• Secure your account

    A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

In your opinion, which is the best X-Men storyline after the Age of Apocalypse saga?

photojones2 said:
aoa is pure 90's hype.

the only decent thing to come out of that was generation next.

No way. The initial plot is brilliant. Transforming all the books to fit the new world was a great innovation, and they all tied together very well.

Plus the ending was GREAT action. Magneto ripping Apoc in half was $$$.
 
Darthphere said:
new_graphic_novel2605.jpg

Ewww, thanks for THAT reminder.
 
Doc Destruction said:
Wha?

I've said that a bunch on here.


Yet, you bash Marvel today for having cross company crossovers today, but you just asked for them to have more stories like that. What is it man?! PICK A SIDE!!!!
 
Darthphere said:
Yet, you bash Marvel today for having cross company crossovers today, but you just asked for them to have more stories like that. What is it man?! PICK A SIDE!!!!

Errrr, you talking to the right person?

Cross Company crossovers, or cross TITLE crossovers. Either way, I've never bashed Marvel for that. Continuity and writing, on the other hand...well...
 
I'm still sticking with Fatal Attractions as the best 90s X-storyline.I would even call it one of their best stories,but I know thousands of rabid fanboys would hound me trying to school me about how The Phoenix Saga rules the universe.
 
GNR4Life said:
I'm still sticking with Fatal Attractions as the best 90s X-storyline.I would even call it one of their best stories,but I know thousands of rabid fanboys would hound me trying to school me about how The Phoenix Saga rules the universe.

Thing is, the thread asks for storylines AFTER AoA. That's why it hasn't been brought up.
 
Gifted is probably the best thing to come out after AoA. I dont care for Morrison's X-Men.
 
Is that the one with Sam's brother and the girl from the opposing family? It was obviously "Romeo & Juliet" but I liked that arc. Part of it is because I'm partial to the Guthries, but there's been worse.
 
Tropico said:
Is that the one with Sam's brother and the girl from the opposing family? It was obviously "Romeo & Juliet" but I liked that arc. Part of it is because I'm partial to the Guthries, but there's been worse.


The first Astonishing arc silly. But yeah I remember that story, CHuck Austen wrote it and it was pretty good actually, and Salvador's art was gorgeous.
 
Darthphere said:
The first Astonishing arc silly. But yeah I remember that story, CHuck Austen wrote it and it was pretty good actually, and Salvador's art was gorgeous.

Sorryyyyyy!!!!:( I'm getting on in years, senility is starting to set in.:(

Was it "She lies with angels?" I seem to remember the title but I don't know if it was one of the comics or the whole story arc. It was Austen? Really? I guess no one is completely bad.:o Yeah, the art was awesome. I actually preferred Josh when he wasn't powered, I have a New Mutants story where he's heavily featured and I liked it a lot. I liked that (apparently) he was just a normal guy but still had this amazing voice, that he wouldn't need to be a mutant like his brother to be special. That was pretty much the moral of the story if I remember correctly. Guess Marvel showed us years later.:(
 
Tropico said:
Sorryyyyyy!!!!:( I'm getting on in years, senility is starting to set in.:(

Was it "She lies with angels?" I seem to remember the title but I don't know if it was one of the comics or the whole story arc. It was Austen? Really? I guess no one is completely bad.:o Yeah, the art was awesome. I actually preferred Josh when he wasn't powered, I have a New Mutants story where he's heavily featured and I liked it a lot. I liked that (apparently) he was just a normal guy but still had this amazing voice, that he wouldn't need to be a mutant like his brother to be special. That was pretty much the moral of the story if I remember correctly. Guess Marvel showed us years later.:(


Yeah thats it. Austen had a couple of good stories. He actually got better as his run on Uncanny was ending.
 
With regard to Cassandra Nova's origin, the whole concept itself is not easy to comperhend. Xavier was born with an evil psyche, used it to make herself have a physical form, made a slugfest with Xavier in their mom's wound (I don't know if it's a literal slugfest or an astral plane slugfest), in which Xavier eventually won, and then Cassandara got stillborn, later turned out to be alive, etc.

And then we have that whole Cassandra storyline thing., which is even more confusing. She intentionally infected herself with a disease of something, because later she's going to swap bodies with Xavier and she wants him to die in her own body, but then, after her trip to the Shiar, she went back to retrieve a dying body she intended to destroy in the first place.

With regard to Whedon, remember that in Morrison's time, the concept of a 6-issue arc wasn't there yet. His storyline arcs in NXM have an arbitrary number of issues. Sometimes, Morrison even made filler issues. It gave him more liberty in creating his storylines. It just so happened that his entire work in NXM perfectly fit a 3 volume hardcover.

Whedon however, doesn't have this liberty. His arcs always have to be composed of 6 issues to make them both TPB and HC friendly.
 
So, what you're actually saying is that there weren't actually any plotholes, you just found it hard to understand?
 
Tropico said:
Yes, any story line that says that by peeing on Iceman's severed ice head you give him enough liquid to reconstitute a new body is priceless.:up:

That's taken completely out of context. Havoc threatened Iceman in that way after Iceman insulted him. It was never meant to be taken seriously. Granted, it was a tasteless line, but at least take it how it was meant to be taken.

Darthphere said:
Oh man, remember when Mystique had sex with the Devil and thats why Nightcrawler looks like a demon. Awesome Chuck Austen is the man for getting rid of the irony and metaphoric appearance of Nightcrawler.

Again, people run with the rumors. Nightcrawler's father was not the devil, nor a demon, nor anything of that nature. He was simply a very old mutant who wanted to get a rouse out of Nightcrawler, and so he refured to himself as the Devil. It was stated that he wasn't.

And before anyone claims the mistake of Azazel trying to get out of his little dimension by getting out and impregnating women so they could have kids to eventually get him out.... that's also false. I was never trying to get himself out, he was trying to get his armies out so he could raid Earth as a whole.

Truthfully, I thought the Draco was a good and interesting read. The only thing I would have changed was the art on the last issue and I would have moved the Juggernaut/Alpha Flight scenes to a single issue just after Draco as part one of the Trial of Juggernaut, to make that story a 3 parter.

And in my opinion I'd say that since AoA, Onslaught had the greatest impact on me. It had amazing buildup and a great payoff. To me, that was probably the best storyline since AoA, though I'd be hesitant to say it's better. In my opinion, I'd probably say they're even. The Twelve had an awsome build up, but it's pay off was really a let down.
 
JewishHobbit said:
And in my opinion I'd say that since AoA, Onslaught had the greatest impact on me. It had amazing buildup and a great payoff. To me, that was probably the best storyline since AoA, though I'd be hesitant to say it's better. In my opinion, I'd probably say they're even. The Twelve had an awsome build up, but it's pay off was really a let down.

*Applause*

Onslaught was hands down the best arc since AoA, I truthfully couldn't give one the edge over the other, Onslaught had EVERYTHING, including proper build, a well written arc in general, the ideal main villian and damn good art. In the end, it's had the most impact aside from AoA as well.:up: :up:
 
JewishHobbit said:
Again, people run with the rumors. Nightcrawler's father was not the devil, nor a demon, nor anything of that nature. He was simply a very old mutant who wanted to get a rouse out of Nightcrawler, and so he refured to himself as the Devil. It was stated that he wasn't.

And before anyone claims the mistake of Azazel trying to get out of his little dimension by getting out and impregnating women so they could have kids to eventually get him out.... that's also false. I was never trying to get himself out, he was trying to get his armies out so he could raid Earth as a whole.

Truthfully, I thought the Draco was a good and interesting read. The only thing I would have changed was the art on the last issue and I would have moved the Juggernaut/Alpha Flight scenes to a single issue just after Draco as part one of the Trial of Juggernaut, to make that story a 3 parter.

AKA....get himself out.
 
He could get himself out just fine (at least until the X-Men destroyed the gateway in the first part of the storyline). He wasn't focused on getting himself out until that point. His main goal, the one people claim was flawed, wasn't to get himself out, but rather his whole army. He could get out, but what good would that do him? With his army he could rage war on humanity once more and claim them.
 
JewishHobbit said:
He could get himself out just fine (at least until the X-Men destroyed the gateway in the first part of the storyline). He wasn't focused on getting himself out until that point. His main goal, the one people claim was flawed, wasn't to get himself out, but rather his whole army. He could get out, but what good would that do him? With his army he could rage war on humanity once more and claim them.


It was still a crappy storyline and pretty much tarnished Nightcrawler's character.
 
Darthphere said:
It was still a crappy storyline and pretty much tarnished Nightcrawler's character.

How did it tarnish his character? The only thing that it changed about Nightcrawler was that we now know who his father is (instead of a faceless name), and we know that he had two half brothers. The only odd thing that came out of it, mostly due to Austen not being able to follow up on his whole Angel Vs Demon idea, was that Warren's blood burns Nightcrawler... but I can live with that. Personally, I found the story to be very good. It's probably up there with my favorate Austen stories, along with the Brotherhood story, She Lies With Angels, and Eden's Trail.
 
JewishHobbit said:
How did it tarnish his character? The only thing that it changed about Nightcrawler was that we now know who his father is (instead of a faceless name), and we know that he had two half brothers. The only odd thing that came out of it, mostly due to Austen not being able to follow up on his whole Angel Vs Demon idea, was that Warren's blood burns Nightcrawler... but I can live with that. Personally, I found the story to be very good. It's probably up there with my favorate Austen stories, along with the Brotherhood story, She Lies With Angels, and Eden's Trail.


The fact is. Nightcrawler was always a metaphor. Highly religious but looked like a demon. But now his dad is shown to be some demon looking dude, oh that makes sense, and he has two borthers that look exactly like him. Awesome! Nightcrawler lost his individuality, all I can say im glad no other writer has picked up on this horrible story line.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"