CBR: Cup O' Joe - Jun 10, 2011

[CBR News]

In a week when Marvel loses one of its heroes in Bucky "Captain America" Barnes and one of its marquee titles in "Uncanny X-Men," Tom Brevoort still has time to juggle his picks for DC's relaunches and more.


Full article here.

[Sighphi]

The All-New Ethnic Atom?

[Boabie]

And this just about sums up why, after 35 years, I stopped buying comics a couple of months back.

I hated the tone of Tom Breevort in this. He ridiculed fans by saying that we moaned about bringing Bucky back and now we're moaning that we're killing him. We're moaning because with every stupid resurrection and stunt 'death' you are undermining the whole MU and making it next to impossible to take the stories seriously. It's got very little to do with Brubaker making him a believable character, as Brevoort believes. Very selective interpretation of fans.

Good luck, Marvel. You don't care about the diehards like me, so I hope you find the audience you're looking for. I thought I would buy Marvel until I died but you proved me wrong. Congratulations.

[minimalistx]

So, I've been reading Bru's run on Cap since the beginning, and they kill Bucky in some event comic that I'm not even reading?

Great, thanks Marvel!

Might be time to be done with you altogether...

[Mark_S]

Bucky is dead again? I wonder how long he'll stay dead this time.

And I agree some of his answers were pretty condescending. But then I don't believe that Brevoort thinks that the majority of fans read these interviews. I think the attitude is 'ok, it's only the online fans I'm going to get angry and they're aren't enough of them to affect sales' so he just goes ahead. There is some logic in this, after all marvel has done it's best to generate hate and anger for years now and they've succeeded online but have also gotten good sales from it. We are inconsequential except that we amuse him.

Mark_S

[the_big_billbowski]

So, I've been reading Bru's run on Cap since the beginning, and they kill Bucky in some event comic that I'm not even reading?

Great, thanks Marvel!

Might be time to be done with you altogether...

Ditto.

I have pretty much dropped everything except Cap and the Avengers, but my plan was to drop Avengers and just keep reading Bru's Cap. Not that I am outraged that Bucky was killed like it's the last straw or something but I am tired of having to follow more than one book to get the whole story. I find it utterly pointless to take the time to bring back a character nobody thought should come back, make him relevant and enjoyable to read and then kill him off again. Not to mention they killed "nomad" because they didn't need 2 Bucky's around and now they are both dead. I'm tired of the constant renumber or reshuffling of titles. And honestly, the books are getting darn expensive.

I really am at a point that I might pick up a trade if it has good word or mouth or I might try Action Comics #1, but I'm at a point where I find it hard to care about what is going on with the Marvel Universe and I"m a Marvel guy.

[DisneysFolly]

Honestly i can't stomach this weekly talk of renumbering to #1s in relation to Marvel who spent the last few years renumbering from low numbers to HIGH numbers (Daredevil, Cap, Incredible Hulk, Thor, etc. etc.) I'm typically a Marvel apologist and don't get caught up in the criticisms that most fling, but this is the one that irritates me most. But they're playing both sides of the argument here and it annoys the living crap out of me. Pick an angle and stick with it. I didn't mind resetting to the higher numbers. I appreciate the legacy there.

But they are dirtying the waters of continuity by going back and forth with this. And then switching titles, renaming titles or creating new ones (Hulk, X-Men) so similarly named to previous editions. Just address that issue. Don't sit there and patronize me about how #1s are good for the industry but then not tell me why it's helpful to vault a comic from #50 to #600 then after 20 further issues relaunch it at #1 while renaming the pre-existing one but keeping its numbering. Because that sounds a whole lot like the opposite of what this blowhard keeps trying to say about #1s.

[marvell2100]

So does this mean they're going get two new team titles from Uncanny because of Schism?One with Scott's team and the other with Logan's? Or will the X-Men who side with Logan move over to X-Force?

[jade_nova]

Honestly i can't stomach this weekly talk of renumbering to #1s in relation to Marvel who spent the last few years renumbering from low numbers to HIGH numbers (Daredevil, Cap, Incredible Hulk, Thor, etc. etc.) I'm typically a Marvel apologist and don't get caught up in the criticisms that most fling, but this is the one that irritates me most. But they're playing both sides of the argument here and it annoys the living crap out of me. Pick an angle and stick with it. I didn't mind resetting to the higher numbers. I appreciate the legacy there.

But they are dirtying the waters of continuity by going back and forth with this. And then switching titles, renaming titles or creating new ones (Hulk, X-Men) so similarly named to previous editions. Just address that issue. Don't sit there and patronize me about how #1s are good for the industry but then not tell me why it's helpful to vault a comic from #50 to #600 then after 20 further issues relaunch it at #1 while renaming the pre-existing one but keeping its numbering. Because that sounds a whole lot like the opposite of what this blowhard keeps trying to say about #1s.

Just wait until they do the Essentials for this time period. There are so many crossovers and renumberings that the people won't know how to put the books together.

[littlenomad]

And this just about sums up why, after 35 years, I stopped buying comics a couple of months back.

I hated the tone of Tom Breevort in this. He ridiculed fans by saying that we moaned about bringing Bucky back and now we're moaning that we're killing him. We're moaning because with every stupid resurrection and stunt 'death' you are undermining the whole MU and making it next to impossible to take the stories seriously. It's got very little to do with Brubaker making him a believable character, as Brevoort believes. Very selective interpretation of fans.

Good luck, Marvel. You don't care about the diehards like me, so I hope you find the audience you're looking for. I thought I would buy Marvel until I died but you proved me wrong. Congratulations.

I don't think he was ridiculing...I think he was just pointing out the irony in how there was outrage among certain fans no matter what Marvel was doing with Bucky (resurrecting vs. killing).

[Hrist]

Brevoort has said over and over that you don't need death to make an event book— you need change. And I'm inclined to agree with him (for all I'm sure people would point out that Bucky dying in particular is almost anti-change). But these big crossovers sure do result in death more often than not. And often in ways that don't have much resonance— I'm still not sure what offing the Wasp accomplished, even within the Secret Invasion storyline.

[Prof. Warren]

And this just about sums up why, after 35 years, I stopped buying comics a couple of months back.

I hated the tone of Tom Breevort in this. He ridiculed fans by saying that we moaned about bringing Bucky back and now we're moaning that we're killing him. We're moaning because with every stupid resurrection and stunt 'death' you are undermining the whole MU and making it next to impossible to take the stories seriously. It's got very little to do with Brubaker making him a believable character, as Brevoort believes. Very selective interpretation of fans.

Good luck, Marvel. You don't care about the diehards like me, so I hope you find the audience you're looking for. I thought I would buy Marvel until I died but you proved me wrong. Congratulations.

The thin skin that some comic fans have amazes me. Breevort didn't ridicule anyone - he simply noted, perhaps with a justifiable chuckle, that fans were outraged when it was announced that Bucky was coming back from the dead and now they're equally outraged that he's been killed off. As for every "stupid resurrection and stunt 'death'" undermining the Marvel U, death and rebirth have been a staple of superhero comics for years. Why should it make it "next to impossible to take these stories seriously?" These stories, by the way, that involve Norse Gods, teenagers who gain powers from radioactive spiders, sorcerers supreme, and all manner of mutants. Given the nature of these characters and the universe they inhabit, for some of them to die and come back to life shouldn't be a deal breaker.

[Gitaroo_Dude]

I lol'd at "The All-New Ethnic Atom!"

[ScotsScribbler]

I am pretty sure 52 #1 titles will hit huge for DC, and Marvel will be jumping on the bandwagon soon enough.

[24kabuki]

Let the rant begin... first of all let me say that I've been a die hard comic book reader/fan since around 1988 (mostly Marvel, but I can't pass up a good DC or Indy book). Anyway, I realized how crappy the state of things has become when I started to flip through some old Jim Lee X-Men cards from the early 90's the other day only to start wishing those days were back. Maybe it's my age, but gone are the days when I used to get excited about going to the comic book store. At this point it's more like a 23 year addiction that I can't shake rather than true enjoyment. Seems like stories are constantly rehashed (Daredevil Born Again anyone?) or simply go nowhere. Books that give a $%#& like Morrison's X-Men or dare I say... Nextwave;) get canned with the quickness for the sake of the status quo. All of my X-Men have either been killed or watered down so much that none of their actions have any real consequences (with the exception of X-Force that I have been enjoying as of late). Now we've got a new Uncanny #1 in the foreseeable future. Should we care anymore?! At least let's get Kitty out of the stupid "intangible" bubble head containment suit and have Jubilee lose the fangs... Come to think of it, maybe the DC relaunch won't be so bad after all. -Nuff said.