Avengers Line-Up Revealed

[KingRanger]

So that would mean the first Xmen movie sucked because it didn't have beast? And the Iron Man movie sucked cause it wasn't set in Vietnam at the beginning? Or spider-man sucks because there was no web shooters?

 

[Skyknight]

Heh. Part of why I loved Janet and Hank was out of that "WTF" pairing. Miller did some wonderful things with it in the first two Ultimates, using Janet's insecurity to mess up her relationships even beyond Hank, so they both came off as deserving of one another (in a light that didnt speak too highly of their character strengths anyway, there just both perpetually adolescent)

 

[MrMonk]

And back to Hank and Jan, I don't think they should've ever gotten back together. Even before the wife-beating incident, their relationship screamed unhealthy. Let's see...Hank starts dating Jan because she resembled his dead ex (big red flag there!). After he becomes Yellowjacket, Jan marries him because she knew he wouldn't propose to her if he was in his right mind. I'm sorry, but taking advantage of someone being mentally ill to marry them is really squicky. They really weren't meant for each other, their relationship was unhealthy from the start, and when they made up after the incident, they should've just remained friends.

They keep getting back together for the reason they keep bringing up the wife-beating. It's the only time the characters were really interesting, though I feel Janet had decent turns in Busiek's Avengers Forever and Avengers run.

Oh geez--that's...special. Really special. I must've missed that issue. Of course, I'd dropped so many comics by then that I missed a lot of stuff. Marvel has really turned into a constant stream of Wall Bangers. I'm guessing Bendis wrote that one--that guy has no clue how to write the Avengers, and there's a reason I dropped it during his abysmal Alpha Flight arc.

Bendis did indeed write it. It was an issue of Avengers explaining when Pym got replaced. The issue ends with the Skrulls killing the agent they had as Pym, and lamenting at how the Pym conditioning never seems to take because he's too crazy and insecure.

That was more because the Illuminati was going for people with huge domains, though. Cap is...well, Cap. T'Challa's a king--he was asked for the same reason Namor and Black Bolt were asked. Speaking of T'Challa, he's also a poster boy for character derailment...as far as I'm concerned, everything that's happened with him since Priest's books got cancelled out from under him didn't happen.

Hudlin's run on the title has been weak at best, but Aaron's doing some good work there and over in Ghost Rider.

But I think the Avengers in general, not just Hank, have been in a writing slump since the '90s. While Busiek and Johns wrote some good issues, their runs were pretty hit-and-miss, enough that I can't list either as being among my favorites. The last Avengers writer whose run I thoroughly loved was Bob Harras in the early-mid '90s (and Waid doesn't count, since his run only lasted three issues). And before Harras, there was Roger Stern on the main book and Englehart on the Whackos.

I felt Johns' run was actually his worst work. It just never clicked with me. Busiek's Ultron Unlimited was a high point. The title's been wandering since then, and though I like the team composition in New Avengers, they never do anything.

 

[ForeverRed]

Ed Norton on the Returning as The Hulk for Marvel's Avengers

During the Television Critics Association Press Tour, currently running until August 8th, HBO held a panel presentation for By the People: The Election of Barack Obama, produced by actor Edward Norton.

Following the panel, talk in the hotel lobby inevitably turned to the eventual movie about The Avengers and whether or not he might be in it. The man responsible for the latest incarnation of The Hulk replied, "I won't comment on that, just because they keep a pretty tight reign on what they are letting out. I'll let them say."

When asked about the 10th anniversary of Fight Club, and how he reflects on the film's importance, he was a bit more forthcoming.

"All of us who were involved in it love that film," says Norton. "I think the best films are the ones that form their own relationship with an audience, over time. They escape the vicissitudes of critical and box office reaction, in the short term, and find their own way to their audience, over time. And, I think that film certainly feels like one of those ones that rippled out from pure person to person, and became what it became more through people's relationship with it than through any kind of intermediary, like a critic or anything like that."

http://iesb.net/index.php?option=co...rvels-avengers&catid=44:interviews&Itemid=172