#1 Edited by adamTRMM (2307 posts) - - Show Bio

So I was just thinking, about the Uncanny Avengers line-up, and while I enjoy the Apocalypse Twins story, I think that UA team doesn't really fit in. By members, I mean. Think about it, this is a team that supposed to improve mutant\human relations, while the team-members are Havok - mutant terrorist's brother; Scarlet Witch that tried to wipe her own species, I mean what mutant will trust a team with her?; Rogue - a former terrorist, yes she is rehabilitated, but you know how propaganda works; and Wolverine, a man that killed more than the Punisher (who is wanted by the government) and messed up so many times, people stopped counting. I understand writers don't think this way, when they assemble a team with the characters they just want, but what's about some logic?

My question is, was it natural character development to make Havok a leader of that team? I mean, didn't he leave the X-Men to kill his brother is space? And wasn't he like a ruthless MF in 90s? Is that natural character evolution for him? I just can't stop feeling it's kinda forced.

I want to hear your thoughts guys, if you feel anything like this happens to a character and you don't feel like it was natural or maybe vice versa. Let's talk about good\bad character development.

#2 Posted by Emequious_Swerve (1273 posts) - - Show Bio

Good points. I think its less "lets have these characters for a reason" and more of "lets use these characters because they aren't doing anything".

At the same time, over the course of years most characters have operated outside or against the law. Cap went against the US government during Civil War, Wonder Man was originally a villain, Sunfire willingly became a Horseman of Apocalypse at one point.

Its the fact that theses characters have been around so long they always have to do new things to keep them fresh, and that includes most characters being a bad guy at some point.

#3 Posted by ItsDaveyJ (196 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't know... I stopped having any hope for the series after the first issue when Rogue was getting up in Scarlet Witch's face about the whole mutant genocide thing. It was odd how Rogue was so upset with her and yet she is fine being with Magneto who has done plenty of horrible things himself and yet that is forgiven.

I just don't think they really know how to write the characters in the first place so they haven't really figured out how to make the team make sense in my opinion. Everything in the series felt forced. For me, it started with the Rogue/SW scene.

#4 Edited by oldnightcrawler (5010 posts) - - Show Bio

@adamtrmm: To be fair, I've never really understood the logic behind letting the Scarlet Witch be on the Avengers. It's not even like Avengers Disassembled or House of M were the first time she's gone crazy and put everyone in jeopardy, in fact I feel like I can think of more times she's done that than times she's actually saved the day. I like the character alright, but she's got a bit of a crap record of being a superhero. Then again, on a team that was started by and consistently features Iron-man and Hank Pym, it doesn't seem like that much of a stretch.

Havok and Rogue actually make more sense, for me. Though they have been both outlaws and taken advantage of by villains, they've also both spent years being legitimate heroes, who have, in my mind, more than paid their superhero dues. Havok also lead X-factor for the government, which seems pretty legitimate on a resume for the Avengers; and he lead the Starjammers! how has there never been a space-pirate-freedom-fighter on the Avengers before?

Wolverine I kind of see your point with, and, besides that I'll always see him more as an X-man, honestly, I can't see why the team would need him. But if they allow the Black Widow and Winter Soldier, who were a strait-up assassins as well, why not him?

I guess one of the things that made the team's assemblage feel organic was that it was really only Havok that we see get asked. Wolverine and Rogue seem like they sort of just invited themselves after the first mission, and that's how most Avengers end up proving themselves. The Vision's first mission was to kill the Avengers; second mission he saves the team, okay, you're in. It makes Avengers sense.

#5 Posted by AgeofHurricane (7306 posts) - - Show Bio

Havok's place on the team--in the state of mutant/human affairs--makes no sense. I mean all writers have their own, respective and specific pet characters, and Havok just so happened to be Remender's, even to the point where he had a CBR interview and Havok, a couple of issues later, regurgitates Remender's ideologies and personal views into the character with no regard for character traits and dispositions. It's a bit repulsive. Obviously, that's what comic book writing usually is, but in Remender's case, as stated already, it seemed forced.

For what it's worth in addition to the amount serious hype Marvel brought towards this title, Remender's flavor has really diminished what could have been the true flagship of the MU--it could have been a seriously good title, but he's just shat all over it with continuous personal, but obfuscated, interjection. Havok's just a mouthpiece for an extremely skewed version of discrimination and general rights. He doesn't really get it. It's a shame.

#6 Edited by adamTRMM (2307 posts) - - Show Bio

It seems that Remender already showed us, he is interested in a use of Havok, but now, he's got another Magneto's daughter. I've read somewhere, that he wanted to use them in his UXF run, but for some reason (X-Factor I guess?) he hadn't. Actually, after a complicated "space-trip" I wouldn't mind Havok & Polaris in his team.

@oldnightcrawler :

So you're saying "get it easy"? Ha I just want a flawless or, at least, a well thought comic book, is that so much to ask? :(
Actually, would it be strange if I'd say Rogue (who isn't written that good) is the only person in this team, that acts sanely?

@ageofhurricane said:
Havok's just a mouthpiece for an extremely skewed version of discrimination and general rights. He doesn't really get it. It's a shame.

Good one. It was that Rogue\SW debate, I couldn't feel anything, but a disappointment in him. It isn't that Rogue lost in this debate to a self-ashamed (and not even in her actions!) person, but how Remender couldn't put the right words into Rogue's mouth, just because a "pretty white boy" like he is couldn't know what she had to say, or maybe he just wanted her to lose, and I don't know what is more stupid, this or losing an argument to SW?! And I'm not even a supporter of mutants as a "minority".
#7 Posted by oldnightcrawler (5010 posts) - - Show Bio

@adamtrmm said:

@oldnightcrawler :

So you're saying "get it easy"? Ha I just want a flawless or at least a well thought comic book, is that so much to ask? :(
Actually, would it be strange if I'd say Rogue (who isn't written that good) is the only person in this team, that acts sanely?

I don't know.. I don't know what that means.

#8 Posted by adamTRMM (2307 posts) - - Show Bio

@oldnightcrawler:

lol sorry, "take it easy" would be correct? I'm still working on my grammar, CV is the first place where I communicate in English only. :)

#9 Posted by oldnightcrawler (5010 posts) - - Show Bio

@adamtrmm: haha, okay.. that's what I thought you meant. yeah, take it easy.