Comparing the Ultimates: Millar, Loeb, Hickman, Humphries

[Plawsky]

In order to keep this debate from filling up every thread about Hickman's new Ultimate series, I'm giving this its own thread. This is a place to discuss the differences - positive or negative - between the three different writers' runs on Ultimates. What did you like? What didn't you like? What did one writer do better than another?

[wyokid]

Loeb's fight scenes were the definition of style over substance.

That's exactly what Ultimates should be.

[Atlas]

That's exactly what Ultimates should be.

Maybe that's what" Avengers" should be, but I don't think that describes the Ultimates style (based on their debut story.)

[taylor51]

That's exactly what Ultimates should be.

HELL no lol.

The Ultimates really has no reason to exist if it's not telling critically acclaimed blockbuster epics. I recognize that you enjoyed Loeb's tenure on the title, but popcorn brawls can't sustain an alternate continuity.

[wyokid]

Which is why Ultimates 3 was treated so poorly, it's different. It's why Miles is being treated the way he is, it's different. Most people need new things shoved down their throats or else it just reverts back to normal (see 616). This is why I read Ultimate Marvel, it's different.

We have two other titles for that. Part of why Loeb's work and Avengers was so fun is because it was epic, each issue was jammed pack, and left me wanting more but satisfied with each issue.

[taylor51]

Which is why Ultimates 3 was treated so poorly, it's different.

Ultimates 3 could have been different from Millar's uber political-ness (which, mind you, was UBER different from what 616 Avengers was doing in its time) without the 616 continuity confusion, poorly developed characters and shallow/thematically-out-of-place-in-the-UU plot.

It's why Miles is being treated the way he is, it's different. Most people need new things shoved down their throats or else it just reverts back to normal (see 616). This is why I read Ultimate Marvel, it's different.

People bashing Miles are being snobby comic elitists ;). Don't worry, I'm working on an awesome thread for why Miles is good for USM's long term health/relevance.

We have two other titles for that. Part of why Loeb's work and Avengers was so fun is because it was epic, each issue was jammed pack, and left me wanting more but satisfied with each issue.

I respectfully but STRONGLY disagree. Not to mention that, if you're the two other titles you're talking about are Bendis' Avengers and New Avengers, they're not exactly providing on that front...

[Plawsky]

Which is why Ultimates 3 was treated so poorly, it's different.

It had nothing to do with how different it was; it's because it wasn't very good. Sure, many fans are resistant to change, but that wasn't the case with Ultimates 3. They just didn't like that particular change.

Part of why Loeb's work and Avengers was so fun is because it was epic, each issue was jammed pack, and left me wanting more but satisfied with each issue.

How was this not jam packed? There's four different main independent plots being set up, as well as some other stuff on the side. Iron Man fought remotely alongside other armored units against war ships, the EUSS took on the Asgardians, Thor was punched fifty miles, and a nuclear bomb blew up; this issue did not lack action.

The first issue of Ultimates 3, on the other hand, was 11 pages of fighting with "Venom," Hank taking drugs, and Wanda being shot. And while those buildups were decent, we know now where those plots lead, and that they never really had any full payoff.

Ultimates should be the action comic like it was in Ultimates 3, Ultimatum, and New Ultimates.

Why should it be like the 15 issues that were almost entirely poorly received (at best)? It makes more sense that 27 issues that are universally acclaimed, changed the direction of Marvel for the past decade and, more importantly, set the stage for what "Ultimates should be" are what Ultimates should be.

This comic isn't worth $4, I could see about $2 but $4 is just asking for too much with little payoff.

How much payoff do you expect in the first issue? Ultimates 3 #1 had no payoff; it ended with Wanda dead in Pietro's arms - 100% setup and cliffhanger.

[wyokid]

The preview of Ultimate X-Men was more entertaining.

It was decent. I was bored about 10 pages in, though. I'm not against political stories in my comics - but I hope this doesn't last past the first story arc.

It's a decent enough first issue but the Ultimate X-Men preview looks much more interesting.

^^^This is exactly how I felt^^^

It had nothing to do with how different it was; it's because it wasn't very good. Sure, many fans are resistant to change, but that wasn't the case with Ultimates 3. They just didn't like that particular change.

IMO it was more enjoyable then Millar's work. Note I said enjoyable NOT better. Millar's was much better in writing, but I didn't care for it.

How was this not jam packed? There's four different main independent plots being set up, as well as some other stuff on the side. Iron Man fought remotely alongside other armored units against war ships, the EUSS took on the Asgardians, Thor was punched fifty miles, and a nuclear bomb blew up; this issue did not lack action.

It felt like nothing happened. With Ultimates 3 #1 I felt satisfied and still was wanting more. This is the first time I ever regret buying a comic.

The first issue of Ultimates 3, on the other hand, was 11 pages of fighting with "Venom," Hank taking drugs, and Wanda being shot. And while those buildups were decent, we know now where those plots lead, and that they never really had any full payoff.

That was payoff for me. It kept me satisfied, wanting to know what happened next, and felt worth the price.

Why should it be like the 15 issues that were almost entirely poorly received (at best)? It makes more sense that 27 issues that are universally acclaimed, changed the direction of Marvel for the past decade and, more importantly, set the stage for what "Ultimates should be" are what Ultimates should be.

It doesn't have to be poorly written. Hickman could have easily written a story that flowed like Loeb's but were better written.

How much payoff do you expect in the first issue? Ultimates 3 #1 had no payoff; it ended with Wanda dead in Pietro's arms - 100% setup and cliffhanger.

I prefer endings that are cliffhangers, the kind that make me want to know what happens next, this felt like it was just throwing information at us, this felt like it would read better in trade. This was not worth my money.

[superchick]

There is more to writing than Dialogue and continuity.

Sure but that is 75% of it. Loeb's biggest failures were character and story as well as dialogue and continuity. In the end, what's the point if the characters don't act like themselves or feel like what they are doing is a natural extension of what is gone before. All the fights in the world won't make up for that.

[wyokid]

Sure but that is 75% of it. Loeb's biggest failures were character and story as well as dialogue and continuity. In the end, what's the point if the characters don't act like themselves or feel like what they are doing is a natural extension of what is gone before. All the fights in the world won't make up for that.

None of the characters felt different IMO, the continuity errors were UXM (my least favorite book), for me it felt naturally extending Millar's books, and the dialogue was enjoyable ("Suck it!" is hilarious!)

[Drz]

None of the characters felt different IMO, the continuity errors were UXM

http://forums.comicbookresources.com...379658&page=70
http://forums.comicbookresources.com...379658&page=71
http://forums.comicbookresources.com...379658&page=72

Nice to see you ignore yesterday's conversation. It's one thing to remain repetive, but when you constantly keep ignoring what people tell you and you not backing it up, you just target yourself as a troll.

[wyokid]

http://forums.comicbookresources.com...379658&page=70
http://forums.comicbookresources.com...379658&page=71
http://forums.comicbookresources.com...379658&page=72

Nice to see you ignore yesterday's conversation. It's one thing to remain repetive, but when you constantly keep ignoring what people tell you and you not backing it up, you just target yourself as a troll.

Okay, Thor got better. Millar wrote everyone on a pedestal, Loeb grounded them and made them more human. I'm not trolling, I'm giving my opinion something YOU have a problem with. I don't get why you constantly feel the need to argue with everything I say. If I really bother you that much just put me on ignore.

[Drz]

Okay, Thor got better.

But he wasn't on par with his previous writing, neither was Tony Stark even after he achieved a new girlfriendl, he kept thinking about Sam Loeb while having sex, thats completely unlike Millar's Tony. Hawkeye was turned into a broot who just wanted suicide more or less, Blob was turned into a cannablist, Sabretooth's powers we're gimped because "a blind eye looks cool" alongside Carol Danvers turned into a D-cupped bimbo. Valkyrie was converted into a Thor lunatic.

Loeb grounded them and made them more human.

What made them more human? Thor was a selffish bastard, Tony was depressed douché. How did their previous incarnations seem less human? Tony was a cheerful billionaire who had a "mid life crisis" in the form of a brain tumor and reacted to that as becoming a superhero, Thor was a force of nature who cared for the people and wanted to ensure no corporate America or any other corrupt government would act as a puppet master, he was also there to stop the war that ends all wars, which is the super soldier arms race.

I'm not trolling, I'm giving my opinion something

It does come off as trollish when you ignore what people tell you over and over again.

[Robbie_Jee]

There is more to writing than Dialogue and continuity.

Never said there wasn't. But to me, those are extremely big problems that Loeb has as a writer and in my opinion he's been very disrespectful to the UU's continuity. Sorry if I touched a nerve

Thankyou. Much appreciated. Lol.

[Balfro]

The problem I have with Ultimates 3, and the way Loeb wrote it, is that he obviously didn't really understand what he was getting into when he first started writing it. Halfway through it's blatantly obvious he went back to the drawing board and tried to "Re-Ultimatize" the mistakes he made. A few examples:

- Thor all of a sudden has the stone hammer at the beginning. Then halfway through he, out of the blue, has Thor say "Yeah, uh, my father gave me MANY weapons... I just feel like using this one now..."

- Black Panther was on the team with no explanation, then when Loeb realized that he shouldn't have been, all of a sudden it turned out to be Steve Rogers... Which doesn't even make any sense.

- Valkyrie was on the team with no explanation, then near the end he tried to sort of hint at it through a dream sequence.

- Lastly, I can't prove it, obviously, but I'm convinced that he didn't intend on having the villain be Ultron or any of the other androids. Again it seemed halfway through that he realized "Oh, a big thing in the Ultimate Universe is tying older events into current ones... lets see, what can I use? What about this one insignificant scene involving Wanda and Ultron?" And the rest, as they say, is history.


Now maybe I'm wrong and he planned everything like this on purpose, but if that's the case then the writing was even more shaudy because it wasn't even a mistake then...