|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Jun 23, 2015 16:41:22 GMT -5
In my totally subjective opinion, Amazing Spider-Man was Marvel's flagship title from the mid-60s up until, probably, the mid-90s. Anyone who disagrees can meet me on top of the George Washington Bridge for a fight with pumpkin bombs! It was the Brooklyn Bridge. Spidey was near-delirious with fever after catching cold and fighting the Hulk in Quebec. Throw in the Goblin and a kidnapped Gwen and he's lucky to have known his own name. I agree 100% with everything else you said.  |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Jun 23, 2015 19:13:44 GMT -5
Bendis' rise to power as a writer is still a strange phenomena after all these years. I liken it to Jim Shooter putting Frank Miller on Avengers, Iron Man and Spider-Man. I'm a big fan of Frank Miller during the 80's, but even I know that's not a good idea from a creative standpoint. Kurt Busiek is just about the perfect Avengers writer, while Bendis is clearly best fit for solo, street-level, titles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 23, 2015 19:27:43 GMT -5
Bendis' rise to power as a writer is still a strange phenomena after all these years. I liken it to Jim Shooter putting Frank Miller on Avengers, Iron Man and Spider-Man. I'm a big fan of Frank Miller during the 80's, but even I know that's not a good idea from a creative standpoint. Kurt Busiek is just about the perfect Avengers writer, while Bendis is clearly best fit for solo, street-level, titles. I'm a classic Avengers fan and never had a problem with Bendis' time writing the title. To me, it was clearly a new time with a new era of story telling. I didn't have a problem separating the two. You can hate Bendis but you can argue that Byrne did more damage to the classic Avengers than he did. Brine made Wanda insane, did away with the babies and took Visions personality away. In his last arc, Bendis put everything back the way it was. Believe me, there were worse writers in their history. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202 
|
Post by Confessor on Jun 23, 2015 21:05:16 GMT -5
In my totally subjective opinion, Amazing Spider-Man was Marvel's flagship title from the mid-60s up until, probably, the mid-90s. Anyone who disagrees can meet me on top of the George Washington Bridge for a fight with pumpkin bombs! It was the Brooklyn Bridge. Spidey was near-delirious with fever after catching cold and fighting the Hulk in Quebec. Throw in the Goblin and a kidnapped Gwen and he's lucky to have known his own name. I agree 100% with everything else you said. Well, the text states that it is the George Washington Bridge, but yeah, the artwork is clearly of the Brooklyn Bridge. But like you say, Spidey was in a bad way that night. |
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Jun 23, 2015 21:20:21 GMT -5
Well, the text states that it is the George Washington Bridge, but yeah, the artwork is clearly of the Brooklyn Bridge. But like you say, Spidey was in a bad way that night. Not at all trying to rub your (cute little  ) nose in it, but it was honest-to-god retconned to be the Brooklyn Bridge, presumably because that's clearly the bridge that Gil Kane drew. Nevertheless, it's canon that it was the Brooklyn Bridge. All this is to say that if you stick yourself on the GW, you stand to be waiting as long as. . .someone who's stuck on the GW. |
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on Jun 23, 2015 22:46:58 GMT -5
I'd say Spidey's the flagship character for Marvel - as Superman is for DC, Mickey Mouse for Disney, Bugs Bunny for Loony Tunes...and that Avengers has been their flagship title(s) since Hickman started building to Secret Wars there-in...if not since the movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Jun 24, 2015 0:08:49 GMT -5
It was the FF back in Stan's day of the Marvel Age
Later, it was Spider-Man until the rise of the X-Men with Claremont
I'd say Wolverine takes the spotlight with his first mini-series until the Avengers explodes under Bendis' (don't get me started ...)
|
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Jun 24, 2015 0:34:45 GMT -5
Bendis' rise to power as a writer is still a strange phenomena after all these years. I liken it to Jim Shooter putting Frank Miller on Avengers, Iron Man and Spider-Man. I'm a big fan of Frank Miller during the 80's, but even I know that's not a good idea from a creative standpoint. Kurt Busiek is just about the perfect Avengers writer, while Bendis is clearly best fit for solo, street-level, titles. I'm a classic Avengers fan and never had a problem with Bendis' time writing the title. To me, it was clearly a new time with a new era of story telling. I didn't have a problem separating the two. You can hate Bendis but you can argue that Byrne did more damage to the classic Avengers than he did. Brine made Wanda insane, did away with the babies and took Visions personality away. In his last arc, Bendis put everything back the way it was. Believe me, there were worse writers in their history. I don't hate Bendis, I just feel his style isn't the best fit for what should be epic superhero books. The basic gist of his tenure as writer was to turn the Avengers into Marvel's Justice League, which I was never a supporter of in general. Wolverine and Spider-Man are great characters, but they have no business being Avengers. Also, it seems like he spent a lot of time getting the Avengers involved in "street level" adventures with the Hood and the like. To me, this seems to miss the concept completely. I'm a fan of Brian K. Vaughn, so I'm not against modern, quirky dialog, but I've never felt that it had much of a place in mainstream titles. I'm very specific in what kind of creators I like on the mainstream stuff. I also feel that the sparse dialog and decompression was actually a regression form what Alan Moore was doing in the 80's and early 90's, so there is that too. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2015 1:44:38 GMT -5
In his last arc, Bendis put everything back the way it was. Believe me, there were worse writers in their history. I liked most of his Avengers run, but I really, really hated that last arc - it basically said that everything I'd been reading in that title for the last several years was a waste of time because hey look it's all been undone back to good, old pre-Bendis times. |
|
|
|
Post by Dizzy D on Jun 24, 2015 3:17:42 GMT -5
Well if the officer is mostly the deciding factor, that would seem that the title would have to feature a character that carries the title if it were a team book. The comic is just the ship to transport a single character that commands the most attention. Not necessarily through the fictional aspect of it, like a team leader, or a natural leader like Cap, but a character that commands the attention of the consumer consistently. Is there any one title that possible has done that from it's start and continues to? I don't think the "officer" in this case is a singular character. It's probably the book which events influence the rest of the line the most. Problem is that Marvel since at least the 80s or so has no longer 1 large "fleet", but several smaller fleets. (Likewise DC): Spider-Man, Avengers, X-Men being the major groups with various other titles filling in smaller parts. (Occassionaly you get a Midnight Sons where various mystical titles are lumped together or an Annihilation where the cosmics get together for a bit, but those last only for a short time). So Uncanny X-Men used to be the flagship for most of the X-titles (New Mutants, X-Factor, Excalibur etc.), though X-Men probably took that over in the 90s when most major characters appeared in that title. Since then it seems to swap a bit between those two titles with occassionally an Astonishing X-Men coming around to take the lead. Amazing Spider-Man usually had the big events in the Spider-Man titles with various spin-offs following those. Haven't been following Spider-Man for the last few years, though Superior Spider-Man definitely was the flagship while it was running. New Avengers/Avengers these days seems to influence the various Avengers titles the most (Uncanny Avengers had some influence, but mostly did its own thing I'd say, apart from Axis), especially with it leading into Secret Wars at the moment, so for now it seems to have taken over the flagship function for the whole Marvel Universe. edit: and I'll add some more forced metaphor to this post: Of course where it's at in the Marvel Universe (and probably also in the DC universe) are the small little skiffs that are bouncing around, not part of any major fleet, but so much fun to be on. |
|
|
|
Post by earl on Jun 24, 2015 20:20:08 GMT -5
I suppose if you also consider the fact that Disney doesn't have the full movie rights to the X-Men, Spider-man or F4 and Iron Man was the launch pad for their line of movies; one could argue that Iron Man could be the 'flagship' character. That said, I kind of doubt that Iron Man has ever been the top selling Marvel comic in a single month (if it happened it was one of the numerous #1 reboots with a boodle of covers) and I tend to seriously doubt that Bendis writing the character will change that situation.
|
|
) nose in it, but it was honest-to-god retconned to be the Brooklyn Bridge, presumably because that's clearly the bridge that Gil Kane drew. Nevertheless, it's canon that it was the Brooklyn Bridge. All this is to say that if you stick yourself on the GW, you stand to be waiting as long as. . .someone who's stuck on the GW. 
