|
|
Post by badwolf on Jul 29, 2019 9:16:51 GMT -5
The poor art that I refer to is from Avengers 212 on. After the recruitment issue in 211, it went down hill. I had no problems with Colans art, but he didn’t get along with Shooter. Sorry, I had just read a post somewhere else where someone said everything after 200 for a while was awful, and I think I still had that in my mind when I read your post.
I liked Bob Hall okay. It wasn't dazzling but it looked decent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Jul 29, 2019 9:19:12 GMT -5
As I've said on many previous occasions, if your story is founded on emotional reality then your audience will accept all kinds of fantastic elements. There isn't an ounce of emotional reality in Avengers #200, which is why I feel it fails so spectacularly.
Cei-U!
I summon the on-the-fly observation!
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jul 29, 2019 9:20:16 GMT -5
I still contend that the story made " comic book " sense. The reader has been asked to suspend disbelief over crazier scenarios ( beings transmuting matter, resurrections , or even flying without a visible means of propulsion) but is asked to analyze someones another persons decision to go off with another being of fantastic power. Carol said she was going off with him, what were they supposed to do, chain her to the Avengers Manson ? As pointed out by profh0011 , you can't stop someone from doing something, even if it's a major mistake. Fantastic things like this story have been written since the beginning and ignored a few issues later, with no repercussions. Another writer might have restored her 5 issues later explaining that Marcus passed away from the aging machines effects and no one would have batted an eye. You might want to rephrase that. These are superhero comics; they are stopping people from doing things every 30 days. I mean on a personal level. Even Thor can’t stop a person from drinking or beating his wife. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jul 29, 2019 10:20:34 GMT -5
I still contend that the story made " comic book " sense. The reader has been asked to suspend disbelief over crazier scenarios ( beings transmuting matter, resurrections , or even flying without a visible means of propulsion) but is asked to analyze someones another persons decision to go off with another being of fantastic power. Carol said she was going off with him, what were they supposed to do, chain her to the Avengers Manson ? As pointed out by profh0011 , you can't stop someone from doing something, even if it's a major mistake. Fantastic things like this story have been written since the beginning and ignored a few issues later, with no repercussions. Another writer might have restored her 5 issues later explaining that Marcus passed away from the aging machines effects and no one would have batted an eye. You might want to rephrase that. These are superhero comics; they are stopping people from doing things every 30 days. Especially people who said something like "He convinced me with a little help from his machines " |
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Jul 29, 2019 13:13:40 GMT -5
As a total aside... some years back, ESSENTIAL ANT-MAN became one of my favorite reprint collections. Ant-Man and the Wasp have long been 2 of my favorite characters, and their dizzy relationship one of the best things about it.
When Ant-Man became GIANT-MAN, he seemed to lose his competence a lot... except, in THE AVENGERS, where GIANT-MAN tended to be treated a lot better. (I see a parallel of sorts with GREEN LANTERN. All the GL stories I read from the 1960s, he always seemed to be better-written in JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA than in his own book.)
Many do not realize this, but, for a long stretch, THE AVENGERS had 3 writers working on it. Jack Kirby was supplying the covers and story ideas. Don Heck was writing the stories based on Kirby's ideas. And then the editor would supply the final dialogue.
But from the moment Roy Thomas took over the series... he seemed bent on making it his own. And somehow, along the way, he went out of his way to screw over 2 of my favorite characters. For one thing, he made The Wasp seem like an idiot (in the story where she hired a chauffer without ever doing a background check that would have uncovered the fact that the guy was a convicted felon). And he made Goliath / then Yellowjacket, mentally unstable. I call this "bad writing", if not outright "character-destructive" writing.
And then Jim Shooter came along, and made it worse. First in a story with George Perez, he had Ant-Man have another nervous breakdown. Then when that didn't "take", he came back years later to "finish" the job.
This was not limited to these two. I forget where it was, but some years back, another comics fan online gave the best description of Shooter's behavior I've ever read. He said, rather than put characters through hell from which they might grow, instead, he seemed to enjoy DUMPING them into Hell, and LEAVING them there... as if he HATED them.
So... in my case... I have NEVER been able to forgive Shooter for what he did to them and their marriage. My guess is Roger Stern was ordered NOT to "fix" the marriage, and multiple writers over the decades since have REPEATEDLY come back to it as some kind of touchstone.
As for Dan Green, after his first couple years in the biz, his inks WENT TO HELL. By comparison, during that brief period where he was pencilling DR. STRANGE, he showed his pencils were vastly better than his inks ever were. On AVENGERS, Green MURDERED the work of every penciller whose art he touched.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 29, 2019 17:27:18 GMT -5
Same here. The Molecule Man two-parter alone was worth the price of my subscription! Too bad about the art during that period, though... Weiss was great for those two issues, but after Perez left the mag the Avengers had mostly pedestrian art for a good long while. I liked the Colan art. Some say it's not his best, or they blame the inker (personally I think Dan Green is great), but even if it isn't it's still nice to look at. The only really weak period art-wise was when Milgrom was doing it, IMO.
Milgrom was definitely serviceable at best, and while Hall did a decent effort his Avengers work couldn’t compare to that of Perez ou Byrne (im my opinion). Hall was much better on Valiant’s Shadowman, and with other more down to Earth characters. Perlin? No, not a fan of Perlin (except on Solar). Laroque? Still very young at the time. Aaaaaand... Colan on Avengers was definitely not my cup of tea. The man is a genius when it comes to mood and the depiction of real-looking human beings, and there’s no one I’d rather see on Dracula, Night Force, Nathaniel Dusk or any number of non-disguised character. But on Avengers? That book fairly demands an artist who thrives on minute technological details and a certain Neal Adams-esque slickness... not Colan’s strong points. Colan’s style works for street-level heroes, as far as I’m concerned, like Captain america and Daredevil... but when it comes to sci-fi oriented titles, I don’t think he’s in his element. But if I’m in the minority here I wouldn’t be surprised... I don’t much care for Buscema and Palmer on Avengers either!!! |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Jul 29, 2019 17:39:18 GMT -5
You might want to rephrase that. These are superhero comics; they are stopping people from doing things every 30 days. Especially people who said something like "He convinced me with a little help from his machines " I wasn't reading the Avengers at this time so I'm not familiar with this issue apart from what I've gleaned from online discussions like this one, but the point raised here reminds me of another incident in the Avengers, I think also from around this era (and therefore also one that I've only heard about, not a story I've read myself): the time Moondragon used here psychic powers to alter Quicksilver's mentality so that he was no longer prejudiced against sentient androids like the Vision. In the discussion I read, pretty much everyone agreed this was a deplorable act on the part of Moondragon, however desirable the result have been: she interfered with another person's free will.
The question that occurs to me is: what if, instead of removing Quicksilver's anti-android prejudice, she had altered Henry Pym's psyche so that he would no longer, under any circumstances, feel any urge to hit his wife - would we still say this was a despicable suppression of the free will of another being?
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 29, 2019 18:23:10 GMT -5
Especially people who said something like "He convinced me with a little help from his machines " I wasn't reading the Avengers at this time so I'm not familiar with this issue apart from what I've gleaned from online discussions like this one, but the point raised here reminds me of another incident in the Avengers, I think also from around this era (and therefore also one that I've only heard about, not a story I've read myself): the time Moondragon used here psychic powers to alter Quicksilver's mentality so that he was no longer prejudiced against sentient androids like the Vision. In the discussion I read, pretty much everyone agreed this was a deplorable act on the part of Moondragon, however desirable the result have been: she interfered with another person's free will.
The question that occurs to me is: what if, instead of removing Quicksilver's anti-android prejudice, she had altered Henry Pym's psyche so that he would no longer, under any circumstances, feel any urge to hit his wife - would we still say this was a despicable suppression of the free will of another being?
That was the subject of Identity Crisis, in a nutshell... Batman was dead set against messing with someone else’s mind, but most of the other JLA members were cool with the idea since the mind in question was Dr. Light’s (the rapist version of Dr. Light). One thing I wonder is why comicdom keeps talking about Hank hitting Jan and basically never mentions Peter Parker hitting Mary Jane in a very similar situation (“LEAVE ME ALONE!” “whap!”) ... especially since Peter hits way harder than Hank does. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Jul 29, 2019 18:50:20 GMT -5
I wasn't reading the Avengers at this time so I'm not familiar with this issue apart from what I've gleaned from online discussions like this one, but the point raised here reminds me of another incident in the Avengers, I think also from around this era (and therefore also one that I've only heard about, not a story I've read myself): the time Moondragon used here psychic powers to alter Quicksilver's mentality so that he was no longer prejudiced against sentient androids like the Vision. In the discussion I read, pretty much everyone agreed this was a deplorable act on the part of Moondragon, however desirable the result have been: she interfered with another person's free will.
The question that occurs to me is: what if, instead of removing Quicksilver's anti-android prejudice, she had altered Henry Pym's psyche so that he would no longer, under any circumstances, feel any urge to hit his wife - would we still say this was a despicable suppression of the free will of another being?
That was the subject of Identity Crisis, in a nutshell... Batman was dead set against messing with someone else’s mind, but most of the other JLA members were cool with the idea since the mind in question was Dr. Light’s (the rapist version of Dr. Light). One thing I wonder is why comicdom keeps talking about Hank hitting Jan and basically never mentions Peter Parker hitting Mary Jane is a very similar situation (“LEAVE ME ALONE!” “whap!”) ... especially since Peter hits way harder than Hank does. hadn't heard about that one - was it around the same time, or before or after? |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Jul 29, 2019 19:04:58 GMT -5
Especially people who said something like "He convinced me with a little help from his machines " I wasn't reading the Avengers at this time so I'm not familiar with this issue apart from what I've gleaned from online discussions like this one, but the point raised here reminds me of another incident in the Avengers, I think also from around this era (and therefore also one that I've only heard about, not a story I've read myself): the time Moondragon used here psychic powers to alter Quicksilver's mentality so that he was no longer prejudiced against sentient androids like the Vision. In the discussion I read, pretty much everyone agreed this was a deplorable act on the part of Moondragon, however desirable the result have been: she interfered with another person's free will.
The question that occurs to me is: what if, instead of removing Quicksilver's anti-android prejudice, she had altered Henry Pym's psyche so that he would no longer, under any circumstances, feel any urge to hit his wife - would we still say this was a despicable suppression of the free will of another being?
More to the point was the time Moondragon forced Thor to be her consort, in #220-221. I don't recall if there was any talk in the letter pages about that, but certainly it doesn't get talked about like #200 does. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 29, 2019 19:25:19 GMT -5
That was the subject of Identity Crisis, in a nutshell... Batman was dead set against messing with someone else’s mind, but most of the other JLA members were cool with the idea since the mind in question was Dr. Light’s (the rapist version of Dr. Light). One thing I wonder is why comicdom keeps talking about Hank hitting Jan and basically never mentions Peter Parker hitting Mary Jane is a very similar situation (“LEAVE ME ALONE!” “whap!”) ... especially since Peter hits way harder than Hank does. hadn't heard about that one - was it around the same time, or before or after? Many years later, during the infamous clone saga. Peter had just learned that he was supposed to be a clone and was trading punches with Ben Reilly. CBR has the damning pages here! (Parental discretion is advised).
Peter is like Wolverine or Charles Xavier. No matter what they do, they’re always forgiven. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jul 29, 2019 20:38:18 GMT -5
I wasn't reading the Avengers at this time so I'm not familiar with this issue apart from what I've gleaned from online discussions like this one, but the point raised here reminds me of another incident in the Avengers, I think also from around this era (and therefore also one that I've only heard about, not a story I've read myself): the time Moondragon used here psychic powers to alter Quicksilver's mentality so that he was no longer prejudiced against sentient androids like the Vision. In the discussion I read, pretty much everyone agreed this was a deplorable act on the part of Moondragon, however desirable the result have been: she interfered with another person's free will.
The question that occurs to me is: what if, instead of removing Quicksilver's anti-android prejudice, she had altered Henry Pym's psyche so that he would no longer, under any circumstances, feel any urge to hit his wife - would we still say this was a despicable suppression of the free will of another being?
More to the point was the time Moondragon forced Thor to be her consort, in #220-221. I don't recall if there was any talk in the letter pages about that, but certainly it doesn't get talked about like #200 does. Moondragon was more a villain than hero in many of her appearances. |
|
|
|
Post by brianf on Jul 29, 2019 21:10:48 GMT -5
As a total aside... some years back, ESSENTIAL ANT-MAN became one of my favorite reprint collections. Ant-Man and the Wasp have long been 2 of my favorite characters, and their dizzy relationship one of the best things about it. When Ant-Man became GIANT-MAN, he seemed to lose his competence a lot... except, in THE AVENGERS, where GIANT-MAN tended to be treated a lot better. (I see a parallel of sorts with GREEN LANTERN. All the GL stories I read from the 1960s, he always seemed to be better-written in JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA than in his own book.) Many do not realize this, but, for a long stretch, THE AVENGERS had 3 writers working on it. Jack Kirby was supplying the covers and story ideas. Don Heck was writing the stories based on Kirby's ideas. And then the editor would supply the final dialogue. But from the moment Roy Thomas took over the series... he seemed bent on making it his own. And somehow, along the way, he went out of his way to screw over 2 of my favorite characters. For one thing, he made The Wasp seem like an idiot (in the story where she hired a chauffer without ever doing a background check that would have uncovered the fact that the guy was a convicted felon). And he made Goliath / then Yellowjacket, mentally unstable. I call this "bad writing", if not outright "character-destructive" writing. And then Jim Shooter came along, and made it worse. First in a story with George Perez, he had Ant-Man have another nervous breakdown. Then when that didn't "take", he came back years later to "finish" the job. This was not limited to these two. I forget where it was, but some years back, another comics fan online gave the best description of Shooter's behavior I've ever read. He said, rather than put characters through hell from which they might grow, instead, he seemed to enjoy DUMPING them into Hell, and LEAVING them there... as if he HATED them. So... in my case... I have NEVER been able to forgive Shooter for what he did to them and their marriage. My guess is Roger Stern was ordered NOT to "fix" the marriage, and multiple writers over the decades since have REPEATEDLY come back to it as some kind of touchstone. As for Dan Green, after his first couple years in the biz, his inks WENT TO HELL. By comparison, during that brief period where he was pencilling DR. STRANGE, he showed his pencils were vastly better than his inks ever were. On AVENGERS, Green MURDERED the work of every penciller whose art he touched. While I can't claim Hank Pym as a favorite character I do think it's pretty messed up that in the current Marvel universe Pym and Ultron are bonded and the comics I've read with this combo are dark and not much fun. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Jul 29, 2019 23:12:05 GMT -5
More to the point was the time Moondragon forced Thor to be her consort, in #220-221. I don't recall if there was any talk in the letter pages about that, but certainly it doesn't get talked about like #200 does. Moondragon was more a villain than hero in many of her appearances. Yes, I only really like the version from Englehart's Avengers. Before, in Starlin's Captain Marvel and Gerber's Daredevil, she was an ambiguous character with some potential but it wasn't until Englehart added her to the Avengers that she really became interesting and a personal favourite. After that, though, writers like Gruenwald and Shooter really dropped the ball IMO and turned her into a boring pseudo-villain. |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Jul 30, 2019 1:05:01 GMT -5
I liked the Colan art. Some say it's not his best, or they blame the inker (personally I think Dan Green is great), but even if it isn't it's still nice to look at. The only really weak period art-wise was when Milgrom was doing it, IMO.
Aaaaaand... Colan on Avengers was definitely not my cup of tea. The man is a genius when it comes to mood and the depiction of real-looking human beings, and there’s no one I’d rather see on Dracula, Night Force, Nathaniel Dusk or any number of non-disguised character. But on Avengers? That book fairly demands an artist who thrives on minute technological details and a certain Neal Adams-esque slickness... not Colan’s strong points. Colan’s style works for street-level heroes, as far as I’m concerned, like Captain america and Daredevil... but when it comes to sci-fi oriented titles, I don’t think he plays to his strengths). But if I’m in the minority here I wouldn’t be surprised... I don’t much care for Buscema and Palmer on Avengers either!!! I liked Colan and Buscema more the first time around. (Although Colan did, what? 2-3 issues of the Avengers in the '60s? But they were good!) I had actually forgotten that Colan came back to the book years later. I guess the last time I did my Avengers read-through was before I'd read enough Colan to put him on my all-time favorites list. |
|
