Favorite Avengers Writer

[paulski]

Stern and Busiek are leading comfortably, as they should be.

[OldSchoolfan]

I agree with almost everything you say (though I liked both Harras and Johns more than you mentioned, and Bendis a lot less)... but this point really sticks with me. I found this comment to be very out of place and took me right out of the issue. I know it was actually a fairly popular line and a lot of people liked it, but I thought it was completely out of character. In fact, I felt it was Slott trying to appeal to the Bendis crowd somewhat... not at all like something I would normally expect.

I am not saying Slott wouldn't have a character say a line like that, but that he would not have a character like Hank Pym say it.

I am glad I wasn't alone in this...I don't think Slott's run was bad...I just didn't like that scene very much.

You liked Harras run? What part? Is it possible that someone else other than me liked the Gatherers? I also just really enjoyed that mix of characters...

[OldSchoolfan]

Bendis. Bendis is easily the best Avengers writer ever...









AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

But no seriously? I've never been big on Avengers. I've read bits and pieces of various runs over the years. But I loved Kang Dynasty the most. So yea, Busiek.

Still laughing at the sarcasm of this post. I like Bendis...but this is a funny way to say you don't. UH Oh....am I reading it right?

If you aren't big on Avengers...you should read Stern's run and then go back to the first 100 issues. Yes, some of its dated, but a lot of it still holds up and it really does lay the second foundation of the Marvel U (FF being the first in my opinion.)

[turtletrekker]

Roger Stern without a doubt.

[Will.S]

As far as the classic stuff goes, it's a toss up for me between either Roger Stern or Kurt Busiek.

[Tom Foolery]

Walt Simonson had an underrated 10 issue run with John Buscema and Tom Palmer that followed Stern's run on the series. I'd like to see that get collected someday, too.

[Tom Foolery]

You liked Harras run? What part? Is it possible that someone else other than me liked the Gatherers? I also just really enjoyed that mix of characters...

I loved the Gatherers. I thought they were one of the best adversaries the Avengers ever had, actually.

[SpideyCzar]

I voted Bendis because, I never really paid attention to the Avengers until he took over. But my overall favorite Avengers story ever is Avengers Forever, never read Busiek's run on the title. Will have to get it in TPB though...one day

[paulski]

As far as the classic stuff goes, it's a toss up for me between either Roger Stern or Kurt Busiek.

Always said you had taste, Will.

Walt Simonson had an underrated 10 issue run with John Buscema and Tom Palmer that followed Stern's run on the series. I'd like to see that get collected someday, too.

Uggh. No, no, no, no, no! I hated that run by Simonson - I thought it was just horrid and couldn't wait for it to end. Trouble is, it ended with Reed and Sue Richards on the team!!

But thankfully Byrne soon rectified that error in judgement.

[OldSchoolfan]

Always said you had taste, Will.

Uggh. No, no, no, no, no! I hated that run by Simonson - I thought it was just horrid and couldn't wait for it to end. Trouble is, it ended with Reed and Sue Richards on the team!!

But thankfully Byrne soon rectified that error in judgement.

I always had the impression, be it right or wrong, that the Simonson run and the Nicienza/Hama runs were more fill in jobs until a regular scripter could be found. Once again, I find myself in an odd predicament of not being able to coorroborate what I heard but: My understanding was that Stern was let go from the book because Shooter didn't want the female Captain Marvel (I think she goes by Photon now?) in charge. Also, Stern was working for DC and Shooter didn't like that either. So because the writer left suddenly, someone had to step in and fill the void. I thought Walt's run on Avengers was servicable....the Marrina story was interesting and I thought had some pathos. While I agree that Reed and Sue shouldn't be Avengers, the way they were worked into the story, an Inferno crossover, at least made sense.
But I never thought Walt was going to stay for very long....he was simply delivering a set of stories so things could settle down. And I liked those Avengers stories...its just hard to follow someone like Roger Stern.

The Nicenza/Hama run I thought had a similar situation, Byrne left abruptly over a disagreement with editorial and these writers were tapped to fill in. The submarine story was okay, not my favorite but there wasn't anything glaring awful about it to me. I actually liked what Hama was doing with Rage. I will never forget the panel where Steve and Tony find out Rage isn't an adult and the Avengers security didn't check something that simple.

All of this is admittedly hearsay, does any body want to back up or dispell my understanding of the situation?

Any how, I didn't really get the feeling that the book had any long term plans, plotwise, until Harras came aboard.

I also am glad to find out others liked the Gatherers storyline. I think there is a lot of stuff you could do with it...

[Tom Foolery]

Simonson was supposed to be longterm. He actually left because it was decided to bring Reed and Sue back to the FF after he was promised that he could have them for Avengers. I'm pretty sure that Hama was supposed to be longterm, too. I seem to remember an article in Marvel Age or something about that, but it didn't work out for one reason or another. Ironically, it was Harras that was supposed to be a fill-in with the bi-weekly Thane Ector story. but Marvel liked what he and Epting did and they ended up sticking around for years.

Not sure what role Shooter played in Stern's removal from Avengers. He was gone from Marvel before Stern was fired. Mark Gruenwald fired Stern.

[Bad Wolf]

Stern and Michelinie are tops with me. They're the ones I grew up with. Shooter was in there as well, but I don't find myself as attached to his run.

After that, Busiek. Byrne...if only he'd been on longer.

[Vic Vega]

Stern and Micheline are tops with me. They're the ones I grew up with. Shooter was in there as well, but I don't find myself as attached to his run.

After that, Busiek. Byrne...if only he'd been on longer.

I voted Shooter because I didn't see a Micheline option.

If I were to list my top 5 in order it'd be something like:

Micheline
Shooter
Englehardt
Thomas
Buskiek

[strathcona]

Stern and Busiek are leading comfortably, as they should be.

Unfortunately it looks like Bendis has caught up to Busiek. I expected him to rank high though as many new readers don't know the Avengers any other way... which is just sad.

Everyone who voted Bendis, do yourself a favour and check out Busiek's run at the very least. Far, far superior stuff.

[strathcona]

I am glad I wasn't alone in this...I don't think Slott's run was bad...I just didn't like that scene very much.

You liked Harras run? What part? Is it possible that someone else other than me liked the Gatherers? I also just really enjoyed that mix of characters...

I really did like Harras's run... I loved how it was mostly second tier characters and not characters that already had their own books. I loved the Gatherers saga... still think it's one of the best, untapped pieces of the Avengers mythos. There is so much that could be done with them. Galactic Storm is one of my all-time favourite Avengers stories. I remember not liking the Collector's Obsession story much when I first read it... but I have loved it more with each subsequent reading. Really, up until the Taking A.I.M. crossover I thought the book was doing great. After that it fell apart and just got worse until the Crossing... but I have always blamed Terry Kavanaugh for that as he was co-writing at the time.