X-Men: Legacy

"Kenneth M. Lin" wrote in


> When is this title reverting back to regular continuity? This is one
> book that puts me to sleep. It's really great that Carey is given a
> chance to retroactively establish connections between many characters
> but the book is rather dry and repetitive.

I'd read near the start that it was supposed to be a temporary title.

Though I'd guess it will continue to run as-is as long as people
continue to buy it as-is.
 >> Stay informed about: X-Men: Legacy 

raystwo RemoveThis @webtv.net (Raymond Speer) wrote in
@storefull-3334.bay.webtv.net:

> Why is it that villains cannot be allowed to reform? It is as if
> comics gurus are cynical bastards who are absolutely dubious that
> convicts can become better people.

It takes several people to turn and keep a long-standing villain good,
but it only takes one person to wipe away those years of reform. One
person who prefers the character as a villain. One person who thinks
the change never should have been done, or the character to be
iredeemable. One person who didn't even know that over the last few
years a character had been redeemed. One person who has it in his
heart to write a story with "x" as a bad guy.

The same is true for any forms of character development, in any
direction.


One of the arguments for keeping villains as villains is that it is
too hard to create new popular villains. If you reform all the popular
villains, then there will be no iconic characters for the heroes to
fight. This argument at best is iffy.

The first problem is that while a villain might get a multi-issue
arc, they only show up sporadically. Even in a shared universe, some
villains can vanish for years at a time from current stories. Indeed,
overexposure can be detrimental to a villain. Add to this that new
villains are constantly being created, even if most will fall by the
wayside. Thing is, no matter how iconic a villain might be, most
aren't actually necessary on a month-by-month basis. Even if all the
characters like Magneto, Juggernaut, and Mystique had stayed reformed,
the monthly issues of the various X-books wouldn't be that different.

The second problem is that, while it is indeed difficult to make
a new hit character of any form, having an existing gallery of iconic
designs to compete against only makes it more difficult. As long as
Magneto lives as a villain, it is almost guaranteed that no one will
make another mutant evil "master of magnetism" that would rival him.
Same for Juggernaut, Mystique, Apocalypse, Doc Ock, Kingpin, and
the rest. As long as these characters exist as villains, they
won't be replaced as villains.

The third problem is that the whole argument ignores the potential
for characters progressing in the other direction. If villains
reform, so too can heroes turn evil. The establishment is even
more against this, as popularity is marketing potential, and good
characters are more milkable than bad. But to be honest, while
you've got characters like Mystique joining the side of the angels,
you've also got characters like Gambit joining the villains.
 >> Stay informed about: X-Men: Legacy 

Billy Bissette wrote in


> raystwo.TakeThisOut@webtv.net (Raymond Speer) wrote in
> @storefull-3334.bay.webtv.net:
>
>> Why is it that villains cannot be allowed to reform? It is as if
>> comics gurus are cynical bastards who are absolutely dubious that
>> convicts can become better people.
>
> It takes several people to turn and keep a long-standing villain
> good,
> but it only takes one person to wipe away those years of reform.
> One person who prefers the character as a villain. One person who
> thinks the change never should have been done, or the character to
> be iredeemable. One person who didn't even know that over the
> last few years a character had been redeemed. One person who has
> it in his heart to write a story with "x" as a bad guy.

It's all a moot point. Rogue has never deviated from being good
from the second she joined the X-Men. While I've never been a huge
Rogue fan, I can admire her commitment to the team. And, really, is
it a loss for Juggernaut to go bad again?

> The same is true for any forms of character development, in any
> direction.
>
>
> One of the arguments for keeping villains as villains is that it
> is
> too hard to create new popular villains. If you reform all the
> popular villains, then there will be no iconic characters for the
> heroes to fight. This argument at best is iffy.

True. IMO, Emma Frost is a far more interesting hero than she ever
was as a villain. She walks the line pretty closely at times, but
no more so than Cyclops (these days) and Wolverine or X-23.
 >> Stay informed about: X-Men: Legacy