|
Post by Doctor Doom on Jun 18, 2007 11:36:29 GMT -5
The Namor one I grant you but I can fully say that I did not buy this issue hoping for a battle. (Mainly due to the fact that I was spoiled online first but the point still stands )
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jun 18, 2007 14:01:05 GMT -5
Are you guys reading Captain America? I avoided it at first since they once again felt inclined to kill off a beloved character--but I just bought the issue with CA's wake, and the writing was exceptional. Now Brubaker can write dialogue!
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Jun 18, 2007 16:27:11 GMT -5
Y'know we DO have a Cap forum That said I'm a regular reader and while I'm pretty sure most of this site doesn't read it, Brubaker has garnered HUGE praise and acclaim from both fans and critics- something rare indeed. For myself, it's the best book on the market by a mile.
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Jun 18, 2007 21:40:04 GMT -5
If only he would let his writing speak for itself without killing and resurrecting characters willy-nilly.
RSC
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Jun 19, 2007 3:23:27 GMT -5
Some of his feel it DOES, and those killings and resurrections are part of it.
I still think your argument that "Could he have written a good story without doing 'X' is utterly irrelevant. It's like saying "Could Stan Lee have written good Avengers stories without bringing back Captain America?" The answer is: Yes... but let's just thank God he decided not to!
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Jun 19, 2007 8:41:41 GMT -5
Some of his feel it DOES, and those killings and resurrections are part of it. I still think your argument that "Could he have written a good story without doing 'X' is utterly irrelevant. It's like saying "Could Stan Lee have written good Avengers stories without bringing back Captain America?" The answer is: Yes... but let's just thank God he decided not to! That's not a good example. At the point Stan Lee resurrected Captain America, he (Cap) had not been regularly published in almost 20 years outside of a handful of issues in the 50s. He was essentially a defunct character. RSC
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jun 19, 2007 11:33:47 GMT -5
The reason I brought CA up was that there isn't any action in the story (well, aside from a bar fight) but the whole things moves quickly and is fascinating. The difference between the dialogue writing quality between Bendis and Brubaker is astonishing.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Jun 19, 2007 12:01:18 GMT -5
But RSC, at the point where Brubaker brought back bucky he had been dead for forty years. He too was a defunct character. He had not been (seriously) in any published comic in those forty-years save in flashback.
The question stands- Could Stan Lee have written good Avengers stories without bringing back Cap?
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist-X on Jun 19, 2007 13:38:19 GMT -5
Too Hypothetical to answer with certainty, same with could burbaker have written a good story without certain deaths/resurections, its too hard to speculate on things like that.
There are a long list of reasons Stan could write a good Cap less avengers, and at the same time it is reasonable to assume that the public would have recieved a different version of the work in a completely different and possibly negative way.
Same for Burbaker, he might have written a different but similar story, but would people have liked it like they liked what he wrote? Impossible to say.
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jun 19, 2007 13:53:07 GMT -5
Well as a guys who's read every Avengers comic, I would say the Avengers would have been more like Bendis' New Avengers without CA. They'd have been a collection of very separate entities without the chemistry Cap brought to the mix. CA made the Avengers seem kind of like a family, rather than a bunch of super stars.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Jun 19, 2007 14:14:29 GMT -5
Well as a guys who's read every Avengers comic, I would say the Avengers would have been more like Bendis' New Avengers without CA. They'd have been a collection of very separate entities without the chemistry Cap brought to the mix. CA made the Avengers seem kind of like a family, rather than a bunch of super stars. Not sure I agree with you here. The Avengers circa 1968 (YJ, Vision, Hawkeye/Goliath, Wasp and BP) had this chemistry too (kind of a fellowship) even without Cap.
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jun 19, 2007 14:46:04 GMT -5
True--but I think having CA join the team early on allowed a change in chemistry that remained with the team whether he was always there or not. This is just my POV---before CA came on board, the Avengers seemed like a bunch of celebrity super heroes rather than a family-like team. It was like the individuals over-shadowed the group in the same Wolverine and Sentry and Spiderman overwhelmed New Avengers.
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Jun 19, 2007 19:27:02 GMT -5
But RSC, at the point where Brubaker brought back bucky he had been dead for forty years. He too was a defunct character. He had not been (seriously) in any published comic in those forty-years save in flashback. The question stands- Could Stan Lee have written good Avengers stories without bringing back Cap? Not so, not so. While Bucky was not "alive," he appeared numerous times in flashback, and was referenced hundreds if not thousands of times. His death had (repeat, had) meaning and he was not a defunct character. RSC
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Jun 19, 2007 19:33:40 GMT -5
The difference between the dialogue writing quality between Bendis and Brubaker is astonishing. Yes, it is. I won't buy either man's product, for totally different reasons. With Bendis it's the mischaracterizations, decompression, lack of accomplishment, inane dialogue, etc. With Brubaker it's the deaths and resurrections. The man is usually a highly competent writer and his characterization and dialogue are far, far superior to Bendis. My knock on him is lack of judgment, and perhaps an approach that says to me he's trying to make a name for himself and put his stamp on every possible facet of the Cap story just because he can. RSC
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Jun 20, 2007 9:05:14 GMT -5
True--but I think having CA join the team early on allowed a change in chemistry that remained with the team whether he was always there or not. It had to do with the Avengers changing from 'JLA-Lite' to Cap´s Kooky Quartet after #16 too. After that B-list characters (Hawkeye and Wanda are the obvious examples) became essential to the team, even more than the big three.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Jun 20, 2007 9:11:47 GMT -5
Brubaker is usually a highly competent writer and his characterization and dialogue are far, far superior to Bendis. My knock on him is lack of judgment, and perhaps an approach that says to me he's trying to make a name for himself and put his stamp on every possible facet of the Cap story just because he can. RSC Well, almost every writer do (or try to do) that, make a name for himself. I don´t think it must be a bad thing, if the writer is doing his best, and not only going for the shock value. As for the Cap´s death, what else could Brubaker do after the end of Civil War (that was not written by him BTW), nine issues of Cap in jail?
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Jun 20, 2007 13:08:04 GMT -5
Well, almost every writer do (or try to do) that, make a name for himself. I don´t think it must be a bad thing, if the writer is doing his best, and not only going for the shock value. As for the Cap´s death, what else could Brubaker do after the end of Civil War (that was not written by him BTW), nine issues of Cap in jail? I don't think that personal recognition as a writer must be a bad thing either. It's just that in Mr. Brubaker's case I am starting to believe that his first and last priority is to make a name for himself and promote his ideas and his characters to the exclusion of all else. In the past, I've resisted thinking that and I continue to resist it to some extent. Whatever I might sound like, I do have some respect for his ability. For example, I have tended not to think that he's angling to put Bucky in the Cap suit because as I see it, that would be the ultimate in self-promotion. However, I've been slowly moving toward the idea that this really might be the case. That is, that this whole story might have been an exercise to and promote and benefit his baby (resurrected Bucky) and not really to write about Captain America. If Bucky ends up in the suit, that will do it for me. Examples? OK, Jack Monroe. It's been very convincingly argued that what Ed Brubaker managed to do with Bucky, in terms of characterization, is simply to re-create Nomad/Jack Monroe. I personally don't think that Mr. Brubaker understood this until it was too late to reconsider. So what happens? He offs Jack Monroe to remove the conflict from the playing field. Another example: Ed Brubaker offs the Red Skull in #1 because, quoting him, "clones are stupid." Subsequently, TRS ends up inside Lukin as a result of cosmic-cube mind transferrance. OK, how is that less "stupid" than a clone? Again, it seems to me that the real reason it happened is that Ed Brubaker wanted to erase Mark Gruenwald's legacy (the cloned Red Skull) and stamp his own on it, just because he could. I'm not saying this is cut and dried. Only time will tell if Steve Rogers has really been consigned to the dustbin for the forseeable future. But even if Cap comes back under Brubaker, the interim is still going to be about plumping his own creations. RSC
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Jun 20, 2007 14:12:33 GMT -5
It's just that in Mr. Brubaker's case I am starting to believe that his first and last priority is to make a name for himself and promote his ideas and his characters to the exclusion of all else. Sharon, "Bucky"/WS, Nick Fury and the Falcon are hardly Brubaker´s characters. These characters belong in Cap´s book, and it´s a pleasure to see them as his supporting cast again. I´m not Sharon biggest fan, and her many incarnations under many writers who changed her drastically made the character even more convoluted, but she is important in Cap´s history, so I can see why Brubaker choose her over some of the other Cap´s love interests. As for WS, we need a separate thread just to discuss him... Whatever I might sound like, I do have some respect for his ability. We´re on the same page here. For example, I have tended not to think that he's angling to put Bucky in the Cap suit because as I see it, that would be the ultimate in self-promotion. Here I strongly disagree. Let´s face it, WS is hardly an original idea. From Alan Moore´s Kid Miracleman to Jason Todd (and I could name many other examples) the teen sidekick turned grown up anti-hero/villain is one of those archetypical stories of the superhero universe that have been around since the beggining of the grim´n´gritty era, the 50´s Bucky/Jack Munroe was sort of a light version of that. So it would be very naive from the part of Brubaker to promote WS as a clever and original idea. OK, Jack Monroe. It's been very convincingly argued that what Ed Brubaker managed to do with Bucky, in terms of characterization, is simply to re-create Nomad/Jack Monroe. Yes, WS is Nomad without the Lorenzo Lamas look, but the emotional background is much more intense, Bucky Barnes was the original Captain America sidekick, Munroe was a fake. And I say that as a Nomad fan (at least until the Lorenzo Lamas years). Another example: Ed Brubaker offs the Red Skull in #1 because, quoting him, "clones are stupid." Subsequently, TRS ends up inside Lukin as a result of cosmic-cube mind transferrance. OK, how is that less "stupid" than a clone? Comic book superheroes stories are made from silly ideas, the very idea of a super serum that turns a fragile young man into sort of an Übermensch is kinda silly, but that´s where the magic lies, in turning odd concepts into good entertainment. And some concepts (clones for example) are overused of just too silly even for superheroes. I'm not saying this is cut and dried. Only time will tell if Steve Rogers has really been consigned to the dustbin for the forseeable future. But even if Cap comes back under Brubaker, the interim is still going to be about plumping his own creations. RSC OK, but again this is not his fault. After CW what else could he have done with Cap?
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Jun 20, 2007 15:41:07 GMT -5
Sharon, "Bucky"/WS, Nick Fury and the Falcon are hardly Brubaker´s characters. These characters belong in Cap´s book, and it´s a pleasure to see them as his supporting cast again. I´m not Sharon biggest fan, and her many incarnations under many writers who changed her drastically made the character even more convoluted, but she is important in Cap´s history, so I can see why Brubaker choose her over some of the other Cap´s love interests. As for WS, we need a separate thread just to discuss him... Nick and Sam certainly aren't, nor even Sharon. However, resurrected Bucky certainly is, and it seems clear to me that the book now revolves around him. Regarding Sharon, I believe that Ed Brubaker also intends to put his permanent mark on Cap's character in the romantic sense as well. The Sharon relationship was revived (again) and made explicit both because Ed Brubaker likes the character, and more importantly because he intends to follow through on it to its logical conclusion. This ties back into his (IMO) desire to put his permanent stamp on everything Cap, meaning in this case marriage and even kids. What am I getting at, you ask? It is my personal view that Mr. Brubaker does have Cap's return planned, because not doing so leaves massive dead ends in plots he has already set up for Cap's romantic future. I've read his Cap stuff carefully, and IMO Ed Brubaker doesn't do things for no reason. It's one of the things I appreciate about his style. While I think that Sharon is the most likely end-beneficiary of this, it's not certain. Spitifire was very subtly re-introduced as a romantic competitor. What I'm getting at is that I believe that Cap will be coming back, because Ed Brubaker has laid the groundwork for a)a Cap/Sharon/Spitfire love triangle to exploit and b)an intention to advance the love story to its logical conclusion, with either Sharon (highly likely) or Jackie (small chance). Hopefully the explanation of my thinking wasn't too confused. No, the overall idea is not original in the sense you mention. However, it is "original" (perhaps original isn't the best word) in the sense that Bucky was one of only two meaningful deaths in all of comics. Undoing that death certainly allowed for the exploration of previously unreachable (and original) territory in the Cap mythos. Of course, that doesn't mean that I think it was a good idea that should have been done. Merely that it is a fact and has been done. Yes, Monroe was Bucky II, but that's as far as the derivative aspects of his character go wrt Bucky I. Before Ed Brubaker took over, Bucky was the kid sidekick who happened on Steve Rogers changing into his uni and begged him to tag along. After Ed Brubaker, Bucky was a throat-cutting commando with a tortured mental history -- in other words, lifted straight from Jack Monroe. You may like the change, but the fact is that Ed Brubaker's "Bucky" bears much resemblance to Nomad and very little to Bucky. Of course. All I'm saying is "what's good for the goose is good for the gander." If Ed Brubaker thinks one of Mark Gruenwald's legacy plot devices was silly, OK. But to then proceed to invalidate that device for a device of his own that is equally silly -- not OK. It's hypocritical. I'm looking for consistency here. Failing to maintain options is his own responsibility, due to lack of forethought, or perhaps too many irons in the fire. Option 1) Cap stuck in jail. Would be called derivative because Ed Brubaker just stuck Daredevil in jail. Well, whose fault is that? Option 2) Cap requests amnesty and grudgingly rejoins the hero community. CW already had Cap rolling over and surrendering at the end, and many antis are already right back to heroing. So there is no real obstacle there. Option 3) Cap requests amnesty and retires. If he officially retired under amnesty, the story would be called derivative of Gruenwald's replacement Cap story, with some validity. Option 4) Cap flees and goes underground as an outlaw, maintaining the Cap uni and shield. This is not derivative of Gruenwald's Replacement Cap story, where he acquiesced to the government's wishes and gave up the mantle. It is also not derivative of the Englehart/Nomad story, where Cap also gave up the mantle. Option 5) Kill Cap for shock value and to provide a false conclusion to CW. I say "false," because it's well known that the Cap assassination plot has nothing to do with the CW plot and was merely tacked on for convenience and sales. It seems to me that options 2) and 3) are the best ones under the circumstances, with perhaps 3) being most appropriate as an "ending" to CW under the circumstances. I fail to see how Cap "needed" to die to conclude CW. RSC
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist-X on Jun 20, 2007 16:12:48 GMT -5
Well if the SHRA is as evil and corrupt and un-constitutional as you say, Marvel's Beacon of Liberty dying is a good way to kick of the new age of the Innitiative.
Not really a 'need' but certainly an event that has a lot of symbolism and parralells with Marvel's current direction.
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Jun 20, 2007 16:23:38 GMT -5
Well if the SHRA is as evil and corrupt and un-constitutional as you say, Marvel's Beacon of Liberty dying is a good way to kick of the new age of the Innitiative. Not really a 'need' but certainly an event that has a lot of symbolism and parralells with Marvel's current direction. Cap driven underground like a common criminal would do that equally well, and would leave Cap, well, alive to write stories about. As it is, you can't explore how he deals with being on the wrong side of the law more or less permanently. RSC
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Jun 20, 2007 16:28:14 GMT -5
Nick and Sam certainly aren't, nor even Sharon. However, resurrected Bucky certainly is, and it seems clear to me that the book now revolves around him. No, not really. I just read CA #27 and, while WS is important to the plot, he´s more in the role of the antagonist than of the protagonist here. So, who´s the protagonist now without Cap, you may ask... nobody. The book is more like a team book now, with a group of characters sharing the spotlight. Regarding Sharon, I believe that Ed Brubaker also intends to put his permanent mark on Cap's character in the romantic sense as well. The Sharon relationship was revived (again) and made explicit both because Ed Brubaker likes the character, and more importantly because he intends to follow through on it to its logical conclusion. This ties back into his (IMO) desire to put his permanent stamp on everything Cap, meaning in this case marriage and even kids. What am I getting at, you ask? It is my personal view that Mr. Brubaker does have Cap's return planned, because not doing so leaves massive dead ends in plots he has already set up for Cap's romantic future. I've read his Cap stuff carefully, and IMO Ed Brubaker doesn't do things for no reason. It's one of the things I appreciate about his style. While I think that Sharon is the most likely end-beneficiary of this, it's not certain. Spitifire was very subtly re-introduced as a romantic competitor. What I'm getting at is that I believe that Cap will be coming back, because Ed Brubaker has laid the groundwork for a)a Cap/Sharon/Spitfire love triangle to exploit and b)an intention to advance the love story to its logical conclusion, with either Sharon (highly likely) or Jackie (small chance). Hopefully the explanation of my thinking wasn't too confused. Interesting points. I don´t think Marvel would let Brubaker get Cap married (with or without children), see Joe Q´s opinion about Peter Parker (who´s the 'average guy' in the MU, much more than Steve Rogers will ever be)´s marriage. Before Ed Brubaker took over, Bucky was the kid sidekick who happened on Steve Rogers changing into his uni and begged him to tag along. After Ed Brubaker, Bucky was a throat-cutting commando with a tortured mental history -- in other words, lifted straight from Jack Monroe. You may like the change, but the fact is that Ed Brubaker's "Bucky" bears much resemblance to Nomad and very little to Bucky. Well, I wasn´t too pleased with the retcon of Bucky´s personality either. And why Brubaker thinks he should become a ladies man too is beyond me (read CA #27 for more information about what I´m referring to). Is it to compete with Tony Stark? Or to avoid the kind of rumor and gossip that all sidekicks are target of... ;D Failing to maintain options is his own responsibility, due to lack of forethought, or perhaps too many irons in the fire. Option 1) Cap stuck in jail. Would be called derivative because Ed Brubaker just stuck Daredevil in jail. Well, whose fault is that? Brian Michael Bendis. No, seriously. Before Doom or the thew40 start complaining, BMB was the one who stuck Matt Murdock in jail. Option 2) Cap requests amnesty and grudgingly rejoins the hero community. CW already had Cap rolling over and surrendering at the end, and many antis are already right back to heroing. So there is no real obstacle there. That would have been the greatest anti climax ever in the story of comic books. After 7 issues of Cap vs. IM, Cap surrenders, register and forms the Mighty Avengers... Only that could have made CW even more ridicule. ;D Option 4) Cap flees and goes underground as an outlaw, maintaining the Cap uni and shield. This is not derivative of Gruenwald's Replacement Cap story, where he acquiesced to the government's wishes and gave up the mantle. It is also not derivative of the Englehart/Nomad story, where Cap also gave up the mantle. Yeah, but the whole point of the end of CW was that Cap realized he was wrong. Why would he restart the war by going underground, to be hunted again by SHIELD?
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Jun 20, 2007 16:34:09 GMT -5
No, not really. I just read CA #27 and, while WS is important to the plot, he´s more in the role of the antagonist than of the protagonist here. So, who´s the protagonist now without Cap, you may ask... nobody. The book is more like a team book now, with a group of characters sharing the spotlight. Exactly. The Red Skull is as much of a main character as Winter Soldier. Hell, Falcon and Sharon were in last issue at least as much as, if not more than, WS and most of his scene was just a brawl. haven't read #27 yet. Actually, I have to say I felt the retcons (of course) made sense. And before RSC calls me a whiner I'm not alone, I know a huge number of Cap fans who like me disagreed with them at first but found them logical as time went on. The old Bucky... no offence but, he just wasn't plausible. Right. Let's not forget that just about any review of either Bendis' Daredevil run OR Brubaker's story of DD in jail got absolutely insane reviews. I'm pretty sure IGN called "The Devil In Cell Block D" the single best Daredevil story since Frank Miller, and maybe even better. Well... that or Skrulls. Exactly. But our friend RSC- like you-, like many- does NOT think he was wrong.
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Jun 21, 2007 0:33:18 GMT -5
No, not really. I just read CA #27 and, while WS is important to the plot, he´s more in the role of the antagonist than of the protagonist here. So, who´s the protagonist now without Cap, you may ask... nobody. The book is more like a team book now, with a group of characters sharing the spotlight. Bucky is far from the antagonist. He is arguably an anti-hero, but he is not the antagonist. And regardless, being an anti-hero these days is certainly no obstacle to starring in a book. See the Punisher, Wolverine, etc etc etc. Bucky didn't steal the shield to hang over his fireplace. He's going to be carrying it. For now he won't be in the uniform -- but the red, white, and blue shield on Bucky's right arm will be a deliberate invocation of the last bearer and will leave no doubt who is the protagonist. What odds would you have given two years ago that Joe Q would've let Ed Brubaker resurrect Bucky? I'll be forthright here and say that Bucky's "commando" retcon is actually a postive development. Many disagree, and I fully understand why. I actually browsed #27 today against my better judgment. Yes, I found the "revelation" that Bucky was tagging Natasha to be gratuitous and totally unnecessary. It also casts a highly disturbing new light on Natasha as well. She knew that Bucky was alive. She served with Cap on the Avengers all those years, and said nothing. And heck, she spent a good period of her time on the Avengers with a smashing crush on Cap. It will probably be said that she didn't know it was Bucky at the time, but it would be impossible for someone in her position to never see a photo of Cap and Bucky, especially once she defected to the US. I wonder if Ed Brubaker considered these implications. You are correct, my bad. It's still a weak option, it's just not Brubaker's fault. As opposed to the anti-climax of Cap and crew just rolling over when tackled by EMTs? And remember, the death was never intended to be the "conclusion" to CW. They are separate plots grafted together for convenience and sales. The premise that "Cap suddenly realized he was wrong" after killing 50 people was as stupid as the premise that Cap would engage in a violent resistance in the middle of a populated city in the first place. You're trying to make sense out of sh*t. I understand this -- so when I say that this was the best option, I mean that only within the context of the story as it's already happened. You can't take a turd, squeeze it between your hands, and expect it turn into a diamond. There was no way to salvage anything out of CW without simply ignoring it. That's why Cap underground, but alive, was the best option. It gives Marvel time to fix, retcon, or quietly ignore everything about Civil War. For example -- how many of the so-called "major changes" are still operative from the "House of M" event? Few, if any. RSC
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist-X on Jun 21, 2007 2:43:58 GMT -5
uhhhh Mutants are still depowered for the most part, Wolverine still has his re-established memories and Ms. Marvel stayed A list in the MU. It also implied Hakweyes subsequent resurection didn't it. And the Scarlet Witch is still in issolation.
Magneto got his powers back, Quicksilver sort of got his powers back but differently, these are the only parts of major changes that got dropped as far as I know.
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist-X on Jun 21, 2007 2:45:37 GMT -5
Ohhhh and House of M's events are being dealt with in the current arc of New X-men (Magik was alive for a short time and that causes the X-kids a world of trouble)
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Jun 21, 2007 9:18:22 GMT -5
Let's not forget that just about any review of either Bendis' Daredevil run OR Brubaker's story of DD in jail got absolutely insane reviews. I'm pretty sure IGN called "The Devil In Cell Block D" the single best Daredevil story since Frank Miller, and maybe even better. Wait, the reviews got insane reviews? It must have been really insane to review a review. I would like to read that! Just kidding. And calm down Doom, I actually enjoyed Brubaker´s Devil In Cell Block D, and was just explaining to RSC that Bendis was the one who left Matt Murdock in jail at the end of his run, and that I wasn´t being sarcastic or making a snarky comment about BENDIS!, not this time. Exactly. But our friend RSC- like you-, like many- does NOT think he was wrong. If they didn´t turn IM into a warmonger and Reed Richards into a mad cientist, I wouldn´t have that much problem accepting that he may be wrong...
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Jun 21, 2007 9:59:12 GMT -5
Bucky is far from the antagonist. He is arguably an anti-hero, but he is not the antagonist. And regardless, being an anti-hero these days is certainly no obstacle to starring in a book. See the Punisher, Wolverine, etc etc etc. He´s the antagonist in the sense that the other characters in the book (who are as important to this capless Cap book as him) are hunting him down to stop him. And Brubaker clearly shows that WS is emotional and intelectual unstable, so he´s not trying to justify his actions, like many writers do with anti-heroes like Wolverine. Bucky didn't steal the shield to hang over his fireplace. He's going to be carrying it. For now he won't be in the uniform -- but the red, white, and blue shield on Bucky's right arm will be a deliberate invocation of the last bearer and will leave no doubt who is the protagonist. I disagree here. If Brubaker really wnated to present WS as the next Cap he wouldn´t write the character with so many flaws like he already did. he would either do a redemption storyarc first or use some plot device to 'purify' the character. WS is borderline schyzofrenic. What odds would you have given two years ago that Joe Q would've let Ed Brubaker resurrect Bucky? To be honest, it didn´t surprise me at all. Joe Q´s known for his love for controversial moves, and what could be more contoversial to CA than bringing Bucky back (and as a killer)? I'll be forthright here and say that Bucky's "commando" retcon is actually a postive development. Err... why? As opposed to the anti-climax of Cap and crew just rolling over when tackled by EMTs? And remember, the death was never intended to be the "conclusion" to CW. They are separate plots grafted together for convenience and sales. I still think it was the only viable option left for Brubaker... The premise that "Cap suddenly realized he was wrong" after killing 50 people was as stupid as the premise that Cap would engage in a violent resistance in the middle of a populated city in the first place. You're trying to make sense out of sh*t. I understand this -- so when I say that this was the best option, I mean that only within the context of the story as it's already happened. You can't take a turd, squeeze it between your hands, and expect it turn into a diamond. There was no way to salvage anything out of CW without simply ignoring it. Exactly, so except for the death, anything else would have just worsened a already problematic development. That's why Cap underground, but alive, was the best option. It gives Marvel time to fix, retcon, or quietly ignore everything about Civil War. For example -- how many of the so-called "major changes" are still operative from the "House of M" event? Few, if any. RSC the death also gives Marvel time to fix the situation, without the danger that even more sh_t hits the fan...
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Jun 21, 2007 10:04:44 GMT -5
uhhhh Mutants are still depowered for the most part, Wolverine still has his re-established memories and Ms. Marvel stayed A list in the MU. It also implied Hakweyes subsequent resurection didn't it. And the Scarlet Witch is still in issolation. The depowred mutants plot is being ignored in almost every X-book except for X-Factor. Marvel is trying to turn Ms. Marvel into Marvel´s Wonder Woman, but could have been made without House of M too. As for Clint and Wanda I´m not sure what you meant...
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Jun 21, 2007 10:30:02 GMT -5
Actually were it this time last year I'd totally agree about House of M, but now it's impossible. EVERY SINGLE X-Book is counting down with an event called "Endangered Species" to another X-Men event... and the ENTIRETY of the plot for both crossovers is based completely around the ending of House of M. So House of M actually caused avery radical shift... it just took it's time to do it.
|
|