![]() |
|
![]() |
Avengers >> View Post |
|
| ||||||
Subj: No, no, issue #12, the first Juggernaut story... Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 at 08:26:02 pm EDT (Viewed 176 times) | Reply Subj: Look at the differences between the two meetings : X-Men # 9 (Stan Lee), X-Men #20 (Roy Thomas) Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 06:01:23 am EDT (Viewed 182 times) | ||||||
Xavier tells a story about Cain Marko driving his car off a cliff in an attempt to scare a college-aged Xavier that went wrong. Cyclops asks if this is the incident that cost Xavier his legs. Xavier replies that this happened "Years later, at the hands of the man you know as Lucifer." This a follow-up to the earlier comment in Uncanny X-Men #9. Thus, Stan Lee established in a line of dialogue that a post-college, adult Xavier was crippled by Lucifer. In fact, it's even vaguely possible that Stan did this in contradiction to the penciller's intent, given the old Marvel Method. The problem is really that Uncanny #12 screws around with Xavier's age, making him a Korean War vet. Roy was stuck with the idea that an adult Xavier lost the use of his legs in an encounter with Lucifer. However, his making Lucifer an alien does contradict Lee, in that Lucifer was clearly described as a human being in the final panel of Uncanny X-Men #9. But I don't see where you find Lucifer is a telepath; the closest he gets is shoving a gadget to his forehead which is triggered by a mental impulse, and that makes him no more telepathic than, say, Henry Pym with his cybernetic helmet or Reed Richards with his weird "encephalo-gun." No, Lucifer comes across mostly as a gadget-using baddie than a superhuman one. Compare Magneto, who simply had mental powers almost identical to Xavier's in the first issue, before this was quietly dropped. The concentration camp idea strikes me as one that would probably never have occurred to Lee to use in a comic, I agree. The real problem is that, even by Silver Age standards, Lee's version of Lucifer was painfully generic, a mad scientist type with no discernible motive and no particularly distinctive gimmick or personality. As with Diablo, Lee may have been working backwards from a distinctive name...maybe no coincidence that both uninspired (by Lee's standards -- he himself has said that Diablo is is least inspired notable creation) villains have "the Devil" as their reference point. Lee was better when he gave his villains motives beyond mere malignity. More generally,. X-Men was pretty clearly the last book on the list when Stan and Jack plotted things out. Stuff is tried and dropped issue-by-issue there: the Beast is a dumb brute for two issues, then he gets his familiar personality; Cyclops's eyebeams tire him out initially, and then this limitation seems to vanish; Jean's power is referred to as both telepathy and teleportation; Magneto is a telepath for a single issue, and Xavier is sometimes a telekinetic. I wouldn't assume much if any long-term planning was going into the book until some time after Roy took over, really. - Omar Karindu "For your information, I don't have an ego. My Facebook photo is a landscape." | |||||||
Posted with Apple Safari 4.1.3 on MacOS X
| |||||||
|
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software |