Page 38 of 54 FirstFirst ... 2834353637383940414248 ... LastLast
Results 556 to 570 of 800
  1. #556
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charliehustle415 View Post



    But seriously some of the hyperbole is outta control.

    I can't even imagine the state of Marvel let alone The Avengers if Bendis didn't wrench it away from the old heads who only want nostalgia.
    Let's be honest Bendis' run didn't really add much to the franchise. In a way its a weird bizzaro period where almost every writer after going "How do I work with this now that Bendis is done?" He didn't really add much outside of use A-listers and the "fresh" idea of using Spiderman and Wolverine. And you see the problem with that when you can't do character development with them because of stories in their own book. The tower is gone. Jones and Cage are no longer part of the team. They're not underground heroes fighting the man. Really nothing of his run is still around outside the Wanda stuff and that was not an improvement considering almost every writer have has to try to fix the damage he did.

    It's not like his stories were better or larger. They're just more well known. Busiek run had Kang taking over the world through pure military might and Ultron killing a country. Bendis stories were much smaller. The most well known in a ten year run being HOM, secret invasion, the illuminati and Dark Avengers. They were event changers but how much was due to Bendis and how much was that due to editorial pushing his stuff to the front? Secret Invasion was a bit of a flop. More of a good idea than a good event.

    His biggest innovation to the title is simply stop using the team history and use the title to write whatever you want. Which in many ways was a precursor to the current run, Aaron's mindset. Retcon whatever you like. Write whatever you like. Characterization doesn't matter. History doesn't matter. Just the story you're writing right now.

  2. #557
    Welcome Back Spidey Kurolegacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Reviresco View Post
    Not decompressed??? This Prehistoric Avengers crap has been ongoing for YEARS. Ditto Mephisto. I have forgotten when we actually had the Avengers in this book, with the story focused on them, instead of all these self-indulgent mash ups and variants of his pet characters.

    This is supposed to be an Avengers book, not a Black Panther book. If he wants to write Black Panther, he can write BP's solo book.
    I wouldn’t really call that decompressed as much as an overarching narrative. The problem is though that he’s got so many of those going that everything feels disorganized. Like we seem to have the Mephisto plot getting ready to meet the Avengers Prime one but now we have that Squadron Supreme/Red Widow plot in the wind.

  3. #558
    The King Fears NO ONE! Triniking1234's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PlanetaryDevastation View Post
    Let's be honest Bendis' run didn't really add much to the franchise. In a way its a weird bizzaro period where almost every writer after going "How do I work with this now that Bendis is done?" He didn't really add much outside of use A-listers and the "fresh" idea of using Spiderman and Wolverine. And you see the problem with that when you can't do character development with them because of stories in their own book. The tower is gone. Jones and Cage are no longer part of the team. They're not underground heroes fighting the man. Really nothing of his run is still around outside the Wanda stuff and that was not an improvement considering almost every writer have has to try to fix the damage he did.

    It's not like his stories were better or larger. They're just more well known. Busiek run had Kang taking over the world through pure military might and Ultron killing a country. Bendis stories were much smaller. The most well known in a ten year run being HOM, secret invasion, the illuminati and Dark Avengers. They were event changers but how much was due to Bendis and how much was that due to editorial pushing his stuff to the front? Secret Invasion was a bit of a flop. More of a good idea than a good event.

    His biggest innovation to the title is simply stop using the team history and use the title to write whatever you want. Which in many ways was a precursor to the current run, Aaron's mindset. Retcon whatever you like. Write whatever you like. Characterization doesn't matter. History doesn't matter. Just the story you're writing right now.
    Man, you're way downplaying Bendis.

    You're saying Bendis never had a story arc to surpass Kang War One and Ultron Unlimited but then you mention House of M, which was the first Avengers/X-Men crossover since Onslaught, Secret Invasion, where the repercussions lasted until Empyre, Illuminati, which was used by other writers, and Dark Reign, where a Spider-Man villain takes over America.

    Bendis tried to use characters that never would've gotten into the Avengers any other way. Power Man, Iron Fist, Daredevil (which led to Echo joining and getting popular), Doctor Strange, Spider-Woman. All we got from Aaron was Blade and Ghost Rider. Hickman already used Starbrand and his version was more interesting and less annoying.

    The worse Bendis ever did was with Wanda but that was just an extreme follow up to a Bryne story. I didn't see him meddling in Thor or X-Men business and re-writing origins like saying Magneto's parents were Hydra or some shit.
    "Cable was right!"

  4. #559
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Triniking1234 View Post
    Man, you're way downplaying Bendis.

    You're saying Bendis never had a story arc to surpass Kang War One and Ultron Unlimited but then you mention House of M, which was the first Avengers/X-Men crossover since Onslaught, Secret Invasion, where the repercussions lasted until Empyre, Illuminati, which was used by other writers, and Dark Reign, where a Spider-Man villain takes over America.

    Bendis tried to use characters that never would've gotten into the Avengers any other way. Power Man, Iron Fist, Daredevil (which led to Echo joining and getting popular), Doctor Strange, Spider-Woman. All we got from Aaron was Blade and Ghost Rider. Hickman already used Starbrand and his version was more interesting and less annoying.

    The worse Bendis ever did was with Wanda but that was just an extreme follow up to a Bryne story. I didn't see him meddling in Thor or X-Men business and re-writing origins like saying Magneto's parents were Hydra or some shit.
    House of M was an impactful story but I would say it wasn't a good one. It uses leaps of logic and characterization and went on for too long being padding. Illuminati is a giant retcon. Their mere existence should have altered countless of stories. Dark Reign was also a story that uses leaps of logic and characterization. The sentry is a mess of retcons. A lot of them coming from him.

    The characters in Bendis Avengers were just characters he thought were cool or popular at the time. And he didn't do anything with many of them. Iron Fist didn't really do much, he spent over ten years with Doctor Strange and just kept taking away all the stuff that made him Doctor Strange until he was done in with his run. Strange didn't have a character arc. Echo was only there because he couldn't use Daredevil and then she just up and vanished. There were a lot of characters he just added to the team because they were popular but he didn't know what to do with.

    Empyre mostly had to do with the fallout of the Kree-Skrull war. And with a lot of characters he tries to hammer a square peg in a round hole. His Hood is not like the Hood in his miniseries. His Sentry is not like the one before. His Noh-varr the same. Also we already had a spider-woman who was an Avenger.

    His stuff while big didn't last as much as his mindset which was anything goes. Characterization and story history does not matter compared to what you want to write. You can trace that mindset all the way to the current run with Aaron. And my point with mentioning Kang War/Ultron was to point out, Bendis didn't innovate something new. Large scale conflicts were already a thing. Those stories were larger scale than anything Bendis wrote. Those stories were wide stories that in modern times would have been events. They weren't nostalgia. They were just updates on old villains. The logical endgame of many of what they would do.

    Bendis biggest impact to the Avengers is the mindset that you can do whatever you want with the title and the old governing rules should be ignored if you want. I'm not arguing his run wasn't popular. I'm arguing that he's main contribution and innovation was his mindset.

  5. #560
    Extraordinary Member Gaastra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,994

    Default

    . Strange didn't have a character arc. Echo was only there because he couldn't use Daredevil and then she just up and vanished.
    No, the avengers left her to die in the jungle. She showed up a little later to yell at them for no longer being on the team that she never quit and was still kind of on yet!

    Bendis big trouble is he didn't give a crap about marvel history and did what he wants. Look at his first story. How many recons had to be made to try to fit it in canon?

    1. Avengers members showing up who were in the wrong costumes are somewhere else? Wanda made them. They are fakes. Yeah, that's it.

    2. Why is wanda out of nowhere upset over her kids she got over and excepted their deaths years ago. Just because.

    3. Avengers give wanda to magneto? Wanda made them.

    4. Strange "no choas magic" when he has used it himself. Strange is now a fake made by wanda.

    5. Hawkeye killing himself for no reason? Wanda made him.

    6. Wanda can't canon wise act this way? Dr doom did it.

    7. Spidey one of the long-time pros by this point who even outsmarted thanos is now acting like a rookie teen version. He wants to use teen spidey i guess.

    The list goes on. Then there is his pet luke cage who he shoved into everything and the guy who only ran a "work for money" business and two failed hero teams (one lasted less than a year) in now the leader of the avengers and when big events pop up he is calling the shots over reed and cap? They even give him avengers mansion just like that?

    He did make cage go from z class to bigger name so i will give him that but bendis pulled a captain marvel play from the 80s of pet is boss when cap, wasp and storm who are better leaders are right there.

    Monica would go on and earn her leadership and grow. I still don't care about luke cage much.

  6. #561
    Extraordinary Member Omega Alpha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,284

    Default

    Bendis' run was the first time in history in which the Avengers were actually the center of the MU as it should be; I mean, Busiek's run was great, but Ultron can wipe out an entire country and Kang literally conquer the entire world, yet outside of it nobody gives a crap and even mentions it, because the team is irrelevant and eventually everything goes back to the same old group of Avengers going to the mansion and the most relevant question is who Wanda, Tigra or Wasp is dating, with the same heroes no one cares about from the hardcore fans, if they actually do (not like everyone was a fan of Triathlon or Doctor Druid).

    Then Bendis' run comes and for the first time in maybe ever it feels like you don't know what can actually happen with the group, who can be a member, and what will be the consequences of what they do (then Hickman actually does a different take on this: a situation where you do, but you know the Avengers are necessarily going to lose, rather than win the day as they usually do). Not that it didn't had MANY problems, specially after Siege, but it was certainly quite a ride like the book never really had before.

    Oh, and the complain about Luke Cage not being a worthy member and Monica Rambeau being is a perfect example of the kind of fan that whines about these things: Monica came out of nowhere, took the name of a character she had no connection to, and shortly after that she became the leader of the team. If this happened today, there would be riots, but it was in the childhood of the people that usually complain about these things, so it's OK. Meanwhile, Cage had been a hero for decades before joining, stayed in the team for a while before leading, and even then he was more by elimination than anything (no one else there was a good fit at the time).

    The people whining about it are the same type whining about Hickman's run today in X-men (in many cases, they are the exact same people): the "you raped my childhood" gang, where everything is bad unless it works exactly how it was in my childhood, pretending that things hadn't become stale for a looong time, and if the internet was around, you would have riots about some of the stuff being done in the "classic" age too- imagine if Marvel announced Cap's Kooky Quartet or the ANAD X-men today? It would break the internet.

  7. #562
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    91,225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charliehustle415 View Post



    But seriously some of the hyperbole is outta control.

    I can't even imagine the state of Marvel let alone The Avengers if Bendis didn't wrench it away from the old heads who only want nostalgia.
    The irony is that Bendis' success with The Avengers in re-establishing their prominence lead to more classic takes on The Avengers in media that was basically a rebuttal to Bendis' take .
    Quote Originally Posted by Omega Alpha View Post
    Bendis' run was the first time in history in which the Avengers were actually the center of the MU as it should be; I mean, Busiek's run was great, but Ultron can wipe out an entire country and Kang literally conquer the entire world, yet outside of it nobody gives a crap and even mentions it, because the team is irrelevant and eventually everything goes back to the same old group of Avengers going to the mansion and the most relevant question is who Wanda, Tigra or Wasp is dating, with the same heroes no one cares about from the hardcore fans, if they actually do (not like everyone was a fan of Triathlon or Doctor Druid).

    Then Bendis' run comes and for the first time in maybe ever it feels like you don't know what can actually happen with the group, who can be a member, and what will be the consequences of what they do (then Hickman actually does a different take on this: a situation where you do, but you know the Avengers are necessarily going to lose, rather than win the day as they usually do). Not that it didn't had MANY problems, specially after Siege, but it was certainly quite a ride like the book never really had before.

    Oh, and the complain about Luke Cage not being a worthy member and Monica Rambeau being is a perfect example of the kind of fan that whines about these things: Monica came out of nowhere, took the name of a character she had no connection to, and shortly after that she became the leader of the team. If this happened today, there would be riots, but it was in the childhood of the people that usually complain about these things, so it's OK. Meanwhile, Cage had been a hero for decades before joining, stayed in the team for a while before leading, and even then he was more by elimination than anything (no one else there was a good fit at the time).

    The people whining about it are the same type whining about Hickman's run today in X-men (in many cases, they are the exact same people): the "you raped my childhood" gang, where everything is bad unless it works exactly how it was in my childhood, pretending that things hadn't become stale for a looong time, and if the internet was around, you would have riots about some of the stuff being done in the "classic" age too- imagine if Marvel announced Cap's Kooky Quartet or the ANAD X-men today? It would break the internet.
    I mean, not everyone cares so much about the book needing to be the "center" of everything or event driven to feel important so much as the as they care about the stories, character work, and the quality of the title being good.

    I can understand the appeal of unpredictability and shaking things up but I think that can only take you so far. And I don't think that's an excuse for poor plotting or mis-characterizations.

  8. #563
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,330

    Default

    While Avengers Disassembled was a bad story, "New Avengers" was good and I think necessary. I don't care about the Avengers being at the center of the Marvel universe, but the Johns run showed limitations in what you could do with the old core cast, and they couldn't do a modernized, gritty book with the traditional cast because that's what "The Ultimates" was. The only way to freshen up the book again was to not just add new characters but, essentially, re-found the team with a new mission and a new approach.

    It burned itself out fairly quickly, but that's nothing new (Busiek's back-to-basics approach lasted three years and then they blew it up and turned the Avengers into a global army with an unlimited membership).

    I personally dislike Hickman's run because I didn't think he had any interest in the Avengers as a franchise with its own history and lore. That's not the case with Bendis's run. The whole point of it is that the Avengers have their own way of doing things and now it's time to do something different. Avengers Disassembled showed disrespect for the franchise but the actual Avengers run it led into did not.

  9. #564
    Astonishing Member Panic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,832

    Default

    Picking up one of Bendis' Avengers issues was actually what got me back into reading Marvel. It was fast moving with great art and snappy dialogue. However...

    Bendis' approach was basically to go full-on blockbuster movie with every story: big cool concepts, but hurriedly thrown together with everyone quipping snappy dialogue regardless of whether it fit the characters or not, round characters forced into square holes for the sake of plot, and story points that didn't hold up to much. It didn't take long before I started to feel that it was pretty soulless, and that Bendis really didn't care at all about half the characters he was writing. There was just a lack of depth to the stories and characters that I found more and more disappointing.

  10. #565
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    91,225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gurkle View Post
    While Avengers Disassembled was a bad story, "New Avengers" was good and I think necessary. I don't care about the Avengers being at the center of the Marvel universe, but the Johns run showed limitations in what you could do with the old core cast, and they couldn't do a modernized, gritty book with the traditional cast because that's what "The Ultimates" was. The only way to freshen up the book again was to not just add new characters but, essentially, re-found the team with a new mission and a new approach.

    It burned itself out fairly quickly, but that's nothing new (Busiek's back-to-basics approach lasted three years and then they blew it up and turned the Avengers into a global army with an unlimited membership).

    I personally dislike Hickman's run because I didn't think he had any interest in the Avengers as a franchise with its own history and lore. That's not the case with Bendis's run. The whole point of it is that the Avengers have their own way of doing things and now it's time to do something different. Avengers Disassembled showed disrespect for the franchise but the actual Avengers run it led into did not.
    I feel like it's less of an issue with shaking things up so much as the execution. Of course that's always been an issue with Bendis.

    I think it was clear Bendis felt more at home with the street-level Dark Reign Avengers fighting The Hood all the time than he was with traditional Avengers stuff.

    I don't think it's fair to compare it to Busiek because that felt like a natural progression of where his run was going. At least to me.

  11. #566
    Extraordinary Member Omega Alpha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,284

    Default

    But while there were, again, lots of problems with Bendis' run, you can't say none of the stuff that happened there was organic.

    Ultimately, the Avengers needed not only a shake up, but that sense they were untouchable, and everything that happened- Skrull Invasion, Norman Obsorn, Civil War, Death of Cap. America (though the last two weren't Bendis' stories) came both for the need to finish that status quo that in the end all they needed was Thor to appear to kick ass and Cap to make a speech and everything would be alright, and as a consequence of that. There's nothing Thor or Cap. America can do that would avoid a Skrull invasion, and a divided Avengers opens the door for a shameless crook like Osborn to exploit (and if Spider-Man isn't in the Avengers, it would have much less impact).

    Of course, there's plenty of complaints about Disassembled that are fair (really, 99% of the problems could have been solved with revealing Immortus was behind the whole thing, driving Wanda to sudden madness to divide the team), but not it's goal of being the first step of modernizing the Avengers and bringing them out of that comfort zone that only led to the same 50 people buying the book since Roy Thomas was writing and no one else paying attention.

    And while one may not care about them being at the center of the MU, that was the role they were created to play. If they are Earth's Mightiest and Most Beloved Heroes, yet the readers and even the other books and characters don't care about them, then what's the point of them even existing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    The irony is that Bendis' success with The Avengers in re-establishing their prominence lead to more classic takes on The Avengers in media that was basically a rebuttal to Bendis' take . .
    Difference is that in the movies the classic Avengers was something new and different. Even then, they used the Hulk, which was barely in the team, and used Spider-Man literally the first chance they got. You bet they would have used Wolverine too if they could.

    We would also never have Netflix series for Luke Cage, Jessica Jones and the Defenders, as well as the future one for Echo- though of course we wouldn't have Echo as Phoenix, which I suppose automatically makes all Bendis ever wrote a complete failure. DAMN YOU, BENDIS!

    Quote Originally Posted by gurkle View Post
    I personally dislike Hickman's run because I didn't think he had any interest in the Avengers as a franchise with its own history and lore.
    Yeah, I don't see it- Hickman's run has as main characters Cap. America, Iron Man and Black Panther (though the latter exclusively in NA). There are secondary roles for Namor, which had been a member before, as well as Hulk, one of the founding members (Sunspot also ends up with a key role, but it's not like most writers bring someone that had never been a member and make him important), not to mention featuring a ton of characters, many of whom classic Avengers.

    The key difference is that Hickman has the Avengers in a situation in which victory is absolutely impossible. Not difficult, not extremely hard, but impossible, and sees what happens. Some do very well (Sunspot certainly, but Thor is noble to end, even becoming worthy), some do very poorly (Cap most notably), meanwhile someone like T'challa ends up at his lowest point, but manages to become not only useful, but essential in the end for the world to be reborn.

  12. #567
    Extraordinary Member Gaastra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,994

    Default

    Oh, and the complain about Luke Cage not being a worthy member and Monica Rambeau being is a perfect example of the kind of fan that whines about these things: Monica came out of nowhere, took the name of a character she had no connection to, and shortly after that she became the leader of the team. If this happened today, there would be riots, but it was in the childhood of the people that usually complain about these things, so it's OK. Meanwhile, Cage had been a hero for decades before joining, stayed in the team for a while before leading, and even then he was more by elimination than anything (no one else there was a good fit at the time).
    They did have complaints over monica back then also in the letter pages, but she went on to be more liked in time. It is still brought up online at times and is still called "pet" online at times however. The cage thing was pretty attacked when it came out. The thing you got to remember is yes monica was a new hero and cage was older but pre bendis cage was a C-grader and butt of many jokes and the "shaft" rip-off. Toyfare had a ball making fun of him. He was blade pre movie so this c grader now leading made a stir. I have no trouble with cage as a avenger. He is kind of a dull on his own to me (works better with iron fist) but he was in defenders and ff so why not avengers? Just never saw him as a avengers leader when cap is right there on the same team. Again, cage is fine but i just was bored with him in bendis run. He got better when iron fist showed up. Cage did get more liked thanks to bendis.

    As for bendis i was talking most about that first AD story. One of the worst avengers stories ever. I would read the crossing over it. But other than the grips posted earlier (kid acting spidey, wanda, ignoring canon) i never saw the other bendis avengers stories as the worst. They were all right. Were they defenders under the avengers name? Yes, but bendis copying dcs jla "movie style comic" worked for him at the time. Also love him or hate him he did bring avengers from under x-men's shadow to the top of the mu! It was bendis who really made the avengers big love it or hate it. Picking on cage or not he did bring him from c-lister to b-lister and he brought spider-woman back to the front!
    Last edited by Gaastra; 08-16-2022 at 01:37 PM.

  13. #568
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    91,225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Omega Alpha View Post
    But while there were, again, lots of problems with Bendis' run, you can't say none of the stuff that happened there was organic.

    Ultimately, the Avengers needed not only a shake up, but that sense they were untouchable, and everything that happened- Skrull Invasion, Norman Obsorn, Civil War, Death of Cap. America (though the last two weren't Bendis' stories) came both for the need to finish that status quo that in the end all they needed was Thor to appear to kick ass and Cap to make a speech and everything would be alright, and as a consequence of that. There's nothing Thor or Cap. America can do that would avoid a Skrull invasion, and a divided Avengers opens the door for a shameless crook like Osborn to exploit (and if Spider-Man isn't in the Avengers, it would have much less impact).

    Of course, there's plenty of complaints about Disassembled that are fair (really, 99% of the problems could have been solved with revealing Immortus was behind the whole thing, driving Wanda to sudden madness to divide the team), but not it's goal of being the first step of modernizing the Avengers and bringing them out of that comfort zone that only led to the same 50 people buying the book since Roy Thomas was writing and no one else paying attention.

    And while one may not care about them being at the center of the MU, that was the role they were created to play. If they are Earth's Mightiest and Most Beloved Heroes, yet the readers and even the other books and characters don't care about them, then what's the point of them even existing?
    I mean, people probably cared about the main Avengers storylines as fans of the comic without needing to get dragged into an event plotline. It's partially why Marvel started to become so reliant on events and crossovers all the time.
    Difference is that in the movies the classic Avengers was something new and different. Even then, they used the Hulk, which was barely in the team, and used Spider-Man literally the first chance they got. You bet they would have used Wolverine too if they could.

    We would also never have Netflix series for Luke Cage, Jessica Jones and the Defenders, as well as the future one for Echo- though of course we wouldn't have Echo as Phoenix, which I suppose automatically makes all Bendis ever wrote a complete failure. DAMN YOU, BENDIS!
    And I think the Avengers aspect was one of the weaker aspects of MCU Spider-Man, just like how Spidey in the actual Avengers comics didn't do much but quip with the team outside his solo books.

    Speaking of the Defenders...now that was a team book that played to Bendis' strengths.
    Yeah, I don't see it- Hickman's run has as main characters Cap. America, Iron Man and Black Panther (though the latter exclusively in NA). There are secondary roles for Namor, which had been a member before, as well as Hulk, one of the founding members (Sunspot also ends up with a key role, but it's not like most writers bring someone that had never been a member and make him important), not to mention featuring a ton of characters, many of whom classic Avengers.

    The key difference is that Hickman has the Avengers in a situation in which victory is absolutely impossible. Not difficult, not extremely hard, but impossible, and sees what happens. Some do very well (Sunspot certainly, but Thor is noble to end, even becoming worthy), some do very poorly (Cap most notably), meanwhile someone like T'challa ends up at his lowest point, but manages to become not only useful, but essential in the end for the world to be reborn.
    The real main characters were pretty much the Illuminati, mostly Reed, T'Challa, Namor and to a lesser extent Strange. The stuff with Steve and Tony and the "Avengers Machine" wasn't anywhere near as relevant or as in-depth as what Hickman was doing in New Avengers.

  14. #569
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Omega Alpha View Post
    Yeah, I don't see it- Hickman's run has as main characters Cap. America, Iron Man and Black Panther (though the latter exclusively in NA). There are secondary roles for Namor, which had been a member before, as well as Hulk, one of the founding members (Sunspot also ends up with a key role, but it's not like most writers bring someone that had never been a member and make him important), not to mention featuring a ton of characters, many of whom classic Avengers.

    The key difference is that Hickman has the Avengers in a situation in which victory is absolutely impossible. Not difficult, not extremely hard, but impossible, and sees what happens. Some do very well (Sunspot certainly, but Thor is noble to end, even becoming worthy), some do very poorly (Cap most notably), meanwhile someone like T'challa ends up at his lowest point, but manages to become not only useful, but essential in the end for the world to be reborn.
    It's never just about the characters, though it is significant that Hickman avoided using the "classic Avengers" B-listers who didn't have their own titles. (He was forced to use Hawkeye because of movie synergy, which was bigger then than it is now.) Just like Aaron's team is mostly characters with a long history of being Avengers, but they're all stars. It doesn't matter that they were members because the Avengers is not where most of their history is and it's not where their development currently takes place.

    The big thing though is that the Avengers have their own history and Hickman deliberately avoided callbacks to earlier Avengers stories, except for Bendis's creation of the Illuminati (and that was in "New Avengers" which isn't really an Avengers team). He said himself when the run started that whereas his Fantastic Four was nostalgic, he was going in the opposite direction with the Avengers and not referring to their past stories or villains. That's fine, but it's not going to satisfy me because I would prefer to see an Avengers run that is rooted in their history and characterization the way Hickman's X-Men was.

  15. #570
    Extraordinary Member Omega Alpha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,284

    Default

    So, it's only a real Avengers title if it has Wonder Man, Jarvis and the Vision? Yeah...I don't buy that.

    Mind you, Hickman also used Falcon, while Wasp and SW were in UA, and the latter one that had, and still has, significant baggage which understandably most writers want to avoid. He also used Pym and Hercules in Time Runs Out, as well as having Iron Lad, Kang and Immortus meeting Cap. America. He also had an event where Thanos shows up.

    What more one has if someone is writing Avengers books, using Cap. America, Iron Man and Black Panther as the key players, and also having Thor, Cap. Marvel, Falcon, Hawkeye, Black Widow and Hulk on the team, while also using Henry Pym, Kang, Immortus, Hercules and Thanos, and yet is not considered "real Avengers" because he doesn't reference something Roger Stern wrote in 1984? That kind of narrow-minded non-sense is exactly why the book became so ignored and irrelevant over the years, appealing only to nostalgia of the diehards.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I mean, people probably cared about the main Avengers storylines as fans of the comic without needing to get dragged into an event plotline. It's partially why Marvel started to become so reliant on events and crossovers all the time.
    But the thing is that people didn't care. Avengers until Bendis was very much the uncool, square kids that nobody bothers with, which is why Marvel managed to retain the rights to them in the first place. Even when the books were good they were ignored.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    And I think the Avengers aspect was one of the weaker aspects of MCU Spider-Man, just like how Spidey in the actual Avengers comics didn't do much but quip with the team outside his solo books.
    You're very much a minority on that one, specially on the MCU part. But people in general were not interested in Avengers until Spider-Man showed up, by the reasons I stated above.
    .
    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    The real main characters were pretty much the Illuminati, mostly Reed, T'Challa, Namor and to a lesser extent Strange. The stuff with Steve and Tony and the "Avengers Machine" wasn't anywhere near as relevant or as in-depth as what Hickman was doing in New Avengers.
    Strange disappears for half the run and only returns barely in Time Runs Out, and in full force in Secret Wars- which is, yes, ultimately a Fantastic Four story. Cap and Iron Man are the clear key players in the main Avengers book, and also play key roles in NA, where the Illuminati don't appear. The fact that Cap. and Iron Man don't even appear in Battleworld is exactly because ultimately they fail because they can't put their differences and grievances aside, but it doesn't mean they were irrelevant.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •