Morrison wanted to kill off Rogue

Thoughts?

Also X-Men general

I usually agree with Morrison but
>let's kill off a girl to motivate her guy friend
Also, we kinda got the bar moment he was describing anyway, but with Logan and Cyclops, and it was better.

If anything, he should've suggested killing off Gambit to make Rogue act more "lie the Goth-y" versions of her. How's THAT for shaking up the status quo?

He's on point, as usual.

Can't say I agree with G-Mozz there. Waifufagging aside, it's that dichtonomy that makes Rogue interesting, what he's proposing is much more clichéd and unoriginal.

Besides, everyone knows movie Rogue is pretty shit.

Good point that a girl unable to touch anyone would not have the personality she has in the comments. But you don't need to kill her, just retcon it. Also it boggles the mind that they haven't been able to come up with some workarounds for her power in all these years. I mean Mr. Fantastic can make clothes of unstable molecules that stretch along with him, but nobody can develop a super thin skin-tight suit that hugs all the contours and crevices of her body? Or her and Gambit can't just adopt Leech and have him in the next room wearing headphones when they bang?

It also gets rid of Gambit who is a shitty fucking character

>Rogue thinks she's been cured
>spends the day with Gambit
>he insists on taking it slow
>after a perfect day, they bed down
>....only it turns out her power was only negated for 24 hours, which is up mid-way through their epic lovemaking, and Gambit dies during la petite morde, his only real goal as a character achieved.
>Rogue is so traumatized she starts becoming distant and more worried about her ability than ever

>Morrison wanted to use tv/movie synergy before it was the norm

Why is Morrison always ahead of everyone else?

Y'know, I wonder how it would have gone if Marvel had gone with Claremont's original idea to go through with the 'traitor' angle. I really like Gambit, but it never sat right with me that he's just a straight up super hero.

Honestly, I think if they re-do the Marvel universe they should separate Rogue into perky flying Rogue and deadly goth Rogue.
Maybe have them be sisters? have the one in the green+yellow tights and brown jacket calls herself something different, while the goth girl calls herself Rogue?

Why did Gambit and Rogue fall out of vogue? Gambit was like in the running to be one of the top X-Men but now losers like Iceman seem more important than him in current marvel

Mutant inhibitors have been a thing for so long it really makes you have to wonder why they aren't used to help mutants like Rogue.

Plus, unstable molecules, like you said.

Can't disagree with that. Gambit's shit.

I'll admit I'm probably too hard on him. But it stems from the fact that everything about him is an awful uninformed cliche and they play it so fucking straight and most people just eat it right up.

I wouldn't mind Gambit if he was a morally ambiguous side character that pops in now and then but is ultimately always out for himself and fucks off after he gets what he wants. (I think they actually did in this in a couple of the later cartoons now that I think of it) But they really fucked up by attaching him and Rogue at the hip and now neither of them seems able to grow past it.

>would have gone if Marvel had gone with Claremont's original idea to go through with the 'traitor' angle.
Didn't they do that with his role in the Mutant Massacre?

Honestly, I think it's post-90's backlash. A lot of characters were really popular in the 90's, but when the decade started to fall out of favor (among comic book-centric circles, that is), a lot of people started to decry popular 90's things because "everything popular in the 90's sucked".

Of course, you had shit like several early Image comics and their knockoffs that were genuinely horrible, but you also had some pretty decent comics and characters caught in the crossfire. I never liked Gambit much, but I don't think he deserves the kind of post-ironic scorn he gets these days, there's way worse X-Men. Like fucking X-Man.

Wasn't Rogue originally more like the introverted wallflower of the latter media adaptations in the early comics, but became the more extroverted, brash type only after absorbing Ms Marvel's powers?

Would have been better then killing off Jean AGAIN.

There is that, yeah, but originally Bishop was convinced he was the traitor in the future who gets the X-Men all killed, or something like that. It never panned out. Gambit got too popular.

nah fuck jean.

He seems stuck as X-23's mentor nowadays. That isn't terribly high profile, but it is better than being forgotten.

Yeah, and he was in a mini with Deadpool recently too.

Marvel has this kind of problem.

Reed Richards can do ANYTHING, except find a cure to Ben Grimm or anything that would actually improve the life on Earth in general.

More than a thousand heroes can destroy the existence with a thought, but when an old woman is hurt, only Satan itself can help her.

I could go on.

I'm a Thrilling Adventure Hour fan, but that mini sucked.

Pre reformation Rogue was full tilt Axe crazy evil; besides the shit that happened with Caril, she off panel GLOATED that she was happy to turn Carol into a brain dead coma victim to Iron Man AND did her best to murder the entire Avengers team. She also stalked and terrorized Dazzler and repeatedly disobeyed Mystique to try and murder Dazzler.

Claremont had to whitewash Rogue and whitewash her HARD to ms!e her hero material.

Rogue has been able to control her powers for years. I have no idea how that came about, though.

Should I read Morrison's X-Men run? I've heard it has a ton of cool moments at the expense of what happens later with Xorn Magneto and the future finale.

To be fair, has Rogue been relevant at all since Morrison wrote X-men?

It's been, what, 15 years? And can you name any worthwhile story she headlined? Any event she mattered in?

I like the character, as a concept, but she's been dead weight for eons.

What said. After the 90's a bunch of writers who grew up with pre-90's shit wanted to trash everything that happened in the 90s

Go ahead. Art ranges from great to terrible, he adds some cool stuff, adds some pointless stuff, and adds some stuff that leaves you thinking, "Well, that was fucking retarded."

She was in Remender's Uncanny Avengers.

I particularly find the series pretty bad, but it has its fans, and maybe you like it.

She was originally older (the grey in her hair being on her temples) and totally queercoded in design (The evil gays are coming to get ya). When she became a "hero" she got redesigned to look much younger and the streak became a birthmark instead of grey from aging.

They eventually got around that: Ben always COULD turn himself human but it requires him being at absolute peace mentally to do so. All of Reeds cures never took because of the mental stress his relationship with Alicia put on the guy

>But you don't need to kill her
You're talking about comic writers. How will their stories about flying caped strongmen be taken seriously if people aren't killed off to show how serious and mature the situation is every five minutes?

Rogue was on a power roller-coaster from when she was exposed to some Skrulls a bit before Morrison's run. She started manifesting all her absorbed powers at once and eventually lost them all, winding up with the new ability to control her own power. That stuck until Remender merged Wonder Man into her.

Rogue was the lead character of X-Men: Legacy for a while.

didn´t he actually betray the team during the 90s? i´m pretty sure it was an issue madureira drew

Does being Mike Carey's waifu in X-men Legacy for years count as mattering?

Sure, it's quite a ride. One of the two series to really bring the X-Men into the 21st Century, for better or worse.

Honestly, while I'm usually a big fan of big shake-ups, Morrison's ideas could be a bit... out there, especially his thoughts regarding Magneto. I've always felt he was better suited for Ultimate X-Men.

It's not about being mature or taken seriously, it's about making a mark.

People storytime certain story arcs because they have cool shit happening in them. They don't storytime stuff because it started exactly the way it ends and no one goes through any changes.

In world, death is a huge change, it's why Logan is who he is, because all his girlfriends and wives died. It's why Punisher is who he is. It's why Batman and Spider-man and so many others are the way they are.

Killing characters in stories is an attempt to recapture that. But it doesn't always hit, and writers miss their mark and stories end up sub-par.

I'm trying to find a reason to think this would have been a negative, but all I'm coming up with are "nostalgia" and "dat ass"

>and totally queercoded in design (The evil gays are coming to get ya).

What the FUCK are you even on about?

>She started manifesting all her absorbed powers at once
Lewd. And horrifying.

Oh yeah, X-user. What are your thoughts on Whedon and Ellis' runs on Astonishing? Cause those were the last X-Men runs I caught up with until I just trailed off.

Claremont had her sporting Cyclops's shades and Wolverine's claws.

>>Wanted to kill Rogue
>>Created Damian Wayne

Morrison is the biggest faggot in all comics.

She originally killed a girlfriend, not a boyfriend.
>acting like mutants aren't representative of homosexuality

>It's not about being mature or taken seriously
I think it is. Some writers (looking at you Joss Whedon) have never gotten over the shame of writing nerd shit and kill characters off solely to prove how great they are.

Evil lesbian kiss cliche

Also Rogue was supposed to be Mystiquue and Destiny's bio baby with Raven being a genderqueer villian epwhi grew a dick to knock Destiny up

Have you seen Rogue's original design? She's a middle-aged butch lesbian.

Yeah but look at the guy we're talking about, Morrison. Love him or hate him, in that run had Cyclops just break up with Jean Grey and start one of the weirdly long-lasting relationships in modern comics. Jean Grey died, sure, but that came later. He also introduced the secondary mutation, which transformed Beast from ugly blue wolverine-ape to cool blue cat and so on and that's a fairly simple maneuver, it's basically just re-doing their first change.

Whedon didn't kill Kitty, but it was an amazing ending to his run (as long as you don't think about how stupid it is that no one can get their hands on a ship that can run down a fucking space bullet.)

I always thought he was cool as a kid. Not sure why. Maybe because he used to smoke cigarettes.

Exploding playing cards are rad as hell.

Who'd Whedon kill off in his run? He brought by Colossus.

His run also had him kill practically everyone on Genosha, kill off multiple characters other than Jean, and his final arc is basically, "It's the future, then everyone dies."

Whedon is good but kinda safe. It's entertaining enough but I never really saw a bigger picture. Always thought it was kind of overrated desu.

Ellis was a bit disappointing, but that's not because of the quality of the writing, but because I expected something a bit... larger? Maybe shake things up a bit more?

I dunno. Definitely another writer I'd like to see reinvent the X-Men in a non-canon series though.

Kitty Pride

He only brought back Colossus because he's a massive Kitty x Piotr shipper that was butthurt that their relationship didn't pan out in the 90s.

Killing characters is so overused that it's completely meaningless. Everyone knows it won't last. What's the point? If you only killed characters with the intention of making it permanent then at least it would have some gravity to it when it did happen. This whole cliche started with the death of Superman, at the time, people actually thought he might really be dead. Those days are over. We all know it's a fakeout so what's the point? People used to say only Bucky and Jason Todd stay dead, haha. Sure they get a temporary sales bump but they'll get diminishing returns on that the more they overuse it. And characters are also so overpowered that it never seems like there's any threat. Wolverine's healing factor is just ridiculous, he can regenerate from a direct impact from Hiroshima. It didn't used to be that cheap.

JRJR Run is best Claremont period.

imma have to buy a damn Marvel Masterworks this week to own it all

anyway what's up thread

I've always liked his stuff too.

>Thoughts?
Morrison was a very poor fit for the X-Men who had obviously not read much of anything regarding the franchise prior to taking over though it's a shame his one good idea (the explosion in the mutant population) was immediately undone.

But whenever I see him talk about any of the characters it's probably the same feeling he'd probably get from seeing the Superman speech in Kill Bill.

>Good point that a girl unable to touch anyone would not have the personality she has in the comments.
Why? Why can't it be treated as something that can be inspiring? She has essentially a disability that makes her life on a physical level harder than it needs to be and has left her with at times crippling emotional issues that she manages to then overcome and find a confidence in herself while learning to live with her condition even if it's not ideal.

But nope, can't touch someone so she should just be moody and mopey all the time.

He's got a cool look (even with the pink and head sock thing) with the trench coat, eyes, scruffiness and such. He's got a cool power that looks neat visually. He's got a cool personality as the suave, laid back libertine ladies man who can serious up when the need arises. There's really nothing wrong with Gambit and he's a perfectly fine A- or B+ level character for the X-Men and to this day is still one of their most popular members despite all the fact everyone in the industry has spent a good 15 years trying to shit all over him.

Maybe you can argue that there's not a whole wealth of good Gambit stories but then there's not a lot of great Nightcrawler stories either and it doesn't make him shit. There's also far worse major X-Men as well i.e. Psylocke, Polaris, Havok, Angel and Iceman off the top of my head where there's not really any good stories focused on them and the characters aren't particularly enjoyable or interesting to read.

She was the lead in both Carey and Gage's run on X-men legacy. Both were pretty good.

>Replacing awesome cartoon Rogue with movie Rogue
Usually I agree with Morrison, but I think this time I'll make an exception.
I mean maybe he could have done something cool with the movie styled Rogue, but for me the entire movie styled characters lost their luster after X3. Now they are just a sad reminder of Fox's continued incompetence.

>X-men legacy
>good
no
stop being the cancer

X-Man wasn't even an X-Men.

The closest he ever got was X-Force.

The way he writes the relationship between Wolverine and Cyclops is what makes the run worthwhile. His Emma is also great and I like a lot of the x-kids he introduces.

Beak is bestboy and I'd legit read an ongoing about his grandson

Morrison himself killed off half the mutants during his run. If I had to pick his best idea from his X-Men run it'd be the U-Men, but even then they were saddled with Sublime baggage.

Disagree, I would say Whedon uses deaths quite effectively to make villains feel menacing and give final battles a sense of weight. Especially in Buffy and Angel

>Nrama: Not to get too fanboyish, but Kitty Pryde is one of my favorite X-Men too, along with Colossues. With both of them on the team, is there a chance of seeing their romance rekindled?

>Guggenheim: I don’t think it’s possible to get too fanboyish -- particularly with this book. I don’t want to spoil what I’m going to do, but I’ll not spoil it by spoiling it, in a way. Daniel Ketchum, my editor and I, one of the things we talk about a lot is that the best X-Men books, the classic X-Men books, are the ones where there’s a certain amount of superheroics and action, but the books really live in the “soap opera” elements. So with that in mind, I didn’t accidentally put Colossus on the team with Kitty. Make of that what you will.

being Rachel is suffering

Everything about X-Men Gold sounds so great except for the actual creative team.

>originally Bishop was convinced he was the traitor in the future who gets the X-Men all killed

Yeah, because Bishop was raised by The Witness, who was Gambit.

So, coming back in time and meeting Gambit, the sketchy thief X-Man he decided that oh, clearly he survived by being the traitor.

Frankly, making Xavier/Onslaught the traitor was probably the best idea.

>Why? Why can't it be treated as something that can be inspiring? She has essentially a disability that makes her life on a physical level harder than it needs to be and has left her with at times crippling emotional issues that she manages to then overcome and find a confidence in herself while learning to live with her condition even if it's not ideal.

>But nope, can't touch someone so she should just be moody and mopey all the time.

Realistically someone with a disability that makes physical intimacy impossible, is likely to have trouble with emotional intimacy as well, and can be expected to be standoffish, rebellious, slow to warm to others, protective, etc. If you just want to make inspiration-porn rather than a realistic portrayal of the character, go for it.

Southern girls dont do goth.

We go through a sort of redneck/white trash thing.

Rogue is a self confident sex bomb, because she has Ms. MARVEL'S brick powers.

>because she has Ms. MARVEL'S brick powers

and also some of her memories/personality and shit floating aroudn

Emma x Scott was his best idea

I've never been the biggest Bishop fan but I appreciated that he was a guy in the X-Men with a pretty distinct role as the stern, hardened cop. What has been done to him starting with the end of Messiah Complex is one of the most thorough and shitty attempts at completely killing a character I've ever seen. I know Humphries tried to handwave it all away as being the result of being possessed by the Demon Bear but obviously that wasn't really enough. It's rendered him completely unusable because nobody wants to see Bishop as a villain but they were so thorough in destroying him as a hero that it's virtually impossible to bring him back as one.

Emma x Scott is one of the ship's I'm hardcore about. Breaking them up was kinda the final straw for me to turn on Bendis

>cool blue cat

You, sir, are a monster, and you can yiff in hell.

It's definitely worth reading. I think it's still the last attempt there's been at pushing the franchise forward to the next step (mutant subculture, humans wanting to be mutants, secondary mutations). There really hasn't been anything else that looks at mutants and their growing role in society like Morrison's did. You can tell that the ending was rushed and could use another six issues or so but it's a fantastic read. The franchise has mostly been spinning its wheels in an "impending doom" story arc since.

I bet you're really excited for another shitty attempt at a Guggenheim X-Men run, aren't you? Carey's Legacy was the best X-men team book for a while until Remender's X-Force came along.

Here is a question that I never seem to get a straight answer on.

Is Juggernaut a mutant. Or have mutant gene as it were. We know his power source is mystical but is he a mutant anyway.

She was Carey's waifu and led the team during his run, then played a decent role in the Xavier portion of Legacy and took the book over full time until it ended. She's been stuck in pseudo-Avenger territory for a few years now (it's really hard to consider most of the Avengers team of the last 3 or 4 years as actual Avengers teams desu).

+1

no

FREE WONDER MAN!!!

Japan makes western women better.

LOL how he was seen as the most important thing ever... then just got phased out... then Hope came...

I remember reading this in the treatment before, and while I liked Morrison's run, I was always rubbed up the wrong way by the idea

He found a gem that makes him the champion of a god.

>wanting to make Captain Marvel even less relevant

>Is Juggernaut a mutant.
No.

I'm a casual and even I know that.

Danger's a mutant. The Inhumans are mutants. Broo's a mutant. Cloak and Dagger and Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch were mutants but now they're not because retcons. Juggernaut is not and never was a mutant.

Rachel is too good for Kitty desu

Shame the book is going to be hot garbage. I hope whoever uses her after Guggenheim drops the Prestige name (go back to Phoenix or just drop the codename altogether) and puts her back in the orange and red spiked jacket costume or some kind of Askani inspired look because Rachel should always look fairly kind of butch.

You didn't read Death of X where Emma, who lived in Scott's head during their entire relationship, makes her psychic projection of Scott say that Jean was the only woman he ever loved?

>Southern girls dont do goth.
Tennessee and Louisiana are both in the south you lying asshole.

This is an ass pull>Rogue was supposed to be Mystiquue and Destiny's bio baby
That has always been Nightcrawler, you pleb. Mystique was always meant to be Nightcrawler's father when they first met in the 80's until she was retconed as his mom in the 90's.

>she was in ____
is not the same thing as
>she was important in _____

Redneck goth is what a juggalo is.

Reminder about 1 in 4 X-men is currently dead and they somehow still get applicants for their fucking school.

>clown
>goth
Now if they were mimes, we could talk, but juggalos aren't goth

I understand the confusion, but edgy and goth are only slightly related concepts.

>It's why Batman and Spider-man and so many others are the way they are.
There are alternate worlds where Uncle Ben lived and Spidey's the same asshole he always is.

Unless you meant Gwen, but she's not dead anymore last I checked.

Actually what's going on in Clone Saga 3: This Time It's Fursonal?

>Is Juggernaut a mutant.

No. He is in X-3, but mostly because it's a movie, and having to explain that there are existent gods with magic powers that can turn people into supervillains, and that's a lot to dump on people for a secondary villain in the third film of a series with no prior hint of magic.

We're talking about late 90's - 00's mall goth here, not 80's "people who listen to Siouxsie Sioux and The Cure"

Rogue's been a bit of a trouble character after the first half of the 90's ended.
They didn't really know what direction to take her in after the Gambit relationship fizzled.
At least in the 80s she had that whole reformed villain who's half Carol Danvers thing, beyond that there wasn't much.
They could (and did) have her finally control her powers, they could (and did) have her powers send her over the deep end, and they could (and did) resolve her unresolved relationships...
They even made the mistake of devirginizing her.
Now she's the Uncanny Avenger's problem, and those guys get it: she lost control of her powers again, she absorbed another Avenger, and once again being a mutant sucks hard for her. Classic direction for the character.
But during Morrison's days where was she?
They had written her into a hole, it was gawd-awful story after gawd-awful story for her back then, death would have been a mercy.

We are judging this with perfect 20/20 hindsight, who knew back then that she could be turned around?