|
Post by von Bek on Feb 28, 2007 13:48:00 GMT -5
So BENDIS! thinks the crappy Avengers Annual 10 by Claremont is one of the greatest comics of all time and Avengers 200 is ham fisted? The mind boggles. No, actually coming from BENDIS! it doesn´t...
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Mar 2, 2007 23:06:57 GMT -5
Bendis contends that they don't want to drive the "classic" fans off. Bendis then states that (in his opinion) MA will be even less likely to appeal to the "classic" fans. Are these statements logically consistent? One would think that if Bendis and Marvel were truly serious about wanting to keep the "classic" fans around, then it would reasonably follow that they would give those fans something they could enjoy. Instead, he is coming right out and saying that they probably will not enjoy MA. Therefore it seems to me that they are doing something they already admit will drive away the "classic" fans (NA and now MA), while simultaneously saying that they don't want to drive away the classic fans. Yes, those statements can be logically consistent. Where your chain of logic breaks is that you are equating “not wanting to drive ‘classic’ fans off” with “wanting to keep ‘classic’ fans”. There is a middle ground of not having either goal, i.e., of considering the “classic”-fans question negligible (if indeed considering it at all). That may be the case here; if so, then driving away “classic” fans would merely be a side effect. Also, it’s possible to have a goal but to lack the means (or to be unaware of the means) of achieving it. Probably there are multiple goals, which might compete against each other. First, the fact that Bendis is discussing it is prima facia evidence that Marvel does consider the question of reaching the "classic" fans. In my opinion, it’s better prima facie evidence that Bendis is answering the interviewer’s question (“is Mighty Avengers your response to people who have bemoaned the lack of a ‘classic’ Avengers team?”). But no, you’re right: his comments indicate a history of cogitation on the topic. However, when I wrote my response above, I was not trying to evaluate the interview (read three pages of Bendis text?!? Oy!); I was merely trying to answer your question about logic and consistency. (I assumed you were asking whether the two positions were consistent with each other.) I still contend that it is logically possible to lack a desire for an effect and simultaneously desire to do something which, as it so happens, produces that same effect. To illustrate with a hypothetical example: I desire to pull some M&M’s out of a bag and eat them. I don’t care whether any of the M&M’s I select and eat happen to be red—i.e., I don’t want to eat red M&M’s, which is different from wanting to not eat red M&M’s. That lack of interest in red M&M’s does not produce any sort of conflict even if one or more of the M&M’s I end up eating happen to be red. Even if I look into the bag and discover all of the M&M’s are red, I can still continue to select and eat them, simultaneously knowing that any M&M I will eat is red and not particularly desiring that particular color. I’m hungry. Now that I’ve studied the interview a little more, I see that in at least one place Bendis does express an interest in keeping “classic” fans (at least, I think that’s what he’s saying; I find his line of self-expression difficult to follow). But in your question you’d asked not about wanting to keep fans but about not wanting to drive them off—these are different things, and I was attempting to answer the question as actually asked. There are things I should think Quesada & co. would know, yet they turn around and make comments that suggest they haven’t a clue. Additionally, what you say about willingness dovetails with that I was saying about having multiple goals—even if they do know that putting some other writer on Avengers comics would keep the old-school fans, doing so might violate some more important goal, such as keeping the editor-in-chief’s cronies gainfully employed.
Can I throw in the opinion that the fact that he wants to KEEP old-time fans on New Avengers doesn't mean that when he does something else, it has to be to cater MORE to old time fans? If he feels classic fans should be amply sated by New Avengers, what's wrong with him trying to appeal to those who aren't yet avengers fans? Perhaps Bendis does feel the old guard should be sated—but as a general group, they aren’t. It’s great if a writer can both satisfy both the longtime fans and pull in new ones. But then—well, it’s probably easiest if I just repeat an old comment: But I do think poor handling of the legacy does count against a writer of a legacy comic. You cite Busiek as a writer who could satisfy both the “old guard” and new fans, in contrast with Bendis, who doesn’t do so well with the former. While you can’t please everybody, and the legacy criterion is hardly the only valid factor upon which to evaluate Avengers writing, I think it’s an important one. And Marvel must think so too, or else it wouldn’t bother maintaining the Avengers name, series, etc. Since serving both newer and older audiences (and you’re on your way to being part of the latter) is possible on a legacy series, why not do it? If Writer X can’t, why not find a Writer Y who can? (Well, maybe I’ve answered that last bit above.)
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Mar 6, 2007 23:09:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Mar 12, 2007 14:30:17 GMT -5
Wishful thinking!? I'm a classic Avengers fan who does NOT particularly like New Avengers- even if I rate it much higher than much of the rubbish we used to put up with like the Austen run. But besides sales, I suggest you check out the CBR avengers forum and you'll find PLENTY of oldschool Avengers fans who like New avengers. LOL, have you actually read the posts by the guys at CBR, they claim they are classic fans, and then don't have a clue what happened during Busiaks run. Sorry, they are just making a lot of false claims on that board.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 12, 2007 14:42:34 GMT -5
Black Knight, CBR is quite possibly the largest comics forum on the Internet. If you want to state that every single person who claims they are a classic Avengers fan is lying or wrong, then good luck with that.
I on the other hand have read the Busiek run, got fully into Avengers because of it, view it was one of my favourite runs on any title and I'm fine with Mighty Avengers and think in the list of ten worst Avengers writers, Bendis is not even there.
So how does that work on the Classic-ometer?
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Mar 12, 2007 14:59:52 GMT -5
in the list of ten worst Avengers writers, Bendis is not even there. So how does that work on the Classic-ometer? You're probably right. He's off the charts. It wouldn't even be fair to the other writers to be associated with the ... ah, nevermind. It's been said here a million times.
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Mar 12, 2007 15:05:31 GMT -5
Black Knight, CBR is quite possibly the largest comics forum on the Internet. If you want to state that every single person who claims they are a classic Avengers fan is lying or wrong, then good luck with that. I on the other hand have read the Busiek run, got fully into Avengers because of it, view it was one of my favourite runs on any title and I'm fine with Mighty Avengers and think in the list of ten worst Avengers writers, Bendis is not even there. So how does that work on the Classic-ometer? I don't doubt you, you have reasons for why you like NA. I think I have made that statement many times. I am referring to the large number of fans on CBR, that attack people who don't like NA, and then claim they are classic fans, but can't answer a single question about anything before Disassembled. I am sorry, I have been on that board for years, and those type of people are numerous. If you want to beleive that CBR is an example of what comic fans are like, then I really want nothing to do with comic fans. LOL
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Mar 12, 2007 15:06:40 GMT -5
Black Knight, CBR is quite possibly the largest comics forum on the Internet. If you want to state that every single person who claims they are a classic Avengers fan is lying or wrong, then good luck with that. I on the other hand have read the Busiek run, got fully into Avengers because of it, view it was one of my favourite runs on any title and I'm fine with Mighty Avengers and think in the list of ten worst Avengers writers, Bendis is not even there. So how does that work on the Classic-ometer? LOL, so name the 10 that are in your opinion, because aside from Austen, Leified, and Simonson I can't think of much worse.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 12, 2007 18:13:37 GMT -5
Well, I'd add Harras to your list, BK, but some do not agree.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Mar 12, 2007 20:28:31 GMT -5
Harras & De Falco aren't very much liked around these parts, but I personally liked them.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 12, 2007 21:19:44 GMT -5
I don't really remember De Falco's run on Avengers (I probably remember the issues, just don't know that he wrote them), but I remember not liking his work a few other places, like on one of the Spider-Man comics.
None of these men come close to Bendis for awful stories. Even the Liefeld bar is higher than that. I liked Bendis' work on Alias, but his work on NA just leaves an awful taste in my mouth. I think others are right when they say he's okay working in certain genres, and superhero teams aren't one of them.
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Mar 13, 2007 7:37:15 GMT -5
I don't remember Deflaco's run on Avengers either, I do remember his horrible run on Thor though... In my list it goes 1) Bendis 2) Austen 3) Liefied 4) Simonson After that it is a toss up.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Mar 13, 2007 16:46:12 GMT -5
Yes, I meant his Thor run...
|
|