InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "wanna finish?"

Doop (xdoop) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-11-05 17:08:00

Entry tags:

char: green goblin/norman osborn, char: mystique/raven darkholme, creator: leonard kirk, creator: paul cornell, title: dark x-men

Dark X-Men #1 preview

You can see the rest of the preview over here.

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	xdoop 2009-11-06 12:24 am UTC (link)
	That issue with Nightcrawler was almost universally panned, and even Lobdell apologized for it. http://tinyurl.com/yeapl76 (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	icon_uk 2009-11-06 12:31 am UTC (link)
	Well, that's sort of irrelevant, because IIRC it had always been the case that she had abandoned him to save her own skin, the precise nature of the abandonment is less of an issue than the fact that she DID, and that in no way lessens the impact of the many other deaths she has caused. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	xdoop 2009-11-06 01:00 am UTC (link)
	because IIRC it had always been the case that she had abandoned him to save her own skin No, originally she didn't know he was her son, which is why she was confused as to why she hesitated when she was about to kill him during Arcade's training sequence. As for her killing other people; does killing someone automatically make you irredeemable or something? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

icon_uk
2009-11-06 01:04 am UTC (link)

No, originally she didn't know he was her son, which is why she was confused as to why she hesitated when she was about to kill him during Arcade's training sequence.

In her first appearance in the X-Men, she clearly DOES know who Kurt is, and is the one to tell him to ask Margali about what really happened the night she took him in.

As for her killing other people; does killing someone automatically make you irredeemable or something?

When they are no threat to you and you don't seem to care, yes, it pretty much does.

How many decades of repeated, cold blooded, unrepentant murder would it take to convince YOU that someone had no intention of ever reforming, despite repeated offers?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

xdoop
2009-11-06 01:24 am UTC (link)

In her first appearance in the X-Men, she clearly DOES know who Kurt is, and is the one to tell him to ask Margali about what really happened the night she took him in.

Yeah, and that scene was referenced in the issue where Mystique was unable to harm Kurt in the training sequence. So I dunno.

When they are no threat to you and you don't seem to care, yes, it pretty much does.

It's not like she kills random people for no reason or for fun.

How many decades of repeated, cold blooded, unrepentant murder would it take to convince YOU that someone had no intention of ever reforming, despite repeated offers?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

icon_uk
2009-11-06 01:38 am UTC (link)

It's not like she kills random people for no reason or for fun.

No, she kills them because it's convenient for her to do so, which is almost as bad, and certainly beyond the pale. She shows no guilt or remorse for anything she has done, even if it has included murdering innocents.

And Xena is a poor example to cite, as Xena was, throughout the series, pretty much consistently determined to try and become a better person. Yes she had done dreadful things in her past, but she genuinely regretted them, and she knew that the bloodthirsty monster she had been had been the wrong thing to be.

Mystique has had no such genuine epiphany, shown no remorse whatsoever for her actions, and every change of sides she has made has been to further her own selfish ends, not out of a desire to become a better person.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	xdoop 2009-11-06 01:39 am UTC (link)
	No, the stuff Mystique has done has either been to save her people or her daughter. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	okkult3000 2009-11-06 02:52 am UTC (link)
	Wow. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	xdoop 2009-11-06 03:01 am UTC (link)
	Tell me how I'm wrong. Most of the stuff she's done has been either to help mutants or to help her daughter. You can say the way she tries to accomplish those things is wrong, but it doesn't change the fact that those are her motivations. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	okkult3000 2009-11-06 07:14 am UTC (link)
	You're right; murdering Moira MacTaggert, trying to murder her own children, and trying to wipe out the human race was wrong. But her heart was in the right place, I suppose. She only kills so much because she loves SO MUCH. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

angelophile
2009-11-06 10:06 am UTC (link)

To be fair, as Doop says, the motivation behind those actions was to try and save the mutant race. She couldn't give a rats ass about humanity certainly, but she's definitely more in the terrorist/freedom fighter mold than just some random psychotic who runs around killing people for no reason. She has a cause.

What's interesting about Mystique is that, like Magneto, it's possible to sympathize with her motivations, if not her methods. I personally find that makes villains much more compelling than someone who just kills for the sake of killing.

Anyway, she's more sociopathic than psychopathic, in my opinion.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

icon_uk
2009-11-06 04:17 pm UTC (link)

To be fair, as Doop says, the motivation behind those actions was to try and save the mutant race. She couldn't give a rats ass about humanity certainly,

She actively tried to wipe them out, that goes beyond "doesn't agree with their outlook" IMHO.

but she's definitely more in the terrorist/freedom fighter mold than just some random psychotic who runs around killing people for no reason. She has a cause.

Or an excuse, depending on how you look at it.

What's interesting about Mystique is that, like Magneto, it's possible to sympathize with her motivations, if not her methods. I personally find that makes villains much more compelling than someone who just kills for the sake of killing.

Up to a point yes, indeed, I thought probably the best line of the X2 movie was her reply to Nightcrawler when he asked why she didn't just use her powers to pass as human all the time; "Because I shouldn't have to". She's absolutely right, but that doesn't excuse her casually murdering people.

Anyway, she's more sociopathic than psychopathic, in my opinion.

Perhaps, though I'm not sure that makes her any less of a monster.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

xdoop
2009-11-06 01:31 pm UTC (link)

I'll just repost what I told you in noscans_daily.

I noticed most of your examples are from the "Dream's End" storyline; I don't think that should really be considered as representative of her character. I mean, a lot of the stuff she did there was worse than anything she had done before (Mystique wouldn't try to kill Rogue like she did). And even then it was clear she wasn't in her right mind.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	okkult3000 2009-11-06 03:40 pm UTC (link)
	It's in continuity. If Spider-Man tried to wipe out the human race, people would hold it against him. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	xdoop 2009-11-06 03:44 pm UTC (link)
	So you're judging the character based on one storyline, and nothing that came before or after. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

icon_uk
2009-11-06 03:59 pm UTC (link)

When the action is as important as attempted worldwide genocide, and has not been invalidated or contradicted, then yes, I think we don't really have much choice in the matter. It happened, deal with it.

Do I like when Chuck Austen wrote the Draco, or that one about the exploding communion wafers being used to try and fake a Rapture that Catholics don't believe in? Hell no, but it happened.

Do I like the fact that Bruce Jones had Dick Grayson cruise bars and pick up a woman whose name he didn't want to know to indulge in meaningless sex? Hell no, but it happened.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) -

xdoop, 2009-11-06 04:21 pm UTC

(no subject) -

icon_uk, 2009-11-06 05:20 pm UTC

(no subject) -

xdoop, 2009-11-06 05:21 pm UTC

(no subject) -

icon_uk, 2009-11-06 06:45 pm UTC

	icon_uk 2009-11-06 07:57 am UTC (link)
	From her twisted point of view perhaps, but many terrorists use the same justification, I don't accept it from them either. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	xdoop 2009-11-06 01:36 pm UTC (link)
	I don't accept it from them either. So you think they're secretly selfish and don't really believe in their cause? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

icon_uk
2009-11-06 01:51 pm UTC (link)

I don't care whether they do or not as, just as with Mystique, whatever justification they use to rationalise their murder does not make it any less murder. Belief in your cause does not make your cause less loathesome.

Whilst she has the saem right as anyone to defend themselves against aggression, aside from a question of proportional response (She was prepared to commit planetary genocide of ALL humans without a second thought) she's more usually fighting those who seek to stop her in her actions because of her actions, not she herself.

She kills without qualm for whatever end suits her on a given day. Are you suggesting that she should be given a pass because she thinks it's a good idea to do so?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

xdoop
2009-11-06 03:31 pm UTC (link)

Whilst she has the saem right as anyone to defend themselves against aggression, aside from a question of proportional response (She was prepared to commit planetary genocide of ALL humans without a second thought)

In "Dream's End," yes. It's not like she goes around all the time trying to wipe out humanity.

She kills without qualm for whatever end suits her on a given day. Are you suggesting that she should be given a pass because she thinks it's a good idea to do so?

No, I was just under the impression that you were trying to argue Mystique's reasons were selfish, which is is why I pointed out how that wasn't the case.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	okkult3000 2009-11-06 03:40 pm UTC (link)
	So once is okay? (Reply to this) (Parent)

icon_uk
2009-11-06 03:41 pm UTC (link)

It's not like she goes around all the time trying to wipe out humanity.

So the implication there is that she should get her first shot at genocide free, and it should only count she came back for a SECOND time? Seriously?

And you surely can't be suggesting she is selfLESS? Mystique IS selfish, and one sure sign of it is how she's so damned manipulative. Even her relationship with Rogue has always been dominated by HER needs, HER belief in what is right, and completely over-rules what Rogue might have wanted. Putting your own desires ahead of what your child needs, that's supremely selfish.

She may dress her actions up in "I'm acting against the humans who oppressed my genetic kin", but when it comes down to a choice between what is good for them and what is good for Mystique, I'm having a hard time she's ever made the truly hard choice.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

xdoop
2009-11-06 04:02 pm UTC (link)

So the implication there is that she should get her first shot at genocide free, and it should only count she came back for a SECOND time? Seriously?

As opposed to letting one poorly-written storyline define her entire character?

And you surely can't be suggesting she is selfLESS? Mystique IS selfish, and one sure sign of it is how she's so damned manipulative. Even her relationship with Rogue has always been dominated by HER needs, HER belief in what is right, and completely over-rules what Rogue might have wanted. Putting your own desires ahead of what your child needs, that's supremely selfish

Like how she let Rogue stay with the X-Men, when Rogue convinced her she wasn't brainwashed?

She may dress her actions up in "I'm acting against the humans who oppressed my genetic kin", but when it comes down to a choice between what is good for them and what is good for Mystique, I'm having a hard time she's ever made the truly hard choice.

And what storyline suggest this theory?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

icon_uk
2009-11-06 04:49 pm UTC (link)

Like how she let Rogue stay with the X-Men, when Rogue convinced her she wasn't brainwashed?

After Rogue had had to run away from home because Mystique couldn't admit that she couldn't help her control her powers? I agree that letting her go was the right thing to do, but it's not like she left her alone after that.

And what storyline suggest this theory?

What theory? She created and led an incarnation of the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants for heavens sake, then when things looked bad for them, she turned tail and became a Government agent (Hardly speaking volumes for her committment to the cause of mutant rights, and speaking to a more pronounced sense of self-preservation). Then as soon as that went south, back to the self serving villainy.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) -

xdoop, 2009-11-06 05:17 pm UTC

	sandoz_iscariot 2009-11-06 01:06 am UTC (link)
	does killing someone automatically make you irredeemable or something? It helps if they show no remorse. (Reply to this) (Parent)

(Read comments) -