Has Avengers stolen the spotlight from Uncanny Avengers?

[thirdfalcon]

I remember reading Brevoort's formspring a while back and he said that UA wasn't meant to be their flagship title Avengers was. UA was just NOWs launch title. I don't remember the question or the exact time that he said it, but it was either right before or a bit after UA 1 came out.

I really hope that turns out to be the case. Hickman has certainly made it sound that way...hopefully, it doesn't change.

Uncanny is a team up book from the jump, so the events can be dealt with there.

I know that Hickman has said that it's basically going to be impossible to avoid the Avengers being involved in the big crossovers, but that he just wants to tell his story and would avoid that as much as possible.

[PwrdOff]

I remember reading Brevoort's formspring a while back and he said that UA wasn't meant to be their flagship title Avengers was. UA was just NOWs launch title. I don't remember the question or the exact time that he said it, but it was either right before or a bit after UA 1 came out.

That doesn't sound like the most sensible strategy. So UA was just meant to be whored out to retailers to get an impressive sales figure, but they had no plans to prop it up as an important book after release? In any event, markets dictate flagships, not editors.

[thirdfalcon]

That doesn't sound like the most sensible strategy. So UA was just meant to be whored out to retailers to get an impressive sales figure, but they had no plans to prop it up as an important book after release? In any event, markets dictate flagships, not editors.

It doesn't have to be the flagship to be an important book. But your right about markets deciding what the flagship is. Perhaps Brevoort felt that Avengers would simply be the strongest title in the long run. Perhaps it was damage control when he realized that UA would face delays. I'm just telling you what the man said.

[celticguy]

It doesn't have to be the flagship to be an important book. But your right about markets deciding what the flagship is. Perhaps Brevoort felt that Avengers would simply be the strongest title in the long run. Perhaps it was damage control when he realized that UA would face delays. I'm just telling you what the man said.

yeah given the lineup they are going to be a central book in any events in the near future so it is an important book.

[Hulk_Is]

I'm glad that Uncanny Avengers has fallen off the way it did. The art and dialogue are terrible. Hickman's Avengers isn't much better, but it is better than UA.

The solicits for the Apocalypse Twin arc in Uncanny Avengers says it supposed to change the face of the Marvel landscape, so I suppose there's still a chance for this book to reclaim it's former status.

[pepper]

Thing is, with Uncanny, the social statement is mute. All the mutant rioting is happening because Red Skull is mind controlling people, not to their free will.

The hatred of mutants was mentioned in early on. RS is building on that. It's alluding to the Nazi rise to power.

They're all scowling. They all look pissed. You just get the same personality tone across this picture.

Different artists. Also, different premises. X-Men focuses the characters' personal lives, from what I've heard. UA offers social commentary. It's meant to be serious and dreary.

I think Wanda's story arc is that she doesn't care about the mutant plight. Those pages just seem that Wanda really doesn't get what being a mutant is all about.

Actually, she's now focusing on mutant issues more directly. She explicitly says that she would do more for mutants in #1. The comments to Rogue were clearly about the X-Men. Why are people not getting this?

He used the wrong picture if used the right one than it would have been good. I'm black I don't really have a problem with SD using that example. Most of the x fans on the xbords all minorities or gay so we feel some sorta of way about Wanda.

That's quite an assumption. Still, just because mutants are a metaphor for minorities, does not mean all their stories allude to that. People can stop with the faux-outrage.

[pepper]

It's not just that, but the thing is Avengers seems to be making Uncanny feel redundant. It just seemed like it took UA's spotlight by being bigger and grander.

Neither overshadows the other. Both offer something different. Adj-less is a classic capes book, UA is about mutant issues, with perspectives from non-mutants and mutants, alike. And delays.

Adj-less Avengers never stopped being the main Avengers book. Marvel was only giving UA a push because it was a new title, made up of their 2 biggest franchises, and coming out first.

And great ad hominum guy. You that insecure about defending this book you have to result to personal attacks?

Some frustrated whinging is funny to watch. Too much whinging is frustrating. You're already cluttering up the UA and YA threads (and prior to that, Arena threads) with your dissatisfaction and your weird fetish. Just tone it down a bit.

[Voss]

I get what SB/DB is saying about feeling like a flapship title. Its not that either book is redundant or telling the same stories or is superflous, its that Marvel touted Uncanny as its flapship title. The biggest title where all the game changing revelations of the MU will take place. With Hickman and what's happening with Avengers it kinda does feel like that book is leading the Marvel line with its stories and Uncanny is being overshadowed. Again though, I just a lot of that might still be down to the shipping.

Yea but everything SB/DB said in the original post was extremely misinformed (which is what I was trying to point out)

But lets ignore all of that and get straight to the root statement. "Avengers is overshadowing UA as the flagship title." How do we go about determining what is and isn't a flagship title? If we are going by the solicites, New Avengers sounds like the title where the heaviest revelations of the MU will take place. If we are going by sales, UA is being beat out by F4, Iron Man (wtf people.....), Deadpool, Hulk, and Cap in November. If we are going by an arbitrary moniker that was awarded by the Marvel marketing department then why would we take their word for it?

I don't want to speak for the guy but I really doubt Remender himself thinks that he is writing any sort of flagship book. Maybe I'm wrong but this just isn't coming off that way. You don't cast someone like Sunfire and put Havok in a leadership spot in a flagship book and directly tie it to the Dark Angel saga (next arc). It comes off more like an X-Book that is set after the events of AvX.

[Captain Jibberish]

Or, as I'd been saying since UA was announced, they should have just re godded Herc and put him on the team.

That actually is a great idea. I guess they went with Thor for recognition.

I'm a big Thor fan, but yeah, this. Hercules fills both those 'Godly' and 'Classic Avenger' roles that Thor does, and he has that boisterous personality that would add a little spice to the Uncanny Avengers.
Also, I feel like Marvel NOW has a lot of redundancy when it comes to the Avengers books, specifically the lineup of each book. With what Hickman is doing in the main book, "going bigger", it would make sense for everybody to appear there, but all of the other books should have unique lineups.

[ImmortalIronFist]

Well first off, Wanda was absolutely right with her martyrdom comment regarding the X-Men.

And second, one of the books is awesome and on time...while the other is average and delayed.