|
Post by humanbelly on Feb 9, 2013 6:54:27 GMT -5
About #4, a few questions: When did A.I.M. get an island?? Are we talking something like a legitimate gov't or do they simply own it? Liked the Hyperion insights but where was their Earth's destruction detailed? Like you said tom, is this tied into the events over in New Avengers? Liked this issue, Kubert's art was decent. Didn't notice this till I saw a post about it on another board. Here in #4, this issue ends with a someone being shown frozen in ice. Just like in another classic #4 where someone in ice is thawed out. Nice touch. Knowing that I'm revealing how out of touch I already am w/ current continuity, I'll still ask a couple of idle questions, if I may? AIM always did kind of have a vaguely-located island base (or three), didn't they? But, boy, if anything-- ANYTHING-- were to stretch my suspension of disbelief, it would be them being granted UN membership. Yeesh. Latveria, yes. Genosha, mmmmmmaybe. But AIM? Do they have anything like a civilian population? Say- there have always sort of been two Hyperions bouncing around the MU, right? The Squadron Supreme fellow (good guy), and the earlier Squadron Sinister guy who we met in, geeze, Avengers #76, was it? I know the latter's whole problem was his rage against humanity for inadvertantly destroying his microverse planet (and that the Vision talked him down from that crisis-state in an annual way, way back. . . ). Do both have the same base origin? And which one does this one seem to be? Thanks guys-! HB
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Feb 9, 2013 8:28:57 GMT -5
Knowing that I'm revealing how out of touch I already am w/ current continuity, I'll still ask a couple of idle questions, if I may? AIM always did kind of have a vaguely-located island base (or three), didn't they? But, boy, if anything-- ANYTHING-- were to stretch my suspension of disbelief, it would be them being granted UN membership. Yeesh. Latveria, yes. Genosha, mmmmmmaybe. But AIM? Do they have anything like a civilian population? Say- there have always sort of been two Hyperions bouncing around the MU, right? The Squadron Supreme fellow (good guy), and the earlier Squadron Sinister guy who we met in, geeze, Avengers #76, was it? I know the latter's whole problem was his rage against humanity for inadvertantly destroying his microverse planet (and that the Vision talked him down from that crisis-state in an annual way, way back. . . ). Do both have the same base origin? And which one does this one seem to be? Thanks guys-! HB There was a vaguely plausible rationale for AIMs acceptance (by comic book standards), I'll see if I can find it, and post it later... This Hyperion seems to be a completely "new" one, since his origin seems to deviate from what we knew of the Sinister and Supreme versions of him. If you'd read Exiles you would have seen a few Hyperions come and go from alternate realities.
|
|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on Feb 12, 2013 22:18:21 GMT -5
My most basic problem is that every time I hear A.I.M. Island, I can't help but think of Cobra Island from Hama's G.I. Joe Real American Hero title.
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Feb 13, 2013 6:06:43 GMT -5
Aim island again.. Here we go, much less "plausible" than I'd remembered, but that's aging for ya: FF #610 p1: and a bit more exposition on p19:
|
|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on Feb 13, 2013 13:00:30 GMT -5
Hm, AIM Island could develop in a number of different ways.
With Latveria, it was always about how their society and economy was better under Dooms' rule. Even though he is sole monarch and perhaps dictator, the people enjoyed his rule.
With Genosha, there's the mutant slavery issue, which dealt at the heart of the mutant issue, being seen as second-class citizens and a threat to be contained.
Now with AIM Island, are we going to see the island's populace prosper under their rule? That ambassador stated they controlled the economic arm of the country. Are they going to use their inventions and tech to turn the island into a modern-day tech paradise?
Or are we going to see the populace suffer from their rule? They also control the political arm of the country which would imply a technocracy. Are the people going to become unwilling subjects for any dastardly experiment?
Yeah, it does stretch credibility some, but it depends on how Hickman manages it.
As for #5, very good issue. Liked Izzy and her intro. The time jumping (Going from Then to Now) can be a little disconcerting, but it worked fairly well. Seeing how she became an Imperial Guardsman was cool.
But was that Gladiator in charge there? I've read very little of the Annihilation/War of Kings and such cosmic stuff so I don't know if this part of any recent changes for him.
And Izzy's grandpa is Dan Dare? The British hero?
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Feb 13, 2013 14:53:46 GMT -5
As for #5, very good issue. Liked Izzy and her intro. The time jumping (Going from Then to Now) can be a little disconcerting, but it worked fairly well. Seeing how she became an Imperial Guardsman was cool. But was that Gladiator in charge there? I've read very little of the Annihilation/War of Kings and such cosmic stuff so I don't know if this part of any recent changes for him. And Izzy's grandpa is Dan Dare? The British hero? I liked #5 a fair bit. I feel it goes some way towards answering charges that Hickman writes "cold" or "too cerebral" comics. Some nice interaction between Izzy, her dad and his dad. Gladiator is now the Big Cheese of the birdhead empire. The Head Honcho, Numero Uno, Top Dog. Can't say that I expect it to last indefinitely, or how are we to be pushed into Imperial Guard battle X,Y, and Z due to Crazy Emperor/Empress? Yes, possibly. Maybe. Marvel doesn't Own the Dare IP, so it's doubtful we'll see much come of it if it is intentionally Ol' Wonky Eyebrow(c) TM. Personally I sort of half assumed it was a coincidental name choice and Grandad Dare was some GI who fought alongside Cap in WW2. But Hickman seems like a writer who would be pretty deliberate about naming characters and such stuff, and so....
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Feb 21, 2013 19:40:38 GMT -5
Crikey! Another issue out! #6 starts to uncover some information about the new Captain Universe, or rather, about her Host/Alter Ego. In amongst this is some arguing over food, and eating of food which ties into recent Spider-Man stories, and possibly foreshadows his eventual ejection from the team after 10 years of constant appearance. There is also more foreshadowing of the Plot of this book, such as it is, as Adam/DarkVeil/Nightmask is finally understood, and we seem to have gotten somewhere in the story. We also now get an idea of who the Narrator Voice of the first issue was/is/will be, as it seems likely that some or all of it was Captain Universe. Maybe. This book is odd. I do enjoy reading it (though the 3 wasted pages each issue continues to aggravate me each time I see it). But it somehow manages to simultaneously have too much happening, and too little. We have all this Grand Cosmic Stuff, all these Portents and Omens and Flash Forwards. Massive rewritings, potentially of the entire history of the MU, not to mention incursions from other dimensions. We have lots of new characters, hero, villain, and who knows what? We have alien races and million year long stories unfolding. Plus a whole new Avengers Team, nay, a whole new Avengers Philosophy, for good measure.
And yet...and yet...it sort of feels "bitty" and un-connected, and slow moving in some ways. It's generally pretty well written, OK characterization, interesting ideas, even enough actual fighting to satisfy me. I genuinely do enjoy each issue, and look forward to the next one coming out. But it's six issue in and there is still a massive amount of gaps needing to be filled in. And whilst I trust Hickman to do so, it's starting to remind me of the Bendis era, of the Proctor era, of never ending dangling plotlines and meandering years long stories whose denouement did not adequately pay off the time spent building to it. But perhaps I worry too much about a possible outcome, and should just focus on the fact that I DO like reading it.
Does it "feel" like The Avengers, though? Well, no, if I'm honest. In a lot of ways the sprawling new cast of in-comers feels neither like a team nor like the Avengers. We still have not really seen how or why most of them joined, (or re-joined). We have not seen them bond or interact, or for the most part even fight together. They are just There, de facto Avengers without even the clumsy attempt at rationale that Bendis gave for the formation of the New Avengers (fate). Again, I'm sort of trusting that much of this will be addressed in future issues, but I guess I'm saying that I'd have preferred it to be addressed in the first six issues, even though I liked the first six issues.
Is my enthusiasm for the New Regime waning already? Maybe a teeny tiny bit. The honeymoon period of "I'm just glad it's Not Bendis" is over, and it's getting judged more and more on what it is, not what it is not.
I'm still looking forward to the next issue, and may revise my opinion of this one upwards once I've re-read it a couple of times.
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Feb 22, 2013 7:47:57 GMT -5
I went back today and read #1 to #6 in one sitting, and my reservations are receding. It reads really well in one go, and the possible weaknesses on any individual issue are strengthened by the issues around them. The sum of the parts really is greater than the whole, as the patterns and ideas become easier to see. It is still very different to pretty much every Avengers run to date, and consequently might put people off. But it's so well crafted, intricate and dense that it rewards re-reading several times. Today I was catching nuances and references and themes I'd not noticed or fully appreciated in the first few issues, and have to say I am impressed by the level of craft in the writing. I think that if you pick up any individual issue from the run so far, you might not be impressed, maybe even be underwhelmed. That is what I was feeling when I first read #6. But read them all in one sitting and it starts to look like something rather special, and rather good. I preferred Opena's art to Kubert's, as some of Kubert's panels and pages look a bit sparse and maybe even rushed. And this is a book where you are rewarded by re-reading and letting stuff sink in, so you want the art to bear up to repeated viewings. Having said that, the majority of Kubert's art is good, and there are some really nice pieces of art in there too. It's just the density and craft of Opena's work better suited the density and craft of Hickman's writing, in my etc.
Anyway, if anyone is not yet reading this, I'd urge you to give it a try. It's not going to engage and excite everybody, but it's managing to engage and excite me, despite my reservations, cynicism and apathy.
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Feb 26, 2013 9:52:53 GMT -5
I have to say I am very disappointed in the last two issues. I agree with you, Tom, that the art is a disappointment after Opena's amazing first few issues. This whole Smasher storyline just isn't grabbing me--Marvel is so awash in super heroes that I find myself asking why we need dozens more? Especially Avengers. I stopped reading the X-Men years ago because there were so many of them--it was like being in a faceless crowd where it's impossible to care about anybody. I am liking the New Avengers (Illuminati) much better but even that took a step backward last issue. I didn't really think Captain America even needed to be there and I didn't like how the Black Panther sort of betrayed him--I hope Hickman makes BP likeable again, not so cold and calculating. I can see him acting that way towards Namor, but not CA.
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Feb 26, 2013 11:16:00 GMT -5
I do pretty much agree with observations that maybe a big crop of new versions of not-avengers-till-now can seem to dilute the franchise and lose the "feel" of it being an Avengers book. And in many ways this does not feel like an Avengers book to me. And yet I'm still liking it enough to forgive the cast-of-thousands approach, and the somewhat glacial pace, and the portentous tone. I guess that with Avengers Assemble providing a much closer fit to a traditional Avengers book, I'm giving Marvel some leeway with the other 700 Avengers titles, and trying to judge them on their merits as books and not just whether it's my idea of who and what the Avengers are. It is a bit odd that the book that on paper might seem the harder of the two to get into (New Avengers) is actually the easier to get to grips with, what with a smaller cast, a somewhat clearer defined threat, and more familiar characters. Avengers is harder to come to terms with, what with new characters, what seems like a lot of newly emerged threats, and a much harder to define ethos. It ought to be easy to get, the Avengers Go Big. But I think that the narrative conceit of dropping us into the story some time into it works against Avengers, as we are left with unanswered questions. I'm confident most will be answered, but can understand that some people may not feel it's worth sticking around a year for answers.
I do think that with the single character focus issues (Avengers #3-#6) Hickman is trying to give us answers, show who these new people in the team are, and to bring us up to speed. Whether that is enough to keep all readers engaged, I don't know...
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Feb 27, 2013 13:28:57 GMT -5
I'm not trying to be unduly negative, but if what you are saying is true--that Hickman is doing single character focuses to get to know the new characters better--then it's going to take over a year to get to know these new Avengers. I buy the Avengers to see them working together --I've always gotten annoyed by single character stories especially if/when they have their own books. Anyway, Hickman is a fine writer so maybe he has something up his sleeve. Hey--was it just me or did the whole battle on Mars storyline end really abruptly? I really liked that issue where the captured Avengers were rescued but I guess I was hoping that storyline would go on longer since it was so intriguing.
I love how Hickman is writing the hulk, and loved how Opena drew him. But just for the sake of discussion--having the Hulk in the Avengers always turns out bad and having the hulk get mind-controlled and taking out Thor was further proof of that. Do you guys like the hUlk in the Avengers?
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Feb 27, 2013 19:41:31 GMT -5
RE: the Mars battle seemingly being over quickly, yes it was, to some extent. But we still have Adam/Blackveil/Nightmask around on earth, seemingly ushering in the White Event. We still have Ex Nihilo and Abyss on Mars, terraforming it. And we still have some unresolved plot threads like Hyperion's "zebra kids" on Mars. So I'm thinking that while that battle is over, the larger campaign may be just getting underway. Course I could be wrong... To be fair to Hickman we have seen some Avengers Team Action, even in the Solo Character issues. Not necessarily enough to satisfy everyone, but there has been some. As to the Hulk, he is getting lost in the crowd, as are a bunch of other characters who in six issues may have only managed a few panels and a couple of lines here and there. This is the downside to any large team. Ask any LSH fan how often you really get to see Mon-El, or Invisible Kid get some good face time. I'm prepared to keep seeing Hulk in the Avengers, simply coz of the movie. For the next few years that's how it will be. Maybe like Spidey's organic webshooters or the Leather Clad Xmen (both based on their respective movies), they will eventually move away from the Movie Template. Till then, I trust Hickman to use him well, as long as this big crowd of Avengers is going to become smaller groups used for one arc.
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Mar 4, 2013 12:54:11 GMT -5
I want to stress here that I am not talking Hickman down--in fact, I am a huge fan and loved the battle on Mars. My GOD have we even seen an Avengers battle in the last ten years? it was refreshing!! I'm also loving his Illuminati storyline but when I saw the last issue was mostly talking, I got Bendis flashbacks. Not fair to Hickman!! I slapped myself in the head after posting that the other day.
Re: The hulk--you have to admit that having him around is never boring--but I just wouldn't want the liability of having him on the team.
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Mar 4, 2013 19:35:13 GMT -5
bobc, I've been so negative myself throughout the Bendis era, it's really weird to be even cautiously optimistic about an avengers title. And suddenly we have *counts on fingers* ..eleventy! And I actually kind of like 'em all. The Hulk should be an interesting member. I'm guessing that maybe he originally got ejected from the Avengers by Stan because his team role and dynamic was identical to the Thing in the early FF; ie bad-tempered strong-man who fights with everyone. Now we can see something different. He worked in the Defenders for years, so I don't see why he cannot be interesting as an Avenger.
|
|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on Mar 4, 2013 22:00:22 GMT -5
Hickman took the time to introduce and set-up the new characters, which was very appreciated. It may seem like a large number of team members, but like that initial icon page suggests, Hickman focuses on just a select number.
Introducing the White Event from New Universe is very intriguing, but combine that (mayhaps) with some connection with the New Avengers' Red/Blue Event Incursions, and I'm really beginning to like Hickman's sense of grandeur.
Unlike Bendis, I think Hickman knows exactly where this is all going and I'm more interested in seeing that with every issue.
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Mar 5, 2013 12:25:39 GMT -5
I agree, MB! Hickman's stories definitely go somewhere--unlike the endless, eventless meanderings of you-know-who. I don't understand what this White Event is though--did it appear somewhere else that I missed?
Tom I agree the Hulk makes for a very interesting character--no doubt about it--I'm just saying that if I were running the Avengers, I would never recruit him due to his volatile nature.
Hey--did you all catch the hilarious line Hickman wrote for Thor regarding Surtur? I re-read it twice and at first I didn't think Hickman would write something like that, but after a second reading I bursted out laughing.
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Mar 5, 2013 17:59:30 GMT -5
The White Event was originally the starting point for Jim Shooters baby the New Universe, back in the 80's. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_UniverseThe idea was that these comics in a completely new universe would posit what would happen if an "event" gave real people super powers, an idea which has been played out many times. There were a bunch of titles and characters, including StarBrand, DP7, Justice and Nightmask. They sold so-so for a couple of years then bit by bit it all went belly up. After Shooter left the line basically got shut down as the sales were not great. The StarBrand actually appeared in Quasar's comic, in the regular 616 Marvel Universe, when Quasar was universe hopping around, though I think this is now forgotten/abandoned/retconned/ignored. Then a few years back Warren Ellis did a series called New Universal for Marvel which rebooted the whole franchise, and bought it up to date with modern, wide-screen sensibilities. I think it didn't get to 10 issues. So, I assume Hickman's White Event, and Adam/Nightmask will possibly tie into one or other of these two iterations of the New Universe. Though it could easily tie into some new third Alternate Universe version as well. And yes I caught Thor's Surtur reference which though funny sounded a little ribald for the normally very PG friendly Thor. Even the movie Thor would be unlikely to use such a term. It was a funny little line though.
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Mar 5, 2013 21:21:04 GMT -5
The White Event was originally the starting point for Jim Shooters baby the New Universe, back in the 80's. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_UniverseThe idea was that these comics in a completely new universe would posit what would happen if an "event" gave real people super powers, an idea which has been played out many times. There were a bunch of titles and characters, including StarBrand, DP7, Justice and Nightmask. They sold so-so for a couple of years then bit by bit it all went belly up. After Shooter left the line basically got shut down as the sales were not great. The StarBrand actually appeared in Quasar's comic, in the regular 616 Marvel Universe, when Quasar was universe hopping around, though I think this is now forgotten/abandoned/retconned/ignored. Then a few years back Warren Ellis did a series called New Universal for Marvel which rebooted the whole franchise, and bought it up to date with modern, wide-screen sensibilities. I think it didn't get to 10 issues. So, I assume Hickman's White Event, and Adam/Nightmask will possibly tie into one or other of these two iterations of the New Universe. Though it could easily tie into some new third Alternate Universe version as well. . I think. . . I think the New U Earth ultimately somehow ended up in the 616 Universe very near the end of Quasar's run. But there was some problem, and Eternity was going to keep it forever shuttered off from contact w/ 616. Uh, I think. Quasar's girlfriend (Kayla?) ended up there at the wrong moment, and she was lost to Wendell forever. Good ol' Mark Gruenwald, tryin' to keep everything neat and orderly and accounted-for. HB
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Mar 8, 2013 8:08:33 GMT -5
Sooo..quickly onto #7. This title comes out so fast! As ever, spoilers abound! Turn back now, or forever regret what follows. Go, now! Save yourself, it's too late for me. Just leave me a bullet and a sip of water....
Slightly weird cover, but then I basically ignore all marvels covers now, as they seldom represent the contents. This one actually does represent the contents, but in a symbolic kind of montage. Perennial complaint; re 3 pages on recap, credits and title. Onto the comic itself. As ever, its a dense and confusing read, but for me, thats a good thing. Plot as follow, approximately; The first few pages are gorgeously drawn/inked/coloured, but I have almost no idea of what is going on, other than it looks Big, Bad, and Serious. It's a sci-fi heavy intro that looks lovely but will probably only make sense down the road a bit. Then after 5 pages of that, we return to where we left off last issue, with Nightmask interacting with the Avengers in Avengers/Stark tower. Immediately we get The White Event, (and yet another fulfillment of a panel and reference from #1) although we are later told that this White Event is unlike any other, because The Machine is Broken. A bit more interaction of Nightmask/Avengers, including Hickman continuing to give subtle nods to the Superior Spider-Man storyline (current continuity! Comics actually referencing the events happening in other comics at the moment! I thought that was gone forever). Then we get 4 pages of flashbacks counting down from 5 hours ago, showing students on a college campus, possibly foreshadowing candidates for the Super Powers a White Event will bring? These pages alternate with Nightmask and the Avengers talking about what is happening, tracking an event at a college, which they go to investigate. It seems the Star Brand has arrived on earth, but who will it be attached to? Hickman pulls of a nice narrative/visual sleight of hand, subverting our expectations and our reading of the flashback pages, and leaves us with a kind of cliff hanger ending as the Avengers arrive in time to meet/confront the new Star Brand.
I enjoyed it. As is becoming the norm, I have had to re-read it a number of times to really get the most out of it. This is definitely not a "like a summer popcorn movie" comic. And I'm sure that re-read again, in the context of issues yet to come, and with those already published, it will be even better. I know the title is losing some readers who feel that it's variously Too Slow, Too Serious, Not About The Avengers, Too Hard To Follow. And there is some merit to each of those complaints. Those accustomed to or wanting a shallower, done-in-six-issues arc or even Done-in-one will be frustrated. Those looking for a classic avengers team fighting the wrecking crew et al will be disappointed. Those looking for simplistic easy to follow stories will be confused. But those looking for depth, complexity, something a bit different and new, will perhaps enjoy this as much as I do. Yes, it moves relatively slowly in some ways. But the sheer scale and complexity of what is going on kind of warrants that, for me. Yes, it's almost opaque and impossible to fathom at first, and a million miles away from "the wrecker robbed a bank" or even "we're hiding from *fill in the name*". Yes, it requires some patience, and a longer attention span than a lot of books do. But for all that there is a sense of direction, of purpose which the Avengers have lacked for, well a decade or more. Even prior to Bendis things had drifted and meandered, even during Busieks middle period. I've never been one for buying Omnibus versions of comics, but I'm starting to think it may be worth doing for this iteration of the Avengers.
|
|
|
Post by starfoxxx on Mar 11, 2013 18:42:40 GMT -5
Why am I not liking Hickman's AVENGERS? I'm going to check out the posts in this thread--(I know, I'm supposed to do that FIRST, but I've been really busy, and I just recently got caught up reading ALL my current comics, up to Avengers #7. Avengers #5-7, this title is just losing steam for me---especially when I followed up my reading with UNCANNY AVENGERS #4---Funny, the title I expected the least from is my favorite by a mile. Uncanny Avengers IS the Avengers as I remember them fondly. Hickman's AVENGERS is taking FOREVER..... I also checked out AVENGERS ASSEMBLE #12---not very good, IMO.
SO my grades for the AVengers titles I've been reading so far--
Uncanny Avengers- A+ great art and writing---it's worth the wait!
Avengers- a B, but losing my interest, twice a month and I am surprisedly underwhelmed by Kubert's art, it's actually very bad in some panels.
New Avengers- a B, and seems to be sloooowly getting interesting, great art
Avengers Arena- a C just OK, crappy art
I'll be back with more detailed insight when I get more time-- starfoxxx
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Mar 21, 2013 19:00:26 GMT -5
Hmmm. here we are at #8, and although I'm personally enjoying it, I do have some sympathy for those who are not. We remain relatively decompressed. We still waste 3 pages of every issue on Recap Page, Title Page, and Credits Page, which i will continue to moan about for as long as they keep doing it. And we are still deep in a rather confusing and complex melange of high concept Sci-fi, plus Warren Ellis/Jim Shooter/Mark Gruenwald New Universe/Universal stuff. But we do at least get a bit of action in a fairly decent throw down that has at least half of the CBR forums describing the Avengers as "worse than Hitler" for getting into a fight with the new Star Brand amongst the bones of 3000 or so recently killed people. OK I'm exaggerating the Hitler thing, but plenty of CBR posters seem to dislike the Avengers on some general principle which eludes me. Some nice moments and some that work less well. Captain Marvel's smart-ass comment/joke in a literal killing field which had just been a university and was now a crater full of bones just seems bizarrely poor taste. Maybe its a set up of something. The Hulk in Space stuff worked for me, though they do seem to be putting in as many nods to the Movie as possible (his grin as Cap Marvel mimes her intent is a pure tribute "and Hulk.....smash!" in the movie). It read well, but like I say, I can sympathize with those wishing it would go faster. We are returning to Mars and Ex Nihilo as we tie in that story thread to the new universal stuff. I'm still very much on-board and a fan at this juncture.
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Mar 26, 2013 9:18:41 GMT -5
New Avengers #4 is magnificent! Can't wait for the next issue!
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Mar 27, 2013 20:00:03 GMT -5
Having just caught up with the series up until now in one afternoon... I'm, to quote the belated Young Justice cartoon, well underwhelmed. Honestly, a lot of Bendis stories were better than this, and Uncanny Avengers, New Avengers and Avengers Assemble make for far better reading.
I appreciate the scope of what Hickman is trying to do, and it did seem to be getting better by #3, but a lot of what happens after that has been plain boring, with characters appearing and disappearing without much explanation.
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Mar 27, 2013 21:02:43 GMT -5
Ohhhhhhhhhh, you guys, you guys, you guys-- And here we've got bobc & Shiryu sittin' on opposite ends o' the teeter-totter. Who'll stay up? Who'll fall off? Will one go down & then hop off, letting the other crash to the ground?? (Man, that sure was tough on the ol' adolescent nether-regions. . .)
Ah, it's a big ol' world, it is. . .
HB
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Mar 27, 2013 22:28:33 GMT -5
I also just caught up this past weekend. I started back at #1 and read all 8 in a couple of days. Having done so, I must agree with...Shiryu. There were enjoyable moments but overall, it's just a rambling mess. I feel exactly as I felt when Hickman wrote the FF. He jumps back and forth so much with so little explaining that I just feel confused. It's not very fun to read. I know people talk about his long term plans but I'm not impressed. 20 issues from now you'll read something and say "Look, he's been planning that from the start" but it's easy to do that if you just outline a story, tell a tidbit in one issue, hint at it in the next, ignore it for the next three, tell another tidbit in the next and so forth. That's not good writing - it's lazy. It's a way to trick people into buying 20 issues to find out what happens. What the better writers used to do was tell a story in an arc for a few issues, conclude it, and then trust that it was good enough to make readers come back for the next arc.
Avengers Assemble is a much better read - so is Young Avengers - so is New Avengers. I'm not reading Avengers Arena because I don't like the concept but the first issue was certainly better written. The Hickman title is by far the weakest and, as Shiryu said (And I hate admitting this) some of the Bendis stuff was better.
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Mar 28, 2013 10:35:42 GMT -5
Wait--are you guys talking about The Avengers or New Avengers with the Illuminati? I really liked the first three issues of The Avengers but since then it has gone downhill.
By the way--the latest Essential Thor volume is out and if you are a fan of John Buscema, you'll love it. The issues contained in it are some of his best work IMO.
|
|
|
Post by starfoxxx on Mar 28, 2013 15:46:26 GMT -5
I just picked up Avengers #8, but haven't read it yet....
but if Sunspot and Cannonball don't get more than 2 panels (like so far), I might just drop this one---I mean sticking with a $4 comic for a whole year adds up to $48 bucks a year, and I can think of a lot better things to spend almost $50 bucks on than what this book has delivered so far.
|
|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on Mar 30, 2013 0:18:59 GMT -5
After reading #7-8, I can say that Hickman is getting a tad too esoteric for my tastes. I'm not sure that I completely understand what is going on here with White and Red Events, two systems that are supposed to achieve the exact same goal, and a still unperceived multiversal threat. I appreciate his ambition, but this may require re-readings to fully comprehend.
I still like this title though. Hickman is building up towards something and while it may be decompressed somewhat, it's nothing compared to what Bendis is capable of doing. But the art needs to be more consistent. Banner looked horrible these last two issues. If it wasn't for the dialogue, I wouldn't recognize him till he hulked out.
|
|
|
Post by tomspasic on Mar 30, 2013 6:03:36 GMT -5
I cannot argue that it is not decompressed, or that it's easy to follow, or that it's a return to a more traditional avengers comic. It's definitely decompressed, bordering on opaque, and unlike any previous Avengers run. And yet, I'm still enjoying it. At least those who dislike Hickman's take have DeConnick's Avengers Assemble, Remender's Uncanny Avengers, and if you prefer Bendis, well, there's Age of Ultron, which retains all his usual tropes and tics.. And it's a stretch, but there's Avengers Arena (hardly counts as an Avengers book for me, but what do I know?)
It's frustrating to not like the "main" title, but with a few other writers on tertiary titles, at least there is some choice, (unlike the ten years of "Bendis, or even more Bendis"). I hope those not enjoying Hickman's Avengers at least get some pleasure from reading one of the other books, because in my opinion they are all pretty good.
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Mar 30, 2013 11:30:53 GMT -5
There's definitely some good stuff out. As I said, Uncanny Avengers, Avengers Assemble and New Avengers are all pretty good (very good, in the case of Uncanny). Secret Avengers is not bad either. Avengers Arena... I'm on the fence with, and it's not really an Avengers book, they just added the word to the title to draw in the movie followers.
|
|