|
Post by humanbelly on Jun 10, 2017 14:08:28 GMT -5
And coincidentally, I too just randomly checked back in after months (if not years!) of touching base at all-! I am, however, completely NOT buying new comics anymore-- which came about back when we were all still quite active on this board, in fact. Doug, Karen, & SharKar's TWO GIRLS A GUY & SOME COMICS blog sort of shifted over to being BRONZE AGE BABIES, which in November they passed on to Redartz and Martinex, who re-launched it into the equally-delightful BACK IN THE BRONZE AGE. . . where I do try to maintain a chatty presence whenever an all-too-busy life allows me to.
I have to say, though, that this board still holds SUCH fond memories for me. It's gone-ish, but definitely not forgotten.
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Oct 3, 2016 12:08:05 GMT -5
Heya StealthRevenge--
Thought we could bring some further discussion back over to this thread, as the ASSEMBLED 2 thread seemed kind of an odd venue for it.
Let me 2nd SFX's recommendation of the Bronze Age Babies site-- LOVE that place! Extremely nice group of folks run by two former mainstays of this very forum (Doug & Karen).
But still-- having a new Avenger-centric individual pop their head in here started gettin' all of the old eager questions a-bubbling to the frontal of my cortex (or something). . . so I'm gonna go ahead and give you the ol' once-over if you're up for it, yeah? (And if you're not, well heck, no casualties incurred-!)
A) Curious as to what you would claim as "Your" Avengers team? The one that you sub-consciously think of as the "real" Avengers. For folks on this forum it's almost w/out exception been a matter of Patterning. The first Avengers comic or two that one reads becomes the team that one identifies with. Earlier teams are ancient history. . . later teams are viewed as when the team "changed". You're in an odd position of starting w/ an old reprint (Avengers #6, would that be?) in 1972. Did that mostly-original team, then, become "your" Avengers-- or was there some way for you to pick up with the teams current exploits at the time? Man-- were you in the mid-70's, and pulling your hair out over the outrage of Cap's Kooky Quartet-?? Gosh--
B) Do you have a particular favorite Team-member? Along with that-- do you have all-star team of 7 you'd love to see?
C) Bomber jackets. Do you find them:
a) A refreshing take on visual team identity b) A stylish nod to the fashion mores of the era c) Totally awesome/want to buy one for yourself someday d) All of the above
[What? What?? C'mon guys-- it's a legitimate question-!]
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Oct 1, 2016 6:17:38 GMT -5
I have just started reading this book - pretty good so far - and it says in the intro that there will be a volume 3. Was this ever published. I cannot find it on Amazon . Is this my stupidity or is it the case that it was not published? Ah yes-- and let's getcha an answer here. Somewhere on this site's home page, or possibly on these boards, Van Plexico does explain that publishing the third volume has been scrapped. The articles and essays he'd collected for it had become dated and (I suppose) of questionable relevance given the fragmentation of the Avengers comics in recent years and because of Marvel's on-going, perpetual shattering of its own continuity. The wind rather fell out of the sails of enthusiasm for it, I daresay. I believe he started posting some of the articles on the site's main homepage as well, but didn't keep up with it. This was indeed a very, very fun forum with some great, bright folks and characters chiming in. But time and events do roll along, and our tastes and focuses change. The strength here- and of any good fan-site, really- isn't so much the shared interest in the subject matter, but the fact that it encourages and nurtures critical thinking, analysis, and expression. And debate, hoo-boy--! This forum very, very rarely devolved into a "Deadpool ROCKS, and anyone who doesn't think so just SUCKS! LOSERS!!"- anti-discussion. (Well, with maybe a couple of occasional exceptions. And those were either ignored or directly called-out and discouraged, rather than fruitlessly engaged.) HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Sept 28, 2016 20:00:10 GMT -5
I don't recall much of this run, but I do recall that the art was really good. Of course I'm a huge Tom Palmer, so that's no surprise. Is this the run where Black Widow fought the Red Skull single-handed? I really liked that issue as it gave Natasha a chance to shine for once. I guess I can see how some people might have liked seeing The Coal Tiger but he basically said he was going to defeat that creature he fought and was himself soundly beaten. I hated that. I am so glad that The Panther is so much more formidable these days. I chuckle to myself about the whole Coal Tiger thing--first off, the costume was one of the worst Kirby ever created, and that is saying something. Two, there are no tigers in Africa so that was dumb.I don't know why Marvel could never take five seconds to fact check wildlife facts. In Jungle Action the writer said part of Wakanda was an area called Piranha Cove(something like that) but piranhas don't exist in Africa either. Yes I'm an animal nerd, but good lord. And don't get me started on how ALL the Marvel artists, including my beloved John Buscema, drew fangs on constricting snakes every time. Snakes kill by constricting, or injecting their prey with venom, but never both. God I'm annoying. And lets not get you started on the movie Anaconda either... . Has anyone EVER thought about how much Princess Python's flippin' snake must have WEIGHED?? It never seemed to have a consistent size/scale, but it was always bigger than any snake I've ever seen, and surely would have topped 300 pounds. And yet Princess P was always able to wear it like a scarf or stole with no extra support. Heh. HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jul 30, 2016 14:46:24 GMT -5
Thanks for the update. I know you're just guessing, but why would Janet just stop being the Wasp? She always loved being an Avenger even when Hank didn't. Do you think Janet is going to retire or something? Now that I think about it, the answer might be pretty mundane. The movie Antman and The Wasp is being made so maybe Marvel felt there was too much baggage from the Hank Pym years to be explained in a movie--so they are setting up a new Wasp who is connected to Scott Lang. While I agree that makes sense from a practicality standpoint, I am a big fan of Janet. Talk about a character that totally bloomed since her beginning when she was basically hostage bait. You know, since Jan does indeed exist in the Cinematic U, I would LOVE to see the studio cast a vital, middle-aged (or older, since Michael Douglas is over 70 himself) actress that is believably old enough to have an accomplished adult daughter. My first thought would be Holly Hunt. Exactly the right look and on-screen energy, very petite, and at 58 is just old enough to make the chronology work. In fact--- I'm not sure anyone else comes readily to mind! Boy, and that would be yet ANOTHER Oscar-winner in Disney/Marvel's stable-- hoo-boy! HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jul 30, 2016 14:36:58 GMT -5
You know I DO love bomber jackets, yup! Really, I think the biggest knock against the Harras run is that it seemed like it was perpetually interrupted with events like Galactic Storm (as you mentioned) or apparently deadline issues (hence that filler run, which I found questionable at best). Also, at a time when we'd been swamped with Councils of Crosstime Kangs and, really, the first big wave of Multiverse-based plot machinations, this quest itself seemed a bit on the old-hat, cliched side, I think. And I don't remember ever having a very good sense of the specifics or mechanics involved. Sometimes it seemed tech-based. . .sometimes supernatural. . . and far too easily achieved in order to make the whole doppleganger aspect of the plot work. The Dane/Crystal/Sersi tangle was very interesting because it was not handled with the bold, soap-opera lines that we'd seen years before with Vizh/Sc.Witch/Mantis/Swordsman. This was messy and honestly seemed to be more about desire than about "true love". I mostly just wanted to separate the three of them and tell them to move on. . . but considering that I don't care for either Sersi or Crystal much as characters at all, the fact that I was pulled in by it says a lot.
And the art was always just fine, too. No question.
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jun 8, 2016 10:55:12 GMT -5
Ha! Nope I didn't see those admonitions, BobC-- 'cause they were on the "Fully Spoiled" post, which I didn't read at all, 'cause I didn't want to go gettin' all spoiled-! I did catch up on it this morning, though, and added a much-belated acknowledgment. HBSon also saw it over the weekend, and we had a GREAT time comparing experiences on Monday (whilst waiting for HBGirl to get graduated from high school. . . )
In a way, the film has the feel of a really solid television series, which to me is a FAR superior story-telling format. It's truly committing to and owning its episodic/installment nature, and not being scared off by that misguided old concern that "People have to understand everything in this movie even if they've never seen any of the others". Number one, the source material managed to pull new people in and intrigue them with elements of story that they weren't fully familiar with-- it didn't alienate them. Number two, it's far easier NOW to get IMMEDIATE access to the entire canon of films for reference/binge-watch than it EVER used to be to pick up even a single back-issue! Really, it's a non-concern here. Glad to see Disney is able to shed that kind of Old Hollywood mindset.
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jun 4, 2016 20:13:21 GMT -5
Finally saw it this afternoon, and I loved it. Yes, yes-- it's much more an AVENGERS 2.5 film than a CAPTAIN AMERICA 3, but cripes, everyone is so on point that I don't fault it for that. I suppose the one slight criticism I could muster on that front is that Steve's "personal" story gets such short shrift that those few moments that do occur seem almost embarrassingly conspicuous. It's also not a cheer-at-the-end film, like so many Marvel films kind of are-- and I like that here. Given the ugly nature of the "family" rift in the team, and the paper-thin amends that are made by the end, this much more measured, sedate, mature ending is a more appropriate in tone.
And great job on the team of writers giving us an IMPOSSIBLY crowded film. . . and managing to make us care about each and every flippin' character that inhabits it-! What they managed to avoid (and I was watching for it) was giving everyone throwaway, cliche'd, sound-bite, "Character" lines in an attempt to force their visibility at the expense of actual depth. Particularly strong? --the obvious budding feelings between Vizh and Wanda; the combative sidekick-buddy relationship between Bucky and Sam; and wow, the BIGGEST surprise for me was that I was CERTAIN this version of Spidey was going to be the Mile Morales re-boot! Heck, I'm sure I read that more than once! This was not a bad take at ALL for giving us a truly geeky 15-year-old kid as brand-new web-slinger! I totally by this kid as that version of Pete-- although I do have trouble picturing him maturing fully into our older familiar Mr Parker.
Ahhhh- fine, fine film!
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 28, 2016 15:27:38 GMT -5
Hey! Let us know what your book is! We might be able to boost your sales by, oh, at least four or five copies-- (not a big herd of us hangin' round here after all). It'll be the beginning of a sales-tsunami, I bet---!
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 22, 2016 6:12:19 GMT -5
Hey, great to see you (in a new incarnation--- didja lose your password like ol' Doc Bong's done about six or seven times now?) pop up again, Woodside!
The beloved HomeSite here is definitely a ghost town these days, with intrepid, stalwart Marvel Boy doing an extremely commendable and dedicated as our still-reading "Man In the Field". And the occasional base-touching from a number of old friends. But folks (and the industry. . . and the world. . . ) have indeed moved on for the most part. It's the Circle of Life, one assumes-- probably to be accepted more than too deeply mourned, maybe.
Hey, hey! Don't you have a couple of toddlers at this point?? Man, how're you holding up under that young-family daily Everest, hmm? "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. . . "-- Dickens may have THOUGHT he was talking about the French Revolution, but really the quote's more applicable to having a house full of under-Four-year-olds-!
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Apr 5, 2016 8:44:12 GMT -5
In a recent interview, Tom Hiddleston teases that his upcoming role as Loki in the 'Thor:Ragnarok' film may be his last. That got me wondering. There's been hints over the years of Downey Jr. leaving too. With these actors SO closely associated with these characters and beloved by fans (even I think Evans and Hemsworth by now), should they leave for whatever reason, should Marvel be bold and brash enough to recast those roles or perhaps retire the character(s) from the MCU in some way instead? Wellllll, it's really that age-old Hollywood problem, isn't it? It takes more time to make a movie in a feature series like this than the in-context elapsed time wants to be. The lead actors age faster than their characters. Heck, even the THIN MAN series (1934-1946) doesn't hold up under chronological scrutiny, since it's quickly anchored by a pregnancy and then an offspring. It takes 12 years to tell a story that, at the very stretchiest, elapsed over maybe 6 or 7. . . all set smack in their present day. But this isn't exactly new ground for superhero films, and hopefully some lessons have been learned from the comically rotating Bruce Waynes from the first Batman franchise. That was, frankly, just dreadful and to me was the heart of that franchise's downward death-spiral. However, Disney/Marvel would never in kazillion years even remotely consider retiring Iron Man or Cap or Thor as entities (when there's perpetual gold to be mined from them), so they need to look to smarter long-view franchises to see how they handled aging/departing lead (and major supporting) actors from the stable. James Bond, say-- and Dr Who. Although Dr Who hit upon its unique conceit at the first juncture-- so that would be a tough example to follow. With Hiddleston? Man, I do think I'd retire Loki. They will never, ever replace Hiddleston's portrayal with someone that won't suffer in comparison. And interestingly. . . if they wanted to somehow revive the character in a few years, he could come back in female form! There's a precedent! HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Mar 15, 2016 16:55:19 GMT -5
Phone message from my sister this afternoon:
"Hey guess what? I had a guy on a flight today who's a comic book writer and artist. He said his name was Bob Layton. Is he someone you've ever heard of? Really, really nice guy. Said he did Hercules and a couple of other things I can't remember. . . "
I swear. . . I SWEAR. . . I'm gonna just give her an autograph book to keep on her person at all times. . .
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Mar 10, 2016 14:18:47 GMT -5
I meant to touch base with you on this earlier, Marv--
Given the fact that I don't intend to start buying comics again, that the MU is forever lost to me, that I'm disaffected, yadda-yadda-yadda. . . I do have to say that this is the first arc I've heard you summarize (which you do a fine job of, btw) that felt very nearly "right" to me in terms of the scale or scope that I've always liked best. Or at least that echoes as being "my old" Marvel, y'know? It's not a huge multi-versal, reality-overwriting, 250-interlocking-part mega/ultra event-- but a respectably hefty story based on existing and on-going situations and characters. It is of the Marvel Universe, it isn't defining the Marvel Universe.
In fact, from your description, the one element that makes me roll my eyes and shake my head is the (IMO) truly unnecessary intrusion of "Cosmic" elements in the form of the Cosmic Cube and Kubik. Is there just a standing rule that every story has to have an obligatory COSMIC aspect to it-- or else whatever readers remain won't pick up the book? It seems like it's just a deus ex machina trick to magically get the plot where the writer wants it. But honestly, I'd much more easily accept (and prefer) an explanation grounded in goofy comic book science (Squadron Supreme's mind-fixing chair/process, say), than yet another solution that relies on believing in forces Beyond The Understanding of Mere Mortals, razza-razza-razza. . .
That aside, though-- I do like the ethical questions alongside the whole buncha interesting characters involved that you've described.
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Mar 2, 2016 12:36:49 GMT -5
It goes on. . .
Human Man! Human Woman! Living Man Living Woman Fire Torch Thunder Lightning
Hmmm. . .
Hawkhawk vs. Silversilver. . .
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Feb 24, 2016 17:14:43 GMT -5
Hell-bug = Hellcat + Ant-Man...? [/quote] Or Spider-man, either one, though a cat that shrinks probably works better. Now, how about the new robot butler - Jarvision [/quote] Holy cats-- that's kind of what he is in the movie, even, isn't it? Nice one-! This is a neat exercise-- especially as you start looking deeper into the roster(s) for variation and inspiration-- Two-Gun Widow-- sort of the Red Sonja of the Old West. Jack of Hearts provides us w/ a great first name to work with, too--- Jack America Jackdragon Jack Marvel Jack Britain Jacksilver Jack Machine Jack Thing Jack. . . Widow (boy, there's a backstory that wants telling. . . ) Ha! And JACK JACKET-- good lord, HE'S the guy who secretly introduced the Gatherer Era bomber jackets!! The other side of his name has potential too: War of Hearts Rage of Hearts Beast of Hearts (ooo, I do like that one--!) MockingThing-- the fight ain't over til the big, lumpy, orange lady sings! I'm. . . I'm killing this thread, aren't I? "Can someone get the remote and turn the HB Channel OFF?!?!? " HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Feb 23, 2016 16:37:32 GMT -5
Hmmmmmmmm.
Hulkules-- (hoo-boy, twice the power, and a reverse-gestalt for a brain-!)
GiantEye-- (makes no sense. . . just a heck of a disturbing image. . . !)
Quick Widow-- (The Speed-Dating Avengeress!)
YellowScarletSilverJacket-- (and his Cosmic Coat of Many Colors!)
Swordsmantis-- (kinda. . . poetic, really.)
Captain IronStrange-- (and now I'm just swingin' wild. . . )
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Feb 23, 2016 16:15:52 GMT -5
That's because, in this instance, McFarlane wasn't a professional writer, only beginning to scratch that surface. I remember reading one particular interview with him where he admits that his plotting Spider-Man #1 consisted of him laying out various random panels and shots he had drawn on the floor and re-arranging them into some coherent form resembling a story. I guess in some bizarre reverse Marvel Method style of writing. He admits that had some of the pro writers of that time at Marvel known of how he did this, they would probably be yelling from the rooftops. But it seems my problem has been solved. For it appears that this May, Marvel is releasing Avengers/Iron Man: Force Works TPB which collects #1-15, the ashcan edition, Century:Distant Sons #1 and material from the Collector's Preview. Hmm, now there´s the perfect Christmas present for Humanbelly... either that or the "Heroes Reborn" collected edition... Ah-hahahahaaaa! Fellas. . . Fellas. . . Must I shamefacedly (is that even a word?) admit yet again that I already own both of those thrice-curse'd runs???They are wrapped 'round the neck of my collection like the albatross hanging from the Ancient Sub-Mariner's. . . I cannot believe that they've gone this far down into the inventory barrel for TPB-fodder. Geeze-- how long before we see Essential Muppet Babies, vol 1? HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jan 30, 2016 6:52:53 GMT -5
Same here, for the most part. (Good art saving a bad story, that is-) But of course it's not as cut & dried as all that. The art is an inherent part of the story-telling, not actually a separate element-- especially in the "Marvel Method". So as long you have an artist who can pump some visual life, energy, humanity, drama, etc, etc onto the page, creating a compelling string of moments (so to speak), he's going a long way toward carrying a questionable storyline. As sort of an example, think of Neal Adams' first X-Men issue-- #56 (I got their Masterworks vol 6 for Christmas). It's actually the continuation of the Living Pharaoh storyline, and brothers and sisters I'm here to tell you that the first installments of that storyline (w/ Werner Roth and then Don Heck on pencils) were just plumb awful. Like, "please let this book end" awful. But Adams' pencils- "wizardry" was the word used right there in the credits- bring a crackling energy and immediacy to a flailing, diffuse, mundane plot, and clearly lit an inspirational fire under Roy's desk, as we suddenly lost most of his by-the-book, Stan-copy, and got a dynamic script that matched the visual pacing. Honestly, it was still a dumb-ish plot at its heart-- but now it worked. At the other end of the spectrum, think of McFarlane's huge coup- where they created a new Spidey title (SPIDER-MAN) all just for him-- as both artist AND writer. The art, if you liked McFarlane, was him at his subjective best-- but the script on that book was almost breathtakingly bad. About a 30 word vocabulary, and not a shred of discernible characterization for anyone whatsoever. Wolverine had exactly the same "voice" and speech patterns as Peter. It was astonishingly poor (and sold millions of units--ugh), and IIRC it did not last long as a title. I can only think of a couple of books that managed a following in spite of questionable (or even bad) art, simply because the writing overcame that limitation: QUASAR-- which Gruenwald kept alive for all of us well past the time Marvel wanted to let it go; there was a fan write-in campaign that extended its run for about a year. And INVADERS-- which I never read; but brother, it had a legion of fans who loved Roy's stories even as they hated Springer's(?) sometimes deranged pencils. Oop- gotta go have dinner! HB Well, I was thinking of the art question more especifically in terms of the Force Works run. I think ANY other art would have been a significant improvement. Ha! Yeah, sorry Bong-! The broader thesis just sort of took control of my brain and dragged me and my keyboard right down the Tunnel of Over-Expansion-- ah, goodness. . . And you know, not only would any artist have been better (even, like, Springer, or late Don Heck, or even late Don Perlin-- or any one of the late QUASAR B-List fellas), but I daresay that if somehow Sal Buscema had been assigned to the book, he actually might have been able to make it work. It didn't need "brilliant" pencils, really-- the book needed "grounded" pencils to help put across the shaky writing of that period. Speaking of which-- WCA itself was rather in the same boat as Quasar or Wonder-Man before it was cancelled. I was still getting it via long-term subscription, but had really stopped reading it. Roy Thomas (w/ Dann) was brought in as the writer, and ultimately a young Dave Ross took over as penciller. . . and it just didn't click. Ross seems to be a MUCH better artist now. . . and Roy didn't seem to have his old knack at all--- much the way Englehart floundered on the title a few years prior. I'll wager the cancellation was a straight sales decision, as well as an opportunity to free up characters for "hot, new" creators and their "hot, new" ideas. . . yadda, yadda. . . But I don't think the decision to end the title's run was incorrect, to be honest. HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jan 29, 2016 19:05:16 GMT -5
Concerning the art question, the answer would be a definite "yes" for me. Same here, for the most part. (Good art saving a bad story, that is-) But of course it's not as cut & dried as all that. The art is an inherent part of the story-telling, not actually a separate element-- especially in the "Marvel Method". So as long you have an artist who can pump some visual life, energy, humanity, drama, etc, etc onto the page, creating a compelling string of moments (so to speak), he's going a long way toward carrying a questionable storyline. As sort of an example, think of Neal Adams' first X-Men issue-- #56 (I got their Masterworks vol 6 for Christmas). It's actually the continuation of the Living Pharaoh storyline, and brothers and sisters I'm here to tell you that the first installments of that storyline (w/ Werner Roth and then Don Heck on pencils) were just plumb awful. Like, "please let this book end" awful. But Adams' pencils- "wizardry" was the word used right there in the credits- bring a crackling energy and immediacy to a flailing, diffuse, mundane plot, and clearly lit an inspirational fire under Roy's desk, as we suddenly lost most of his by-the-book, Stan-copy, and got a dynamic script that matched the visual pacing. Honestly, it was still a dumb-ish plot at its heart-- but now it worked. At the other end of the spectrum, think of McFarlane's huge coup- where they created a new Spidey title (SPIDER-MAN) all just for him-- as both artist AND writer. The art, if you liked McFarlane, was him at his subjective best-- but the script on that book was almost breathtakingly bad. About a 30 word vocabulary, and not a shred of discernible characterization for anyone whatsoever. Wolverine had exactly the same "voice" and speech patterns as Peter. It was astonishingly poor (and sold millions of units--ugh), and IIRC it did not last long as a title. I can only think of a couple of books that managed a following in spite of questionable (or even bad) art, simply because the writing overcame that limitation: QUASAR-- which Gruenwald kept alive for all of us well past the time Marvel wanted to let it go; there was a fan write-in campaign that extended its run for about a year. And INVADERS-- which I never read; but brother, it had a legion of fans who loved Roy's stories even as they hated Springer's(?) sometimes deranged pencils. Oop- gotta go have dinner! HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jan 24, 2016 22:21:16 GMT -5
One of the worst comic series ever (Even by today's standards). The story was pretty bad and that Century character was terrible but no aspect could come close to the art for sheer awfulness. And yes, I have the entire series. I was a big fan of the West Coast Avengers and continued to hope that this would become good because of my love for the characters. It is now one of the embarrassments of my collection. I think, SW, that there's an element of almost. . . perverse pride. . . that can be taken in being able to admit harboring generally reviled items like that in one's collection. Lord knows, the HB collection is a veritable museum of comics that are notorious in their awfulness: Force Works, yes. The Crossing/Timeslide specials. Nearly the ENTIRE Heroes Reborn output (god, it was a masochistic nightmare. . . ) At least the first five issues of ALL of the New Universe titles (including KICKERS, INC). Vision & the Scarlet Witch Maxi Series Secret Wars 2 (which is still kinda the Benchmark of Bad for me) The last fourth of Werewolf by Night's run Aaaand I'm sure there's plenty more, just a-cluttering up the longboxes! HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jan 24, 2016 17:18:32 GMT -5
Yikes, Force Works is a nightmare, IMO. I had stopped reading comics by the time it appeared (I quit @92), but I'm aware of this steaming turd. YES, the art was absurd!!! Also, is it just me or did something happen to Marvel's coloring palette in the 90s??? Maybe the paper was different, but I never remember so many pinks and pastels, and just crappy coloring jobs before the 90s. A major reason I can't stand GAMBIT, that pink-and-trenchcoat look is just sooooo lame, IMO. And Wanda and US Agents' FW costumes were appalling. FW kinda worked better in the IRON MAN 90s cartoon, Hawkeye was on that one. Oh man, I forgot about Wanda's costume. My impression is that this was the first time we finally had a total surrender on keeping Wanda's look even remotely classy, and she too joins the full-prostitute trend (albeit poorly designed even then). Perez' later costume for her is probably more egregious, if you're being totally objective, but somehow you could forgive it because it was a better looking, characteristic outfit. . . You also found yourself wondering why, exactly, USAgent was still being included on any team at that point. Such a dreadful character from the get-go. . . HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jan 24, 2016 7:14:05 GMT -5
I used to have the whole run too. Man, back then I was a clueless, masochistic completist. I seem to recall that the book sort of tied into WAR MACHINE for a bit as well-- which wasn't a bad fit. The two jumble together in my mind--- although I think Rhodey's book may have been the better of the two. But yeah, I was buying and AWFUL lot of comics during that dark, aesthetic famine. Out of habit, out of opportunistic "completeism", out of. . . my mind, in retrospect! HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Jan 23, 2016 10:34:28 GMT -5
21 issues. 10 pencilers. 7 inkers.
Each artistic permutation worse than the last. Although, IIRC from those dim years in the past, there was somehow an amazingly uniform look to the awful-ness in spite of the many hands creating it. Like everyone had been handed Rob Liefeld or Erik Larson's high school sketch books, and were told to copy that style precisely. Hunh-- a whole-comic-book version of the "can you draw this clown?" correspondence art school ads from the old days. . .
I. . . . .do have the whole flippin' run, I do. And as much as I loathed the art, I still felt like there was a decent group book in there trying to get out-- but it obviously had no editorial support at all. I know that I don't hate it nearly as much as most folks do-- but I also certainly can't blame them for it. The title from the get-go was far, far, far too derivative and dependent on a thorough understanding of both Avengers continuity and history, AND the late run (and demise) of the WCA. A person was never ever ever going to be able to pick that book up as a new or cold reader and have any idea what was going on. That being said, A&L did a credible job of keeping folks in character and having their interpersonal conflicts stem from well-established traits. I was also liking the "mystery" character of Century while his mystery remained intact-- 'cause he did seem like a very ancient character having in-the-moment personal growth-- it was kinda cool. But then he turned out to be an impossibly stupid "Amalgam of a Race"-type character, and immediately lost all credibility or empathy.
And of course it was all tangled up in the horrific mess of THE CROSSING at the end. It's funny how, once upon a time, that event represented a never-could-get-worse-than-this nadir for the Avengers and their related titles. Now it's barely a footnote in the Ledger of All-time Awful Avengers Arcs. . .
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Oct 20, 2015 9:39:40 GMT -5
Oh man, I don't know, Marv----
First of all, solid job on boiling down all of these fresh-start titles to reasonably comprehensible capsules for us. Judging from the result, that was noooooooooo mean feat. And your open-minded, optimistic outlook is certainly refreshing and engaging.
But I have to honestly say that this ANAD Universe is clearly not for me--- and if I understand what you've told us correctly, it's. . . rather a big ol' sham, isn't it? Of course, I'm not conversant in any of the on-going events or details, so I could be out in left field. But-- this doesn't sound at all like a CRISIS or NEW 52-type of universe reboot in the least, am I right? I'm getting that the MU multiverses have sort of been collapsed into this single one, with a whole lotta refugees landing here as well-- but that's not at all the same as starting over. That's just another giant, messy, impossible-to-stabilize, no-coherent-status-quo event, to me. And there's no "regular" anyone or anything, as far as I can glean. Good lord, how many characters are now running huge corporations or organizations? That immediately jumped out as a very weak go-to crutch for (apparently) several writers. Peter Parker running any kind of big industrial corporation is the antithesis of the entire concept of the Spider-Man character, and doesn't excite me at all (and mind you, I'm the guy who LOVED Pete&MJ getting married, and was always happy to have Spidey be an Avenger). Small, relatable, normal successes (like getting married), yes, that's what we like for Pete. Being a corporate big-wig? Uh, no-- now it's just shallow bigger-is-better wish-fulfillment.
And it's clearly team-crazy. TOO MANY teams. EVERYONE is on some team or in some group. Sadly, it just makes the whole team concept pointless and pedestrian. There's no special distinction or honor involved at all, as far as I can see. It's just. . . it's just pure quick sales-gimmickry, it seems like, without a shred of thought to long-term product sustainability.
Nah-- really, I'm sorry to be joe-negative-rant. . . but the cliche that I can't escape is that this is just another grand re-arranging of the deck chairs on the Titanic. . .
HB (sour. . . disgruntled. . . spraying those blasted kids w/ the hose. . . )
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Oct 15, 2015 8:03:16 GMT -5
I wonder if any of you guys had any. Once, when I was a kid, I dreamt that I made a deal with the Devil: I sold him my soul in exchange for every Marvel comic book ever written. Nothing unusual on my end-- the occasional acquisitive dream. . . wandering through a vaguely familiar shop or used book store type of place, and discovering an almost impossibly valuable trove of old Marvels. Usually this became an anxiety-based dream, where I'd try to purchase as many as possible without letting on how valuable they really were, and would keep dropping them, or the transaction would keep getting delayed or side-tracked. And honestly, if something like that presented itself in real life today (and the shop owner was nice), I would probably struggle with taking that kind of advantage of their lack of guile. It's the ol' "What would Peter Parker do?" mantra. The vivid recurring dreams in my childhood tended to be based on Saturday morning cartoons. Underdog, Jonny Quest, Banana Splits, and the Herculoids in particular. As a younger adult, HBWife and I were big parrot hobbyists (we bred African Greys for a few years, even), and that whole scene provided a WIDE variety of types of recurring dreams-! Not infrequently they were of an Awake With A Start/"Thank God It Was Only A Dream!" nature--- hoo-boy. (Still get those sometimes--) HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Oct 8, 2015 22:10:38 GMT -5
Conversely, we could also pick the 3 we would like the least for sharing a planetoid with. I´m gonna go with the Sub-Mariner, Sersi and US Agent. Interesting. I certainly agree with USAgent being an excellent choice. I'm in agreement on that one. Therefore my picks are: Moondragon USAgent Dr. Druid I don't think I could take it. Geeze-louise. . . The Unholy Three. Ultimately, Moondragon (vastly more powerful) would, uh, delete the other two, and then make us (the one left alive) her personal mind-controlled lackey. HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Oct 8, 2015 9:06:48 GMT -5
Interesting question and especially hard to keep down to only 3. Not sure how useful powers are because if we are the only ones there, fighting skills would be irrelevant. That makes a lot of itcome down to personality for me. I actually have to say my male/female groupings would be a bit different than Humanbelly's. I've never mentioned the fact that I'm gay here because it was never important but it would be in this scenario. That makes Living Lightning my first choice since Northstar isn't an Avengers and Wiccan and Hulking are way too young. My best picks for female companionship that I think I'd really enjoy would be She-Hulk, Wasp, and Hell-cat but I don't think any of them would be happy with just Miguel and I guess that makes it Wasp and Hawkeye. I love Janet and she and Clint have a history so that should work out. Besides, he would be awfully handy to have around for hunting and LL would be great to get fires started to cook what he caught. I won't be sexist enough to say Jan would do the cooking though. That could me my job since I have no powers and besides, I don't think I'd want to eat anything she cooked. Being a spoiled heiress, I doubt she can boil water. She can be our leader. So, there you have it: Living Lightning Wasp Hawkeye Miguel's a solid choice, SW. Geeze, he'd be better in this scenario than Northstar, regardless--- Northstar always struck me as being second only to Quicksilver when it came to innate speedster-type aggravation and crabbiness. Also REALLY helpful to have some type of fire-starting power-set, yeah? With Hawkeye, part of me thinks that if you were ever gonna find an A-list Avenger that was homophobic, it would be Clint. BUT-- he grew up as a carny performer, didn't he? A little society that does tend to be quite accepting and tolerant? Underneath his machismo, there may be surprisingly open mind. And if not, it would be a HOOT to see him be forced to come around to a more enlightened frame of mind. . . which he surely would. Someone like USAgent, on the other hand-- yikes. Yeah, I was wondering if my only contribution might be cooking as well. HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Oct 7, 2015 20:28:34 GMT -5
Yeah-- Yeah, yeah, yeah-- that's a good parameter, Bong. We're gonna lose some truly nice folks, but being able to fill long hours with enjoyable conversation is pretty darned important for maintaining group sanity. Ahhh-- we're gonna lose Cap, that's too bad. Who do I still like for this?
Janet Pym Hawkeye Beast She-Hulk Monica (an active & good listener-- it occurs to me that's also a necessary component) Thing Spider-man Scott Lang Stephen Strange-? Ah! Okay, I can make my choice from this group then-- a group I'd be happy to survive with:
Spidey She-Hulk Monica Rambeau . . . aaaaand The Humanbelly!
It's-- hunh-- it's actually a group of fairly regular (albeit admirable and high-achieving) folks who had the mantle of superpowers thrust upon them. Their basic normal-person decency is what makes them attractive for this scenario.
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Oct 7, 2015 8:44:01 GMT -5
Okay, so making my first-cut would be:
Janet Pym Steve Rogers Hawkeye Vision T'Challa Black Widow Beast She-Hulk Monica Rambeau Thing Wendell Vaughn (Quasar) Jim Hammond (Torch) Spider-man Firestar Jocasta Scott Lang Stephen Strange
For me, it would really be way less about power sets, and more about who wouldn't make each other crazy under pressure in long-term isolation. A few of these may be on the fiery side-- but definitely not in a toxic way.
HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Oct 6, 2015 10:46:24 GMT -5
Man, this is the kind of exercise in blue-sky speculation that just gets ridiculously more difficult the more you think about it. Going with characters you might generally "like" isn't really a reliable gauge of whether they'd be ideal planetoid-mates, y'know?
Volatile or extreme personalities want to be scratched right off the bat. (I did a small national theatrical tour right out of grad school-- believe me, extreme personalities in hard day-to-day situations in a small isolated community are not at all a good thing. . . )
It's going to want to be two men and two women. We all naturally pair off-- we're built that way-- even if everything is completely above board and plutonic. And I think any group is better off with both sexes equally represented.
Yeesh-- self-esteem problem. How do ANY of us measure up as useful in a group of castaways where the other three are flippin' AVENGERS??? Cripes, ya don't want to be the "pet" regular guy that can't contribute or has to be protected. . .
Hmm. Hmmmmm. Hmmmmmmmm. Tough, this is tough. . .
HB
|
|