• 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.

Rogue is a useless character...

TNC9852002 said:
Wait for X3 and see what they do with her character then...After that, you can do as much complaining as you want..

I have a feeling I will still be disappointed with her character. But here's to hope!
:O
 
Mistopurr83 said:
Moving on. For those of you (such as myself) who would really love to see the comic Rogue actually shown on screen; forget about that happening in the movies (since X3 is said to be the last one)! Just be hopeful that will happen if they ever make x-men into a live action TV show someday in the near future.

This may just be ANOTHER valid arguement that you ignore, here, but I have to say: How come no one complains about how different Cyclops, Storm and Wolverine are from their comics counterparts?

Few do. I'm not entirely sure what the problem with Rogue is, but Rogue is just as accurate as everything else in the movie. From Wolverine, to Cerebro to "Reverend" Striker.

As for her being "useless," well that's just a matter of persepctive, and VERY subjective. Rogue's mutant ability involved copying powers, meaning she is useful for anything given the right plot, whether that be dive tackling juggernaut or being used by magneto to start a revolution.

Also, Anna is a talented actor, and, to be honest, makes a more convincing teenager flying a jet than I've seen in all my years of magically talented high tech superhero watching.

Is she useful in a fistfight? No, perhaps not, but why should she be? Her power lends itself to so much more than just being a clone of Ms. Marvel, and I'm glad shows like X-Men Evolution and the movies are taking advantage of that instead of just making her supergirl...

Additionally, please notice... that there are plenty other X-Men being useful in Rogue's place. all significantly powered down from the comics...
 
GL1 said:
This may just be ANOTHER valid arguement that you ignore, here, but I have to say: How come no one complains about how different Cyclops, Storm and Wolverine are from their comics counterparts?

Few do. I'm not entirely sure what the problem with Rogue is, but Rogue is just as accurate as everything else in the movie. From Wolverine, to Cerebro to "Reverend" Striker.

As for her being "useless," well that's just a matter of persepctive, and VERY subjective. Rogue's mutant ability involved copying powers, meaning she is useful for anything given the right plot, whether that be dive tackling juggernaut or being used by magneto to start a revolution.

Also, Anna is a talented actor, and, to be honest, makes a more convincing teenager flying a jet than I've seen in all my years of magically talented high tech superhero watching.

Is she useful in a fistfight? No, perhaps not, but why should she be? Her power lends itself to so much more than just being a clone of Ms. Marvel, and I'm glad shows like X-Men Evolution and the movies are taking advantage of that instead of just making her supergirl...

Additionally, please notice... that there are plenty other X-Men being useful in Rogue's place. all significantly powered down from the comics...

You're completely missing the point. No one is talking about Rogue deviating from the comic books. No one is saying that the movie Rogue doesn't have POTENTIAL to be important. But as done in the last 2 movies, she has shown NOTHING other than being a tag-along. Thats the problem...they're not doing anything with her, where as in the comics she played a big role.

And whoever said that Anna doesn't give off the presence of a heroine, I agree ;o
 
I swear you are either completely ignorant of the comic rogue or a idiot.Rogue is not just her miss marvel powers and to say she is useless is ridiculous.She is an evolving character in the movies,she was written that way so she could take non-comic book fans through the journey of her finding out who she is and where she belongs-which is with the x-men.She couldn't possibly know how to use her powers to their full advantage ,cause she only developed them at the beginning of x1,and she was completely untrained unlike storm,cykes,jean and wolvy.Now she is part of the team she will be so much more active and capable with her powers(evidence of that is her presence in the DR in the trailor).Plus you obviously have never read a comic or you would know there have been numerous times when rogue has been emotionally vunerable because of the nature of her powers,so before you complain about anna's protrayal of rogue be a little more educated and understand these are the movie version and not a complete copy of the comics-which means they go about things differently.
 
" Many of us are eager for instant gratification b/c it's how comic Rogue was almost always portrayed"

Wolverine, Storm, Magneto,Mystique aretn the same as they were portrayed in the comics either. Why dont you complain about them.

Storm is strong,proud and dangerous,not weak like Halle has portrayed her. Wolverine isnt so girl-ish and would never kiss Jean no matter how much he wanted to, Mystique is completely different.

The movie is a "adaptation of the source material" in the comics. Rogues mutant ability is to take others for a limited period of time - how would you explain super strength and flight in the films?
The only weve seen with the ability to fly is Storm and its more like floating or gliding. Who would she steal that power from?

These films are based in reality and they wanted to use Rogues original mutant ability, which IMHO is the way to go.


If you want comic book Rogue, then read the comic books.
 
conan69 said:
how would you explain super strength and flight in the films?
conan69 said:
The only weve seen with the ability to fly is Storm and its more like floating or gliding. Who would she steal that power from?

These films are based in reality


Except, they're not based on reality. They're based on the average audience member's feeble understanding of reality, and consequently a lot of the decisions that have been made regarding which powers are too unrealistic don't make any real sense.

Take Wolverine's power for example. I'll forgo the practical impossibility of a viable life form’s metabolism being fast enough to repair itself, and get straight to the crucial matter, conservation of mass. A body regenerating at a greatly increased rate would need to be supplied with the necessary raw materials (proteins etc.) for replacing dead cells at the same greatly increased rate. As there is no such supply, Wolverine's body should very quickly lose its ability to regenerate; the fact that it does not proves that the principle of conservation of mass is being broken.

Next to that, circumventing gravity somehow and flying is downright plausible.

Similar arguments can be made against other character's powers being any more realistic, in a completely accurate sense, than flying.

Regarding Rogue's usefulness, although I did think she was very effective in the role given to her in X1, I have to agree with the basic sentiment (if not the reasoning) of the thread starter; at this point in time her character is of little use.

In X1 Rogue represents one facet of the mutant experience; a runaway, an outcast because of her powers (which seem nothing but a curse to her), struggling to find acceptance, to be somewhere she belongs. Of course, now that she has found acceptance with the X-Men, this story is concluded, and she doesn't seem to have anything else to justify more screen time.

If Rogue were not in X1, the film would have to have been substantially different, and would lose some of its best moments. Conversely, if Rogue were not in X2, would anyone have noticed? Her character doesn't seem to be going anywhere anymore.

I do think something needs to happen to shake her character up a bit, to make her interesting again. Giving her another mutants powers permanently, as well as the associated mental problems due to retaining a personality strong enough to overpower her own, would certainly achieve this. It would however be silly to think that this is the only way to do it; the writers may well be able to come up with a way to rejuvenate her character which fits better into the overall plot.
 
What a thoughtful excellent post. :)

We need more of that here.

I dont disagree with anything you said, I disagree with the "Rogue in the movies isnt the same as the comics/isnt hot enough(which I definitely dont agree with)/cant fly/etc" endless whinning.

A movie isnt a comic book.
 
ljr and conan69, your only saying these things in order to defend a character you like which only makes me dislike her even more! I don't care what you say b/c I will always consider the movie Rogue a useless whiner. You also can't seem to comprehend that Rogue being considered useless by people like me is not just b/c of her not having additional permanent powers. It's basically b/c she's too weak, she's not a heroine at all and she acts like a first class wossie.

Your wondering why nobody her is talking about Mystique, Wolverine, Storm, Cyclops, Deathstrike and Magneto? Well duh, it's simply b/c this thread is NOT about them! Are you blind for god sakes? Anyway I think the main reason people are not as disapointed with them in the movies is b/c so far they haven't been treated like useless whiners. I don't recall them being damsel in distresses constantly screaming and not kicking a$$ physically or powerwise. Storm (yeah she's weak looking and pretty useless but this isn't about her) and Magneto did plenty with their powers while the others got to fight back physically at some points. Rogue however was not able to do either of these things. Absorbing Pyro at the Drake home doesn't count b/c he was not a villain yet. He was still a classmate to her. Not only that Pyro at least got to kick a$$ by driving the police away with his powers and Iceman did fight back against Styker (powerwise) by creating that ice wall. I don't recall Pyro and Iceman being treated as constant whiners screaming for help either. That's why I don't consider them as useless as Rogue. So face it Rogue is the most useless for being a whiner, a damsel in distress, kicking no a$$ physically or powerwise and for being a sidelined bystander. You also can't compare Evo Rogue to the movie Rogue. Aside from both not having additional permanent powers their nothing alike and you should know why that is.

I don't know which comic movie is the most unfaithful to it's source material. It's either X-Men, Constantine or Catwoman. Each of those comic films were NOT staying faithful. They looked more like they were trying to recreate everything that existed in the original universe. Which totally does not do it for me. I bet if Catwoman and Constantine had turned out to be master peices (which of course they weren't) people like conan69 and ljr would be making up the same BS excuses for their changes just to defend what they liked.:down When you say the movie is not the comic, that's a BS excuse your coming up with in order to defend a movie you like.
 
So what does that make you? A BS poster who uses generalizations to attack a movie that you DON'T like and can't stand that other people DO like?
 
Cyclops said:
So what does that make you? A BS poster who uses generalizations to attack a movie that you DON'T like and can't stand that other people DO like?

I'm not answering that.
 
You already did, long before I asked it.

Look, if people can say that they DIDN'T like Rogue, then people can say that they DID. It's just fair.

See, it's called "opinion", and everyone's is different. Just because someone likes what you don't doesn't make their opinion BS. The fact that you want to discredit someone's opinion because it doesn't line up with yours makes YOU BS.
 
Why thank you cyclops,and to Mistopurr if you dislike the character and movie so much go to another forum and take your ignorant posts with you.
 
how do you rate how useful a character is? is it screen time? is it their mutant power? is it how many lines they have? think about this: mystique had 18 words in the first movie......18...... yet she was very heavily involved with the situation in x2. rogue was the key to the entire plot of x1, but in x2, she was more in the background. if i remember correctly, neither the animated series, nor did the comics focus on one single character for very long. in some episodes, handfulls of x-men wouldn't even make an appearance, but that didn't make them useless. all the characters don't all have equal exposure in every single installment all the time. rogues powers weren't as applicable in x2 as they were in x1, so she didn't use them as much. if the x mansion is burning down, prof. x's powers are going to be pretty useless against the blaze, but storm and bobby are going to be front and center with their powers to put out the fire. does prof. x's lack of ability to call rain or create ice make him a useless character?

mistopurr83:
i can't imagine kitty in rogue's role in x1. her power would have no use in x1's plot. how/why would magneto use kitty's power to his advantage? you seem to get offended when someone disagrees with you, so i'm not disagreeing with you, i'm simply asking how you imagine kitty in that role.... i sure can't.
 
Yellow Ranger said:
how/why would magneto use kitty's power to his advantage? you seem to get offended when someone disagrees with you, so i'm not disagreeing with you, i'm simply asking how you imagine kitty in that role.... i sure can't.

Well you must not know how to use your imagination. When Kitty Pryde first came in she was a plot device for the enemies (Hellfire club) the x-men were fighting against at the time. In my imagination they could've done something similar in X1. Only it would've been with the brotherhood. True the plot would've been different but not by a lot. Magneto could've used Kitty to get something he couldn't get b/c of her phasing ability than he would've made the x-men stay back by threatening to kill her (as he once did to Kitty in the comics). So that's my imagination of how it would've and could've been Kitty's role in X1. So don't tell me you can't imagine that being just as dramatic either. It would've been similar to how Green Goblin threatened to kill Mary Jane and those little kids in Spider-Man 1. Why do you think the other directors would've made it Kitty's role in the first place? They must've had something good in mind.

ljr, don't tell me where to go. I got a right to say what I want here. So if you can't stand my posts why don't you ignore them?

PS Rogue's power being the source of Magneto's revolution is an unrealistic and bad scientific theory. I don't know how absorbing somebody through some nonexistent machine would cause the end of humanity in real life.
 
Cyclops said:
You already did, long before I asked it.

Look, if people can say that they DIDN'T like Rogue, then people can say that they DID. It's just fair.

See, it's called "opinion", and everyone's is different. Just because someone likes what you don't doesn't make their opinion BS. The fact that you want to discredit someone's opinion because it doesn't line up with yours makes YOU BS.

Than why did you waste your time asking that question again??? Cylcops, you have issues. The opinions are not the problem here. It's people trying to make opinions sound like facts.
 
I have plenty of issues. Issues of X-Men, Spider-Man, BPRD, Captain America, Iron Man... ;) :p

And funny you mention that the problem is people trying to make opinions sound like facts... you're the one trying to discredit opinion because it doesn't fit yours...
 
Haw said:
hey all, 1st post here. didn't really see much on Rogue so sorry if it's been said before...

what is up w/ this character? this will be the 3rd movie she's been in and guess what? no flying, no super strength and let's be honest, not the looker or body type we're used to in the comics. all she's good for is overacting and NOT using her powers.

she's worse than any other character interpretation in this xmen series by far.

I understand where you’re coming from-Rouge isn’t the sexy, cool girl we’re use to; instead they made her into the “Jubilee” character. Don’t get me wrong I like Jubilee but enough give us the kick-ass Rouge.
 
Cyclops said:
I have plenty of issues. Issues of X-Men, Spider-Man, BPRD, Captain America, Iron Man... ;) :p

NO, I meant as in problems.
 
Well, yeah, who doesn't? But I hardly think it appropriate that someone like you should presume to tell me what my problems are. What's the old proverb? "Before you remove the splinter from your neighbor's eye, you must remove the beam from your own"?
 
psylockolussus said:
I feel sad when they casted Anna Paquin, will never see the Real Rogue in the movies.



I have to agree with you we don't need Rogue in the movies, but she is an awsome character in the comics.
 
I like the movie Rogue. She's a much more logical extension of her comicbook origin than she became in the comicbooks throughout the 80's. Her power is to absorb/copy the power of another and I would prefer to have seen that retained on the page instead of becoming a second-class plot device to explain her problems with intimacy, but at the end of the day the movie version has a great actress performing a tricky role and there's plenty of room for development there in Rogue's evolution from fear of herself to acceptance and finally the coping mechanisms needed to get through day to day life.

I don't need (nor want) her flying around and lifting cars. That Rogue is a pale shadow of what she once was and is built for children who think more power is what makes a character great.
 
Mistopurr83 said:
Well you must not know how to use your imagination. When Kitty Pryde first came in she was a plot device for the enemies (Hellfire club) the x-men were fighting against at the time. In my imagination they could've done something similar in X1. Only it would've been with the brotherhood. True the plot would've been different but not by a lot. Magneto could've used Kitty to get something he couldn't get b/c of her phasing ability than he would've made the x-men stay back by threatening to kill her (as he once did to Kitty in the comics). So that's my imagination of how it would've and could've been Kitty's role in X1. So don't tell me you can't imagine that being just as dramatic either. It would've been similar to how Green Goblin threatened to kill Mary Jane and those little kids in Spider-Man 1. Why do you think the other directors would've made it Kitty's role in the first place? They must've had something good in mind.

ljr, don't tell me where to go. I got a right to say what I want here. So if you can't stand my posts why don't you ignore them?

PS Rogue's power being the source of Magneto's revolution is an unrealistic and bad scientific theory. I don't know how absorbing somebody through some nonexistent machine would cause the end of humanity in real life.


rogue's powers weren't the source of magneto's revolution, they were the key. big difference. he needed her powers to operate his machine. bottom line. as for your interpretation of how the story would've been had kitty been involved, here's what i think: the plot would have been much different by a whole lot. it would be difficult for magneto to hold kitty captive as a hostage if she could just phase through anything he locked her in. if kitty were tied to magneto's machine, she'd simply phase out of the locks. so the whole liberty island scene wouldn't be in the movie, and magneto's revolution wouldn't have been possible. what if wolverine had stabbed kitty through the chest? could kitty heal herself like rogue did? that would be gone from the first movie. if kitty were trapped in wolverine's burning truck, she would have just passed through the seatbelt to safety. so that's out of the first movie. rogue's role was very important in the first movie. if you want to take her out and put kitty in, you're asking for an entirely different movie. i've got my issues with x1, but it is still a good movie. if you don't like it and you refuse to change your mind about it, fine, that's your opinion and i respect it. but x1 worked for the most part as it was, with rogue, not kitty. if the writers thought kitty would make the movie work, they would have put her in it. :up:
 
WarBlade said:
I like the movie Rogue. She's a much more logical extension of her comicbook origin than she became in the comicbooks throughout the 80's. Her power is to absorb/copy the power of another and I would prefer to have seen that retained on the page instead of becoming a second-class plot device to explain her problems with intimacy, but at the end of the day the movie version has a great actress performing a tricky role and there's plenty of room for development there in Rogue's evolution from fear of herself to acceptance and finally the coping mechanisms needed to get through day to day life.

I don't need (nor want) her flying around and lifting cars. That Rogue is a pale shadow of what she once was and is built for children who think more power is what makes a character great.

I grew up watching the cartoon and loved Rouge not just because of her powers but her personality, which I hope we will see when Gambit finally enters the picture. I do have to disagree; Anna Paquin is not the best choice for the role. She may have the potential to become a great actress, but the Rouge part is not going to help her any for she was not made for that role.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"