Sugarcoated look at a book about the making of X-Men 97
Polygon wrote a sugary article about a new book telling how Marvel Animation produced X-Men 97 as a continuation, but no mention how PC it was compared to the original. Some of what they tell in the following is rather predictable:
Based on how the "revival" was actually developed, there's really not much to celebrate here, and less reason to buy a book. If it turns out the book's not transparent about any PC alterations made to how it was originally produced, then it's just another "tabloid" publication that doesn't really give serious insight to much of anything.
It’s been more than a year since Marvel Animation revived X-Men: The Animated Series in all of its splashy operatic 2D glory. X-Men ’97 was a triumph, not just in the Marvel canon but in an entire year of TV. As the producers and artists behind the series explain in the new book X-Men ’97: The Art and Making of the Animated Series, translating the ’90s Fox show for new and audience alike was a delicate process. To do it right, they needed legit fans — but also artists who would know when to make changes that would empower the storytelling. A rarity in the series revival business, the crew took a character-first approach to nostalgia.Yup, so much so that they even forcibly injected allusions to LGBT ideology, and watered down Rogue's character design in the process. I think even the story where Gambit was obliterated was also going pretty far. Nothing particularly "delicate" in terms of management there.
Ahead of the book’s July 1 release, Polygon has obtained an exclusive excerpt, along with some behind-the-scenes imagery from the making of the series. As we wait patiently for X-Men ’97 season 2 — not easy! — here’s author James Field’s deeper dive into what worked so well in season 1.
Art Style & Design
“I was lucky. I got a phone call from [VP of Marvel Animation] Dana Vasquez-Eberhardt asking if I wanted to do a pitch for an X-Men animated series,” began X-Men ’97’s Supervising Producer/Director Jake Castorena. “They gave me two weeks to come up with the pitch—I had COVID for about a week and a half of it, and then I did a storyboard pitch, and the rest was history. They liked my interpretation, what X-Men ’97 means to me, how it would become relevant—fresh but familiar in this day and age.”
The nineties were an important time for the X-Men, not only debuting the animated series but also notable for some of the characters’ most famous comic book stories and most memorable costumes. “When you look at the comics and you look historically at the X-Men, that late nineties period is one of the most iconic periods of the comics,” said Winderbaum. “It gives us unique parameters to play within that aren’t going to be too influenced by what’s come before in live action, and it won’t step on the toes of any plans in the future. It puts it in a fond time and place that is both visually incredible and nostalgic.”Oh, did they ever need fans alright. Specifically, those who couldn't keep their ultra-leftist politics out of the aforementioned sandbox. Why, even the part about "education" smells fishy. Sorry to say, but these "fans" they speak of are little more than modern leftist ideologues who couldn't give a damn about the original comics, and Beau deMayo's activities behind the scenes taint the production as it is.
Castorena would work in tandem with the Marvel Studios team to create a Venn diagram of sorts to ensure that they were bringing on the right artists to bring their vision of X-Men ’97 to life. “We needed people who are really good at their job and people who are fans of X-Men—those are the two biggest caveats that we needed for trying to get people on board the show,” he recalled. “First and foremost, we needed fans. The responsibility we have in making the show, telling it right, and doing the characters justice is not lost on our showrunner. It is not lost on Marvel. . . . The less education we have to do with people about the IP [allows us to] expand on the love they have for it and makes the overall process of playing in this sandbox more effective.”
Based on how the "revival" was actually developed, there's really not much to celebrate here, and less reason to buy a book. If it turns out the book's not transparent about any PC alterations made to how it was originally produced, then it's just another "tabloid" publication that doesn't really give serious insight to much of anything.
Labels: animation, dreadful artists, golden calf of death, golden calf of LGBT, history, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, moonbat artists, msm propaganda, women of marvel, X-Men
