• Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

New Avengers vs. Old Avengers: Pros and Cons

I see, then I guess I must just have bad taste then.

I just like the personal feel.

Though I do admit New Avengers is an unashamed rip off of the Outsiders reboot. They even have the same mass supervillain jailbreak and Arsenal-Iron Man talk about forming a team that will be totally professionals instead of being friends.
 
How much do y'all think Mighty Avengers won't cut it in the least?
 
I dunno, it should satisfy the criers of old-school superiority, I think.
 
I won't be around to find out. There's nothing so far to suggest that it won't just be more of Bendis' spin on the Avengers that New Avengers has been giving us for the past two years, and if that's the case, I'm not interested.
 
TheCorpulent1 said:
I won't be around to find out. There's nothing so far to suggest that it won't just be more of Bendis' spin on the Avengers that New Avengers has been giving us for the past two years, and if that's the case, I'm not interested.

Exactly. And the fact that Quesada has said that the only reason why this book is going to exist is to make more money because of the success of New Avengers and Bendis. That tells you how much quality is going to be put into this book.

God dammit, the least Marvel could have done is give someone else the book to see how someone else interprets the Avengers. This is just going to be the same damn interpretation that we've already seen and many do not like. It'll continue the JLA styled transformation of the Avengers (adding in Wasp and Hulk to the Avengers, keeping Wolverine as an Avenger, etc.). And you know what, even with the Hulk, they'll probally lose to something as pathetic as Hand ninjas
 
Just let it go. I can appreciate the fact that Marvel's a business and Joe Q's primary concern is making money right now, not fostering creativity or building good stories for the long term. Joe Casey proved with Earth's Mightiest that there is still a market for and creator interest in the old Avengers' spirit and characters, so odds are good that the pendulum will swing back to the other side and we'll finally get a book that showcases them. Until then, I'll just be patient and appreciate the fact that I'll save some money for a while.
 
I think that people's affection for the Old Avengers and the seeming change for the original Avengers are clouding their judgement alittle. While people may not like Bendis, that's certainly their perogitive, but I think it's important to note that I don't feel that the new team is something that is innately broken in and of itself.

I may have always been out of step with the Avengers fandom (hated Celestial madonna and it's true ending) but aside from missing the cosmic plots and some characters, there's nothing really gone. The cosmic plots can be inserted again and any missing characters.

And I for one don't mind that.

Oh and Earth's Mightiest Heroes needed more personally. I loved it to death myself but unlike JLA: Year One, there's some big honking gaps in the frickin narrative. Also, some pretty bizarre story elements. Captain America has never tried to kill anyone in wartime? Thor tells the Captain to hunt down and murder Zemo? Oiye.
 
I guess it's just different strokes. The old Avengers were monumentally boring to me, and the New Avengers rock. It's likely the simple addition of Luke Cage that makes me most excited about the team, but the result is more important than the reasoning.
 
"[t]hey are different tonally. And I'm writing Mighty Avengers using narrative and thought balloons in ways you usually don't see. On top of that, there's a growing threat to the world. Volcanoes are erupting, there's hailstorms--it's bedlam all over. And the Mole Man attacks New York City. The attack is brutal and very insane, very 'old-school Marvel' crazy."

I dunno, it might be good for Old style Avengers action.
 
Willowhugger said:
Wow, the negativity here could be cut with a knife.
I know.

Y'know,... the last ten issues before diss-assembled really wasn't very good work,... and dissassembled was sloppy with just enough people written completly out of character (justified by wanda) to make my teeth ache,.. and HOM was more miss than hit.

BUT,......................


NA started out sloppy and had been on a steady improvement curve IMHO. It's too bad a few things I was waiting for them to resolve will never happen.
:(


Peace.
 
TheCorpulent1 said:
Just let it go. I can appreciate the fact that Marvel's a business and Joe Q's primary concern is making money right now, not fostering creativity or building good stories for the long term. Joe Casey proved with Earth's Mightiest that there is still a market for and creator interest in the old Avengers' spirit and characters, so odds are good that the pendulum will swing back to the other side and we'll finally get a book that showcases them. Until then, I'll just be patient and appreciate the fact that I'll save some money for a while.


it's not hard to do either...they did it when Morrison was on New Xmen...they gave the older fans a Claremont Xmen book to read
 
Willowhugger said:
I think that people's affection for the Old Avengers and the seeming change for the original Avengers are clouding their judgement alittle. While people may not like Bendis, that's certainly their perogitive, but I think it's important to note that I don't feel that the new team is something that is innately broken in and of itself.

I may have always been out of step with the Avengers fandom (hated Celestial madonna and it's true ending) but aside from missing the cosmic plots and some characters, there's nothing really gone. The cosmic plots can be inserted again and any missing characters.

And I for one don't mind that.

Oh and Earth's Mightiest Heroes needed more personally. I loved it to death myself but unlike JLA: Year One, there's some big honking gaps in the frickin narrative. Also, some pretty bizarre story elements. Captain America has never tried to kill anyone in wartime? Thor tells the Captain to hunt down and murder Zemo? Oiye.
I don't think New Avengers is inherently broken either. I have no problems with the current roster outside of Wolverine, but Bendis proved to me early on that he's not good at writing the Avengers the way I'd like to read them. Iron Man recruited Wolverine specifically for the purpose of having an Avenger who would kill without remorse? Iron Man's had his morally ambiguous moments, but that's way beyond the pale for him. I have other problems with it, but I'll leave the ranting out for now because, frankly, I've said it all before. Suffice it to say that it's because of Bendis that I'm probably not going to bother with the "new" New Avengers or the Mighty Avengers, no matter who's on the team. If it's full of people I don't like, that's reason enough not to buy it. If it's got lots of people I do like, I'll be worried that Bendis will put his usual spin on them and make me hate them.

As for the EMH thing, the Captain America one I'll grant you because it's just silly for Cap to never have killed in the war. But Thor still has the ancient, semi-chivalric mentality where, if a person has wronged you as grievously as Baron Zemo has Cap, it's perfectly reasonable to hunt them down and kill them. In fact, it's usually considered necessary. Thor himself has killed giants, trolls, and even his own foster brother for their crimes, so I don't see how it's out of character for him to recommend Cap do the same, especially at the time EMH takes place, when Thor was still new to the modern world.
 
Simply put: He's not a writer of big action stories, and The Avengers is a title that is inherently about big action.
 
The Question said:
Simply put: He's not a writer of big action stories, and The Avengers is a title that is inherently about big action.

That I can understand, the only action sequences of note I can recall are the Big Ass Brawl in the Prison (and that was mostly left to the imagination) and Adaptoid Fight.
 
I can't speak for "people," but I can tell you my problems with his New Avengers work. It's overly decompressed, for one thing. He wastes entire issues. I'm not talking about putting too much talk and not enough action in, either. Talk begets character development so it's ok by me, and my favorite comic right now is Checkmate, which is far heavier on politics and intrigue (a.k.a. talk) than action. Bendis takes up too much space with his back-and-forth character banter that was, at one point, interesting and fun but has since become clichéd. I don't need a collection of "ums" and "uhs" to beat the point that this is natural speech into my head. People stumble over words and stutter in real life, yes, but on the written page it becomes distracting if it's overused and Bendis absolutely overuses it for my tastes.

His stories and pacing lack balance, too. He drags out the build-up and then stuffs the climax and aftermath all into the last issue. He's done it in Ultimate Spider-Man lots of times, in Secret War, and in Ultimate Six, as well. The sales indicate that people like it, I'll grant you that, but I don't. I prefer the more robust storytelling of Brubaker or Slott or Rucka. Something important enough to warrant a full issue happens in each issue, rather than the first five being mere setup that's dragged out ad nauseam.

Also, Bendis writes characters to fit his style rather than thinking of how they would naturally serve the story. These characters have been around for nearly half a century or more in most cases; they have established personalities and characteristics. That goes away under Bendis' pen, and he clearly doesn't care to change it. That's his prerogative, since he's been given free reign in the characters' use, but I don't enjoy reading a Spider-Man who acts like an amateur or a Spider-Woman whose powers are completely wrong or an Iron Man who's well beyond morally ambiguous and edging on outright vengeful. Bendis does have a very good handle on some characters, of course, and they're the characters that everyone would expect: Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, and Daredevil. He's written them inside and out, he's had a hand in developing them all to varying extents, and he knows them well. The others, however, are apparently beyond him, and it seems like he's deciding that he knows them well enough off the cuff to write them anyway rather than doing the necessary research.

Before I'm beset by the NA fans: I'm aware that my complaints are subjective. Everything about comics is subjective. I'm not ragging on anyone for liking New Avengers. Different comics exist for different people, I get that. Fans of the old Avengers had their time for 40 years, so it's understandable that NA fans have little patience for us. I just don't think it's fair that NA becomes the be-all and end-all of the Avengers when, really, it was something of a comedy of errors why the old Avengers "died" in the first place. Either way, Disassembled's come and pass, New Avengers is what's there now, and Bendis is "the Avengers guy" for the time being. Nothing I can do to change that, so NA fans, enjoy. I'll just keep hoping for a return to something I can enjoy about the Avengers.
 
TheCorpulent1 said:
I can't speak for "people," but I can tell you my problems with his New Avengers work. It's overly decompressed, for one thing. He wastes entire issues. I'm not talking about putting too much talk and not enough action in, either. Talk begets character development so it's ok by me, and my favorite comic right now is Checkmate, which is far heavier on politics and intrigue (a.k.a. talk) than action. Bendis takes up too much space with his back-and-forth character banter that was, at one point, interesting and fun but has since become clichéd. I don't need a collection of "ums" and "uhs" to beat the point that this is natural speech into my head. People stumble over words and stutter in real life, yes, but on the written page it becomes distracting if it's overused and Bendis absolutely overuses it for my tastes.

His stories and pacing lack balance, too. He drags out the build-up and then stuffs the climax and aftermath all into the last issue. He's done it in Ultimate Spider-Man lots of times, in Secret War, and in Ultimate Six, as well. The sales indicate that people like it, I'll grant you that, but I don't. I prefer the more robust storytelling of Brubaker or Slott or Rucka. Something important enough to warrant a full issue happens in each issue, rather than the first five being mere setup that's dragged out ad nauseam.

Also, Bendis writes characters to fit his style rather than thinking of how they would naturally serve the story. These characters have been around for nearly half a century or more in most cases; they have established personalities and characteristics. That goes away under Bendis' pen, and he clearly doesn't care to change it. That's his prerogative, since he's been given free reign in the characters' use, but I don't enjoy reading a Spider-Man who acts like an amateur or a Spider-Woman whose powers are completely wrong or an Iron Man who's well beyond morally ambiguous and edging on outright vengeful. Bendis does have a very good handle on some characters, of course, and they're the characters that everyone would expect: Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, and Daredevil. He's written them inside and out, he's had a hand in developing them all to varying extents, and he knows them well. The others, however, are apparently beyond him, and it seems like he's deciding that he knows them well enough off the cuff to write them anyway rather than doing the necessary research.

Before I'm beset by the NA fans: I'm aware that my complaints are subjective. Everything about comics is subjective. I'm not ragging on anyone for liking New Avengers. Different comics exist for different people, I get that. Fans of the old Avengers had their time for 40 years, so it's understandable that NA fans have little patience for us. I just don't think it's fair that NA becomes the be-all and end-all of the Avengers when, really, it was something of a comedy of errors why they "died" in the first place. Either way, Disassembled's come and pass, New Avengers is what's there now, and Bendis is "the Avengers guy" for the time being. Nothing I can do to change that, so NA fans, enjoy. I'll just keep hoping for a return to something I can enjoy about the Avengers.


Excellent post.


Thats my job.
 
Darthphere said:
Excellent post.

Thats my job.

And a fine job of it you do.

In any case, my biggest problem with the storylines of Avengers that drove me away from the comic for a time was the fact that there had gotten to be something of a stale flavor to me. [A magical Imp appears wearing a 'Disassembled Sucks' t-shirt "LIESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!"] While I certainly loved the Kang takes over the Earth adventure, it was a sign to me that they'd passed the point where they had anything original to tell with the current lineup. Especially given the fact that no other Marvel title registered Kang's little takeover. The least you could do would be to retcon the thing out of existence.

The biggest problem that had accumlated for me was that the personal feelings of the characters had gotten a little jumbled in the histories of their adventures. Marvel comics thrives when they're telling personal stories about superheroes. Its the formula that made them great and frankly has become the staple in the industry to the potential deterrent of more epic tales of derring doo. The Avenger's 'human element' is always an important part of the storyline and while I doubt Crystal/Black Knight/Sersei has ever been anyone's favorite plotline, it was important.

I just....lost interest, I suppose because it seemed to be business as usual in the mansion. Vision and Wonderman had returned from the grave so many times it was difficult to take any story involving them seriously anymore. Nevermind Jean Grey, its actually difficult to take death seriously in the Avengers comic. The Kang takes over the country arc just reinforced nothing seemed to matter. The mansion would be rebuilt, Cappy would rally the troops, and everything would end up fine.

Now, Disassembled is crap. It's a series of random events tied together by the lamest of deus es machina. Ultron, the Kree, Osama Bin Quinjet and the Suicide bomber Jack-O-Hearts, Tonycolism, She Hulk all crazy (and then fine). You could literally not write a plot with more elements that have nothing to do with one another from Avenger's history. If we include the story arcs from other Disassembled books there's Tony's girlfriend getting murdered by a business rival and Cap discovering his girlfriend is a robot (that oddly have nothing to do with the plot of Wanda).

However, I don't mind the "idea" of Disassembled in that the Avengers are dealt such a crushing and final defeat that they can't rally back but need a few months to get their heads straightened out. The madness of the Scarlet Witch (if some holes were tied up) might have been enough of itself or an attack of Ultron OR THE KREE (you catch my drift). If nothing else, it worked well in re-establishing the Avengers don't have a bubble around them protecting them.

Rebooting the New Avengers worked for me for reasons that are almost unrelated to the characters themselves. I couldn't care less about Ronin (whom SHOULD have been Daredevil), Sentry, or Spiderwoman. I admit, Spiderman joining a team was something I liked because it was something new in Spidey history as the closest he's come is the Fantastic Four and unlress he marries Jonny, there's no way he can 'really' fit in. Ditto Jessica Jones' presence because I love her in anything but that's it.

The biggest draw for me was the "new team" smell to begin with. Seeing Captain America seek out the players, introducing the new HQ, and preparing for the first mission. There's a reason "team forming" stories almost always work well. Captain America could have recruited Jessica Jones, Spiderman, Iron Man, Thor, had brother voodoo ressurect Hawkeye and George Harrison's undead corpse and I would have read it just the same.

The real question becomes of course....why did I come back afterwards? I have to admit that it was a number of factors. The premise was a big lure in that I believed that the Avengers would genuinely end up going against SHIELD and the United States government (which was something NEW for the team) plus also the hints of HYDRA. I love HYDRA and I also waited for the promsie presence of hunting down supervillains issue by issue. It seemed like it'd be a "World's greatest Hits" of Marvel supervillain wise and I can't say I'm not dissapointed that it didn't materialize.

(Though I still love the Wrecker fight and its one of the reasons I was kept on---because of the fact that it re-established the team was going to have to WORK for its fights much harder).

I've had my problems with the storylines of course as well. The "Collective" could have been dealt with in an annual honestly and the comics better devoted to hunting down supervillains like it could have been. Also, why the Hell was Magneto re-empowered in a Avengers comic? It's like Thor coming back in the Fantastic Four! I mean, no one's stupid enough to cross-pollinate like that!
 
Crystal/Black Knight/Sersi was one of my favorite storylines.

Your issues with comic book deaths are just that: issues with comic book deaths. They happen in every comic, not just Avengers, and resurrections are always a dime a dozen. It's not really fair to single the Avengers out for killing and resurrecting characters.

I'm not arguing that a creative shake-up might've been in order. The old guard had been around for dozens of issues and could've certainly used some new blood. Scott Lang, Jack of Hearts, and the Falcon were all welcome additions, but it would've been nice to see some characters who were totally unaffiliated with the Avengers beforehand join the team. Bendis, if nothing else, accomplished that much with Disassembled.

The rest of your points basically just reiterate that you enjoy what Bendis has been doing--for the most part, at least. That's all well and good. I'd point out, however, that a lot of the stuff you're citing as novel really isn't. The Avengers have fought the government before. The Avengers have fought Hydra before. The Avengers have fought big-name villains before. Spider-Man's joining the Avengers wasn't really new, since he was already a reservist and he'd worked alongside them on numerous occasions.

(As an aside, Bendis really sent mixed signals about Spider-Man, I thought. He trumped up Spider-Man's inclusion as a recognition of Peter's experience and claimed it was a long time coming, but in the comic itself he portrayed Spider-Man as a completely inexperienced, reckless idiot. That was the sorest spot for me in the early NA issues.)

Anyway, at the end of the day all I can really do is repeat my previous comments. New Avengers lacks the feel of the classic Avengers. It's not a well-oiled team led by the world's greatest field leader. It's a conglomeration of people who happened to be in the same place at the same time, including a guy who is on or off the team depending on his whims and a guy who was recruited solely for the purpose of acting as the resident killing machine. One could argue that the classic Avengers joined forces under similar circumstances, and that's true, but they've developed well beyond that since then. In many ways, NA is a return to the Avengers' roots (which are really most superhero teams' roots) with a different outcome. It's an entirely new team. That's fine, but did it really need to usurp the classic Avengers' name and kick them off the comic scene altogether to do it?
 
Willowhugger said:
So what DOES bug people about Bendis' style?

Corp and Darth echo my feelings...

But to be very specific (and this is something you can read in every Avenger and Spidey title Bendis writes) he writes all characters as though they are 15. There are lots of "....um...er..." and his dialogue trips over itself.

If Spidey is in fact 15 and nervous, this is acceptable.

Captain America who led troops in war and has led the Avengers for years, Iron Man how is one of the most intelligent men in the Marvel Universe, Spidey is how middle aged and has always been intelligent, etc. etc. (I noticed this especially in recent Ult Spidey that I...procurred, where Kingpin bumbles like a young man with his first eretection) should not speak like that.

I'm all for moments of indecision or less than perfect english.

But Spidey is not going to say "Wanda really rewrote reality?" 5 times in 5 variations, while stuttering and saying "um" a lot.

And when it is put in the main Avengers title (as far as I'm concerned, YA is the only real Avengers title out) it annoys me even more (for the record, I'm fairly young and through other...procurrment of early 90s Avengers, I fell in love with the old team. This being the team with Herc, Black Knight, Crystal, etc.)

Willowhugger said:
The Avenger's 'human element' is always an important part of the storyline and while I doubt Crystal/Black Knight/Sersei has ever been anyone's favorite plotline, it was important.

....

That actually is one of my favorite plots....
 
You raise some very good points and I have a few concessions (I'm not utterly immovable here) and a few rebuttals.

And Crystal is the perrenial comic book girlfriend. She always livens things up no matter whom she's dating.

1. Re: Comic Book Deaths

Comic book deaths aren't actually something I have a problem with. I don't mind it when Doctor Octopus is raised from the dead in order to use him in a later storyline because Doctor Octopus rocks. I don't mind the Madelyne Pryors, the Doctor Doom's return, the Magneto re-empowerings, and so on because they're iconic characters and to kill them off is a waste. Also, to occasionally kill off a character helps reinforce the danger of an individual mission.

Still, its always got to be taken SERIOUSLY and it be treated miraculous when someone returns. Even when its clear it wouldn't be taken too seriously (oh, Don't worry, he's ionic)

If nothing else, the New Avengers have played hard-ball in the fact that they've killed characters left and right. I must admit the death of Alpha Flight has to be one of the most pointless massacres in the history of comics but it reinforced the danger.

No, I actually am going to quote Stan Lee, I think the problem was that the danger had gone down for the team. If there's a feeling of untouchability and lack of stuggle there's a serious problem. The Avengers were a well oiled team truly and that was part of the problem. If they're well oiled, they need to be outmatched. At least to maintain tension. They need to get thrown around a bit to make it clear the enemy is tough.

2. Re: Shake up

Well, we agree here honestly. I liked Falcon, Lionheart, and Scott Lang even if I didn't care much for Jack-Of-Hearts.

I also think that Lionheart's storyline actually benefits from the shakeup because she was too easy and accepting of the traumatic origins of her background. Now she's much better as supporting cast/villain in NE.

But at heart, yes, the shake up is what actually worked best for me.

3. Re: Novelty

I point out that you're accurate in that most of the plotlines have been done before but there's something to be said for re-packaging old material. The X-men and Spiderman movies are so utterly "classic" X-men and Spiderman that they may be technically original but every element has been done in some way or form before. Nevertheless, that's why they work.

The Hydra/Government/Resource-less Avengers have all been done before but it seemed timely here.

4. Re: Spiderman

This, I'll concede to you. I frankly was looking forward to the description I heard in previews that Spiderman was essentially going to be replacing Hank Pym while Luke Cage was replacing Hawkeye (as resident everyman). Instead of just being the wisecracker he was in New Avengers, they said they'd touch on him as the battling scientist aspect. Apparently, that got nixed somewhere.

I wouldn't describe Spiderman as inexperienced in the book (I mean, he never HAS fought a Super-Adaptoid to my knowledge) but I could have used more moments like where Luke Cage asks a question and no matter how obscure, its Spidey whom answers it.

I mean...seriously...Spiderman answers about the Savage Land sounds odd. Yet, after a seconds' thought, oh wait, he's probably been there.

5. Well oiled nature

I admit, the biggest problem with the Avengers is the fact that we never got the "training montage." We got the damn training montage EVERY other issue with the Avengers (exaggeration). It seemed they were always training, even more than the X-men.

It's a bit peculiar really and you'd think Cap would have them run laps or something so we get to know them getting better at fighting.

6. Wolverine

I also have always objected to Wolverine being recruited as the resident killing machine. I'm not a HUGE Wolverine fan (I got out of that phase when I was 14) yet even I know that he's not a mad dog killer like the Punisher...whom lost all my sympathy when he killed his partner Microchip.

Yes, Wolverine kills, but he kills in self-defense or when utterly left with no other choice. In other words, he acts like most people would under extreme provacation. You could recruit Wolverine for a thousand reasons.....hell, even the Mutant thing Wolverine mentioned. Yet, you choose the fact he KILLS.

...okay.

If I have any other complaints abot New Avengers, its the fact I'm never entirely sure whom the hell is actually on the team at any given time. Is Ronin actually a member or was she a guest star? Why do the X-men and Inhumans show up? Is Caroll a guest star or a permanent member now? What about Vision?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"