Secret Invasion (possible spoilers)

JangoFett

Yeah, SpiderWoman,

the Skrull Queen telling stark that he is a Skrull who has been brainwashed into actually believing he was Stark was interesting but it does seem a tad weak even though it does fly in the context, and the matter of the second Iron Man thats running around. So if they decide the real Iron Man is the one who's been on the space ship, how will they go about updating him? New Armour, will he use the armour the skrull used etc etc? Same for all the other heroes

AngryBadger

Fysh wrote: »

I've heard the "bad decisions" listed to include some or all of the following:

• Iron Man & Reed being dicks in the Civil War
• Spiderman unmasking
• One More Day/Brand New Day
• The Republican & Liberal avengers
• World War Hulk (either the way it crossed over into some comics or the way it ended or both)

One More Day/Brand New Day are the only stories in your list I think were genuinely bad ideas.

I don't know what "The Republican & Liberal Avengers" is about, never even heard of it.

Fysh wrote: »

Now, given these decisions and the fact that, according to lots of fans, they fundamentally & negatively change a character that the fans liked reading about....
...what makes you keep reading?

Well as I said above, I don't consider most of your list to be bad stories. I lvoed Civil War, and the fact that Reed and Tony were the "bad guys" so to speak. Spider-man unmasking was only a ****ty move because they decided to undo it, and do that with magic. I didn't even read the whole "One More Day" arc it was so ****ty. I really enjoyed "World War Hulk".

Personally I tend to read books on an arc-by-arc basis. For example, "Astonishing X-men". I read the first arc in its entireity, then I was dissappointed with the first two parts of "Danger" so I stopped reading, then I started again with the most recent arc where Colossus is the destroyer of the world Ord came from.

While I like coherence in my continuity, creative teams on titles change every few months, and each team is going to have their own take on that particular book. You've got 60-odd years of continuity in some books, there's no way that could be kept tight up to present-day.

So while I do like coherence, I'm willing to allow for a few bad arcs here and there. If a creative team/person comes onto a book and I don't like them, I'll stop reading that book until they move onto something else.

So I guess for me I read as long as I'm enjoying the book, if I cease enjoying the book I cease reading. I don't see any significant limitations due to the format of comic books. If you feel there are inherent limitations to the format (I may be misunderstanding what you were saying altogether) then obviously you're not going to enjoy comics at all, which is fair enough.

Fysh

AngryBadger wrote: »

One More Day/Brand New Day are the only stories in your list I think were genuinely bad ideas.

I don't know what "The Republican & Liberal Avengers" is about, never even heard of it.

Personally, I think the Tony/Reed dickery was more a bad idea because of how sloppily it was done, but then again by my standards quite a lot of Marvel's output is, in general, a bad idea. As for the Republican/Liberal Avengers thing, that's a bad joke I've picked up from Hannibal Tabu's Buy Pile column. Those are his nicknames for the Mighty and New Avengers books.

AngryBadger wrote: »

Well as I said above, I don't consider most of your list to be bad stories. I lvoed Civil War, and the fact that Reed and Tony were the "bad guys" so to speak. Spider-man unmasking was only a ****ty move because they decided to undo it, and do that with magic. I didn't even read the whole "One More Day" arc it was so ****ty. I really enjoyed "World War Hulk".

Really? You liked WWH? I didn't even read it, just followed the synopses on Wikipedia and scans_daily, and even from that it looked like a promising story betrayed by an awful cop-out of an ending. Hell, at least Civil War had an ending that genuinely affected the world around them - WWH had an ending where the biggest change was Banner being put in jail. No lasting change brought about by the Hulk's quest for revenge, no real consequences to speak of, just "oh look, it turns out that all the bad stuff was actually done by this expendable secondary character who now has the life expectancy of a redshirt in Shatner's Star Trek".

AngryBadger wrote: »

Personally I tend to read books on an arc-by-arc basis. For example, "Astonishing X-men". I read the first arc in its entireity, then I was dissappointed with the first two parts of "Danger" so I stopped reading, then I started again with the most recent arc where Colossus is the destroyer of the world Ord came from.

While I like coherence in my continuity, creative teams on titles change every few months, and each team is going to have their own take on that particular book. You've got 60-odd years of continuity in some books, there's no way that could be kept tight up to present-day.

So while I do like coherence, I'm willing to allow for a few bad arcs here and there. If a creative team/person comes onto a book and I don't like them, I'll stop reading that book until they move onto something else.

So I guess for me I read as long as I'm enjoying the book, if I cease enjoying the book I cease reading. I don't see any significant limitations due to the format of comic books. If you feel there are inherent limitations to the format (I may be misunderstanding what you were saying altogether) then obviously you're not going to enjoy comics at all, which is fair enough.

I guess that's the answer I was half-expecting, that the continuity aspects aren't really as important as some publishers or hardcore nerds would have us believe.

The limitations of the format that bug me are more limitations of certain types of approach, like the continuity-centric notion of trying to keep 60 years of stories in continuity when the general premise of the comic world is that all those events have happened over the last 10 years. I'd prefer to see good stories which discard aspects of continuity over mediocre stories that allow all the past "events" to be crowbarred into some convoluted timeline.

That said, I think another part of it is that I'm just not that interested in superheroes, and they tend to be the majority of long-form comics....

JangoFett

I though WWH was a let down, the fight between Hulk and Sentry was a bit of a letdown, which was really disappointing considering The Sentry is the most interesting character Marvel have come up with in years

Nevyn

I'm not happy about the retconning going on at all.

I am more of a DC then a marvel fan but enjoyed civil war and I do not like the look of where this is going.

FFS it looked like Spider woman was getting some decent storylines for the first time in a long time. So yeah I'm pissed at this.

JangoFett

I'm more DC as well and I started reading Marvel with interest during civil war and its really messy at the moment, they need to stay away from these "REALLY BIG STORIES" and concentrate on character development for a while, they really need to repair!!

Snakeblood

Thaedydal wrote: »

I'm not happy about the retconning going on at all.

I am more of a DC then a marvel fan but enjoyed civil war and I do not like the look of where this is going.

FFS it looked like Spider woman was getting some decent storylines for the first time in a long time. So yeah I'm pissed at this.

Bendis wasn't retconning anything. Pretty much since the New Avengers started, it's all been leading to the skrull invasion. He's still going to be doing a Spiderwoman ongoing, although it's anyone's guess as to what that will involve.