Dave Galanter
December 1st 1969 - December 12th 2020
He was loved.

Movie >> View Post
Post By

Member Since: Tue Aug 01, 2017
Posts: 24
In Reply To
Ancient One 

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,613
Subj: Re: Here's what's wrong with movie making in Hollywood.
Posted: Wed Jun 26, 2019 at 09:00:07 pm EDT (Viewed 185 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Here's what's wrong with movie making in Hollywood.
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 at 02:56:32 pm EDT (Viewed 183 times)

Previous Post

    Beast, perhaps, but Angel and Iceman are irrelevant to everything about the X-Men. Period. There's nothing whatsoever iconic about them. You don't see Avengers movies including members like Swordsman, Hellcat, Starfox, etc. Angel and Iceman are to the X-Men what these characters are to the Avengers.

I'm not sure I'd agree with that. When was the last time Scott Lang was important to the MU? Or even to the Avengers? Hawkeye and to a greater extent Black Widow (As much as I adore both characters) have never been anything other than unimportant until the films. None of the current Guardians of the Galaxy ever amounted to a hill of beans before the films. How about Shuri? An absolute nothing in the comics, but the breakout star of Black Panther. Carol Danvers? 50 years of being a victim, and suddenly THE single most important character in the Marvel Universe (Not to most fans, but to the powers that be), even over and above Captain America, Iron Man and Thor.

I say again, all it would take to make Angel, Iceman and Beast great characters is a writer with the will to do it. Then it would happen quicker than a finger snap from Dumbthanos.

    For the past 55+ years, Iceman had one single important showing: OZT. That's it. Nothing before. Nothing since.

Maybe we read different books. I remember him single-handedly squaring up to Magneto, saving the lives of the other X-Men and Warren's parents and wrecking Magneto's plan, all while recovering from an illness (issue 18). He didn't save the universe, or even the world, but the courage, determination and skill he showed while hopelessly outclassed is an extremely important showing in my book. I could cite more examples for Iceman, and similar ones for Angel and Beast.

'Important' doesn't necessarily equate to 'big'.

    But neither of these things are very important to the overall X-Men story. Both are easily done by the vastly more important "second genesis" X-Men characters.

Like Nightcrawler? Or Colossus? Both of whom have... um, what the heck HAVE they done?

I'm kidding there. Well, half kidding. I love me some Nightcrawler and Colossus, and I know how important they are. But they're only important because some writer(s) had the will to give them something important to do. However, you could substitute Angel or Iceman for either one, and they'd have ended up being just as important to the story.

The Fantastic Four can have a hell of a time thwarting Doctor Doom's latest plan. But take the FF out of the equation and Cap's Kooky Quartet will do just as well. So will Spider-Man. Or Luke Cage. Or Daredevil. Or...

Galactus? No sweat. Call Squirrel Girl.

That's just the way comic books are written.

Chris Claremont was technically a better writer than either Stan or Roy. And storytelling in comic books developed rapidly in the early 1970's too, so it's hardly surprising that the new X-Men fared better (for characterisation) than the originals.

It doesn't take anything away from the originals, though, without whom we would have no X-Men (Not to mention Magneto, the Brotherhood, the mutant rights issues, Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch and so on) at all.

Ancient One is entirely correct. The X-Men are fictional characters, so if one of them is 'boring,' then it's because of the limitations or biases of the writer. Where I think Black Guardian's views go awry is his implication that Angel and Iceman are inherently boring. That any new movie shouldn't use them, because no one will find them interesting. And that's where the Ancient One's point corrects that idea: all it takes is a good writer to make Angel and Iceman interesting.

I also agree that Angel and Iceman are iconic, and for that reason, can't be overlooked. That would be much like the Avengers' movies. The Pyms were left out, and that didn't sit well with a lot of fans. The Black Widow was an odd choice, since she really didn't spend much time as an Avenger. Johansson did a decent job (although she was way too American IMO). But how much better would she have been if she had been cast as the Wasp? I think she'd have made a much better Janet, than Natasha. So why handicap the X-Men the same way? Just use the original team, and hire a good writer (admittedly, an endangered species in Hollywood).

It's also important to note that 'boring' is subjective. Bruce Timm once said that every character is someone's favorite. While Black Guardian may find Angel, Iceman and the Beast boring, others do not. The Beast is one of my all time favorite characters (the Avengers version). While I don't love Angel and Iceman, I do like them. There are plenty of X-Men who are more boring than Bobby and Warren. Jean actually had no personality until the Phoenix saga. Lorna was even worse. Female characters were written as love interests, and nothing more. It hasn't gotten much better with time. Dazzler is one dimensional. And Jim Lee's changes to Psylocke were all style, and no substance. Just an excuse to draw a hot Japanese babe in provocative clothing. To me, that's boring. Bishop, in spite of his cool powers and back story, is actually pretty dull. Banshee had great potential that went no where. Now, just because I feel that way, should those characters not be used? A good writer could revitalize them in no time.

A parting example: Bruce Timmm again. He took Hawkgirl and John Stewart, two of the most boring characters at DC, and turned them into fantastic characters in the Justice League animated series. I grit my teeth when I found out Hal and Katar weren't being used, but by the time it was over, I loved them both. I might even go as far as to say the John Stewart surpassed Hal as a character.

Do the original X-Men. Expand the roster as it happened in the comics. And make Bobby, Warren, Lorna and Jean interesting in the process.

Posted with Google Chrome 75.0.3770.100 on Windows NT 4.0
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2021 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2021 Powermad Software