Eternals: Apparently NOT so Eternal after all.....

[Rev. Calibos]

Had a chance to pick up the latest issue of Eternals last week. Great issue that continued the Eternals/X-Men team up as Ikaris and the X-Men took on Druig and his followers in a brutal throwdown.

Don't have it in front of me currently, but reading the blurb for the next issue it seemed to imply that next month's issue will be the last for the series.

Did some checking about on marvel.com and my lcs and there doesn't appear to be an Eternals issue for post March......so is the END of the Eternals?

If so, I'd like to raise my glass to an excellent series that ended far too soon. Hopefully they'll be able to wrap up the Horde storyline as they're just about ready to hit Earth, lol.

[Ex_]

Had a chance to pick up the latest issue of Eternals last week. Great issue that continued the Eternals/X-Men team up as Ikaris and the X-Men took on Druig and his followers in a brutal throwdown.

Don't have it in front of me currently, but reading the blurb for the next issue it seemed to imply that next month's issue will be the last for the series.

Did some checking about on marvel.com and my lcs and there doesn't appear to be an Eternals issue for post March......so is the END of the Eternals?

If so, I'd like to raise my glass to an excellent series that ended far too soon. Hopefully they'll be able to wrap up the Horde storyline as they're just about ready to hit Earth, lol.

I doubt they're ending it right after an X-Men guest appearance. They'll want to milk any possible interest that may stem from it. Eh? Maybe just a delay that month?

[Rev. Calibos]

I doubt they're ending it right after an X-Men guest appearance. They'll want to milk any possible interest that may stem from it. Eh? Maybe just a delay that month?

I hadn't considered that.....but looking forward there aren't any issues going into April/May timeframe.....


Probably just speculation on my part but that end of issue blurb just gave me the distinct impression that it's done, lol.

I'm in BMB lecture currently, does anyone have that issue on hand that can post the blurb? If not it's all good, I'll put it up when I get back to the house.

[XPac]

Honestly, I think it would take either a miracle or an A list creative team to keep the Eternals an on-going monthly book. And their creative team, while very good, isn't exactly an A list crop.

THat books days were pretty much numbered after the first issue. That said, maybe the X-Men can boost interest a bit. We'll see.

[The Sword Is Drawn]

I really WANT an Eternals book. One I can enjoy. One I can love the shit out of.

The Gaiman/Romita Jr series was like that. The perfect set up, the perfect re-invention.

But this series has totally failed in recapturing that vibe. I just don't know how they could have got this wrong. I understand WHY it could be in contention for cancellation. But I would much prefer seeing a different creative team onboard, and it being given another chance.

[Runguy]

Had a chance to pick up the latest issue of Eternals last week. Great issue that continued the Eternals/X-Men team up as Ikaris and the X-Men took on Druig and his followers in a brutal throwdown.

Don't have it in front of me currently, but reading the blurb for the next issue it seemed to imply that next month's issue will be the last for the series.

Did some checking about on marvel.com and my lcs and there doesn't appear to be an Eternals issue for post March......so is the END of the Eternals?

If so, I'd like to raise my glass to an excellent series that ended far too soon. Hopefully they'll be able to wrap up the Horde storyline as they're just about ready to hit Earth, lol.

Well next issue does wrap up this story arch. Of course what happens after that who knows :frown:

[americocaine]

cancelled? makes sense. they dropped the ball big time by using tv writers in the first place. maybe gaiman can return soon?

[Will.S]

I really WANT an Eternals book. One I can enjoy. One I can love the shit out of.

The Gaiman/Romita Jr series was like that. The perfect set up, the perfect re-invention.

But this series has totally failed in recapturing that vibe. I just don't know how they could have got this wrong. I understand WHY it could be in contention for cancellation. But I would much prefer seeing a different creative team onboard, and it being given another chance.
I was hoping for Neil and John to continue the book rather than set it up for a relaunch.

It seems to be extremely hard to find A-list talent who can run with the ideas and make the Eternals work both creatively and financially. I think a writer like Neil Gaiman, Jonathan Hickman, or a Grant Morrison can make it work provided the right art team who can capture that same energy that Kirby brought to them but it's tough.

That being said, I did like what the Knaufs were doing with Acuna. I've been loving the art and how the characters have been portrayed even if they strayed from the Kirby Eternals but they're never going to revert back to that since they've been so fully integrated into the MU as well as the concept of the Celestials and all of that stuff.

[Expletive Deleted]

It had a bad launch and it never really recovered. Sales on the Gaiman/JRJR mini started off strong enough, but it ran parallel with CIVIL WAR and was consistently beat out by crossovers and tie-ins. Sales ended up being decent, if not great. Whatever buzz there was about the book centered on the creative team. So how do you do a follow-up series? Delay a year until the metaphorical iron is ice cold, bring in a creative team with a diametrically opposed style (not a bad style, necessarily, but 180 degrees from Gaiman and Romita), and wait for sales to roll in! I liked the series well enough (at least while Acuna was the artist - the last two issues have been pretty dire), but it was doomed from the get-go.

I'm sure some will blame this cancellation on the Knaufs' failure to hew to Kirby's vision and on Marvel's inclusion of the Eternals in the MU, but I think even if the editorial and creative direction had been spot on, it would've been a hard sell. Heck, pull it out of the MU and it's an even harder sell.

[Rev. Calibos]

Some great points thus far.

Looking back I think that a lot of casual fans who may have picked up the Gaiman/Romita miniseries may have been a bit let down by the toned down pace of a monthly book.

Add on the fact that a major portion of the early issues dealt with Ikaris and Thena hunting down the 'lost' Eternals who were hidden on Earth in human form, their memories subdued. It was far too similar to what was going on in Thor and the lost Asgardians.

I can't quite put my finger on what makes these characters such a hard sell. My first encounter with them was during the 12 issue Eternals maxi-series in the mid 80's. Aside from a few notable guest spots and one shots there really hasn't been anything significant done with them since then.

Most fans are going to be familiar with the Gaiman mini which served as a great jumping off point for a series, but for whatever reason it's not catching on.

[berk]

I wouldn't blame the cancellation on the Knaufs' failure to follow up on the Gaiman miniseries. As far as I can tell, that's exactly what they did, build from Gaiman's story.

But the fact is that Gaiman's reinvention was never going anywhere in the first place. Everything he did was geared towards making the Eternals part of the MU. But MU fans have never been particularly interested in the Eternals. They don't make good superheroes, because they weren't designed to be superheroes.

Gaiman tried to skate around that problem, but once you're a superpowered humanoid in the MU, fans expect you to act and speak like all the rest of the superpowered humanoids, which means they expect superhero/villains. The Knaufs did that, and to the extent they were successful in making the Eternals look like superheroes and villains, complete with Avengers/X-Men style soap opera subplots and relationship problems and "good-mutant vs evil-mutant" superhero battles, some fans enjoyed the new series.

I wouldn't blame the cancellation on the undeniably complete lack of connection with Kirby's original. The original wasn't popular either. And who knows, one of these days they might hit upon some twist or gimmick that will attract superhero fans, and there will finally be a popular "Eternals" series. But so what? It won't be the Eternals, just a new superhero group. Why not just create an entirely new group from scratch? Oh right, that wouldn't give the opportunity for hypocritical claims of honouring Kirby's visionary creations. Sorry, stupid question.

[Sandy Hausler]

That being said, I did like what the Knaufs were doing with Acuna. I've been loving the art and how the characters have been portrayed even if they strayed from the Kirby Eternals but they're never going to revert back to that since they've been so fully integrated into the MU as well as the concept of the Celestials and all of that stuff.

No disrespect to Kirby, but the Eternals was hardly his finest work.

Sandy Hausler

[Cayman]

Too bad, it was a great book.

[Sandy Hausler]

It had a bad launch and it never really recovered. Sales on the Gaiman/JRJR mini started off strong enough, but it ran parallel with CIVIL WAR and was consistently beat out by crossovers and tie-ins. Sales ended up being decent, if not great. Whatever buzz there was about the book centered on the creative team. So how do you do a follow-up series? Delay a year until the metaphorical iron is ice cold, bring in a creative team with a diametrically opposed style (not a bad style, necessarily, but 180 degrees from Gaiman and Romita), and wait for sales to roll in! I liked the series well enough (at least while Acuna was the artist - the last two issues have been pretty dire), but it was doomed from the get-go.

I'm sure some will blame this cancellation on the Knaufs' failure to hew to Kirby's vision and on Marvel's inclusion of the Eternals in the MU, but I think even if the editorial and creative direction had been spot on, it would've been a hard sell. Heck, pull it out of the MU and it's an even harder sell.


This raises an interesting point. Does ANY book have a chance to succeed while Marvel is putting out one big event crossover after another?

Sandy Hausler

[Cayman]

This raises an interesting point. Does ANY book have a chance to succeed while Marvel is putting out one big event crossover after another?

Sandy Hausler


The big books help finance the little books. There's no real reason to think that more people would buy a fringe title like Eternals if there weren't event books. Most likely it would still have a small audience. People will buy the titles that interest them most, and titles with familiar characters will always have an advantage.

[Will.S]

I wouldn't blame the cancellation on the Knaufs' failure to follow up on the Gaiman miniseries. As far as I can tell, that's exactly what they did, build from Gaiman's story.

But the fact is that Gaiman's reinvention was never going anywhere in the first place. Everything he did was geared towards making the Eternals part of the MU. But MU fans have never been particularly interested in the Eternals. They don't make good superheroes, because they weren't designed to be superheroes.

Gaiman tried to skate around that problem, but once you're a superpowered humanoid in the MU, fans expect you to act and speak like all the rest of the superpowered humanoids, which means they expect superhero/villains. The Knaufs did that, and to the extent they were successful in making the Eternals look like superheroes and villains, complete with Avengers/X-Men style soap opera subplots and relationship problems and "good-mutant vs evil-mutant" superhero battles, some fans enjoyed the new series.

I wouldn't blame the cancellation on the undeniably complete lack of connection with Kirby's original. The original wasn't popular either. And who knows, one of these days they might hit upon some twist or gimmick that will attract superhero fans, and there will finally be a popular "Eternals" series. But so what? It won't be the Eternals, just a new superhero group. Why not just create an entirely new group from scratch? Oh right, that wouldn't give the opportunity for hypocritical claims of honouring Kirby's visionary creations. Sorry, stupid question.
I think the main problem is that the Eternals are about an entire pantheon rather than a particular protagonist like Thor to the Asgardians or Hercules/Ares to the Olympians. Ikaris never seemed to have risen to popularity although Sersi through the Avengers had gained more broad appeal.

I do find that the Eternals are a fascinating group of characters but their existence needs to very much be defined by something other than recovering other Eternals as well as facing threats that are more cosmic in scope. I think they are very similar to the Inhumans in certain ways but the Inhumans have had a lot more integration into the MU and very good creative teams.

No disrespect to Kirby, but the Eternals was hardly his finest work.

Sandy Hausler
I never said it was his finest work but I did happen to highly enjoy it along the lines of Kirby's OMAC and would like to see it succeed on a broader level.

[Sandy Hausler]

The big books help finance the little books. There's no real reason to think that more people would buy a fringe title like Eternals if there weren't event books. Most likely it would still have a small audience. People will buy the titles that interest them most, and titles with familiar characters will always have an advantage.

Evidentally, the big books don't finance the little books for long. They still get cancelled.

And, I assume by fringe you mean, any book that is not an X-Book, Spider-book or Avengers book. (And even Spider-books are not immune. Look at Spider-Girl.) I don't see Eternals as being any more a fringe book than, say, Daredevil. In fact, Daredevil seems to be the only book that doesn't fit into one of the above characters, but still manages to hold on.

Sandy Hausler

[berk]

No disrespect to Kirby, but the Eternals was hardly his finest work.

Sandy HauslerActually, it may well have been his very finest work.

[berk]

I think the main problem is that the Eternals are about an entire pantheon rather than a particular protagonist like Thor to the Asgardians or Hercules/Ares to the Olympians. Ikaris never seemed to have risen to popularity although Sersi through the Avengers had gained more broad appeal.

I do find that the Eternals are a fascinating group of characters but their existence needs to very much be defined by something other than recovering other Eternals as well as facing threats that are more cosmic in scope. I think they are very similar to the Inhumans in certain ways but the Inhumans have had a lot more integration into the MU and very good creative teams.I think that's right. Like the New Gods, a very different work in other ways, once you remove them from the context of the larger concept that gives them meaning, they don't really function that well, and readers sense that. OTOH, superhero fans as a whole have shown very little interest in that larger context - no surprise there, since it wasn't a superhero story. The Inhumans were an earlier variation on the idea of superhumans genetically engineered by alien technology, and do work well as part of the MU because they were originally envisioned that way.

The Eternals, despite that superficial similarity, are an entirely different kettle of fish. I don't see any Eternals (or New Gods) series succeeding commercially unless the audience itself changes, which doesn't seem too likely for the foreseeable future.

[Omega Alpha]

It had a bad launch and it never really recovered. Sales on the Gaiman/JRJR mini started off strong enough, but it ran parallel with CIVIL WAR and was consistently beat out by crossovers and tie-ins. Sales ended up being decent, if not great. Whatever buzz there was about the book centered on the creative team. So how do you do a follow-up series? Delay a year until the metaphorical iron is ice cold, bring in a creative team with a diametrically opposed style (not a bad style, necessarily, but 180 degrees from Gaiman and Romita), and wait for sales to roll in! I liked the series well enough (at least while Acuna was the artist - the last two issues have been pretty dire), but it was doomed from the get-go.

I'm sure some will blame this cancellation on the Knaufs' failure to hew to Kirby's vision and on Marvel's inclusion of the Eternals in the MU, but I think even if the editorial and creative direction had been spot on, it would've been a hard sell. Heck, pull it out of the MU and it's an even harder sell.

Exactly. This could have lasted long enough, but Marvel really screwed up any of the (few) chances it had of being successful.

[Rev. Calibos]

I think the main problem is that the Eternals are about an entire pantheon rather than a particular protagonist like Thor to the Asgardians or Hercules/Ares to the Olympians. Ikaris never seemed to have risen to popularity although Sersi through the Avengers had gained more broad appeal.

I do find that the Eternals are a fascinating group of characters but their existence needs to very much be defined by something other than recovering other Eternals as well as facing threats that are more cosmic in scope. I think they are very similar to the Inhumans in certain ways but the Inhumans have had a lot more integration into the MU and very good creative teams.



That's a good point.......Thor has always done well because it all boiled down to one character, the Thunder God. You could have big, cosmic stories that involved huge, sweeping concepts and the next arc could involve Donald Blake trying to dip out of a date with Jane Foster so he could change and take on the Absorbing Man in downtown Manhattan.

Thor felt just at home amongst the Avengers hanging out at the mansion as he did in space battling Ego or heading into battle against a horde of trolls with the Warriors Three.



With the Eternals there's no central character to act as the liaison between these Huge, Cosmic Concepts and the mere mortal reader......the reader is almost an afterthought, an outsider looking in.

Sadly, I can't think of a single character from the series that COULD act as that liaison.

[mdg1]

Ikaris? He was usually the focus in the old days.

[Rev. Calibos]

Ikaris? He was usually the focus in the old days.



Ikaris was the 'lead' but there was nothing about him that was likable or that set him apart like Thor did.

With Thor you had the lame Doctor Donald Blake to tether him to earth with his practice, his longing for Jane Foster, his dependency on keeping a hold of the hammer and not letting it loose for of changing back......there were a number of things that kept the 'Mighty' Thor from becoming TOO mighty.

With Ikaris and the rest of the Eternals there's nothing to really connect them with the reader. When she was with the Avengers we learned that Sersi was somewhat of a legend in NYC's social circles.....but other than that there's not much that we know about the Eternals to make us care for them as individuals.

We can read their adventures and be captivated by the scope of the Celestials....but there's nothing there that really makes us care about them one way or the other. They, like us, are just chess pieces being bandied about by forces beyond their reckoning.

[midnightman2001]

Cancelled?

I SAY THEE NAY!

[Zero Hunter]

I know he has some fans, and I am not trying to be a dick here, but Arcunna is a very "love him" or "hate him" type artist. Having him on the art was always going to be a polerizing factor. I don't like his art much at all, but I did try the book for the first 3 issues, and I eventully dropped it because of the art.

[berk]

Ikaris wasn't really the focus in the original until the later issues, where it's very clear that Kirby was trying to bow to editorial and/or fan demands for a more conventional series. To get an idea of the real Eternals I think you have to look at the first 13 issues or so plus the Annual. The lead role varies from story to story, moving amongst various members of the ensemble. Because it really was an ensemble series. I agree this was one of the reasons fans didn't understand the series. Another was that none of the characters fit easily into the usual types familiar to superhero readers. IOW, as with the Fourth World stuff, Kirby was once again being too innovative for his audience.

[Trey]

I know he has some fans, and I am not trying to be a dick here, but Arcunna is a very "love him" or "hate him" type artist. Having him on the art was always going to be a polerizing factor. I don't like his art much at all, but I did try the book for the first 3 issues, and I eventully dropped it because of the art.

That's a good point. I loved his DC stuff. And his art on Eternals was somehow off to me. Not his best.

This series got swamped by too many books that tied into the main thread of the MU, leaving this book on the outside looking in.

[Shyft]

it seems that other than the basic concept, alot of the re-imagining done by Gaiman and JrJr was thrown out for the new series. a shame.

[Arksy]

I liked this series and i wish Gaiman or Morrison could continue this book. Morrison, being a Kirby partisan would probably jump at the idea.

[berk]

I liked this series and i wish Gaiman or Morrison could continue this book. Morrison, being a Kirby partisan would probably jump at the idea.I'm not so sure about that. Morrison hasn't yet shown any ability to translate the appreciation of Kirby's New Gods he's shown in interviews, forwards and introductions, etc into a proper New Gods story. He's had more than one opportunity and in each case has chosen to do otherwise, Final Crisis being the most recent example.

Anyway, I've never read any comment of his about the Eternals, so I have no idea what he thinks of that creation, or whether he'd be interested in doing anything with it. Based on what he had to say about dropping the New Gods from Final Crisis, I think he's generally done with Kirby, at least as far as his own writing for DC is concerned.

As for Gaiman, he had his chance, and chose to write a conventional Marvel Universe story that ignored the original idea completely, so he has zero credibility as far as the Eternals are concerned.

[Karl H]

I picked up the first trade over the weekend and really enjoyed it. Shame. But yeah I agree with everyone's points re it being a difficult sell.

[The Sword Is Drawn]

So... where exactly is this announcement that the book is cancelled all of you seem to be working off?

[Rev. Calibos]

So... where exactly is this announcement that the book is cancelled all of you seem to be working off?

I've yet to see it.The thread was part speculation about the fate of the book given the end of issue blurb from #8 and the fact that Diamond doesn't have the title shipping for April and part discussion of the title and characters in general.

I may have jumped the gun in assuming that the book was getting axed but it was fueled by a couple of things.

1) The end of issue blurb. Didn't have a chance to pull it out to post it last night as I'm getting ready for a Calc. midterm......but it gives the impression that next issue may be the last.

2) Looking forward to April in Diamond there's no listing for Eternals #10. This could also mean that's it's just delayed but, again, it's just speculation. Part of the purpose of the thread was to discuss how difficult it is trying to package these concepts and characters into a title that will pique fan's interest, which leads into.....

3) The general consensus that this book is not fated long for this world, lol. I, like many others who enjoy the Eternals, have to reconcile ourselves to the fact that more than likely this book isn't going to set any sales records and, more than likely, will get the axe at some point. It hangs overhead like a sweet lil' cloud of misery reminding us that at some point in the near future there's going to be a blurb on the cover that reads 'DOUBLE SIZED LAST ISSUE!' or some such.



So if it's not canceled I for one would be thrilled......but that doesn't negate the concern that the title isn't going to hit 25. If it does, great, but I don't see that happening.


In the meantime we can still enjoy Eternals while it's here and discuss the characters/concepts and how they fit in, if at all, within the context of the current Marvel U.

[Sean Walsh]

It had a bad launch and it never really recovered. Sales on the Gaiman/JRJR mini started off strong enough, but it ran parallel with CIVIL WAR and was consistently beat out by crossovers and tie-ins. Sales ended up being decent, if not great. Whatever buzz there was about the book centered on the creative team.

They were expecting MARVEL 1602 numbers from Gaiman's ETERNALS.

But while 1602 was a fantastical Gaimanesque interpretation of Marvel characters (and thus appealing to many both in and out of comics), ETERNALS was steeped in Marvel continuity (goodbye outside readers) that didn't really feature a lot of recognizable characters (goodbye most people who had no idea who people like Makkari and Ikaris are) and, as you said, was running alongside CIVIL WAR.

[Runguy]

Do not see it listed for May, either :)

[Pixie_Solanas]

I liked this series and i wish Gaiman or Morrison could continue this book. Morrison, being a Kirby partisan would probably jump at the idea.

Except for this: Morrison has carte blanche at DC to create the sequel to Kirby's magnum opus "Fourth World", and why would he want to go back to Marvel and work under Joe Q again?

As mentioned earlier above, Kirby's Eternals just doesn't compare to his Fourth World material. In fact, it's pretty inferior in every way

[Rev. Calibos]

Except for this: Morrison has carte blanche at DC to create the sequel to Kirby's magnum opus "Fourth World", and why would he want to go back to Marvel and work under Joe Q again?

As mentioned earlier above, Kirby's Eternals just doesn't compare to his Fourth World material. In fact, it's pretty inferior in every way

Which isn't to say that it wasn't good, it just can't compare to the Fourth World.

This isn't like comparing Dark Knight Returns to Dark Knight Strikes Again where one is a timeless classic and the other rubbish......it's just that the Eternals can't hold up to what he already created with the Fourth World, few comics can.

[Sandy Hausler]

Which isn't to say that it wasn't good, it just can't compare to the Fourth World.

This isn't like comparing Dark Knight Returns to Dark Knight Strikes Again where one is a timeless classic and the other rubbish......it's just that the Eternals can't hold up to what he already created with the Fourth World, few comics can.

I'd have to say that Eternals was not one of Kirby's better works, so I'd have to say that it wasn't very good. It may have been better than his Black Panther though.

I'm saying this this just so that there is no mistake that I am saying (and I believe Agent-Torpor agrees) that not everything Kirby did was gold, and this was a bad period in his career. I don't think there was anything he did for Marvel during this period that I liked.

Now looking back at his DC work, on the other hand, I never thought he was a great writer, but I always liked Kamandi and Demon and Mr. Miracle. They were just more fun that what came out when he returned to Marvel.

Sandy Hausler

[berk]

Except for this: Morrison has carte blanche at DC to create the sequel to Kirby's magnum opus "Fourth World", and why would he want to go back to Marvel and work under Joe Q again?

As mentioned earlier above, Kirby's Eternals just doesn't compare to his Fourth World material. In fact, it's pretty inferior in every wayBesides, Morrison and DC have apparently given up on the idea of relaunching the New Gods, so all the less reason to expect any interest in the even less popular and even more misunderstood (but in no way inferior, IMO) Eternals. Probably just as well, I think. I've lost faith in Morrison's approach to the concept.

[Pixie_Solanas]

Besides, Morrison and DC have apparently given up on the idea of relaunching the New Gods, so all the less reason to expect any interest in the even less popular and even more misunderstood (but in no way inferior, IMO) Eternals. Probably just as well, I think. I've lost faith in Morrison's approach to the concept.

Where'd you get this? Didio at NYCC basically said that GM has a blank slate with which to craft his "Fifth World" storyverse. (then again, who's trusting Didio's word in anything LOL)

[TCJohnson]

Have the Eternals been cancelled? There is no solicit for #10 in April.

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Have the Eternals been cancelled? There is no solicit for #10 in April.

Or May.

Marvel needs to sort this out and let us know, and not just leave us hanging.

[berk]

Where'd you get this? Didio at NYCC basically said that GM has a blank slate with which to craft his "Fifth World" storyverse. (then again, who's trusting Didio's word in anything LOL)There was a quote from a Morrison interview immediately post-FC that basically said he dropped his plans of presenting his reinvented New Gods at the end of FC because he was told, presumably by people at DC, that no one was interested. I think it was a good decision in the end, but one that should have been made earlier, before the series began, because the NG have no place in a DCU superhero story focussed on Superman/Batman.

He went on to say that readers should just accept that the story was as close to finished as it's ever going to be in Kirby's own books and put it to rest. I'll see if I can find the exact quote, just in case I'm exaggerating from memory. I more or less agree with him there as well, though probably from a different motivation than Morrison's. The last thing I want to see is these characters being trotted out again and mis-used as mediocre superheroes/villains in some JLA story. Same with the Eternals and the MU.

[edit:]Here it is Morrison: The Fifth World is whatever cool new stuff happens from now on in the DC Universe. I see it as a Mythic Age for the DCU. An age of definitive struggles. There was more I wanted to do with the Kirby stuff, but by the time I got to the end of it, I had been told that nobody wanted to do anything more with the New Gods. So I decided to tuck them safely away on Earth 51. So now we have all the Kirby concepts in one place. Because as I was working through Final Crisis, I realized this was about the death of Darkseid and Orion and it seemed like, with the New Gods, Kirby's story really just should be rested and considered complete long ago in the guy's own books.

I don't think we should go back to what was, if, as far as I've been told nobody really wants to. So I decided to move it all over to a place where maybe we could look at later with Earth 51, which Nix Uotan fixes up conveniently to link back into Countdown continuity for neatness fanatics. I just thought that if the age of the New Gods has passed, then let's put them somewhere where they can be useful in a different way. Let's watch them having to struggle with a new status quo – starting from scratch, inside a universe, like the Greek Gods in Wonder Woman. Behind the scenes of Kamandi's adventures with the remnants of the Earth-0 OMAC corps you could have the New Gods playing out 'Clash of the Titans' dramas. Rebuilding New Genesis in the ruins of Apokolips.

And if we put them on the same Earth as Kamandi and then tie that into some of the other Kirby stuff, then suddenly you have a whole world based on that beautiful mad Kamandi map Kirby drew and that nobody's ever really explored. I feel like there's a potential series in the notion of the New Gods rebuilding their power base by encouraging belief and guiding the rise of civilizations from chaos, like 'Populous'! Building the destiny of a new world from Great Disaster to some kind of utopia, and then you can cut forward to Earth 51 Legion of SuperGods or something like that.

So to me it seemed like fertile ground but it deserved to be away from the main story of DC Earth-0. When we finally see the New Gods [in Final Crisis #7] they're walking away, and that's how I really felt about it by the end. It's time for them to walk away into the mists of myth.I suppose you could interpret some of that as hinting he might come back to the idea in the future, but the general impression I get is that he's moved on and isn't really interested any more. I hope so, because as I say, I've lost faith in his take on the characters and the ideas they're grounded on. Not that I see anyone else out there who'd do better. So best that both the New Gods and the Eternals be left alone, IMO.

[earl]

People have made good comics with both the Fourth World characters and Eternals, it is just that it is something that just never seemed to catch on. The comics didn't even sell well when Jack Kirby was doing them.

I don't think it is a matter that they cannot fit in either the Marvel or DC Universe but the fact that what the comics are about just doesn't hit the zeitgeist of a large enough audience for some reason. Maybe it is that people cannot relate to gods in the same way they can some other characters.

I think a more likely scenario is that the characters appeal to an aficionado audience that has read a bunch of comics, including previous permutations. I just don't think they have been successful in developing any new fans for these characters. There might be people who get into Jack Kirby or people that are into Grant Morrison or Neil Gaiman who will check these titles out, but they just don't seem to capture a bigger audience.

If Walt Simonson can do a series like Orion that well and it never caught on, I don't think any of these characters can get a big audience. It isn't that they are bad comics, it just has too narrow an appeal (i.e. not Batman or Spider-man or Wolverine). Personally, I think Ikaris or Mister Miracle are way more interesting characters than a bunch out there, but oh well.

[gorthon616]

To be honest, I'm not surprised it's heading for cancellation (if indeed it is).

The 1602 and Gaiman Eternals mini-series were, in my honest opinion, boring and not remotely worth my money.

Not bad per se, but compared to Sandman (which to be honest, aside from anything he gets Dave McKean to illustrate, is basically the only thing I've ever liked from Gaiman) it was complete garbage. It nowhere remotely compares to anything of that quality and at best was simply readable.

I was excited about it because it was Gaiman when it came out. Gaiman on a Kirby creation. That seemed steep in the sort of mythic history that Gaiman would be amazing with. Yet, half-way through it I was only picking it up because I wanted to complete what I started. And in the end I didn't even buy the last two issues. I read them somewhere, or something like that I think.

I actually picked the current series up for the Knaufs, being a big Carnivale and Iron Man Director of SHIELD fan. But it hasn't really been up to expectation either.

[Shyft]

which to be honest, aside from anything he gets Dave McKean to illustrate, is basically the only thing I've ever liked from Gaiman)

Are you talking about just comics, or in general? Have you read American Gods, or Neverwhere?

[Sean Walsh]

Not bad per se, but compared to Sandman (which to be honest, aside from anything he gets Dave McKean to illustrate, is basically the only thing I've ever liked from Gaiman) it was complete garbage. It nowhere remotely compares to anything of that quality and at best was simply readable.

I think you're doing Marvel, Gaiman and comics in general a great dishonor in saying that.

Simply put, there will never be another SANDMAN ever again.

If you hold anything and everything Gaiman produces against SANDMAN, you disrespect him as a writer. Even he probably admits he'll do something like SANDMAN again, but he continues to tell great stories.

If you expect Marvel to themselves expect another SANDMAN whenever Gaiman writes for them, you insult the company.

And if you expect both those things, then comics in general will both lose the chance to thrive off of what Neil Gaiman can produce for them - because he'll just stick to writing his own books and work movie & screenplay deals - and doom the industry into just getting the standard superhero crossover madness that Marvel is used to (and despised by some) for putting out on the market.

Gaiman's ETERNALS made me interested in the Eternals again. I wanted to go back and reread Kirby's original stories. The problem, as I'm sure many others here agree with, was that the ongoing series that followed it (many months later) was by a completely different group of people, who ultimately didn't hold the readers' grasp like Gaiman did.

And to be even fairer, Gaiman's ETERNALS didn't sell blockbuster numbers in the first place. Part of that's due to the CIVIL WAR frenzy around the time, and also because of the Eternals' relative C-list nature in the eyes of Marvel fans. It sold insanely well for an Eternals project, sure, but mainly due to Gaiman and Romita Jr's names on it.

[celticguy]

Are you talking about just comics, or in general? Have you read American Gods, or Neverwhere?

Is American Gods good?

I read Stardust which was fun and Neverwhere which i really liked.

I am rading the Graveyeard book this week for a laugh.

[gorthon616]

Are you talking about just comics, or in general? Have you read American Gods, or Neverwhere?

Yes. Neither of which really wowed me. Honestly though, I don't really remember either of them that well so I can't really say much more than that. I suppose Neverwhere was good enough that it interested me in getting American Gods. But apparently American Gods didn't interest me enough to check out whatever he wrote next. Anasi Boys? I forget.

I know I didn't think that they were outright bad. But to be fair, I'm actually not big on fictional literature that doesn't have pictures. Or perhaps more accurately, I just have a much higher standard for them. A book is "good" when after I start reading it, I literally cannot put the book down until I have finished reading it. Usually when it's a book that I read piece-meal over a course of days/weeks, I only consider the book to be "average" and consider it overall to be a minus in the world of time/effort-investments.

So my little ratings world, American Gods and Neverwhere were "average" books. Maybe to others that would count as good, but it's something I'd pass on.

[gorthon616]

Is American Gods good?

I read Stardust which was fun and Neverwhere which i really liked.

I am rading the Graveyeard book this week for a laugh.

I did like Stardust.

[gorthon616]

I think you're doing Marvel, Gaiman and comics in general a great dishonor in saying that.

Simply put, there will never be another SANDMAN ever again.

If you hold anything and everything Gaiman produces against SANDMAN, you disrespect him as a writer. Even he probably admits he'll do something like SANDMAN again, but he continues to tell great stories.

If you expect Marvel to themselves expect another SANDMAN whenever Gaiman writes for them, you insult the company.

And if you expect both those things, then comics in general will both lose the chance to thrive off of what Neil Gaiman can produce for them - because he'll just stick to writing his own books and work movie & screenplay deals - and doom the industry into just getting the standard superhero crossover madness that Marvel is used to (and despised by some) for putting out on the market.

Gaiman's ETERNALS made me interested in the Eternals again. I wanted to go back and reread Kirby's original stories. The problem, as I'm sure many others here agree with, was that the ongoing series that followed it (many months later) was by a completely different group of people, who ultimately didn't hold the readers' grasp like Gaiman did.

And to be even fairer, Gaiman's ETERNALS didn't sell blockbuster numbers in the first place. Part of that's due to the CIVIL WAR frenzy around the time, and also because of the Eternals' relative C-list nature in the eyes of Marvel fans. It sold insanely well for an Eternals project, sure, but mainly due to Gaiman and Romita Jr's names on it.

I can't really speak to people who liked Gaiman's Eternals and don't like the Knauf's Eternals, because as stated I didn't care much for Gaiman's Eternals.

True, like you, it did spark the "who are the Eternals?" fire in me. And to be honest, I still have a little bit of that fire. But ultimately, it did not light the "what is going to happen next in Gaiman's Eternals?" fire. In retrospect, that was probably why I didn't finish it up. I became much interested, like you, in reading (not rereading since it's all new to me) the old Jack Kibry Eternals stuff. But that did not translate into caring a great deal about how the story would finish. Nothing in the plot or characters, especially drew me to them.

I don't see how I am "insulting" them. Gaiman's name is on the cover. It is obviously used as part of the marketing. There are reasons for that. The foremost of that is "this is the guy who wrote Sandman." I don't expect him to write Sandman every time he writes, but it would be naive of him to think the comparisons aren't going to be there.

I picked up Eternal's on Gaiman's name. As I have done so with many of his other works. If after all of that, I have found the majority of his non-Sandman work to be fairly uninspired, how is that not fair? How have I done Marvel, Gaiman, the comic industry, or the great cosmic consonance of the universe a disservice by giving their works a try and after that saying that I do not think it met expectations? I see no insult or dishonor in that. I have been told that I am a person who is completely devoid of tact, but I'm sort of always like that so it's a bit futile to take it personally.

[berk]

People have made good comics with both the Fourth World characters and Eternals, it is just that it is something that just never seemed to catch on. The comics didn't even sell well when Jack Kirby was doing them.

I don't think it is a matter that they cannot fit in either the Marvel or DC Universe but the fact that what the comics are about just doesn't hit the zeitgeist of a large enough audience for some reason. Maybe it is that people cannot relate to gods in the same way they can some other characters.

I think a more likely scenario is that the characters appeal to an aficionado audience that has read a bunch of comics, including previous permutations. I just don't think they have been successful in developing any new fans for these characters. There might be people who get into Jack Kirby or people that are into Grant Morrison or Neil Gaiman who will check these titles out, but they just don't seem to capture a bigger audience.

If Walt Simonson can do a series like Orion that well and it never caught on, I don't think any of these characters can get a big audience. It isn't that they are bad comics, it just has too narrow an appeal (i.e. not Batman or Spider-man or Wolverine). Personally, I think Ikaris or Mister Miracle are way more interesting characters than a bunch out there, but oh well.Well that's the thing with these characters (Eternals & New Gods): you're not meant to identify with them the same way fans identify with Superman/Batman or any other favourite superhero protagonist. They weren't designed for that kind of wish-fulfillment story, and you're exactly right, that's why superhero fans as a group don't really enjoy readin stories about them.

[Beadle]

Personally I think the Eternals are predominantly a stronger group of characters than the New Gods (with obvious exceptions like Mr Miracle, Darkseid etc), and with a better-established mythos attached to them. However despite all this there are probably a few major reasons why the New Gods as a concept has been stronger and more supportable than Eternals historically:

1) Dilution. The Eternals are too disparate. It's not just Ikaris, Thena, Makkari, Zuras, Phastos, Sersi, Gilgamesh and Druig. They're just the Earth-bound Eternals. If they're going to make it more of a property, they need to wrap into it other branches like the Titanian Eternals (Mentor, Starfox, Thanos). That group brings with it connections to the Vells (Mar-, Genis-, and Phyla-), Drax & Moondragon, the remaining Blood Brother, Nebula, Isaac etc. If you consolidate the brand, you broaden the appeal. All the New Gods, noble or evil, have been together on two twin worlds in large societies and constantly interacting.

2) Autonomy. The New Gods essentially just got on with stuff. They were autonomous. With the Eternals, there is still the spectre of the Celestials hanging over them. The Celestials created the Eternals for a purpose, but they just don't know what that purpose is, or when it will be fulfilled. As soon as they've dealt with that and got that albatross from round their necks, they can move on. Look at how much more readable Cable has been since he had his supposed "final" confrontation with Apocalypse. The character's direction's been less constrained. I have my own ideas about what they could do with this, but they aren't paying me.

3) Villains. Apokalips has been a perfect antagonist to New Genesis. The New Gods are their own worst enemies, and Darkseid, Granny Goodness etc have very defined characters and roles. The Eternals villains are more vague and nebulous, but when consolidated could be a pretty good list. The Deviants should not be a nameless rabble - Kro, Ransak, Karkas etc could become a more militant unit. Ghaur could be used more often than he is. Maelstrom is half Deviant. And when you bring in the Titanians, then Thanos, Nebula etc are all strong villains. The Horde and the Celestials are too vague and too all-powerful to be the basis of a rogues gallery. It could also be expanded outside the mythos to characters like Terminus, High Evolutionary, Magus etc.

If you can improve these three major elements I believe you can make the Eternals a useful commodity.

[The Crime Dentist]

I'll shed no tears over this book. The reason it failed isn't because the concept or characters are intrinsically flawed, it failed because it was terribly written.

They had a chance to do this big cosmic story full of mythic resonance and wasted 6 issues telling pointless domestic stories with shallow characterization. Why write a book about demigods if that's all you're going to do? 7 issues in, we still had no real idea who half these characters were or what they could do or what type of personalities they had beyond thumbnail sketches.

The most recent issue was completely insulting to people who had stuck with the series. Literally half of the pages were just glorifying the X-Men, and the series' Satan-like immortal villain gets smacked around by the Beast of all people and laughed off and called "cute" by Cyclops. The group of villains didn't even get any kind of introduction beyond their names before being promptly dispatched not by any Eternals, who only had 2 pages in the book, but by random X-Men. Who were those guys?

After Acuna left the art became atrocious - not up to professional standards on several pages. The scenes in the afterlife were the worst, with Sersi's facial features randomly strewn across her face.

And any sense of mystery the series had around the Celestials coming in was promptly washed away, with the concept becoming dumbed down into a corny "becoming human" subplot. The apocalyptic swarm was just a rip off of Annihilation's plot, and even that became borderline comical with the way it was handled.

All in all, I started off with huge hopes for this series, the first two issues had my head exploding with great directions they could take it in, but they weren't up to the task and every issue became worse than the last, until the last issue moved me from wishing it was better to being downright insulted that I'd paid $3 for this instead of giving the change to the homeless guy I passed on the way to the shop and doing some good.

This book is awful and deserves if not to be cancelled outright, to certainly have its terrible creative team never allowed near it again. Just bad.

[berk]

I'll shed no tears over this book. The reason it failed isn't because the concept or characters are intrinsically flawed, it failed because it was terribly written.

They had a chance to do this big cosmic story full of mythic resonance and wasted 6 issues telling pointless domestic stories with shallow characterization. Why write a book about demigods if that's all you're going to do? 7 issues in, we still had no real idea who half these characters were or what they could do or what type of personalities they had beyond thumbnail sketches.

The most recent issue was completely insulting to people who had stuck with the series. Literally half of the pages were just glorifying the X-Men, and the series' Satan-like immortal villain gets smacked around by the Beast of all people and laughed off and called "cute" by Cyclops. The group of villains didn't even get any kind of introduction beyond their names before being promptly dispatched not by any Eternals, who only had 2 pages in the book, but by random X-Men. Who were those guys?

After Acuna left the art became atrocious - not up to professional standards on several pages. The scenes in the afterlife were the worst, with Sersi's facial features randomly strewn across her face.

And any sense of mystery the series had around the Celestials coming in was promptly washed away, with the concept becoming dumbed down into a corny "becoming human" subplot. The apocalyptic swarm was just a rip off of Annihilation's plot, and even that became borderline comical with the way it was handled.

All in all, I started off with huge hopes for this series, the first two issues had my head exploding with great directions they could take it in, but they weren't up to the task and every issue became worse than the last, until the last issue moved me from wishing it was better to being downright insulted that I'd paid $3 for this instead of giving the change to the homeless guy I passed on the way to the shop and doing some good.

This book is awful and deserves if not to be cancelled outright, to certainly have its terrible creative team never allowed near it again. Just bad.I wouldn't say the creative team was terrible, just completely ill-suited to this series.

I agree with most of your points, though. Too much soap opera, too much humanising of the characters, trying to make them "relatable" to the reader, Thena's completely superfluous kid, Makkari's "addiction" problem, Ajak's temper tantrums and fits of jealousy, the general teenage angst displayed by these immortal beings, complete with mall-rat dialogue, etc,etc, all that just took away whatever it was that made the Eternals its own unique, individual concept in the first place. Not to mention the ill-conceived explanation of the Celestials, draining that concept of all its imaginative power and sense of mystery.

A lot of this was based on Gaiman's set-up though, so I don't think the Knaufs deserve all the blame here.

[Sean Walsh]

I can't really speak to people who liked Gaiman's Eternals and don't like the Knauf's Eternals, because as stated I didn't care much for Gaiman's Eternals.

True, like you, it did spark the "who are the Eternals?" fire in me. And to be honest, I still have a little bit of that fire. But ultimately, it did not light the "what is going to happen next in Gaiman's Eternals?" fire. In retrospect, that was probably why I didn't finish it up. I became much interested, like you, in reading (not rereading since it's all new to me) the old Jack Kibry Eternals stuff. But that did not translate into caring a great deal about how the story would finish. Nothing in the plot or characters, especially drew me to them.

I don't see how I am "insulting" them. Gaiman's name is on the cover. It is obviously used as part of the marketing. There are reasons for that. The foremost of that is "this is the guy who wrote Sandman." I don't expect him to write Sandman every time he writes, but it would be naive of him to think the comparisons aren't going to be there.

I picked up Eternal's on Gaiman's name. As I have done so with many of his other works. If after all of that, I have found the majority of his non-Sandman work to be fairly uninspired, how is that not fair? How have I done Marvel, Gaiman, the comic industry, or the great cosmic consonance of the universe a disservice by giving their works a try and after that saying that I do not think it met expectations? I see no insult or dishonor in that. I have been told that I am a person who is completely devoid of tact, but I'm sort of always like that so it's a bit futile to take it personally.

But you have to take it personally! Wah! :tongue:

I do know where you're coming from - from my POV, though, I don't pick up Gaiman books because "he wrote SANDMAN." And I don't even pick up all Gaiman comics/books (never touched 1602, probably never will).

He's got a writing style that I find.......interesting, but not universally appealing. I react more to his reputation. If he's writing something I like already, I'll pick it up because he'll probably provide a new twist or a curiously different view.

With ETERNALS, I was definitely intrigued, since I had a past interest in the characters and because it was essentially Gaiman writing a Kirby homage (of sorts). And yeah, it didn't really inspire me to read more of this particular vein, but rather more to read those old comics. I've yet to get around to it, but gotta give Gaiman props, at least, for inspiring *something* in this new story.

I guess it just kinda seems unfair at times that he has to be associated with such a high pinnacle of his career - one that he can't be really expected to hit every single time he writes a comic - otherwise you're (not you specifically, just "you" in the general sense) just never happy with his work ever again. And that sucks. I guess I went a bit overboard with that; sorry. ("dishonor?" yikes, Sean...)

[ElDuderino456]

I personally have not read this book but I must say that it is a bit sad that titles like these tend not to last very long. Some of Marvel's best comics have been set in their own little part of the MU.

[gorthon616]

I guess it just kinda seems unfair at times that he has to be associated with such a high pinnacle of his career - one that he can't be really expected to hit every single time he writes a comic - otherwise you're (not you specifically, just "you" in the general sense) just never happy with his work ever again. And that sucks.

Well, to a certain extent these sort of disappointments have to occur to detract from that comparison. I know I'm not going to walk into the next Gaiman project with the same point of view. So I suppose, in a roundabout way I ended up assuming your viewpoint on him anyways. I have been thoroughly and completely convinced that Gaiman is an altogether human writer who can write things of little interest to me. :biggrin:

[Madrox84]

Bah that sucks if it's true... I have enjoyed this series so far.

Has any offical comment been made?

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Bah that sucks if it's true... I have enjoyed this series so far.

Has any offical comment been made?

None. I asked Joe Q about it on MySpace in the comments for this week's Cup O' Joe, so hopefully we'll get answers.

[Madrox84]

None. I asked Joe Q about it on MySpace in the comments for this week's Cup O' Joe, so hopefully we'll get answers.

Hopefully we will get an answer soon.

It would suck if the book was cancelled.

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Hopefully we will get an answer soon.

It would suck if the book was cancelled.

I concur 100%.

[Comet Man]

I'll shed no tears over this book. The reason it failed isn't because the concept or characters are intrinsically flawed, it failed because it was terribly written.

They had a chance to do this big cosmic story full of mythic resonance and wasted 6 issues telling pointless domestic stories with shallow characterization. Why write a book about demigods if that's all you're going to do? 7 issues in, we still had no real idea who half these characters were or what they could do or what type of personalities they had beyond thumbnail sketches.

The most recent issue was completely insulting to people who had stuck with the series. Literally half of the pages were just glorifying the X-Men, and the series' Satan-like immortal villain gets smacked around by the Beast of all people and laughed off and called "cute" by Cyclops. The group of villains didn't even get any kind of introduction beyond their names before being promptly dispatched not by any Eternals, who only had 2 pages in the book, but by random X-Men. Who were those guys?

After Acuna left the art became atrocious - not up to professional standards on several pages. The scenes in the afterlife were the worst, with Sersi's facial features randomly strewn across her face.

And any sense of mystery the series had around the Celestials coming in was promptly washed away, with the concept becoming dumbed down into a corny "becoming human" subplot. The apocalyptic swarm was just a rip off of Annihilation's plot, and even that became borderline comical with the way it was handled.

All in all, I started off with huge hopes for this series, the first two issues had my head exploding with great directions they could take it in, but they weren't up to the task and every issue became worse than the last, until the last issue moved me from wishing it was better to being downright insulted that I'd paid $3 for this instead of giving the change to the homeless guy I passed on the way to the shop and doing some good.

This book is awful and deserves if not to be cancelled outright, to certainly have its terrible creative team never allowed near it again. Just bad.

I wouldn't say the creative team was terrible, just completely ill-suited to this series.

I agree with most of your points, though. Too much soap opera, too much humanising of the characters, trying to make them "relatable" to the reader, Thena's completely superfluous kid, Makkari's "addiction" problem, Ajak's temper tantrums and fits of jealousy, the general teenage angst displayed by these immortal beings, complete with mall-rat dialogue, etc,etc, all that just took away whatever it was that made the Eternals its own unique, individual concept in the first place. Not to mention the ill-conceived explanation of the Celestials, draining that concept of all its imaginative power and sense of mystery.

A lot of this was based on Gaiman's set-up though, so I don't think the Knaufs deserve all the blame here.

I've just read the entire thread, because I'm also saddened by the thought that this series may be cancelled, and I think these two guys hit the nail on the head.

As much as I liked it, and it's had it's moments, there were parts that made me dissapointed. There shouldn't have been too much of the human element in the book, and it should have been more grand, with the characters much more godlike.

Not saying that that would have made the book sell more, but it definitely would have been much better.

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Well, Quesada confirms it in this week's My Cup O'Joe: Eternals is gone. :frown: :frown: :frown:

He says they'll be coming back "when we least expect it", but I shan't be holding my breath.

This sucks.

[Comet Man]

Sure does suck! :mad:

Man, that's why everything's been so rushed the last couple of issues. The Knaufs really had something going here, but they needed a lot more time to flesh it out.

I guess they didn't put Wolverine in it soon enough.

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Sure does suck! :mad:

Man, that's why everything's been so rushed the last couple of issues. The Knaufs really had something going here, but they needed a lot more time to flesh it out.

I guess they didn't put Wolverine in it soon enough.

This is almost exactly what happened to Dan Knauf during Carnivale season 2. Marvel, have you learned nothing from HBO's gross errors?

Maybe if Hugh Jackman had joined the cast as a young soldier named Jim Howlett, Carnivale would have lasted its intended six seasons...

[Comet Man]

This is almost exactly what happened to Dan Knauf during Carnivale season 2. Marvel, have you learned nothing from HBO's gross errors?

Maybe if Hugh Jackman had joined the cast as a young soldier named Jim Howlett, Carnivale would have lasted its intended six seasons...

Man, you're not kidding, that was a great show.

So was this comic! :mad:

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Man, you're not kidding, that was a great show.

So was this comic! :mad:

I'm with you on both counts, dude. After this, Carnivale and Marvel's shuffling them off Iron Man, I'm beginning to think the Knaufs can't catch a break, which is really upsetting considering their obvious talent. All one has to do to see it is read the Iron Man story "Haunted" or watch, well, any of Carnivale and see it. Hell, Dan Knauf even wrote a pretty nifty first season episode of Supernatural. Maybe someone can convince Kripke to hire him and Charlie for season 5?

[CaptMonkey]

Are the Knauf's on any other books? I loved Carnivale and thought they were great on Iron Man. Eternals had its moments, and I'll be sad to see it go, because I think they were building towards something that we'll never see now.

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Are the Knauf's on any other books?

Negative, CaptMonkey. :evilangry:

[Pixie_Solanas]

Considering the absolute bullshirt that Fraction is pedding on Invincible IM, i'd welcome the Knaufs back to Tony in a heartbeat.

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Considering the absolute bullshirt that Fraction is pedding on Invincible IM, i'd welcome the Knaufs back to Tony in a heartbeat.

As would I. This whole thing blows for so many reasons.

[Rev. Calibos]

Well, Quesada confirms it in this week's My Cup O'Joe: Eternals is gone. :frown: :frown: :frown:

He says they'll be coming back "when we least expect it", but I shan't be holding my breath.

This sucks.

Son of a biscuit.

Whenever I hear creators tell us that a recently canceled will be back 'when we least expect it' or something similar I think of a parent telling their child that they've taken a favorite pet 'to a farm upstate'.

'Will I ever see Sprinkles again Mom?'

'....ummm....sure you will, when you least expect it we'll come for a visit.....'



Like many others here I think that they really missed the boat by putting this series out so far removed from the mini series.

Add on the fact that fans had to shell out for any number of massive events (Final Crisis, Dark Civil Invasion Disassembled Crusade of Champions), any other books would have be be given extra scrutiny.

We find that 'under the radar books' have to be exceptionally good to have any sort of chance out there and, sadly, while the potential was there Eternals never found its voice.

Oh well, it was fun while it lasted and, as he stated in the interview, Uncle Joe says that he took the Eternals to a farm in upstate New York where they can run around as much as they like and eat as much as they want.

When I asked Uncle Joe 'are we ever going to see them again? Maybe find out what was going on with the Celestials and the Horde?' he said '.....ummmm....sure....we'll see those Eternals again......when you least expect it...'

[americocaine]

Wasn't participating in Dark Reign either.

It seems any book not involved in this even..errr..direction is automatically on the chopping block (unless your last name is Brubaker or the title starts with Astonishing) just like the status quo change books which are currently being affected right now (Ms. Moonstone, Wolverine).

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Wasn't participating in Dark Reign either.


One would think Osborn is so far below the Eternals' radar it shouldn't even be an issue, unless Druig was called upon to a member of the Cabal (which probably wouldn't have been a bad idea on Norman's part).

Really, if Marvel had any interest in keeping the series going, mention HAMMER and Osborn in one issue and slap DARK REIGN on the cover. That wouldn't be too hard.

[G. Boney]

The art was great when Acuna was on the title, but has sucked since he left. The story was always just okay. And I still don't get why Phastos was turned into a white guy...

[sneggz]

I'm with you on both counts, dude. After this, Carnivale and Marvel's shuffling them off Iron Man, I'm beginning to think the Knaufs can't catch a break, which is really upsetting considering their obvious talent. All one has to do to see it is read the Iron Man story "Haunted" or watch, well, any of Carnivale and see it. Hell, Dan Knauf even wrote a pretty nifty first season episode of Supernatural. Maybe someone can convince Kripke to hire him and Charlie for season 5?
Speaking of supernatural, do you think the Knaufs could pull off a Sorcerer Supreme book?

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Speaking of supernatural, do you think the Knaufs could pull off a Sorcerer Supreme book?

In a heartbeat. When I heard they'd be working for Marvel, I was surprised they were hitting up Iron Man instead of Stephen Strange.

[Blade X]

I think that this book MIGHT have been "stealth" canceled like the previous HEROES FOR HIRE series was.

[CaptMonkey]

I think that this book MIGHT have been "stealth" canceled like the previous HEROES FOR HIRE series was.

Last I checked, there wasn't even a mention of "Final Issue!" in the solicit. I think even The Order had that dignity bestowed upon it.

[JoshuaCee]

In a heartbeat. When I heard they'd be working for Marvel, I was surprised they were hitting up Iron Man instead of Stephen Strange.

The Knaufs on a Dr. Strange book would rock.

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Last I checked, there wasn't even a mention of "Final Issue!" in the solicit. I think even The Order had that dignity bestowed upon it.

Things like that make me want to stealth punch Marvel.

[Xero]

I was following this series, right up until they decided to change Phastos from black to white, then I dropped and avoided it, so I have no problem with it being cancelled.

[G. Boney]

I was following this series, right up until they decided to change Phastos from black to white,

Yeah that made no sense to me. It's not like they had a dearth of white eternals...