Avengers by Brian Michael Bendis: What is your verdict?

[Corto]

That is not good story telling, no matter how you cut it. If he doesn't like that Thanos became more than just a bad guy... tough shit, you use someone else then, you don't just ignore or reverse that development because it doesn't suit your story. Or let's talk about the fact that The Living Tribunal made it so that the Infinity Gems would not work together. But again, Bendis ignores this because he can't write stories without changing things. That is poor comic book story telling, plain and simple.

I disagree. We're talking about two different writers writing about the same character (or their visions of the same character). If one writer chooses to ignore what the other writer is doing, how does that affect the storytelling of one or the other?

[Lord Bravery]

I disagree. We're talking about two different writers writing about the same character (or their visions of the same character). If one writer chooses to ignore what the other writer is doing, how does that affect the storytelling of one or the other?

Because what it basically is, is this.

Bendis: Oh so Mr Starlin and Mr Giffen made Thanos something other than just a bad guy? Pah that's terrible, I don't like it and I can't write a story featuring Thanos if he isn't just a bad guy.

What the hell is he doing writing comic books if that is his attitude? It's completely ignoring character development. It's not just a superficial change, like a costume design or something like that. And it isn't a natural change, there was no development... it's just BAM! Thanos is back to being a bad guy who wants unlimited power because a three dimensional Thanos doesn't fit Bendis' story. It really is nothing beyond that.

Thanos changing his mind, changing his goals, is a major piece of development for the character. But all that is thrown out on a whim simply because that development doesn't fit some guys story idea?

The simple fact of the matter is, it doesn't take much talent to just change a character to fit your story. Anyone of us could do that.

What takes talent, is taking into consideration previous characterisations and plot points and incorporating them into a new story. Whilst continuing to develop that character in a NATURAL way.

[hysang]

All the complaining about continuity....remember when Stan Lee referred to Bruce Banner as "Bob Banner" in an issue of the Hulk? And no wonder that book got canceled after issue number 6. It was all over the place story-wise.

And it isn't as if Stan had any excuse - the Marvel Universe was only a few years old by that point. So I guess that means he stinks as a creator.

There are many reasons for why Brian Michael Bendis may or may not be a weak writer. Continuity, for me, isn't one of them - simply because it's only an issue if you allow it to be. Things change. Stories are fluid. Mistakes happen.

There are some really dumb story ideas (see: any story by Chuck Austen), but ultimately a shared universe is going to have hiccups.

[Lord Bravery]

It's not fluid though. Thanos went from a borderline anti hero who has zero interest in the Infinity Gems... back to a stereotypical bad guy who wants the gems, for LITERALLY no other reason than Bendis wanted to use Thanos as a bad guy.

That is poor story telling. It's not fluid, it's not natural. It's shit.

Same thing with the Infinity Gems not even working when they are together. All that was ignored. For LITERALLY no other reason than Bendis wanted to use them in his story.

That is poor story telling. It's not fluid. It's not natural. It's shit.

[Corto]

Because what it basically is, is this.

Bendis: Oh so Mr Starlin and Mr Giffen made Thanos something other than just a bad guy? Pah that's terrible, I don't like it and I can't write a story featuring Thanos if he isn't just a bad guy.

What the hell is he doing writing comic books if that is his attitude? It's completely ignoring character development. It's not just a superficial change, like a costume design or something like that. And it isn't a natural change, there was no development... it's just BAM! Thanos is back to being a bad guy who wants unlimited power because a three dimensional Thanos doesn't fit Bendis' story. It really is nothing beyond that.

Thanos changing his mind, changing his goals, is a major piece of development for the character. But all that is thrown out on a whim simply because that development doesn't fit some guys story idea?

The simple fact of the matter is, it doesn't take much talent to just change a character to fit your story. Anyone of us could do that.

What takes talent, is taking into consideration previous characterisations and plot points and incorporating them into a new story. Whilst continuing to develop that character in a NATURAL way.

I understand that these things make you hate Bendis' stories, but it's still not an answer to my question. How is this relevant to his actual storytelling? What do his choices have to do with him being a bad storyteller?

All the complaining about continuity....remember when Stan Lee referred to Bruce Banner as "Bob Banner" in an issue of the Hulk?

I agree with your points, but I need too correct you here. His name really is Bob, as Robert Bruce Banner is his full name. Granted, the Bruce part was probably added later.

[lobsterj]

But all of these writers are extremely talented & can sell books regardless of what a few very loud people on the internet will tell you.

But how do you know that if we don't have access to any reliable sales charts, just the Diamond estimates which provide only a look at a portion of sales, and an inaccurate one at that?

[Lord Bravery]

I understand that these things make you hate Bendis' stories, but it's still not an answer to my question. How is this relevant to his actual storytelling? What do his choices have to do with him being a bad storyteller?

It makes him a bad story teller, in the comic book medium, because he is simply changing things to fit his story, which doesn't take a lot of skill or effort.

Anyone of us could just go "Oh well i don't like how that character has been portrayed previously, it doesn't fit the story i want to tell, so i'll just change the character".

Let's think in terms of a long running TV show or something, which has a lot of similarities to comics. Let's use Star Trek, for instance.

Captain Kirk has always been portrayed as a charismatic womanizer, but who has a heart of gold.

If i then came along and UNNATURALLY turned him into a boring dolt who is a bad guy, just to fit my story, that means i'm a poor story teller when it comes to the serial/ongoing continuity format.

That is basically what Bendis is doing. That is why he is a poor story teller in this format.

If he wants to change characters or contradict plot points just to fit his story? Write some MAX books or Elseworld stories. Or like what he did with Ultimate Spider-Man. He's basically doing what he did with Ultimate Spider-Man... but in the 616.

[striderhirryu2]

Well he seems to ignore the fact that Thanos doesn't give a crap about the Inifinity Gems anymore and hasn't for a long time. Or the The Living Tribunal made it so they don't work together...

If he explains those away or at least attempts to, then there is no problem. But going by Bendis' previous track record, i seriously doubt that will happen.

Starlin implied that the gems could work again. In the Thanos series, Galactus gathers the gems to power a crux that would keep him from ever needing to eat a world again. Thanos wondered why Galactus didn't simply just use the gems to will his hunger away thus saying the gems would work together again.

[Corto]

It makes him a bad story teller, in the comic book medium, because he is simply changing things to fit his story, which doesn't take a lot of skill or effort.

Anyone of us could just go "Oh well i don't like how that character has been portrayed previously, it doesn't fit the story i want to tell, so i'll just change the character".

Let's think in terms of a long running TV show or something, which has a lot of similarities to comics. Let's use Star Trek, for instance.

Captain Kirk has always been portrayed as a charismatic womanizer, but who has a heart of gold.

If i then came along and UNNATURALLY turned him into a boring dolt who is a bad guy, just to fit my story, that means i'm a poor story teller when it comes to the serial/ongoing continuity format.

That is basically what Bendis is doing. That is why he is a poor story teller in this format.

If he wants to change characters or contradict plot points just to fit his story? Write some MAX books or Elseworld stories. Or like what he did with Ultimate Spider-Man. He's basically doing what he did with Ultimate Spider-Man... but in the 616.

Basically, you're saying that he's a bad storyteller because he doesn't respect the continuity established by other writers. I'm saying that that criticism has nothing to do with his storytelling abilities. We'll have to agree to disagree here.

[Angrel]

Agreed with everything Lord Bravery has been posting lately.

Preach on!

[Lord Bravery]

Basically, you're saying that he's a bad storyteller because he doesn't respect the continuity established by other writers. I'm saying that that criticism has nothing to do with his storytelling abilities. We'll have to agree to disagree here.

It does mean he is a bad story teller!

Look, when you are dealing with a universe that has an on going continuity, comics or a tv show, that is one big story. The whole thing is one big story, made up with other little story arcs.

Contradicting earlier parts of that story, whether it's plot points or characterisations, is bad story telling.

Now if Bendis actually used some skill and made it as though these changes were natural character progressions/developments, I wouldn't have a problem. Because that actually takes some imagination and talent.

Going... "POOF! That character is completely different now with absolutely zero explanation!" can be done by anyone. You, me... little Jonny down the street. It takes zero talent to do that.

Let me be clear, I think Bendis does sometimes come up with some great story concepts. But if you can't execute those stories without changing the bigger story that is happening (which is the ongoing continuity) then you have failed as a story teller in the serial/on going continuity format. It's that simple.

[Corto]

It does mean he is a bad story teller!

Again, agree to disagree. We'll never meet eye to eye about the things that constitute a good storyteller.

Oh, and I almost forgot this.

It makes him a bad story teller, in the comic book medium, because he is simply changing things to fit his story, which doesn't take a lot of skill or effort.

You're generalizing. The comic book medium is a LOT more bigger than just the shared universes of Marvel and DC. And Bendis was working in comic books (as both writer and artist) long before he started working for Marvel.

[drwho]

I really think his ideas for the most part are horribly executed. His use of the hood is retarded.

He goes from a local hoodlum to

1. having magic powers.
2. being a mob boss
3. getting powered up by norn stones
4. getting the infinity gauntlet

This guy is probably gonna be offed by bendis cus he used him up. And the fact this guy can get the infinity gauntlet without help is retarded. The whole plot about dormammu controlling him should have stayed in affect. That would make this more believable.

[Lord Bravery]

Again, agree to disagree. We'll never meet eye to eye about the things that constitute a good storyteller.

Oh, and I almost forgot this.



You're generalizing. The comic book medium is a LOT more bigger than just the shared universes of Marvel and DC. And Bendis was working in comic books (as both writer and artist) long before he started working for Marvel.

Well you must have known what i meant, mainstream comics, the big two.

[Nomads1]

That doesn't mean s**t, and you know it.

There was an immense amount of good word of mouth about Bendis, Powers, and Daredevil prior to the Avengers.

There was an immense amount of good word of mouth about Fraction, Casanova, and Iron Fist prior to Iron Man and X-men.

There was an immense amount good word of mouth about JMS, Rising Stars, and Midnight Nation ( yeah, yeah! Ok, his work on Babylon 5 could have had something to do with it too) before Spider-man and Thor.

It didn't mean jack-s**t in the end, people will always cheer on the underdog, but slash the guy that's on top of the world into a million, million bloodied little shreds.

Now, I enjoyed the most of these gentlemen's output after their rise to fame, but the great majority of the most active users on this forum absolutely did not.

Since I am 100%, no ONE THOUSAND PERCENT certain that you are one of the wast majority of the most vocal and active users on this board, I can only assume that you're setting yourself up for disappointment with extreme prejudice, with this faith in Nick Spencer.

Save yourself some black eyes... leave Spencer be the moment he goes big.

I've already said that in this thread. And I think at the very least one more poster did so as well.

What's new under the sun? Oh, just this: What you're painting for yourself in the above post, is a hopeless, impossible utopian dream which you know cannot possibly happen. Can perhaps two of the three criteria be met, EVENTUALLY? Sure. All 3? F*** no.

Yup. Pretty much.

Aaah, come on! :p This is comics, heckling and making fun of stuff is in the name: comics. It's the same thing as being unable to cope with jokes about your favourite sports-team, or whatever. It's just a game... it's not life or death.

PS: Don't take my harsh tone in this post personal, I'm just on one of those flamer-runs that we talked about in the Crossing-thread. It's good for the soul, let's out all of the demons and wrath that we pent up in us.

Ok, flamer-boy, let's see...

Not the one who suggested Spencer. In fact, I cautioned against throwing someone, IMO, still largely untested to the sharks (as the previous poster so colorfully put it). Why my excessive caution, if I'm always trying to sell Bendis being replaced? Because a few years ago I was actually excited when a hot new talent called Bendis came in to replace Austen. Well, that didn't last much. (And I admit that, compared to Austen's run, Bendis's was a step up. However, considering how low my opinion on Austen's run is, that's not much of a compliment.) I'd rather have someone more proven, such as Kelly, Waid, PAD, Slott, Gage, etc... I know none of them is going to fit the 3 criterias. Hell, probably no one on Earth ever will or has. Bendis sure as hell isn't. However, when we are not satisfied with something, all we can do is change in the best way you can(unfortunately not up to me, I know), and hope for the best. If we can't dream, what's the point of living?
Second point. I agree that people in general like to root for the underdog, and try to cut down the guy who is on top. Especially here, in the internet, where anonimity gives people the balls to do what that they lack the courage to do in real life. Unfortunately, not one of those (in both counts. People who do know me point out being to outspoken and excessively frank as some of my personal flaws. Trying to work on this, and work extra hard not to get carried away in the internet. Not everything needs to be said.). I'm my own man. Never was the kind of guy to go along with fads. (Well, maybe never is to strong a word. I guess one or two. We are only human after all.) As with Strathcona, I had very little (if any) previous knowledge of Bendis' work before Avengers. Don't remember if I read his Ultimate before or after, and am pretty sure that what I read of his Daredevil run came afterwards. Liked both. Not so much his Avengers work, to put it mildly. As for an exemple that I don't follow the hive-mind in tearing down who is at the top, I'm probably one of the few that doesn't mind what Robinson is doing in JLA now. (Go to the DC forums and you will see that the outcry is very similar to what we have here, although I feel like he has less outspoken defenders than Bendis.) Is it his best work? No. His worse? Far from it. IMHO, it's just good enjoyable super-hero stories, bogged down by a loy of editorial interference. (But that is subject for a whole other post.)
As for Quesada's "joke" (if you want to call it that), I forgot to put my happy face at the end of my comment. I'm not that humorless.

Two last things, I've said it before, but I'm gonna have to side with Bendis supporters on the Thanos thing. We don't know yet what that was (since I'm no longer reading the books, you guys will have to fill me in next month). As another poster said. It was a cliffhanger. You don't explain things in the cliffhanger. As the word says, it's meant to leave people hanging. Nexta month, if he fumbles (as, IMHO, previous history has shown that there is a great chance of happening), then I will be beside you crying foul. Untill then, let's let it rest.
And Lord Bravery, ever since Avengers Disassmbled, I no longer consider that we are reading the adventures of Earth 616. As the demon pact that Peter Parker made proves, this is Earth 666. Maybe someday, we'll be able to go back.

Peace