If you had caught the PPC's review of the 2000 Avengers/Thunderbolts crossover story, you'd have a good idea which poor slob is on the receiving end of all those fists/bolts/arrows and whatever else is being hurled in his direction. And more to the point, you'd know why the reaction this individual is experiencing right now is probably nothing more than... boredom.
But to answer the who and the what, we can give you the rundown that readers received of events leading up to this melee, before all hell breaks loose:
That's right, Count Nefaria, who stars with the Avengers and the Thunderbolts in a blockbuster battle issue clocking in at thirty-eight pages and featuring the closing work of artist George Pérez, sticking with this new volume of The Avengers from the start for nearly three years. So it's a sad day all around--particularly for our heroes, who are in for the fight of their lives!
As a result of Nefaria's strike, the town of Blaircrest, though saved from destruction by the Avengers*, now becomes a battleground, as well as a tool for Nefaria to use in forcing the Avengers to make a choice between dealing with him or attempting to prevent his ionic bomb from launching; Nefaria is nothing if not insidious, knowing full well how to play on the Avengers' priorities. (No, I have no idea why Nefaria didn't simply hurl his device into orbit. Let's assume it still needs to make use of power from his castle prior to its launch time. Best I could come up with on short notice.)
*Props to Senor Pérez for keeping in mind that the Vision, when becoming lighter than air in order to fly, is unable to carry anyone (to safety or otherwise). Bravo, sir!
As to why Nefaria is doing all of this, the same question was broached previously at Avengers Mansion, with no one able to provide a definite answer. This time, however, we hear it from the horse's mouth, in all of its pathetic context.
Realizing that Nefaria's motivations stem from nothing but pure evil and an utter lack of conscience, the Avengers are left with little choice but to battle on, despite the odds of their prevailing. To make matters worse, Nefaria continues to remain aware of his bomb's state of readiness, and, more importantly, anticipating the likelihood that his foes might make a run for it. (Literally, as it turns out.)
Meanwhile, arriving in the area is Nefaria's estranged daughter, Madame Masque, whose distrust in the Avengers--in anyone--had, we now learn, led her to conduct a final act of treachery in sabotaging the "ionic lock" device which was used successfully to free Wonder Man and Atlas from Nefaria's control but failed to stop Nefaria himself. Reasoning that Nefaria would go on to destroy the Avengers, she now wields a completely functional device which, once the Avengers fall, will destroy him, thus alleviating the insecurity and paranoia she's felt for so long regarding her safety against perceived enemies. Yet unknown to her, one of her bio-duplicates--the one named only "Masque"--approaches with the hope of convincing her to trust in and help the Avengers in their struggle.
Elsewhere, Atlas and Wonder Man have recovered from her device's effect on them, in time to witness a sight that all of those battling Nefaria have dreaded--and when the two streak after their target with the intent of stopping it, the tactics of the remaining heroes shift to stopping Nefaria from giving pursuit at all costs.
At that critical point, we see "Masque" emerge from the wooded area where she was apparently forced to seize the ion device from her progenitor. Regrettably, she is fatally dealt with before she can act against Nefaria--yet the scene serves as a wake-up call for the real Whitney Frost, and, using the element of surprise, she strikes, with no compunction about taking the life of her father.
Realizing that this may well be their final stand, the Avengers again put everything they've got into defeating their foe. Their struggle is, by any standard, epic--but it's to writer Kurt Busiek's credit that even at such a moment, and at this late stage of the story, it doesn't make sense for Nefaria to suddenly succumb to such a heroic assault. Instead, remaining a formidable threat, he reaches the end of his patience and strikes back at the Avengers with anger at their continued annoyance--making use of the town's water tower to hurl toward them, with the impact of onrushing and inundating water, rock, concrete and steel effectively bringing an end to the Avengers' resistance.
Or at least it might have, in a nonfictional scenario where those among the two teams without benefit of armor or super-strength would have been critically injured by such a strike at the very least; here, however, Busiek and Pérez only go so far but no further in regard to the physical punishment the Avengers are subjected to, yet sustain no casualties among themselves or the Thunderbolts (or even so much as a stretcher needed). Instead, daunted but not surrendering to despair, they rise once more to face the man who has become without a doubt their ultimate foe; even given the Avengers' long history, there's no other who can claim that description now, in light of what we've seen here.
If a gleam of hope remains, it lies in the knowledge that the effect of Masque's device has not been negligible--while, above, Wonder Man and Atlas resolve to make the ultimate sacrifice in order to thwart Nefaria's fate for the entire world.
In the aftermath, both Wonder Man and Atlas are recovered by fliers from their respective teams, still alive in spite of the bomb's implosion. As for Madame Masque, despite an offer from one of the T-Bolts of an ear to bend, she decides to withdraw but with thanks, giving our heroes (and we readers) a sense of hope regarding her future. And in the real world? The issue provides quite a feather in the cap of Busiek, establishing in the annals of Avengers stories one that could easily rank among its top 20... and certainly makes for one hell of a sendoff for George Pérez, who left his stamp on the book and then some.
As for Nefaria--well, Nefaria is a nasty piece of work and a preeminent villain, and we've all learned over time that any comics villain who exclaims "Noooooooooo!" in his final moments has "return appearance" written all over him. (If there's any justice, maybe he'll just end up as a disembodied wraith haunting the ruins of his castle.)
9 comments:
The Busiek/Perez/Vey iteration of The Avengers is one of my favourites - sharp writing and of course gorgeous art. Pablo Marcos is for me the premiere inker for Perez but Al Vey does a great job in his own right.
I'm not a huge fan of Marcos's work across the board, charliedogg, but I think he did right by Perez for the most part. OTOH, I enjoy Busiek's stories quite a bit, and I've noticed he receives good word of mouth in other forums, as well.
This run has great art of course. But while I found Busiek's run very enjoyable - and the best since Roger Stern left - he did have a few quirks which bothered me.
In his attempt to generate high stakes, he would routinely go too far. Ultron killed everyone in an entire European country. Kang actually conquered the entire world. The problem with this is that these shattering events have no long term impact. Everything resets to the status quo once the Avengers defeat the villain. But the event itself should have had incredible consequences. Since it doesn't, it makes the stories seem smaller. He'd have done better to have dialed things back so we could continue to suspend our disbelief.
I was also utterly uninterested in Triathlon, his ties to the 3D-Man, and the Triune cult he belonged to. He just wasn't that interesting a character to devote so many pages to it. Same for Silverclaw. These are all pedestrian characters that don't deserve to be in the Avengers. Yet they are because the writer invented them and could shoehorn them in. At least when Stern introduced Captain Marvel, he built her up a little, her power level justified her membership, she didn't take over the page count, and Stern skillfully built her up as a solid member of the team over many years. Busiek just was not as skillful.
Busiek did do many things right, and he has solid stories. He also had to do some of the dirty work of reversing some of the stupider decisions of the past decade. Without his work on Warbird, we may not have Carol Danvers return to headline status. He had a good run that restored the title, but I think his flaws prevented it from being great. But maybe I am being too picky.
Chris
Chris, you make excellent points on Busiek all around. I readily agree that he's at times gone overboard in terms of casualties while appearing to sweep thoughts of long-term impact under the rug (you'd think Washington, D.C. being nuked would produce wide-scale repercussions), though I think that any writer who produces a tale that results in disaster and mass fatalities or even devastation closer to home (Sue Richards' miscarriage comes to mind) is obliged to consider just how long, and to what extent, the comic in question should dwell on what has gone before before moving on--a valid question to raise, considering that there is at minimum a thirty-day gap between issues for the reader, who probably isn't buying a monthly comic to dwell on grief or a past crisis. My own opinion on the subject would be that the writer would opt to deal with the matter either briefly here and there (e.g., Busiek's segment where the Avengers pay tribute to their deceased NSA liaison, Duane Freeman, killed in the Washington attack) or, if appropriate, in an entire follow-up issue, or two (e.g., Namor's abdication, which led to a change in direction for the character).
As for the characters you mention, no doubt the acquisition of new characters has been at times a mixed bag when it comes to this team. (We can probably add Justice and Firestar to your list.) Some will catch on (e.g., the She-Hulk, the Black Knight, the Swordsman, certainly Captain Marvel... I even liked Dr. Druid, until Walt Simonson got ahold of him) while others (Gilgamesh, the Falcon, Tigra) fail to take hold. Frankly I'm surprised not to hear of anyone at a convention broaching the subject with a writer--I would have been curious to get their feedback on why this or that character was originally thought to be an ideal addition to the Avengers at the time.
When a guy reads the Avengers, there is always a character or two that invoke sighs of perseverance. (if more than two, it's probably when the reader leaves the title until the roster changes again). At the risk of drawing the ire of the Cult of Carol Danvers, when she was suspended from the ranks for her alcoholism, I gave a small cheer. I find her a raggedy patchwork "what are her powers/what do we call her this week?" character.
After the departure of Perez, I kept buying the title. The next couple of issues had serviceable artwork. So far, so good. Then ALAN DAVIS! For me, it was unheard of for Marvel to tag team in one A-List Premium artist for another A-Lister. But then it turned out to be a variation on the infamous Marvel bait & switch when Davis left after six issues.
The art fell face-first into the mud. The Kang Invasion story was utter dreck that ended on the cacophonic note involving the Triune going cosmic gobbleydegook.
And I stopped collecting The Avengers. During the years following I've kept in touch, cherry-picking a few stories here and there, but I haven't "collected" the title since. My most dependable Avengers fix came from the cinema offerings.
But even with some dire clunkers in his resume, seeing the name "Busiek" rouses sharp interest and optimism when I see it on comic masthead.
A fine (and consistent) observation concerning Carol Danvers, Murray. At the tail end of her first series, she became a striking figure as the new Ms. Marvel (with many thanks to Dave Cockrum)--but whether as Ms. Marvel or Warbird, she boiled down for me to a flying hero who mainly belted people, though helped to a great degree at the point when Chris Claremont spruced up her background by giving her Air Force credentials and had her presence in the field given high praise by Wolverine, character traits which distinguish her further. And of course we had the Brood's tampering with her makeup, which took her off the scale and produced a far different character in Binary. Revisiting your comments in '19, I'm curious how you regarded the cinematic version of the character (which, not yet having seen "Endgame" but catching clips of her scenes, appears to me to dwarf Binary's power to the nth degree without raising a sweat.)
(I try not to let the fact I'm probably repeating myself ad nauseam deter me. Where would a comic book true believer be if rehashing opinions wasn't allowed?)
I watched Captain Marvel because it seemed like "required homework reading" before seeing the keenly anticipated Endgame. I resisted, but my wife doesn't have my fanboy baggage and was keen to make it a Date Night at the movies.
One thing about the Marvel Cinematic Universe--I grew to appreciate that capturing the spirit of the comic books is A-OK over being stringently faithful to canon. I feel (up until Endgame) the moviemakers achieved that spirit far more than they missed. In fact, it felt entirely refreshing watching the distilled essence of a character, pruned of decades of retcons and alterations made by a dozen different writers.
In the end, I enjoyed watching an entirely new origin of how Carol Danvers became Captain Marvel. All centered around a "transfusion" from an Infinity Stone and (I probably shouldn't use "shazam" just now) she's the most powerful superhero in the MCU.
I only read a couple of X-Men comics guest-starring Binary, so I'm not sure who ranks higher in power.
The fact she was now more powerful than Thor brought forth a well-practiced sigh of forbearance. I was pleased Captain Marvel, despite the hype, had barely more than a substantial cameo appearance in Endgame. She pitched in, but didn't save the day or overshadow the Avengers at all.
I was never that keen on Carol Danvers either, Murray. Probably because I mainly knew the character from the 70s/early 80s, and Marvel writers weren't that good at female characters back then (see: Avengers #200!)
And yet I thought Captain Marvel was probably the best of the standalone Marvel flicks.
Comicsfan, if you think about it, theres only so much an Avengers writer can do with the classic characters - Cap, Thor, Iron Man have their own books anyway, and the other core members are well established - so it makes sense that they'd bring in one or two fresh faces. The important consideration I would have thought is the new members don't have too much continuity baggage
My theory is there are no bad characters, just some that aren't written well, so if an addition to the roster doesn't work thats down to the writer.
Consider the Beast and Wonder Man for example. Were either of them particularly promising as new members at first? Surely no-one who'd read any of the Beast's series in Amazing Adventures, or Wondy's early appearances in the Avengers would have thought so? And yet together, their dynamic as a couple was at the heart of the book in its best era (the Avengers generally seemed like less than the sum of its parts before the late 70s).
Busiek's reasoning for bringing in Justice and Firestar was sound. He just didn't write them well enough.
-sean
PS Apparently it was Steve Englehart who bought the Beast into the Avengers, CF, because he worked on the later part of the solo Amazing... series, had some ideas and wanted to carry on writing the character.
I suspect the reason for bringing in most specific new members - at least before everything became more editorially driven - was as simple as that.
-sean
Post a Comment