Personally, I don't like the story arcs/lines of any of the X-men comic book series currently running, I personally don't find any of them entertaining. Also I don't like the team rosters for any of the comic series currently running (this may just be used to the fact that I am not used to these new team rosters yet), I preferred the pre schism team rosters and the pre schism foes. What are your opinions, do you like pre or post Schism better?
Do you like the post schism "X" comic series?
Uncanny X-Men is my favorite comic at the moment. It has an awesome roster. How can you not like a roster with Scott, Emma, Magik, and the Stepfords. Tempus is also a solid up and comer.
As someone who is a big fan of Magik, I am digging post Schism and the fact that she is becoming a major player in the X-Men.
Uncanny X-Men is my favorite comic at the moment. It has an awesome roster. How can you not like a roster with Scott, Emma, Magik, and the Stepfords. Tempus is also a solid up and comer.
As someone who is a big fan of Magik, I am digging post Schism and the fact that she is becoming a major player in the X-Men.
Uncanny X-men is OK, but it doesn't compare to the pre-schism story archs
@lateralus: Definitely agree, it's fantastic to see Magik in a big role like she is. The new mutants (Eva in particular) on Cyclops's team are all pretty good too. Except for Goldballs. He's just weird.
@cosmomau5: Well duh, we are comparing 3 years of X-Men to 40+ years
I like the attention on Magik, and a few of the new characters, but overall I think the current status quo is pretty boring.
Personally, I don't like the story arcs/lines of any of the X-men comic book series currently running, I personally don't find any of them entertaining. Also I don't like the team rosters for any of the comic series currently running (this may just be used to the fact that I am not used to these new team rosters yet), I preferred the pre schism team rosters and the pre schism foes. What are your opinions, do you like pre or post Schism better?
when I think "pre-Schism era" I think of the SF and Utopia era, from like The Uncanny X-Men #500 - SFX, Part 1 until Schism itself around issue the end of the series, and personally I didn't really like anything from that era too much. There were some good ideas and some well done character threads, New Mutants (vol.3) and Uncanny X-Force (vol.1) were decent, but Uncanny' itself and most of the main X-men books just weren't that interesting to me.
The Regenesis era that followed interested me more initially because of the idea that there were smaller, more distinctly defined teams, but it didn't seem to get much of a chance to really take before Avengers Vs. X-Men seemed to derail the whole thing.
Post Avs.X, I think the books have actually been getting better again. With the exception of Battle of the Atom and maybe a few weaker issues, I really think that Bendis' Uncanny X-Men (vol.3) has been one of the most distinct and interesting X-men books of the last decade. Latour's Wolverine & the X-Men (vol.2) has been really entertaining so far, and though it had some weak arcs in the middle I've become quite interested in Wood's X-Men (vol.4) again as of the last few issues.
so, I guess though I have lots of criticisms I could make about X-men comics in general in the last few years, I still find what's going on now more interesting than the 3 or 4 years leading up to Schism.
Yea I think post schism(up to AvX) was a real let down because it didn't go anywhere, but I thought that one thing in particular it had over the Utopia period was the multiple team format.
Where the Utopia period pretty much just had X-Force, New Mutants and then everybody else on Utopia. Post schism had a different cast for every book that was consistent issue to issue. Though to me it sucks still because in the long run half the books ended before they got going, during AvX and in a way it hurt the ones that stuck around because they had nothing to play off of.
Now if you wanna say that your including post House of M X-men in that pre schism list then I'll agree completely. In my mind the most fun period is from the end of Morrison up to the start of San Francisco period. It's probably just me, but I love the teams then
As for now. This period of books is in an up swing, There's more good then bad, and its definitely alot more interesting stories then the Utopia era.
Yea I think post schism(up to AvX) was a real let down because it didn't go anywhere, but I thought that one thing in particular it had over the Utopia period was the multiple team format.
Where the Utopia period pretty much just had X-Force, New Mutants and then everybody else on Utopia. Post schism had a different cast for every book that was consistent issue to issue. Though to me it sucks still because in the long run half the books ended before they got going, during AvX and in a way it hurt the ones that stuck around because they had nothing to play off of.
Now if you wanna say that your including post House of M X-men in that pre schism list then I'll agree completely. In my mind the most fun period is from the end of Morrison up to the start of San Francisco period. It's probably just me, but I love the teams then
As for now. This period of books is in an up swing, There's more good then bad, and its definitely alot more interesting stories then the Utopia era.
2004-2008 was probably my favorite era of the contemporary X-men. Whedon's Astonishing X-Menwas probably as great a flagship book as the X-men ever had, New X-Men was one of the better student books, Uncanny X-Men had some fun runs from Claremont, Davis, and Brubaker in the later 400's, and David's Decimation-era X-Factor was some of his best work ever. '04-'08 was where it was at. SF/Utopia/Regenesis eras <<< Decimation era.
Where we're at now, might not be as great as that era was, but, for me, it's the most interesting the X-men have been since then.
I tried out X-Men vol. 4 and Uncanny X-Force vol. 2, but those both got very bad very quickly.
I'm hoping Nightcrawler's book will stay good (even though I'm pretty sure it's not going to last very long.
@oldnightcrawler: Agreed. Honestly i think that just the number of books(Astonishing, X-men, Uncanny, New, X-factor,...plus solos) is sort of reminiscent of to the number of titles today...and I think it's worth noting for comparison
Quality may not be the same across the board but there hasn't been so much potentially relavent stuff happening at once (cable's mission, Cyclops revolution, magneto's mission, Quires future, etc....) probably since the 04-08 period. And it's interesting that the biggest story from that era spun out of adjectiveless X-men, which probably wasn't on anyone's radar compared to the other titles. So anyone of today's books could do the same
I just don't like the idea about the X-Men being split up since I'm so used to seeing them together, so I can't really get into these stories because of that.
I just don't like the idea about the X-Men being split up since I'm so used to seeing them together, so I can't really get into these stories because of that.
you realize the X-men have mostly been split up since 1986, right?
@oldnightcrawler: Oh yeah, I knew that the X-Men have been split up since the 1980s, but I just don't like the fact that they are constantly at each others throats at this moment. I do like the idea about there being separate teams for separate missions though.
@oldnightcrawler: Oh yeah, I knew that the X-Men have been split up since the 1980s, but I just don't like the fact that they are constantly at each others throats at this moment. I do like the idea about there being separate teams for separate missions though.
yeah, I hear that. The state of animosity towards Cyclops makes sense from a story perspective, but I would rather it didn't have to be reiterated so often.
I'm pretty into most of the books right now, but with the exception of the ones that all take place at the same school, I just think all of them are more distinct and ultimately stronger the less they bleed into each other. Having all of the X-men on one big team has rarely effected the individual books or characters very positively.
@oldnightcrawler: Oh yeah! I like the idea about the X-Men having different voices depending on which team they are in since it makes them even more diverse, which is what I like, but I agree with you that they need to stop having the same characters in almost every book and add in characters that haven't appeared yet.
@oldnightcrawler: Oh yeah! I like the idea about the X-Men having different voices depending on which team they are in since it makes them even more diverse, which is what I like, but I agree with you that they need to stop having the same characters in almost every book and add in characters that haven't appeared yet.
eh.. if a character's not being used it generally doesn't bother me, I don't think every character needs to be in play all the time.
but most of the books have enough interesting enough casts that they needn't crossover as much as they do, that's all.
While I like the diversity and different points of attack so to speak, i cant say that its inherently more interesting than other time periods. I think the writing is shoddy many times and I generally feel that the Xmen comics have the wrong writers in place. The use of the same old characters in 2 and 3 books while others sit on the sideline is annoying as well. I thought the Schism was not written well but the results of having different teams with a different focus for each is great and should continue to be explored, though not necessarily with the pettiness of the Schism as the backdrop. I see potential in the post-schism stuff but whether the books live up to that potential is another thing entirely. I happen to think that much of the time period from House of M up until before Schism was pretty good, in fact better than most of what we've gotten post-schism with the exception of a few books. But that's me
While I like the diversity and different points of attack so to speak, i cant say that its inherently more interesting than other time periods. I think the writing is shoddy many times and I generally feel that the Xmen comics have the wrong writers in place. The use of the same old characters in 2 and 3 books while others sit on the sideline is annoying as well.
Oh yea...
Storm is in X-Men, Amazing, and WatX-Men....and this month she was the focus of an Annual.
I don't mind guest appearances, heck the only reason I would want them all in one school is so that different characters could interact without it being a big event. But this is ridiculous now.
- While I like the diversity and different points of attack so to speak, i cant say that its inherently more interesting than other time periods.
- I think the writing is shoddy many times and I generally feel that the Xmen comics have the wrong writers in place.
- The use of the same old characters in 2 and 3 books while others sit on the sideline is annoying as well.
- I thought the Schism was not written well but the results of having different teams with a different focus for each is great and should continue to be explored, though not necessarily with the pettiness of the Schism as the backdrop.
- I see potential in the post-schism stuff but whether the books live up to that potential is another thing entirely.
- I happen to think that much of the time period from House of M up until before Schism was pretty good, in fact better than most of what we've gotten post-schism with the exception of a few books. But that's me
1. really? I can't think of any point at which the various X-books were as diverse in both tone and subject as they are now
2. --
3. when I think of characters I like that aren't being used, I see this kind of frustration.. but at the same time, there are characters i like more than others. If Storm or Nightcrawler are in more than one book, that sort of means I have a better chance of seeing them in something I like, which I think is better, even if it means I might not be able to get a good.. I dunno, Warpath story every month.
4. totally agree on all these points, actually
5. I agree with both of these points, but, I guess for me I feel like there's more diversity among the books than any other time, so even if I don't like them all, the ones I do like I like both in more different ways, and more than most of what was happening just before or after Schism..
6. I think the HoM/Decimation period was good, really good actually; just not the SF/Utopia/Schism/Regenesis/AvsX stuff. Since AvsX I think it's been getting much better though, personally..
@hislolita: I've barely been following it but I thought the X-men weren't really going to have any big connect to that event.
Seems busy....especially with them having "Will of Xavier" and Wolverines death around corner
@hislolita: I've barely been following it but I thought the X-men weren't really going to have any big connect to that event.
Seems busy....especially with them having "Will of Xavier" and Wolverines death around corner
True, true but considering how Emma is being used (although more as a cameo) I am hoping something useful for her as a character will come out of it.
This whole death of Wolverine I am taking with a grain of salt. I mean, I believe it's going to happen but how it'll happen I am a bit wary about. Marvel keeps making noise about how everything is going to be some kind of huge explosion once October hits and I just assume it will affect the X-Men world. But yeah, so far it seems to only be aimed at the Avengers, Thor and the Fantastic Four. I sincerely forgot about this whole "Will of Xavier" thing. It hasn't grabbed my attention as much as Original Sin has in terms of storyline.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment