|
Post by MDG on Mar 13, 2017 13:13:13 GMT -5
Maybe I missed something but I never saw what was special about Plastic Man. There, I said it. If I'd never read the Jack Cole stories, I'd agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Mar 14, 2017 2:02:09 GMT -5
You know, for years and years there were always multiple characters from various publishers who had stretchy abilities. Are there any being regularly published now? Stretchy guys and gals-please come back
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2017 2:16:11 GMT -5
You know, for years and years there were always multiple characters from various publishers who had stretchy abilities. Are there any being regularly published now? Stretchy guys and gals-please come back Kamala Khan, the new Ms. Marvel has shapechanging powers she uses like stretchy powers... -M
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Mar 14, 2017 2:19:40 GMT -5
You know, for years and years there were always multiple characters from various publishers who had stretchy abilities. Are there any being regularly published now? Stretchy guys and gals-please come back Kamala Khan, the new Ms. Marvel has shapechanging powers she uses like stretchy powers... -M Thank God or Allah or whomever
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Mar 15, 2017 7:55:37 GMT -5
Seeing an ad for another X-Men comic, I find myself thinking...
I fail to comprehend the interest of Psylocke and Bishop. They became boring extremely early in their career; the first when she turned into a ninja, the second upon his third appearance. Why bring them back to the fore yet again?
I fail to see the appeal of bringing back Archangel. He was interesting for, like, a dozen issues in the '80s and that was that. Besides, he was dead.
I fail to see the interest for Gambit. Made to be kewl in the late '90s, he is so dated it hurts. His unpalatable "origin" doesn't win him any point.
And mostly, I really, really don't get what so many writers see in Mystique. Blechhhhhh!!! As far as characters go, she's in the same league as the Vanisher or the Trapster.
There. I said it!
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Mar 15, 2017 8:02:51 GMT -5
But Mystique is hot. The shape shifting power is kind of cool. Is she still Nightcrawlers mom ?
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Mar 15, 2017 9:01:19 GMT -5
But Mystique is hot. The shape shifting power is kind of cool. Is she still Nightcrawlers mom ? I dread the thought of even checking. It will probably turn out that she thought she was Nightcrawler's mom, but that it was actually a false memory implanted in her by Lady Mastermind who wanted her to develop a bond with Kurt who could then be replaced by a resurrected Changeling possessed by the Shadow King, so the evil mutants would have a spy among the X-Men. Mystique thinks the father is the extradimensional Azazel, but he himself is only a figment of Mephisto's imagination given form by his exposition to the reality gem during the Infinity War. (True, said war happened after Kurt's conception, but the time gem caused the effect to happen retroactively). As for Kurt's real mother, it was actually Irène, who had sex with Mystique when the latter shape-shifted into the form of a man. Except that wasn't really Mystique, it was a Skrull infiltrating the mutant community. And the baby wasn't really Kurt after all, because it was revealed to be... ta-daaa... another Mystique, who looks like the one in the movie; that new Mystique grew up in Charles Xavier's house and we just never heard of her before now. Meanwhile, Kurt is shown to be an actual demon, just as in Cockrum's original pitch, and not a mutant at all because mutants are now managed by Fox. The smell of brimstone when he teleports is just the smell of Hell. (That's how Kurt came back to life a few years ago, too; he isn't a normal mortal). God, I hope none of that turns out to be true.
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 15, 2017 9:14:59 GMT -5
I like Mystique because I'm fascinated by shape-shifters.
But I don't get Bishop or Gambit either, and I hate Warren's Archangel phase. Have they changed him back yet?
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Mar 15, 2017 10:48:51 GMT -5
Seeing an ad for another X-Men comic, I find myself thinking... I fail to comprehend the interest of Psylocke and Bishop. They became boring extremely early in their career; the first when she turned into a ninja, the second upon his third appearance. Why bring them back to the fore yet again? I fail to see the appeal of bringing back Archangel. He was interesting for, like, a dozen issues in the '80s and that was that. Besides, he was dead. I fail to see the interest for Gambit. Made to be kewl in the late '90s, he is so dated it hurts. His unpalatable "origin" doesn't win him any point. And mostly, I really, really don't get what so many writers see in Mystique. Blechhhhhh!!! As far as characters go, she's in the same league as the Vanisher or the Trapster. There. I said it! I don't think you can really say that Pylocke became boring "extremely early in her career" and then qualify that with "when she became a ninja", given that Betsy Braddock had been around for well over a decade by then. I do agree the ninja thing ruined her, though, just as the Angel was ruined by being turned into Stabby mcStabwings...sorry, I mean "Archangel". I also agree with you about Mystique, Bishop and Gambit. But the Trapster is one of the greatest super villains ever to exist.
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Mar 15, 2017 10:53:35 GMT -5
I like Mystique because I'm fascinated by shape-shifters. But I don't get Bishop or Gambit either, and I hate Warren's Archangel phase. Have they changed him back yet? They changed him back into Angel, then inexplicably made him Archangel again. Then they killed him, resurrected him as Angel but with no memories, then made him Archangel yet again. Along the way, they brought a younger Angel into the present, then decided even one well adjusted, non lethal Angel was too many, and gave him bionic wings made of fire. Because, y'know, that's apparently cooler.
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Mar 15, 2017 10:55:19 GMT -5
But Mystique is hot. The shape shifting power is kind of cool. Is she still Nightcrawlers mom ? I dread the thought of even checking. It will probably turn out that she thought she was Nightcrawler's mom, but that it was actually a false memory implanted in her by Lady Mastermind who wanted her to develop a bond with Kurt who could then be replaced by a resurrected Changeling possessed by the Shadow King, so the evil mutants would have a spy among the X-Men. Mystique thinks the father is the extradimensional Azazel, but he himself is only a figment of Mephisto's imagination given form by his exposition to the reality gem during the Infinity War. (True, said war happened after Kurt's conception, but the time gem caused the effect to happen retroactively). As for Kurt's real mother, it was actually Irène, who had sex with Mystique when the latter shape-shifted into the form of a man. Except that wasn't really Mystique, it was a Skrull infiltrating the mutant community. And the baby wasn't really Kurt after all, because it was revealed to be... ta-daaa... another Mystique, who looks like the one in the movie; that new Mystique grew up in Charles Xavier's house and we just never heard of her before now. Meanwhile, Kurt is shown to be an actual demon, just as in Cockrum's original pitch, and not a mutant at all because mutants are now managed by Fox. The smell of brimstone when he teleports is just the smell of Hell. (That's how Kurt came back to life a few years ago, too; he isn't a normal mortal). God, I hope none of that turns out to be true. She's still Nightcrawler's mum.
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 15, 2017 11:10:47 GMT -5
They changed him back into Angel, then inexplicably made him Archangel again. Then they killed him, resurrected him as Angel but with no memories, then made him Archangel yet again. Along the way, they brought a younger Angel into the present, then decided even one well adjusted, non lethal Angel was too many, and gave him bionic wings made of fire. Because, y'know, that's apparently cooler. oh god make it stop
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2017 11:18:17 GMT -5
I like Mystique because I'm fascinated by shape-shifters. Did you ever read the Doctor Who Voyager graphic novel that Marvel UK published? There's a shape-shifter in that. (Frobisher.) You'd probably have to like Doctor Who though, but Frobisher is fun!
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Mar 15, 2017 11:22:57 GMT -5
I like Mystique because I'm fascinated by shape-shifters. But I don't get Bishop or Gambit either, and I hate Warren's Archangel phase. Have they changed him back yet? They changed him back into Angel, then inexplicably made him Archangel again. Then they killed him, resurrected him as Angel but with no memories, then made him Archangel yet again. Along the way, they brought a younger Angel into the present, then decided even one well adjusted, non lethal Angel was too many, and gave him bionic wings made of fire. Because, y'know, that's apparently cooler. And I guess somewhere in there is the only modern Angel story that I ever read that I liked, Uncanny X-Men #437-440; She Lies with Angels. Which I know is probably not a popular opinion since Chuck Austen wrote it, who I do not think is very well regarded here.(?) But that paragraph is why X-Men hasn't interested me, at almost anytime (though I have read less of pre 80's or so X-Men) for more than maybe one or two story arcs. And why (though there is some good stories after) Wolverine pretty much died as an interesting character after #50 (edit: of his first ongoing self title series). Even as much as I like Age of Apocalypse it had that insufferable Jean-Scott-Logan love triangle that pretty much rendered them no different in any way outside of costumes, from their 616 counterparts.
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Mar 15, 2017 12:01:40 GMT -5
I like Mystique because I'm fascinated by shape-shifters. Did you ever read the Doctor Who Voyager graphic novel that Marvel UK published? There's a shape-shifter in that. (Frobisher.) You'd probably have to like Doctor Who though, but Frobisher is fun! How could a shape changing private eye who spends most of his time as a penguin not be fun?
|
|