West Coast Avengers Appreciation

[Nomads1]

Personally, I liked Force Works. They introduced a lot of different concepts to make it stand out from Avengers (the caos vault, the Hex ships, the support staff, the holographic "butler", Plato, the different style of bad guys, etc...), it was a truly more proactive team, something many claim to want to be, but I think they did succeed in being. However, as mentioned enough, a couple of misteps did serve to kill any momentum the book might have had. The death of Wonder Man was the first. I mean, after Iron Man, Simon was probably the greatest attractive of the book. And another was the unstable art team problem. They even had a few quite good pencilers working on the book (Jim Califore, Dave Ross, Jimmy Cheung, etc...) but none of them stuck around for more than a couple of issues. Really terrible to get a book to take of and to make readers stick around. The Crossing was the final nail on the book, erasing a lot of what made it unique. All in all, I was a fan. (But I prefered WCA.)

Peace

[Vic Vega]

That's my problem with multiple teams bearing the same name. During it's run, most of the time, WCA was my favorite Avengers book. Many times it was of much better quality than the main book, which seemed to hit a rut after Stern left, arguably, only recovering when Harras and Epting came on board. But it was always seen as a less important book, after all, it was a branch of the main Avengers. That's why I fully supported the change of the book to Force Works, even if it was a poor substitute to WCA (Not poor in quality, but just because it had very little to do with what the old book was about). Same reason I hate the current franchise mode of New, Dark, Secret, pinka-dot, etc.... Avengers. IMHO, it takes aways the specialness of each title.

Peace

I think there are two separate issues here.

When Byrne was on WCA to me, that was the better book product-wise and the book that "mattered" more.

After Byrne left you had Thomas (who was no longer a fan favorite, by them) on West and Harras on East, trying to do faux Xmen with a funky art team so THAT book mattered more. I'm always going to go with the book that has the better creative team. Failing that, the better roster. Having two titles just means you have twice as many chance to get a decent artist/writer team or that roster you like.

I never thought that say, Justice League Europe was less important than the main Justice League title. I cared more about Wally West than Batman so that was the book I bought (until they replaced Bart Sears with artists from hunger).

On an in-story level it would make sense for the Avengers to expand as thier job got bigger. The Avengers operating on the scale they did during Galactic Storm is what the Avengers should be capable of all the time, IMO. West Coast Avengers should just have been Avengers Europe or Avengers International because it make it look like the parent team protected the world and the Wackos just protected LA.

If the WCA protected everything that WASN'T the US they would have seemed a lot more important in story.

But really this is where the Xfranchise up until recently, had it over the Avengers. No Xfan thought that one book was lesser than the other.

The difference between the Xfranchise and the Avengers back in the day was that they made sure that both the anchor books(let's leave aside New Mutants and Xforce for a moment) had fan faves on them. The book that didn't get Jim Lee got Whilce Portacio. The book that didn't get Andy Kubert got Salvator Larocca.

It wasn't until Bendis got here that you got A list talent thruout the Avengers line. Mainly because he wasn't writing damm near the entire line and there was no way the was gonna have a hack art team on his books.

[Nomads1]

I think there are two separate issues here.

When Byrne was on WCA to me, that was the better book product-wise and the book that "mattered" more.

After Byrne left you had Thomas (who was no longer a fan favorite, by them) on West and Harras on East, trying to do faux Xmen with a funky art team so THAT book mattered more. I'm always going to go with the book that has the better creative team. Failing that, the better roster. Having two titles just means you have twice as many chance to get a decent artist/writer team or that roster you like.

I never thought that say, Justice League Europe was less important than the main Justice League title. I cared more about Wally West than Batman so that was the book I bought (until they replaced Bart Sears with artists from hunger).

On an in-story level it would make sense for the Avengers to expand as thier job got bigger. The Avengers operating on the scale they did during Galactic Storm is what the Avengers should be capable of all the time, IMO. West Coast Avengers should just have been Avengers Europe or Avengers International because it make it look like the parent team protected the world and the Wackos just protected LA.

If the WCA protected everything that WASN'T the US they would have seemed a lot more important in story.

But really this is where the Xfranchise up until recently, had it over the Avengers. No Xfan thought that one book was lesser than the other.

The difference between the Xfranchise and the Avengers back in the day was that they made sure that both the anchor books(let's leave aside New Mutants and Xforce for a moment) had fan faves on them. The book that didn't get Jim Lee got Whilce Portacio. The book that didn't get Andy Kubert got Salvator Larocca.

It wasn't until Bendis got here that you got A list talent thruout the Avengers line. Mainly because he wasn't writing damm near the entire line and there was no way the was gonna have a hack art team on his books.

Despite a lot of what you say makes sense, at least for more selective readers such as you or I, I have disagree with you. I think that, as a general perception, with very few exceptions, spin-off books carry less importance than the original one. Unless the spin-off eventually does something to distance itself from it's originator. Sorry, but despite also being my favorite of the two (by very little, both were great and faily interconnected) JLE was a poor exemple. It was seen as less important than JLA. American market. Justice League AMERICA will always trump Justice League Europe. I do agree that the X-franchise does seem to manage that better, but, even so, to my knowledge, New Mutants, X-Factor, Excalibur or whatever, always carried second billing when compared to the X-Men and, with few exceptions, such as when Morrison was around, Uncanny trumped adjectiveless.

Peace

[XPac]

I think there are two separate issues here.

When Byrne was on WCA to me, that was the better book product-wise and the book that "mattered" more.

After Byrne left you had Thomas (who was no longer a fan favorite, by them) on West and Harras on East, trying to do faux Xmen with a funky art team so THAT book mattered more. I'm always going to go with the book that has the better creative team. Failing that, the better roster. Having two titles just means you have twice as many chance to get a decent artist/writer team or that roster you like.

I never thought that say, Justice League Europe was less important than the main Justice League title. I cared more about Wally West than Batman so that was the book I bought (until they replaced Bart Sears with artists from hunger).

On an in-story level it would make sense for the Avengers to expand as thier job got bigger. The Avengers operating on the scale they did during Galactic Storm is what the Avengers should be capable of all the time, IMO. West Coast Avengers should just have been Avengers Europe or Avengers International because it make it look like the parent team protected the world and the Wackos just protected LA.

If the WCA protected everything that WASN'T the US they would have seemed a lot more important in story.

But really this is where the Xfranchise up until recently, had it over the Avengers. No Xfan thought that one book was lesser than the other.

The difference between the Xfranchise and the Avengers back in the day was that they made sure that both the anchor books(let's leave aside New Mutants and Xforce for a moment) had fan faves on them. The book that didn't get Jim Lee got Whilce Portacio. The book that didn't get Andy Kubert got Salvator Larocca.

It wasn't until Bendis got here that you got A list talent thruout the Avengers line. Mainly because he wasn't writing damm near the entire line and there was no way the was gonna have a hack art team on his books.

What I think helped sell the notion that one Avengers team wasn't more important than the other in the mid-portion of the Bendis era was the fact that prior to the Heroic Age, neither Avengers book was simply called THE Avengers. There was Mighty Avengers, New Avengers, or Dark Avengers. Marvel at least by it's title wasn't trying to imply that one book was the main one, while the others were off-shoots. That was lessened when the Heroic age began and we not a book simply entitled Avengers again.

That said, even when there was New and Might, I think there was a general sense that Mighty Avengers was the less significant book once Bendis left it. So I think that clearly demonstrated that the status of the creative team, and the level in which they were inter-connected with the rest of the MU were factors in that whole "B team" mentality.

[destro]

Favorite cover: #3, Tigra vs Kraven looks so awesome. Hated how Kraven makes Tigra seem so weak though in the battle. She should have torn him to pieces, but I digress...
Runner up: #17

Not to derail the thread, but I don't see that at all. Kraven regularly gives Spider-Man a good fight and I've never seen Tigra as being nearly as powerful as Spider-Man, not that she isn't an interesting character. Also a big part of Kraven's whole deal is dealing with animals, especially Lions and Tigers. Kraven is sort of specifically designed to take down someone like Tigra.

[Vic Vega]

I submit that when you replace a Bart Sears with a Ron Randall that does more to tell the reader that the book he/she is reading is second tier than anything in story.

ESPECALLY when the parent book is alternating between Kevin McGuire and Adam Hughs.

In the 90's the Xfranchise kept darn near every fan fave artist Marvel had in house, so they never had that problem.

Avengers?

You had the choice of either Dave Ross(who I liked, mind you) or Steve Epting.

[RDMacQ]

I liked it. It had Iron Man on the team, and I liked Iron Man. Shallow, I know, but what can I say- I was eight.

Anyway, I think thematically it made sense to have another team stationed in another part of the country. Just narratively, it solved the problem of why the other Avengers team wouldn't just come in and help them out whenever they had a problem. They were on different sides of the country, making it hard to team up on every other case.

In regards to the changeover to Force Works, I have to say that I didn't mind the way Avengers West Coast moved over to the Force Works team. It kind of made sense- Iron Man wants to be more proactive, and doesn't want to work within the Avengers system anymore. It's no big throwdown, just a debate on the effectiveness of one team over another that comes to a painful end. It doesn't end on a bang, but a whimper.

Now Force Works in and of itself? Well, looking back on it now, I kind of think the idea of a more "proactive" team looks better on paper than it does in practice. It's good for one story, but eventually the narrative starts telling the same type of superhero stories that came before just with minor altered elements.

[RDMacQ]

What I think helped sell the notion that one Avengers team wasn't more important than the other in the mid-portion of the Bendis era was the fact that prior to the Heroic Age, neither Avengers book was simply called THE Avengers. There was Mighty Avengers, New Avengers, or Dark Avengers. Marvel at least by it's title wasn't trying to imply that one book was the main one, while the others were off-shoots. That was lessened when the Heroic age began and we not a book simply entitled Avengers again.

That said, even when there was New and Might, I think there was a general sense that Mighty Avengers was the less significant book once Bendis left it. So I think that clearly demonstrated that the status of the creative team, and the level in which they were inter-connected with the rest of the MU were factors in that whole "B team" mentality.

And it didn't help that New Avengers were progressing the story of the Marvel U. at the time along with Dark Avengers and had a lot of cross referencing, while Mighty Avengers were taking care of things that weren't being referenced in other books.

[Ramage]

I really liked those early issues. Englehart was writing it like a throwback book to his Avengers and I liked the characters--especially the Shroud, the Thing, and Moon Knight although Flamebird/Espirit seemed to be getting the Captain Marvel/Roger Stern treatment. Milgrom's art seemed a little rushed and blocky though. Even at the time I thought it was a weak element especially with Buscema/Palmer being the team on the main book. I lost interest right after the Byrne era---I thought he shortshifted Hawkeye and the whole Wanda's kids are illusion thing was not a favorite, even though it paid dividends years later. Then Roy Thomas came along and I wandered to other things. I think I was starting college about that time.

For some reason those Englehart years are getting some good reprints.

[Nomads1]

I really liked those early issues. Englehart was writing it like a throwback book to his Avengers and I liked the characters--especially the Shroud, the Thing, and Moon Knight although Flamebird/Espirit seemed to be getting the Captain Marvel/Roger Stern treatment. Milgrom's art seemed a little rushed and blocky though. Even at the time I thought it was a weak element especially with Buscema/Palmer being the team on the main book. I lost interest right after the Byrne era---I thought he shortshifted Hawkeye and the whole Wanda's kids are illusion thing was not a favorite, even though it paid dividends years later. Then Roy Thomas came along and I wandered to other things. I think I was starting college about that time.

For some reason those Englehart years are getting some good reprints.

]
Thomas, also. Byrne's run has been reprinted in a couple of TPBs, but some of Roy's stories were collected in the second (Darker than Scarlet). Now, last month, came out a collection of Thomas early issues on the book. Along came a Spider. Artwise, it's still a little bit uneven, but I liked it. Might be a good chance for you to check them if you liked the early WCA.

Peace

[Vic Vega]

I liked it. It had Iron Man on the team, and I liked Iron Man. Shallow, I know, but what can I say- I was eight.

Anyway, I think thematically it made sense to have another team stationed in another part of the country. Just narratively, it solved the problem of why the other Avengers team wouldn't just come in and help them out whenever they had a problem. They were on different sides of the country, making it hard to team up on every other case.

In regards to the changeover to Force Works, I have to say that I didn't mind the way Avengers West Coast moved over to the Force Works team. It kind of made sense- Iron Man wants to be more proactive, and doesn't want to work within the Avengers system anymore. It's no big throwdown, just a debate on the effectiveness of one team over another that comes to a painful end. It doesn't end on a bang, but a whimper.

Now Force Works in and of itself? Well, looking back on it now, I kind of think the idea of a more "proactive" team looks better on paper than it does in practice. It's good for one story, but eventually the narrative starts telling the same type of superhero stories that came before just with minor altered elements.

I never understood why a proactive team book was so hard to pull off.

I notice that Secret Avengers managed to keep the "proactive" theme even if it is only implyed.

MY problem with S.A. is that by premise it sounds like it should be a military espionage book, and except for the period when Eliis was writing it, its not.

[Nomads1]

Avengers?

You had the choice of either Dave Ross(who I liked, mind you) or Steve Epting.

For me, that's like a choice between cinnamon banana cake and strawberry with whipped cream cake.

Peace

[Nomads1]

I never understood why a proactive team book was so hard to pull off.

I notice that Secret Avengers managed to keep the "proactive" theme even if it is only implyed.

MY problem with S.A. is that by premise it sounds like it should be a military espionage book, and except for the period when Eliis was writing it, its not.

I guess the problem with the proactive approach is the whole Minority Report conundrum. Is intent a crime? Can a pérson be guilty of a crime she hasn't even commited? The other approach is reactive, about which a lot of people also complain. I liked the FW approach. It was a play with probabilities. Information inputted into a computer that would predit the most likely hotspots of activity. So, all they had to do, was be there and wait for it to happen. I thought it was a cool and untried approach. It's not the same as go after the bad guy before he does the wrong thing.

Peace

[RDMacQ]

I never understood why a proactive team book was so hard to pull off.

I notice that Secret Avengers managed to keep the "proactive" theme even if it is only implyed.

MY problem with S.A. is that by premise it sounds like it should be a military espionage book, and except for the period when Eliis was writing it, its not.

I think because really it's not actually all that different from what teams do ordinarily.

It's like the Avengers are like "Oh, no, the Kree attacking. We better do something." And Force Works is "Oh, no, the Scatter are attacking. We better do something." It's kind of the same thing, just the way they get there is a little different. And when more of the focus is on the battle itself rather than how they get there, it kind of makes it seem like the actions of the two parties are fairly similar.

[RDMacQ]

I guess the problem with the proactive approach is the whole Minority Report conundrum. Is intent a crime? Can a pérson be guilty of a crime she hasn't even commited? The other approach is reactive, about which a lot of people also complain. I liked the FW approach. It was a play with probabilities. Information inputted into a computer that would predit the most likely hotspots of activity. So, all they had to do, was be there and wait for it to happen. I thought it was a cool and untried approach. It's not the same as go after the bad guy before he does the wrong thing.

Peace

Except that was never really explored, and it was just a way to get the heroes to the bad guys. The proactive approach eventually becomes a macguffin- it could be anything, it's just to involve the heroes in the plot. Which is kind of a weak premise to base an entire direction upon.