Avengers by Brian Michael Bendis: What is your verdict?

[tony ingram]

Stan lee and Thomas's run are shit

You clearly wouldn't know quality if it bit you. Unless this is some kind of bizarre joke I'm just not getting.

[Brannon]

You clearly wouldn't know quality if it bit you. Unless this is some kind of bizarre joke I'm just not getting.

I've come to realize that with some readers, if the dialog isn't "modern", no matter how much fun, excitement or how many original ideas are thrown at them, they are programmed to think it "sucks." Nah, what really sucks is the modern writing style that a lot of readers buy into as an artistic choice meant to be dramatic, etc, blah, blah. What's really going on is that it allows these guys to take a basic idea and stretch it out for a year so they don't have to come up with a new plot.

Give me Stan Lee's corniest script any day over most of the modern dreck that the big two are shoveling at us. I really don't f'ing care that Claremont was overly wordy--he wrote truly great superhero fiction that I actually care about.

[Whip Whirlwind]

Admittedly, I have that issue too where sometimes the dialogue is a bit dated, however more often than not if it's a quality work I can appreciate it for the ideas and story being told.

And honestly even if you don't like it, you should still respect it for what it did for the characters / medium.

[Brannon]

Admittedly, I have that issue too where sometimes the dialogue is a bit dated, however more often than not if it's a quality work I can appreciate it for the ideas and story being told.

And honestly even if you don't like it, you should still respect it for what it did for the characters / medium.

Dialog is probably the most overrated factor when determining what makes a great comic story. Comics aren't movies, or even novels, as we all know. There is an inherent mix of nobility, absurdity and charm to superheroes that actually works better with the style Stan Lee used.

Take John Byrne. One of my favorite creators, but at times his dialog could be clunky. That being said, his sequential storytelling ability is first rate and his plots are usually fantastic. If a comic is boring, with nothing happening, why would anyone care about snappy banter? Give me awe and grandeur. If I want a witty dialog fix, I'll watch a BBC sitcom.

[x-mind]

I like the first part, the pro-Siege Avengers more!! I think that I like olny that!! After that there were all craps!!!!!!!!

[hysang]

When someone invariably posts about how Bendis "made Avengers a big seller," I just laugh a bit. He didn't do it all by himself, and I would argue that the Avengers books became big _despite_ his work...which was okay to mediocre at best and terrible and hamfisted at worst. Bendis has no sense of how dialogue should work on a comic book page. None. Near the end, he was using less dialogue, but still didn't quite get the hang of a visual medium. Which always baffles me: he clearly understands it in other books...why did he have so much trouble in Avengers? Did he just not gel with certain artists?

I won't miss his work at all. I won't miss the "random stuff happening just because with two pages of explanations shoehorned in to make it work." I won't miss the "Sentry is this, no wait, he's THIS, well okay he's THIS" plotting.

Bendis' best moment was Dark Avengers. The first one, not the second attempt. He's better at writing villains than heroes.

(I realize this is contradictory because most of the dumb Sentry stuff happened in Dark Avengers - it was my least favorite part of the book, and I wasn't sad to see him die)

[HaveAtThee]

I've come to realize that with some readers, if the dialog isn't "modern", no matter how much fun, excitement or how many original ideas are thrown at them, they are programmed to think it "sucks." Nah, what really sucks is the modern writing style that a lot of readers buy into as an artistic choice meant to be dramatic, etc, blah, blah. What's really going on is that it allows these guys to take a basic idea and stretch it out for a year so they don't have to come up with a new plot.

Give me Stan Lee's corniest script any day over most of the modern dreck that the big two are shoveling at us. I really don't f'ing care that Claremont was overly wordy--he wrote truly great superhero fiction that I actually care about.

Preach on, my brother.

[Nomads1]

Admittedly, I have that issue too where sometimes the dialogue is a bit dated, however more often than not if it's a quality work I can appreciate it for the ideas and story being told.

And honestly even if you don't like it, you should still respect it for what it did for the characters / medium.

Wise words.

Peace

[Clark_Krunk]

I've come to realize that with some readers, if the dialog isn't "modern", no matter how much fun, excitement or how many original ideas are thrown at them, they are programmed to think it "sucks." Nah, what really sucks is the modern writing style that a lot of readers buy into as an artistic choice meant to be dramatic, etc, blah, blah. What's really going on is that it allows these guys to take a basic idea and stretch it out for a year so they don't have to come up with a new plot.

Give me Stan Lee's corniest script any day over most of the modern dreck that the big two are shoveling at us. I really don't f'ing care that Claremont was overly wordy--he wrote truly great superhero fiction that I actually care about.

Gone are the days of the overly wordy books in which the narrator exclaimed all the action and thoughts, the characters and their grandiose comments and thoughts. The use of ridiculous adjectives describing all the characters involved..

You what to read things from before the late 80's, and youre stuck in the past, unable to enjoy most modern comics. That's what most of these "old school" types hate about Bendis avengers.

I for one enjoy the comics for the times they were written but I sure as hell don't miss an overly wordy chris Claremont x-men story where so much nonsense is added.

[Whip Whirlwind]

Gone are the days of the overly wordy books in which the narrator exclaimed all the action and thoughts, the characters and their grandiose comments and thoughts. The use of ridiculous adjectives describing all the characters involved..

Sure about that?



Only difference is it's the character, not the "narrator" dumping exposition on us.

You what to read things from before the late 80's, and youre stuck in the past, unable to enjoy most modern comics. That's what most of these "old school" types hate about Bendis avengers.

I for one enjoy the comics for the times they were written but I sure as hell don't miss an overly wordy chris Claremont x-men story where so much nonsense is added.

As someone who started reading in the late 90s and has enjoyed many comics since then including SOME of those written by Bendis, most of the issues people find with his work have nothing to do with modern vs. past writing techniques.

When he's on I think his dialogue does a good job of making the characters believable. When he's off he just gets so wrapped up in dialogue for the sake of dialogue that we get half of an issue of people just talking.

Frankly though, the idea of someone defending Bendis while simultaneously stating that they don't miss overly wordy comics is just hilarious to me.

[Zen-aku]

You clearly wouldn't know quality if it bit you. Unless this is some kind of bizarre joke I'm just not getting.

even Lee has said that his run on avengers was phoned in, it sucks man deal with it, old doesn't automatically mean good.

[strathcona]

I've come to realize that with some readers, if the dialog isn't "modern", no matter how much fun, excitement or how many original ideas are thrown at them, they are programmed to think it "sucks." Nah, what really sucks is the modern writing style that a lot of readers buy into as an artistic choice meant to be dramatic, etc, blah, blah. What's really going on is that it allows these guys to take a basic idea and stretch it out for a year so they don't have to come up with a new plot.

Give me Stan Lee's corniest script any day over most of the modern dreck that the big two are shoveling at us. I really don't f'ing care that Claremont was overly wordy--he wrote truly great superhero fiction that I actually care about.

I wish this were Facebook so I could 'LIKE' this post.

[Zen-aku]

I've come to realize that with some readers, if the dialog isn't "modern", no matter how much fun, excitement or how many original ideas are thrown at them, they are programmed to think it "sucks." Nah, what really sucks is the modern writing style that a lot of readers buy into as an artistic choice meant to be dramatic, etc, blah, blah. What's really going on is that it allows these guys to take a basic idea and stretch it out for a year so they don't have to come up with a new plot.

Give me Stan Lee's corniest script any day over most of the modern dreck that the big two are shoveling at us. I really don't f'ing care that Claremont was overly wordy--he wrote truly great superhero fiction that I actually care about.

Most readers want to be able to take what they read seriously. Just because you like the equivalent of doo-opp music doesn't mean every one else is some how suffering because they changed with the times

[BananaPhone]

It was okay, but not great. Like Ultimate Spider-Man and Powers a great deal more when it comes to Bendis.

[Clark_Krunk]

Sure about that?



Only difference is it's the character, not the "narrator" dumping exposition on us.



As someone who started reading in the late 90s and has enjoyed many comics since then including SOME of those written by Bendis, most of the issues people find with his work have nothing to do with modern vs. past writing techniques.

When he's on I think his dialogue does a good job of making the characters believable. When he's off he just gets so wrapped up in dialogue for the sake of dialogue that we get half of an issue of people just talking.

Frankly though, the idea of someone defending Bendis while simultaneously stating that they don't miss overly wordy comics is just hilarious to me.

that page is definitely not wordy like a chris Claremont xmen book.... they still employ that tactic today but there is no arguing that it doesn't exist as a industry standard the way it did in the past.