Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:

william-james88 wrote:About the X-Men, what arcs/runs from the past 5 years would one have to read to best be prepared for this current House of X crossover?

Important to note: It isn't a crossover, it is a reboot.

New X-Men By Grant Morrison
Phoenix Endsong (redundant now)
Astonishing X-Men By Joss Whedon

Secondary X-Books:
Uncanny X-Force by Rick Remender
X-Men Legacy by Si Spurrier
X-Factor by Peter David

Essentially those are the only runs of the past 19 years you need to be aware of.

Jonathan Hickman is using lore far older and more relevant than anything Bendis wasted pages with. HoX/Po10 is actually refreshingly self contained. It also better depicted a reboot in the respective first issues of HoX & Po10, than IDW 2.0 has managed in 12.

FWIW I vouch for all of these stories. I think Whedon's run is overrated, but a lot of people like it, and I understand why.

And I agree the heavy lore is much older than Bendis, but for better or for worse Bendis is a part of it. Based on Hickman's statements, I would bet he called Bendis to talk about using some of his characters. Plus you can't overlook the invocation of "House of M" in the title.

I've been grumpy about the ending of that series for a decade, but Hickman's found a way to almost justify it.

Everything right back to the 60's series is a 'part' of X-Men lore. But, unlike most other stuff, everything Bendis did has been unceremoniously swept under the rug since. Rightly so, as it is was a blight.

The equivalent of the McCarthy run of IDWverse.

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:
In order:

Everything is still canon, it is just not relevent.

1) Not referenced
2) Not referenced
3) Not referenced
4) Referenced in supplementary material, only.
Just like in Alan Moore's Watchman, there are prose parts to each issue of HoX/Po10. During which the big events are referenced.

One of the central characters to this story is Moira MacTaggart. So only contextual stuff related to her matters. In the past several years Phoenix, Wolverine, Nightcrawler and Cyclops have died. There is no mention of this or their resurrections.

There is even a bit of shade thrown over the past few years of X-Men books. Wherein the era is described as "the lost decade"

yeah that does feel like a reboot alright, or at least so much as can be accepted when still being within the larger Marvel universe (which I assume it is). Man, this sucks in a way since a friend of mine just lent me all the X-Men comics I missed in the past 6 years and it all feels like a waste now when I could simply be reading these issues instead.

AcademyofDrX wrote:
FWIW I vouch for all of these stories. I think Whedon's run is overrated, but a lot of people like it, and I understand why.

And I agree the heavy lore is much older than Bendis, but for better or for worse Bendis is a part of it. Based on Hickman's statements, I would bet he called Bendis to talk about using some of his characters. Plus you can't overlook the invocation of "House of M" in the title.

I've been grumpy about the ending of that series for a decade, but Hickman's found a way to almost justify it.

It is overrated, but only because it was heralded as the best x-men comic of all time (even winning the award for best comic series that year). It has my favourite Cyclops story/moment though.

Also, while New X-Men was great, there is an added element of familiarity to Joss Whedon's team and costumes, which inspires good times. Also the art is more cohesive. Some of the art in New X-Men is really bad.

And yes, the fact that this new serie's name is a rather big reference to House of M simply made me assume that there was a connection there.

About Hickman, while I absolutely adored some of his work (FF), his later avengers stuff got really tedious. I could have really done without that meandering story where a not justice league come in.

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Everything right back to the 60's series is a 'part' of X-Men lore. But, unlike most other stuff, everything Bendis did has been unceremoniously swept under the rug since. Rightly so, as it is was a blight.

The equivalent of the McCarthy run of IDWverse.

I wasn't a huge fan of what I read, but fraction was worse for me. Really hated those Greg Land Uncanny issues where nothing of substance happened.

Astonishing had two things going for it. The best written Cyclops of at least the past 20 years and the ending arc, "Unstoppable", is one of the best X-Men stories ever.

william-james88 wrote:

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Everything right back to the 60's series is a 'part' of X-Men lore. But, unlike most other stuff, everything Bendis did has been unceremoniously swept under the rug since. Rightly so, as it is was a blight.

The equivalent of the McCarthy run of IDWverse.

I wasn't a huge fan of what I read, but fraction was worse for me. Really hated those Greg Land Uncanny issues where nothing of substance happened.

You'll note I compared Bendis to McCarthy, not Costa...

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Astonishing had two things going for it. The best written Cyclops of at least the past 20 years and the ending arc, "Unstoppable", is one of the best X-Men stories ever.

william-james88 wrote:

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Everything right back to the 60's series is a 'part' of X-Men lore. But, unlike most other stuff, everything Bendis did has been unceremoniously swept under the rug since. Rightly so, as it is was a blight.

The equivalent of the McCarthy run of IDWverse.

I wasn't a huge fan of what I read, but fraction was worse for me. Really hated those Greg Land Uncanny issues where nothing of substance happened.

You'll note I compared Bendis to McCarthy, not Costa...

World building doesn’t matter if nobody gives a damn about the world.

What's the bigger problem with this title, the story or the pacing? Or are they equally bad? Would it be better if these 12 issues got reedited and cut down to say 9 or even 6 issues?

Rodimus Prime wrote:What's the bigger problem with this title, the story or the pacing? Or are they equally bad? Would it be better if these 12 issues got reedited and cut down to say 9 or even 6 issues?

I think the biggest issue is the pacing. The story is bland though.

Making a list to go dig through Ultimate Comics' back issue warehouse ay lunchtime, thanks for all this info!

william-james88 wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:What's the bigger problem with this title, the story or the pacing? Or are they equally bad? Would it be better if these 12 issues got reedited and cut down to say 9 or even 6 issues?

I think the biggest issue is the pacing. The story is bland though.

I could deal with the pacing if the story was better and the pacing is making the story develop too slowly for it to feel like a good one. It's a feedback loop of crap.

The worldbuilding would be cool if there were characters that the reader cared about presenting the world through their actions, emotions, conflicts, interest or even relationships but since Rubble got offed there's been very little of this executed effectively.

I like the idea of what this series tries to do but something keeps stopping it from achieving relevance at every turn. It's either dull characters, poor dialogue, rushed art, lack of recognizing these are Transformers (though this has been a little better lately) and yes, tortoise-like pacing. Usually those don't all come together at once but when the issues pile up things start to wear thin. I'm genuinely shocked the sales attrition rate on this isn't higher - but maybe that's because X-Men has folks going to shops again

ScottyP wrote: It's a feedback loop of crap.

As for House of X/ Power of X HOLY SHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET!!!!!! I will be honest, I was super skeptical about the notion that this was an actual reboot. I mean really? But it is. And yeah, the only thing it really references is Grant Morrison's new X-Men which is great because that's the last time such pure and deep sci fi notions were explored. I really like the notion of Hickman just coming to a title and doing as if nothing before mattered (like he did with FF and Avengers) and knowing that whatever he does will probably be undone later. So might as well give something the readers will never forget. Very Morrison like.

By comparison, I am very surprised that the Transformers IDW series is not using their reboot as a truly new jumping on point for new ideas. Instead, a lot of it is just using things directly from the previous incarnation of the book.

EDIT: Oh man, I just read issue 5 and I am NOT sure how I feel about this. It is the boldest move I have ever seen the franchise go. It's a very good issue for sure, but man, they look and sound just like my x-men but are they really my x-men? I mean, this is nuts on a whole other level. And Scotty, yeah, to better appreciate issue 5 and know some of those characters involved, Bendis' Uncanny X-Men would be a prerequisite. Just so you see where some of these now ridiculously crucial characters come from.

On the pacing /story thing I give the edge to the story being the problem (the writing altogether tbh).

But considering this book was coming out every 2 weeks and it STILL felt glacial that's gotta be some kind of record for bad pacing.

I still haven't been arsed to read past issue 8 and it astounds me to think at this stage the entire G2 comic from the 90s was done and dusted.

Look at it this way lads, where do you think we'd be now if we were talking about issue 12 of an Alex milne / Jonathan Hickman run?

Now THAT would be a "bold new era" if he came up with anything like his FF/xmen work.

The moral of the story is simple. Stop hiring hacks idw

partholon wrote:Look at it this way lads, where do you think we'd be now if we were talking about issue 12 of a Jonathan Hickman run?

By issue 2 we had already experienced 9 lifetimes of stories, literally.

And by issue 5, I am going through an existential crisis.

But it's not a fair comparison since this is not necessarily what I want to read in a Transformers comic. I will gladly take something half way.

Indeed. Compare like for like.

Where were we by issue 12 with Furman's -Ations? RiD?? MTMTE???

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Indeed. Compare like for like.

Where were we by issue 12 with Furman's -Ations? RiD?? MTMTE???

I remember people saying the -ations were taking a long time.

RiD was complained about incessantly, especially next to MTMTE.

Bringing these up as comparison to this series doesn't inspire any confidence in your (you and others) objectivity regarding these proceedings.

I have no problem acknowledging the pacing issues - it feels at times as though things are happening, at other times it feels like nothing is happening. Some of the story points don't thrill me - Killing Brainstorm was the first quibble, and there are a few others. But I guess after 40 years of reading I'm just not expecting perfection.

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Indeed. Compare like for like.

Where were we by issue 12 with Furman's -Ations? RiD?? MTMTE???

I will be honest, of those only MTMTE had really good pacing. Stories would be quick and fun and not necessarily overarching. But that's because it was like a road movie with little adventures here and there making a greater whole. Wasn't a fan of RID. Optimus Prime had some serious pacing issues too (art was pretty good though). TAAO had decent pacing.

Here is the real question: How many people are still buying this book because they actually like and enjoy it, and how many are doing it simply out of some sort of sense of responsibility and loyalty to the franchise?

Ironhidensh wrote:Here is the real question: How many people are still buying this book because they actually like and enjoy it, and how many are doing it simply out of some sort of sense of responsibility and loyalty to the franchise?

Since only like 5 people even post to this thread you'll never get a sample of any significant meaning.

I'll still go ahead and say I enjoy reading the issues, despite imperfections. Imperfections and quibbles can be improved. Cancellation requires a complete starting over, so I will err on the side of continuance.

sol magnus wrote:

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Indeed. Compare like for like.

Where were we by issue 12 with Furman's -Ations? RiD?? MTMTE???

I remember people saying the -ations were taking a long time.

RiD was complained about incessantly, especially next to MTMTE.

Bringing these up as comparison to this series doesn't inspire any confidence in your (you and others) objectivity regarding these proceedings.

Nonsense and that isn't the point. By comparing like for like, I mean comparing this book to other Transformer books, which is valid and 100% objective.
I also said where were we in those books by issue 12? In terms of story, world building etc
What had been achieved in those other books during a dozen issues.

Depending on where you place Megatron Origin, within 12 issues Furman's runs had: Infiltration, Stormbringer and the beginning of Escalation. Throwing in a handful of Spotlights among those arcs.

RiD had shoehorned introduced Bumblebee as Autobot Leader, Starscream as a rival, introduced the NAILS, established the post-war reinvention of Cybertron and by issue 12, Megatron had "returned".

MTMTE most importantly, solidified it's characterisation and gave new interpretations for virtually every cast member. To most who followed the book, it gave them characters they cared about and had empathy with.

That is just the cliff notes version too.

Now objectively list what IDW 2.0 has done uniquely off it's own back, without trading in on pre-existing continuity.

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Now objectively list what IDW 2.0 has done uniquely off it's own back, without trading in on pre-existing continuity.

It introduced the senate and different political groups and how one would deal with passing of a motion to delagate...

But objectively, it did give us an idea of how megatron staged an uprising and how the decepticon symbol was formed, along with giving a backdrop on his relationship with Optimus. In the overarching story, that's pretty much where we are at in 12 issues.

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:

sol magnus wrote:

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Indeed. Compare like for like.

Where were we by issue 12 with Furman's -Ations? RiD?? MTMTE???

I remember people saying the -ations were taking a long time.

RiD was complained about incessantly, especially next to MTMTE.

Bringing these up as comparison to this series doesn't inspire any confidence in your (you and others) objectivity regarding these proceedings.

Nonsense and that isn't the point. By comparing like for like, I mean comparing this book to other Transformer books, which is valid and 100% objective.
I also said where were we in those books by issue 12? In terms of story, world building etc
What had been achieved in those other books during a dozen issues.

Depending on where you place Megatron Origin, within 12 issues Furman's runs had: Infiltration, Stormbringer and the beginning of Escalation. Throwing in a handful of Spotlights among those arcs.

RiD had shoehorned introduced Bumblebee as Autobot Leader, Starscream as a rival, introduced the NAILS, established the post-war reinvention of Cybertron and by issue 12, Megatron had "returned".

MTMTE most importantly, solidified it's characterisation and gave new interpretations for virtually every cast member. To most who followed the book, it gave them characters they cared about and had empathy with.

That is just the cliff notes version too.

Now objectively list what IDW 2.0 has done uniquely off it's own back, without trading in on pre-existing continuity.

Not nonsense. Using your own ill-conceived argument about "where we were" people still complained bitterly about what was happening (or not happening) in those books in that timeframe. IIRC, people wanted Transformers and no humans, which is why Stormbringer was so well received in general although people complained about the story itself when THEY GOT WHAT THEY WERE CRYING ABOUT. You can look at the amount of issues out all day. That says nothing about the commentary of the day when the books were released. Nothing.

Going into a blow-by-blow of what happened in MTMTE and RID titles also speaks to nothing regarding how fans viewed both books at the time, either separately or especially in comparison with each other. I don't need the blow-by-blow. I have the books. Bumblebee was Autobot Leader at least 18 months before RID even was a thing, btw.

What I said regarding objectivity still holds: You look back fondly (more or less) on those books. You don't like this one. However, the commentary of the day on those books don't all compare favorably, or even really differently to the commentary of the day on this book.

Getting this book in floppy format probably isn't going to leave a lot of people (ha) in a good place - I frequently go back to other books to reference the "current" issue out. Howvever, at least for myself having read #1-10 back to back, the overall story definitely reads better. Still, this is nothing new. We've been dealing with decompressed storytelling for 20 years now. Thanks, Bendis.

william-james88 wrote:

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Now objectively list what IDW 2.0 has done uniquely off it's own back, without trading in on pre-existing continuity.

It introduced the senate and different political groups and how one would deal with passing of a motion to delagate...

It introduced the mentor taking a newly forged Cybertronian and guiding through the early stages of life amongst themselves.

sol magnus wrote:Still, this is nothing new. We've been dealing with decompressed storytelling for 20 years now. Thanks, Bendis.

Oh man, and now it's been plaguing Batman too. I think it hit a new extreme with that book.

Also is it just me or is Daredevil still Bendis' best work in comics? I feel that's the only time his style really worked with a character.

sol magnus wrote:

william-james88 wrote:

AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Now objectively list what IDW 2.0 has done uniquely off it's own back, without trading in on pre-existing continuity.

It introduced the senate and different political groups and how one would deal with passing of a motion to delagate...

It introduced the mentor taking a newly forged Cybertronian and guiding through the early stages of life amongst themselves.

Which is something that could/should have been 2 issues maximum. By a more competent writer. Beast Wars typically handled more development for a new character in a single episode...

Also, I have no love for RiD or MTMTE. I don't look fondly at either of them. But they at least cared more about fleshing out their rosters than anything 2.0 has done to date.

Objectively, Furman's run had been to half a dozen worlds and introduced fleshed out characterisation for several characters and alien races. You even had a bit of retroactive world building with Stormbringer. All in 12 issues.

IDW 2.0 - Killed off a name character for nothing more than notoriety because Brainstorm had no identity in 2.0 continuity. Therefore the death was meaningless as there were no stakes or context.

william-james88 wrote:

sol magnus wrote:Still, this is nothing new. We've been dealing with decompressed storytelling for 20 years now. Thanks, Bendis.

Oh man, and now it's been plaguing Batman too. I think it hit a new extreme with that book.

Also is it just me or is Daredevil still Bendis' best work in comics? I feel that's the only time his style really worked with a character.

It plagues everything. The good writers nowadays are the ones who can give you the feeling something happened in each issue of a decompressed arc.

One of the main things I love about Hickman is stuff actually happens in his books, to bring that back for a minute. At the time, New Avengers (The Illuminati) was the best damn book on the market. Something happened every issue, and you couldn't wait until the next one.

Ruckley may not be quite as good with that, but the strength of what he has to work with is also the weakness of the same: An essemble cast of fan-favorite characters that all have to get enough "screen time" to matter. Also, they aren't quite the guys we know and love and love to hate -- yet.