Are the New Avengers a REAL Avengers team?

[Doctor Doom]

Well, pretty self explanatory. Are the New New Avengers a real Avengers team?

[balok]

I don't think of them as such. I think that book might have been better titled "Resistance" or "Underground" or some better title that connotes what they're goal is (chiefly, opposing the SHRA), and I'm sure a markethole could come up with something better. Or maybe even, "The Defenders"

I also don't think they're a good team - I like these characters, but every one of them works better as a solo act. And has in the past or present worked exactly that way.

[Nutcase65]

Like someone else ha pointed out, they would make a wonderg=ful marvel knights team. But they-re no Avengers.

[Doctor Bong]

They make the Great Lakes Avengers make more sense by comparison...

[dlw66]

balok said:

I don't think of them as such.

I am trying to wash them from my memory banks altogether...

[redstatecap]

I am not someone who believes that only previous Avengers can be Avengers. For example, I didn't have much of a problem with the old "New Avengers" roster with the exceptions of Man-Suit Ronin (total joke of a character) Wolverine (there for cash flow) and Sentry (a lame Superman ripoff). None of those reasons include "they weren't Avengers before," and only Wolverine I would say is not "Avengers material," based on established characterization.
I had no problem with Spider-Woman, Spider-Man, or even Cage. I only really had a problem with the storytelling or lack thereof, and how those characters plus Iron Man and Cap were handled by Bendis.
The New, New Avengers roster is a bit more problematic for me. Ronin is a foolish attempt to salvage a stupid concept, regardless of who is in the suit. Wolverine again is there for the cash flow and should not be an Avenger. Dr. Strange will be nerfed when Bendis needs him to be and uber-powerful when Bendis needs him to be -- the perfect plot device. And finally, Echo's disability makes teamwork highly difficult.
Iron Fist I don't have any problem with per se, except that teaming him up with Cage seems to be a cutesy reprise of "Power Man & Iron Fist" of the 80s.
If you want to pick (as the writer) some totally new Avengers, fine. But do a better job of picking and then do a better job utilizing and characterizing what you picked, is my opinion.
I also think that the handling of how the new roster came about leaves much to be desired. As usual, Bendis fails to heed the "show, don't tell" maxim of comics. He snaps his fingers, and the New, New Avengers roster is a decree. Well, show me Danny Rand being recruited. Show me Dr. Strange being recruited.
I voted "No Way" not because there were no classic members, but because of the poor choice of members.

RSC

[Doctor Bong]

Now I, on the other hand, have a problem with 6 out of a total of 8 NEW NEW Avengers...
The only ones I'm okay with are Spider-Woman & Echo... Even so, though, I prefer the other Spider-Woman, Julia Carpenter, now Arachne...
But, like redstatecap, I have no problem with the idea of trying new Avengers... I didn't mind Justice, Firestar, Silverclaw, Triathlon, or Ant-Man II... I can tell you I didn't care for Jack of Hearts or the (briefly...) new Captain Britain as avengers...
I just think Bendis' thought processes when pondering an Avengers' roster are the most misguided & unfortunate I've ever seen...

[Tana Nile]

My problems with New Avengers over the course of its run have not been so much with roster as with story. I look back on the last 30 issues, and with the exception of the initial story (about the prison break), I don't see anything that I really enjoyed, or will look back on as memorable.

The only character I had an objection to in the first line-up was Wolverine. Hs inclusion seemed to go against general Avengers principles (for example, not killing) and was a signal that things were changing. We hardly ever saw Ronin so that bothered me less.

The current line-up does feel very Defenders-like. I agree with Balok that it might have made more sense to call them "The Resistance" or some such thing, but realistically, the name 'New Avengers' brings the dollars, so no way Marvel would do that.

[The Night Phantom]

So far, it doesn’t quite feel like the New Avengers team is a “real” Avengers team—but I suspect that someday there will be a reunification, and history will look on both the New and Mighty teams as legitimate rosters.

[Nutcase65]

what about "League of Sustitute Avengers"

[Black Knight]

I had to go with the best defenders team every. This would make a great Defenders comic, or Marvel Knights comic. But an Avengers comic. NOPE

[imperiusrex]

ehhh, sigh.
I just hope this very loaded question doesn't become another point of contention.
I mean it's fairly obvious how 90% of the membership here is going to answer and it's not going to be glowingly positive.
Anyway if you want to get technical, seeing as how the original Avengers were disbanded sometime around Diassembled as per the charter with a consensus of founding members and no other team has been reformed by founding members, no Avengers team in current existence is a real Avengers team...

[Nutcase65]

Rex, with the backing of the goevernment wouldn't the MA be considered the sanctioned 'Avengers'?

[imperiusrex]

nutcase65 said:

Rex, with the backing of the goevernment wouldn't the MA be considered the sanctioned 'Avengers'?

Sanctioned? sure. The govt can do pretty much whatever they want. They could in theory create a hundred Avengers teams if they want...
However, the Avengers as known by their charter were established by Thor, Hulk, IM, Hank and Jan.
They set the rules of the team created the charter and were the ones who controlled the destiny of the team.
That included disbanding and re-establishing the team (as seen in Avengers 93-94 among others- perhaps Cap has been given retroactive founding member status according to Busiek?).
But the Avengers as established by the founding Avengers, was disbanded and only a majority of existing founding members would likely be able to establish their return.

[Alchemist-X]

The New Avengers are an Avengers team for sure. Roster wise, they are more interesting than Avengers have been in a while, not any previous Avengers on the team, but that didn't stop me from likeing the way they fit together. Afterall if they were called the New Avengers and only had classical members that would be silly (Now Yu needs to jump of a bridge so the art can get better)

[Nutcase65]

imperiusrex said:

nutcase65 said:

Rex, with the backing of the goevernment wouldn't the MA be considered the sanctioned 'Avengers'?

Sanctioned? sure. The govt can do pretty much whatever they want. They could in theory create a hundred Avengers teams if they want...
However, the Avengers as known by their charter were established by Thor, Hulk, IM, Hank and Jan.
They set the rules of the team created the charter and were the ones who controlled the destiny of the team.
That included disbanding and re-establishing the team (as seen in Avengers 93-94 among others- perhaps Cap has been given retroactive founding member status according to Busiek?).
But the Avengers as established by the founding Avengers, was disbanded and only a majority of existing founding members would likely be able to establish their return.

Follow up question. Aren't Tony, Hank and Jan all on board for this? That would make up a majority of currently available founders. Cap was made a founder in lieu of Hulk in the Avengers comic and he's dead. Thor is also considered dead for all intents and purposes. So they actually have a unanimous vote by all existing founding members.

Also, as far as the Government is concerned, the Avengers have always been concerned about that charter, so I'd have to say government approval IS a factor.

[The Night Phantom]

imperiusrex said:

However, the Avengers as known by their charter were established by Thor, Hulk, IM, Hank and Jan.
They set the rules of the team created the charter and were the ones who controlled the destiny of the team.
That included disbanding and re-establishing the team (as seen in Avengers 93-94 among others- perhaps Cap has been given retroactive founding member status according to Busiek?).
But the Avengers as established by the founding Avengers, was disbanded and only a majority of existing founding members would likely be able to establish their return.

Although the Hulk was a charter member or founding member in the sense that he was a member at the team’s inception, my understanding of Busiek’s Avengers #4 (and of Casey’s first Earth’s Mightiest Heroes mini-series, I think) is that a formal charter was established after the Hulk left and Captain America joined, making Cap but not the Hulk one of the Founders for the purposes of the special stewardship responsibilities put forth in the team’s bylaws. (The Hulk is still considered a bona fide former member, however.) I assume the bylaws allow any one of the Founders to reëstablish the team when it has been disbanded, as when Cap (in his “the Captain” guise) re-formed the East Coast branch in Captain America #349 and Avengers #298–300 (in the latter case, along with fellow Founder Thor—but still not a majority). Of course, it’s possible the team’s rules change from time to time.

[Nutcase65]

That's 2 votes.

[Doctor Bong]

Well, 3 guesses how the Hulk will feel about it...

[imperiusrex]

nutcase65 said:

imperiusrex said:

Sanctioned? sure. The govt can do pretty much whatever they want. They could in theory create a hundred Avengers teams if they want...
However, the Avengers as known by their charter were established by Thor, Hulk, IM, Hank and Jan.
They set the rules of the team created the charter and were the ones who controlled the destiny of the team.
That included disbanding and re-establishing the team (as seen in Avengers 93-94 among others- perhaps Cap has been given retroactive founding member status according to Busiek?).
But the Avengers as established by the founding Avengers, was disbanded and only a majority of existing founding members would likely be able to establish their return.

Follow up question. Aren't Tony, Hank and Jan all on board for this? That would make up a majority of currently available founders. Cap was made a founder in lieu of Hulk in the Avengers comic and he's dead. Thor is also considered dead for all intents and purposes. So they actually have a unanimous vote by all existing founding members.

Also, as far as the Government is concerned, the Avengers have always been concerned about that charter, so I'd have to say government approval IS a factor.

Well the Avengers as they previously existed without the retroactive continuity weren't always looking for gov't approval, in the early Lee/Kirby days.
As for Mighty, well I'll chalk it up to Bendis and his need to write scenes with his snappy dialogue instead of occasionally adding some exposition, but unlike Avengers #1 vol 3, there's no scene of the founders getting together and deciding to reactivate the team. I still don't think wasp would've been so easy to forgive Stark myself and the Hank I know wasn't such a suck up Tony either...
However, with no founding members and no charter, the New Avengers are pretty much just pretenders to the throne.

[thew40]

I'd say they're an Avengers team . . . kinda. They're like an off-shoot of the actual Avengers. They're like the new "West Coast Avengers."

~W~

[Nutcase65]

imperiusrex said:

nutcase65 said:

Follow up question. Aren't Tony, Hank and Jan all on board for this? That would make up a majority of currently available founders. Cap was made a founder in lieu of Hulk in the Avengers comic and he's dead. Thor is also considered dead for all intents and purposes. So they actually have a unanimous vote by all existing founding members.

Also, as far as the Government is concerned, the Avengers have always been concerned about that charter, so I'd have to say government approval IS a factor.

Well the Avengers as they previously existed without the retroactive continuity weren't always looking for gov't approval, in the early Lee/Kirby days.
As for Mighty, well I'll chalk it up to Bendis and his need to write scenes with his snappy dialogue instead of occasionally adding some exposition, but unlike Avengers #1 vol 3, there's no scene of the founders getting together and deciding to reactivate the team. I still don't think wasp would've been so easy to forgive Stark myself and the Hank I know wasn't such a suck up Tony either...
However, with no founding members and no charter, the New Avengers are pretty much just pretenders to the throne.

I think another thing that is missing, is it became S.O.P for them to come outside and stand somewhere and yell Avengers Assemble,.... wait,... didn't the NA do that too? I think, like you said a little exposition definitely wouldn't hurt anyone.

[steed]

I'm not even sure why they would still be together after Civil War and Cap's death.

[Nutcase65]

because Luke Cage is soooooo cool.

[goldenfist]

They are an intresting Avengers team, When Wolverine joined
the previous roster Iron Man thought it was a good idea while
Captain America thought that Wolverine would turn the offer dow
n since he was an X-Man.

So the roster of the New New Avengers(Spider-Man said that in
the issue where they rescue Echo)has Luke Cage, Iron Fist, Dr.Str
ange, Echo, Ronin(Clint Barton), Spider-Man, Spider-Woman, and
Wolverine.

Bendis has signed a deal with Marvel to stay until the next decade
so I don't see the roster of New Avengers splitting up anytime soo
n.

[redstatecap]

goldenfist said:

Bendis has signed a deal with Marvel to stay until the next decade so I don't see the roster of New Avengers splitting up anytime soon.

*bangs head on desk*

[balok]

goldenfist said:

Bendis has signed a deal with Marvel to stay until the next decade so I don't see the roster of New Avengers splitting up anytime soon.

"Rippy the Razor sez: Remember, it's down the block, not across the street!"

[uberwolf]

balok said:

"Rippy the Razor sez: Remember, it's down the block, not across the street!"

I'll be the one to say it... Wha...

[goldenfist]

redstatecap I see your not happy when I said Bendis is sticking
with Marvel until the next decade.