![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
angelophileWell, okay, not completely, but recent revelations in Chris Claremont's X-men Forever title start some curious thought processes.
For those not ink the know, X-men Forever is a new semi-out-of-continuity title that picks up from when Chris Claremont left X-men back in 1991. It follows on directly from his original run, providing a new continuity, a blend of what he had planned for the book before he was forced out, new ideas picking up on old plots and entirely new plot devices that he couldn't get away with in a shared universe.
For example, one of the major developments so far is an event that would never be allowed to take place permanently in the Marvel universe proper, the death of Wolverine.
X-men Forever #5 revealed this major revelation: http://asylums.insanejournal.com/scans_daily/791851.html
Now, this is clearly a newer idea, or at least one that wouldn't have flown back in 1991, but it presents some interesting points.
Firstly, this is actually quite a clever device in terms of the book.
Because, it's picking up from a time when the X-men cast packed two books. Everyone's been wondering what's happened to Jubilee, Psylocke, Archangel, Forge, Banshee, Iceman, etc etc who were on the team at the time. This actually provides a legitimate excuse why some of these characters won't be around - if you know it decreased your life expectancy every time you used your powers, would you still want to be an X-man? There's characters like Bobby, who've walked away before to live normal lives, who now legitimately have a reason for wanting to call it quits.
Secondly, a point that occurs to me only now, is that this should have happened instead of House of M.
It's perfect. Joe Quesada had a problem with the number of mutants. That a new mutant could be created at the drop of a hat. He wanted to limit them, put the genie back in the bottle.
Now, this idea does that, far more elegantly, not by depowering mutants and doing it haphazardly, but presenting a logical reason why fewer mutants might want to be superheroes, why fewer mutants are using their powers, why mutants might keep under cover, not use their powers.
It provides a perfect way to limit mutants - any uber powerful new character you create is going to burn out more quickly - existing mutants can legitimately disappear off the radar - the remaining mutants are far more focused and it also adds that element of danger and risk into their lives of just being mutants that's normally served by killer robots and angry hate mobs - the kind that have been done to death over and over.
This is, actually, M Day without the.. well... crap.
Credit where credit's due - I have to say, I think Claremont's come up with a corking idea here.
For those not ink the know, X-men Forever is a new semi-out-of-continuity title that picks up from when Chris Claremont left X-men back in 1991. It follows on directly from his original run, providing a new continuity, a blend of what he had planned for the book before he was forced out, new ideas picking up on old plots and entirely new plot devices that he couldn't get away with in a shared universe.
For example, one of the major developments so far is an event that would never be allowed to take place permanently in the Marvel universe proper, the death of Wolverine.
X-men Forever #5 revealed this major revelation: http://asylums.insanejournal.com/scans_daily/791851.html
Now, this is clearly a newer idea, or at least one that wouldn't have flown back in 1991, but it presents some interesting points.
Firstly, this is actually quite a clever device in terms of the book.
Because, it's picking up from a time when the X-men cast packed two books. Everyone's been wondering what's happened to Jubilee, Psylocke, Archangel, Forge, Banshee, Iceman, etc etc who were on the team at the time. This actually provides a legitimate excuse why some of these characters won't be around - if you know it decreased your life expectancy every time you used your powers, would you still want to be an X-man? There's characters like Bobby, who've walked away before to live normal lives, who now legitimately have a reason for wanting to call it quits.
Secondly, a point that occurs to me only now, is that this should have happened instead of House of M.
It's perfect. Joe Quesada had a problem with the number of mutants. That a new mutant could be created at the drop of a hat. He wanted to limit them, put the genie back in the bottle.
Now, this idea does that, far more elegantly, not by depowering mutants and doing it haphazardly, but presenting a logical reason why fewer mutants might want to be superheroes, why fewer mutants are using their powers, why mutants might keep under cover, not use their powers.
It provides a perfect way to limit mutants - any uber powerful new character you create is going to burn out more quickly - existing mutants can legitimately disappear off the radar - the remaining mutants are far more focused and it also adds that element of danger and risk into their lives of just being mutants that's normally served by killer robots and angry hate mobs - the kind that have been done to death over and over.
This is, actually, M Day without the.. well... crap.
Credit where credit's due - I have to say, I think Claremont's come up with a corking idea here.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-08-13 09:31 pm (UTC)Claremont has felt a bit like he's in a rut to me with his last few ventures, so I didn't really give X-Men Forever much attention. Maybe I'll glance at it a bit next time I'm in the store.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-13 09:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-13 09:40 pm (UTC)