, and the age explicitly said. Roy was probably planning to age them LOL.. I think it's a good idea because X-Men team is not set in stone, that would be refreshing (more frequent team changes, and they were changing them anyway). Wolverine, due his slow aging would probably stay to this day LOL (few gray hairs maybe..) come think about it, if that was the case some overarching continuity (that Marvel/Disney committees insist so much on) would be a bit less nonsensical.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 11, 2017 18:55:21 GMT -5
Yeah, its rare these days to get any time references at all... the companies all know we keep track, now, and keep things as ambiguous as possible. I definitely prefer the old way (characters actually aging and changing).. I suppose that puts a limit on the number of stories one can tell, but I don't think that's actually a bad thing.
And yes, I know the IPs are important, but its' not like you can have an 'untold tales' or out of continuity series after the character gets old and dies.
|
|
bran
Full Member
Posts: 223
|
Post by bran on Jul 12, 2017 1:04:54 GMT -5
Yeah, its rare these days to get any time references at all... the companies all know we keep track, now, and keep things as ambiguous as possible. I definitely prefer the old way (characters actually aging and changing).. I suppose that puts a limit on the number of stories one can tell, but I don't think that's actually a bad thing. And yes, I know the IPs are important, but its' not like you can have an 'untold tales' or out of continuity series after the character gets old and dies. exactly, there are many creative ways to do it. in DKR Miller aged (and practically killed) Batman (the character), but rejuvenated Batman title (property). now, in DKRIII they apparently did just the opposite (Lazarus lake arghhh, notice it didn't only heal him but made him younger and a lot nicer too... perhaps that's why DC super heroes don't age - Superman takes them to the lake every once in awhile..)
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Jul 12, 2017 1:34:24 GMT -5
Yeah, its rare these days to get any time references at all... the companies all know we keep track, now, and keep things as ambiguous as possible. I definitely prefer the old way (characters actually aging and changing).. I suppose that puts a limit on the number of stories one can tell, but I don't think that's actually a bad thing. And yes, I know the IPs are important, but its' not like you can have an 'untold tales' or out of continuity series after the character gets old and dies. exactly, there are many creative ways to do it. in DKR Miller aged (and practically killed) Batman (the character), but rejuvenated Batman title (property). now, in DKRIII they apparently did just the opposite (Lazarus lake arghhh, notice it didn't only heal him but made him younger and a lot nicer too... perhaps that's why DC super heroes don't age - Superman takes them to the lake every once in awhile..) on that note, wouldn't all the original new mutants be pushing 50 right now?
|
|
bran
Full Member
Posts: 223
|
Post by bran on Jul 12, 2017 15:19:03 GMT -5
exactly, there are many creative ways to do it. in DKR Miller aged (and practically killed) Batman (the character), but rejuvenated Batman title (property). now, in DKRIII they apparently did just the opposite (Lazarus lake arghhh, notice it didn't only heal him but made him younger and a lot nicer too... perhaps that's why DC super heroes don't age - Superman takes them to the lake every once in awhile..) on that note, wouldn't all the original new mutants be pushing 50 right now? yeah, surviving once.. just reading Judge Dredd, out of the order, he is ~55 now. it's working quite well for him..
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 12, 2017 17:32:07 GMT -5
exactly, there are many creative ways to do it. in DKR Miller aged (and practically killed) Batman (the character), but rejuvenated Batman title (property). now, in DKRIII they apparently did just the opposite (Lazarus lake arghhh, notice it didn't only heal him but made him younger and a lot nicer too... perhaps that's why DC super heroes don't age - Superman takes them to the lake every once in awhile..) on that note, wouldn't all the original new mutants be pushing 50 right now? If it was real time, yes. If you go by 'Marvel time'.... they've probably aged around 15 years (I'd put Kitty as being portrayed as about 30, and the others are right around there)... Of course, no one else in the MU has aged that much since then... I think that's what annoys me the most, is the relativity of it all... it just really sticks out to me.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 13, 2017 20:29:33 GMT -5
I thought this was funny (or sad, not sure which).. In Champions this month, the team, including time displaced Scott Summers, are watching TV and reminisincing, and they ask him what show he remembers when he was 'a kid'. He says he didn't watch TV much, but that he liked... Seinfeld.
That's a bit of a time slide from the setting of these comics, eh?
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Jul 14, 2017 7:03:54 GMT -5
I thought this was funny (or sad, not sure which).. In Champions this month, the team, including time displaced Scott Summers, are watching TV and reminisincing, and they ask him what show he remembers when he was 'a kid'. He says he didn't watch TV much, but that he liked... Seinfeld. That's a bit of a time slide from the setting of these comics, eh? Considering his answer should properly have been something along the lines of "Howdy Doody" or "The Lone Ranger," yeah, I'd say so. Cei-U! Let's do the Time Warp again!
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 14, 2017 17:26:31 GMT -5
I think Superman would have been a fun answer, but a bit too early I suppose. . Really, they should have stuck with 'I didn't get to watch any TV', since, if they go with the origin of the Summers' boys being a an orphanage, there's no way in heck an orphanage in the mid 50s would have a TV set. It's also a relatively timeless one.
|
|
zilch
Full Member
Posts: 238
|
Post by zilch on Jul 14, 2017 18:35:50 GMT -5
The Marvel Universe aged in "real time" until about the death of Gwen Stacy. It was this event that prompted Stan (i think) to use the phrase "illusion of change". You have to track Peter's college career to get any semblance of time passage, and even then he dropped out of his Master's program.
|
|
|
Post by Mormel on Jul 15, 2017 10:56:48 GMT -5
The Marvel Universe aged in "real time" until about the death of Gwen Stacy. It was this event that prompted Stan (i think) to use the phrase "illusion of change". You have to track Peter's college career to get any semblance of time passage, and even then he dropped out of his Master's program. X-Men is a curious case in terms of the cut-off point where the sliding timescale kicked in. As late as #98 (1976), Jean Grey comments that the X-Men faced the Sentinels "back in 1969" referring to #57-59 which were published in that year. So that indicates that they were still going by real time at that point. It does stretch credibility in terms of how old the X-Men are supposed to be; refer to the issue discussed above where Bobby celebrates his 18th birthday. Only 4 issues later, Storm is said to have been born in 1951, establishing her age as 25 years old. She is a couple years older than Jean and Scott; after Dark Phoenix Saga, Jean's tombstone will say "1956-1980", so our timescale has started to slide. There is an interesting date set in a narration box in X-Men #55's (1969) back-up feature about Angel (set before his joining the team); winter 1963. Rather than January or February '63 (preceding the publication of X-Men #1 as you might expect), we may take this to mean December '63, as Iceman's origin story (in #44) has him join the team in "fall 1963", and he joins before Warren. On quick scan, I see no ages given for the 4 male X-Men in their origin back-ups, so it's uncertain how much time passes between Hank joining and X-Men #1. However, they're obviously playing around with the idea of a sliding timescale some 4 years prior to 'The Night Gwen Stacy Died', even if Claremont tries to present the issues as having taken place roughly in real-time (not accounting for story arcs where the individual issues take place in a span of days or weeks relative to each other.) And I'm not even as excited about these things as the guy who runs the Marvel Chronology Project! ;-)
|
|
|
Post by chaykinstevens on Jul 15, 2017 12:53:20 GMT -5
The reprints in Classic X-Men revised Jean's "back in 1969" to "years ago" and her tombstone was altered to say "Jean Grey Rest in Peace".
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Jul 15, 2017 13:19:16 GMT -5
The reprints in Classic X-Men revised Jean's "back in 1969" to "years ago" and her tombstone was altered to say "Jean Grey Rest in Peace". I've read a lot of X-Men comics via Classic X-Men and thought I remembered the dates on Jean's tombstone, so I just double-checked. On the splash page in Classic X-Men #44, Jean's tombstone does have "1956-1980". It's the new cover that substitutes "Rest in Peace". But the other changes makes me want to get an Omnibus to see the edits I didn't realize were in the Classic X-Men reprints. Some edits were obvious though. Classic occasionally had some new pages inserted in original story (I'm not talking about the new back-ups). I think Kieron Dwyer did the art in several of them.
|
|