I'm on board with the early Quesada too. Some of those comics were truly great (like, say, the first series of Ultimates).
God, yes. I can't believe how much I liked that comic. I never knew that those characters could be used in such a way. Every issue felt like an event and I was never disappointed during any issue of Ultimates 1 or 2. I was into every character, interested in all their stories and really enjoyed what was going on in those pages. It was a good modernized take on the Avengers, written with new millenium sensibilities.
See, I don't mind the Ultimate interpretation of the characters because I know it's a different presentation with a different set of circumstances defining the characters and their world.
What I DON'T like, and I have seen far too much of it recently, is the 616 characters acting like their Ultimate counterparts. If Marvel wants to make the 616 more like the UU interpretations, without all the random death, they should just do a soft reboot.
Here's my theory about what happened: Early on, Quesada put a bunch of his friends in charge of key aspects of the line (like Axel on Marvel Knights). It just so happened that those guys were in the prime of their careers, and bereft of editorial meddling, they created a lot of really creative and noteworthy work.
Now, cut to ten years later. Those guys are either burnt out without realizing it, straight up gone, or otherwise diminished. But they still get to do whatever they want, so the same thing that made their work good way back when makes it bad now.
Here's an example: Daredevil as an Avenger. Bendis's run on Daredevil was pretty great, if you ask me. Some all around good stuff. He took chances with the character, and I think it worked.
But as an Avenger? Come the fuck on. That's a terrible idea, and I honestly don't see a way to make it work. Even if there was a way, Bendis has lost the creative edge needed to pull it off. But the editorial staff clearly gives him free reign to do whatever he wants, so that's how it is.
I'd also cite Mark Millar's stuff. Early on, those Ultimates books were friggin' amazing. Now what do we get from him? Crappy creator-owned stuff. I don't care what anyone says, Kick-Ass was lame.
Anyway, that's my theory. I'm curious to know what you guys think of it.
I think it's a decent theory. Mine is very similar.
This is the way they did things at the start and it worked. Then, as they all got big headed about their success and dominance, the general mindset around the 'office' was 'this is working, so let's just do it until we have to worry about it.'
Comic fans are conditioned to just keep buying the titles, by and large. So they'll buy through the lean/bad times.
And I strongly feel that the editorial staff lets the creators get away with murder. This isn't an era of the IP aware creator. Guys like Alan Davis, who know how to write and draw the characters and do their best to honor their purest concepts, are uncommon. Or even guys like John Byrne, who found ways to drastically alter some of the status quo of a title while still retaining the essence. I feel Dan Slott is doing this in Amazing Spidey-it's all new and different but at the same time it feels 'right.' The new X-Men that debuted with Giant Sized X-Men #1 pulled this off very well, too. And in an era where those kinds of things RARELY happened.
Nowadays, drastic changes just to push boundaries are the only constant. It's tiresome and tedious and there is no need for it. I prefer the 'bait and switch' that more talented creators use-change everything, but still have it 'feel' like the original property.
Having the Avengers hiding in Bucky's basement from Norman Osborn didn't FEEL like the Avengers. It felt, and smelled, like shit. Because it was. It was such hot garbage that I'm surprised maggots didn't spill out when the comic was opened.
ANYWAY, I think the status quo at Marvel editorial worked for a while and now it's run rampant. Nobody seems to care about running a tight ship as long as it can still sail. It doesn't even have to be on time, and it's cargo doesn't need to be delivered in the proper order.
As for Bendis, I still think the guy has the chops in the right role. I enjoyed every issue of Ultimate Spidey that I ever read, and I felt his 'voice' and creative direction for that book were spot on. The book was written with a youthful verve, and the artwork reflected the youth movement perfectly after Ultimatum. And I agree that his Daredevil run was, at the time, pretty good. I even bought the three trades collecting it. Imagine that: me buying trades written by Bendis.
But he is roadkill when it comes to writing Avengers. He always was, in my opinion. Everything from Dissassembled on pretty much sucked. But it struck a chord with fans of the time, and they bought it in droves. So good on Marvel for turning a buck by shaking up the box and seeing where the pieces fell. But it could have been good without setting so many bad precedents along the way. I put that mostly on Marvel editorial because it's THEIR job to be the stewards for the IPs and ensure they're being handled properly.
Creators are going to create. But it's up to editors to tell them what is viable and what isn't.
Shooter was the best for this, IMO.
