Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.
I sent one of the Nightcrawler asks so if you got only two then me and that other person just have bad timing, but if you got more than that then yeah someone is probably trying to troll you in a really weird way
One person sent several over a couple days, with remarkably similar wording. It was pretty bizarre. There was another that sounded fairly different, which I assume was yours, but, yeah, came in at the same time as one of theirs—so, a little from column A, a little from column B.
It’s a good question—the Bamfs are a continuity clusterfuck going back literally *decades*—and I promise I’ll answer it eventually. Just might be a while, because, life.
I don’t want to jump on Rachel’s answer, but I think it’s worth mentioning that, while the Bamfs (the mini-Nightcrawlers) would certainly be confusing to new X-Men readers, the reason for their presence was never clear to even the oldest of fans. When they first showed up in Wolverine and the X-Men, it wasn’t the first time we had seen them in history, but their appearance and behavior was very different, and we had no idea where they’d come from or why they were infesting the school. Then that series went on for 42 issues and the Bamfs were never explained. As that run ended, an explanation was finally given in a different book- Amazing X-Men.
I guess the point I’m trying to make is, when you’re a new reader, you think that anything you don’t understand is only confusing to you because you’re new. But sometimes things are just weird and confusing because that’s the way the writer wants it to be. That’s especially true, I think, in Wolverine and the X-Men.
Okay, so I'm pretty fond of Wolverine and the X-Men, but that's at odds with my frustration over Quentin's characterization in it. I've been trying for the last forty minutes to think of a way to ask your opinion on this that isn't rude, accusatory, or presumptive, and I've got nothing. So may I ask for your thoughts on Quentin's post-Morrison arc?
I think he’s become—at least superficially—a radically different character, but I also 100% support that choice. Here’s why:
Dude’s a teenager. Developmentally, he’s at an age where his identity is going to be in massive flux no matter what—a lot of adolescence is about literally trying on people you might want to be, and committing headfirst to each permutation. In Morrison’s run, Quire starts out as someone who carefully avoided questioning who he was—or much of anything, really—and then, when something pulled a block out of that tower, it sent everything he’d though of as defining him crashing down. His response was to explode—to blindly push back as hard as he could.
So, in Wolverine &, yes, he’s pretty different, but he’s different in a way that makes sense in a logical arc. He’s made a series of grand, dramatic gestures, but ones that were pretty much doomed to failure from the start. He reacted like anyone does when the borders of their world disappear: threw himself outward, hard, to try to find the new ones. If there’s one thing that’s come up again and again and again about Quire—originally, and in the new version—it’s that dude desperately craves security. He’s attached to the bombastic enfant-terrible persona, but he’s happiest in situations like the Jean Grey school, where he can push back as hard as he wants and be reasonably confident that he’s not going to seriously hurt anyone.
In those respects, for what it’s worth, one of the reasons I buy QQ’s character arc from Morrison to Aaron is that—at least superficially—it reminds me a lot of myself as a teenager.
Also, bear in mind: No one really knows how the fuck Quire’s powers work, or what their limits are. He literally stopped existing in the material universe for a while. He’s gonna grow up to be host to a functionally omnipotent cosmic force.
That is some crazy shit to deal with when you are still figuring out how to be a person.
TL;DR - Quentin Quire’s characterization follows a pretty believable arc, because adolescent psychology.
I agree with all of this. Also, the part about him growing up to be a cosmic force makes me want to see a story set in the future in which Quentin Quire and Franklin Richards are frenemies bitchily competing for who gets to be God.
I believe that the Age of Apocalypse changed was explained as something to do with the M'Krann Crystal? M-maybe?
Sounds likely. I admit, I still haven’t caught up with a lot of the Marvel books that came out during my “All I read are Starman, Madman, and Vertigo titles” phase.
How DOES time travel work in the Marvel Universe?
Basically, every time someone time travels, an alternate universe is created. I mean, according to What If, an alternate universe is created every time anyone does anything, but the effects are more pronounced when time travel is involved.
So, under this model of time travel, you can’t change your present by changing your past. Reed Richards explained it in Marvel Two-In-One #50, which is the first time it was presented this way, as far as I know.
It does make some previous stories make more sense, though. For example, it’s easier to believe that when Doctor Doom sent Reed, Ben, and Johnny back in time it created an alternate reality in which the Thing was Blackbeard, as opposed to believing that the Thing was always Blackbeard.
So this means that when Vance Astro from the future changes his younger self’s destiny, it leads to two vastly different characters who can coexist: a millennium-old space traveler who lives in the 30th Century, and a 20-something superhero who lives in the 21st.
Similarly, when Rachel Summers comes back from the “Days of Future Past” future, it doesn’t affect her existence when that future is obviated by the X-Men’s actions in the present.
Learning she’s not going to be born is understandably upsetting, but it doesn’t cause her to fade away like Marty McFly during his guitar solo. Then of course, the same basic thing happens four or five more times: Cable, Bishop, those future X-Men who stuck around after “Battle of the Atom.” You come back from the future, you keep your timeline from happening, and then you just go on living in the present.
These same basic rules also allow for the tangled mess that is Kang the Conqueror (aka Immortus, aka Rama Tut, aka Iron Lad). When you time travel as much as that guy, it’s inevitable that there will be a lot of different versions of you running around bumping into each other.
Of course, there have been a lot of Marvel time travel stories by a lot of writers since Marvel Two-In-One #50, and naturally not all of them subscribe to these rules. “Age of Apocalypse” is one of the biggest exceptions, since it does the more traditional “someone changed the past, and now the present is different” science fiction plot. Since that story ended, though, that timeline has been treated as just another part of the multiverse.
So this brings us to All-New X-Men. As I’ve said before, the common Marvel time travel theory is what will allow the book to go on indefinitely, with the younger X-Men finding places to coexist with their modern day counterparts. However, during “Battle of the Atom,” things go the other way:
So that’s disappointing. But in that same story, the spacetime continuum somehow won’t allow the young X-Men to be sent back to the past. So it’s clear that something else is going on. And whatever it is, I guarantee it will allow them to stay in the present for as long as Bendis and other writers can come up with stories to tell about them (and probably long after that). Also, I still kind of think that young Iceman is doomed.
So that’s time travel in the Marvel Universe. It’s a good system when the writers get it, because it allows for maximum storytelling potential and minimal fretting about the butterfly effect. But it can also be confusing as hell.
Page 1 of 59