Avengers #1
Summary: Some random villain named Ex Nihilo decides to make Mars a lush planet with new lifeforms. He's joined by some woman named Abyss and a robot named Aleph. Before starting his terraforming of Mars, he randomly blasts Earth with some terraforming bombs, which naturally brings the Avengers(the movie version in this case) to Mars. The villains easily defeat the Avengers and Ex Nihilo drops Captain America back on Earth, just because, I guess. Cap, recalling an earlier conversation with Iron Man about making the Avengers larger, puts out a call to all sorts of obscure heroes because nowadays everybody gets to be an Avenger. And a slew of random characters show up answering Cap's call, ending this one.
Thoughts: Well, this was what I feared... Hickman seems like he wants to be Grant Morrison, but he actually makes LESS sense than Morrison!!! It's awful. After reading this issue, I'll be dropping new Avengers from my pull list(before it even releases!) and will put the series on a VERY short leash. I have a terrible feeling within a few months the unthinkable will happen and I'll be longing for the simpler days of Bendis as the Avengers writer... Naturally, if you were a fan of Hickman's work on Fantastic Four and FF, I have no doubt you'll enjoy this, because he's moving in the same direction here. If not? Good luck...
Score: 5 1/2 out of 10.
Avengers Assemble!
I was foolish enough to give him one issue on this series. Never reading anything by Hickman again.
ReplyDeleteAnd the art was pretty poor as well...
I was about to say...that's about the ugliest Hulk I've ever seen.
ReplyDeleteI actually like Hickman's work on the Ultimates, so I look forward to reading this. But hot damn, that's some bad art.
FUCK YOU ALL, THE ART WAS FUCKING INCREDIBLE.
ReplyDeleteNice to meet you, Jerome Opena.
DeleteHA!!! Best response ever!
Deletelol seriously anon, i really Love the art too but show respect, yes JT for the Win :)
ReplyDeletesorry you where disapointed in the issue x-man
also very happy you came around on thor with issue #2 i love that book soso much
1 thing i think you all should take note is, hickman is doing very short arcs on this book, like this arc is only 3 issues and so on, diffrent artist on each arc i think the lineup is Opena, Adam Kubert, Dusten Weaver and Mike Deadato Jr, and then it stars over. so if you cant stand the art on this arc come back around in 2 issues and see if you like the new artist. justa thought
ReplyDeleteNot sure what the irrational hate of Hickman is for, his run on fantastic four was actually pretty good. He established a pretty awesome concept in the council of reeds while also fleshing out the children's characters so that they were more than just there. He gave purpose for franklin and made use of his reality altering powers. Before Hickman valarie and franklin were characters you might briefly catch a glimpse of in the comic to remind you they had kids, during hickman's run they were actual characters.
ReplyDeleteAs for the avengers issue, I think its too early to pass judgement on the series. I think it could be good for the avengers to go back to fighting larger than life opponents threatening the earth. It brings the avengers back to how they were many many years ago when they would frequently travel and fight in space or other planets. The change in pace from the squabbling and fighting with each other will be nice, and if they could just get away from the whole poor public opinion is poor for the avengers vibe from benids that would be great. Time to see more Kang, Ultron, Thanos and those larger than life villains and less Norman Osborn, seriously he's a spider-man villain not avengers grade. And it looks like with this issue that's what were going to get from Hickman larger than life villains which is just the change of pace this comic needs to keep it fresh.
Irrational hate implies there is no reasoning behind the dislike of him.
DeletePersonally, every single story he has written has either bored me, uninterested me or made me wonder why I bothered reading it.
Thank you, Nagash. It's not irrational, I thought I made it clear. Hickman's stories either flat-out bore me or are written in a way where I rapidly lose interest. The stories he writes just aren't for me. He writes for certain comic book fans, of which I am not one.
DeleteIrrational hatred is such a bad phrase. Like someone using literally.
DeleteNo, we have reasoning and justification for not liking it. And it was nothing like a space shuttle launch.
Which we will probably never see again.
And I am still bitter about that.
Space is awesome.
I want to be an astronaut still...
Anywho, back on topic. Yes, back on topic!
This comic sucked for me.
But then I already sort of knew it would. After all, I have never liked a book by him. I have never liked the Fantastic Four (but love Doom). I actually enjoyed both Fantastic Four and FF 1 by Matt Fraction. Who I like.
And then sometimes writers surprise you - I am willing to give them a chance. JT Krul had never written anything good for me, and probably will never again, but his run on Teen Titans was very enjoyable for me. If only he had had more time on it.
Stupid New 52...
Still not seeing more than one revamped book I enjoy reading there guys.
The book is Wonder Woman.
All other books were either new properties or continuations (Batwoman, Demon Knights, Frankenstein, Sword of Sorcery etc). And even Voodoo got good after the first issue. Shame about the whole Grifter thing. Bleh.
I think I went off topic again...
I liked this issue. I know that you didn't and weren't expecting to, but here are a few reasons why I liked it.
ReplyDelete-I thought the art was top notch. There were some panels that were a bit off but it was super detailed and the angles were interesting. That is definitely NOT the worst Hulk I have ever seen. I have some hulk runs that will baffle you!
-Hickman is obviously planning something big, but as the commenter before me said: The avengers title is 3 issue arc, then 3 stand alone issues and then more arcs. That is a good sign or this title I believe.
-My number one reason for liking this was Hickman's new avengers. They foreshadowed a little something about them in Steve's dreams. Hickman is quoted as saying this about the titles:
"I've said in other interviews that thematically 'New Avengers' and 'Avengers' are two sides of the same coin. The 'Avengers' is about life, and 'New Avengers' is about death. One book is about day and the other is about night. One is about light the other is about darkness.
"There's a very real contrast to the kinds of stories we're telling between the two," Hickman continued. "'New Avengers' is a heavy, heavy book. 'Avengers' is very hopeful, very positive. They're both big books, but certainly if you're looking for a more 'Fantastic Four' kind of vibe in regards to the type of stories I'm doing, 'Avengers' is certainly more that book."
Needless to say that is why I will be sticking with these titles. I am more excited for New Avengers than most any book. Epting on art!? YEs please! If you read the interview here:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=42504
It is obvious that Hickman is WAY more excited about new avengers. And if you didn't like his FF and F4 runs, he talks about how Avengers is the title that is much like that. So NA could end up being completely different and new. Who knows. But I am on board!
OK, I'm staking out a middle ground here by saying that I'm cautiously optimistic. First, I've never read anything by Hickman, so I feel like I can put some fresh eyes on it. Second, I really, really effing hated Bendis, so, honestly, Hickman's honeymoon with me is going to be longer than most just because he's not Bendis.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anonymous about wanting to see more Kang, Thanos, etc. Part of the reason that I hated Bendis' run was, as Anonymous said, we kept getting street-level villains like Green Goblin, villains that one of the heroes would be able to eliminate on his/her own. I don't feel like Bendis ever really delivered an epic villain. He tried by giving the Hood the Infinity Gauntlet, but, man, that story sucked. So, I'm excited to see Hickman swing for the fences. Ex Nihlo and the Garden at least feel like villains who could give the Avengers a run for their money. In a weird way, it was nice just seeing them get their asses handed to them.
My worry about Hickman so far is, as you noted X, that he's doing that Grant-Morrison thing where he confuses intentionally obtuse for narratively interesting. I had to keep re-reading part of this issue to make sure I was following it and not just because we were dropped in the middle of the story. Epic doesn't have to mean confusing and Hickman seems to have a tendency for that (an impression based admittedly on this one issue). I want him to read Kurt Busiek's Kang saga (which you and I have discussed, X) and use that as a guide.
I'm al so a little worried by the rotating roster, if only because I want to see characters like Cannonball and Sunspot frequently, since this title is the only place I can see them. If I don't see Captain Marvel for a while, it's OK, since I collect her title. But, for those two, it's this series or nothing. So, I'll be disappointed if I go six or seven issues without them.
Anyway, we'll see. Cautiously optimistic.
Yes! I've been waiting forever and a day to see Kang, the Grim Reaper or Ultron, or some real Avengers-feeling threat face-off against the team... Norman Osborn is a Spider-Man enemy! The Hood? He never should have even appeared in Avengers, especially if you read that Hood mini by BKV! Bendis bastardized the Hood character like nothing I'd ever seen before! But one of my MANY gripes about Bendis's Avengers run was the fact that he had them facing the wrong types of villains. Villains are just as important in a superhero book as the heroes themselves, and the wrong villains can go a long way in hurting a series. As Bendis proved time and again.
DeleteAs for confusion... JW? You haven't seen anything yet... Just wait until issue #3... All I'll say about that issue is one word... "Pies".......