thegentlemanrogue

I thought Daken's death was very apropos. This larger than life character with Machiavellian aspirations of power, held down and snuffed out in a inch deep puddle of dirty water like he was nothing. As great as he thought himself to be, he was taken out like a piece of gutter trash, and to add insult to injury we find out that for all his cunning and manipulation, he was nothing but a pawn being adeptly maneuvered behind the scene into this very outcome. It's mundane, but that's what makes it poetic.

Brilliant issue.

Also on the issue of Sabretooth, if you remember back to the time of Identity Disc, Fury fully believed that Creed was the one pulling everyone's strings and manipulating the outcome. We of course know that isn't true, but Fury and Shield believed it, and it wasn't a hard sell. Wolverine has said in the past that Sabretooth plays the fool because it suits his needs and allows him to fly under the radar, in fact it's arguably that very character trait that allowed him to go over Daken like this in the first place, because very few people know Creed is capable of pulling it off. That's one of the things that makes him dangerous.

A lot of people seem to think that Wolverine's stance doesn't make any sense, but I don't think that is the case at all. Honestly, and this might sound weird to someone who only has a passing familiarity with Wolverine, but Logan's stance in Schism is far more "in character" then Wolverine leading or even joining X-Force. Historically Wolverine wouldn't have tolerated the existence of that team, or at least not with the roster that made it up. Wolverine's views on killing and the X-Men has always been that it may be necessary but if it needs to be done, he's going to be the one to do it, no one else. How many times has Wolverine step in and stopped one of his friends and teammates from killing someone? Countless times, and he was even prepared to kill Rachel to stop her from killing Selene. Wolverine is there to get his hands dirty and prevent to other X-Men from making the choices he has had to make and fallowing in his foot steps. I feel like Wolverine's views on killing are pretty well defined and his stance in Schism not arbitrary in the slightest, it is very much in line how the character has been portrayed practically since his inception.

@thegentlemanrogue said:

@NXH said:

The red head spider-woman was hot in a geekish sort of way.

I'm pretty sure she is a porn star.

Do you... do you have a name?

The red head spider-woman was hot in a geekish sort of way.

To me Cyclops' character development has always come off natural in the context of the storyline of the last couple decades. He is the leader of a critically endangered species on the brink of destruction, with a responsibility to all remaining mutants, and not just the ones who volunteer to put their lives on the line. Cyclops no longer has the luxury of being idealistic, he needs to be pragmatic. The situation the X-Men faced called for a certain type of leadership, he needed to step up or move aside, and he choose to step up. Scott isn't a peace time leader or a war time leader, he is a leader. Period. He made the chooses that had to be made.

The last decade or so of character development have made Cyclops and interesting character with interesting motivations. Before M Day Scott wasn't a character. He was a bland cardboard cut out with no personality. If someone liked his "character" it was because he was such a nothing character that a reader could impose there own personality on him. That's no longer the case.

You completely twisted everything I've said, I never said that Wolverine's past was convoluted or that his character was a plot device, I said that his past was a plot device and this his character was convoluted.  Both which are absolutely true.  Wolverine's blank past is the perfect setup for writers to put in whatever the hell they feel like putting in, they could write a story about Wolverine going to the moon in the 50's, fighting aliens, blowing up the death star, etc etc and fit it perfectly into continuity if they wanted to.  That's a plot device.  Wolverine's character itself is convoluted because he literally stretches out in to 300 other concepts and characteristics and those too would fit into continuity.  Batman might be walking deus ex machinma but that has little to do with his character or personality and more to do with plot and how the character is represented to readers.  You're post here has more to do with complaining about plot then the character itself. 

Right, and how many of these concepts change his core personality? How many of these change the way the character is portrayed? In comics, Bruce Wayne and Batman are typically portrayed as 2 different characters.  You said it yourself earlier that there is no alter ego for Wolverine, that Wolverine and Logan are the same person, yet he can be a samurai with a code of honor one minute, then a brawler who'll fight dirty the next, a savage who fights his inner nature, or a rebel who defies authority.  All of these gimmicks change Wolverine's character. Batman being a ninja or an engineer doesn't change his core personality, and being a billionaire is a characteristic of Bruce Wayne, who is commonly seen as a different character from Batman all together.   Wolverine is more convoluted then most characters out there.  It wouldn't even be so bad if they could actually blend these gimmicks together properly but they rarely ever do so, because it's nearly impossible to put together that many characteristics and make it work.  I find it hysterical how Wolverine tries to follow the samurai code of honor, but has no problem attacking people from behind, one of the biggest taboos among samurais. 

His viewpoints on the justice system, his relationships, similar to Wolverine he also fights his urges to want to kill, his philosophy on killing, these make him a more complex character then Wolverine is without the need to expand his character into a billion different archtypes.  These are more valid reasons then the abundance of conflicting ideologies, or the diversity of the character, both which were 2 of the reasons you brought up to justify Wolverine's complexity a few pages ago.  You also brought up Wolverine having a diverse history, which goes to the original point that his blank background is one giant plot device for writers benefits.  Batman has been a central character in his universe for 60 years now, he has his fair share of flaws considering his status of importance and popularity in DCU.  If Wolverine had stuck to a core concept without expanding into so many other archtypes, under his circumstances he would of been a more engaging, deeper character.  Unless you're a huge fan of the 90's archtype that was so popular, the anti hero, it's hard to give 2 shits about Wolverine as a character.  There isn't a lot Batman can do when it comes to fixing the criminal justice system.  It's not like he can make a list of new rules and regulations, march into the GPD and demand everyone does what he tells them to do.  It just doesn't work like that.  The best thing he can do is make criminals face justice, which is what Batman is about.  Is it a flaw? Sure, but it's no worse then Wolverine being a convoluted mess of a character who can be anything because his plot device past allows it. 

This video right here is pretty accurate as well, explaining why Wolverine is marketable to younger readers.  Kids eat this shit up, ever since the 90's the idea of cool was someone who cusses, kills, and defies authority hence why Lobo, Punisher and Wolverine all peaked during that decade in popularity.   None of these characters have exceptionally deep personalities, but at least with Lobo and Castle, they typically have one gimmick or concept.  But that's mostly because DC and Marvel didn't plan on relying on those 2 as cash cows like they did with Wolverine.  When you actually look back at the 90's, Wolverine seems more generic then anything else. 

  

The only thing here that's even close to fact so far is that Wolverine is a more convoluted and marketable character then Batman is.  His entire background is a giant plot device for the writers benefits, he's a character composed of numerous gimmicks and concepts to market him to whatever is cool and whatever the bandwaggon is at the time.  So far there is very little about Wolverine's character or personality that's deep or complex.  Batman = Complex in the sense that he has a deep character without the use of 100 different gimmicks and concepts to add diversity to his character.  One complex personalityWolverine = Convoluted in the sense that his fans confuse flexibility and marketability to complexity.  Several generic and marketable personalities, concepts. Oh, and it's someone decided to use a Hyde Jekyll comparison, I guess Wolverine is also a victim of recycled gimmicks, since this is the basis of one of Marvel's more popular character who I shouldn't have to name.  Now those are facts. 

How fast can he run is it 25-30 mph which is around peak human or  is he faster. How fast can he punch or swipe his claws is it peak human around 40-45 mph or faster.

Some things are just true and don't require an opinion, the fact that Wolverine is a more complex and layered character than Batman is one of them. I welcome someone to actually attempt to argue the point.