Cyclops: The Worst Leader (an interview)


Comics

1 to 50 of 78 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.

An intimate interview with the worst leader ever.


Sodding hilarious. =) Sad part is, every single word is true. I do wish they had brought up the little fact that he got beaten in a duel for leadership by a depowered Storm too.


Good,really good!
It just describes perfectly Scott Summers's characterization before Grant Morrisson and Joss Whedon happened and at last found what to do of him!
Just remember Summers's acts during the Torn and Unstoppable story arcs,how brilliant it was!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

While of course ignoring decades of characterization before then. Generally, as with many things in comics, driven by editorial decisions having little to do with characterization.

And Scott actually did lead the X-Men, without Xavier telling him what to do at every turn, for good chunks of both the Original and New X-Men's run. Since Xavier not being dead and Jean knowing about it was a retcon, Xavier wasn't speaking through Jean and telling him what to do during that time.


thejeff wrote:

While of course ignoring decades of characterization before then. Generally, as with many things in comics, driven by editorial decisions having little to do with characterization.

And Scott actually did lead the X-Men, without Xavier telling him what to do at every turn, for good chunks of both the Original and New X-Men's run. Since Xavier not being dead and Jean knowing about it was a retcon, Xavier wasn't speaking through Jean and telling him what to do during that time.

Are you so sure?

Having been reading Uncanny x-men from the beginning I quite find Whedon's and to a lesser extent Morrisson's run faithful to the core of the X-men stuff,and I think their job helped devellop Scott Summers in a full grown adult mutant of the 21st century,reaching at last maturity and freedom at the same time, more so than writers like Nicieza or Lobdell to quote a few.


I was speaking of the "interview". I read Morrison's run and thought it worked pretty well for Scott. I only read a couple scattered issues of Whedon and it was writers like Nicieza or Lobdell that caused me to quit reading X-Men in the first place.

I was thinking more of the interview's description of his leadership in the earlier years.


OH,sorry Jeff!
I find the interview rather amusing,for myself, and well documented!
Who doesn't remember Scott's stpidloss of leadership to a depowered Storm,his abrupt leaving of his wife and child and all those stupid things unimaginative writers made him do!


Lochmonster wrote:


An intimate interview with the worst leader ever.

Guess someone never read Utopia or Second Coming. I felt like those two story lines (in addition to being some of the best X-Men writing I've seen) did a great job of painting Cyclops as a skilled leader who was capable of organizing his (egotistical, philosophically and ethically divided) teams in the face of unstoppable forces.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

As I have said in other debates on the subject, the vast majority of cyclops hate is manufactured by bad writing by people who hated the character and did everything they could to ruin the character.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
As I have said in other debates on the subject, the vast majority of cyclops hate is manufactured by bad writing by people who hated the character and did everything they could to ruin the character.

For some reason, the bulk of Marvel's writers who worked on the X-Men,decided that Scott Summers was going to be the Butt Monkey of the Marvel Universe. I suspect that these were the same people that expected you to actually be sympathetic for the pro-registration side during the Civil War despite that side being represented by some of the lowest scum performing some of the most despicable acts on the planet.


OK, wow.

I am not now nor have I ever been an avid X-Men fan but know enough to get a chuckle out of this.

It's also pretty clear to me that the person who wrote this loves the X-Men. You can't really lampoon and satirize things so completely if you hate them, and the author's knowledge shows a deep love of X-Men it's mythos and backstory.

I just thought it was a funny thing to share.

Erleichda!

Also I know he can't be the worst leader ever...because he doesn't actually exist.

*ducks for cover!*


LazarX wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
As I have said in other debates on the subject, the vast majority of cyclops hate is manufactured by bad writing by people who hated the character and did everything they could to ruin the character.
For some reason, the bulk of Marvel's writers who worked on the X-Men,decided that Scott Summers was going to be the Butt Monkey of the Marvel Universe. I suspect that these were the same people that expected you to actually be sympathetic for the pro-registration side during the Civil War despite that side being represented by some of the lowest scum performing some of the most despicable acts on the planet.

+1


Butbutbut... The pro registration people only wanted to protect our children from dangerous criminals!!!


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I for one like the character of Cyclops.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

[LazarX]For some reason, the bulk of Marvel's writers who worked on the X-Men,decided that Scott Summers was going to be the Butt Monkey of the Marvel Universe.

I think they wanted to push him out of the way for whatever character they preffered. Instead, they made most of the X-Men look bad. Wolverine didn't look any better when Cyclops looked terrible. Instead he became the guy who couldn't get the girl away from a total loser. Which only served to make him a bigger loser.


This is so hilarious that it is painful to read!

Dark Archive

It's funny but at the same time depresing especially since there still trying to pass him off as a good leader. (Side note also makes me think how dumb the average person in the Marvel univers must be.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's funny, but horribly distorted at the same time. I know it's fashionable to bash Cyclops these days and recent writers have done a number on him, but he really was portrayed as a good leader for years.
Even in the Classic X-Men days, the writers realized the problems with just having the Professor relay orders through him, that's why he was away or injured or dead so much of the time. After the first year or so, he rarely gave orders in the field, even when he was around.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You can't have a decent discussion about Scott Summers these days. Since AvX the fandom has divided into utter fanboys of the character ( called "Cychos" by the fans not so enamored with him ) and people who despise him ( which a lot of Avengers fans fall under, although there is a good number of X-Men fans who also don't like to worship him like a god ). When the two sides clash, it ain't pretty.

I really disliked how Cyclops was depicted as this super-ubermensch before AvX happened. Ironically, AvX brought him much more down to earth because of his huge failure and now it is Wolverine and Beast ( the two X-Men most opposed to Cyclops way of doing things ) who have come off lately as spiteful rage-filled people. It has been a very interesting year in X-Men comics.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, nothing good came out of AvX as far as I'm concerned. Every major character in that crossover was done terribly.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Awww... Why so hard on Cyclops? Cyclops not so bad person. Try to lead good, but only have one eye! And that in middle of head! No binocular vision and can't tell what on either side!


Grey Lensman wrote:
Well, nothing good came out of AvX as far as I'm concerned. Every major character in that crossover was done terribly.

Seems that way.


magnuskn wrote:

You can't have a decent discussion about Scott Summers these days. Since AvX the fandom has divided into utter fanboys of the character ( called "Cychos" by the fans not so enamored with him ) and people who despise him ( which a lot of Avengers fans fall under, although there is a good number of X-Men fans who also don't like to worship him like a god ). When the two sides clash, it ain't pretty.

I really disliked how Cyclops was depicted as this super-ubermensch before AvX happened. Ironically, AvX brought him much more down to earth because of his huge failure and now it is Wolverine and Beast ( the two X-Men most opposed to Cyclops way of doing things ) who have come off lately as spiteful rage-filled people. It has been a very interesting year in X-Men comics.

I did very much enjoy the conversation he had with Wolverine. I thought it was awesome, very very well done.


Lochmonster wrote:


An intimate interview with the worst leader ever.

I don't know. In the 1960s, Xavier didn't CONSTANTLY lead the team. Sometimes Xavier was unavailable, and sometimes he deliberately stopped communicating with the team to give them a trial by fire, so Cyclops had to lead SOME of the time.

After Second Genesis, it's true that the new X-Men did not act like a team at first. Over the next several years, however, they gradually came to learn. With the Herculean task of trying to make Wolverine a team player, I thought it commendable that Cyclops did as well as he did.

And then Xavier came back from outer space, criticized Wolverine's lack of discipline, and blamed Cyclops for giving the reins too much slack. Cyclops tried to explain that leading a team of people like that was different from leading children, and Xavier didn't listen. This thread indicates to me that some would see this as a sign that Cyclops is an incompetent leader compared to Xavier, but I saw it the other way around.

(I'll admit that I've read very few X-Men comics since "Age of Apocalypse", so I can't comment on its recent history.)

EDIT: In the last part of the "first generation" run, when Xavier was presumably dead, it looked to me like Cyclops, not Marvel Girl, was leading the team, actually giving the orders that were being obeyed, but I may have to browse through those stories to confirm that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This makes me wish Whedon had had a crack at doing the X-Men flicks - maybe adapting the arc he did for Astonishing X-Men. As others have noted in the thread, both Whedon and Morrison had a good handle on Cyclops' character. Not a perfect dude but certainly under the gun like few others in the Marvel Universe have been.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Dude has a Howitzer for a face. It's understandable that he'd be a little high strung.

That being said, it's a damn travesty what bad writing has done to the character. I like Cyclops. I just wish the writers would stop screwing with him for shock value or setting him up to play the heel for Wolverine whenever another movie comes out.

There used to be a time when I was a die-hard Marvel fan. The stuff they've done to my favorite franchises over the last 10 years or so has basically driven me away completely. It's sad and pathetic and Quesada needs to go retcon himself with a pitchfork.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

The dude killed Lincoln. Nuff said.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd be interested if Blacklops stuck around now. A meeting between the two could be funny.

Cyclops: An alternate me! Come to the Xavier school so we can fight oppression.

Blacklops: Oppression? You call this Oppression? Let me tell you about Oppression, whitebread.

(Aside, Glad to see Blacklops and Gayverine survived. Wish the book had gone on longer and they hadn't killed all the Nightcrawlers.)


Matt_Scudder wrote:
This makes me wish Whedon had had a crack at doing the X-Men flicks - maybe adapting the arc he did for Astonishing X-Men. As others have noted in the thread, both Whedon and Morrison had a good handle on Cyclops' character. Not a perfect dude but certainly under the gun like few others in the Marvel Universe have been.

You're right,they took Summers to new heights!

If Whedon had a shot at X-men I think it would be great,but alas my poor Yorick, I think it won't happen anytime soon since FOX owns the rights to the films and Whedon is working with Marvel Studios!
I just wish Whedon had another shot at the X-Men comics!


This thread makes me weep sometimes....


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Aaron Bitman wrote:
Lochmonster wrote:


An intimate interview with the worst leader ever.

After Second Genesis, it's true that the new X-Men did not act like a team at first. Over the next several years, however, they gradually came to learn. With the Herculean task of trying to make Wolverine a team player, I thought it commendable that Cyclops did as well as he did.

And then Xavier came back from outer space, criticized Wolverine's lack of discipline, and blamed Cyclops for giving the reins too much slack. Cyclops tried to explain that leading a team of people like that was different from leading children, and Xavier didn't listen. This thread indicates to me that some would see this as a sign that Cyclops is an incompetent leader compared to Xavier, but I saw it the other way around.

This.

When I got into comics 'serious'. Was about the time of the Jim Lee X-men #1. Cyclops was this straight laced, stick up the butt, obnoxious character. (cool costume and powers...) but I had vague memories of cartoons and stuff from when I was just a little kid and Cyclops had been my FAVORITE..

A couple years went by and I finally picked up the 'Essentials' of those early 'Giant sized team'... and THAT was the Cyclops I remembered!! the LEADER. The one who stood up to the professor, and the only one on the team that told wolverine to shut up and toe the line... and he DID!

Cyclops was ALWAYS supposed to be awesome.. He was the #2 leader in the Marvel universe. Because... well, nobody beats captain America.

Also as an added note... I Absolutely HATED wolverine in the 90's and beyond. His powers were too ridiculous, he was too violent, he was too much of a jerk. Rereading THOSE books, showed me why he became popular.

They promoted him to MUCH... but he had potential as the feral little trouble maker who healed fast and cut stuff. Not to be trusted... but good in a pinch.

The more popular wolverine got... the more 'unlikeable' they had to make his chief opponent. Cyclops... Ironically the more mainstream Wolverine got, the more they had to bring in new troublemakers and watch THEM get popular... Enter Gambit.

But yeah, Cyclops was always my favorite X-men. I'm really annoyed by the directions they've taken him... Hooking up with Emma while Jean was still around was bad enough... but then he found the X-force 'wet works' division??? that's when I wrote of the X-men.

Even killing Xavier as Dark Phoenix I could forgive... but he just isn't backing down and getting redeemed. He's going full on magneto :(

Matt_Scudder wrote:
This makes me wish Whedon had had a crack at doing the X-Men flicks - maybe adapting the arc he did for Astonishing X-Men. As others have noted in the thread, both Whedon and Morrison had a good handle on Cyclops' character. Not a perfect dude but certainly under the gun like few others in the Marvel Universe have been.

Agree! Well, about whedon anyway, I only skimmed morrisons, and I hated those years. Astonishing X-men was awesome when it came out. His whole 'We've saved the world too many times for people to NOT see us as superheroes' was an great direction.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

My Cyclops will always be the one that backhanded Wolverine for sass after Thunderbird's death and the one that non-lethally took down the entire team in the From The Ashes arc. :)


Aaron Bitman wrote:
And then Xavier came back from outer space, criticized Wolverine's lack of discipline, and blamed Cyclops for giving the reins too much slack. Cyclops tried to explain that leading a team of people like that was different from leading children, and Xavier didn't listen.

I just happened to come across that scene recently, so I can name my source: The Uncanny X-Men #129, from 1979.

Dark Archive

Aaron Bitman wrote:
Aaron Bitman wrote:
And then Xavier came back from outer space, criticized Wolverine's lack of discipline, and blamed Cyclops for giving the reins too much slack. Cyclops tried to explain that leading a team of people like that was different from leading children, and Xavier didn't listen.
I just happened to come across that scene recently, so I can name my source: The Uncanny X-Men #129, from 1979.

Yeah, I just reread the Dark Phoenix saga, and saw it there.

That Cyclops was quite a bit different than the one we've seen recently.


Personally I'm hoping that the end result of the upcoming X-event is to try and amalgamate the current Cyclops with the one that got me into comics.


Grey Lensman wrote:
Personally I'm hoping that the end result of the upcoming X-event is to try and amalgamate the current Cyclops with the one that got me into comics.

I'd rather they eliminate the current, and replace him with the original.

Dark Archive

GreenDragon1133 wrote:
I'd rather they eliminate the current, and replace him with the original.

If they can get rid of the Civil-War-era Reed Richards and Tony Stark who went about fifty times past anything Cyclops has done, that would be cool, too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Set wrote:
GreenDragon1133 wrote:
I'd rather they eliminate the current, and replace him with the original.

If they can get rid of the Civil-War-era Reed Richards and Tony Stark who went about fifty times past anything Cyclops has done, that would be cool, too.

And Civil War Captain America and One More Day Spiderman...

Can we just reboot the whole universe back to before Avengers Dissassemble?


VM mercenario wrote:


Can we just reboot the whole universe back to before Avengers Dissassemble?

I second this.


I stopped reading anything Marvel about two years after Heroes Return, so somewhere between there and Civil War sounds good.


After civil war for me. That storyline disgusted me to no end. Richards building torture camps for heroes who did not register. Stark actively working to instate monstrous policies. And worst of all: The X-men remaining neutral through it all. I mean, this is EXACTLY the same plot they have fought for twenty years real-time to prevent (mutant registration act), because they KNOW it will lead to a sentinel-controlled nightmare future with mutant death camps and so on. Then they suddenly accept it because it's sodding Iron Man who pushes for it? Give me a break. Stupid, stupid, stupid writing.

I think perhaps the central issue here is the unagingness of the Marvel universe. It would have been far better to adopt an equal time policy, and LET PEOPLE AGE! Yes, we would have a Cyclops in his seventies by now, but so what?


Back in the nineties, when MC2 was a going concern, I made the following timelines:
MC1/616: approximately 12-15 years prior to present day, Xavier's School opens, Stark and Pym's experiments.
Ten years ago, Spiderman and the Avengers.
Five years ago: Secret War, Franklin Richards is 4&1/2.
1-2 years ago: Inferno, Acts of Vengeance.
Present day: Maximum Carnage, Legacy Virus, Immortus manipulation of Scarlet Witch's life revealed.

MC2: all these events happened, over a 15 year period, from the early sixties to about 1980. Somewhere after that, Doom vanished, the Avengers, Juggernaut, Reed and Sue, with him. Peter Parker crippled.
Present Day: Spidergirl, J2, A-Next, F5.

These are rough, and based on 20-yr old memories. Key is, MC1, present day is always present day, and the modern age of heroes always happened a slowly increasing time previous. MC2, the events happened at a fixed time in the past, while events of the MC2 titles occurred in the present - more or less.


Sissyl wrote:


I think perhaps the central issue here is the unagingness of the Marvel universe. It would have been far better to adopt an equal time policy, and LET PEOPLE AGE! Yes, we would have a Cyclops in his seventies by now, but so what?

I have always HATED this idea. I find it selfish.

People usually mean, "I wish they started to age when "I" started reading them.

Personally, "I" like Peter Parker, Bruce Wayne, and Clark Kent. Seeing as how they have been going on for 50+ years, if they had aged I would never have met them.

To say that Bruce wayne should age and retire... means that anyone (like me) who got into comics in the 90's... would be reading about Peter's Great- Great- Grandson... or Bruce's Great, Great, great great GREAT grandson wearing the cowl? And would probably have buried one or tow SINCE the 90's.

That doesn't interest me at all.

It all boils down to WHO do you like to read, the costume or the character? How long down the family line can uncle ben's death resonate?

There HAVE been generational heroes like the Phantom and occassionaly Zorro (though I HATE him as generational too... Don Diego FOREVER!!)

Frankly they don't sell well.


This was something that DC had going on right before the New 52 Reboot.
The Justice League consisted of Batman, Wonder Woman, a Flash, a Green Lantern, Supergirl, and a few others. Not Bruce, Diana, Hal, Kyle, Barry, Wally, or Clark. The Big Seven were growing older, and passing the torch to a new Generation.
And as the latest Teen Titans were approaching age 20, the JSA were training fourth and fifth generation heroes.

I would have liked to see that continue.

And for those who wanted a modern reboot, updating the classic characters to the 21st Century - isn't that the whole point of Earth-1? With the existence of Earth-n52, Earth-1 is somewhat irrelevant.

By all means, let the originals be immortal, and reinvent them as needed, but why abandon seventy-five years of history - for everyone but Batman and Green Lantern (who retained virtually all Silver and Bronze age history)?


GreenDragon1133 wrote:

This was something that DC had going on right before the New 52 Reboot.

The Justice League consisted of Batman, Wonder Woman, a Flash, a Green Lantern, Supergirl, and a few others. Not Bruce, Diana, Hal, Kyle, Barry, Wally, or Clark. The Big Seven were growing older, and passing the torch to a new Generation.
And as the latest Teen Titans were approaching age 20, the JSA were training fourth and fifth generation heroes.

I would have liked to see that continue.

And for those who wanted a modern reboot, updating the classic characters to the 21st Century - isn't that the whole point of Earth-1? With the existence of Earth-n52, Earth-1 is somewhat irrelevant.

By all means, let the originals be immortal, and reinvent them as needed, but why abandon seventy-five years of history - for everyone but Batman and Green Lantern (who retained virtually all Silver and Bronze age history)?

the weakness is that a lot of those later generation heroes weren't very likable, and DC fans are notorious for their calls for blood the instant a new character isn't up to snuff.


Stephanie Brown and Cassandra Cain were quite likeable. And yet they are in limbo with Wally West and Donna Troy.

I will agree, many of the new JSA and JSA All-Stars characters probably couldn't support a solo title. But then, that's why they were in those titles.


GreenDragon1133 wrote:

Stephanie Brown and Cassandra Cain were quite likeable. And yet they are in limbo with Wally West and Donna Troy.

I will agree, many of the new JSA and JSA All-Stars characters probably couldn't support a solo title. But then, that's why they were in those titles.

I wuv steph and wanted her to be the next robin. Cassie I could take or leave, but that was because I found her fans obnoxious.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

I love Stephanie too.

I've said elsewhere, with DC's (slow) aging of characters, Dick, Donna, Wally, Raven, Vic and co were 'my generation' of heroes. To see them grow up, and the next generation step in was nice. I can share my Batgirl trades with my goddaughter, as she enters her seniour year of High School. When the boys hit that age, the High School/College age Tim Drake would resonate the same with her. Just as they look to their parents and I for experience and support, Stephanie, Tim, Rose, and Connor look to their elders.

I think *both* of the big two need their 'young titles'. Marvel has the Ultimates. Kitty Pride, Jimmy Hudson, etc etc *can* age slowly for a generation, and 20, 30 years down the road, a new generation of heroes can be introduced to their kids.


I started reading X-men in the mid 80s. Right after Dark phoenix. To be honest? If Cyclops, Iceman, Beast and Jean Grey had been replaced completely by the international team with Storm, Wolverine, Colossus and so on, that would have been lovely. Every single time they changed things up, it was good. Excalibur was a wonderful team. The team during Mutant massacre was great. I even liked the Maggot/Marrow configuration if they had excluded Iceman. And every time they went back to the old team, it stunk, because those characters are beyond done. We know them, and after a while it gets very, very old hearing about how Cyclops is a stick in the mud.

So, no, I would seriously have preferred it if things never got unaging in the first place. It would be a good thing if they trusted their ability to make interesting characters instead of keeping the most famous ones on assisted breathing.


Excalibur was great. Until they crossed it over. And let writers who had no idea about the characters write them. Like turning Sersei, the alien from another dimension into a 616-Shiar.

I also preferred Captain Britain's sister as a British Secret Agent - not a Ninja Hooker.

BTW I participated in Waffles for Stephanie - the letter writing campaign to get her restored. The letter was sent back. DC basically doesn't care about the fans, as long as they are still making money.

1 to 50 of 78 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Comics / Cyclops: The Worst Leader (an interview) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.