Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

Marvel Comics Omnibus thread


odessasteps

Recommended Posts

I continue to trek back through cosmic Marvel (some I've read before, some I haven't) and God damn, the way DnA slowly built around the cocoon that the UCT have for nearly the entire series is just a breathtaking masterclass in comic story telling.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/19/2017 at 7:48 PM, Eivion said:

I'm still trying to remember where I left off on my X-men reading as far as older stuff goes. I need to remember where I was on X-Factor as well. The last thing I recall is Inferno. What comes next for the X-books after that?

Days of Future Present followed by X-Tinction Agenda, IIRC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I skipped all of Realm of Kings that wasn't Nova or GOTG because I really just can't take anymore Inhumans than absolutely necessary.

I've never read Annihilators before, but it's been really fun.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, APO said:

Days of Future Present followed by X-Tinction Agenda, IIRC.

Thanks, I might have just skipped right past  Days of Future Present had you not mentioned it.\

18 minutes ago, Brian Fowler said:

So I skipped all of Realm of Kings that wasn't Nova or GOTG because I really just can't take anymore Inhumans than absolutely necessary.

I've never read Annihilators before, but it's been really fun.

I thought the stuff with Inhumans in the DnA cosmic era was generally good-great. Do you dislike Inhumans in general, or is it overload from the current forced push by Marvel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both. I never really liked them even before Marvel decided to Roman Reigns them.

War of Kings was fine, but a pretty severe stepdown from the Annihilation Wars. I mostly blame Blackbolt.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, when I read them with a couple years in between the end of DnA and the start of BMB, I didn't notice nearly as much how little Bendis cared about, you know, anything from the previous run. It's not badly written, but... Yeesh the characters are totally different, the way the galaxy views them is totally different....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed, but it was only around a year or so from when I read the DnA run to when Bendis's run began. I'm not sure how much I blame the changes on him since of a lot really comes from the movies. Its more of the synergy bullshit Marvel pushes while claiming they don't just because things aren't the exact same. Its why we have a black Nick Fury with convoluted origins that no one is really interested in. Its why we have the AoS cast in the comics now and why Daisy is now an Inhuman and focused on that instead of being the spy-master Nick Fury trained her to be. It really annoys me since Bendis dropped so many things that made the DnA/Giffen cosmic stuff so good and interesting. Its even worse considering it was that run that got the movie green lit in the first place. Gunn was highly fond of it even with all the changes he made for the movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And most of Gunn's changes were more about streamlining and simplifying than wholesale throwing things out.

For all the ways things are vastly different, the movies feel like DnA. This, uh, really doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Brian Fowler said:

Is the Marvel NOW! Nova series any good?

 

Yeah. It's the most I've liked Sam and it's also really good to see Rich again even if it sort of piles on him some more.

 

5 hours ago, Brian Fowler said:

You know, when I read them with a couple years in between the end of DnA and the start of BMB, I didn't notice nearly as much how little Bendis cared about, you know, anything from the previous run. It's not badly written, but... Yeesh the characters are totally different, the way the galaxy views them is totally different....

 

Yeah. Bendis' run is weird. It feels like he really enjoyed the DnA run but also had totally different ideas about what he wanted the book to be which...fair enough but it's still jarring read side by side.

 

5 hours ago, Eivion said:

I noticed, but it was only around a year or so from when I read the DnA run to when Bendis's run began. I'm not sure how much I blame the changes on him since of a lot really comes from the movies. Its more of the synergy bullshit Marvel pushes while claiming they don't just because things aren't the exact same. Its why we have a black Nick Fury with convoluted origins that no one is really interested in. Its why we have the AoS cast in the comics now and why Daisy is now an Inhuman and focused on that instead of being the spy-master Nick Fury trained her to be. It really annoys me since Bendis dropped so many things that made the DnA/Giffen cosmic stuff so good and interesting. Its even worse considering it was that run that got the movie green lit in the first place. Gunn was highly fond of it even with all the changes he made for the movies.

Considering GotG the film was announced either after or concurrently to Bendis soft rebooting the comic with Avengers Assemble, the most Bendis would be going off of was the roster at first. After the first film hit he definitely incorporated some elements of the film versions into the book but to be fair he did it without overhauling everything and mostly just took the stuff that would translate okay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was aware of timing when I said that. Movies are planned a decent bit before announcements are made, and Bendis was a part of the group that was consulting for the movies before they were kicked out with Perlmutter. He was totally aware of the beats that were going to be hit. The style and direction he took things started make sense to me once we started seeing trailers for the first film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's considered the definitive Uncanny X-Men run?  I've actually never been a regular X-men reader, even during the Claremont/Byrne era.  I'm in the mood to pick up a couple collections and read at least Claremont/Byrne stuff.  Going to start with Uncanny 94, of course.

Byrne left after issue 143.  Any reason to keep going past that point?  I think the Marvel Masterworks collections stop around that point?  I'm probably going to pick up the Marvel Masterworks run or the X-Men Omnibus hardcovers.  Since i don't display comic book collections on the bookshelf, I generally find tpb's easier to bag and store than hardcovers, so I'll probably opt for the Masterworks collection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Byrne/Claremont is the truly iconic run although the quality is still good afterwards. Claremont's constant exposition doesn't age terribly well, but not much from that era does.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like Claremont/Byrne and Claremont/Lee are two big ones. The 90s had a lot of crossovers, some of which are a lot of fun. Morrison/mostly Quitely is probably up there too and is olnough to be considered classic at this point. 

 

Post 2004 it's mostly writer based runs because modern Marvel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ace said:

Morrison's run was on New X-Men, not Uncanny.

 

 

I loved that, for the most part.  I have read most of the noteworthy X-runs from the past 15-20 years - Morrison, Fraction, Gillen, Bendis, Peter David on X-Factor, Remender on X-Force, etc.  I just never read the Claremont run consistently.  Honestly, I've never liked much of Claremont's writing, other than Excalibur being kinda fun.

The Marvel Masterworks trades cover through 140 or 150.  Think I'll read through those and then decide how much further I want to go

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...