Ultimate X-Men #51 (SPOILERS!!!)

Hey, I FINALLY got my issue, guys! I know this is a little late, however, bare with me... I think I have some good questions that will allow us to chat it up until the next issue comes out (Speaking of which, when DOES it come out?)

1.) The Fenris Twins said that they were assembling a team of these crafty mutants... Will there be more than Rogue and Gambit? Could be an interesting way to bring back all of the things that were talked about in Gambit's past...

2.) A few interesting things popped into my head as I read the panels of Gambit's past. The Callisto looking character is saying, "Yes, I like you, Remy. You are my heart... You are my soul..." I took a little French. :). What do you think of this? Also, is that Sinister in the last flashback? Is he going to harm Callisto?

3.) Why do the Fenris Twins have an army of their own if they are a commercial marketting team? That doesn't make sense to me...
 
Goodwill said:
Hey, I FINALLY got my issue, guys! I know this is a little late, however, bare with me... I think I have some good questions that will allow us to chat it up until the next issue comes out (Speaking of which, when DOES it come out?)

1.) The Fenris Twins said that they were assembling a team of these crafty mutants... Will there be more than Rogue and Gambit? Could be an interesting way to bring back all of the things that were talked about in Gambit's past...

2.) A few interesting things popped into my head as I read the panels of Gambit's past. The Callisto looking character is saying, "Yes, I like you, Remy. You are my heart... You are my soul..." I took a little French. :). What do you think of this? Also, is that Sinister in the last flashback? Is he going to harm Callisto?

3.) Why do the Fenris Twins have an army of their own if they are a commercial marketting team? That doesn't make sense to me...
Click to expand...
1. Maybe Ultimate Marauders- it would be good to see a 616 villain team who aren't villains or are not JUST evil. But the impression i got was that the "assembling" has just started and Rogue and Gambit are it so far

2. I didn't think it was Sinister but agree about Callisto. I just assumed that it would be the abusive father/stepfather seen in the Gambit arc earlier. I don't think it would work with Ultimate Sinister (I liked the Ultimization of the character because it was both different (stuttering, un-confident) but similar (still cool evil). He's a favourite villain and the Ultimization was good but i don't think the Ultimate Character should be passed of a an illlegal genetic experimenter. Yes he was making stuff for Oscorp but leave it at that

3. The army is to stop them from going too evil. You never know with marketers
 
Ok GW, let me help you out here buddy.

1.) Yes, they're could me more than just Rogue and Gambit. And it would be cool to see more.

2.) Like Caduceus said, dont hink its Callisto. There could be that chance, but until she's named, well you know.

The girl could just be someone he dated or had a little "fun" with her.

3.) The Fenris Twins are making they're own "army" of mutants because like they said, they want their company to stay way above the others they're competing with. So they use mutants to stop them anyway possible (but not including killing them- at least I think). So like for Rogue, she can steal plans and what not from them from her touch. Gambit, well, you know how good of a thief this guy can be.

Hope that helps GW.
 
1.) The Maruaders are an option, yes, and I recall them being tied to Gambit in the 616 universe, so that could definitely work. I would imagine the next two issues will be more about Gambit's past and the Fenris Twin's motives.
2.) You are right, Ice, but that wasn't what I was trying to say. I said that it was a Callisto looking character... Read the post again. Also, read Cad's he said that he thought it might be Callisto but didn't think the scientist was Sinister, although I still, to this post, disagree. You have to remember that with a different artist, the characters will look slightly similar.

Cad, did you ever think that the stuttering came from the voices in his head? Like that testing tripped up his head it could've done the same for Sinister's speech. We already know that Sinister has connections to Sinister, we just don't know how. This could be the ticket.

3.) I guess I can understand the army. They need a security team that can combat the mutants that they drag in. Cool.
 
GW i think you mean "we already know that Gambit has a connection to Sinister" If it is not explained now I will not be happy. If it is not explained now and Gambit joins up with the X-men I will be apopleptic.

We'll just have to wait and see about if it is Sinister though.
 
Well, what other person would he know that dresses in a lab coat? Like Rogue said, this man is a backwater pervert, he's not hanging around Harvard U with college Professors. That's nonsense.

You know what? You bring up a good point, there. Gaining these memories may just be an indication that he will be joining the team... Like, when he's there, it would show there is room to explain them all in good time. Shame that Vaughan won't be around to share with us HIS ideas for the character's past, but we'll see.
 
Not having a Vaughn written Gambit backstory is a very very very bad thing. A very bad thing
 
Caduceus said:
GW i think you mean "we already know that Gambit has a connection to Sinister"
Click to expand...

I hope that's not what he meant, because that's not even close to true...
 
It was mentioned during Austen's UXM Gambit story that he had had previous dealings of some sort with Nathaniel Essex, so unless Vaughan hasn't picked up on this, we're gonna have ourselves another wonderful Ultimate continuity error. This isn't such an important issue, though, and most things written by Chuck Austen should be ignored, so...
 
It was mentioned during Austen's UXM Gambit story that he had had previous dealings of some sort with Nathaniel Essex
Click to expand...

This goes back to what I say about reading into things - Bludd you might be right but "Nathaniel Essex" is not necessarily Sinister, we just tend to assume so since that's who he is in 616. But I get what you're saing, and would agree that this is very likely a nice continuity error. Gambit has no established relationship or connection with Sinister.
 
Oh yeah, I know that this is Ultimate Sinister and that he's not the same character as in 616, but Austen obviously placed that line about Gambit's past with Essex with intent that Essex was indeed or was going to be Sinister. The fact that Vaughan never mentioned Sinister's real name in the arc may well have been deliberate so that he didn't have to work off of Austen's set up. But it bugs me that it's that simple for a writer to just say "But this is the Ultimate version". I really enjoyed The Tempest, but i don't consider Vaughan's Sinister as what an ultimization is meant to be. Ultimate characters are meant to be fresh takes and a modern update to the characters, whilst keeping them the same as we know them at the core. Except for his link to Apocalypse, this guy was not Sinister. And now in the Ultimate Universe, we have both Nathaniel Essex and Mister Sinister as different characters who have both been mentioned in the pages of UXM. I mean, Bendis' ultimization of charcters such as The Green Goblin, Carnage and Dazzler are staying true to what the Ultimate U was created for, but did Vaughan have an idea to write about a crazy mutant serial killer and then decide "I'll make this guy Mister Sinister", or did he say "I think I'll ultimize Mister Sinister" and then write him as a serial killer? Vaughan's a great writer, but right now I think he's trying to Ultimize as many characters as possible instead of ultimizing the characters that make sense for his story.
 
Nathaniel Essex is Sinister. Read the Tempest when Storm and Wolverine are in the Tattoo parlour. The guy refers to him as Essex and, if memory serves (which it may not) Fury outlines his history in the final issue and refers to him as Nathaniel Essex
 
My point is that - and I'm not saying this is the case or that I like it - without something definite connecting the "two" Nathaniel Essex's, they could be totally different. Just like the 2 Eddie Brocks in USM. Hokey? Maybe, but you have to assume that if it isn't explained.
 
Well, I really can't imagine it being a different person. Essex was in New Orleans and so was Gambit at one point... Sinister did some "behind the curtain" business which may have involved crime, which may have involved Gambit. We just don't know, really. My bets are on Sinister Essex and the Essex related to Gambit are one in the same.
 
I really really can't see them having TWO Nathaniel Essex's. Eddie Brock in USM was a tiny appearance (the reporter) and they seemed to me as an aborted backstory they just ignored or passed off as a common name. Nathaniel Essex's connection with Gambit was established in his early appearance and then having another Nathaniel Essex without the connection is too farfetched. Even for marvel
 
Caduceus said:
Eddie Brock in USM was a tiny appearance (the reporter) and they seemed to me as an aborted backstory they just ignored or passed off as a common name.
Click to expand...

Right. That's how I'm taking the Gambit "connection" until is said otherwise.
 
You don't even think that they are related? Like, you can take it however you'd like, I can accept that, but what are you thinking now? There's no Gambit/ Sinister connection?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top