Secret Avengers #34 *Spoilers*

[Infestor]

It's more that he doesn't always seem to do sufficient research into the characters he's using. Continuity shouldn't be the be all and end all, but a good writer is able to work within the boundaries of it. If you do not do that research you wind up with characters reacting and behaving in fashions which just don't make sense.

He has a tendency to fixate on one period of a character from some point in their history, and portray them purely in that fashion, regardless of however many years or even decades of stories mean that they don't behave like that anymore for one or more very specific reasons.

It's not just the case here. He's done it a fair bit on Uncanny X-Force also. I've still no idea how The Shadow King is suddenly back in Amahl Farouk's body, one he hasn't used in decades. So much has gone on since then, different hosts, different dimensions, but I doubt greatly Remender really read up on any of that.

I think he's done plenty of research. Any disagreements with subsequent developments would have been a conscious choice, I think, not a mistake born of ignorance.

[The Sword Is Drawn]

I think he's done plenty of research. Any disagreements with subsequent developments would have been a conscious choice, I think, not a mistake born of ignorance.

I could list you at least 10 errors and inconsistencies with his writing the Braddocks alone. I don't ever advocate hassling creators on Twitter, but some months back a fair few people did ask Remender directly whether he'd ever actually READ Captain Britain before writing him. He claimed that he had, mostly the Moore stuff and roughly up to the half way point of Excalibur. Which is largely the problem. Because had he read the second half he'd have seen how the character changed, and the life experiences which make this strange reversion to some kind of odd and inept hero impossible a characterisation to match up with. It even doesn't match up with Marvel's own handbook entries.

Conscious choices, maybe. But not ones which make any real sense.

[Robby Robot]

You have to read every comic ever if you want to write comics. It's the rules.

[The Sword Is Drawn]

You have to read every comic ever if you want to write comics. It's the rules.

Not every comic. Just the issues involving the key changes and big life moments for a character. Without those you run the risk of creating a characterisation which either jars with what has come before, or directly contradicts it. In his dealings with The Braddocks, be that Captain Britain, Psylocke or Jamie, there are several instances where Rick Rememder has fallen foul of that.

[Robby Robot]

Not every comic. Just the issues involving the key changes and big life moments for a character. Without those you run the risk of creating a characterisation which either jars with what has come before, or directly contradicts it. In his dealings with The Braddocks, be that Captain Britain, Psylocke or Jamie, there are several instances where Rick Rememder has fallen foul of that.

And how many comics is that exactly?

[tingray]

Completely ignoring continuity is really annoying to a lot of fans, Robby Robot. If it doesn't bother you, fine, but realize other people read the book too.

[The Sword Is Drawn]

And how many comics is that exactly?

We're not really talking issues, we're talking arcs.

I'm not saying a writer has to read every appearance, but paying attention to what has happened to them over the past 15 years would always be advisable. Certainly not producing a characterisation which almost seems deliberately at odds with the character's last series, in particular, seems like a poor choice.

Captain Britain has not been a rookie for a VERY long time. Nor shown to be a man who makes continuous poor decisions, rushes into situations with no plan, is excessively arrogant, disrespectful to others. It's debatable as to whether he EVER was. A lot of his more odd and extreme behaviour examples in early Excalibur were explained away long ago, and deep and significant changes which shaped the character into who he has been for the past 15 years feature in Warren Ellis' run on Excalibur - not only one of the highest regarded runs, but also one which Marvel have finally been collecting in trade over the past few years. Without understanding how his time trapped in the timestream fundamentally changed Brian's personality and perspective on life his characterisation in all appearances since (including Excalibur runs, minis, guest arcs in Avengers, Captain Britain & MI13) it might seem plausible to retcon him back to being some kind of lesser hero. But with those changes acknowledged it's just completely illogical.

I know that Captain Britain readers are considered by some to be some to be a kind of 'lunatic fringe,' who don't really belong on an Avengers forum. But the bottom line is this. Captain Britain is a character who has ties to Captain America, Spider-man the X-men, Thor, Iron Man, Black Panther, the Black Knight and other long term Avengers. Sometimes as a guest star. Sometimes even being on a team with them. His eventual inclusion on an Avengers team was seen by many to be a no-brainer. All the connections were there for a very natural transition.

Rick Remender chose to bring Captain Britain onto his roster for Secret Avengers. His choice. And yet in doing so he chose not to embrace the many virtues and positive elements established in the character, or make real use any of the connections which would make his inclusion logical. Instead he chose to overplay the character's negative qualities, engineer and emphasize ways in which he couldn't fit in, shouldn't be an Avenger, and mostly paint him as an oddly inept hero. That's something which not only contradicts most of the characters history, but even contradicts how Marvel characterise him in their handbooks.

For the first time in a long time most of Captain Britain's appearances have now been collected in Hardback and Trade form. And yet the current version of the character, as he has been used, doesn't really match up well with any of those collections.

[Guest_1001]

Frankly, I wouldn't even expect any Captain Britain writer to scour the archives for the most critically-acclaimed titles or the ones considered essential reading; if Remender had stuck to Captain Britain's most recent series alone, it would negate practically all the flaws the fans have with the character. It would still be possible for Remender to write the character as arrogant and inept but the ridiculous continuity errors -- the old costume, the Corps being resurrected without explanation, "damn that Merlyn and damn his test!" -- wouldn't exist.

For those who aren't Captain Britain fans and want to know how jarring this is, imagine if Gwen Stacy turned up alive in the pages of Spider-Man after a creative team change and there wasn't any explanation. Just because that's what the writer was familiar with. Or if Iron Man was in his Silver Centurion armour for one arc, followed by him returning to the current version. There's no reason these inconsistencies shouldn't be called out just because it's Captain Britain, particularly because what was done with the character immediately prior to Remender picking him up was pure gold. The lowest rating that an issue of Captain Britain & MI:13 received here on CBR was three-and-a-half stars. All that for nothing.

[Aelle3]

You have to read every comic ever if you want to write comics. It's the rules.

Not at all, but whats the point of using a character if you don't plan on writing him in character? Its not like it was an interesting direction to take Brian in. Its a shame because I really like a lot of Remenders work, its just disappointing that his Braddock and Otherworld stuff has been such a let down.