"New Avengers: Illuminati" Talkback (Spoilers)

[Spider-Man]

The events in this book act as a prologue to not one but two entirely different Marvel blockbuster summer events.

NEW AVENGERS: ILLUMINATI

http://www.marvel.com/comics/onsale/covers/0306/NEW_AVENGERS_Illuminati_sm.jpg (http://www.marvel.com/comics/onsale/covers/0306/NEW_AVENGERS_Illuminati.jpg)

WRITER: Brian Michael Bendis
PENCILS: Alex Maleev

THE STORY:
Ripped from the pages of NEW AVENGERS, the Eisner award-winning team of Brian Bendis and Alex Maleev present this all-new special. An explosive hidden story of Marvel’s secret past, the secret history of Marvel’s most secret team -- how they came together and how they are ripped apart. The Marvel Universe is about to split down the middle and the line is drawn here!!! You will be asked: whose side are you on? Well... whose side are you on???

Thoughts? What are your comments?

[Spider-Man]

I'm actually not sure how to rate this book. I don't mind "talking head" comics and Bendis is usually really good when it comes to exposition heavy reads. I like that he does honestly set up about three different events in this comic and it works without being too clunky. It was cool to see Bendis look back at a couple earlier events and sneak in this "Illuminati" stuff without making it seem like a really bad retcon. It's not a great comic by any means and does have some problems although its a nice set up to Marvel's big 2006 events.

I do have a few gripes. I don't know why Bendis insists on calling all the recent events by their event name like "House of M," "The 198," etc. I guess it does work if you stretch it alittle but it just seems a little bit awkward.

There is a bit of action when Iron Man and Namor fight it out for a few pages. Nothing big but they've really make Namor an over the top drama queen. And why would Blackbolt care about the Superhero Registration act at all? The Inhumans have nothing to do with the normal Marvel world but it looks like he was saying that it wasn't his problem.

My big complaint is Bendis implies that Hulk has been killing innocent bystanders for sometime when since the early days there has always been that "Hulk never kills innocent bystanders" clause. He was even framed for it a few years ago during Bruce Jones' run and it just comes off as a lame excuse to get him into that space capsule. And Nick Fury lookalikes? Please!

It's a fine comic but one I can't recommend to anyone not interested in Marvel's big plans for the year.

[Stu]

Spider-Man, do you think this issue will seem out of place for those who only read New Avengers through the trades? The first two stories have been collected thus far, so The Sentry has just joined the group. Parts of this story were referred to in this month's Fantastic Four, and I'm slightly curious about this book. Will it ruin any potential New Avengers storylines that I haven't read yet, in your opinion?

[Xurk]

I think this book was okay [is it a one-shot, btw?], as it didn't read like a huge retcon and instead gave some interesting insight into the idea of having "important super-hero" meetings.
It was nice seeing the different point of views of the heroes, like Black Panther being negative from the start, and the disagreements and agreements at the end, while also showing the uncertainties of Tony Stark.

The book also did an okay job of launching off two storylines with no forced feeling to it.
I liked the art; it gave the book a kind of classic feeling, which felt just right during the flashback, and I didn't mind it after that, as it had grown a bit on me :)

[randomguy]

Will it ruin any potential New Avengers storylines that I haven't read yet, in your opinion?I can field this one. New Avengers: Illuminati doesn't tie into anything since the end of the "The Sentry" arc, when the Illuminati were introduced. So you can read it independently of what's happened in New Avengers 11-17.

I'll pop back in for a more thorough review later, but I was actually pleasantly surprised by this. I was prepared for more sweeping retcons of Marvel history, but Bendis doesn't insert much into the past at all, and the characters ring true for the most part.

[Spider-Man]

I'll pop back in for a more thorough review later, but I was actually pleasantly surprised by this. I was prepared for more sweeping retcons of Marvel history, but Bendis doesn't insert much into the past at all, and the characters ring true for the most part.
I'd definitely like to have a bit more discussion on this. I does do a good job at inserting these characters into a few key points of Marvel history but I'm surprised at the lack of discussion over Hulk's new killing spree.

Him knocking off 26 civilians in a rampage just doesn't seem to work and ast least if it was something that did happen it should've been at least referenced in The Incredible Hulk. Four issues of Hulk killing people before being sent off to space would've been much more interesting that the four issues that acted as a prelude to his current Planet Hulk (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=160369) storyline. Plus the way they just causually toss out this information when just a few years back a huge stink was made over the Hulk being implicated in the death of one little kid doesn't seem to work right.

I think that's my major problem with this issue. This actually is a good set-up comic to what's coming but that incident concerning the Hulk is just not working for me. This should've been a big deal for Marvel but it seems like a poor excuse to get him in the space station.

[Web Head]

Him knocking off 26 civilians in a rampage just doesn't seem to work and ast least if it was something that did happen it should've been at least referenced in The Incredible Hulk. Four issues of Hulk killing people before being sent off to space would've been much more interesting that the four issues that acted as a prelude to his current Planet Hulk (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=160369) storyline. Plus the way they just causually toss out this information when just a few years back a huge stink was made over the Hulk being implicated in the death of one little kid doesn't seem to work right.

I think that's my major problem with this issue. This actually is a good set-up comic to what's coming but that incident concerning the Hulk is just not working for me. This should've been a big deal for Marvel but it seems like a poor excuse to get him in the space station.
It's best not to think about things like this in a Bendis written comic. It was a throwaway line that I personally have already forgotten. This would be a major status quo change for the Hulk, and I doubt something this big would happen offscreen and merely be alluded to in a non-Hulk book.

To me, this whole issue was perfectly handled in Dan Slot's She-Hulk series. Here, Shulkie was talking about how she knew that the Hulk had never killed anybody in his many rampages. This was because, she said, she knew her cousin. She believed that if the Hulk had ever actually taken a life then Banner would kill himself rather than risk it happening again.

But about this issue, there was one point that really killed me. Tony Stark goes into this big speech about how he and Reed Richards are the type of thinkers that can almost predict the future, via analytical reasoning or some such. Then he goes into a narration basically explaining how the Civil War will start.

Yet no one at the table thought to bring a notebook and pencil so Black Bolt could actually communicate with everybody!

[Xurk]

This is what Bendis has to say on the Hulk killing thing, in this article (http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=66106) at Newsarama:

Q: In She-Hulk #4 just 2 months ago, it was revealed that the Hulk has NEVER killed a civilian. So why are Tony Stark and S.H.I.E.L.D. saying that the Hulk has killed and continues to kill civilians? I don't get it. Is the Hulk a murderer or not?

BB: Remember in the Hulk movie when the Hulk threw a tank with a guy inside it across the desert and it crashes and the guy gets out of the tank unscathed? Didn’t that seem like complete and utter ________ to you? It did to me. I’m not saying the Hulk is a squeezing a guy’s head until his eyeballs pop out murderer but when Hulk smashes ____ gets ____ed up and people get hurt. You can’t knock down a building and everyone inside brushes off and goes to lunch. It's ridiculous.

The rest of the Q&A session is pretty entertaining/interesting to read as well.

[90'sCartoonMan]

To me, this whole issue was perfectly handled in Dan Slot's She-Hulk series. Here, Shulkie was talking about how she knew that the Hulk had never killed anybody in his many rampages. This was because, she said, she knew her cousin. She believed that if the Hulk had ever actually taken a life then Banner would kill himself rather than risk it happening again.

I was thinking the same thing, but according to this issue, Banner can't kill himself, he's tried and failed. So that's out. Yeah, I didn't really buy it either, but I am glad they mentioned Dr. Strange trying to cure him. All the time in The Defenders and I always wondered if Strange could somehow cure Bruce Banner.

I like the idea of the Illuminati, but they went a little too far back. I like Xavier being there and his voice, but with all the stuff the X-Men went through, they remained isolated and didn't consult with other heroes when dealing with the likes of the Phalanx or even the Phoenix (wait, was the Phoenix before or after the Kree/Skrull War?). And what did everyone think of Xavier becoming Onslaught, or did they not even know?


Yet no one at the table thought to bring a notebook and pencil so Black Bolt could actually communicate with everybody!

They should've invited Awesome Andy along, he's smarter than Black Bolt.

Can Spider-Man really be blamed for what Norman Osborn does? If anything, blame the legal system that doesn't give him the death penalty or the prisons for not having good enough security. Spider-Man would be committing a crime if he killed Osborn, then HE'D end up in jail.

So whose side ARE you guys on? Practically, Stark and Reed are probably right, but I'm going to have to agree with Strange on this one.

[Web Head]

They should've invited Awesome Andy along, he's smarter than Black Bolt.
One day the editors at Marvel are going to wise up. And when that day comes, Awesome Andy is going to be on more teams than Wolverine! :)


So whose side ARE you guys on? Practically, Stark and Reed are probably right, but I'm going to have to agree with Strange on this one.
Logically, Tony and Reed are right. Metahumans are basically walking WMD's, and if someone exercises this power carelessly then there should be some sort of recourse.

But since I only read about this universe and don't live in it, I see myself pulling for the anti-registration team. I think you're going down a slipperly slope when the government can draft superheroes and send them off to war.

Plus, it looks like Captain America will be leading the anti-registration people. And a good rule of thumb is to side with Cap whenever possible.

[90'sCartoonMan]

But since I only read about this universe and don't live in it, I see myself pulling for the anti-registration team. I think you're going down a slipperly slope when the government can draft superheroes and send them off to war.

Plus, it looks like Captain America will be leading the anti-registration people. And a good rule of thumb is to side with Cap whenever possible.

I agree with you, and it is good to agree with Cap, but it's also wise to trust the judgment of Mr. Fantastic. He DOES see the big picture. Remember during the Secret War when he said they should let Galactus win because that would save the billions of billions of lives he costs? He eventually changed his mind (with a baby on the way, who could blame him?), but Reed is the type to consider all logical possibilities.

With Captain America (and probably Spider-Man eventually) on the same side, I'm glad someone like Reed is on the other.

[SpiderPunk]

I am torn as to who side I'm on. I think politically, I side with the anti-registration camp. I mean I really don't like the Pariot Act and the registaion bill seems to mimic parts of that. Anything that limits freedom in this country seems, to me, un-American, and that's why I think that Cap leads that camp. Cap isn't loyal to the govenment of the US but rather to the ideas that this country was founded on.
Then again I also see the reasons for the registration act, even if I don't agree with them. There's also a much more shallow reason I'd side with the Iron Man camp, which is I just like the heroes in that camp more. Well rahter I'm a huge Spider-Man fan, and it'll be hard for me to root aganst him.
I have to disagree with 90s Cartoon Guy when he says that Spidey will eventually side with Cap's camp. He promised Tony that he'd side with him no matter what. If there's anything that Spider-Man takes seriously it's promises that he makes. I mean he basically gave Tony a blood oath that he'll follow him to the end.

[Gillespee]

I am torn as to who side I'm on. I think politically, I side with the anti-registration camp. I mean I really don't like the Pariot Act and the registaion bill seems to mimic parts of that. Anything that limits freedom in this country seems, to me, un-American, and that's why I think that Cap leads that camp.

While trying to walk the tight-rope of not getting overtly political, I'd like to throw out a comment that I see very little actual correspondence between the Patriot Act and the Registration idea. The only real correlation (in my mind at least) is the feelings some people have about both things. A better real world law corresponding to the registration would be to have all Muslims register their names and addresses so the government can keep tabs on them.

However, since no such law exists (thankfully), I'm guessing that the writers are aiming at the Patriot Act at least in part with their pens.

[90'sCartoonMan]

I have to disagree with 90s Cartoon Guy when he says that Spidey will eventually side with Cap's camp. He promised Tony that he'd side with him no matter what. If there's anything that Spider-Man takes seriously it's promises that he makes. I mean he basically gave Tony a blood oath that he'll follow him to the end.

90s Cartoon Guy?! Peter will definitely be loyal to Tony, but I think that's only at first. I can see him being conflicted (especially since Tony will be switching the stance he took in ASM) and then, hopefully, ultimately thinking that siding with the anti-registration party is the right thing to do (perhaps to protect his family).