What's Your Opinion On Bendis?

[90'sCartoonMan]

Okay, lately, Brian Michael Bendis is getting on my nerves. He was great when Ultimate Spider-Man started, and I could tell he was building up something good when he came on Daredevil.

So what happened? Seriously. Ultimate Spider-Man hasn't been that good since Bendis tried to do 3 well known Spider-Man stories at once, and Daredevil is more talking than anything. I hate his Avengers stuff. What does everyone else think?

[ManicWebb]

I like his writing style. His dialogue makes the characters sound like real people, and he's good at picking up loose ends issues after they were dropped.

Lately, however, I've felt like his work has been lacking effort. He's just spread too thin. I'd rather have Bendis on one or two really good titles than Bendis on 12,000 garden variety titles. Sadly, readers have been getting the latter, and it doesn't look like he'll be letting up soon.

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

There was an older thread about BMB (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=128982&highlight=bendis) that petered out about 3 months ago. I can't imagine much has changed since then, though.

-- Ed/Ace

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Okay, lately, Brian Michael Bendis is getting on my nerves. He was great when Ultimate Spider-Man started, and I could tell he was building up something good when he came on Daredevil.

So what happened? Seriously. Ultimate Spider-Man hasn't been that good since Bendis tried to do 3 well known Spider-Man stories at once, and Daredevil is more talking than anything. I hate his Avengers stuff. What does everyone else think?
Generally you either love him or you don't. Personally, I think his streetwise dialogue is appropriate for books like Daredevil, or even to a certain extent Spider-Man (I have mixed feelings about making Spidey's cast TOO realistic sounding) but for books which require a certain amount of purple dialogue like Avengers or X-Men...no.

I'm of the opinion that superhero books need not all SOUND realistic and "hip". I think many writers have gone too far in trying to "mature" every superhero book out there, so that the inherent camp value of superheroes in general is beaten down, or looked down upon, rather than embraced as fun.

I do think Bendis is a bit overrated by fans, but when you write half of the Marvel universe, I guess you can't help but BE rated highly in most fan polls.

[EarthX]

Okay, lately, Brian Michael Bendis is getting on my nerves. He was great when Ultimate Spider-Man started, and I could tell he was building up something good when he came on Daredevil.

So what happened? Seriously. Ultimate Spider-Man hasn't been that good since Bendis tried to do 3 well known Spider-Man stories at once, and Daredevil is more talking than anything. I hate his Avengers stuff. What does everyone else think?
He's great on what is essentially pure-character stuff, like Powers and Daredevil, but his "mucho discussion" pacing is starting to bog down Avengers.

[kid_flash]

DAREDEVIL is the best book Marvel's publishing right now. After Bendis and (the oft-forgotten) Maleev pack their bags, I can almost guarantee that book won't be on my list.

Bendis did something I thought no one could ever do: He made me want to read Spider-Man books. His modern take on Spidey got me reading that book monthly, then JMS' AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (which was very, very good for awhile there), and then a whole slew of Marvel books I thought I'd never pick up.

And POWERS is pretty much the coolest take on superheroes I've ever read. Out of all the books I recently dropped, this is the one that was hardest to let go of.

[90'sCartoonMan]

Howdy,

There was an older thread about BMB (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=128982&highlight=bendis) that petered out about 3 months ago. I can't imagine much has changed since then, though.

-- Ed/Ace
Ah, thanks. I checked a few pages back but figured if there was one, it wouldn't have mentioned New Avengers. Guess I was wrong.


Generally you either love him or you don't. Personally, I think his streetwise dialogue is appropriate for books like Daredevil, or even to a certain extent Spider-Man (I have mixed feelings about making Spidey's cast TOO realistic sounding) but for books which require a certain amount of purple dialogue like Avengers or X-Men...no.
I don't agree with you...wait, yeah I do. I mean, it's not so cut and dry as you either love him or you don't, but I think he's only suited for a particular type of book. Daredevil? Sure. Avengers? No. I like his dialogue, but I hate the way he slows things down. Maybe it's Marvel wanting longer arcs for trades, but I'm having less and less enthusiasm for his Ultimate Spider-Man.

[GregX]

I personally love Bendis' comics. Love Ultimate Spider-Man, he made me a fan of Daredevil, thought Alias was one of the best comics in years, am really enjoying The Pulse, I enjoyed Avengers Disassembled (was never a hardcore Avengers fan, so maybe that's why), am loving New Avengers, and am greatly looking forward to The House of M.


THing is though, I read most of this stuff as trades, not as monthly issues, and I think his work reads a lot better in the graphic novel format. Same goes for most of my favorite comic book writers.

[Matthew Williams]

Ultimate spider-Man: I like this. Great take on his life and I like how he emphasizes the Peter Parker part of the equation. The origin he did for Ultimate was the definitive version of the Spidey origin as far as I am concerned.

New Avengers: an interesting idea. I like the idea of pairing the most powerful of all Marvel's champions.

Avengers Disassembled: Why I will always, always, always despise you despite your work.

[90'sCartoonMan]

I enjoyed Avengers Disassembled (was never a hardcore Avengers fan, so maybe that's why), am loving New Avengers.
Greg, I'm surprised at you. A Gargoyles fan loving Disassembled? Maybe you weren't a hardcore Avengers fan, but as someone who can analyze Demona's motivations, don't you feel that using Scarlet Witch was a total cop out? Forget the continuity inconsistencies, Disassembled wasn't character driven, it was shock driven, and that's why I didn't like it.



THing is though, I read most of this stuff as trades, not as monthly issues, and I think his work reads a lot better in the graphic novel format. Same goes for most of my favorite comic book writers.
Fair enough, I imagine this works quite well for a number of things.

[Redhood]

Personally I think Bendis is marvel's best writer right now. here's what i think of his books:

Ultimate Spiderman: definitely his best book. Since issue 50 it hasn't been as good, but I think the rest of the hobgoblin arc is going to be great.

NewAvengers:Also a great book. I didn't care much for disassembled but this makes up for it. Spiderman is the best part of the book. Bendis does a really good job on dialouging Spiderman. I think bendis has a really good handle on these charcters.

Pulse:This is a good book but it doesn't come out on a regular period which makes it hard to follow.

Daredevil: I just started reading this book with the Golden age arc. So far its been pretty good.

Secret war: Like the pulse its good but hard to follow

Thats all over all I think Bendis is a great writer and I'm greatly anticipating House of M

[GregX]

Greg, I'm surprised at you. A Gargoyles fan loving Disassembled? Maybe you weren't a hardcore Avengers fan, but as someone who can analyze Demona's motivations, don't you feel that using Scarlet Witch was a total cop out? Forget the continuity inconsistencies, Disassembled wasn't character driven, it was shock driven, and that's why I didn't like it.I thought Scarlet Witch made sense based on the reasoning that was given. But the story is not over yet, we'll see how "The House of M" goes, and I'm greatly anticipating it, since Magneto is my favorite Marvel character.

I agree that out of all of Bendis' work, Disassembled was definetly, definetly not even close to being his best. But I enjoyed it enough, and I think there will be payoff. Sometimes, you got to put the characters through Hell.

And New Avengers rocks!

[krazymed]

The workload is catching up to Bendis. He should be doing two comics per month, max.

[randomguy]

I think Bendis is a damn fine writer on books that suit his sensibilities, but he struggles with titles that don't really match his distinctive tone. I would probably agree with criticisms that he's taken on too heavy a workload. I really enjoyed a lot of Bendis' books, but since becoming the chief architect of the entire Marvel Universe (a role I feel he's ill-suited for), I think the quality of his writing has suffered.

Ultimate Spider-Man was an incredibly good book for the first fifty odd issues, but I think it's lost some major stream over the last year and a half or so. The pacing problems have become a major issue. We're four issues in "Hobgoblin" and still haven't seen the villain. I like the high school drama stuff very much, but that's overkill. At this point, Invincible is probably a better Ultimate Spider-Man than Ultimate Spider-Man.

Daredevil is another title that totally rocked early on in his run (up to and including "The King Of Hell's Kitchen"), but just hasn't been the same recently. I think a big part of it is that the book's main plot hasn't advanced at all for about a dozen issues now. Plus, while I think Matt Murdock being outed as Daredevil has been a pretty good story, I question whether or not it's wise for the long-term health of the character.

Powers and The Pulse are perfectly good reads. No complaints here. Alias was one of the better Marvel books of the last few years, also.

New Avengers, meanwhile, is a real puzzler. "Chaos" was a disaster, in my opinion, and not just because it disbanded the original Avengers (who I was a fan of). It bothered me just because, as a storyline, it was so poorly plotted and illogical. It didn't really respect the characters, and felt like a really lazy deck-clearing exercise. But New Avengers, although it started out weak, has gotten much stronger lately. I guess I reserve judgement on that one.

Bendis has certain weaknesses, obviously. His dialogue style can get a bit repetitive, and it works better on some books than others. He has pacing issues, and his continuing insistence in interviews on how he has to tear down characters in order to make their stories good seems misguided to me. I question whether or not he's appropriate for straight superhero stuff, but for books on the fringes of the Marvel Universe, I think he's very talented. That, and all his old crime works, like Jinx and Torso, were great. And Total Sell-Out is hilarious and all too true.

[screw on head]

I'm not much of a fan of his. I've tried many times to get into reading one of his monthly titles, but the talking head jibber jabber drives me up a wall. I don't know how Mike Bagley can put up with staging Bendis' conversations.

I remember picking up the Ultimate Spider-Man/Wolverine team-up issue and just feeling robbed. There was an insane amount of talking, Wolverine getting injured pretty badly in a little diner, and then the meeting between him and Peter, and well, all of it felt so drawn out. A major selling point for me is art, even if the story stinks, and I even felt short changed there too.

His style doesn't work for me for a lot of reasons. He hasn't really won me over, and buying his doesn't really seem worth my dime. I have the same problem with Warren Ellis as well, this whole school of drawing stories out at painful lengths. I'd gladly read his stuff for free (I loved Marvel.com's dot comics, I read twenty or so Ultimate Spider-Man issues for free there), but I'm not about to spend money for stories spanning as many issues as his do...

[RAINMAN]

He seem to relay too much on cheap shock value then good ideas. AD is living proof of this. He think he can take lame character like sentry and make them the next big thing. That may work for the clowns at wizard who praise him but I`m not buying it.