This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"We didn't turn the tide of glorious history."
11943 members | you are not logged in | 24 April 2014












May 15 2006

X-Men Greats: Joss Whedon and John Cassaday. UGO.com explains why the Astonishing X-Men duo helped give the X-Verse "its heart and soul". Click on the pics to see the articles in full.

It's not often that there's an article which focuses solely on Joss' X-Men work so enjoy.

Is that picture of Joss? If so, he looks...nothing like himself. I'm confused.

Awesome article. I've really enjoyed Joss' run, even if I (like many) found aspects of the "Danger" arc wanting.
Hmm, this papier mache Joss is a bit less convincing than the one from the interview the other day ;). Anyone know who that actually is in the photo ?

Nice little blurb and all true IMO. Liking the current arc in AXM very much (and i'll like it even more when it goes monthly again, the waits between issues are killers).
Well the pic came from WireImage and they say it's Joss from the "InStyle & Warner Bros. 2006 Golden Globes After Party" so who I am to argue?
Hmm. I agree that that's probably not a picture of Joss. I don't care what WireImage says ;-).

Anyway, it seems kinda strange to put Joss up there as one of the X-Men greats with, currently, only 14 issues under his belt, but I'm not complaining. I've been enjoying the entire run (including the "Danger"-arc) immensely. Issue 14 especially was a great piece of work. Dark and psychological, it may be the best piece of writing I've seen in quite some time. I loved it to bits.

Only criticism I can think of is that, at times, it still feels like Joss is writing a tv show instead of a comic book. I have the feeling some of the jokes or reveals would work better in a tv format than in the current comic book format. But, really, that's just a nitpick. Astonishing X-Men is my favorite title at the moment, and I'm still crossing my fingers thst they'll keep Joss on for a further 12 issues after his second run has ended.
If that's a pix of Joss Whedon, I'll eat my Spamalot cap. The guy's a brunet(te), for Joss's sake!
Very nice summing up of X-creator history. Yeah, having Joss and John Cassaday in there is obviously because they're the curren 'hot' team (and I really miss a couple of other names such as Grant Morrison and John Byrne) but that's to be expected, I guess.

Also, some small mistakes, such as creditting Colossus's defection to the Acolytes to Claremont (it happened during Scott Lobdell's run), but pointing that out would just be nitpicking. ;-)
That's what I thought too, Telltale. I loved Scott Lobdell's run, and was kinda bummed he wasn't on the list.

But Joss, yay.
While Joss Whedon may have only written fourteen issues so far; Jack Kirby only did about twelve.
Whoever uploads the picture to WireImage (99% of the time the photographer) chooses the name of the person I believe - a lot of the time, they get it wrong.
NickSeng, I started reading the X-Men pretty much when Lobdell started (though I bought Claremont back issues simultaneously), so personally, I owe him thanks for bringing me in--but I believe that in general, his run is often dismissed for being too soap-operaish, and as "that period with all of the hundred-part crossovers." So I at least understand why they chose not to include him.

"While Joss Whedon may have only written fourteen issues so far; Jack Kirby only did about twelve."

Eleven, actually, but he kept doing layouts for six more. But, back to the point, no matter how much or how little they did, the people who actually created the book deserve special treatment.
I'm still amazed by the negative reaction to the second, "Dangerous" arc. I enjoyed it completely the first time around, and even more on re-reading the hard-cover.

Joss and Cassaday definately deserve to be in there with the greats.
I loved Morrison too much to not miss him. As did i Cockrum or Byrne (not to mention Byrne as one of the most important x-men artists is madness). And that picture looks more like Tarantino Than Joss.
And that picture looks more like Tarantino Than Joss.


i thought it looked like joss as played by tarantino, personally. :)
I've always wondered what would happen if Tarantino and Joss collaborated. (We know that "Fool for Love," as per Doug's commentary, has huge "Reservoir Dogs" influences, if nothing else.) If nothing else, the making-of interviews would be incredibly enthusiastic and adorkable.
'Adorkable'. That's my favorite new word today.
Eesh, I'm very confused about that photo of "Joss". Perhaps its his evil twin "Boss"? There's a light resemblance, enough to confuse the average person, but it's definitely not Joss.

Very nice article, though. And I hadn't really followed much of the news about Astonishing X-Men when it was released because I wanted to avoid spoilers, but now I'm wondering exactly what the critical reaction was from reviewers and fans.
Ha, that does it a bit like Tarantino. It certainly doesn't look like Joss.

I havn't read any of Joss's X-men run. Though I plan on buying the TPB's of them.
I thought Morrison's ideas were brilliant, but that there were so many of them thrown out so fast, it overshadowed the characters and the story, and didn't 'fit' with the generational feel of the book. I really like how Joss has cherry-picked a very few of them and brought them into tighter focus, seemlessly integrating them into the previous eras (Claremont/Cockrum/Byrne), along with his own Joss'y goodness.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home