Hickman's Three-Peat: Defining Runs on Fantastic Four/Avengers/X-Men

[Revolutionary_Jack]

HOX/POX is over and its 12 issues is an instant classic and a pantheon-level X-Men story. That made me realize that Hickman is set up to do what no writer in Marvel history has done. Not since Stan Lee and even Lee is arguable. He is going to be the first writer in Marvel history to defining runs on all three of Marvel's biggest teams : Fantastic Four / The Avengers / X-Men .

I mentally went over a list of other writers who might come close and other examples. I request the help of fellow CBR posters to help me/correct me/qualify me on this.

So looking at major writers who have done defining works on multiple teams and characters:

Lee-Kirby
1) Fantastic Four -- Natch.
2) The Avengers -- The early issues until Kirby left and then Lee handed over to Roy Thomas. Important for sure, and key moments like Loki instigating the Avengers' formation, and Cap being found in a block of ice and becoming the leader were done then. So it's too short for a run but it's defining.
3) The X-Men -- Lee-Kirby's X-Men is revised now and again for nostalgia reasons and it introduced many key elements and so on. Some can argue that it's defining while others will disagree. I don't think it's defining but I'll leave that to others to judge.

After that, though, it's debatable if we've had writers do defining runs on one or both titles, leave alone all three.

-- Roy Thomas worked with Dave Cockrum on X-Men and on the Avengers with other artists. Of the two, I think his Avengers run is more defining and long-lasting. But Claremont has said his run on X-Men was underrated. Thomas wanted to work on Fantastic Four but I don't think he ever got a long run on the title and even if he did, it was part of the long slump in the title between Lee-Kirby and John Byrne, which brings me to...
-- John Byrne was an artist on the X-Men, and a defining artist at that. He was also a close collaborator and plotter with Claremont. It's well known that Byrne resented and disliked the direction Claremont was taking the X-Men and as he said in a recent interview, "I didn't like what Chris was doing, but it was popular and for most readers that was becoming the X-Men. So if I didn't like what Chris was doing, it meant I didn't like the X-Men". Byrne then went on to do the second major run on Fantastic Four as both writer/artist. So it's ambiguous with him if he qualifies on two titles since he served different roles in both. Byrne later worked on the Avengers later but I don't know if his run there was great. Chris Claremont later worked on the Fantastic Four in the '90s and that wasn't considered especially memorable.
-- Roger Stern is interesting. He served as line-editor of X-Men during the Claremont/Byrne run. He then became writer of a defining run on the Avengers (arguably the greatest), and followed that with a brief stint on Fantastic Four which was most notable for the issues in which Stern brought Jean Grey back to life from the cocoon in Jamaica Bay. So it's all tangled there with him. But I think Stern got 1 out of 3.
-- Mark Millar for better and worse wrote a defining Avengers story (CIVIL WAR) and he had a run on Fantastic Four which I think had some good issues. I don't think he wrote a major X-Men story however.
-- Brian Michael Bendis wrote a defining Avengers run (New Avengers), and he wrote a story (HOUSE OF M) that was significant in X-Men publ. history even if it wasn't especially good or influential. But he didn't do much with Fantastic Four.

So that leaves Hickman, who has done a defining run on Fantastic Four (from Dark Reign:Fantastic Four onwards), a defining run on the Avengers, which ended with a landmark crossover (Secret Wars 2015) that was a finale for both of those runs. Now he's doing X-Men, and starting with HOX/POX which is one of the greatest X-Men stories ever. So Hickman wins.

[Reviresco]

Since Lee and Kirby actually created those teams, I doubt anyone is knocking them off the pedestal for their defining runs.

[Hybrid]

Since Lee and Kirby actually created those teams, I doubt anyone is knocking them off the pedestal for their defining runs.

Thing is, sometimes a work that gets created by one person is made better by someone else. X-Men is the epitome of that.

[Frontier]

I dunno about "defining" when it comes to Avengers. I think the most defining thing he did was his mega-arc that ended up dovetailing back into a Fantastic Four story, the Avengers themselves were actually superfluous to it.

I guess he did establish the idea of an expansive Avengers roster but that hasn't really caught on in other ways yet.

[Captain M]

Stern's run is the greatest Avengers run imo, followed by Busiek. I need to read Byrne's run still

Nothing Hickman did on Avengers was defining really, none of it matters now. It told a cool story but that's it. It'll be the case for his X-Men work in a few years too. His work is always too grand to not get completely ignored by the creators that come after

[Marvell2100]

Stern's run is the greatest Avengers run imo, followed by Busiek. I need to read Byrne's run still

Nothing Hickman did on Avengers was defining really, none of it matters now. It told a cool story but that's it. It'll be the case for his X-Men work in a few years too. His work is always too grand to not get completely ignored by the creators that come after

Shooter, Busiek and Stern.

[gurkle]

While I disliked Hickman's Avengers (I think his love for the X-Men shows in what he's writing now; I don't think he cared about the Avengers), I agree that it's an impressive feat.

Byrne is probably the closest to the three-peat because his run writing the two Avengers books was quite significant to the franchise's history: what he did with the Vision and the Scarlet Witch is still being felt today, and he created the Great Lakes Avengers, a concept that is still around today. His Avengers run was controversial and often hated, but it was commercially successful and significant - it was a huge influence on Bendis, for example. And then he co-plotted the definitive run of X-Men and wrote one of the definitive runs of FF.

Also Millar wrote the first run of Ultimate X-Men, so he does have some significance there, and Ultimates is a very important Avengers run even if they decided not to call it Ultimate Avengers.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

While I disliked Hickman's Avengers (I think his love for the X-Men shows in what he's writing now; I don't think he cared about the Avengers), I agree that it's an impressive feat.

Hickman said that when he started writing FF and Avengers he wasn't too familiar with both titles, and that X-Men was always his favorite and the one he followed as a fan.

Byrne is probably the closest to the three-peat because his run writing the two Avengers books was quite significant to the franchise's history: what he did with the Vision and the Scarlet Witch is still being felt today, and he created the Great Lakes Avengers, a concept that is still around today. His Avengers run was controversial and often hated, but it was commercially successful and significant - it was a huge influence on Bendis, for example. And then he co-plotted the definitive run of X-Men and wrote one of the definitive runs of FF.

I guess it would be Lee-Kirby followed by Byrne and then Hickman.

Also Millar wrote the first run of Ultimate X-Men, so he does have some significance there, and Ultimates is a very important Avengers run even if they decided not to call it Ultimate Avengers.

Not in 616 though. And Ultimate X-Men was always the least influential of the Ultimate titles and books. Ultimate X-Men didn't catch as much attention or influence as for instance Grant Morrison's New X-Men and Whedon's Astonishing that was published in 616 at the same time.

[Hybrid]

That, and Hickman's Avengers run was basically a sequel to his Fantastic Four run, rather than a standalone Avengers story. It's great for sure, it's just hard to gauge it on the merit of being an Avengers run.

[Ying Ko]

Hickman's FF run was great, certainly up there with Lee/Kirby and Byrne. His X-Men is only beginning now but seems to be building towards greatness as well.

His Avengers however I found to be very average. Didn't even bother to finish it at the time.

[CaptCleghorn]

Hickman's FF run was great, certainly up there with Lee/Kirby and Byrne. His X-Men is only beginning now but seems to be building towards greatness as well.

His Avengers however I found to be very average. Didn't even bother to finish it at the time.

I agree on X'Men. Hickman's X-Men run has only set itself up with 12 issues of minis. The setup has been both brilliant and revolutionary and fully capable of being a seminal (Claremont's favorite word) part of the X-Men's journey.

I disagree on Avengers being average, but I will agree with a previous poster that it was basically a lead-in to an FF oriented Secret Wars.

As for Hickman's FF, I think common consensus is that it's a classic run in the series' top three.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

That, and Hickman's Avengers run was basically a sequel to his Fantastic Four run, rather than a standalone Avengers story. It's great for sure, it's just hard to gauge it on the merit of being an Avengers run.

Hickman's New Avengers run built on themes that Bendis had laid down, namely the Illuminati and so on. Characters like Namor, Black Panther, Doctor Strange were figures in Illuminati and also major players and movers in Hickman's Avengers run.

So I don't think it's entirely fair to say that Hickman's run isn't connected to the Avengers at all. It builds off of Bendis' work and simply takes that to the next level. Stuff like Avengers World with the Builders and Ex Nihilo as well as Starbrand builds on new universe and other stuff.

And let's not forget that Hickman invented and created the Black Order who made their big screen debut in Infinity War and Endgame.

So yeah it's related to his run on Fantastic Four but it's also an Avengers story. Both can be true.

And Time Runs Out ends with Iron Man and Cap beating the s--t each other. Doesn't get more Avengers than that.

[Hybrid]

Yeah, I may have overstated that. I meant more in picking up on what he wrote in Fantastic Four, rather than writing the Avengers as standalone.

[your_name_here]

I always feel sorry for the creative time that follows Hickman, how do you follow his huge ideas?
Usually it’s by taking a step back and being more nostalgic, but I imagine it’s very hard to follow a run of his.