I have no idea how time works in the Marvel Universe.

But it's not a stretch to assume that -- say -- six years have passed since Kitty's first appearance several decades ago during the Claremont/Byrne run. She was 13 then; she could be 19 now. Boom, done, no statutory rape problems for Colossus.

About half your complaints about ASTONISHING X-MEN involve the art, yet you put all of the blame on Whedon.

Of course, I don't actually think you believe Whedon drew those books. It's just a way of mocking your fetish for mindlessly crapping over things.

Mike

The art was by John Cassaday, who is quite popular. He's most associated with PLANETARY.

But I'll always remember him best as the guy who traced Byrne's cover of X-Men #141 and sold it to Wizard.

Yeah, me too. And one of the things Feige did right as producer of the series is pick an appropriate person to write and direct the pay-off for all that build-up. And he sure wasn’t going to go with Frank Miller.

Allen's consistently expressed his dislike of Whedon's work, which is fine in itself. But it does seem to be getting to 'chip on his shoulder' levels.

"Rockwell's Justin Hammer and Rourke's Whiplash were individually better than Hiddleston's Loki"

Rockwell's character was a big part of the problem with IM2.

In case anyone cares, THE AVENGERS made just over $402 million in its first two weeks of U.S. release. That's the most successful 1st two weeks in movie history and the film is now a mortal lock to make at least $500 million domestically and almost certain to wind up at least #3 all time for domestic box office.

Mike

The movie didn't leave enough of an impression on me to argue the point without watching it again. I will say that the idea of Stark being opposed by two men who are both twisted mirror images of him seemed solid, but the execution was lacking.

Mike

And Americans have never spent a lot of money on useless, forgettable products.