Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Movies
Byrne Robotics > Movies << Prev Page of 4
Topic: How to "fix" X-Men 3 for X-Men 4 (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Keith Thomas
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 April 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 3082
Posted: 15 June 2009 at 8:30pm | IP Logged | 1  

How could Rachel not be from an "alternate" future if
Jean was dead in the timeline into which future Kate/Kitty
leaped back into?


That's what I was gonna ask since "Jean" dies in X-men 137
Rachel first appears in 141-2.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 114014
Posted: 15 June 2009 at 9:07pm | IP Logged | 2  

The plot and story of DAYS OF FUTURE PAST was developed and
begun before the rewrite of 137. In point of fact, if you read the story on
its own, setting aside everything you "know" from later stories, you'll
notice Rachel is not actually identified as Scott and Jean's daughter. She
is "just" a telepath. So either way, her story becomes excessively
complicated only after I am no longer there to ride herd on it.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Keith Thomas
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 April 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 3082
Posted: 15 June 2009 at 9:17pm | IP Logged | 3  

Quickly? It was almost a year long storyarc.

His words from his answer to the question on his website.


Then Davis built on Galactus not wanting Phoenix to
have a human host in Excalibur 61. That by achieving
sentience, taking form on this plane of existence, it was
stealing lifeforce, keeping future generations from being
born.


I didn't like that retcon it doesn't fit with what was
already established especially issue #25. You can't be a
creator of new life by stealing life-force.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Keith Thomas
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 April 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 3082
Posted: 15 June 2009 at 10:10pm | IP Logged | 4  



So either way, her story becomes excessively
complicated only after I am no longer there to ride herd
on it.


I guess it doesn't matter since she shouldn't exist to
begin with, though interestingly CC made her uniquely
nonexistent in every alternate Earth for some reason
whereas everyone else has a counterpart. And I guess if
you want, since when she comes back physically(in NM #18)
she realizes this isn't "her" past, the Rachel in the MU
isn't your Rachel but one from an actual alternate
future and your Rachel along with her future were in fact
erased. :)
Back to Top profile | search
 
Noah Smith
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1201
Posted: 15 June 2009 at 10:35pm | IP Logged | 5  

I'm joining this thread a bit late, but I thought I might share something I wrote after seeing X3, my way to bring things back on track after that disaster --

In X4, we see the whole scene of what happened at Alkali lake. Phoenix is literally sucking face with Cyclops when who should pop out of the lake, but Jean. It turns out Phoenix is a malevolent force, maybe something generated accidentally by Magnetoís machine in the first movie. It has cloned Jeanís body and powers. Jean and Cyclops battle it. They realize they canít win, so Jean wraps them in a protective cocoon and hides them at the bottom of the lake, but first she blasts a portion of her psyche into Phoenix Ė now the malevolent force has a conscience.

So, the events of Last Stand happen and the evil Phoenix seems to die, but, wait Ö if Xavier can pass his mind into the empty vessel in Scotland, why canít Phoenix. Yep, now theyíre both occupying this body. But Phoenix -- now calling itself Proteus -- is hungry. It wants more mutant power to feed on. So it influences Xavier, unaware that heís sharing his new body, to summon the other X-Men for a reunion. Wolverine, Storm, Kitty, Colossus and Nightcrawler go to Scotland (Iceman and Rogue are off working things out) and fall into a trap. Proteus has them and starts to feed.

Jean and Scott emerge from their cocoon and figure out whatís going on. They round up every mutant available for a rescue mission Ė that means Beast, Iceman and Angel.

Yep, itís REVERSE GIANT SIZE X-MEN #1! The original team goes to rescue the new guys!

Doesnít that sound fun?
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
Larry Morris
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 July 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 622
Posted: 16 June 2009 at 12:15pm | IP Logged | 6  



 QUOTE:
 
Quickly? It was almost a year long storyarc.

His words from his answer to the question on his website.



Interesting.  I've seen him talk about the arc previously.  Interviews from the 90s.  Never recall him phrasing it anything like that.  My recollection was hm thinking what he did was in line with when he and Claremont worked together on the book. 

Not that I thought it was .  Not entirely.  Again, per Claremont, the Phoenix didn't have all these hosts.
It's Jean's or her offspring.


 QUOTE:

Then Davis built on Galactus not wanting Phoenix to
have a human host in Excalibur 61. That by achieving
sentience, taking form on this plane of existence, it was
stealing lifeforce, keeping future generations from being
born.

I didn't like that retcon it doesn't fit with what was
already established especially issue #25. You can't be a creator of new life by stealing life-force.  



Sure you can, just not on this plane.  Phoenix's default state was not on this plane, using a humn host or impersonating one.  It's ony in that state that it steals future life force.  It is still Claremont's Phoenix in that the force is the sum and substance of all that lives.

It's been so long since I read Claremont's Excalibur that a lot of the details are sketchy.
Not going to claim there are no contradictions.

Of course if we started listing all the Phoenix related stories that contradicted each other we'd be here all day.  Claremont was doing it every time he's write another story in Classic X Men essentially saying that Jean had been Phoenix while the X Factor writers, her monthly handlers, were saying the opposite..

Days of Future Past didn't outright say that Rachel was Jean and Scott's daughter?  Talk about being sketchy on details, I am on that one.  Another one where it's been so long since I read it.  And after all this time, Rachel being that way for so long, I forgot that it wasn't stated in that story.  
 

Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Rhodes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2988
Posted: 16 June 2009 at 12:18pm | IP Logged | 7  

As the TAC TAC TAC sound effect indicates, Chris and Dave intended that Jean get zapped by the cosmic rays, same as the FF. Phoenix was not meant to be anything other than Jean with her powers boosted. She "introduces" herself in that hyper-dramatic, over the top fashion because, well, that's how Chris writes. (And, hey! It works for him!) This is why Moira, in the issue cited upthread, declares Phoenix to be a boosted-power version of Jean.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Rhodes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2988
Posted: 16 June 2009 at 12:31pm | IP Logged | 8  

As the TAC TAC TAC sound effect indicates, Chris and Dave intended that Jean get zapped by the cosmic rays, same as the FF. Phoenix was not meant to be anything other than Jean with her powers boosted.

The idea of a mutant already having superpowers getting exposed to superpower-giving cosmic rays is a really cool one. I can't think of another incident of this happening. I guess suggesting Cloak and Dagger were mutants before the drug overdose, which allowed them to survive, is kind of similar...or the idea that  Banner, Parker, Murdock, the Storms, Grimm, Richards, etc., all had something "unique" in their body chemistry that had radiation give them powers versus poisoning.

What if the Hulk is bombarded with Cosmic Rays? This is addressed somewhat in Future Imperfect, as the Maestro just kept absorbing non-specified types and amounts of radiation and got more powerful because of it. Although in some stories, radiation blasts (Gamma or otherwise) are usually a trigger to change him back to Banner.

How about exposing Wolverine to Cosmic Rays? Or Gamma Rays? Or would his now-ridiculously powerful healing factor just fight off any effects, good or bad, immediately?

Moot point, I guess, since he's already "The Most Powerful Character in the Marvel Universe" TM

 



Edited by Brian Rhodes on 16 June 2009 at 12:32pm
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Keith Thomas
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 April 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 3082
Posted: 18 June 2009 at 6:59pm | IP Logged | 9  

Found this somewhere else as to Rachel's origin:

"Rachel Summers has no Father: In Excalibur (1st Series)
Moira discovers unusual anomalies in Rachel Summersís DNA.
If Claremont had continued with Excalibur it would have
been revealed that Rachel would be the daughter of Jean
Grey and the Phoenix with no father. This would result in
the Phoenix Trinity of the Mother, the Daughter and the
Phoenix."
Back to Top profile | search
 
Larry Morris
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 July 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 622
Posted: 18 June 2009 at 8:47pm | IP Logged | 10  

I've seen Claremont say that himself.   In the last several years.  While I preferred it the way it was, I suppose it's better than the other one I've seen speculated.  That Logan was her father.   I always thought that might be a possibility if Claremont had ever gotten his hands on the three characters for long enough.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Sam Karns
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7567
Posted: 19 June 2009 at 12:17am | IP Logged | 11  

I thought X-Men: The Last Stand was far better than the rest of the X-Men films.  As long as FOX stay far away from Bryan Singer's vision the better the movies will be.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 32848
Posted: 19 June 2009 at 9:50am | IP Logged | 12  

Of course you would, Sam.  Rail on STAR TREK for messing with the characters every chance you get, but think X3 was a good movie even though it...messes with the characters and makes many of them unrecognizable.  Remarkable!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Monte Gruhlke
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3303
Posted: 19 June 2009 at 10:34am | IP Logged | 13  

Maybe X3 is like some beers where the initial taste sucks but after the 7th or 8th one, it starts becoming drinkable?
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 32848
Posted: 19 June 2009 at 10:39am | IP Logged | 14  

I could barely get through X3 the first time I saw it!  Now you're saying I have to sit through it seven times to make it palatable?  Not a chance!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Monte Gruhlke
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3303
Posted: 19 June 2009 at 11:55am | IP Logged | 15  

Are you an "Ameri-can or an Ameri-canít?" 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 114014
Posted: 19 June 2009 at 12:30pm | IP Logged | 16  

I am inclined to agree that X-3 was "better" than 1 and 2 -- but as I have said elsewhere, better in the sense of it being better to be poked in the eye with a dull stick rather than a sharp one.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Larry Morris
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 July 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 622
Posted: 19 June 2009 at 3:57pm | IP Logged | 17  

If I didn't know the characters, I think I could have enjoyed X3 as an action flick.  But I do know the characters.  Still, I enjoyed how Beast was done very much.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Paulo Pereira
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 April 2006
Posts: 15541
Posted: 19 June 2009 at 5:03pm | IP Logged | 18  

I thought X-Men 2 was the best of the lot.  Or, at worst, the least sucky.
Back to Top profile | search
 

Sorry, you can NOT post a reply.
This topic is closed.

<< Prev Page of 4
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login