Bleeding Cool says "Make Mine Marvel" will restore legacy numbering

[Blackest Knight]

It all depends greatly on the creative teams, but I love this news. As someone who started reading Avengers in 1975 and Uncanny X-Men in 1976, I'm thrilled to see Marvel honoring its legacy and acknowledging that.

I have very big hopes for Make Mine Marvel. Please help me spend my money, Marvel!

[Digifiend]

Only problem I could see with this is trying to figure out what issues and what books they count in order for it to reach whatever legacy numbering it is?

I would assume it would be just any series that bears that title, but as the list of all the 150 Venom issues shows, it's ALOT more complicated than that. Honestly I would prefer just sticking with the current numbering and not doing any one-month #1 relaunches. Or do that for one-off legacy issues, like Ultimate X-Men #600, Deadpool #250, and the most recent Thunderbolts.



I agree with this, if they put "Part 1" on the cover for whatever new arc is starting up, then it will be alright. They did it with all the Marvel NOW! 2.0 books, but then dropped doing it after the first arc.

Like DC does... good idea.

Thunderbolts was a 20th anniversary issue. Not a legacy numbering. It would've been issue 200, if you don't count the Red Hulk series and do count the Dark Avengers run that continued the numbering (which ended at 190). But I think the Red Hulk series does count, considering that team was included on the cover of #10. Which means they're actually a little bit past 200 now.

[Frontier]

There's gotta be a catchier slogan for their new initiative then "Make Mine Marvel." Just stick with "Generations," if nothing else.

Though frankly I'll take going back to legacy numbers versus another slew of relaunches and #1's .

I wonder what number they'll land on with ASM?

Also good to know we can look forward to a proper Hulk run with Banner back and a proper Steve Rogers Cap run soon .

I wonder if Thor will take back his book near or at #700?

[Ianbarreilles]

Well, to be fair while I do think they've made mistakes (every company does afterall) I think the ''Make Marvel Mine'' is their way, if this article is completely accurate that is, of acknowledging their history. And, personally speaking, I don't see anything wrong with the ''Make Marvel Mine'' branding. Doesn't even necessarily mean that they think they've gone wrong somewhere either it could just be a branding issue thing LOL. Nor do I see it as ''cringeworthy'' personally.

Anyhow, that's just my two pennys worth

I agree I think what I am saying is to some people who didn't like the direction marvel took with their stories during the all new all different marvel and marvel now 2016/2017 version may think it's admitting they were wrong in that they didn't do anything right.

I think that marvel did somethings wrong such a civil war ii in how bendis wrote Carol Danvers and in my opinion riri williams abruptly taking on the mantle of iron man and especially the lack of a good reasoning for why the world thinks cyclops is hitler or worse than hitler? And how the clone conspiracy felt kinda rushed in its final issue even with the omega issue it still feels so rushed and it's a shame because I really liked the first four issues.

I also felt the X-men titles could've shown more of the consequences and effects of the terrigen cloud poisoning and killing off the mutants and how the mutants were coping with the effects.

[Ianbarreilles]

I really hope this time captain marvel and the untimates won't relaunch like they did for marvel now.

[MindofShadow]

I really hope this time captain marvel and the untimates won't relaunch like they did for marvel now.

Why? because you won't Carol cancelled?

Carol is a perfect example. She can't survive in this climate without some sort of a boost every 12 or so issues.


As a fan of some books that hover in the 20K range... this will suck. Sure, Spider-Man, Logan, Cap, and other will be just fine and dandy no matter what but others (Luke Cage and IF solos I am lookign at you) could be very well F'd by this.

I love the seasonal model and wish they would simply go all in with it. year + issue, relaunch every Jan

[Digifiend]

Ultimates would be illogical, as the 1610 runs definitely don't belong lumped in with the current one, and they've DELIBERATELY used the seasonal model, rather than it being a editorial mandate.

Carol's solo... would you count her Ms. Marvel runs? Or the non-Carol Captain Marvel runs? Or just count from when she became Cap?

[The Negative Zone]

idk guys buying Amazing Spider-Man # 586868 just isn't as fun as buying Amazing Spider-Man # 1. Kind of takes away the whole this is a new entry thing.

[CIA]

Like DC does... good idea.

Thunderbolts was a 20th anniversary issue. Not a legacy numbering. It would've been issue 200, if you don't count the Red Hulk series and do count the Dark Avengers run that continued the numbering (which ended at 190). But I think the Red Hulk series does count, considering that team was included on the cover of #10. Which means they're actually a little bit past 200 now.

174 issues of Thunderbolts volume 1 (including New Thunderbolts)
32 issues of vol 2
12 of vol 3
3 annuals (1997, 2000, vol.2 annual)
4 one shots
1 point one issue

You can add Avengers/Thunderbolts and maybe Dark Avengers and it will be very close to #250.

[Ianbarreilles]

Ultimates would be illogical, as the 1610 runs definitely don't belong lumped in with the current one, and they've DELIBERATELY used the seasonal model, rather than it being a editorial mandate.

Carol's solo... would you count her Ms. Marvel runs? Or the non-Carol Captain Marvel runs? Or just count from when she became Cap?

I think if neither captain marvel nor ultimates relaunched and retained their numbering and wouldn't take the numbering of prior volumes the exception being the ultimates.

so for captain marvel it would probably continuing the numbering of the 2017 marvel now relaunch so putting it at 12 issues by the end of this year assuming it doesn't relaunch but with the ultimates 2 since it actually flowed perfectly in how it picked up where previous the all new all different marvel volume left off on with its civil war ii tie so if they do that it'll be like 26 issues total.

Of course this is all assume they don't relaunch.

[Frontier]

idk guys buying Amazing Spider-Man # 586868 just isn't as fun as buying Amazing Spider-Man # 1. Kind of takes away the whole this is a new entry thing.

Do we really need that many ASM #1's though? Especially when it's been the same writer across multiple relaunches?

[Wiccan]

Why? because you won't Carol cancelled?

Carol is a perfect example. She can't survive in this climate without some sort of a boost every 12 or so issues.


As a fan of some books that hover in the 20K range... this will suck. Sure, Spider-Man, Logan, Cap, and other will be just fine and dandy no matter what but others (Luke Cage and IF solos I am lookign at you) could be very well F'd by this.

I love the seasonal model and wish they would simply go all in with it. year + issue, relaunch every Jan

I mean... I don't think they plan on not giving Carol a book at all, regardless of how well it does, so they may as well give her a consistent run. Don't bring a new creative team just because it's relaunching and don't relaunch just because of a new creative team.

[John Ossie]

I really hope this time captain marvel and the untimates won't relaunch like they did for marvel now.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see on that front but if I was forced to go one way or the other I'd say they would? (See even in my hypothetical guess I'm not sure LOL)

I agree I think what I am saying is to some people who didn't like the direction marvel took with their stories during the all new all different marvel and marvel now 2016/2017 version may think it's admitting they were wrong in that they didn't do anything right.

I think that marvel did somethings wrong such a civil war ii in how bendis wrote Carol Danvers and in my opinion riri williams abruptly taking on the mantle of iron man and especially the lack of a good reasoning for why the world thinks cyclops is hitler or worse than hitler? And how the clone conspiracy felt kinda rushed in its final issue even with the omega issue it still feels so rushed and it's a shame because I really liked the first four issues.

I also felt the X-men titles could've shown more of the consequences and effects of the terrigen cloud poisoning and killing off the mutants and how the mutants were coping with the effects.

I agree that there'll be people who'd think that (there's always some right?) but I think they'd be wrong to think that as Marvel aren't exactly known for thinking they've done something wrong LOL.

As for Clone Conspiracy, the ending was done in a weird order IMO. ASM 24 felt like Omega LOL and vice-versa. There're other things I personally think Marvel have screwed up but I'll leave it as I'm not sure whether it'd derail the thread which is not my intent.

Ultimates would be illogical, as the 1610 runs definitely don't belong lumped in with the current one, and they've DELIBERATELY used the seasonal model, rather than it being a editorial mandate.

Carol's solo... would you count her Ms. Marvel runs? Or the non-Carol Captain Marvel runs? Or just count from when she became Cap?

Interesting question about Carol. My guess is yes that they would count non-Captain Marvel stuff if they did go in that direction for her solo stuff?

[MindofShadow]

I mean... I don't think they plan on not giving Carol a book at all, regardless of how well it does, so they may as well give her a consistent run. Don't bring a new creative team just because it's relaunching and don't relaunch just because of a new creative team.

Why?

What does a "consistent run" of numbers accomplish exactly

[John Ossie]

Do we really need that many ASM #1's though? Especially when it's been the same writer across multiple relaunches?

I personally feel that writers (on any title) shouldn't have more than two number ones on a title but that's just me.