X-Men - Part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah it does, or at least in my eyes. I will happily kill everyone in the future to prevent something awful from happening now because any change in the timeline negates future acts. So by time hopping in any form and doing anything that changes the future you are in actuality killing everyone that would have been part of that time line and replacing them with others. Basically if he changes the future, or is anyone does, they kill anyone that was in the current timeline's future. So people anyone that has seen the future and done something differently because of it is in fact guilty of killing everyone on the planet and also responsible for birthing new people on that same planet.

Millions in the present which is different from millions in the future. The basic laws of time and evolution show that past lives are more important than future lives. One person in the past can birth hundreds in the future.
Your logic is flawed bc Bishop wasnt trying to save the lives of millions in the present. He was trying to save lives of millions from his alternate future, which is completely irrelevant to the people in 616. So Hope presmably might kill millions in the future; isnt that exactly what Bishop did, you know kill millions from the future?
 
Your logic is flawed bc Bishop wasnt trying to save the lives of millions in the present. He was trying to save lives of millions from his alternate future, which is completely irrelevant to the people in 616. So Hope presmably might kill millions in the future; isnt that exactly what Bishop did, you know kill millions from the future?

Ok, I'll give you that in some form but you're still wrong. Save someone in ten years from now and negate all future problems still accomplishes the same thing. The basic rule is the closer the timeline is to zero the more important things become. If you are altering the present timeline or the near future timeline you still are destroying the further future timeline and replacing it so anything done in that further future timeline ceases to have ever actually happened.

Bishop did but erased that probability by the simple fact they were time jumping then returned to live in the present and affect change. Understand any precog that warns anyone of anything is a planet killer but also a planet birther. Whether they do it by their own hands or just with a word of advice the result is the same. So to revise things because you're hung up on small matters I will happily kill everyone in one hundred years to save a bunh of people in ten years because any change will still destroy and rebuild those hundred year people timeline anyway.

Look I get you don't dig bishop, find his actions harsh. I really do. They are harsh. But for time travelers I do see some differences between things or anyone that has seen or knows the future really. I don't think babies should be killed, but I would totally kill baby hitler, mao and stalin with my bare hands and be ok with it. That's just how I see things.
 
Ok, I'll give you that in some form but you're still wrong. Save someone in ten years from now and negate all future problems still accomplishes the same thing. The basic rule is the closer the timeline is to zero the more important things become. If you are altering the present timeline or the near future timeline you still are destroying the further future timeline and replacing it so anything done in that further future timeline ceases to have ever actually happened.

Bishop did but erased that probability by the simple fact they were time jumping then returned to live in the present and affect change. Understand any precog that warns anyone of anything is a planet killer but also a planet birther. Whether they do it by their own hands or just with a word of advice the result is the same. So to revise things because you're hung up on small matters I will happily kill everyone in one hundred years to save a bunh of people in ten years because any change will still destroy and rebuild those hundred year people timeline anyway.

Look I get you don't dig bishop, find his actions harsh. I really do. They are harsh. But for time travelers I do see some differences between things or anyone that has seen or knows the future really. I don't think babies should be killed, but I would totally kill baby hitler, mao and stalin with my bare hands and be ok with it. That's just how I see things.
Id rather rehabilitate and have that child raised differently than flat out kill a baby. The past shouldnt be messed with and everything happens for a reason. Had Bishop been successful in killing Hope , while chasing she and Cable in the future, the X-men along with like 90% of what was left of the mutant race would have been dead in Second Coming. Who knows how messed up the future would be had that happened. What Bishop did was very flawed and it could have had serious ramifications, maybe even worse than what he was trying to prevent
 
Id rather rehabilitate and have that child raised differently than flat out kill a baby. The past shouldnt be messed with and everything happens for a reason. Had Bishop been successful in killing Hope , while chasing she and Cable in the future, the X-men along with like 90% of what was left of the mutant race would have been dead in Second Coming. Who knows how messed up the future would be had that happened. What Bishop did was very flawed and it could have had serious ramifications, maybe even worse than what he was trying to prevent

Now that's fair and your opinion.

I'm not sure about the second part. There have been plenty of alternate universes without superman or iron man or other key figures that have saved the world countless times yet they all have futures, it turns out without that key figure another seems to always step up, but that's a conceptual balance theory hard to say either way.

I did say it was bad, I just said not as bad, in my opinion, as what scott and magik have done. Bishop killed theoretical innocents and tried to kill one actual person in a misguided attempt to save everyone those others killed real innocent people and sent others to hell not to save lives but to make some people have superpowers cause being a regular human is worse than death so I see bishop as much more sympathetic than the other two.

Though I will completely agree, most time altering for the better nonsense ends up making things worse. You have a very valid point there. I was more speaking to intentions of the characters though.
 
So rumor has it that Bendis may kill off one of the young time hopping X-Men, possibly not furry yet Hank McCoy...
 
That would stink. :( I like Hank.
 
So rumor has it that Bendis may kill off one of the young time hopping X-Men, possibly not furry yet Hank McCoy...

Nah, he'll probably kill teen Jean Grey, since she's the designated sacrificial lamb of the X-franchise. :cwink:
 
Jean isn't going anywhere. This is a Jean not shackled to the giant sinking rock that is the Phoenix Force, which (seemingly) is something that Marvel has wanted for years. We'll never see the other Jean again.
 
So rumor has it that Bendis may kill off one of the young time hopping X-Men, possibly not furry yet Hank McCoy...

This guy's been there for 5 minutes and somebody needs to die already? Jeez, I wonder who Hawkeye 2.0's gonna be.
 
It's times like these I wish i could just hibernate for 10 years and see what's left of my X-Men when I wake up
I don't mind character deaths when they're written by good writers
but Bendis having his way with the characters I grew up loving scares the hell outta me
I'm sorry Avengers fans, oh god what a terrible feeling... we didn't know! we couldn't have known!!

lol
</overdramatics>
 
It's times like these I wish i could just hibernate for 10 years and see what's left of my X-Men when I wake up
I don't mind character deaths when they're written by good writers
but Bendis having his way with the characters I grew up loving scares the hell outta me
I'm sorry Avengers fans, oh god what a terrible feeling... we didn't know! we couldn't have known!!

lol
</overdramatics>

Well if Bendis' X-Men exit strategy is anything like his Avengers' then he'll right a few of his wrongs in one final(and damn entertaining) arc.
 
Does it really matter though if it's a young version that just debuted a few weeks ago? If this was the actual Beast that's been around for 50yrs then I'd be annoyed.
 
Jean isn't going anywhere. This is a Jean not shackled to the giant sinking rock that is the Phoenix Force, which (seemingly) is something that Marvel has wanted for years. We'll never see the other Jean again.

We'll see. Seems wherever Jean goes the "sinking rock" that is the Phoenix isn't too far behind.

I'd love to be proven wrong though.
 
Ok, I feel dumb for asking but, has All-New X-Men came out yet?
 
Yes it has. So has the second issue, and I think the 3rd issue is coming Wednesday though I could be wrong.

And who cares if Bendis kills anyone. Death means nothing.
 
You say that, but us Nightcrawler fans are getting impatient.
 
I keep buying ANXM mainly out of hopeful curiosity that im wrong in my usual Bendis pessimism.

The second issue was better than the first, but yeah, I should probably stop buying this before I get angry at myself for wasting money.
 
I just figured the Banshee fans had gone into hiding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,290
Messages
22,081,121
Members
45,881
Latest member
lucindaschatz
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"