Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

[Admiral_Young]

"Avenging Spider-Man" was indeed pitched as a Spider-Man/Avengers team up book, which is why most if not all of the team ups have featured his Avengers team mates or at the very least former Avengers. Captain America pretty much explains this in the first issue.


Axel Alonso addresses Marvel Now questions and states T'Challa is important to their Marvel Now plans and we'll find out where he'll be in the mix. Given how Jonathan Hickman wrote him in "Fantastic Four" and his role in the second half of Avengers Vs X-Men it would surprise me if he returns to the Avengers as part of Hickman's run.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?p...ticle&id=40276

[Turtletrekker]

Hickman interview about his Avengers plans.

[Admiral_Young]

Yeah, Bendis did a Q and A as well for "All New X-Men" on the Marvel site as well. I'm not sure anything new is covered that wasn't already covered in their CBR interviews. 18 characters. Going to be interesting to see who the team is comprised of as well as the other redesigned costumes.

[JD]

Have they explained yet what relationship is between the two Avengers books? I know during the comic-con they said it was going to be different than you average spin-off/parent series relationship.

[Admiral_Young]

Not really, just what Hickman has stated about it briefly already. I would imagine that he will treat it the same way as he did "FF" after "Fantastic Four".

[Turtletrekker]

Admiral_Young wrote:

---

Not really, just what Hickman has stated about it briefly already. I would imagine that he will treat it the same way as he did "FF" after "Fantastic Four".

Hickman has actually said differently...

Marvel.com: How are you approaching the structure of the series? It’s shipping twice a month and will be interconnecting with New AVENGERS as well. Will it have its own discrete arcs and stories or will the books interact on an issue by issue basis like FANTASTIC FOUR and FF?

Jonathan Hickman: It’s not like FANTASTIC FOUR and FF. It’s not like that in that part one of a two-part story could go across both books. That won’t happen until way, way down the line. Not until the story demands it. But if you know what’s going on in one book it makes the other book way more interesting. More like referential things. Iron Man does one thing in one book and we reference it in the other book. It’s not critical to the story that you know what the other thing was, but if you know what the other thing was it’s kind of an “Aha!” moment where you’re like “Oh, I see.” This is a whole world kind of feel.

[Admiral_Young]

Dan Slott describes what Marvel Now is for those fans who are still unclear.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/08/...of-marvel-now/

[Turtletrekker]

Kieron Gillen on his plans for Iron Man...

[shivkala]

Admiral_Young wrote:

---

Dan Slott describes what Marvel Now is for those fans who are still unclear.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/08/...of-marvel-now/

Could have done without the digs at DC. If, instead of re-launching everything, most with new creative teams, DC had done a "Marvel NOW" then there wouldn't have been rotating creative teams on their books, either. Batman, Green Lantern/GLC, Action Comics (well, Morrison is leaving, but with over a year of books under his belt), Justice League, Aquaman, etc. have not had "a creator on a book for four or six issues and then– whoosh– a new creative team gets slapped in."

I've always felt that Marvel was more cancellation happy, while DC changed the creative team, first. Not always, but more often than not.

I don't mean to be hard on Marvel, as I'm just starting to get into their books again, but I hate this mentality. Maybe because I've always been more DC than Marvel, but it seems that Marvel, historically, has thrived on bashing DC. However, I've always felt that if you have something good, it should be able to speak for itself.

The comic book industry is hurting and I think the answer is to be more supportive, not bash the other guy. In my experience, when you get someone into comics, they generally end up branching out, trying different titles and different companies. I'm not saying Marvel should start advertising for DC, but to me, getting someone into a comic shop is a potential win for all comic companies.

[Icemizer]

As bad as Iron Man currently is even that horrid description of the future plans sounds better. As for Slotts comments, we will see how long things last if sales dont show an uptick.

[Admiral_Young]

Jason Aaron talks about "Thor: God of Thunder".

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/thor...son-aaron.html

[Turtletrekker]

Icemizer wrote:

---

As bad as Iron Man currently is even that horrid description of the future plans sounds better. As for Slotts comments, we will see how long things last if sales dont show an uptick.

What's wrong with Gillen's plans?

[Icemizer]

^Tony and his relationship with the universe and Tony and his relationship with women and you ask whats wrong. Throw in the grail knight nonsense and we have a real mishmash of ideas. About the only thing interesting is some new bad guys to fight.

[Turtletrekker]

If you say so.

[PsychoPere]

Spider-Men #4 consisted almost entirely of conversations between Peter, Gwen, Miles, and May - and it was the best issue of the miniseries so far. The bit where May accepted that it really was a Peter was particularly well-done, and fairly low-key too. Watching Miles play with Ultimate Peter's web-shooters was amusing, and has me looking forward to seeing if those are the ones he'll be using in the near future in his own title*.

(* If he has already started using web-shooters, then I haven't gotten to those issues yet - I think the last issue I've read so far was #10.)