Oh god, lets not go down that road. Lines like that always lead to the first spark in a internet flame war.

As far as people's opinions on Claremont. He's a good writer, he's just been going little crazy lately... proably from the treatment he's been getting. I mean the "God Love Man Kills" is proably one of my favorite X-men stories of all time. Claremont can write, just lately he's been slacking.

Am I the only one who caught that little Xorn reference in House of M? When Dr. Strange has the conversation with Scarlet Witch he says at one points (don't know the exact quote) "I heard about a year ago your father died. Could it have been you subconsciously who brought your father back to life throughout all the confusion?"

I knew it was a Retcon but it was a retcon that made sense. Wanda hears her father died, reality gets a little messed up from her, and suddenly daddy's back from the dead. I thought it was a good way to explain the plot involving xorn (the good one) and magento's return. Their returns made no sense yet everyone in the universe kinda just execpted it, which would also be ala Scarlet Witch. Opinions are just opinion but I liked that retcon, then this New Avengers thing happened and just made things more crazy (although I saddly must admit I do like the fact we have Magneto back. X-men isn't the same without him)

Same here. I liked villians who had good reasoning behind what they were doing or 'good guys that do things the wrong way'. Magneto has been the first character I think of whenever I describe a character like that.

Don't get me wrong, I feel a villian NEEDS a good reason, to do what he does, I just thought that Magneto as a terrorist was better

And here's an idea.
Onslaught is suppose to be back soon. Onslaught is a half creation of Magneto, his "evil" side, merged with part of Xavier's, in it's own body. Now, what if, when Onslaught was created, it wasn't so much a copy of Mag's evil side that was used, but that Onslaught has the original evil in him, depriving Mag's of his own "evil" side. Now, should Onslaught "die", that evil could return to Mag's, making him like he use to be, more or less.

That, or Onslaught could use Mag's body, which wouldn't be too far fetched, Onslaught had Chuck's bod once. And since "Michael" had all those powers, whose to say that wouldn't draw Onslaught in?



Anyways, it's just a thought.

His illustration must have changed a lot, then. Jae Lee's work in Namor (back in the day) and the first Inhumans miniseries was beautiful.

I think it was around the Sentry mini series (the first one) where his art took a turn for worse. I really liked his work on Inhumans myself with the thick blacks, but the only stuff drawn by him I read before that was some average work on Spider-Man.

People seriously consider Joss Whedons Astonishing to be better then Morrisons? Okay.... well I guess the cool thing about comics is that the stories you love are always going to be the stories you love no matter what ####ty editor or writer decide to plop all over them a year later.

I thought GM did some things with some of the characters that NEEDED to be done (Scott and Emma was the best example) and there were things about his run that I didn't like (mostly revolving around his choice/creation of villains, the odd pacing -which ruined a few of his arcs for me- and the way he tied up his run).

In retrospect, it wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to be after reading the first few issues, but I would hardly call it the greatest X-story of all time. He did some things right and some things wrong, but either way he tried something new - and something has to be said for that.

As far as the retconning/Joey Q revenge idea - wtf? I thought since they changed some of Morrison's run after it ended (for WHATEVER the reason), the New Avengers retcon was fine. It tied everything up without totally destroying it (after all, GM said it was a virus that made Mags crazy). Sure it was different than the GM run, but show me what has gone through three or four writers that hasn't been altered or some hidden agenda revealed - I KNOW YOU CAN, but it's rare.

I dunno - disagree as you will, but JQ is human. Good with the bad. From my chair, I see more good than bad. Civil War is really much better than I had anticipated, and while we had some painful growing pains called Disassembled, House of M wasn't as bad as I feared (although I wouldn't call it great by any means). So some good and some bad - just like GM.

And look at everything else. I really liked Son of M, Brubaker is rocking on his various titles... in fact most of the Marvel books are far better than they were 3 years ago.

So, if we're going to blame Joey Q for approving the bad, let's at least give him credit for greenlighting the good.

But these are just my opinions...

As far as the 'grey villains' go... I have trouble believing that aside from the very rare and disturbed, that anyone truly sees themselves as a monster.

Grey villains rock!

[quote=Ro-gan]I just got done two days ago reading all 12 issues [the 2 TPBs] of Whedon's first run on AXM. It was good. But, it wasn't mind-blowingly good. I laughed, I cried, I cheered... but-- it didn't make me think. It didn't open my mind to a new way of seeing the X-Men.

Grant's first few issues did all that and more. He took everything I thought I knew about the X-Men and fleshed it out even more and made me scratch my head in wonder and awe.[/quote]

[quote=algrim]I thought GM did some things with some of the characters that NEEDED to be done (Scott and Emma was the best example) and there were things about his run that I didn't like (mostly revolving around his choice/creation of villains, the odd pacing -which ruined a few of his arcs for me- and the way he tied up his run).[quote]

I think each of these guys hit the negatives of these two runs (for me):

Whedon: Telling good stories, but not having the same depth.
Morrison: Very odd choices of the pacing of certain developments...especially towards the end of his series.