Rogue taking the cure - wrong message entirely

LadyVader said:
In another thread I brought up the story of a kid who had the power to disintegrate people around him. I mentioned him because people were going on and on about accepting who you are, and here's this child who would have to accept the fact that he is a killer. He chose to die.

UltimateXMen41-11.jpg


UltimateXMen41-17.jpg


UltimateXMen41-18.jpg


UltimateXMen41-19.jpg


UltimateXMen41-20.jpg


UltimateXMen41-21.jpg


UltimateXMen41-22.jpg


This happened in Ultimate X-men 41.


ya id prob commit suicide if i had his mutant ability
 
Rogue wasnt one of the lucky one during the evolution process. If I had Storm,Icemans, or Prof X powers there would be no need to take the cure. But for people like Rogue,Beast, ect...they have a really hard time fitting in. If I was only able to touch someone sucking away their life force by the second I would rather take the cure, realistically speaking


Thats pretty sad :( that sucks big time. Thats something I get a cure for and if I cant Id rather kill myself too.
Poor kid
 
No disagreement from me on the right to choose.

Probable disagreement from me on whether it was the "right" choice (and who actually made the choice).

For this Rogue, for MovieRogue, it was clearly the easy choice. But part of what makes a hero heroic is not choosing the easy path. Part of heroism is making the difficult choice. If we were at least shown remorse from Rogue after making her "mistake", I wouldn't mind it nearly so much.

Fortunately, the "cure" is no cure and not permanent, so an evolved Rogue can still occur.

The young mutant who decides to die, while sad, is not relevant to me in this case. This character was clearly created specifically to make this very decision.
 
kainedamo said:
Rogue taking the cure sends a terrible message to children. She should have appeared at the end and explained why she DIDN'T take the cure.

The cure is like asking yourself "if I were black, and there was a "cure" for it, would I take it"? And the answer is "sure, sometimes being black is hard, but I am proud of who I am and I shouldn't have to change".

Rattner and whoever the hell wrote the script didn't understand the X-Men's message of understanding and tolerance.

well brett ratner did say that the x-men series was all about conforming becuz individuality of a mutant learning to control her powers IS TOTALLY WRONG. j/k
 
Oh, Roguey Rogue Rogue... rather than changing yourself so that you could be with someone else, you should've waited for the guy whose natural abilities complemented you and made it unnecessary for you to be anyone other than who you are. You just should've waited...

Waited for him to grow up, that is. What? You can tell in like five years he's going to be totally hot! :D
 
LadyVader said:
In another thread I brought up the story of a kid who had the power to disintegrate people around him. I mentioned him because people were going on and on about accepting who you are, and here's this child who would have to accept the fact that he is a killer. He chose to die.

UltimateXMen41-11.jpg


UltimateXMen41-17.jpg


UltimateXMen41-18.jpg


UltimateXMen41-19.jpg


UltimateXMen41-20.jpg


UltimateXMen41-21.jpg


UltimateXMen41-22.jpg


This happened in Ultimate X-men 41.
You're really tempting me to start reading this title. It looks sweet. Who writes it?
 
i keep hearing this if you where her you would take the cure well all who refuse to believe me refuse, but if i where her i wouldn't take the cure.
It's not only about being proud of who you are but not making like what you have is not a gift. I don't think im the only who sees her power as a gift and who's to say she can't control it. The worse part of her taking the cure was that it didn't stay true too the character.
 
gambitfire said:
i keep hearing this if you where her you would take the cure well all who refuse to believe me refuse, but if i where her i wouldn't take the cure.
It's not only about being proud of who you are but not making like what you have is not a gift. I don't think im the only who sees her power as a gift and who's to say she can't control it. The worse part of her taking the cure was that it didn't stay true too the character.

I was still glad to see her take the cure- you do feel bad for her not being able to ever touch anybody, plus the X-Men movie-verse isn't one where all mutants are necessarily proud of their gifts. Ideologically, mutation has negative associations, and Rogue was never proud of her abilities anyway, so I don't know if it would fit her [movie] character to opt against it.

Either way, the cure and her taking of it are meant to be controversial and challenge views (like abortions or the media's love-affair with the Schiavo case), and I didn't mind seeing the side accepting it (Rogue) to the side that also had reason to accept it but stood strongly against it (Beast); they were good contrasts.


The only people I can really see hating Rogue taking the cure are the Rogue fans from the comics, but thats part of a bigger debate I'm entirely too lazy to get involved in.
 
Do you guys think they should bring Ms. Marvel into the next movie so Rogue can get her powers?
 
supermarvelman said:
Do you guys think they should bring Ms. Marvel into the next movie so Rogue can get her powers?

You know, I was thinking about them trying to do something like that to please the comic fanbase and the movie fanbase (by bringing back Anna). As long as the next real part of the X-Men franchise (no spinoffs)- the Young X-men story- isn't turned into a kids movie and doesn't have wolverine I'll be happy. Give Wolverine his solo film and try and replace his emotional "invulnerbility" with Colossus- there's just as much possibility with his character as there is with Logan.
 
I wish people would stop camparing it to being black or gay it is NOT the same thing at all for rogue.

people have no idea what it must be like for someone to have no physical contact with an another human.
also when she does come into contact with people she can potentially KILL them...

...so to compare, black people would have needed to shot death rays out their eyes during the civil right period and then switched to being white no death rays for it to be comparable to rogues plight.

you go girl I'd have done the exact same thing in your position and if that makes me weak so be it
 
spider-neil said:
I wish people would stop camparing it to being black or gay it is NOT the same thing at all for rogue.

people have no idea what it must be like for someone to have no physical contact with an another human.
also when she does come into contact with people she can potentially KILL them...

...so to compare, black people would have needed to shot death rays out their eyes during the civil right period and then switched to being white no death rays for it to be comparable to rogues plight.

you go girl I'd have done the exact same thing in your position and if that makes me weak so be it

Yea, the black or gay comparison can be OK when your talking about maybe being treated like an outcast, but Rogues situation is an extreme and is a lot different.

HERE'S A REALLY GOOD COMPARISON TO ROGUE'S OUTCAST SITUATION:
There's a deaf subculture- complete communities where your only allowed to live there if your deaf, and people are extremely proud of being who they are. For example, if a girl dates a non-deaf boy everyone would talk about it, take offense, that kind of stuff. Well, they now have corneal implants, where they can implant these in the ears of children and they can hear and learn to talk and everything else- the parents take offense to this though, and a lot won't allow their kids to get the procedure done because there is nothing wrong with them. Would a child be wrong to want to get the surgery done? Let's say they could create a "cure" for blindness, would it be wrong to want to get the procedure done?

I apologize if I offended any deaf individuals with the subculture reference- I was just trying to put things into a different perspective.
 
LadyVader said:
In another thread I brought up the story of a kid who had the power to disintegrate people around him. I mentioned him because people were going on and on about accepting who you are, and here's this child who would have to accept the fact that he is a killer. He chose to die.

UltimateXMen41-11.jpg


UltimateXMen41-17.jpg


UltimateXMen41-18.jpg


UltimateXMen41-19.jpg


UltimateXMen41-20.jpg


UltimateXMen41-21.jpg


UltimateXMen41-22.jpg


This happened in Ultimate X-men 41.
I have that issue. I used to like ultimate x-men but then i got fed up with it then stopped reading it. but the drawings are amazing.
 
How would you guys introduse Ms.Marvel?

As a mutant, like they did with Juggernaut or a Superhuman?
 
Ironically, I've seen more evidence that the movie message (if taken to heart) was a bad one from the people who are seemingly trying to defend it...

You don't get the STORY POINT of it. Sure, there's the mutants who are a metaphor for people who aren't white and catholic with different religions and sexualities and stuff, but the STORY POINT of Rogue was that she wanted to take the cure because she wanted to be with Bobby. In that way, it's lie many teenagers, giving up their entire lives to be with someone they love.
Yeah, I think that is exactly the way the movie, left it. And that's rather unfortunate. But it is a very relevant social issue, considering so many young people seem to be making this choice more and more.

But the real question is, was that a good message to send to young, impressionable minds? Especially since woman have been fighting against the sexist notions for the last 20 yeats ,that they should give up who they are to be with their man.

Either way, for me, it wasn't explored enough. And the movie writer's/ directors should have had the guts to choose a view and present it. Had they chose this 'middle of the road' position because they wanted people to think, that may have been a good thing. But it seems more like they chose it because it's more politically safe.
 
supermarvelman said:
How would you guys introduse Ms.Marvel?

As a mutant, like they did with Juggernaut or a Superhuman?
Honestly, I think the best way is not to do it at all. Secondary mutation could explain a lot without going through any of the rest of her comic story.

She could go through a phase where her powers go hay-wire and she suddenly starts channeling different peoples powers that have touched her throughout the years (right from the comics baby). The story line would be touching and deep because Rogue would honestly not know what to expect from one day to the next. The resolution would be that she would learn some 'mental' exercises that allows her to calm herself and choose which 'identity' to channel, thus allowing her some sembelance of control. Of course this still leaves her open to getting caught in times of distress where she lapses and loses control and all hell breaks loose, so she won't be too 'perfect'. Then we could get a more sassy Rogue who would start wanting to zapp people to add to her repetoire.
 
Angry Sentinel said:
Ironically, I've seen more evidence that the movie message (if taken to heart) was a bad one from the people who are seemingly trying to defend it...

Yeah, I think that is exactly the way the movie, left it. And that's rather unfortunate. But it is a very relevant social issue, considering so many young people seem to be making this choice more and more.

But the real question is, was that a good message to send to young, impressionable minds? Especially since woman have been fighting against the sexist notions for the last 20 yeats ,that they should give up who they are to be with their man.

Either way, for me, it wasn't explored enough. And the movie writer's/ directors should have had the guts to choose a view and present it. Had they chose this 'middle of the road' position because they wanted people to think, that may have been a good thing. But it seems more like they chose it because it's more politically safe.

I don't think the movie ever tried to make a message relative to the cure, but rather put it out there for everyone to look at because that is a controversial issue. In my opinion, there were too many sugar-coated character endings to make the film a little "happier", and I think Rogue NOT taking the cure would have been one of those.

ON THE OTHER HAND, if the Bobby/Kitty/Rogue triangle was actually played out, with the scenes of Bobby/Kitty kissing and Bobby worrying/taking care of Kitty, then I would agree that its the wrong message because it would be clear that she did it to impress Bobby. As it stands now in the film, she made the decision for herself, not Bobby (which IS a good message to send), and I didn't mind her taking it- being incapable of physical contact is a big thing, and her taking it showed a dichotomy to the cure (could be good and bad), which was the underlying theme of the film in my opinion
 
Let's say that instead of mutant powers, we were talking about Huntington's disease or cystic fibrosis. Are you people honestly telling me that if they discovered a cure for one of these genetic disorders, you wouldn't take it because "it's just who you are"? Don't kid yourselves, the word "mutation" describes an error in genetic material. It means that, on a genetic level, there is something abnormal about you. It doesn't mean that mutants are bad, per se, just that they are genetically unlike "normal" humanity. Rogue taking the cure doesn't imply ANYTHING about minorities, that's an apples to oranges comparison. Rogue's mutation was much more of a curse than blessing and she took a step to better her life.
 
Sun_Down said:
Let's say that instead of mutant powers, we were talking about Huntington's disease or cystic fibrosis. Are you people honestly telling me that if they discovered a cure for one of these genetic disorders, you wouldn't take it because "it's just who you are"? Don't kid yourselves, the word "mutation" describes an error in genetic material. It means that, on a genetic level, there is something abnormal about you. It doesn't mean that mutants are bad, per se, just that they are genetically unlike "normal" humanity. Rogue taking the cure doesn't imply ANYTHING about minorities, that's an apples to oranges comparison. Rogue's mutation was much more of a curse than blessing and she took a step to better her life.
Stryker from the second movie thought mutants were a disease as well.
 
TheVileOne said:
Stryker from the second movie thought mutants were a disease as well.

That all you got? Really, Vile, I was expecting more.

I'm not saying that Stryker was right. He saw mutants as an uncontrollable threat which needed to be eradicated. All I'm saying is that mutation doesn't denote a genetic problem and there's nothing wrong with fixing a genetic problem if it improves your life.
 
Sun_Down said:
Let's say that instead of mutant powers, we were talking about Huntington's disease or cystic fibrosis. Are you people honestly telling me that if they discovered a cure for one of these genetic disorders, you wouldn't take it because "it's just who you are"? Don't kid yourselves, the word "mutation" describes an error in genetic material. It means that, on a genetic level, there is something abnormal about you. It doesn't mean that mutants are bad, per se, just that they are genetically unlike "normal" humanity. Rogue taking the cure doesn't imply ANYTHING about minorities, that's an apples to oranges comparison. Rogue's mutation was much more of a curse than blessing and she took a step to better her life.

I'm almost with you on this one. Mutation, in my mind, isn't an actual error, for pretty much all of us are actually, technically mutants. Some mutations are more affecting than others, and most of these more affecting mutations are "bad" (bad in that those born with them don't live long enough to have children). But, we homo sapiens would not be here without them.

Genetic diseases are a little different in my mind. A genetic disease isn't really a mutation. Maybe the first time the disease occured it was the result of a mutation, but then comes independent assortment and dominants/recessives and all that gooey stuff.

And, let's not forget that the "cure" isn't really a cure. It's a masking agent which mimics Leech's power. Even after taking the "cure", Rogue's basic genetic material, the stuff that makes a mutant, is still the same. Rogue is still a mutant, it's just her powers are in some kind of dormant state.

Rogue's affliction only affects her when she touches someone. People with cystic fibrosis or Huntington's are affected by the disease all the time regardless of what they do.

I think there is enough of a difference to not think of a true cure for cystic fibosis as the same kind of thing as Worthington's Curse.
 
TheVileOne said:
Stryker from the second movie thought mutants were a disease as well.

Yep. I don't think Sun-Down actually meant disease though, because everything he said was trying to put mutants in positive regard, and "disease" isn't a positive word.

BOTTOM LINE WITH THE CURE- IT'S NEITHER GOOD OR BAD. Dichotomy is the underlying theme of the film, and that's why there's the Pheonix and Cure plots- Pheonix shows dichotomy in regards to her psych, the Cure shows it because it can be good or bad depending on the context (good=Rogue, bad=Weaponized).

Didn't anybody catch Xavier's speech when he was talking about the comatose patient? Apart from being a set-up for the after-credits scene, it

A) Was an ethics course
B) He was lecturing about power, and that its how that power is wielded that determines whether its good or bad. Yea, this is true with Pheonix, BUT this resounds even more about the Cure: the cure is the developed 'power'- when its used as a weapon, then obviously its bad, when its used voluntarily for those who need it, its good. Rogue taking the cure was NOT a wrong message- if anything, like I said in another post it was a good message because she took it for herself, not to impress Bobby.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"