No they weren't. The real heroes of that story were Adam Warlock and Silver Surfer. The Avengers were just expendable redshirts, cannon fodder dispatched by Thanos in a hilariously brusque faction, using the power of the infinity gems to eliminate ''Earth's mightiest heroes'' in morbid and creative ways, like when Frank Miller has his version of Batman defeat and humiliate the other DC heroes. A-list characters like Captain America, Spider-Man, Iron Man and Wolverine (memorably defeated by having his skeleton turned into spongy rubber) have far less importance to the story than the often underrated and overlooked mystical heroes like Silver Surfer, Doctor Strange and most of all Adam Warlock. And the whole point of that story was Thanos realizing that he is own worst enemy and that not even omnipotence will help him get Mistress Death to love him.
It's annoying how so many people think Gauntlet is an Avengers story.
Last edited by CaptainMar-Vell92 of the Kree; 08-28-2019 at 10:14 AM.
Ditto. Gauntlet was never meant to be a crossover event with Avengers and X-MEN, it's the sequel to Jim Starlin's runs on Captain Marvel and Warlock from the 1970's and it was originally supposed to be contained in the Silver Surfer comic series before Defalco and co. turned It into a event to compete with DC.
An explanation for readers "criticizing" (to put it mildly) Bendis' Avengers run, oh boy where do you want me to begin? I could start by him peppering the dialog of characters like Hawkeye, and Luke Cage with Yiddish expressions (ie Hawkeye saying pisher for one, Luke Cage saying tucchus for another), making Wasp sound like Jessica Jones, him not being arsed to research which characters were dead, (Cutthroat, Supiria, and Snap Dragon to name 3) or character continuity (his characters were a tad out of character). And that's just a few things, but in BMB's defense it's not like Avengers was in top shape (have you read Chuck Austen's Avengers, nuff said)
Meet the new Blu_Spyder,
same as the old Arachne_Azure
"If Life doesn't give you some sugar to go with the lemons
your lemonade is gonna suck"
I've never seen him stick the take-off. you know how to not set up a grand skrull invasion threat? show the queen of the skrulls getting a boob job. and there's the ascendance of Parker Robbins. we're introduced to him shooting the Owl; a relatively low level crime "boss." that was supposed to win everyone else over? a lot of those gathered criminals were bulletproof. wtf is the Wizard (messianic A.I.M figurehead and Frightful Four organizer) doing there? Living ("i'm a God") Laser being the one to quell everyone's doubts? has Bendis read any other Living Laser appearances? Bendis fails because he sees all of these characters (except his pets) as interchangeable (imo). he plays with them like my 6 year old nephew plays with toys.
You might want to check out the vision and scarlett witch limited series trades for more wanda stories. There were two limited series and both go into her history.Awesome thanks, I'll definitely check it out especially anything with Vision and Scarlet Witch together.
Secret Invasion and Siege's endings were rad, tbh. Like Empire Strikes Back and a cooler Return of the Jedi. The weak points are in-between like his Mighty run or the Hood/Voodoo stuff.
I don't blind date I make the direct market vibrate
You know those laughably awful fanfics that are clearly written by 14 year olds? That's how Bendis' writing reads to me. Stilted dialogue, juvenile humour, cliches, blatant author insert characters, plot that go nowhere, and just cringe cringe cringe.
I wish comics would get professional critique, just as art in any other medium would. Right now, the writers don't get any feedback other than "you made X character do this. I don't like that. This story is bad!" because most readers don't have the depth of understanding of writing to be able to analyse and communicate why a story works or doesn't (I certainly don't). Even valid criticism comes off as fanboy whining and the editors/writers can brush it off without much consequence.
I just felt like Bendis was having way too much fun destroying things for the sake of destroying things. And then towards the end, it just felt really directionless. Bendis isn't a bad writers, when he's good he's great. When he has a goal and a purpose, his stuff is fun. But he goes overboard and revels in the destruction.
When was the last time editors had any teeth with the big names?
Honestly, I think as a whole the industry cannot recognize cause and effect. Rob Liefeild is still considered employable because he created Deadpool and Cable. Yet everyone ignores that it was later writers who defined the characters, and actually made them popular. All Rob can do is draw poorly designed feet. And so, so many pouches
He screws the take off, the in-between and landing, yeah.
As you said, take the Hood. His big speech to his goons was changing the paradigm of super crime. Yet all he did under Bendis' pen was go after the New Avengers for revenge, him or his crew. Hell, they assaulted a registered hero for petty revenge, which should have had law enforcement gunning for him.
Or the skrulls. What did their infiltration even amount to? Nick was unknowingly in contact with the queen, yet that didn't seem to matter at all when it came down to it.
Or Dark Reign. Why did the Avengers never try to out any of his Avengers?
Bendis just bulldozes to his desired ending. IIRC, that was part of the reason why JMS left Thor, shame really.