Hyperion Appreciation

[CentralPower]

I don't think that anyone had an issue with Hyperion as an Avenger; for example. creating a DC analogue to mock DC is a waste of resources.

Yes, and, in theory, it is a waste of readers' time.

But, consider how most Squadron appearances play out. The first intelligent handling of the characters was the 1985 series. Before that, the characters were depicted as imbeciles. Even correcting for the generally lower standards of Silver Age comics, pre-85 Squadron appearances can be summed up as "lolololol, the DC guys am teh stupit". Post-85, it was not much better. The Squadron were written as clowns during Gruenwald's run on "Quasar". (This may have been more a result of Gruenwald wanting to use characters that he had no real reason to use more than corporate sniping. But, Squadron were jokes.)

I don't think that anyone had an issue with Hyperion as an Avenger; for example. creating a DC analogue to mock DC is a waste of resources. I can think of better ways to use Gary Frank, at least. having recently read jurgens and JMS' take on the team, I'd say that the JMS version had more storytelling potential. but I'm ok with him going out on a cliffhanger. i'll ignore the non-MAX stuff.

The Ultimate iteration of the Squadron (JMS et al) was a noble attempt. But, even that was hindered by trying too hard to be current and mature.

It fell back on trying to be "ripped from the headlines" or just relying on basic shock-value. Those were common problems for comics at the time. And, in the case of the Squadron, it was s step up by virtue of not simply using the characters as idiotic proxies for the competition's characters.

Gruenwalds Squadron was great. Honestly I still put that up there with Watchmen and Kingdom Come.

But, you have to recognize that it is the anomaly, in both tone and quality. There is also the problem that Gruenwald's writing was, at best, a product of the time (the Bronze Age), if not more dated.

But in the MU, there's only so far you can go.

And, Marvel (along with DC) is now willing to publish comics with the characters failing at the conceptual level. (The current run of "the Punisher" is based on that.) There is less need to use proxy characters when mainline characters are available.

Time will tell. Maybe Hyperion will get another shot at being an Avenger. It was something he said he was proud of.

That is unlikely with the Sentry getting a push.

The other problem is that Hyperion was in 2 failed series. The solo series was good. But, there was no support. And, the Squadron series failed despite a significant push from Marvel. Honestly, I am surprised that Hyperion survived "Secret Empire".

I half expected Blurr to show up in that Robinson SHIELD series. But, as far as I know, he has not. Robinson back-wrote a convoluted origin for Spectrum that tied her in with the Inhumans. But, Marvel getting the X-license back means that the Inhumans are likely going to be forgotten. There are currently 3 Zarda variants floating around (Gruenwald, the Squadron Sinister variant, and the one from Ewing's "Defenders" series). Nobody cares. Nighthawk is dead, and was replaced with another d-list character in a cancelled Avengers series.

[Michael Watkins]

But, consider how most Squadron appearances play out.

I could do that. or I could just point to the Ultimate Power crossover. lackluster Bendis writing aside, the Squadron were mostly in the right. Nick Fury, in an attempt to get the FF under control, made a deal with the devil/Doom. and this was a very violent version of the Squadron.

The first intelligent handling of the characters was the 1985 series. Before that, the characters were depicted as imbeciles. Even correcting for the generally lower standards of Silver Age comics, pre-85 Squadron appearances can be summed up as "lolololol, the DC guys am teh stupit". Post-85, it was not much better. The Squadron were written as clowns during Gruenwald's run on "Quasar". (This may have been more a result of Gruenwald wanting to use characters that he had no real reason to use more than corporate sniping. But, Squadron were jokes.)

I know. but the concept evolved for the Gruenwald series. that evolution could have continued. they managed to use Quagmire, of all people, as a credible villain. there's no reason why they couldn't have taken the actual Squadron members seriously. Hyperion was intelligently handled by Hickman. it's really all on the writers using them.

The Ultimate iteration of the Squadron (JMS et al) was a noble attempt. But, even that was hindered by trying too hard to be current and mature.

was it? I thought that was the draw of Supreme Power and the Ultimates. it didn't seem to suffer until it lost the MAX imprint. but maybe that's just my interpretation.

It fell back on trying to be "ripped from the headlines" or just relying on basic shock-value.

they seemed like 3-dimensional characters to me. what part of it was just shock value, in your opinion?

But, you have to recognize that it is the anomaly, in both tone and quality. There is also the problem that Gruenwald's writing was, at best, a product of the time (the Bronze Age), if not more dated.

that's why I don't really talk about it. I preferred the updated version.

And, Marvel (along with DC) is now willing to publish comics with the characters failing at the conceptual level. (The current run of "the Punisher" is based on that.) There is less need to use proxy characters when mainline characters are available.

but they are also swinging and missing with a lot of the new characters they have introduced. technically, Daredevil and Quasar are proxy characters. I think that they could get away with focusing on Zarda as a solo or non-squadron team character. Nighthawk's appearance in Occupy Avengers wasn't jarring. they are all fish out of water characters. but I still don't see the limits that you might, in utilizing them. it would be easier than creating characters from scratch.

That is unlikely with the Sentry getting a push.

they had no problem putting Wonderman and Sentry on the same team. Sentry is only a superman analogue in a shallow sense. he's not an extraterrestrial or a boyscout. if they wanted to, they could always use Hyperion as a foil or friend to Sentry. they used Gilgamesh as Hercules roommate. that was unexpected fun.

The other problem is that Hyperion was in 2 failed series. The solo series was good. But, there was no support.

yes, it was good.

I half expected Blurr to show up in that Robinson SHIELD series. But, as far as I know, he has not. Robinson back-wrote a convoluted origin for Spectrum that tied her in with the Inhumans.

yes, that was garbage. and I'm not sure that I even want to see that character again. the Great Society was interesting. but she wasn't the part of it that caught my eye.

There are currently 3 Zarda variants floating around (Gruenwald, the Squadron Sinister variant, and the one from Ewing's "Defenders" series).

I have no knowledge of the Defenders Zarda. the original seems to be the most usable. and she's unmistakable with the others now that she had her powers removed. the evil version is quite usable, as well. there aren't that many superstrong warrior villainesses still active. and she had the most ambition of them. there's still the dangling thread of her alliance with Modred. I'm not saying that they should give her a solo series. but she'd be an interesting guest star in several books.

Nighthawk is dead, and was replaced with another d-list character in a cancelled Avengers series.

yes, a grievous mistake. if anything, he should have focused on planning things from the shadows and sponsored Dwayne Taylor as the new Nighthawk. the latter could easily have transitioned into being a Nightwing-esque figure. then again, there's a built-in out for 'Raymond' being alive. he killed what he thought was the 616 Kyle Richmond; only for it to turn out to be a skrull or some other alien shapeshifter. given that Ray has been the only one tracking the Myriad, maybe one of them abducted/replaced him.

[CentralPower]

I could do that. or I could just point to the Ultimate Power crossover. lackluster Bendis writing aside, the Squadron were mostly in the right. Nick Fury, in an attempt to get the FF under control, made a deal with the devil/Doom. and this was a very violent version of the Squadron.

It is not a question of the Squadron being right or wrong. It is a question of the comics being good or not. And, those were not good.

The Squadron only work as idea based characters. Any plot or character driven use of the Squadron makes them useless, beyond the fact that there are plenty of generic superhero comics. In this case, a generic comic using the Squadron is redundant because somebody can simply read a generic Justice League comic, (never mind how many other bastardized Justice League style teams there are).

Bendis is not an idea guy.

there's no reason why they couldn't have taken the actual Squadron members seriously. Hyperion was intelligently handled by Hickman. it's really all on the writers using them.

Normally, I would agree with that on principle. But, even a good writer cannot save an idea with no support or purpose.

This gets back to the problem that I have consistently been asking about. Does the Squadron have any place in the industry in a time when DC is willing to publish "Red Son", "Master Men" or "White Knight"? The 1985 "Squadron Supreme" worked because it was the best Justice League story that DC never published. It was revolutionary, and unique. Now, it would not be.

they seemed like 3-dimensional characters to me. what part of it was just shock value, in your opinion?

An "R" rating (effectively what MAX imprint books had) is a license to use blood and boobs. And, it is often seen as a mandate to use them. MAX comics were not quite as bad in this regard as Avatar Press comics. But, they were often in the category of "if somebody is old enough to buy this, they are old enough to know better".

In other cases, (such as "Hyperion v/s Nighthawk") the comics borrowed heavily from the headlines, and merely proved the difficulties of using fiction to write intelligently about real world events. (Comics have no business writing about something like the Darfur genocide.)

Sentry is only a superman analogue in a shallow sense.

In this case, the shallow sense is enough. Both Hyperion and Sentry are c-grade (at best) characters. Nobody outside of a comic shop knows or cares. The best answer to the question of who/what those characters are is "Superman analogue". Yes, it can be expanded on. But, most comic fanboys (or for that matter, retailers) cannot be trusted to do that well. The last thing that Marvel needs in that conversation is somebody asking "Why does Marvel have two fake Superman characters?"

yes, that was garbage. and I'm not sure that I even want to see that character again. the Great Society was interesting. but she wasn't the part of it that caught my eye.

If I were going to guess, I would assume that the "Spectrum is an Inhuman" back-write was an editorial mandate that Robinson had to work in.

I would like to see a Great Society or Squadron series that tries to use Silver Age morality, without the dumber aspects of Silver Age comics.

yes, a grievous mistake.

No reason to keep that variant of Nighthawk alive. Along with the "2 failed series" problem that Hyperion has, the Ultimate Nighthawk has specifically polemical roots, at a time when Marvel is trying to scale that stuff back.

Equally as important, there is no reason for a character like Nighthawk to have any backstory as convoluted as "thought dead, but replaced by skrulls and...."

[Star_Jammer]

I miss Supreme Power.

[XPac]

I miss Supreme Power.

Supreme Power was incredible. Squadron Supreme which followed it sucked.

[Michael Watkins]

Supreme Power was incredible. Squadron Supreme which followed it sucked.

That we can agree on. I'm not sure what Chaykin was trying to do. His marvel hero analogues weren't exactly charming.

[Michael Watkins]

This gets back to the problem that I have consistently been asking about. Does the Squadron have any place in the industry in a time when DC is willing to publish "Red Son", "Master Men" or "White Knight"? The 1985 "Squadron Supreme" worked because it was the best Justice League story that DC never published. It was revolutionary, and unique. Now, it would not be.

so the idea is to employ restraint because DC is taking chances? I'm not sure that this is logical. and I'm not looking them as The Squadron. I think the time for that is over. now that they are displaced, they are Hyperion, Zarda, Blue, etc.

An "R" rating (effectively what MAX imprint books had) is a license to use blood and boobs. And, it is often seen as a mandate to use them. MAX comics were not quite as bad in this regard as Avatar Press comics. But, they were often in the category of "if somebody is old enough to buy this, they are old enough to know better".

to me, the quality dropped once it was no longer a MAX book. Gary Frank's depictions of nudity and violence never took me out of the story. and there was a lot of story w/o it seeming to be decompressed. JMS is pretty much the anti-Bendis in that respect.

In other cases, (such as "Hyperion v/s Nighthawk") the comics borrowed heavily from the headlines, and merely proved the difficulties of using fiction to write intelligently about real world events. (Comics have no business writing about something like the Darfur genocide.)

it made sense to me. given Nighthawk's hyperfocus on black people, him trying to steer a superhuman into intervening in Africa made sense. why is it off topic in a comic book but ok for a CineMax tv show?

In this case, the shallow sense is enough. Both Hyperion and Sentry are c-grade (at best) characters. Nobody outside of a comic shop knows or cares.

Sentry's a c-grade character who has another series on the way. someone has a story to tell about him. that's more than I can say about the great Silver Surfer. Marvel should lean into the punch; sell Hyperion as Marvel's Superman. some people don't want to read DC. some people wouldn't mind reading Marvel's take on Superman.

The best answer to the question of who/what those characters are is "Superman analogue". Yes, it can be expanded on. But, most comic fanboys (or for that matter, retailers) cannot be trusted to do that well. The last thing that Marvel needs in that conversation is somebody asking "Why does Marvel have two fake Superman characters?"

the question is only relevant if you agree with the premise. I don't. Superman would have been a jarring addition to the Dark Avengers. he definitely wouldn't compromise himself the way that Hyperion has. the real question is, "what are you going to do with your supermen?" Hyperion is highly usable as a heel/a company-wide threat (see: Exiles). personally, I like the evil versions better. but I also really loved him as a directionless incognito powerhouse driving around the U.S. getting drug into standard heroism. there isn't someone else doing that, right now. I think Hawkeye has settled down. Sentry's story is that he's playing at being Superman while being something much different. that is interesting to some people. they might now want the blue boyscout. maybe they want an unstable Superman type who is actually part of the main universe; as opposed to being part of some disconnected mini-series (another reason why the only DC I read is Doom Patrol). these characters already have half of the popularity equation. they can go fist to fist with the Hulk. I'm part of several comic related fan pages on Facebook. Sentry's name comes up a lot!

If I were going to guess, I would assume that the "Spectrum is an Inhuman" back-write was an editorial mandate that Robinson had to work in.

I need a "What If the Inhumans didn't exist" series.

I would like to see a Great Society or Squadron series that tries to use Silver Age morality, without the dumber aspects of Silver Age comics.

well I could be all for it. what do you consider to be silver age morality? I ask because it could mean gunning down Nazis. or it could mean stopping mid-fight to lecture kids on looking both ways before crossing the street.

No reason to keep that variant of Nighthawk alive. Along with the "2 failed series" problem that Hyperion has, the Ultimate Nighthawk has specifically polemical roots, at a time when Marvel is trying to scale that stuff back.

I thought that was some of Daniel Way's best work. and I'd say that the reveal of superhumans did a lot to broaden that version of Nighthawk's world view. or, at least, he came to hate and fear more than just white people. he's basically Magneto w/ wealth instead of powers. and my idea was for him to step out of the costume while still putting forth a world view that his protégé wouldn't accept. I think there's good drama in it.

Equally as important, there is no reason for a character like Nighthawk to have any backstory as convoluted as "thought dead, but replaced by skrulls and...."

sure. I'm just saying that it's an available option. I don't care how crappy the character's solo series was. his death was disrespectful; moreso because the writer gave his pet character the identity. that's a dick move.

[Jovos2099]

I would love to read a new Hyperion series myself

[Michael Watkins]

I would love to read a new Hyperion series myself

but who to write/pencil it?

[JudicatorPrime]

...some people wouldn't mind reading Marvel's take on Superman.

Interesting point. I wonder how many fans of Superman -- I mean the devout ones that have read more than a handful of his stories -- would follow a series about Hyperion, Gladiator, Sentry, etc.? On the flipside, I also wonder if the Marvel fans who want to read a Superman story have ever really read more than a dozen or so issues of Superman comics? Ultimately, I hope that the lure for fans of Hyperion, Sentry, etc., is deeper than that. I mean I would read a Blue Marvel story even if he had been created by Grevioux to be Marvel's version of Dr. Fate, or the Spectre, or Dr. Manhattan.

[Star_Jammer]

but who to write/pencil it?

Ewing/Pacheco.

And not "I'll quit/get replaced in a few issues Pacheco"; I want Operation: Zero Tolerance era Pacheco.

[Michael Watkins]

Ewing/Pacheco.

And not "I'll quit/get replaced in a few issues Pacheco"; I want Operation: Zero Tolerance era Pacheco.

I like his work. He draws a great Hyperion.

[CentralPower]

so the idea is to employ restraint because DC is taking chances? I'm not sure that this is logical. and I'm not looking them as The Squadron. I think the time for that is over. now that they are displaced, they are Hyperion, Zarda, Blue, etc.

The point is that "the Justice League and Superman comics that DC will not publish" is a much weaker sell when DC will, in fact, publish those comics.

If DC is willing to publish more robust comics, then the bar for a Squadron series is set much higher, simply to compete with DC. And, there are more indie publishers, many of which cover the low-pitch side of the equation. In a market where junk like "EVIL Heroes" gets published, there are more than enough Justice League or Superman riffs. (Mark Waid's Superman, "Axiom", did not do so well. And, that was Mark Waid....)

it made sense to me. given Nighthawk's hyperfocus on black people, him trying to steer a superhuman into intervening in Africa made sense. why is it off topic in a comic book but ok for a CineMax tv show?

When did I say it was okay for television, and not comics?

There are two problems with comics being ripped from the headlines.

The first is basic decorum. (Maybe comics and other entertainment should not be piggy-backing on real events that much?)

The second is creative. Having the heroes be unable to solve a real-life problem arguably undermines the idea of those heroes on page. But, having them solve it easily undersells a real problem, and gets back to the first problem.

(Never mind that most writers in the industry probably have no business writing about real-life politics and world problems.)

sell Hyperion as Marvel's Superman. some people don't want to read DC. some people wouldn't mind reading Marvel's take on Superman.

Most people who want Superman are just going to read Superman. DC is not some odd or obscure thing. Reading through a DC comic does not even count as trying something new.

Hyperion is highly usable as a heel/a company-wide threat (see: Exiles).

Citing anything by Chuck Austen as a "best use of a character" is probably the best argument for never using that character.

well I could be all for it. what do you consider to be silver age morality?

I mean have the series start of less grey in terms of morals, with the heroes being more popular on page. The background for the Great Society (they rose after an age of anti-heroes) would give the creators cover to stay with that theme for longer than would be tenable in most modern series. (The idea could be that the characters acted with unreasonable restraint in order to avoid another anti-heroic age.)

But, over time, the series could get more grey and complex, reflecting the industry as a whole, particularly when it used scenarios where Silver Age morals would not work.

sure. I'm just saying that it's an available option. I don't care how crappy the character's solo series was. his death was disrespectful; moreso because the writer gave his pet character the identity. that's a dick move.

Nighthawk was a failed d-lister. What kind of send-off would you expect Marvel to give him?

I mean the devout ones that have read more than a handful of his stories -- would follow a series about Hyperion, Gladiator, Sentry, etc.?

It depends on how you define "devout". If they are slaves to the Silver and Bronze age, not many. If they follow creatives teams, they would probably read a series about a Superman analogue by one of those teams, or by a newer team riffing on that team.

(For example, I read "Axiom" because it was a Mark Waid series. I recently bought "Red Mass from Mars", because it is Hickman riffing on superhumans. I would not bother with anything by Chuck Austen.)