Uncanny Avengers #1 Recap\Review

[Kurolegacy]

I thought those things made perfect sense. Why didn't they make sense to you?

Hell the issue even pointed out most of those things. Kwannon and Monet are on the team because their telepathy is an asset. Plus the both are strong combatants. The MLF are basically just useful tool for “Captain Krakoa” while they believe that they’re following Cyclops. And they clearly do care about who’s under the mask consider that Steve attempted to unmask him.

[Uncanny X-Man]

I thought this was a very fun first issue. Gerry Duggan has been on fire lately, all his books have benefitted from his renewed creativity thanks to fall of X and this Uncanny Avengers #1 is a very well-executed intro issue that manages to quickly establish all the main players, set up the Cap Krakoa mystery and also catch up with the main X-Men book's continuity. Can't wait to read what comes next.

[marvelprince]

So we’re not even getting a perfunctory Avengers don’t kill here? If we’re going to contrast between Steve and Captain Krakoa wouldn’t wanting to show how one values all life be important ? How does this show humans and mutants working together when most of the mutant members were just on a rampage killing Orchis members? Read more like a joint Avengers XForce team than a Unity Squad.

[TheRealWashout]

So we’re not even getting a perfunctory Avengers don’t kill here? If we’re going to contrast between Steve and Captain Krakoa wouldn’t wanting to show how one values all life be important ? How does this show humans and mutants working together when most of the mutant members were just on a rampage killing Orchis members? Read more like a joint Avengers XForce team than a Unity Squad.

Cap is fed up too. He's being a real ally here, and he's better for it.

[Ilargi]

They are not killing random humans, they are killing fascists.

It's a big difference

[Nicoclaws]

Yeah, wouldn't it be weird to see Captain America have issues with killing nazis ?

[BobbysWorld]

I think people tend to forget that in all incarnations and adaptations one universal element of Steve's backstory is he was literally a SOLDIER.

He doesn't LIKE killing people. That doesn't mean he never sees the necessity of it or habitually goes around judging other people for killing when in wartime conditions.

[cranger]

Saying someone deserves to be killed because they are fascist is redundant (or some other word where the proof is dependent on the claim), as fascist is only used by people to describe someone who deserves to be killed.

A bunch of armed goons are rounding up people and putting them in prison facilities and then shuttling them off planet. The protagonists stage a rescue operation to free the captives from the armed opposition. In every action story in the mainstream the protagonists are going in using lethal force. So any scene where someone kills can be rationalized in general by these standards.

When people criticize the depiction of killing in some stories this is not because they cannot understand that such actions could take place but that an idea they have about the character being portrayed. A lot of the blame for this lies with Marvel as characters having a hard stance on this topic is often used as a way to differentiate characters (and explain why they do not kill their enemies who keep escaping) and as a source of conflict between characters with different views.

I am not familiar enough with Captain America to remember if he often spoke out against killing or at least had any significant story where it mattered, but I do remember not too long ago Cyclops getting lectured pretty hard (and reminded) about the X-Men not killing which was important. Even as readers would not care that X-Force type squads would pop up part of the appeal of those stories is they are doing the work that the 'heroic' team will not.

So people will read a story and sometimes find issue with it. They might ask if this makes sense based on past stories or at least their interpretations of them. What type of story does Captain America fit? If there was an disagreement between characters in a story about killing what side would Captain America usually have been expected to take?

(edit: personally I am more irritated by Steve being used to 'vouch' for Deadpool who Steve really should just have taken down and shipped off to never be seen from again the first time he saw him).

[marvelprince]

I think people tend to forget that in all incarnations and adaptations one universal element of Steve's backstory is he was literally a SOLDIER.

He doesn't LIKE killing people. That doesn't mean he never sees the necessity of it or habitually goes around judging other people for killing when in wartime conditions.

Im familiar with this element of his backstory. I also remember him taking down Wolverine when he tried to kill rogue shield agents in front of him and having an issue with a killer on the team so forgive me for questioning.

Anyways It’s not the biggest deal in the world, I wouldn’t want him to give a lecture to these guys when mostly everyone they know was killed and the bad guys are fully aware of what’s happening. It just felt weird that it wasn’t addressed at all , along I will assume we’re supposed to take Monet’s thoughts about Cap slowing him down meaning his morals and just roll with it.

[adamishere1]

I liked it, seems like a good team and I'm disappointed that its only a mini series.

Would like to see another regular Uncanny Avengers book. Always felt that it was a good idea to combine the two teams into one, probably with more of a lineup including mutant heroes.

also like the acknowledgment by Cap towards Deadpool about the Secret Empire stuff

[Nicoclaws]

Saying someone deserves to be killed because they are fascist is redundant (or some other word where the proof is dependent on the claim), as fascist is only used by people to describe someone who deserves to be killed.

A bunch of armed goons are rounding up people and putting them in prison facilities and then shuttling them off planet. The protagonists stage a rescue operation to free the captives from the armed opposition. In every action story in the mainstream the protagonists are going in using lethal force. So any scene where someone kills can be rationalized in general by these standards.

When people criticize the depiction of killing in some stories this is not because they cannot understand that such actions could take place but that an idea they have about the character being portrayed. A lot of the blame for this lies with Marvel as characters having a hard stance on this topic is often used as a way to differentiate characters (and explain why they do not kill their enemies who keep escaping) and as a source of conflict between characters with different views.

I am not familiar enough with Captain America to remember if he often spoke out against killing or at least had any significant story where it mattered, but I do remember not too long ago Cyclops getting lectured pretty hard (and reminded) about the X-Men not killing which was important. Even as readers would not care that X-Force type squads would pop up part of the appeal of those stories is they are doing the work that the 'heroic' team will not.

So people will read a story and sometimes find issue with it. They might ask if this makes sense based on past stories or at least their interpretations of them. What type of story does Captain America fit? If there was an disagreement between characters in a story about killing what side would Captain America usually have been expected to take?

(edit: personally I am more irritated by Steve being used to 'vouch' for Deadpool who Steve really should just have taken down and shipped off to never be seen from again the first time he saw him).

Redundant means one repeats oneself. It's arguable though that "fascists deserve to be killed" is a redundancy, because for many fascist = deserve to be killed because they're fascists.
And no. Fascists is used by fascists. They actually chose the name.
Orchis may not be strictly fascist, although they seem to follow an authoritarian way of thinking, are clearly militaristic, and believe in "forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society ". They're not trying to seize the power, apparently. So militarist faction with fascists tendancies. Also, they're litteraly mainly composed of Hydra agents, who are nazis. Who declared war against a recognized nation, so rules of war should apply.

The X-men are not soldiers. Captain America is (and representative of a quite belligerent nation too).

[Master of Sound]

What is it is quack quack quack quick Howard the Duck? See Alpha Flight thread from where this idea came from.

[Shadowcat]

Weapon Omega was Canadian not American.
I reckon for you guys’d busses that’s its Stevil. Giving him a new moniker as Captain Krakoa is a good use for him that im sure Marvel wouldn’t pass up.

Wild Child Weapon Omega was Canadian. Michael Pointer, Weapon Omega who killed Alpha in that shitty New Avengers comic by Bendis, was American, from Alaska.

[ARkadelphia]

I think Cap Krakoa is actually Henry Gyrich. Think they picked him up when he was floating in space and got a machinary upgrade, like Moira. I called it first!!

Not quite. I made that call a month or two ago in another thread. I forget which.

[ARkadelphia]

Him breaking out of the tank is visually similar to Caps Judgement Day resurrection too

Very much so. I noticed that too.