|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
When I was a kid, I remember visitng my sister in hospital (I think she was having her tonsils out). I must have been 8 or 9, and I stole a copy of an Avengers comic from the waiting room.
This Avengers comic had a bunch of the Avengers, including Tigra, Thor, Iron Man, and Ghost Rider. Ghost Rider was causing some sort of trouble, and I recall that it seemed to be the last issue of a story arc. The characters seemed interesting, but I didn't really get the story.
I didn't read another Avengers story for 20 years - a silly Byrne story with USAgent, Iron Man, Dr Pym, the Scarlet Witch, the Wasp and others. The story was soem continuity stitching: Byrne got rid of the Scarlet Witch's children through some inexplicable stupidity. It turned me right off the title and the concept.
And so, I didn't read another Avengers story until last week, when on the back of the considerable on-line controversy that erupted over the title, I bought the Ultimates tpb.
Millar has stripped down a lot of the concepts to their bare bones, or even altered them dramatically, and the distilled versions of the characters really appeal. Removing the continuity from the characters was like brightening diamonds. At their bare concepts, the characters have become very interesting and indeed compelling. A lot of the superheroics is missing, and where it is still there, Millar pokes fun at it (Wasp tells Giant man that he looks like a gimp in his leather suit!). Iron Man's armour looks like its straight out of a Japanese manga, and I really liked that contemporary update. Same goes for the references to Freddie Prinze Jr, George Bush, and Shannon Elizabeth. Thor looked like the lead singer of Metallica, and was clearly an anti-globalisation protestor. It made the story seem very "now": I concede that it may mean that the story will date terribly in thew fullness of time.
Two stand out things for me:
1. Captain America. Captain America's origin because truly poignant, more so for Bucky's survival, rather than his death. Cap is now also a soldier, not a goody two-shoes. Kicking Banner in the teeth was not the action of the in-continuity Cap. This was a soldier, knocking the crap out of the enemy. In that regard, Millar has taken Cap back to his roots. (I also liked the fact that they corrected Cap's hair: it stopped being 1930s slick, and became 1940s cropped.)
As an aside, one of the more moving moments arises when Fury tells Cap that not all things he loves has moved on, and points to the American flag. I showed this page to my wife, as part of an effort to get her to write a review for this board. She thought it was pure cornball revolting patriotism, and told me to become an American citizen. Its interesting that Millar, who is Scottish, was able to tap into and decently write American patriotism. It reminded me to an extent of Ennis's work on Preacher, with his "Proud Texans".
2. The core friendship of the team - Cap, Iron Man and Thor. Millar believably welds together an improbable friendship based on the few common values shared by the three very different men - a desire to improve the world. I thought the dinner party at the end of the book was very very well done. In a very human fashion, the three men find that they have something fundamental in common. I thought the attention Millar gave to Stark stole the show, in that regard. He is an eccentric playboy billionaire with shades of Richard Branson (the guy who owns Virgin Airlines), yet he has spiritual urges and, ultimately, a very human motivation to improve the world.
Other tweaks to the mythos - making Wasp Asian and a mutant, making Fury an integral part of the team and making him black, Jeeves a homosexual, Bruce Banner a jealous and petty geek, and Hank Pym a prozac-popping wife beater - have all been subject to criticism by old school fans. I didn't find them objectionable at all, and only prodded my interest in the story. They added an interesting, realism-orientated diversity to the cast. Other elements lending realism to the story included the tinted glasses for Giant Man to prevent his enlarged pupils from taking in too much light, the green glop in Iron Man's armour (suggesting a coolant for a high temperature device) and the cyborg jacks in Stark's arms, the all too human problems with Iron man's armour (the launch chamber's doors jammed and his firing sight was out)and the fact that Giant Man and Wasp did not have clothing made of unstable molecules (a necessary if silly plot device in the puritan world of comics) and were frequently naked when they changed shape.
Another thing is that the Ultimates have a huge staff: medics, guards, firefighters. I don't know of another superteam that has its own personal army, but it meakes sense in a contemporary world for a project which is funded by the US government to have a massive number of personnel.
I thought it was odd that the Ultimates have their headquarters in the "Triskelion", rather than the old mansion. I guess they could hardly have used the SHIELD helicarrier - with Millar's and Hitch's involvement, a Carrier would have drawn criticism that they had simply re-done the Authority for Marvel.
People have accused Millar of being the shock-jock of comics. I think there is some truth to that, but I also think that he's also a very capable writer, who can imbue his characters with very human personalities and meaningful interaction. Its not poetry, but its very entertaining. I see reading back through this review that I've repeatedly used the word "human", and I think that's the essence of the story. These characters are not untouchably superhuman, as the in-continuity Avengers have always been: they have very human qualities and I think this is the very thing which is special about the story. I give Ultimates a respectable 7 out of 10.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,289
2000+ posts
|
|
2000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,289 |
I like the book alot, though when I read each issue I'm mainly enjoying the art. It's not until I ready an arc that I can properly appreciate the story. That's a result of slower pacing (not necessarily a bad thing, just frustrating on a month to month basis) and infrequent publication.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
I liked the manga-esque armor Iron Man was given.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 16,240
Kisser Of John Byrne Ass 15000+ posts
|
|
Kisser Of John Byrne Ass 15000+ posts
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 16,240 |
I noticed you didn't say much else? ![[wink]](images/icons/wink.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 23,091
The Once, and Future Cunt 15000+ posts
|
|
The Once, and Future Cunt 15000+ posts
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 23,091 |
Billy Zane was the bomb in The Phantom yo!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Pig Iron:
I noticed you didn't say much else?
Aye. Just about everything else we disagree on, it would seem. I especially don't see how Millar making idiotic pop culture references like "Hulk smash Freddie Prinze, Jr!" makes this a good book.
Millar's been a twit ever since he bought into his own hype years ago, and I assume he'll be a twit from now until eternity. I've told this to him personally, I've told it to his friends, I've told it to his fans. I can't stop telling it. He's a twit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
quote:
Originally posted by Pig Iron:
I noticed you didn't say much else?
Aye. Just about everything else we disagree on, it would seem. I especially don't see how Millar making idiotic pop culture references like "Hulk smash Freddie Prinze, Jr!" makes this a good book.
Millar's been a twit ever since he bought into his own hype years ago, and I assume he'll be a twit from now until eternity. I've told this to him personally, I've told it to his friends, I've told it to his fans. I can't stop telling it. He's a twit.
I looked for the "Hulk smash Freddie Prinze Jr" reference, but at no stage does the Hulk actually say that. Which is a shame, as its quite a funny line.
Pop culture references put the book in its place, as being contemporary. It stands out from the seemingless timeless/ageless irrelevance of the regular Avengers book. Its very "now", and relevant.
Millar is presenting a challenge to DC. The JLA continue to pretend to exist with 1950s moral strictures living in the 1980s or some unspecified decade so the material will not date. The Ultimates exist in a real universe, with famous people from that real universe, dealing with real issues.
I'm not judging Millar on his hype: I'm judging Millar on his work. There is a big difference, and I am of the opinion that his skill as an entertaining writer is underestimated or perhaps discounted because of the hype.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 33,385 Likes: 3
Regenerated 15000+ posts
|
|
Regenerated 15000+ posts
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 33,385 Likes: 3 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
Millar's been a twit ever since he bought into his own hype years ago, and I assume he'll be a twit from now until eternity. I've told this to him personally, I've told it to his friends, I've told it to his fans. I can't stop telling it. He's a twit.
You know, for a guy who claims to passionately dislike Millar's work, you certainly seem to take the time to comment at every mention of his name....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
I looked for the "Hulk smash Freddie Prinze Jr" reference, but at no stage does the Hulk actually say that. Which is a shame, as its quite a funny line.
It's on the last page of the issue where the Hulk first appears in real time(i.e not in a flashback). Like #5 or #6.
quote:
Pop culture references put the book in its place, as being contemporary. It stands out from the seemingless timeless/ageless irrelevance of the regular Avengers book. Its very "now", and relevant.
It dates it, but it certainly doesn't make it any more "relevant". Now, if it actually dealth with issues and concerns of this era(like terrorism, or violence in schools, or homophobia), then it would be an updated and more relevant take.
The only real "issue" he touches on(albeit briefly, and in typical shock-shlock form), is spousal abuse, which the previous Avengers series discussed, as well.
quote:
Millar is presenting a challenge to DC. The JLA continue to pretend to exist with 1950s moral strictures living in the 1980s or some unspecified decade so the material will not date. The Ultimates exist in a real universe, with famous people from that real universe, dealing with real issues.
Correct me if I'm wrong...but the latest arc involves aliens, doesn't it? How is that a "real issue"? How is it any different from what goes on in the JLA?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Prometheus:
You know, for a guy who claims to passionately dislike Millar's work, you certainly seem to take the time to comment at every mention of his name....
I tried to avoid commenting on him my first post, but after Piggie's response....I just couldn't help myself!
Yes, I'm addicted to bitching about the guy. It's a chemical imbalance of some kind. I grow, turn green, start speaking in two or three word sentences, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
I looked for the "Hulk smash Freddie Prinze Jr" reference, but at no stage does the Hulk actually say that. Which is a shame, as its quite a funny line.
It's on the last page of the issue where the Hulk first appears in real time(i.e not in a flashback). Like #5 or #6.
I hate to nitpick... ....but he doesn't actually say "HULK SMASH FREDDIE PRIZE JR". He says something about Freddie Prinze Jr, but not "Hulk smash".
quote:
quote:
Pop culture references put the book in its place, as being contemporary. It stands out from the seemingless timeless/ageless irrelevance of the regular Avengers book. Its very "now", and relevant.
It dates it, but it certainly doesn't make it any more "relevant". Now, if it actually dealth with issues and concerns of this era(like terrorism, or violence in schools, or homophobia), then it would be an updated and more relevant take.
The only real "issue" he touches on(albeit briefly, and in typical shock-shlock form), is spousal abuse, which the previous Avengers series discussed, as well.
quote:
Millar is presenting a challenge to DC. The JLA continue to pretend to exist with 1950s moral strictures living in the 1980s or some unspecified decade so the material will not date. The Ultimates exist in a real universe, with famous people from that real universe, dealing with real issues.
Correct me if I'm wrong...but the latest arc involves aliens, doesn't it? How is that a "real issue"? How is it any different from what goes on in the JLA?
I haven't read the most recent arc, so I don't know, but I think what you've said kind of misses my point.
The isuse is not so much the fact that there are notable causes in the world which need attention drawen to, but that from a marketing perspective the story sounds fresh and new.
Superman does not usually interact with Hollywood stars or contemporary politicians. He operates in his own little reality bubble. 9/11 didn't even occur in Superman's reality.
Millar has deliberately avoided this. He invoke pop icons (or at least second tier icons) to paint the story as firmly set in reality, and at odds with the traditional approach of superheroes being timeless and detached. And this has the advantage of making the title seem "new" or cool. People like to buy "new" or cool stuff.
It has two significant collateral benefits: it gives the characters some Hollywood glitz, which assists Millar to tell the story of how superhumans would actually be famous and screwing starlets if they actually existed.
Second, it draws upon the Hollywood glitz to promote the title itself: it is the comic where Hollywood stars make guest appearances. That has a strong commercial pull - it almost acts as a product endorsement by Freddie Prinze Jr and Shannon Elizabeth of the title. Which assists in the cool factor: the rabid fanboys will think that the girl with the great body from American Pie likes this comic because she appeared in it. And like it or not, that's the way good marketing works.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 37
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 37 |
Obviously, you and I see very difference things in Ultimates. You see Freedy Prinze Jr as making this dreg "relevant". I see it as a frantic, failed attempt to be "kewl". You apparently like "Hollyword glitz". I absolutely can't stand it! Sorry, but I find absolutely NOTHING good about Ultimates!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 308
300+ posts
|
|
300+ posts
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 308 |
I enjoy the Ultimates. They're the superheroes we deserve.
I don't think the Ultimates would be as enjoyable to me if these were the original versions of the characters. Part of the appeal to me is the funhouse mirror aspect, although I use the term "funhouse" lightly.
I don't see where these guys are trying to make the world a better place, other than that's what their job description might say. Some of them like Thor might think this is their motivation, but I read these characters as typical self-obsessed celebrity types, including Thor. If SHIELD wasn't already exploiting them, they'd find some way to exploit themselves.
At the end of the day, when I want superhero deconstruction, I look no further than Watchmen.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
"It made the story seem very "now": I concede that it may mean that the story will date terribly in thew fullness of time."
I'm not sure that's Millar's goal, or even if it should be. He's trying to tell good stories and perhaps senses the audience might enjoy these pop references. We're a far more pop savy audience than we were when the Avengers were created.
Regarding criticisms that Millar's "ruined" the Avengers...he's not telling Avengers' stories. These are the Ultimates. You want your tried and true Avengers, you'll have to go elsewhere (though I'm not sure that Johns is giving you them either).
I, too, like THE ULTIMATES as a "mirror, mirror" kind of thing. They're neat because they're NOT our old favorites but are still recognizable.
I'm looking forward to Vol. 2.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
I hate to nitpick... ....but he doesn't actually say "HULK SMASH FREDDIE PRIZE JR". He says something about Freddie Prinze Jr, but not "Hulk smash".
Touche.
"Hulk wants Freddie Prinze Jr!" There. Better? It's all the same. I know I deserved that, but damn you!
quote:
I haven't read the most recent arc, so I don't know, but I think what you've said kind of misses my point.
The isuse is not so much the fact that there are notable causes in the world which need attention drawen to, but that from a marketing perspective the story sounds fresh and new.
Ok, but this is something of a revision of your original statement. Marketing-wise, it's clear that the Ultimates is more appealing to today's youth than the Avengers. I wouldn't debate that. I would, however, debate your contention that the Ultimates deal with "real issues".
quote:
Superman does not usually interact with Hollywood stars or contemporary politicians. He operates in his own little reality bubble. 9/11 didn't even occur in Superman's reality.
They've made references to 9/11, haven't they(just not actually shown it happened, for sentimental reasons)?
Superman's world doesn't involve real Hollywood stars or politicians, but it does involve artistic takes on those people. I think, as a writer, it's best to avoid commenting on actual individuals in fiction because you allow your personal bias to affect your storytelling(just as Millar's political bias seeps into his stories).
Frank Miller cleverly used fictional celebrities in his work to deal with political issues(though he had a few real ones, as well, like David Letterman in DKR), and I think it was quite effective. It even allowed him to go to the extreme to drive home his point without fear of libel.
quote:
it gives the characters some Hollywood glitz, which assists Millar to tell the story of how superhumans would actually be famous and screwing starlets if they actually existed.
I don't think it contributes in any way to the actual story, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
I take your point: the story doesn't deal with contemporary social issues. Thor is used to pay lip service to the anti-globalisation movement, but I don't see that as drawing attention to it, but rather, diversifying the cast. I think having starlets etc. does assist the story somewhat. To reiterate, if you had superpowers, you'd be famous. Famous people hang out together. quote:
Originally posted by DuplicateMan:
Obviously, you and I see very difference things in Ultimates. You see Freedy Prinze Jr as making this dreg "relevant". I see it as a frantic, failed attempt to be "kewl". You apparently like "Hollyword glitz". I absolutely can't stand it! Sorry, but I find absolutely NOTHING good about Ultimates!
Well, you've said that you don't like the references to existing famous people, but that's hardly where the story begins and ends, is it? What else don't you like about it?
I think "Hollywood glitz" has a marketing role and a role in the story, the latter of which I've dealt with above.
To go further into the marketing role....I think Millar has done something which no one else has thought to do before. When Michael Jordan advertises Oakley sun glasses, no one seriously thinks that he prefers them to, say, Ray-Bans. People know he gets paid a lot of money to endorse them. But people nonetheless buy Oakleys because Jordan is associated with them. Millar has adopted the same approach in Ultimates, but he doesn't have to pay millions of dollars for Shannon Elizabeth to appear in the comic. Nonetheless, people will buy the comic because of the perception that the actress endorses the comic. I think its a great move.
I can see it going further, too: what's the bet that within the next 10 years there will be a superhero team with the likes of Bruce Willis or some other action movie actor as a permanent member?
On a slight tangent, I daresay the idea of having Princess Diana as a member of X-statix (aside from being in extremely poor taste) was an effort to do exactly that, without the expense of paying for a celebrity to appear, and guessing that the traditionally litigation shy Windsors would not sue. Marvel misunderstood the nature of personality rights badly though, as well as public reaction. In the US, personality rights are something which can continue after a famous person's death. This is why Elvis Presley's estate still brings people to court for commercially exploiting his image.
Marc makes an interesting point about it being deconstructionist. I don't think its necessarily deconstructionist: I think its just a revision. There aren't too many deconstructionist elements to it. I do like the "funhouse mirror" label though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
I hate to nitpick... ....but he doesn't actually say "HULK SMASH FREDDIE PRIZE JR". He says something about Freddie Prinze Jr, but not "Hulk smash".
Touche.
"Hulk wants Freddie Prinze Jr!" There. Better? It's all the same. I know I deserved that, but damn you!
Heh. ![[cool]](images/icons/cool.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
To go further into the marketing role....I think Millar has done something which no one else has thought to do before. When Michael Jordan advertises Oakley sun glasses, no one seriously thinks that he prefers them to, say, Ray-Bans. People know he gets paid a lot of money to endorse them. But people nonetheless buy Oakleys because Jordan is associated with them. Millar has adopted the same approach in Ultimates, but he doesn't have to pay millions of dollars for Shannon Elizabeth to appear in the comic.
Well, the Shannon Elizabeth appearance wouldn't have come about had her comic geek boyfriend not convinced her to agree to be "immortalized" so to speak, so in that sense, it's not exactly an endorsement.
Still, it's certainly not something Millar originated.
quote:
I can see it going further, too: what's the bet that within the next 10 years there will be a superhero team with the likes of Bruce Willis or some other action movie actor as a permanent member?
I don't think that will ever happen in a literal sense, but how many comic book characters or superheroes are based on celebrities already? You even mention one example, with X-Statix(containing parodies of celebrities like Eminem, N'Sync, and, of course, Elian Gonzalez).
Weren't we talking a few days ago about how John Constantine was based on Sting?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
To go further into the marketing role....I think Millar has done something which no one else has thought to do before. When Michael Jordan advertises Oakley sun glasses, no one seriously thinks that he prefers them to, say, Ray-Bans. People know he gets paid a lot of money to endorse them. But people nonetheless buy Oakleys because Jordan is associated with them. Millar has adopted the same approach in Ultimates, but he doesn't have to pay millions of dollars for Shannon Elizabeth to appear in the comic.
Well, the Shannon Elizabeth appearance wouldn't have come about had her comic geek boyfriend not convinced her to agree to be "immortalized" so to speak, so in that sense, it's not exactly an endorsement.
Still, it's certainly not something Millar originated.
"Immortalisation" is different from product endorsement. That fact that Elizabeth's boyfriend persuaded her to do it doesn't negate its effect. It just means Millar/Marvel got her for free.
quote:
quote:
I can see it going further, too: what's the bet that within the next 10 years there will be a superhero team with the likes of Bruce Willis or some other action movie actor as a permanent member?
I don't think that will ever happen in a literal sense, but how many comic book characters or superheroes are based on celebrities already? You even mention one example, with X-Statix(containing parodies of celebrities like Eminem, N'Sync, and, of course, Elian Gonzalez).
Weren't we talking a few days ago about how John Constantine was based on Sting?
A resemblance to a real person is not what I mean: I mean a real person entering a comic book asn an ongoing character. You're the editor and you want to improve the sales of Cage? Why not buy 50 Cents' image for a year, and the right to have him appear as a character? Or improve sales of Green Lantern by having Kyle Rayner have a romantic attachment to a Britney Murphy league starlet, or hang out with Ashton Kulcher?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
I don't think that would really improve sales that much...if anything, it might work as a novelty, but after a while it would get boring and trite. Sales not only didn't improve when Princess Diana was introduced....they went down(from 35,047 to 34,214, according to icv2).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 308
300+ posts
|
|
300+ posts
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 308 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
I can see it going further, too: what's the bet that within the next 10 years there will be a superhero team with the likes of Bruce Willis or some other action movie actor as a permanent member?
Already happened, man. Hulk Hogan was a member of the A-Team (endearingly bad 80s television series), and Sgt. Slaughter joined the G.I. Joes.
quote:
Marc makes an interesting point about it being deconstructionist. I don't think its necessarily deconstructionist: I think its just a revision. There aren't too many deconstructionist elements to it. I do like the "funhouse mirror" label though.
Actually, Dave, I think I agree with you, in that I read the members of the Ultimates as utter bastards in the classic sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
Sgt Slaughter? He's a wrestler, right? quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
I don't think that would really improve sales that much...if anything, it might work as a novelty, but after a while it would get boring and trite.
Sales not only didn't improve when Princess Diana was introduced....they went down(from 35,047 to 34,214, according to icv2).
Diana is a bad example, and as I heard it, she was never actually introduced. Marvel pulled the concept when the British Royal Family commented on it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 37
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 37 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
I take your point: the story doesn't deal with contemporary social issues. Thor is used to pay lip service to the anti-globalisation movement, but I don't see that as drawing attention to it, but rather, diversifying the cast.
I think having starlets etc. does assist the story somewhat. To reiterate, if you had superpowers, you'd be famous. Famous people hang out together.
quote:
Originally posted by DuplicateMan:
Obviously, you and I see very difference things in Ultimates. You see Freedy Prinze Jr as making this dreg "relevant". I see it as a frantic, failed attempt to be "kewl". You apparently like "Hollyword glitz". I absolutely can't stand it! Sorry, but I find absolutely NOTHING good about Ultimates!
Well, you've said that you don't like the references to existing famous people, but that's hardly where the story begins and ends, is it? What else don't you like about it?
The references to famous people is the least of my gripes with Ultimates! I don't like "horny" Hulk! I think Betty Ross and Jan are total bitches, and just the fact that Bruce and Hank are with them shows that they are losers with no self-respect. Ultimately (no pun intended), what it comes down to is that I find nothing "heroic" in these characters! The "real" Marvel heros are flawed, but their heroism still shows. The only real hero I saw in Ultimates was "hard-ass" Cap, who came off as a Batman rip-off!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by DuplicateMan:
The references to famous people is the least of my gripes with Ultimates! I don't like "horny" Hulk! I think Betty Ross and Jan are total bitches, and just the fact that Bruce and Hank are with them shows that they are losers with no self-respect. Ultimately (no pun intended), what it comes down to is that I find nothing "heroic" in these characters! The "real" Marvel heros are flawed, but their heroism still shows. The only real hero I saw in Ultimates was "hard-ass" Cap, who came off as a Batman rip-off!
I don't understand why you don't like horny Hulk, but I guess its a matter of personal taste. In Freudian terms, the Hulk was Banner's id - his basest emotions, including sexual emotions. I thought this was a clever spin.
As for the lack of heroism...this is one of the key reasons I liked it. I've met very few actual heroes in real life, but plenty of peole like the Ultimates' Betty Ross, Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, Hank Pym.... Finding a person entirely motivted by altrusim in real life is actually a difficult exercise. Most people are motivated by greed, self-worth, jealousy or lust, or a combinationof those things and more.
The DCU and the regular Marvel U have more than their fair share of saints, and I'm well and truly over it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 37
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 37 |
The "real" Marvel heros are not exactly saints, but they ARE still heros. Bruce Banner, for all his psychological problems, had the guts to save a dumb teen from his bomb. Tony Stark is an alcoholic, a womanizer, and a control freak. But still a hero. Hank Pym has a history of mental problems and spousal abuse, but he too is a hero. I don't want to read stories of greedy, self-serving, arrogant characters. Yes, I realize that many people in RL ARE greedy assholes with few redeeming characteristics, but I don't want to read about those types! At least not in starring roles. I don't mind flawed heros, but I want some heroism along with the flaws.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by DuplicateMan:
The "real" Marvel heros are not exactly saints, but they ARE still heros. Bruce Banner, for all his psychological problems, had the guts to save a dumb teen from his bomb. Tony Stark is an alcoholic, a womanizer, and a control freak. But still a hero. Hank Pym has a history of mental problems and spousal abuse, but he too is a hero. I don't want to read stories of greedy, self-serving, arrogant characters. Yes, I realize that many people in RL ARE greedy assholes with few redeeming characteristics, but I don't want to read about those types! At least not in starring roles. I don't mind flawed heros, but I want some heroism along with the flaws.
Then Ultimates isn't for you. I gave this some thought after reading your post. Marvel's regular continuity has heroes with powers. The Ultimates has people with powers. As you correctly point out, there is a big difference.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
Diana is a bad example, and as I heard it, she was never actually introduced. Marvel pulled the concept when the British Royal Family commented on it.
They originally weren't going to...but they managed to slip it in anyway. Sneaky bastards.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
I don't understand why you don't like horny Hulk, but I guess its a matter of personal taste. In Freudian terms, the Hulk was Banner's id - his basest emotions, including sexual emotions. I thought this was a clever spin.
In Freudian terms, perhaps, but that's more of a Jekyll/Hyde thing. The Hulk and Banner are slightly different. The Hulk is Banner's childlike state, personifying the anger and pain Bruce experienced during his childhood, because of his abusive father. It's not really a sexual thing; afterall, children aren't really sexually expressive.
I realize it's not suppose to be the exact same Hulk, but I have noticed many people refer to him as the Hyde of the comic universe, which isn't entirely correct.
quote:
As for the lack of heroism...this is one of the key reasons I liked it. I've met very few actual heroes in real life, but plenty of peole like the Ultimates' Betty Ross, Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, Hank Pym.... Finding a person entirely motivted by altrusim in real life is actually a difficult exercise. Most people are motivated by greed, self-worth, jealousy or lust, or a combinationof those things and more.
You work with too many lawyers.
I judge "realism" by it's believability, by how much I can understand, relate to and empathize with the characters and situations. That's not to suggest that I expect every character to be saintly, but I expect to be given a fair explanation of why they do and think the way they do. That's my barometer for what is "realistic".
And...I can't relate to any of these characters(with the possible exception of Cap). I can't empathize with them. I don't believe in their motivations or perceptions. I find them to be caricatures more than anything else. So, by my grading system, The Ultimates falls far, far short of "realistic".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
"Id" in Freudian theory is the element of human personality without any controls or inhibitions. That's the Ultimate's Hulk, to a tee. quote:
And...I can't relate to any of these characters(with the possible exception of Cap). I can't empathize with them. I don't believe in their motivations or perceptions. I find them to be caricatures more than anything else. So, by my grading system, The Ultimates falls far, far short of "realistic".
Whereas I find the heroic archetypes in mainstream comics to be one dimensional and facile. Its why Magneto was such a refreshing change.
People rarely fall into Manichean two-tone morality sets. They're somehwere in a spectrum of morality and motivaton. Millar has dotted his characters throughout the spectrum, rather than having them all fall in "white" or "black".
And I do like most of the characters, aside from Pym and possibly Banner (he was a reckless weakling, but hopelessly in love). I like Thor's principles, I like Stark's superficial foppishness but deep altruism, and I like Cap's patriotism. Wasp needs some filling out, but there is nothing to dislike about her. Only Fury bothered me as a character.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 509
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 509 |
I've come to the conclusion that I don't like the Ultimates.
The characters are mostly static and interchangeable. Their most definining characteristics are their pasted-on faults. Iron Man's an acholic, Giant-Man's a wife beater, etc. None of these character flaws are ever looked into in depth, or resolved/dealt with. It's taken the best of Stan Lee's basic premise of all Marvel comics (Superheroes with Human problems) and caricaturized them into ridiculousness. In 12 issues or so, I don't care any more or any less about any of the characters. Captain America could get shot in the face, and it wouldn't affect me as a reader. Any emotion behind the characters are as pasted-on as their flaws. It's all just translucent skin.
The wait between issues doesn't help. Planetary didn't come out for something like 2 years, and when a new issue came out, I was still as involved with it as I was when it was initially a monthly book. I cared about the characters, situations, etc. Ultimates doesn't have that.
It also doesn't help that little to nothing happens in any issue. It took four issues to build to the Ultimates being "blown up" and revealed to have escaped off panel with a tidy and ultra convenient explanation, for 20 more pages of really nothing going on at all.
Overall, I don't give two shits about the characters, the wait between issues isn't worth it, and the fact that it takes six issues for one thing to happen wrap into a big pile of crap.
Millar, when he wants to be, is a fine writer. Swamp Thing, Superman Red Son, the first two arcs of his Authority run, all prove that to me. But so far his Marvel work has been barrel scrapin' craptacularness. I am looking forward to his upcoming non-Marvel work.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 37
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 37 |
Dave: I understand what you're saying about altruistic heros being boring, but I don't think that applies to Marvel, or even to current day DC. Certainly a whole universe of heros like Superman, Barry Allen, or Hal Jordan (pre-Emerald Twilight) would be boring, but even DC has gotten away from that, and nearly all of Marvels mainstream heros have "human" flaws. Ultimates goes too far, IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Originally posted by DuplicateMan:
Dave: I understand what you're saying about altruistic heros being boring, but I don't think that applies to Marvel, or even to current day DC. Certainly a whole universe of heros like Superman, Barry Allen, or Hal Jordan (pre-Emerald Twilight) would be boring, but even DC has gotten away from that, and nearly all of Marvels mainstream heros have "human" flaws. Ultimates goes too far, IMO.
I suspect my complaint goes towards the characterisation. Mot superhero comics I've read rely upon altruism as the be all and end all of the characters.
Nobody thinks they're poorly painted, as caricatures. I don't see them like that. I see some depth, below the shock value.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 308
300+ posts
|
|
300+ posts
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 308 |
I see a certain depth in the characters. I just don't like what I see. Which is what makes the book enjoyable to me.
I want to like Ultimate Thor as a hero, but I don't trust him. He seems to embrace a kind of skin-deep spirituality that understands itself best in market terms. Likewise, Ultimate Cap's brand of patriotism doesn't sit well with me. He doesn't walk softly and carry a big stick. He walks loudly and bludgeons things. Iron Man, I think, is a wealthy man playing a wealthy man's game. I'm suspicious of his motivations.
They're the gods of twenty-first-century globalized captialism and American-dominated consumer culture. That isn't a criticism. It's what I enjoy about the book.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
Whereas I find the heroic archetypes in mainstream comics to be one dimensional and facile. Its why Magneto was such a refreshing change.
I do too, though, infact, I agree completely here. Magneto was one of my favorite villains, because his motivation was properly explained.
quote:
People rarely fall into Manichean two-tone morality sets. They're somehwere in a spectrum of morality and motivaton. Millar has dotted his characters throughout the spectrum, rather than having them all fall in "white" or "black".
I think they're just all "black"..
quote:
And I do like most of the characters, aside from Pym and possibly Banner (he was a reckless weakling, but hopelessly in love).
In love or in lust?
quote:
Wasp needs some filling out, but there is nothing to dislike about her.
She seems just as arrogant, superficial, and uncaring as the rest.
quote:
Only Fury bothered me as a character.
Giant Man beating his wife didn't bother you?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1
1 post
|
|
1 post
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1 |
Well, I just want to say that I like it because it is different. It's not like Avengers or Teen Titans and I'm glad, if I want to read a story like that, I pick up those books. There are so many superhero books out right now, we should be glad that there are so many different takes on them right now. Variety can be good.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 18,080
He tastes of America 15000+ posts
|
|
He tastes of America 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 18,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 18,080
He tastes of America 15000+ posts
|
|
He tastes of America 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 18,080 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
quote:
People rarely fall into Manichean two-tone morality sets. They're somehwere in a spectrum of morality and motivaton. Millar has dotted his characters throughout the spectrum, rather than having them all fall in "white" or "black".
I think they're just all "black"..
Even Cap? Hawkeye? Jarvis???
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
I said Cap was a possible exception.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,367 Likes: 13 |
quote:
Giant Man beating his wife didn't bother you?
Have you seen Dangerous Liasons? Malkovich's character was manipulative, grubby and without any merit (until the end). The character was still astonishingly enjoyable to watch.
What about Rorshcach? A brutal psychotic murderer. Yet his characerisation was fascinating.
So, Hank Pym. He's a flawed, smug, weak and petty bully. I detest Pym above all the rest, even Banner, but I really like his characterisation. He's hardly a role model, but the book isn't about role models. Its about a selection of humanity which has superpowers.
Nicely put, too, Marc.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
Have you seen Dangerous Liasons? Malkovich's character was manipulative, grubby and without any merit (until the end). The character was still astonishingly enjoyable to watch.
What about Rorshcach? A brutal psychotic murderer. Yet his characerisation was fascinating.
Well, I wasn't asking if you found the characterization interesting. I was asking if he bothered you.
The motivations of the above were well explained/described/illustrated, and presented in a thought-provoking manner. I didn't find this to be the case with Pym.
quote:
I detest Pym above all the rest
Right, so, he bothers you(in that sense), right?
quote:
He's hardly a role model, but the book isn't about role models. Its about a selection of humanity which has superpowers.
I wouldn't use the word "humanity" in any description of this book, for I believe it is far from it.
|
|
|
|
|
