m1b@rayssd.UUCP (M. Joseph Barone) (05/30/85)
Marvel Age #30 (Yes, it's true, I'm a Marvel zombie
(see CBG #602)) announced their new title, X-Factor. The
original surviving X-Men will be starring plus a mystery woman.
Since Dazzler is being cancelled, my money is on her as the
mystery woman.
Joe Barone, {allegra, decvax!brunix, linus, ccice5}!rayssd!m1b
Raytheon Co, Submarine Signal Div., Box 330, Portsmouth, RI 02871boyajian@akov68.DEC (06/08/85)
> From: rayssd!m1b (Joe Barone) > Marvel Age #30 (Yes, it's true, I'm a Marvel zombie > (see CBG #602)) announced their new title, X-Factor. The > original surviving X-Men will be starring plus a mystery woman. > Since Dazzler is being cancelled, my money is on her as the > mystery woman. Nope. I heard a rumor a few months ago (from that wealth of information, himself --- Reliable Source) about the mystery woman in X-FACTOR. If the rumor is true, there'll be a big storm a-brewin', because the circumstances surrounding her will negate almost 10 years worth of X-Men continuity. (Now if *that* isn't a hint, what is?) If you think you've guessed, and think it's a great idea, think again. Old Reliable reports that the whole idea is Shooter's, and that he is keeping a tight reign on this book. The circumstances alluded to above are, as I've heard them, truly disgusting, as is the effect that it'll have on a certain couple. (Hint #2 in a series. Collect them all; trade them with your friends.) If you still haven't figured it out, here's Hint #3: In Joe's posting which I quoted above, delete "surviving". --- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, Maynard, MA) UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4|allegra|ucbvax|...}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-akov68!boyajian ARPA: boyajian%akov68.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA soon to be: boyajian%akov68.DEC@DECWRL.COM
chenr@tilt.FUN (Ray Chen) (06/10/85)
Groan. All right kiddies, can you say "Dark Phoenix"? I thought you could. I thought Claremont and Byrne made a courageous decision by allowing Jean Grey to kill herself. She died, but like a tragic hero, the manner of her death revealed a depth and a strength of character that made her one of the most memorable characters in comics. For me, her death is very much her monument and resurrecting her would only cheapen her memory. After all, what's an Ultimate Sacrifice if it turns out to be no sacrifice at all? Every time I hear a rumor of Jean Grey being revived, I grind my teeth. Why can't Jim Shitter let Jean Grey stay dead? Let the X-Men get on with their lives (pathetic as they may be at the moment), especially Cyclops. The poor guy deserves some happiness after all he's been through. I liked the recent Mastermind story in the X-Men. For one thing, it reminded me of exactly WHY Scot Summers was the X-Men's "first and best leader"*. For another thing, it showed Scot Summers finally coming to terms with Jean Grey's death and putting her memory to rest. I wish Shooter and the rest of the Marvel people would do the same. Ray Chen princeton!tilt!chenr * -- Cyclops as described in a relatively recent issue by Mystique.
ccastkv@gitpyr.UUCP (KEITH VAGLIENTI) (11/14/85)
[eat this you line eater, you]
I think some people need to read Marvel Age, or the Mutant Report to be
specific. It has had some interesting information about X-Factor which
ya'll seem to be missing.
No, just grabbing mutants off the street and taking them away somewhere to
hide wouldn't do very much for mutantkind. This is probably why X-Factor is
doing more than this. Consider the situation. Magneto has taken over Prof.
Xaviers school. They have only his word that this is what Xavier wanted.
Without Prof. X they have no easy way to find new mutants. So what do they do?
They set up an agency that people will contact when they think someone they
know is a mutant. X-Factor comes, "fights the dirty mutie," takes the mutant
away. Days or weeks later X-Factor brings the mutant back but...he's been
demutified. The ex-mutant then settles in as a normal human being. The secret
is that X-Factor will be teaching the mutant how to use and, more importantly,
control his powers. This will help the mutants because it says to anti-mutants
that being a mutant is similar to having a disease, that you can be cured of
being a mutant.
As for their wearing big Xs on their uniforms and then expecting people not
to associate them with X-Factor. These are the original X-Men. That's what they
have always been known as, collectively. This is what people will associate
the X with. Not X-Factor. The question is, will they associate the X-Men with
X-Factor considering the names are so similar.
About Scott, remember that Jean was his first love and they didn't break
up, Jean committed suicide, or so everyone thought, to save the universe.
Maddy reminds Scott of Jean and even though he loves her some of those feelings
can't help but also be associated with Jean. Add to that the fact that Maddy
and Scott are having marital problems. Witness the fact that upon returning
from Asgard all of the X-Men except Scott called Madelynn to see how she was
doing. Cut Scott some slack if Jean's return causes him some mental anguish
which reflects in his actions. I doubt that in the same circumstance I would
act significantly differently than he has and I doubt ya'll would either.
I think you have just decided that this is one of Big Bad Jim Shooter's
projects and thus it can't be any good. I disagree. Its nowhere near as bad as
Secret Bores. I don't approve of the way Jean was brought back but I intend to
at least give X-Factor a chance to prove itself instead of condemning it
before consigning it to the garbage pile.
The oxen are slow but the earth is patient.sds5044@ritcv.UUCP (None) (11/15/85)
So everybody is leaning on X-Factor. I didn't think it was the greatest but I still enjoyed it. It is obviously intended for fans of the original X-Men. From what I've heard so far, not on this network of course, more people like the book than not.
m1b@rayssd.UUCP (M. Joseph Barone) (11/18/85)
*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MARVEL FLAME *** In <9044@ritcv.UUCP>, sds5044@ritcv.UUCP (None) writes > So everybody is leaning on X-Factor. I didn't think it was the > greatest but I still enjoyed it. It is obviously intended for > fans of the original X-Men. From what I've heard so far, not on > this network of course, more people like the book than not. At a recent comic convention on Providence, RI, more than half the dealers (who read what they sell) thought the story was dog poop. Even those that liked it weren't raving about it. As one dealer stated, "It was better than Devil Dinosaur #1." Many didn't seem to mind Jean rising from the dead, though. Not afraid to attach my name! Joe Barone, {allegra, decvax!brunix, linus, ccice5}!rayssd!m1b Raytheon Co, Submarine Signal Div., Box 330, Portsmouth, RI 02871
sds5044@ritcv.UUCP () (11/19/85)
So no one likes Jean Grey's return. What more can you expect from John Byrne and Society of Claremont Haters. Why does everybody hate X-Factor. Let's see some articles saying why you think it is a bad book. Something more substantial than " Sheer silliness.".
kayuucee@cvl.UUCP (Kenneth W. Crist Jr.) (11/19/85)
> So no one likes Jean Grey's return. What more can you expect from > John Byrne and Society of Claremont Haters. Why does everybody hate > X-Factor. Let's see some articles saying why you think it is a bad > book. Something more substantial than " Sheer silliness.". > I did not like X-FACTOR, but I take offense at being called a Claremont Hater. I like a lot of Claremont's work, up until two years ago X-MEN was my favorite book. And I doubt there will ever be a story in comic form that will top GOD LOVES, MAN KILLS. This is the pinnacle of anything that Claremont could say about prejudice. And that is the point. There is nothing more to say about it. While it is true that anti- mutant sentiment cannot just magically stop in the Marvel Universe, he could stop rehasing the same old story over and over. He will never be able to recreate GOD LOVES, MAN KILLS and he should stop trying. What does the `Society of Claremont Haters' have to do with X-FACTOR? From what I hear Claremont had nothing and wants nothing to do with th book. Now, about X-FACTOR. The actions of the Original X-Men are doing nothing to lower the fear of mutants in the world. They seem to be adding to the problem. This is not the why to educate the masses about mutants and thereby allay their fear of mutants. The return of Jean Grey. When Jean died I was very upset. She was one of the best characters Marvel had at the time. I ranted and raved about Jim Shooter and what a bastard he was for killing her off. Then a few months later I thought about it in a calmer moment and realized he made a good editorial discision. Not a popular one, but a good one. AND he appeared to be ready to back it up no matter what. He SEEMED to have principles. Now, for a fast buck (anything to keep people from buying other people's comics) he has turned 180 degreesfrom his position about Jean Grey and why she had to die. I lost a lot of respect for Jim Shooter after hearing Jean was coming back. And even more after seeing how they did it. Well, that is all I have to say about the subject. Thank you for listening. Star-Lord
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (11/20/85)
> So no one likes Jean Grey's return. What more can you expect from > John Byrne and Society of Claremont Haters. I assume what you mean is that JB&SoCH are responsible for Jean Grey's return. Please note that FF#286, in which the return occurs, does not have Byrne's name in the credits. He did the book, all right, but he refused to have his name on it. So blaming John Byrne is, uh, a little inappropriate; he doesn't seem happy about all this either. > Why does everybody hate X-Factor. Let's see some articles saying why you > think it is a bad book... There have been several already. The problems include infantile plot, ridiculous characterization, indefensible premises, and a general triumph of greed over common sense and continuity. -- Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry
dtuttle@uw-june (David C. Tuttle) (11/21/85)
>>> From: sds5044@ritcv.UUCP (He who will not give his name) <<< >>> Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY > So no one likes Jean Grey's return. What more can you expect from > John Byrne and Society of Claremont Haters. Why does everybody hate > X-Factor. Let's see some articles saying why you think it is a bad > book. Something more substantial than " Sheer silliness.". *** Also, in an earlier posting... > So everybody is leaning on X-Factor. I didn't think it was the > greatest but I still enjoyed it. It is obviously intended for > fans of the original X-Men. From what I've heard so far, not on > this network of course, more people like the book than not. Wait a minute! Are you saying Claremont was behind the resurrection of Jean Grey (Gray? I can never remember...)? No No No No No !!! It's not Chris Claremont's doing!!! It's Jim Sh**ter's fault that Jean is back. Chris *hates* the idea (there have been excellent previous postings to this group about this)! Byrne wrote the story that brought Jean back, but he was very unhappy with it (he refused put his name to it), so I don't think he really likes it either (despite what he says (has to say?) in public). It was an Edict From Above from a person who chooses not to look beyond(er) this month's sales figures. Now, as for the book X-Factor, it's not a "bad" book for *Marvel* standards. There are other Marvels (as well as other companies') that reek just as bad (whoops, my opinion is showing :-). And if you read them regularly (e.g., the Thing, the new Alpha Flight) you can probably take X-Factor at face value and add it to your collection. Objections come (mostly) from fans of the current X-Men, who enjoy Chris Claremont's handling of their story (most of the time). Now, suddenly Mr. Claremont gets shafted, and characters he has handled so well in the past (I'm speaking mostly of Cyclops and Madelyne here), characters the readers have come to know and like, are now shoved into the all-too-familiar, all-too-mechanized, one-issue-wonder-plot mediocre writing that plagues the comics mentioned above (I know, there's been only one issue of X-Factor, but we've seen this before, and it doesn't look promising...) It is *painful* to see someone's creation brutally altered, just for the sake of more sales. That is the crux of MY complaint, and I think there are many others who agree (and even have more to add...) P.S. A small side note: I speculate the following correlation: The older one is, and/or the more one reads comics, the more one hates X-Factor. I small convention I attended last weekend had little kids liking it, and older folks and dealers calling it bird poop. I know who *I'll* believe... ========== ========== ========== David C. Tuttle Dept. of Computer Science, University of Washington [ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax]!uw-beaver!uw-june!dtuttle dtuttle@uw-june.ARPA >Some of the above is speculation and shouldn't be confused with the truth.< >But at least I put my name on things that I submit... <
tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney) (12/02/85)
Why is everyone so down on X-Factor???? I have dropped X-Men and New
Mutants, but I will continue to buy X-Factor for as long as it maintains the
standards of the first two issues. In fact, I enjoyed X-Factor 2
considerably more than the last six months of New Mutants and X-Men
combined! Among other things, we finally have a reasonable characterization
of Cyclops, which Claremont was never able to do because of his hatred for
the character; I especially liked the way Layton pointed out how much he
uses his "cursed powers" as an excuse for his own social ineptitude. There
is no sentimentality here, just honest emotion, and that in itself puts it
light-years ahead of Claremont's soap operatic trash.
I've been trying to figure out the negative reactions, and I've come up with
two main ideas. First, people feel that anything would have to be Swamp
Thing's quality or better to make up for the idiotic stories where Jean Grey
returned. Since I avoided those stories, I don't have any such perception
of karma, and I can appreciate X-Factor for what it is. Second, people are
only familiar with the Claremont X-Men and expected something similar. Wake
up, guys; THESE are the X-Men, the Stan Lee characters, not those
johnny-come-lately jerks that Claremont jacks off to pictures of. They are
infinitely better than that Len Wein-created cast of losers and stereotypes.
(The only good thing Wein ever did was Swamp Thing, and I understand
Wrightson held down a huge chunk of the storytelling on that. Wein is
always trite and feeble, and his "new X-Men" were no exception.) They have
real, complex relationships in the classic Stan Lee style, not the
cut-and-dried, melodramatic ones which Claremont has created. I'll bet you
don't like Marvel Tales either...
Seriously, there is more authentic characterization, plot, humor, and pathos
in X-Factor than in anything Claremont has written in the last two or three
years. I prefer not to think that everyone here is totally without taste,
so I must assume that people were expecting something different, and so see
this book only in terms of their expectations. Which is, simply put, a
tight competitor with BATO for the best team book on the market.
PS. My love Pam, who's about to begin her Ph.D. in Writing, agrees with me
concerning the relative quality of this book and Claremont's drivel. Is it
possible a classics scholar knows some things you don't? Nah, you read
comics and science fiction, not those outdated old farts like Dickens and
Shakespeare and James, so you must have highly discerning standards of plot
and characterization....
(Oh, am I going to catch it for this....)
-=-
Tim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot, CMU Center for Art and Technology
tim@k.cs.cmu.edu | uucp: {seismo,decwrl,ucbvax,etc.}!k.cs.cmu.edu!tim
CompuServe: 74176,1360 | CMU. Tomorrow's networking nightmares -- today!laurie@isieng.UUCP (Laurie Sefton) (12/05/85)
In article <690@k.cs.cmu.edu> tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney) writes: > Among other things, we finally have a reasonable characterization >of Cyclops, which Claremont was never able to do because of his hatred for >the character; I especially liked the way Layton pointed out how much he >uses his "cursed powers" as an excuse for his own social ineptitude. There >is no sentimentality here, just honest emotion, and that in itself puts it >light-years ahead of Claremont's soap operatic trash. No, Tim, a reasonable characterization would have been one that could have been built on what has happened beffore--not just wipe out all the work that has been done (good or badd). The character has to *have a reason* for a sudden reversal or change in character, not just because the writer says so. You can't throw out the past. > >I've been trying to figure out the negative reactions, and I've come up with >two main ideas. First, people feel that anything would have to be Swamp >Thing's quality or better to make up for the idiotic stories where Jean Grey >returned. Since I avoided those stories, I don't have any such perception >of karma, and I can appreciate X-Factor for what it is. Second, people are >only familiar with the Claremont X-Men and expected something similar. Wake >up, guys; THESE are the X-Men, the Stan Lee characters, not those >johnny-come-lately jerks that Claremont jacks off to pictures of. They are >infinitely better than that Len Wein-created cast of losers and stereotypes. >They have real, complex relationships in the classic Stan Lee style, not the >cut-and-dried, melodramatic ones which Claremont has created. I'll bet you >don't like Marvel Tales either... So you selectively ignore the past events that has brought the book into being--sounds like you're more into a nostalgia trip than into an examination of the book. I also don't consider the "oh! how could I ever tell Jean that *fill in the possibilities here*" wonderful writing. And stereotypes? Look at the original X-Men (the early stuff) for some real one-dimensional characterizations. Layton has managed to bring that back full circle. BTW, the "johnny-come-lately jerks" have been around for many more issues than the originals. >Seriously, there is more authentic characterization, plot, humor, and pathos >in X-Factor than in anything Claremont has written in the last two or three >years. I prefer not to think that everyone here is totally without taste, >so I must assume that people were expecting something different, and so see >this book only in terms of their expectations. Which is, simply put, a >tight competitor with BATO for the best team book on the market. No, I was looking for a decent plot line and a reasonable script. Not too much to ask... > >PS. My love Pam, who's about to begin her Ph.D. in Writing, agrees with me >concerning the relative quality of this book and Claremont's drivel. Is it >possible a classics scholar knows some things you don't? Nah, you read >comics and science fiction, not those outdated old farts like Dickens and >Shakespeare and James, so you must have highly discerning standards of plot >and characterization.... > No fair having loved ones to offer assenting opinions... Besides, if you want to see some magnificent stereotypes, read some Dickens, read some Shakespeare. BTW, don't either of you read anything but anglophone writers? Why don't you try Cervantes, Dumas, or Dante? :-) >Tim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot, CMU Center for Art and Technology You said it, I didn't :-) Laurie Sefton Integrated Solutions
moriarty@fluke.UUCP (The Napoleon of Crime) (12/11/85)
In article <690@k.cs.cmu.edu> tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney) writes: >(Oh, am I going to catch it for this....) Oh, you're right, Tim! But not due to your views on X-Factor, though I totally disagree with your views on it and on Claremont (and somewhat on Wein... "always trite and feeble" is much too harsh for him). As we've argued before, opinions is opinions, and everybody's got a right to vent 'em. However, the following little exchange caught my eye... >PS. My love Pam, who's about to begin her Ph.D. in Writing, agrees with me >concerning the relative quality of this book and Claremont's drivel. Is it >possible a classics scholar knows some things you don't? Nah, you read >comics and science fiction, not those outdated old farts like Dickens and >Shakespeare and James, so you must have highly discerning standards of plot >and characterization.... [enter heavy sarcasm mode] Ah, but I know one person with a Master's degree in English Literature and another finishing up a Master's in Classics who both HATE X-Factor! Gosh, do two Masters beat a prospective Ph.D.? [exit heavy sarcasm mode] I get very suspicious of the strength of someone's viewpoint on "literary quality" when they need to resort to bringing in someone with a degree to support their opinions. A person with an education dealing in Literature and Literary Studies will have read more material to compare a novel, play or story against, and can make more specific criticisms; but their experience makes them no more or less "correct" in their assessment of a literary work -- and certainly not without detailed criticism backing it up. Also, it strikes me that a background in popular literature would be of more help to someone reviewing comics -- the more you've read, the more "good" books you've found that you can compare the work you're currently reading with. I like Dickens and most of Shakespeare (however, James has always struck me as a writer who sacrifices emotional power for technical artifice (Woo!)), but that does not hinder me from appreciating some of the deft characterizations Chris Claremont has done over the years (granted, his style has been uneven of late...). I'm know many people who combine reading comics with all sorts of other literature -- heavy readers read, and their amount of intake often results in a startling breadth of genres and literary forms. It strikes me we should just stick to letting each other know our opinions (and why we formed 'em) and remember that, no matter what our background, that's all they are -- opinions. Besides, some of us HAD to read Homer! (right, Ellen?) "And their shields clattered amongst the dust..." Sounds kindof like Crisis, doesn't it? :-) "Just remember, he knows more than you do!" "I have a Master's Degree!" "In SCIENCE!" Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer ARPA: fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPA UUCP: {uw-beaver, sun, allegra, sb6, lbl-csam}!fluke!moriarty <*> DISCLAIMER: Do what you want with me, but leave my employers alone! <*>
ma3752af@unmc.UUCP (12/17/85)
> this book only in terms of their expectations. Which is, simply put, a > tight competitor with BATO for the best team book on the market. > > PS. My love Pam, who's about to begin her Ph.D. in Writing, agrees with me > concerning the relative quality of this book and Claremont's drivel. Is it > possible a classics scholar knows some things you don't? Nah, you read > comics and science fiction, not those outdated old farts like Dickens and > Shakespeare and James, so you must have highly discerning standards of plot > and characterization.... > BATO is not the best team book - The New Teen Titans is! As for your last statement, I am an English student and I read all those outdated farts and I think X-Factor is drivel, too. I plan on doing my graduate work in CREATIVE writing, so I do have high standards for plots and characterization. Obviously, this last paragraph of yours shows just how silly you really are. Sci-Fi is still literature, though maybe not as good as Shakespeare. I believe that it is not possible for a CLASSICS scholar to know anything about comics, but a CREATIVE writer does!!!! 'till Plato turns over in his grave . . . V.J. Murphy