XPost: alt.startrek, alt.tv.star-trek, alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise   
   From: sky.diver@moonbase.alpha   
      
   In article , J R Laredo   
    wrote:   
      
   > >> Good, shows that someone at Paramount was thinking.  The characters are   
   > >> not   
   > >> the same age, and wouldn't have been all at the Academy at the same time.   
   > >> It would have been as stupid as the recent decision with the X-Men   
   > >> reimagined cartoon which made all the mutants, save Xavier, Magneto, and   
   > >> Logan, about the same age, give or take 5 years.   
   > >   
   > > That might be a little more correct. The original X-Men (Cyclops,   
   > > Beast, Iceman, Angel and Marvel Girl) were roughly the same age. I'm   
   > > not thrilled with the cradle-robbing Jean Grey in the movies. Is there   
   > > any reason they couldn't have found a young girl to play Jean? Or a   
   > > 30-something guy to play Scott? That young pup they did hire has been   
   > > pretty colorless as Cyclops. I don't remember anything about him. Then   
   > > again, I don't remember much about either movie. Lots of sound and   
   > > fury, signifying little.   
   >   
   > I was talking about the cartoon, X-Men Evolution.  Just about every mutant   
   > in the world was between the ages of 13 and 18, not just the members of the   
   > X-Men.   
      
   I understand what you're saying, just pointing out that once upon a   
   time, all of the X-Men were the same age. If they had a good   
   explanation for all mutants being the same age, for instance some   
   worldwide mutagenic event that affected only fetuses, I don't think I'd   
   mind all that much.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)