After today's announcement from elsewhere in the Marvel multiverse, I'd sooner hope he'd portray this timeline's version of a certain other character:
Marvel Animation’s X-Men ‘97 Discussion Thread.
- Thread starter Wingcommanderdarkwolf01
- Start date
After today's announcement from elsewhere in the Marvel multiverse, I'd sooner hope he'd portray this timeline's version of a certain other character:
For me it was one of those "you can't go back" things. I don't think they did anything wrong but I just found myself uninterested. I kind of wonder if they'll ever be able to get past "1997" with the X-Men. I'd be more interested in something that was an introduction to the newer comic concepts. Again, I don't think it's bad, and it seems to have successfully delivered what it promised but I don't think I'm the audience for this one.
What an amazing couple of episodes. Taking the old X-Men cartoon and giving it an upgrade in almost every way, including much better action and more solid writing. I hope this ends up getting more then just one season, its great. I also love how its keeping with the era of the original cartoon, no modern day X-Men stuff just to be more "modern". The best part of the old show was how it adapted actual X-Men storylines and this return seems to be doing that, but also adjusting things to fit its particular universe. I can't wait to see where they go next.
That's the cool thing about voice acting -- it's much less time-consuming than on-camera acting, so a single actor can do multiple roles at the same time and you don't have to choose.
Whereas I was impressed by how successfully they did go back. I mean, I was expecting something modernized with the kind of cel-shaded 3D they use in What If...? Instead, we get something that authentically captures the original show's design style and the general feel of 1990s TV animation, but done with much better quality than before.
I walk up and have my cereal while I launch D+ and watch a bit of “X-men 97” before I head out the door.
It was like I was 10 again waiting to go to school
It was like I was 10 again waiting to go to school
Even though I was a diehard X-Men comics fans during the early 1990s to the late 2010s, I wasn't all that into TAS because I wa rarely home to see it during its original broadcast run and quickly fell behind and could never catch up. So I approached X-Men '97 as a jumping on point, which it did very well--continuing the previous narrative while reintroducing the characters in almost passing dialogue. I was a bit concerned that I had to see all of the original show to get the gist of things, but that wasn't necessary. I really enjoyed the first two episodes. I'm definitely going to stick with the show this time around.
On a side note, did anyone else get a Liz Cheney vibe from Valerie Cooper, at least in her appearance?
On a side note, did anyone else get a Liz Cheney vibe from Valerie Cooper, at least in her appearance?
She sounded like a 95 year old
Well, yeah, the entire voice cast of the original animated series was Canadian. That's why it had so many actors in common with Vancouver- or Toronto-made live action shows, like Cedric Smith, David Hemblen, Catherine Disher, Chris Potter, and Philip Akin. Zann showed up in her share of live-action Canadian shows too.
It's funny, David Hemblen/Magneto played Lord Dread in Captain Power as well, there HE was the one leading the robots in the war against organics.
I have a few comments.
1) When a Sentinel attacks their aircraft in episode #1 and the team falls out towards the desert floor, I was reminded of the beginning of X-Men #95 [https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/X-Men_Vol_1_95]. In that story, Cyclops was saved from impact by Banshee at the last moment. Here, Cyclops was able to use his force beam to save himself. That's an interesting difference. Given the similarity of the team falling out of their aircraft and of the fate of Cyclops being determined last in both versions, it felt to me like they were doing a redux on purpose.
2) It was also good to see Chris Claremont, Dave Cockrum, and Len Wein named in the credits (special thanks section, under the creators), and others as well, although I'm puzzled as to why Neal Adams gets no mention.
3) I could have sworn Scott called Jean "Jan" at one point. Oops.
4) While the goal is obviously a continuation, certain themes in the climax of episode #2 resonate particularly with current events. It shows also how the undercurrents of the X-Men are relevant not only in the 1960s (or the 1970s or 1990s) but also in the 2020s.
1) When a Sentinel attacks their aircraft in episode #1 and the team falls out towards the desert floor, I was reminded of the beginning of X-Men #95 [https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/X-Men_Vol_1_95]. In that story, Cyclops was saved from impact by Banshee at the last moment. Here, Cyclops was able to use his force beam to save himself. That's an interesting difference. Given the similarity of the team falling out of their aircraft and of the fate of Cyclops being determined last in both versions, it felt to me like they were doing a redux on purpose.
2) It was also good to see Chris Claremont, Dave Cockrum, and Len Wein named in the credits (special thanks section, under the creators), and others as well, although I'm puzzled as to why Neal Adams gets no mention.
3) I could have sworn Scott called Jean "Jan" at one point. Oops.
4) While the goal is obviously a continuation, certain themes in the climax of episode #2 resonate particularly with current events. It shows also how the undercurrents of the X-Men are relevant not only in the 1960s (or the 1970s or 1990s) but also in the 2020s.
Last edited:
There's the "Previously on..." video that was posted here on Monday, but the show itself does a reasonably good job recapping anything important, though it occasionally does so with some stilted "As you know, Bob" dialogue.
Really, this is a question you should never need to ask about any competently told story. Every work of fiction depends on events from the characters' past -- Star Trek: "The Cage" depends on the battle on Rigel VII, Casablanca depends on Rick & Ilsa's romantic history, etc. -- but the audience can follow the story because the storyteller makes sure they're told everything they need to know. Exposition is a basic part of storytelling, whether it's informing the audience of something new or reminding them of a past episode they may have missed or forgotten.
It's still a reasonable question to ask if that condition was indeed met or if a new viewer would find it felt lacking. I would hope the engineers of a new car have taken its ride into account but I still am going to take it out for a test drive before I buy.
Fair point, but I often see the tendency these days for people to assume that it's impossible as a rule to understand a story without having seen previous stories in the series, so I feel constrained to say that that's the exception, not the rule. Continuity is supposed to be a bonus, not a barrier to entry.
Anyway, it's kind of a moot point here, since Disney+ has the entire classic X-Men series as well as '97. So it's easy, if a bit time-consuming, to catch up if you want to.
Similar threads
- Poll
