Marriage Era Spidey bashers are shameful opportunists (Like you REALLY didn't enjoy a single Spidey comic in 20 years)
Conversely, BND haters REALLY need to get over their continuity elitism already
Of maybe it was Cap pointing out that he doesn't hate the French like everyone says he does. He doesn't really feel that way; he just wanted to rally the troops. He is a soldier after all.Taking out him patting himself on the back for getting away with such an Anti-American and Anti-French scene, who writes a joke and then says how good their joke was?
Plenty of Loki's army was human, many killed by the Avengers. Cap had a machine gun; he wasn't just wounding.I don't recall them killing any humans in The Avengers and who was the last person Cap killed since he's been unfrozen?
As far as 616-Cap, I'm not sure. Bucky Cap, though, carried a gun.
Okay so Captain America has done and said some lame stuff. Now he's quit the Ultimates because of how guilty he feels about the Spider-Man thing and he's doing some hard soul searching. When he comes back he's probably gonna be a changed man. That's character development. People go through changes in life and having that happen in a comic makes it more realistic. Millar starting Captain America off as not a perfect guy gave room for the character to grow. He may never be perfect but that's just realistic. He's been pretty heroic but he's a human first and real humans don't base their decisions on what a comic book super hero would do, so why should he?
Now that Humphries has begun his solo run on the Ultimates, I've updated the title accordingly. And since this thread is all about comparison, let's take a look at each writer's first issue on the book:
Millar: Obviously Millar's situation is much different, since he had to start from scratch. His first issue is more of a Captain America origin than an Ultimates book, but it still does a great job setting up that this book isn't going to be a typical Avengers book. Cap's mythos is established as quite familiar, but different. Bucky is a photographer who survives the fight (setup for a BIG moment in issue #3) and there's a tease towards the longterm villain, the Chitauri. It doesn't get into the meat of the Ultimates, but that's because he had to start with Cap. The end, where Tony finds him, is a great setup for things to come.
Loeb: After the big success of Millar's Ultimates, Loeb decided to do something different, which makes sense. And he sure did that. As a standalone book that wasn't related to anything ever, this issue might have been a decent start to something. But as a continuation of the Ultimates? Awful. The characters are unrecognizable (in both art design and dialogue). New characters have come out of nowhere (Black Panther, Valkyrie). Loeb got rid of a lot of Millar's themes (real world implications, political intrigue, high character focus) and replaced them with much worse ideas (over the top action, forced "mysteries," too many incoherent subplots). Ultimates 3 may have come together, somewhat, to be mediocre (at best), but the start was absolutely awful. Granted, it partly "improved" due to the lowered standards of the first issue, so I guess Loeb's start did a good job dumbing down the reader.
Hickman: The Ultimate Universe spent 2 years in a directionless void after Ultimatum. New Ultimates ended after only 5 issues, Ultimate Avengers fell short of expectations, and there was never a sense that anything big was happening. Hickman changed that. In his first issue alone, he set up the Ultimates for what would become more than a year worth of conflict for both the Ultimates and the X-Men. 12 issues later, some of this still hasn't been wrapped up, because it's all going on at once. He proved that he could write these characters as well as anyone. Though he may have left us for the Avengers, he no doubt left a big mark on the Ultimate Universe. A year later, it's clear looking back how well planned his run was from the beginning. Comparing this to Loeb's first issue is a lesson in how to do long term planning and how not to, respectively.
Humphries: Though he cowrote a few issues with Hickman, issue #13 was Humphries's first solo mission. Since Hickman's work on Ultimate Fallout, we had been waiting for Cap's return, and it was finally time. Humphries brought back the Big 3 in a big way, and showed that he understands the Ultimates. Small teases towards the future seem to build in the way that Millar did, but the big focus was on Cap, Thor, and Iron Man. It might not be the most significant issue, but it was certainly a good start.
Millar - 2/10
Loeb - 7/10
Hickman - 7/10
Humphries - 9/10
Anyone who doesn't like Miles Morales is a racist.
Humphries is not a bad writer at all by himself. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if he was offered an Avengers job in the 616. Please for the love of god don't abandon us I mean how hard is it to have job in the 616 and 1 job in the Ultimates. Anyway the problem is conflicting story lines. Issues 10,11,12 would have been better if Hickman finished his story line in 3 chapters instead of one. I think because of the co-authors two people were trying to do something different at the same time. Sam was trying to introduce new plots and Hickman was just trying to finish the story. Because of this plot struggle the story was diminished. I think the story would have been better if Sam focused on the fight with Reed in the three issues and adding other plots in his stand-alone issues. Modi didn't need to be reintroduced until after the fight with Reed. We didn't need to see extra Washington death scenes. We really needed to know what happened to Zorn.
Anyway I would rate
Last edited by sage6paths; 07-25-2012 at 04:19 PM.
I don't think that anything in the UU will catch fire quite like Millar's Ultimates did. I also think that what Millar did was much more impressive considering he was starting from scratch and didn't have 12 years of stories to stand on as well. Even if we compare just the individual "first" issue's I still would rank Millar's as far superior to Loeb's and Humphries, I would say that Hickman's was closer to Millar's but still not on the same level.
I'm not saying that I didn't enjoy Humphries first issue because I did, as a matter of fact I think it is his best work so far in the UU. I agree with Plawsky's assessment of Loeb's run, as a stand alone story it was actually kind of mindless fun, but it doesn't really fit in the Ultimates world. What Hickman did was nothing short of amazing, but it is beyond clear that he did his homework by reading the past stories and building on that. I have to give Millar credit for providing that inspiration.
1) Find a bad guy
2) Be Wolverine
Ultimate Wolverine is coming back, sort of!
Yeah, Millar is still the king, followed by Hickman.
Humphries, eh i'm still not convinced. #12 of Ultimates was so horrible.
I don't think anyone can ever top Millar though. It's not a popular opinion but his Ultimate Avengers was so fucking good.
Hey, Thanos, baby!
Yeah i don't get the Avengers disappointments over here. Millar promised focus on villains and action, and he delivered.
Humphries' could have ended the story in some other fashion than deus ex machina, a giant Hulk and whatnot. He refers Ultimate Marvel as an HBO show, yet we get some silly super science like a Giant Hulk and Tony Stark suddenly having superpowers, not to mention completely ignoring Hickman's Children and just having them turn againts their master, despite them being always aware what Reed had been doing.
Yeah i'm giving Humphries the chance here, at least Alex Alonso is hyping how his story will make him famous, i guess they're going for President Captain America, but yeah, we'll see.
One month later, and I figured I'd take another look at the Humphries vs his predecessors. Two issues in, how have things changed?
Millar: Now that Cap has been set up, we can get on to the rest of the team. We're introduced to the rest of the main team, save Thor (though he's mentioned). With the team starting to get assembled, everything is starting to get a big feeling. Each character has a unique voice and has a bit of time to breathe in the second issue. And of course, the art is outstanding.
9/10 (rating for both issues)
Loeb: Well, there's still a lot of action. So... Loeb has that going for him. But an unnecessary appearance from Spider-man distracts from the rest of the team. We at least find out that Magneto and the Brotherhood is behind everything, but there's just not much going on still.
Hickman: The team is back together, the plots have been set up, it's time to get on with it. The Ultimates are thrown right into battle here. But it's not just the action that holds this book together. The Loki and Thor exchange is easily my favorite moment of dialogue in any Ultimates book. Hickman's character work is simply perfect, and the art's not too shabby, either.
Humphries: After a solid start, Humphries definitely slowed down for his second issue. As I've said in my discussions in the issue's main thread, the issue just felt really bland. The story is solid, and has lots of potential, but Humphries seems to not be connecting with the characters in the way that Millar and Hickman already were at this point in their runs.
So the only writer who really changed by their second issue was Humphries, it seems. While there's nothing really bad about his book, it doesn't feel like an Ultimates book. What's kind of surprising is how much quicker Hickman took the book to the next level than Millar, but that also has to do with the different amount of setup that each writer needed.
Therefore, my comparison remains the same.
With the introduction of President Cap, it seems that Ultimates is going to be more political than ever. Humphries is definitely taking a page out of Millar's book by bringing politics back to the front. Hickman had been political, but this is a whole different level.