jaydawg said:
Provided this is true, I spit on it. Bagley was the last thing that kept me reading USM past the Hollywood arc. The fact that Mark Brooks isn't the artist is total bull****.
In total agreement. Mark Brooks' art on the last two USM ANNUALS was very crisp and flowed seemlessly with Mark Bagley. He would have been my natural choice. And it's not like Brooks is a "no-name", as he's gotten big drawing some X-Books.
The only question mark with Brooks was how many issues he could do a year; Marvel supposedly wanted someone who could at least make a go at matching Bagley's 18 issues a year. Granted, Bagley rarely penciled other books while he was on USM (aside for some stints on PULSE and FF, and covers to the ULTIMATE HANDBOOKS), so with only one title he could invest more time into being regular. But also he's one of the few artists who still hails from the work ethic of the early 90's. Most artists have issues doing a meager 6 issues on time without breaks, and Brooks may be one of them.
Immonen can do a few issues at a time, he was fairly reliable on ULTIMATE X-MEN when he drew Vaughan's stories, but he doesn't fit USM methinks. Least if you want to have a simular artist to Bagley.
But then again, this is an editorial dept. that felt following up Hitch's photorealism for Ultimates 3 would be "Mr. Manga", Joe Mad. So much for "flow".
I'll give Immonen a chance, but I agree wholeheartedly that it shoulda been Brooks. As it is, Bendis' originality on USM is runnin' on empty and I'd be more excited if Bagley was staying but Bendis got a co-writer. Not leave the book altogether, but have someone else co-writing so at least a few pages each issue ain't predictable. And so Peter could be less of a helpless sissy.
With Mark Bagley's lengthy run on "Ultimate Spider-Man" ending soon, it's time for a new artist to be named. Who might it be? 
