Just a reminder that I didn't drop Academy because I didn't like it but because I spent too much money and HAD to drop something and, of what I was reading at the time, it was the easiest drop that I liked the least. But that said, I did enjoy the book and have thought about getting caught up a few times... though I don't have the money to do that so it never happens. Same as why I didn't get the past two issues of ASM this week. I wish it well though and am glad the characters are getting a kick of promotion recently.
You can always just read my summaries. I review the book very often.
We did have a few debates about whether the story was progressing fast enough with the characters, so I mingled that into your reason for dropping it. You probably have a few titles on your pull list that I'd consider worse you could have dropped instead, but I'm sure you could say the same about mine (as I'm the only one reading HAUNT or SUPER DINOSAUR around here apparently).
AVENGERS ACADEMY will begin a 5 issue FEAR ITSELF tie in with issue #15. Gage was usually solid with tying into events by himself on AVENGERS: THE INITIATIVE during DARK REIGN and SIEGE (he had Slott tag-teaming for SECRET INVASION), so I expect good things here.
This is a similar thing to Academy. I just need to drop some stuff, even if it's just for the Summer until the double shippings die down, and Venom is by itself and I'm not heavily invested in it yet. But it's not officially dropped, it was just too heavy of a week and I had to put SOMETHING back, so this was one of them.
But the leading reason why I WOULD drop it is IF I drop Spider-Man because I kinda link the two together in my head. If I drop one then I can drop the other and not feel like I'm missing a piece (despite their not having much to do with each other). I'm probably still on for now though.
To be honest, the only way the series has been connected in that Betty and Peter occasionally show up and it uses Spider-Man legacy villains. It is it's own beast, although that may change with SPIDER-ISLAND.
One dilemma I think it and SPIDER-GIRL have, or had in her case, is the lack of defining villains on their own. It's a tough thing, launching a new book in this market. On one the hand, you want "named" villains to show up who the audience knows. On the other hand, I feel every character needs their own rogues gallery. For all the shallow things done in the 90's, Marvel at least realized this back then; DARKHAWK and SLEEPWALKER both had Spider-Man show up - hell, Darkhawk battled the Hobgoblin in issue two - but they had their own rogues. SPIDER-GIRL, aside for a generic evil organization in RAVEN, just fights Spidey's hand-me-downs like Screwball, Hobgoblin, and Ana Kravenoff. VENOM has seen Thompson fight Kraven as well as new versions of Jack O'Lantern and Crime-Master. While I suppose Venom has the better idea - at least these new legacies have ONLY battled Thompson so far - eventually it would be nice to see some new rogues. Fred Van Lente and Sean McKeever are able to do that, as is Dan Slott. The dilemma is that as hard as fans are for ANY new character who is a hero or love interest, they're 50 times as impatient and intolerant for a new villain. ANY new villain who is not instantly the Joker or the Green Goblin is hated, and writers internalize this and often kill off their original villains before they leave a book, figuring no other writer will use them again anyway. Bendis aside, that's still a very true sentiment.
Yes, even "crappy" new villains are worth keeping around, because you never know which writer will have a good, bold idea with them and make us love them. In the Silver Age, a damn lot of villains had downright silly motivations or designs, but they kept showing up and stumbled onto defining runs. If there is any issue, it is that sometimes comics are like a snake eating it's tail, and new ideas are just based on old comic ideas. Yay, we have a new Vulture that EATS PEOPLE? Ugh.
That's because Marvel's a joke. They have fantastic characters but as far as people behind the scenes I have next to little faith in most of them. There's some writers or aritsts I like but mostly I just roll my eyes and hope for failure. That's not really a healthy mindset for a comicbook fan to have, is it?
What you mean is Marvel's higher up editorial are a joke, and that I agree. They don't believe in honesty, professionalism (allowing latenesses to pile up for years), or even the basics of keeping a press release statement straight. They have a tin ear for their customers, yet when they try to respond to criticisms, it seems to always be some arrogant or ass-backwards way. It has reached the point where few reasonable fans believe anything that comes out of the mouth of a senior editor or a VP of sales, especially when they sometimes claim they're misquoted or answer valid criticisms with what can be best described as whining. I suppose they're human, but there have to be better ways of doing things.
The irony? When Disney took over Marvel, people feared they'd influence how they publish comics. To be honest, I think having a rational, objective, business sensed adult look over what they're doing and give a "what the **** are you morons DOING!?" speech would work wonders. Instead I see it as a chain of yes-men at worst or, at best, a chain of senior editors and VP's of things who are so close to each other as friends and peers that they can't judge many strategies objectively. It has often been said that most people need at least one good friend who is brave enough to tell you when you're full of ****. Many companies lack this once you get to middle and upper management, and Marvel are the same.
My theory is the era of Jim Shooter, who by many accounts was a maniac, so scarred many long timers and talent at Marvel that they vowed in the post-bankruptcy era never to be such a way again. I think the result is they bred a bullpen where nobody is accountable - same as adults who vowed to never be like their oppressive parents often have their own kids who they coddle and ignore until they become spoiled brats.
Since the Disney takeover, Marvel Comics have been more eager to flood the market and stretch every brand name they have until it snaps.
And that's one of the reasons I try to support them but I just don't think their characters or titles are as good as most of Marvel's, though that could be the 20 years of solid Marvel fandom talking here. Sadly, Batgirl might end up being another cut for me. I like it but it's an easy drop, and I'm not that interested in the current storyline (though before that, for about 4 or 5 issues, was a solid run). We'll see.
It is difficult to compete with a generation of familiarity with a universe. That's why I don't bother why many DC books. I never feel I can hop on and know enough about the universe and make sense of it. Sure, some comics can make it on sheer execution, but if I haven't read the prior material I won't get many of the references - especially if it has anything to do with Geoff Johns or Grant Morrison, who practically run DC themselves. Between DC's semi-constant universal shake ups and half my DC lore coming from TV cartoons or researching for them, I never know what's the foundation for anything. I'm on BOOSTER GOLD because I've been on it since it picked up from 52, which was the last era I was dipping my toe into DC more. BATMAN BEYOND is based around the TV show, at least loosely.
I love AVENGERS ACADEMY. But do I think anyone who doesn't at least have an above average working knowledge of the Marvel Universe will get as much out of it as I do? No. Sure, there's a lot else to like in the new characters and the execution, but all those little references would be missed. I sort of operate like a walking Handbook and I like knowing what I dive into. For some people, DC was their thing before Marvel and for me it was the opposite. Even if I dive into a Marvel book I never did before, like CAPTAIN AMERICA or THUNDERBOLTS, I at least know the basics of the character and their universe. Could I say the same about GREEN LANTERN, ACTION COMICS or THE FLASH? No. Especially not in recent years.
Sure, there's the Internet, but when I have to wikipedia to understand a critical plot point in a comic, I am turned off. I had to do that for the BATMAN BEYOND mini when they introduced a new Catwoman who duplicates herself, and I was irritated. How was I to know she's the daughter of some D-List, non Batman villain?
Yeah, that was the turn off to me too but then I heard it might have major impacts on the line and that kinda interested me, but not enough to buy it. Then I realized Kubert was the artist and I LOVE Kubert... that made me tempted. Then I skimmed it at the shop and saw the final page revelation that the Flashpoint Batman is actually Thomas Wayne and that Bruce seemed to have died during the shooting. That made me buy it. I enjoyed it and I'm considering picking up the Batman tie-in but that'd be the most I do, if I even do that.
That final page isn't even original. That's just Owlman, who was Thomas Wayne Jr. on another earth and THAT was supposed to be shocking once in a while. Again, the serpent eats it's own tail. Which makes the fact that "The Serpent" is the name of the baddie in FEAR ITSELF unintentionally satiric. The only way it could be worse would be if the superheroes had to escape THE VOID OF NO IDEAS, where no original thought can enter or escape.
Barry is stunned that the DC Universe has been altered? He HAS been dead a while. The DC Universe is altered every 5th Wednesday. He just has to punch a Monitor and all will be well again, aside for Wonder Woman or anyone else who has to reset to the Silver Age.
Of course, when the big plot of Marvel's event is, "an old man throws magic hammers at people during an economic crisis", that doesn't help.
I actually really liked the Circus but thought Noir was kinda unoriginal and bland. There's been a dozen characters just like her in the past so I see no real appeal there. The Circus isn't exactly original either but they were enjoyable.
I don't recall anyone making a team of magical assassins based on theater roles from the 17th century. The fact that the Harlequinn looks like Capt. Spaulding from "THE DEVIL'S REJECTS" and "HOUSE OF 1000 CORPSES" helps too.
Is that book $4? If it is I'll skip it but if not I may give it a shot. I like X-23, Power Man, and Amadeus Cho. It could be worth a look.
To be honest, whole FEAR ITSELF: HOME FRONT is a better idea then their FRONTLINE series have been, the content is very hit or miss. It's an anthology so the quality will always wax and wane depending on the strip. The Christos Gage Speedball strip is the lead story, thus the longest, and will carry on for the whole series. It's good, but also a bit bleak and depressing. I lost all sympathy for the citizens of Stamford after they tried to lynch Speedball seconds after he was defeated saving them from super-criminals, after he is so guilted that he blames HIMSELF when someone trying to beat him hurts himself with his own weapon. That's like Superman being shot at by mobsters and crying when one of them hurts themselves on their own ricochet.
The second strip is a Peter Milligan Jimmy Woo/Agents Of Atlas strip, and it's nowhere near as good as Jeff Parker on it. It will run until issue #4 or #5. The other strips vary but they get shorter. The strip that unites the heroes I mention could wind up being about 8 pages, and it may not be worth $4 for that. I'll give a head's up, maybe.
I mostly wanted to buy this book, even prior to my dropping it originally, because of the focus on Beast. I've always liked this team assembled but, as you know, Bru failed on portraying the team. Once I heard a new writer was coming on with intents to focus on other characters I was sad I dropped it and got caught up again. I've liked the past two issues by Spencer and will probably get the last couple of issues but beyond that I'm not sure.
Warren Ellis is a writer that either does fantastic or bombs horribly, and his professionalism when it comes to being on time is a joke. If he can turn out something as good as his Thunderbolts run I'd love it, but if it's like his Astonishing X-Men then I hate the idea of spending $4 on it an issue. Then again, it's only 6 issues long.
I don't know... I figure I"ll decide what to do when the time comes. Fortunately that should be late Summer or even later and the double shippings should have calmed down by then and it may not be an issue.
I do like that Nick Spencer is focusing on other team members; that was Brubaker's fallacy. But the issue for me is with there being 3 writers before the book reaches it's 2nd year, I am rethinking the editorial strategy. When it began, it existed to be Brubaker's Avengers. Fine. He's a hot writer. But after a year, he's done. I suppose you could say the same of MIGHTY AVENGERS, only that title gained Dan Slott (and occasionally Christos Gage) for the long haul, until it ended. SECRET AVENGERS, by contrast, will have two writers who will combine for 10 issues of material. That shows little long term thought, and I question why I should have more loyalty to a $4 book than editorial does. It seems to exist because it sells well enough to, but that's not good enough - just look at the Ultimate line.
Plus, in 2 issues in a row, Nick Spencer has ended things with a very preachy soapbox moment and I am fearing it may become a trend. Still...that next issue is Valkyrie, one of few characters who isn't obligated to another title/writer so something critical COULD happen for her...sigh.
(), it makes sense to have skipped these last two issues of ASM, which Christos Gage wrote and basically had Spider-Man teach the Academy cadets. I had a blast with it, because I love Academy, but if you didn't, it would have made little sense to have gotten it. You only missed one INFESTED strip, and it wasn't essential.
