The World's Hardest Avengers Quiz

[berk]

I am also embarrassed by my showing here. I pride myself on my Avengers knowledge but clearly I need to go back to the books.

Naturally, I blame Bendis for this. Before he took over, I would have been able to answer most of these questions, but after almost 9 years of seeing the Avengers completely trashed, I have kind of given up on the team and have been reading other things instead. I still love Avengers #1-285, but without the new stuff driving it, I haven't felt the need to re-read these in a long time.

Why #285 in particular?

My own cut-off date had been around the end of the Korvac saga when Perez left for the first time, but I'm thinking of extending it through the early 200s since Perez came back for a few issues around then.

But I want to avoid two things:
1. the whole Hank Pym debacle, which I think happened somewhere around there - never read that and no desire to do so now.
2. the story where Moondragon goes nuts and enslaves a whole planet via mind-control - that was the ruin of what could have been a good character, for me. This one I have read - hunted down the back issues when i first heard about it just to see if it was as bad as it sounded - and don't want to re-visit.

I'm curious now: what are the essential Avengers eras for all you Avengers fans? I've never really thought about going beyond 175 until recently, but maybe I should since I know a lot of people here whose tastes sometimes coincide with mine like the Roger Stern era, for example. I should also try the Busiek/Perez run some time, but that's more recent and something I've meant to do for a while now.

[icctrombone]

I'm a big Avengers fan as well but I'm not gonna beat myself up too much. We're not like those guys in the Big bang Theory show. Many of us have too much going on to memorize who the Triumvirate of Evil are. But it was a nice quiz.

[Jolly Mon]

Why #285 in particular?

My own cut-off date had been around the end of the Korvac saga when Perez left for the first time, but I'm thinking of extending it through the early 200s since Perez came back for a few issues around then.

But I want to avoid two things:
1. the whole Hank Pym debacle though, which I think happened somewhere around there - never read that and no desire to do so now.
2. the story where Moondragon goes nuts and enslaves a whole planet via mind-control - that was the ruin of what could have been a good character, for me. This one I have read - hunted down the back issues when i first heard about it just to see if it was as bad as it sounded - and don't want to re-visit.

I'm curious now: what are the essential Avengers eras for all you Avengers fans? I've never really thought about going beyond 175 until recently, but maybe I should since I know a lot of people here whose tastes sometimes coincide with mine like the Roger Stern era, for example. I should also try the Busiek/Perez run some time, but that's more recent and something I've meant to do for a while now.

My personal preference is for the 1st series from #1 through the early 200s, which captures the best runs and avoids the downhill slide that starts right before the "Hank Pym debacle" as it shall be hereafter referred to. After that it jumps to the Busiek/Perez run, up to the Red Mist storyline, which I believe is where Geoff Johns took over?

[icctrombone]

I'm curious now: what are the essential Avengers eras for all you Avengers fans? I've never really thought about going beyond 175 until recently, but maybe I should since I know a lot of people here whose tastes sometimes coincide with mine like the Roger Stern era, for example. I should also try the Busiek/Perez run some time, but that's more recent and something I've meant to do for a while now.

To Each his own I guess but I consider the main great Avengers era to be from #1 to 233. After the fall and rise of Hank Pym , I sort of felt the rest of the run was lots of rehash. I know that the Assault of the Avengers, around #277 or so, is well regarded , but I only saw it as ok.

[icctrombone]

My absolute favorite run was #17 to about #50. Cap in charge of the kooky quartet and the return of the hank was great. That's when I thought Hawkeye was at his best, too.

[Jolly Mon]

I'm a big Avengers fan as well but I'm not gonna beat myself up too much. We're not like those guys in the Big bang Theory show. Many of us have too much going on to memorize who the Triumvirate of Evil are. But it was a nice quiz.

That makes me wonder. The far and away winner was redsocks68, a new user with a total of one post. Maybe redsocks68 is in reality.... Dr. Sheldon Cooper!

[icctrombone]

That makes me wonder. The far and away winner was redsocks68, a new user with a total of one post. Maybe redsocks68 is in reality.... Dr. Sheldon Cooper!

Or maybe there's no honor in the honor system....... JUST KIDDING!

[Shellhead]

I'm curious now: what are the essential Avengers eras for all you Avengers fans? I've never really thought about going beyond 175 until recently, but maybe I should since I know a lot of people here whose tastes sometimes coincide with mine like the Roger Stern era, for example. I should also try the Busiek/Perez run some time, but that's more recent and something I've meant to do for a while now.

I personally feel that there are five essential Avengers eras. In chronological order:

1. Cap's Kooky Quartet: Avengers #17-35. It's a weak line-up for "Earth's Mightiest Heroes," but this brave quartet survives some serious adventures despite some frequent bickering and challenges to Cap's leadership. The Don Heck art and the Stan Lee writing aren't the greatest, but there are some outstanding scenes.

2. The Roy Thomas run: Avengers #36-104. Late in the Kooky Quartet era, Roy Thomas starts scripting Stan's stories and then takes over the writing completely by issue #36. It still feels like Kooky Quartet at first, but gets much better after Black Panther joins the team and then the Vision is introduced. Many classic villains and concepts are introduced during the Thomas run, including highlights like Avengers Annual #2 and the legendary Kree-Skrull War.

3. The Steve Englehart run: Avengers #105-151. The transition from Thomas to Englehart was slick, going from Sentinels to Savage Land Mutates in back-to-back issues. Englehart then goes on a rampage of character development, especially for Scarlet Witch and Vision. He brings back the Swordsman in a bold way, along with a brand new Mary Sue-type character who is actually kind of fun. Highlights include the first great crossover in comics, the Avengers-Defenders War, as well as several great stories featuring Kang that solidified his status as one of the top two Avengers villains. We also get a clever new origin for the Vision, great rematches with Zodiac and the Squadron Supreme, and the shocking return of a golden age character named Patsy Walker.

4. The Michelinie/Shooter era: Avengers #158-205. David Michelinie and Jim Shooter either took turns or collaborated on many of the issues in this run, and the overall quality is high. This might just be the best Avengers run ever. Although many Avengers fans remember this era best for the epic Michael storyline, I preferred the subsequent issues after Henry Peter Gyrich clamped down on the roster. And guest writer Steven Grant wrote one of the best Hawkeye stories ever in issue #189. Unfortunately, this run is marred by the notorious Avengers #200, with a distasteful story involving a pregnant Ms. Marvel.

5. The Busiek/Perez run: Avengers (vol. 3) #1-56, plus JLA/Avengers. After the horrible travesty of Marvel outsourcing Avengers (and some other titles) to the likes of Jim Lee and Rob Liefeld, the Busiek/Perez run was a desperately-needed return to classic form for the Avengers. This is a basically a greatest hits run, revisiting nearly every great villain and concept from the above three runs plus other eras. Perez isn't on board for the art on every issue, but does his best. Busiek and Perez also did the excellent DC/Marvel crossover of JLA/Avengers, and that's even better than their work on Avengers.

[Scott Harris]

I picked #285 because it's the end of Roger Stern's last full arc on the title. He was in the middle of the next arc, the Heavy Metal storyline, when he was dumped and the story was completed by Ralph Macchio (I think?), so it's not really a Stern story.

In terms of post-200 issues, I think there's a bit of a generational divide here. My first issue of Avengers was #256, the middle of the Stern era. My introduction to Hank Pym came in West Coast Avengers #1. So while I hadn't read the Fall of Hank Pym story in Avengers #211-230, I came on board just as Englehart was beginning his long rehabilitation of the character, which was a main focus of WCA for the first two years of the title. Therefore, the Fall of Hank Pym wasn't a terrible blasphemy for me, it was the backstory that informed a character I ended up really liking.

As a result, I am a big fan of the Fall of Hank Pym but I can certainly see why older fans hate the story. I try to keep this in mind when I see new fans touting Bendis, but it's kind of hard, because while I respect that the new generation is just coming on board fresh to the scene, on the other hand Bendiss Avengers stories are all terrible and should be burned in a giant pyre at the center of universe for all eternity.

I am a fan of the Stern era. The Ultimate Vision story is very interesting, even though the aftermath after he leaves the book in #254 basically destroyed the character permanently. The actual story, though, is good. The Mansion Siege, as I mentioned, I read as a kid and it blew my mind. There's some other very good stuff during the Stern era, especially the return of John Buscema as penciller, though some stories are messed up a little by crossovers (the Nebula arc around #260, which had a lot of promise, completely fizzled thanks to a random deus ex machina intervention by The Beyonder). On the other hand, the Secret Wars II epilogue in #266 is the only part of that story worth reading.

[icctrombone]

I personally feel that there are five essential Avengers eras. In chronological order:

1. Cap's Kooky Quartet: Avengers #17-35. It's a weak line-up for "Earth's Mightiest Heroes," but this brave quartet survives some serious adventures despite some frequent bickering and challenges to Cap's leadership. The Don Heck art and the Stan Lee writing aren't the greatest, but there are some outstanding scenes.

2. The Roy Thomas run: Avengers #36-104. Late in the Kooky Quartet era, Roy Thomas starts scripting Stan's stories and then takes over the writing completely by issue #36. It still feels like Kooky Quartet at first, but gets much better after Black Panther joins the team and then the Vision is introduced. Many classic villains and concepts are introduced during the Thomas run, including highlights like Avengers Annual #2 and the legendary Kree-Skrull War.

3. The Steve Englehart run: Avengers #105-151. The transition from Thomas to Englehart was slick, going from Sentinels to Savage Land Mutates in back-to-back issues. Englehart then goes on a rampage of character development, especially for Scarlet Witch and Vision. He brings back the Swordsman in a bold way, along with a brand new Mary Sue-type character who is actually kind of fun. Highlights include the first great crossover in comics, the Avengers-Defenders War, as well as several great stories featuring Kang that solidified his status as one of the top two Avengers villains. We also get a clever new origin for the Vision, great rematches with Zodiac and the Squadron Supreme, and the shocking return of a golden age character named Patsy Walker.

4. The Michelinie/Shooter era: Avengers #158-205. David Michelinie and Jim Shooter either took turns or collaborated on many of the issues in this run, and the overall quality is high. This might just be the best Avengers run ever. Although many Avengers fans remember this era best for the epic Michael storyline, I preferred the subsequent issues after Henry Peter Gyrich clamped down on the roster. And guest writer Steven Grant wrote one of the best Hawkeye stories ever in issue #189. Unfortunately, this run is marred by the notorious Avengers #200, with a distasteful story involving a pregnant Ms. Marvel.

5. The Busiek/Perez run: Avengers (vol. 3) #1-56, plus JLA/Avengers. After the horrible travesty of Marvel outsourcing Avengers (and some other titles) to the likes of Jim Lee and Rob Liefeld, the Busiek/Perez run was a desperately-needed return to classic form for the Avengers. This is a basically a greatest hits run, revisiting nearly every great villain and concept from the above three runs plus other eras. Perez isn't on board for the art on every issue, but does his best. Busiek and Perez also did the excellent DC/Marvel crossover of JLA/Avengers, and that's even better than their work on Avengers.

Shellhead, you nailed it except for the comment about Heck and Stan lee. I loved the bickering and artwork. It shows a development from immature hotheads to heroes that respect and follow Cap. It was the run of my youth (through reprints) and will always have a special place in my heart. For a while I considered Heck to be the definitive Avengers artist.

[icctrombone]

I picked #285 because it's the end of Roger Stern's last full arc on the title. He was in the middle of the next arc, the Heavy Metal storyline, when he was dumped and the story was completed by Ralph Macchio (I think?), so it's not really a Stern story.

In terms of post-200 issues, I think there's a bit of a generational divide here. My first issue of Avengers was #256, the middle of the Stern era. My introduction to Hank Pym came in West Coast Avengers #1. So while I hadn't read the Fall of Hank Pym story in Avengers #211-230, I came on board just as Englehart was beginning his long rehabilitation of the character, which was a main focus of WCA for the first two years of the title. Therefore, the Fall of Hank Pym wasn't a terrible blasphemy for me, it was the backstory that informed a character I ended up really liking.

As a result, I am a big fan of the Fall of Hank Pym but I can certainly see why older fans hate the story. I try to keep this in mind when I see new fans touting Bendis, but it's kind of hard, because while I respect that the new generation is just coming on board fresh to the scene, on the other hand Bendiss Avengers stories are all terrible and should be burned in a giant pyre at the center of universe for all eternity.

I am a fan of the Stern era. The Ultimate Vision story is very interesting, even though the aftermath after he leaves the book in #254 basically destroyed the character permanently. The actual story, though, is good. The Mansion Siege, as I mentioned, I read as a kid and it blew my mind. There's some other very good stuff during the Stern era, especially the return of John Buscema as penciller, though some stories are messed up a little by crossovers (the Nebula arc around #260, which had a lot of promise, completely fizzled thanks to a random deus ex machina intervention by The Beyonder). On the other hand, the Secret Wars II epilogue in #266 is the only part of that story worth reading.

I remember issues #200 -254 as having really bad artwork. Al Milgrom kind of sunk the book for me. Even with Sinnotts inks , I couldn't stay interested.

[Scott Harris]

Yes, Milgrom's art is a major drawback. I don't think he became a regular until the 220's or so though. Before that I think it as a bit of a carousel, with a bunch of people doing art, including Gene Colan.

Has there ever been a bigger upgrade in art than Milgrom being replaced by John Buscema?

[Shellhead]

Shellhead, you nailed it except for the comment about Heck and Stan lee. I loved the bickering and artwork. It shows a development from immature hotheads to heroes that respect and follow Cap. It was the run of my youth (through reprints) and will always have a special place in my heart. For a while I considered Heck to be the definitive Avengers artist.

Same here, including considering Heck to be the definitive Avengers artist for a while. My early Avengers reading was a combination of new issues by Englehart and reprints of the Kooky Quartet. At the time, I was fascinated by Swordsman, because each month I got to see him as a reformed villain and then sometimes I also got to see his original villainy in the reprint in Marvel Triple Action.

[Shellhead]

I didn't enjoy the early part of the Stern run, though it got better. Aside from the cartoony Milgrom artwork, there seemed to be a very forced effort to load up the Avengers roster with women. And then there was a major push of Stern's Mary Sue character, the unfortunately named Captain Marvel. I eventually warmed to her personality, but I always felt that her powerset was too problematic for good storytelling. Either she was getting short-circuited by a plot gimmick, or she was too easily saving the day. And while I sometimes like Buscema's artwork, I felt that his first Avengers run (with Roy Thomas) was better than his work with Stern. Facial expresssions were almost comically exaggerated, especially during the Siege storyline. Also, I didn't appreciate the way Stern wrote Hercules as such an oaf, when Herc was getting much better writing from Bob Layton in those two minis.

[icctrombone]

I was doing quick research and saw that they used : Alan Kupperberg, Bob Hall, Sal Buscema, Mark Bright, Greg Larocque , Alan Weiss and Don Perlin during that run. Not all bad artists but some were paired with inkers that did not gell. And some were new inexperienced artists ( Hall).