Marvel All New, All Different - Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

I haven't read the Last Days books because they're books I don't normally read. I don't suppose any of them directly deal with the multiversal collapse and that final 616 vs Ultimate battle that was so swiftly glossed over?

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

No. It's negative space. What's happening that isn't the primary story.

The skies are red, that planet is up there, and panicked humanity is rioting.

It's about the smaller world that has to coexist with all this huge ####.

The Punisher is like a pig in ####.

End of the world baby.

He's got people to kill before god does it for him.

#### god.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

I do like when Marvel decides to dig deeper into the character box and do this, like with Hercules getting and ongoing as well.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Secret Wars is being expaned to 9 issues, with the finale coming out in December. This won't affect the relaunch of the regular Marvel line.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Those ungrateful ####s.

I need to burn something valuable.

Back in 20.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Today's issue of SHIELD brought in elements from Jonathon Hickman's unfinished SHIELD series, namely Leonardo DaVinci and the secret history of SHIELD that Hickman established.

It seems that DaVinci has arranged for the ascension of every SHIELD director (including Osborn) and now wants Coulson for the job. To this end, he arranged for the assassination of Maria Hill, which was thwarted by Coulson. The why of it remains for another issue.

The best part-- Coulson out-witting Leonardo.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Is that were the Da Vinci stuff came from? This issue was extremely reader unfriendly. It didn't seem like it fit with the rest of the series at all, and now I know why. That's kind of BS, to basically stop a series to continue a storyline from a series that ended years ago, without adequate intro or explanation for new readers. I thought going in that I was still reading the comic where Phil Coulson and friends team up with different heroes every month, not leftovers from a comic run I couldn't care less about. It feels like a bait and switch, honestly, especially since it was a horrible story anyway, and I think its continuing to next month.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Red She-Hulk spent the end of her run working for Da Vinchi.

You're just feeling excluded because you're not as well read as the people spending a thousand dollars a week on comics.

Thooooose people.

I hate them too.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Given that it was a 50th anniversary issue, it only makes sense that they would try and touch on as many aspects of the history of SHIELD as they could. It also included flashbacks to the Fury Sr, Duggan, Sitwell and the Contessa era as well as incorporating the newer Hickman stuff.

ETA: And art from Kirby and Steranko!

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

I read all of Red She-Hulk's run. Was the weird computer predicting dude and super smart girl supposed to be related to the SHIELD stuff? It was a pretty weak arc regardless.

The Flashbacks were fine. Still, an anniversary issue shouldn't require you to actually read 50 years of comics to understand. If I wanted idiotic, convoluted SHIELD stories, I'd be reading his old SHIELD book. Its like if The New Mutants have an anniversary, but the book just continues a Rob Liefeld plot from decades ago. Or if a Spidey anniversary just continued the Clone Saga. Taking a break from a book's actual story (and its entire premise) to follow up with a story the majority of your readers probably didn't even read (I highly doubt the majority of Mark Waid's SHIELD readers also read Hickman's book) is a very shady thing to do.

Plus, you know, some history should just be forgotten. I doubt Carol Danvers (Captain Marvel/Ms. Marvel)'s 50th anniversary (in 2018) will include a celebration of Avengers #200 The same should have happened to a confusing, stupid plot from a mediocre writer of a SHIELD run that's mostly forgotten at this point. Instead, we lose a whole issue of Mark Waid's SHIELD run to Johnathon Hickman's bad writing, and he's not even ruining the book personally

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

why should Hickman's SHIELD story be forgotten? because you didn't read it? i think if you actually read those issues you'd enjoy it (thought the last mini is incomplete). typically, an anniversary issue will take a look back at past eras. you don't have to know the whole 50 year history of SHIELD...but those of us who do probably enjoyed it. i did.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Agree completely with Saga.

And I have to say, I think that this may be the first time I've ever heard anyone, anywhere accuse Hickman of "bad writing". I loved his SHIELD series and really, really want to finally read the final two issues. IIRC, the scripts are done and we are just waiting on Dustin Weaver's art.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

So, "anniversary issue" means a SHIELD comic that has no connection to any SHIELD story of the past 50 years except Hickman's (outside of a few panels taken from older comics)? Oh, wait, sorry. The Dum Dum story is a continuation of the idiotic Original Sin, which was written by Jason aaron, and the book reprinted an old SHIELD story. So, only most of the anniversary issue focused on Hickman, the rest focused on a stupid plot twist from a bad event comic or a reprint that doesn't connect to anything. Yeah, I can see what you mean. That is exactly what an anniversary book should be

All of Hickman's Avengers work and the whole Infinity event are some of the worse Marvel comics I've ever read. He has written a few decent comics, but he's mostly a writer who loves convoluted plots, and is horrible at characterization. Even his Fantastic four run, looking back at it, is overrated. He's like Grant Morrison, but without a history of amazing work to compensate for writing a bunch of confusing, pointless garbage.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Wow. Just... wow. I mean, you're entitled to your opinion of course, but... wow.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Yeah, I have an intense hatred of most of Hickman's work. Marvel didn't publish any good main Avengers books for years because of that idiot (Secret Avengers and Mighty Avengers were good, but not main Avengers books). Between that and Infinity (the most insultingly bad Marvel event I've read, and I've read every one since Civil War), Hickman's near the top of my "worst writers of all time" list. He isn't at the top (Frank Miller and Rob Liefeld are written in stone on that list at this point), but he has written some of the worst Marvel comics I've ever read, so he has that "honor".

I try to just ignore him and not let it get to me (especially since he's almost gone and will soon have no big books at Marvel ), but the SHIELD issue has really set me off.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

100% agreement about Liefield, and 50% agreement on Miller. I recently re-read his Daredevil run and thought it f'ing brilliant. Dark Knight Returns, Batman: Year One and Give Me Liberty for Dark Horse are all favorites (although, in hindsight, you begin to see the beginings of his later insanity in GML). However, it's been a veeeerrry long time since he's written anything I have interest in.

Hickman, however, is one of my favorites. Loved Secret Warriors, loved SHIELD, thought his Fantastic Four/FF run was amazing. I'll admit that his Avengers/New Avengers run, essentially an 85 issue (counting Infinity) build-up to Secret Wars, was a bit on the bloated side, but I did greatly enjoy it for the most part. Infinity suffered from what a lot of potentially good stories suffer from. They turned it into an "event".

ETA--

Try harder.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Hickman's Avengers stuff was fantastic. i'm sorry you don't like good comics.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

I wouldn't say Hickman is a bad writer at all, but I see where the criticism comes from as I dropped all Avengers books after Infinity because of him.

He's a very cold writer and does push characterization to the far back so that he can focus on the crazy sci-fi story that doesn't really seem to fit an Avengers story, except that's what he happens to be writing at the moment so he makes the best of the characters he has. There's the odd time he shines, I really liked Avengers 12 (that the one where Hyperion and Thor have that talk on the mountain in the savage land?) and I'm really liking Game of Thr... I mean Secret Wars. A lot. But overall, he really needs to find a better balance with his work, though admittedly I never read his Fantastic Four.

With the amount of great books coming out from multiple publishers every month (Image is doing so good right now), making that assumption is a little harsh for something so subjective, don't you think?

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

To be fair. SW is more reminiscent of his Image work: East of West and which ultimately borrorws from Dune (which he has repeatedly stated to be his favorite novel) than GoT.

 

Re: Marvel Now/ReEvolution Ongoing Discussion (Spoilers)

Agreed with the latest issue of "S.H.E.I.L.D" loved the incorporation of Hickman and Weaver's story..looks like this will be the final arc of Waid's book before Guggenheim takes it over later on post SW.

Both Hickman's FF run and SW are heavily influenced from "Dune" and "God Emperor of Dune" as Hickman outright calls Doom that in SW. It's one of the reasons why I love the concept so much.