New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Moderators: Col_Fury, michel, Arthur, Somebody, StrayLamb
- Col_Fury
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7769
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 3:37 am
- Location: on a Helicarrier, above Illinois
- Contact:
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
And here's a preview page from New Avengers #41, from Tom Brevoort's blog:
http://www.marvel.com/globals/view_gene ... 7_full.jpg
And there's Spider-Man in his classic Red & Blues. Hopefully, an obvious slot will make itself aparent for Strange to appear in OMD post-Annual 2. Going by just Spider-Man's costume, it seems the intent is for OMD to follow the Annual and precede at least New Avengers 41.(unless, of course, this is a FlashBack.)
http://www.marvel.com/globals/view_gene ... 7_full.jpg
And there's Spider-Man in his classic Red & Blues. Hopefully, an obvious slot will make itself aparent for Strange to appear in OMD post-Annual 2. Going by just Spider-Man's costume, it seems the intent is for OMD to follow the Annual and precede at least New Avengers 41.(unless, of course, this is a FlashBack.)
-Daron Jensen
-
- Henchman
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 4:05 pm
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
All they had to do was show Spider-Man in the red and blue costume in NEW AVENGERS ANNUAL 2 and it all would have made sense, as far as OMD goes. Especially since there was a jump in time after page 4 of the NEW AVENGERS ANNUAL to post-WWH, or so it seems. That jump in time removed the obligation to show Spider-Man in the black costume since it didn't continue immediately from NEW AVENGERS 37 in terms of the timeline. That's all they had to do. Illustrate and colour him in the original costume. It didn't matter what costume he was in. So why couldn't they have done that? It would have been the simplest thing in the world.
I guess the scary answer is that Bendis didn't mean to imply that much of a space in time after page 4 as we'd like to interpret and actually thought it made sense for World War frickin' Hulk of all things to take place within a couple of hours and end before the Hood's ambush. It wouldn't take that much time and energy away from concentrating on writing the main story for these writers to pay attention to the little details.
I guess the scary answer is that Bendis didn't mean to imply that much of a space in time after page 4 as we'd like to interpret and actually thought it made sense for World War frickin' Hulk of all things to take place within a couple of hours and end before the Hood's ambush. It wouldn't take that much time and energy away from concentrating on writing the main story for these writers to pay attention to the little details.
I want to know everything.
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Bear in mind that they probably didn't know if ASM545 would be out by the time NA@ 2 was released when this was being written & drawn...
-
- Comic Pro
- Posts: 5424
- Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 6:51 am
- Location: Florida
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Marvologist wrote:
Well, that, and (more importantly) not to have Peter remove his frikkin' mask in NA@ 2.All they had to do was show Spider-Man in the red and blue costume in NEW AVENGERS ANNUAL 2 and it all would have made sense, as far as OMD goes.
Paul B.
-
- Henchman
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 4:05 pm
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Oh God, was that a reference in NEW AVENGERS 38 to both battles with the Hood happening in one night? I'm sure you all read that. Even if you fit NEW AVENGERS ANNUAL 2 into the last bit of FRIENDLY NEIGHBORHOOD SPIDER-MAN 24, where in the hell do you place WWH into the New Avengers timeline since the post-Civil War issues started? They seemed to follow directly from Captain America's death in a continuous timeline through to now. With no breaks in Revolution and The Trust. Am I right?
I want to know everything.
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Before NA 28.Marvologist wrote:where in the hell do you place WWH into the New Avengers timeline
No, that's not a serious suggestion (we've got Echo and Ronin both in WWH, after all), but here's the thing - Spider-Woman's referenced as a member of the NEW Avengers in WWH 2. What does that do to placement?
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Oy. Preview for ASM #555...
http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=149389
We're well past "One More Day" at this point, and what have we here ... Dr. Strange, Wong, and a still-standing and still boarded-up Bleecker Street sanctum.
On the minus side, I think we're going to have to break down and assume that in some behind-the-scenes, possibly-upcoming story, Dr. Strange returns and goes back to letting the NA'ers hang out at his place.
On the plus side, making this annoying assumption gives more breathing room for other things -- it makes it easier to place OMD after NA@2, instead of presuming a lot of back-and-forth costume changes, chopping it up and squeezing it between panels.
I say, embrace the screw-up! Let it liberate our chronological placements! Let's all get drunk!
Maybe one of the knock-on effects of Mephisto's deal in OMD was the restoration of the Sanctum, just like May's house was restored...?
-Jeph!
http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=149389
We're well past "One More Day" at this point, and what have we here ... Dr. Strange, Wong, and a still-standing and still boarded-up Bleecker Street sanctum.
On the minus side, I think we're going to have to break down and assume that in some behind-the-scenes, possibly-upcoming story, Dr. Strange returns and goes back to letting the NA'ers hang out at his place.
On the plus side, making this annoying assumption gives more breathing room for other things -- it makes it easier to place OMD after NA@2, instead of presuming a lot of back-and-forth costume changes, chopping it up and squeezing it between panels.
I say, embrace the screw-up! Let it liberate our chronological placements! Let's all get drunk!
Maybe one of the knock-on effects of Mephisto's deal in OMD was the restoration of the Sanctum, just like May's house was restored...?
-Jeph!
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Jeph, I mentioned this back on p2, and it was brought up in another thread as well. A preview page with Wolverine/Strange/Sanctum's been floating around for months.
My vote is still to wait - although, if pushed, I say ignore the black suit/mask off in NA@ 2 and treat that as post-OMD. I can't imagine Strange's status won't factor into something upcoming, probably SI.
My vote is still to wait - although, if pushed, I say ignore the black suit/mask off in NA@ 2 and treat that as post-OMD. I can't imagine Strange's status won't factor into something upcoming, probably SI.
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
So you did. Thought it sounded familiar.I mentioned this back on p2
That's pretty much always my vote as well. However, these young hooligans these days just can't wait to chronologize right off the press -- no desire to wait for some context, just wham and done and set in stone. It's kind of frustrating, actually, so I tend to overcompensate with off-the-cuff chronological suggestions based on rumors and preview pages, determined to stay one step ahead of these young turks...My vote is still to wait
I really, really don't want to have to do that.if pushed, I say ignore the black suit/mask off in NA@ 2 and treat that as post-OMD.
-Jeph!
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Which I'm sure is nothing to do with you Waiting For The Tradejephyork wrote:That's pretty much always my vote as well.Somebody wrote:My vote is still to wait
Well, what "wham and done" decisions have been made of the TPBs you have that you would reverse, hmm?jephyork wrote:However, these young hooligans these days just can't wait to chronologize right off the press -- no desire to wait for some context, just wham and done and set in stone. It's kind of frustrating, actually, so I tend to overcompensate with off-the-cuff chronological suggestions based on rumors and preview pages, determined to stay one step ahead of these young turks...
Understandable - but it looks like we've got one of those "A before B before C before A" loops where something will have to give, and if nothing comes along to resolve it (and, short of an actual retcon, I'm not sure what can - you really think Bendis is going to undo NA@ 2? Me neither.) my instinct is to say the Spider-Man cluster should.jephyork wrote:I really, really don't want to have to do that.Somebody wrote:if pushed, I say ignore the black suit/mask off in NA@ 2 and treat that as post-OMD.
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Beats me, I haven't had the time lately to really do any deep thinking on the matter. I just don't like the rush to judgment that occasionally happens around here ... because, when later issues come out and a more elegant solution might present itself, it's too late -- it's already been decided in everyone's minds that we're going with the initial suggestions, and we've all moved on to chronologizing the NEXT hot-off-the-presses issue.Well, what "wham and done" decisions have been made ... that you would reverse, hmm?
Note I said "occasionally". I don't need to be hit with a bunch of instances where we have rethought things based on later evidence. I'm just griping.
In general, though, I'm sure everyone would agree that you can't perform a thoughtful analysis on a story that hasn't finished yet.
And my instinct is to say that Strange's situation should. Earlier in the thread, someone made a compelling argument that (a) we didn't see Strange's mansion *demolished* in NA@2, just *damaged*, and (b) pointed out that when Spidey dropped in on him in OMD, he needed to ask permission to come in -- which could be used as evidence that this occurs after Strange disassociated himself from the team in the Annual.my instinct is to say the Spider-Man cluster should.
By the way, since you asked, THAT -- to me -- is a good example of an alternate theory that went more-or-less undebated because everyone had apparently already made up their minds to splice up OMD and pretend that Peter switched costumes four times for no reason.
I'd rather assume that, although Strange gave the team the boot after the Annual and "pretended" to exile himself while he made repairs to his sanctum, he later softened his position (perhaps after Spidey's frantic visit in OMD, assuming Strange remembers it now) and let them hang out there again (as we'll see in ASM #555). If later stories force the issue by showing Strange returning from a retreat or exile, we can simply assume that sometime after ASM #555, Strange went on an actual retreat.
Although, as always, the safest bet is to wait until (a) ASM #555 comes out, and/or (b) Strange resurfaces elsewhere.
*Can* we wait?
-Jeph!
- Col_Fury
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7769
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 3:37 am
- Location: on a Helicarrier, above Illinois
- Contact:
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
That was me. And I still prefer it.jephyork wrote:Earlier in the thread, someone made a compelling argument that (a) we didn't see Strange's mansion *demolished* in NA@2, just *damaged*, and (b) pointed out that when Spidey dropped in on him in OMD, he needed to ask permission to come in -- which could be used as evidence that this occurs after Strange disassociated himself from the team in the Annual.
I think we *have* to. But in the meantime, I like my theory.jephyork wrote:Although, as always, the safest bet is to wait until (a) ASM #555 comes out, and/or (b) Strange resurfaces elsewhere.
*Can* we wait?
-Daron Jensen
-
- Comic Pro
- Posts: 5424
- Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 6:51 am
- Location: Florida
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
Jeph wrote:
I, too, am standing pat with a theory, and it's based on what's already been published, not conjecture about out-of-context panels in future issues. The damage to the Sanctum looked pretty extensive to me, SHIELD probably took control of the place after swooping in at the end of NA@ 2, and Strange's exile seemed to set up a new status quo for him and the the New Avengers, as followed up on in A 38. When new info comes to light that forces the theory to change, I'll be happy (well, mostly) to change it. And that's quite likely. After all, we're talking about continuity based on Strange...and he's...magic! You know... magic!
"Young?" I'll take that as a compliment!these young turks...
I, too, am standing pat with a theory, and it's based on what's already been published, not conjecture about out-of-context panels in future issues. The damage to the Sanctum looked pretty extensive to me, SHIELD probably took control of the place after swooping in at the end of NA@ 2, and Strange's exile seemed to set up a new status quo for him and the the New Avengers, as followed up on in A 38. When new info comes to light that forces the theory to change, I'll be happy (well, mostly) to change it. And that's quite likely. After all, we're talking about continuity based on Strange...and he's...magic! You know... magic!
Paul B.
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
based on what's already been published, not conjecture
SHIELD probably took control
...I see.Strange's exile seemed to set up a new status quo
For the record, Col. Fury's theory, that I'm championing, has nothing to do with "out-of-context preview panels". He simply found a way to read NA@2 that allowed OMD to occur afterwards, and I agree with it. The preview panels just reinforce his theory in my mind.
Why the rush to come up with any theory right now? Why not wait and see what context later issues provide, so you don't have to re-think your initial assumptions and essentially do everything over again?When new info comes to light that forces the theory to change, I'll be happy (well, mostly) to change it.
-Jeph!
- Col_Fury
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7769
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 3:37 am
- Location: on a Helicarrier, above Illinois
- Contact:
Re: New Avengers Annual #2 -- what the #$%^&!?
ASM 555 is out, and in the letters page they come out and say it's a mistake caused by scheduling. They even put out a call for explanations to be rewarded with a No-Prize! So I've dusted off my old letter hacking skillz and shot off an e-mail. We'll see what happens... in about a month.
-Daron Jensen