The idea that this X-Men relaunch is any sort of return to relevance is hilarious. And definitely speaks to how little attention the guys have been paying the X-Men books.
The two main teams in this relaunch are pretty much exactly the same two main teams that have been in books since Secret Wars ended. And arguably the creative teams are lower profile than the teams those books had.
Ok, I get @Adam_Murdough 's appreciation of the post Zero Hour Legionairres - new start, bright expressive art, idealistic. What I don't get is the repeated references to the Legion being too convoluted.
Admittedly, I'm a long time reader, but Legion history is no more convoluted than Xmen history - especially with Clairmont. The team isn't significantly larger than the Xmen.
I keep hearing this and continue to fail to understand. I get it not being to taste, but density and complexity I do not understand.
Ok, I get @Adam_Murdough 's appreciation of the post Zero Hour Legionairres - new start, bright expressive art, idealistic. What I don't get is the repeated references to the Legion being too convoluted.
Admittedly, I'm a long time reader, but Legion history is no more convoluted than Xmen history - especially with Clairmont. The team isn't significantly larger than the Xmen.
I keep hearing this and continue to fail to understand. I get it not being to taste, but density and complexity I do not understand.
From someone who tried to read LOSH in the 80s/90s, here's the problems with LOSH over X-Men:
X-Men does not have a Crisis On Infinite Earths to contend with. X-Men does not have a "Five Years Later" to contend with. X-Men did not have inter-office feuds leading to the whole reason for the team existing being wiped from existence. X-Men didn't have a book starring clones of the main characters. Legion of Superheroes had a continuity dating back to 1958, X-Men in the 80s had a continuity essentially dating back to 1975. X-Men didn't have characters with names ending "Lad" X-Men didn't have vast swathes of its formative years written by a teenage Jim Shooter (true, vast swathes were overseen by an adult Jim Shooter, which may be worse). X-Men didn't have loads of alien races to remember.
I found L.E.G.I.O.N. easier to get into than LOSH, though that was probably down to Alan Grant's writing style being familiar to me from UK comics.
Ok, I get @Adam_Murdough 's appreciation of the post Zero Hour Legionairres - new start, bright expressive art, idealistic. What I don't get is the repeated references to the Legion being too convoluted.
Admittedly, I'm a long time reader, but Legion history is no more convoluted than Xmen history - especially with Clairmont. The team isn't significantly larger than the Xmen.
I keep hearing this and continue to fail to understand. I get it not being to taste, but density and complexity I do not understand.
From someone who tried to read LOSH in the 80s/90s, here's the problems with LOSH over X-Men:
X-Men does not have a Crisis On Infinite Earths to contend with. X-Men does not have a "Five Years Later" to contend with. X-Men did not have inter-office feuds leading to the whole reason for the team existing being wiped from existence. X-Men didn't have a book starring clones of the main characters. Legion of Superheroes had a continuity dating back to 1958, X-Men in the 80s had a continuity essentially dating back to 1975. X-Men didn't have characters with names ending "Lad" X-Men didn't have vast swathes of its formative years written by a teenage Jim Shooter (true, vast swathes were overseen by an adult Jim Shooter, which may be worse). X-Men didn't have loads of alien races to remember.
I found L.E.G.I.O.N. easier to get into than LOSH, though that was probably down to Alan Grant's writing style being familiar to me from UK comics.
Of course, the problems with X-Men over LSH are:
LSH never had more than two titles to keep up with at one time. LSH was rarely heavily involved with event crossovers. LSH didn’t have vast swathes written (and/or re-written) by the editors rather than the actual writers.
And, yeah, LSH had Crisis and clones, but with all the time-travelling going on with the X-Men, with characters from multiple time lines on the same team, I see that as a wash.
L.E.G.I.O.N. was just a fantastic series, at least for the first three years or so. In fact, I would argue that it was simply a better series than any of the pure LSH series has been. Personally, I don't even really think of it as a LSH series. I view it as being to LSH as, say, Starjammers is to X-Men—there's a lot of cross-continuity, but they kind of stand on their own.
Not sure I agree with all, but having re-engaged with both books in the mid-late 80s after a fair gap away from them, I didn't find either particularly impenetrable.
Both saw the characters grow and evolve, both had long games weaving through their plots.
I completely get the fact that Five Years Later was impenetrable for a new reader. For me, it was an opportunity to see characters grow up and witness a world with real consequences. It continues to be a favorite segment in Legion history.
I've since gone back and picked up all of the post Zero Hour issues, but that event was the catalyst that got me to walk away from comics for almost a decade and the impact it had on Legionairres was a massive part of that. The notion that neither of these two teams really knew which were the originals was fascinating.
I think I'll take young exuberant Shooter over EIC Shooter, and definitely over washed up returning to writing Shooter.
I completely get the fact that Five Years Later was impenetrable for a new reader. For me, it was an opportunity to see characters grow up and witness a world with real consequences. It continues to be a favorite segment in Legion history.
I was never a big Legion fan, but I've bought runs here and there over the years. And, yes, Five Years Later was pretty impenetrable for a new reader, mainly because most of the characters weren’t wearing their recognizable costumes and weren’t using their recognizable code names. I’d read some Legion stuff in the ’70s, but Five Years Later was the first time I bought a Legion book on a monthly basis. And despite the fact that there were a few characters I didn’t know anything about—“Who the hell is Kent Shakespeare?”—and I was constantly trying to play catch-up, I still really enjoyed the book, and it’s still my favorite LSH run.
From someone who tried to read LOSH in the 80s/90s, here's the problems with LOSH over X-Men:
X-Men does not have a Crisis On Infinite Earths to contend with. X-Men does not have a "Five Years Later" to contend with. X-Men did not have inter-office feuds leading to the whole reason for the team existing being wiped from existence. X-Men didn't have a book starring clones of the main characters. Legion of Superheroes had a continuity dating back to 1958, X-Men in the 80s had a continuity essentially dating back to 1975. X-Men didn't have characters with names ending "Lad" X-Men didn't have vast swathes of its formative years written by a teenage Jim Shooter (true, vast swathes were overseen by an adult Jim Shooter, which may be worse). X-Men didn't have loads of alien races to remember.
I found L.E.G.I.O.N. easier to get into than LOSH, though that was probably down to Alan Grant's writing style being familiar to me from UK comics.
Then there was that X-Men series that tried to reconcile the continuity of three different versions of the X-Men..Final Crisis: X-Men of Three Worl... oh wait...
I'm not sure you guys mentioned this, but I happened upon Scott McDaniel's name in the back of the book: Blackbox Comics p.310 - "I.T.: The Secret World of Modern Banking" I loved it when he drew Nightwing, and a few years ago Richard Dragon. So I'm wondering how or even IF his art style has changed and how in the world can you make a comic about banking. Just curious...
Comments
The two main teams in this relaunch are pretty much exactly the same two main teams that have been in books since Secret Wars ended. And arguably the creative teams are lower profile than the teams those books had.
Admittedly, I'm a long time reader, but Legion history is no more convoluted than Xmen history - especially with Clairmont. The team isn't significantly larger than the Xmen.
I keep hearing this and continue to fail to understand. I get it not being to taste, but density and complexity I do not understand.
X-Men does not have a Crisis On Infinite Earths to contend with.
X-Men does not have a "Five Years Later" to contend with.
X-Men did not have inter-office feuds leading to the whole reason for the team existing being wiped from existence.
X-Men didn't have a book starring clones of the main characters.
Legion of Superheroes had a continuity dating back to 1958, X-Men in the 80s had a continuity essentially dating back to 1975.
X-Men didn't have characters with names ending "Lad"
X-Men didn't have vast swathes of its formative years written by a teenage Jim Shooter (true, vast swathes were overseen by an adult Jim Shooter, which may be worse).
X-Men didn't have loads of alien races to remember.
I found L.E.G.I.O.N. easier to get into than LOSH, though that was probably down to Alan Grant's writing style being familiar to me from UK comics.
LSH never had more than two titles to keep up with at one time.
LSH was rarely heavily involved with event crossovers.
LSH didn’t have vast swathes written (and/or re-written) by the editors rather than the actual writers.
And, yeah, LSH had Crisis and clones, but with all the time-travelling going on with the X-Men, with characters from multiple time lines on the same team, I see that as a wash.
L.E.G.I.O.N. was just a fantastic series, at least for the first three years or so. In fact, I would argue that it was simply a better series than any of the pure LSH series has been. Personally, I don't even really think of it as a LSH series. I view it as being to LSH as, say, Starjammers is to X-Men—there's a lot of cross-continuity, but they kind of stand on their own.
Not sure I agree with all, but having re-engaged with both books in the mid-late 80s after a fair gap away from them, I didn't find either particularly impenetrable.
Both saw the characters grow and evolve, both had long games weaving through their plots.
I completely get the fact that Five Years Later was impenetrable for a new reader. For me, it was an opportunity to see characters grow up and witness a world with real consequences. It continues to be a favorite segment in Legion history.
I've since gone back and picked up all of the post Zero Hour issues, but that event was the catalyst that got me to walk away from comics for almost a decade and the impact it had on Legionairres was a massive part of that. The notion that neither of these two teams really knew which were the originals was fascinating.
I think I'll take young exuberant Shooter over EIC Shooter, and definitely over washed up returning to writing Shooter.
X-Men Epic Collection - Second Genesis Lois like a good way to get into the Claremont XMen.