Darque Edge

Marvel has recently launched Icon, a new subdivision, flagshipped by 'Powers'. What does this new subdivision mean? Simple. It's creator owned stuff, hence Powers making the jump from Image to Marvel. Now what this could mean for Marvel, is a huge amount of quality, mature comics. What do you think? Thoughts on the subject?

This is one of those awkward things, isn't it? Does a story like this glorify, or give ideas to paedophiles? Was the scene filmed innapropriately? And if the answers are no, then where do we draw the line? Does 'Lolita' cease to be a work of literature, and become underage pornography? Are we able to explore the theme of sexual awakening without it being a beacon for perverts? And could a film have been made with the theme this film has without them addressing the need for physical closeness (closeness, not sex)? Personally, if the kid was okay with it, if the parents were okay with it, and if the scene was not filmed inappropriately, then I don't have a problem with it, as long as the scene is kept as a tender moment about physical closeness than it is about lust, sex or physical gratification. It's a difficult line to tread, but if the scene is dramatically justified, and not grauitous, then it could work well. If any of those lines are crossed, it will be the end of a few careers.

Was it Sabretooth, to continue the charade that he was brain damaged?

I finally got round to watching this. Wow. If Rodriguez has gained the ability to edit, this could be good.

Which time? Cerebro's been destroyed more than once.

This may help you out Good site - although I'm aware of Cable's history already. What I'm saying is how Liefeld originally intended it, not what Lobdell etc added to it later, if that makes sense. Cable ended up being a far better character than he should have been, mainly thanks to Scott Lobdell.

Wasn't his arm and eye a result of the virus, he was infected with as a kid? That was added later by Scott Lobdell. And in answer to Yoda, I always thought it was originally intended as hinting that he had more robotic parts that we couldn't see. It was never explained as being prosthetic, it was always just there.

Half human, half robot? With lots of guns? Who can teleport? With one eye, which glows? That doesn't echo the look of Terminator? And I know that Cable isn't a cyborg, but that wasn't made clear for quite a while in the comics, IIRC.

How do you figure? Cable first appeared in New Mutants #86 (cameo) and #87 (full), which were published in February and March of 1990. Meaning, they would have been drawn in mid to late 1989. Terminator 2 was released in July of 1991. Terminator 1 then.

Naah. That character also looks like Nick Fury. Which is a shame, cause I hate Rob Liefeld, and would gladly take the piss. This said, I note the Star Wars artist does have difficulty drawing feet, which doesn't remind me of any famous artist, honest, guv. And Cable was a Terminator 2 rip-off anyway.

Yes, I do. You see, when you buy lots on eBay, just to get certain ponies in the lot, you tend to get a lot more common ones, and usually quite a few of them. No, I didn't purposefully get a bunch of the same pony. Awww....do they make you feel like an ickle pwincess? God, this feels like I'm six again, and teasing my sister. Aww, who am I kidding. It feels like last week when I teased my girlfriend.

It's unlikely - I have it on good authority that so does Morphine Jim.

Whereas that horrible ending, for me, makes it the best ending I've seen yet from a series. Absolutely brilliant stuff, especially since the episode before ws the Elvis one, which was one of the most fun ones they did. I really can't see them having improved on it, I thought it was a brilliant ending. Mind you, I only saw it once, and that was years ago.

I know. Supposedly they're not going to undo or undermine everything Morrison did. It's all going to be worked in. Has anyone told the marvel editors this? Cause they don't seem aware. In the space of four issues since he left, we've had the spandex return, Xorn turn out to be a real person, and not Magneto after all, Magneto turn out to not be Magneto after all, and the ultimate death of the Phoenix being changed so she can come back as well. It feels a little like Chris Claremont got listened to, and now he's putting his toys back the way he likes them.

What the Hell is up with that? You've received Catwoman, right? Yes. And Hellboy comes out soon as well.

Me. I'm on Earth-2, I'm a mod, and I'm super. This is my way of saying I don't have a clue.

I mean, maybe this isn't him. Only Joss and Marvel know for sure. I was referring to Colossus being back from the dead, not Wolverine betraying the team. I think it's cheap, because I'm a long time reader, and if I invest in a character emotionally, and they kill him, then bring him back a few years later, then my emotional investment didn't mean anything. Also, I think Marvel are deliberately moving away from the Grant Morrison style, which I don't understand at all, cause it rocked.

Really? I didn't know that. Surprising, since the DVD is set for release in two weeks. It's true. I went to the cinema the other night, and the Punisher poster was on 'coming soon'.

I doubt it. Chances are that will be Wolverine, especially considering the upcoming run by Mark Millar and John Romita, Jr. In which case I revert back to my 'Fuck Marvel' stance. This is just cheap.

Apparantly Issue 7 features 'A betrayal from within'.....so it may not be the real Colossus....

I wouldn't be surprised if there was also an element of people going to watch a train wreck....

Very - VERY - nice job.

ARGH! THE WRATH! IT BURNS! BURNS LIKE ACID! ACID IN MY HAIR! Having seen pics of you, acid in your hair would probably be preferable to the current style.

He was charging a card, but a piece was shot off before he threw it. The rest, as normal, was reabsorbed by him, sine he never threw it. The other piece (the fragment that was shot off) had been charged, thrown accidentally, and blew up in his face. If he hadn't thrown it, he would have reabsorbed it, in the same way that Scott's power doesn't become actual until it leaves his body - hence the lack of eyelids being blown off. However, once it's out of his body, it's energy, and has been unleashed, thus he can be hurt by it. This theory covers everything except him and Alex being immune to each other.

Whatever happened to mutants being invulnerable to their own powers? Since when was that established? IE Wolverine has claws - if he cuts himself, he ain't invulnerable to it. Scott shoots energy beams, which, if reflected, hit him too. Same kind of thing. Gambit was charging a card, somebody shot it, and a fragment blew up in front of his eye. An explosion is an explosion is an explosion. I don't mind that. I do mind Magneto being back, and I do mind Phoenix coming back. Leave it for...say, five years, then do it. Bullshit and insulting to their readers to do this crap now. Oh, and Gambit is currently in Uncanny X-Men (The Chuck Austen one), walking around going 'What's going on, I can't see!'