Not signed in (Sign In)
    • CommentAuthorWakefield
    • CommentTimeJun 13th 2008
     (2597.1)
    Something I've been thinking about since I picked up Ultimates 3: when a new creative team begins an arc on an ongoing series, what sort of responsibilities do they have towards maintaining the narrative direction established by the previous team? Certainly, a case can be made for creative freedom but that's not always a good thing, is it?

    Whedon's Astonishing X-Men isn't like Morrison's New X-Men, but there's an internal logic dictating the shift in tone (ie Cyclops and White Queen become the leaders in Prof X's absence, which naturally pushes the team in a different direction, gives them a different attitude).

    On the other hand, I have no idea what Loeb is doing with with Ultimates. It's like I was watching the Wire and suddenly it turned into CSI. In terms of the story, there's no given reason why the Ultimates suddenly go from an international peace-keeping taskforce to just another superhero team battling a bloated roster of supervillains.

    It's like a throwback. Madureira's re-designs underscore this. Does anyone else out there think this undermines Marvel's Ultimate label? I always thought the line was supposed to modernize their major heroes by providing a fresh take. What's the point, if you're going to tell the exact same stories as those taking place in the traditional Marvel U?
  1.  (2597.2)
    Something I've been thinking about since I picked up Ultimates 3: when a new creative team begins an arc on an ongoing series, what sort of responsibilities do they have towards maintaining the narrative direction established by the previous team?


    None.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPeter Kelly
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2008 edited
     (2597.3)
    While I see your point Warren and pretty much agree, I would like to add that I think their should be an internal logic to any shift in direction.

    I haven't read Ultimates 3 but I think Thunderbolts is a good example.
    There was a radical shift in that comic at #76, where a new creative team brought a whole new concept to the series, completely unrelated to the previous 75 issues. As a reader, I didn't understand that, it things are going to be that different, why use that title? Why not create a new comic book?

    Then Thunderbolts got relaunched back under the original concept, and then a few years later another new creative team (including our host here) shifted the direction of the book. But this time, their was an internal logic. I could see why the shift occurred and how the new direction came out of the old.

    So while a new creative team doesn't owe anything to the previous, I think there should be some sort of logical connection. ( i suppose this is the editor's department responsibility, the writer/artist should just be telling the best story they can)
  2.  (2597.4)
    While I agree entirely with Twicetold that the Loeb/Madureira Ultimates contains virtually nothing that was good and distinctive about the Millar/Hitch Ultimates, Loeb and Madureira don't owe me anything. They have no duty to produce a comic I like, and likewise I have no duty to buy what they produce.
    • CommentAuthorMathias B
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2008
     (2597.5)
    While I certainly don't know all the behind-the-scenes machinations of the comic book industry, I would assume that any major change in tone/direction would have to be okayed, or perhaps even suggested, by the editors. My guess is the people in charge wanted to take The Ultimates in a different direction, and found a creative team who would meet their demands. That doesn't mean I don't think Jeph Loeb (in this particular case) has any input at all, just that he's picked because he's on the same page as the Marvel people on how the book should develop.
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2008
     (2597.6)
    To paraphrase what I believe is the standard language in both the Marvel and DC Work Made for Hire contracts:

    "Marvel Comics (or DC) is the author of the work.'
    •  
      CommentAuthorTed
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2008
     (2597.7)
    They have no duty to produce a comic I like, and likewise I have no duty to buy what they produce.


    Absolutely. I don't like what I'm seeing, I don't worry, I just don't buy either.
    •  
      CommentAuthormojojoseph
    • CommentTimeJun 17th 2008
     (2597.8)
    I would have to agree with both Mr Ellis and Twicetold...which is a hard thing to balance really. The writer/new creative team has no responsibilty to the previous creative team as such, and also no real responsibility to the fans; for however long your team is doing a book, it's you story, not the previous teams, and a trope of comics is any major shift you do will inevitable return to the status quo eventually.

    However, I think it only makes sense to try and get any major shift in style/content to have a reason. The aforementioned examples are great, as is the new direction X-Men is going in now; new status quo, new challenges, new location. Any major changes it helps to have an internal logic behind it, helps both the fans and the creating team.

    Loeb and Madureira's run has but one attempt at reasoning their major change as far as I could see, and that is that some time has passed since the end of Ultimates 2. However, the characters feel so completely off from how they had been...to the point that they mostly seem like the 616 counterparts. It's too jarring for the audience, but if there had been greater attention to explaining this change (and I'd say early on, as it seems to be suggested there is a reason and that's a reveal yet to come, but the jarring has damaged the books reception amongst fans) it could have worked.

    But then again, it's not over, and maybe all will make sense and actually make the whole thing a better experience. I personally have felt that more and more comics seem to be written in such a way that they read better as a trade.
    •  
      CommentAuthorLokiZero
    • CommentTimeJun 17th 2008
     (2597.9)
    For me, Ultimates 3 is one of those movies you watch for the eye candy while not paying any attention to the story.

    Ultimates 1 and 2 was excellent in every way, and the series could've ended there and I would've been happy. in a way it did. Now I have a book every couple of months full of new art from Joe Mad.
  3.  (2597.10)
    new creative teams only responsibilities are to the work being good and taking the book in the way they pitched/were approached with.

    anything else smacks of "newsaramaism"- juvenile fanboy entitlement. if something like ultimates 3 comes out, my responsibility is to myself, my wallet, and logic: not reading crappy comics is MY patriotic duty.