Marvel announces X-Men plans; Uncanny is back

XMEN_REGENESIS.jpg
NOTE: This story originally had the art teams switched. It has been corrected.

It turns out there will soon be a comic book called UNCANNY X-MEN for sale after all! It’s coming back in October with a new #1 as part of an X-Men eventish thing called “X-men Regenesis” which will find the mutants splitting into two teams (yes kinda like Blue and Gold back in the day.) One will appear in UNCANNY X-MEN, to be written again by Kieron Gillen with art by Carlos Pacheco & Greg Landand another called WOLVERINE & THE X-MEN, also debuting in October, to be written by Jason Aaron, with art by Chris Bacahlo.

“The best thing about this split is that the two books hit two very different chords. One is hardcore super hero action and the other is something else entirely that I can’t go too deep into without spoiling `Schism,’” Lowe said. “The best way I can describe it is a return to a structure that made the X-Men what it was.”


It doesn’t get more X-menny than Wolverine vs Cyclops!

In this move, the hand of Axel Alonso is much noted:

Ultimately, when “Schism” concludes, Alonso said that the survivors β€” whomever they may be β€” “will stare at each other across a philosophical chasm the size of the Grand Canyon. This is a war for the heart of the X-Men.”

Comments

  1. So how many X-team books are there going to be now? Is “Wolverine & The X-Men” replacing “X-Men,” and if not, what’s the point of the latter? What about “Uncanny X-Force”…would Wolverine need to lead both a covert and non-covert team? That’d make no sense.

    Also, I think it’s fairly safe to say that an Uncanny X-Men #1 will outsell any of DCnU’s #2s, right?

  2. Caged Wisdom says:

    I don’t understand why Wolverine needs a belt with pouches – he’s not exactly a gadgets kind of guy. Maybe it’s filled with dozens of packs of cigarettes?

  3. Maybe it’s filled with dozens of packs of cigarettes?

    I’m betting on condoms and mini bottles of Jack.

  4. Kate Willaert says:

    Because their outfits don’t have pockets, silly. I’m more curious what Cyclops does without a belt with pouches.

    Movie Captain America isn’t a gadgets guy either, and look at all his straps and pouches.

  5. DanielT says:

    So X-Men is doing Civil War, 5 years after?

    Brilliant!

  6. It was a great opportunity to dump Greg Land, and they didn’t take it. I can’t imagine the writers are anymore happy with his story-killing random orgasm faces at inappropriate moments than the readers are.

  7. Back in 1990, Chris Claremont was pushed aside as writer on the X-men for the group of artists who left a year later to found Image. I noted that in 9 issues of Uncanny X-Men and X-Men and published in the 3 months surrounding Jim Lee’s X-Men #1, the X-men fought the X-men 5 times. So, yeah, this isn’t really so much new.

  8. Caged Wisdom says:

    But comics Cap has had pouches on his belt for ages – plus he carries a gun so he at least needs extra ammo. And military forces have a long history of carrying lots of gear with them.

    Wolverine doesn’t need any of these things – he is his own first aid kid, clue gatherer and weapon. Besides the aforementioned cigs, condoms and booze I can’t imagine why he would even need pockets.

    And yes, I know how completely ridiculous this line of argument is. :) Something about Bacahlo’s style when he’s doing superheroes just rubs me the wrong way.

  9. Stephen says:

    >So X-Men is doing Civil War, 5 years after?

    Yup, even down to nearly identical taglines:

    Civil War: “Whose side are you on?”

    Schism: “Who will you follow?”

  10. Naveed says:

    Someone tell me how Wolverine is staring his own series, leading the X-Men and being a New Avenger at the same time? Marvel is stretching it a little, same with Spider-Man. They claim to have 5,000 characters yet you see 20 of them in every monthly comic. Would have been nice to see someone else lead the new X-Men books than the been-there-done-that rivalry between Cyclops and Logan.

  11. Synsidar says:

    Have the mutants ever been written as being allergic to each other?

    That would be fairly easy to do. Have them evolve slightly, in two different directions, and have them emit signals (chemical or radiation) to attract friends and repel enemies. If the mutations were tied to brain functions, being in the presence of a “B” mutant instead of an “A” mutant could drive each other insane. If there’s going to be a split, why not make it real?

    SRS

  12. UGH. Well, the made my decision on whether or not I was gonna buy Uncanny X-Men #1 or not. by Kieron Gillen with art by Chris Bachalo. BIG pass on Chris Bachalo.

  13. thequestion says:

    and both will certainly be 3.99…mercy Marvel! no mas!

  14. This just reeks. What’s the point of a new number 1 here? And Uncanny X-Force is so entertaining. If this junk replaces that I’m going to be angry

  15. Kate Willaert says:

    X-Books: Cancel one, and two shall take its place.

  16. Snikt Snakt says:

    I’m more surprised hearing that people STILL read Uncanny X-Men…!

  17. Deaf65 says:

    I was considering coming back to at least one X-book after an exile for a while but after reading this article, I am not so sure… Possibly opt for Ultimate X-Men instead. Decisions, Decisions!!!

  18. “I was considering coming back to at least one X-book after an exile ”

    This comment (and I see similar ones all the time) confuses me. How can anyone follow a single X-Men title, or Avenger title, or Green Lantern title? I’m not being critical; I’m honestly curious. Isn’t that like reading chapters 1, 4, 8, 10, and 16 of a book?

  19. For the most part the X-Men titles are relatively self contained, at least in the sense that storylines tend to stick to a single title. It helps that nothing of any real significance happens in X-Men or Astonishing X-Men, which are basically just schedule-fillers, and that the stories in Legacy tend only to have a major effect on its own regular cast. You’d miss a lot by skipping Uncanny, but even then you’d probably get by.

  20. Deaf65 says:

    @tbob Because I have always found X-Men and mutants in general to be fascinating but the glut and quality of those books have turned me away too often.

  21. More info to tbe had at MARVEL’s Comic-Con booth?

    [Surprise, surprise--- MARVEL will be at SDCC afterall! DESPITE the NY TIMES and additional 'Internet Echo Chamber' prognostications here and elsewhere reporting otherwise...]

  22. (Yeah, that’s me ‘ed’ above. I couldn’t post under my old name/eddress, for some reason?)

  23. No one said Marvel COMICS would not have a booth.

    The idea was that MARVEL STUDIOS was still thinking about whether to have a presentation or not.

  24. Synsidar says:

    How can anyone follow a single X-Men title, or Avenger title, or Green Lantern title?

    That has to do with why one buys the title. Does he buy it to read, as one would read a prose story, for the combination of text and artwork, or just to stay in touch with what certain characters are doing? I don’t buy UXM to read for the content; I buy it to stay aware of what’s going on in the X-verse and to spot mistakes. The one title I buy for its entertainment value is SAVAGE DRAGON.

    SRS

  25. ['ed' here again; still can't post under my regular eddress...]

    Heidi—

    Just how is MARVEL Studios exactly differentiated from MARVEL COMICS in your mind, regarding to their presence on the SDCC Exhibit Floor?

    Last year, the MARVEL booth I saw had that “Odin’s Throne” setpiece from the upcoming THOR Film (which was a PARAMOUNT STUDIOS co-production), along with the “Destroyer”, “Infinity Gauntlet”, and Thor/Odin/Loki helmet props from the movie… while tables nearby held Writer and Artist signings from the Comics side of the ‘brand’.
    From what I saw, there was no distinction from the Studios and COMICS aspects: they were just “MARVEL”, one and same. (Indeed, the PARAMOUNT booth elsewhere on the Floor had no THOR presence.)

    Forgive me if I conflated your inference that it’s only MARVEL Studios that won’t be at SDCC this year— and not MARVEL COMICS. Obviously you had meant that ‘No Hall H Presentation’ DID NOT EQUAL ‘No SDCC Presence’; I stand corrected.

    (Am curious though, of the lack of reportage in your article and the NYT one on another possible reason on why DISNEY Studios skipping out on Hall H this year: the upcoming D23 EXPO http://d23.disney.go.com/expo/ happening in August… just a month after Comic-Con? Failure of TRON and “Flynn’s Arcade” SDCC promotions or layoffs and budgetary cutbacks COULD explain the diminished DISNEY SDCC presence; or maybe DISNEY just decided to blow their promotions budget on their own Convention, rather than at San Diego? It’s what LUCASFILM did last year when they too had a ‘diminished SDCC presence’— they had their own REED Pop Group-managed STAR WARS CELEBRATION 3 weeks after Comic-Con to go to. Must’ve been just a deadline oversight.)

Speak Your Mind

*