Have a drink. It might help that mortis attitude of yours.

Sunday, October 29, 2006

Villains Unlim…*Ahem* Thunderbolts

I’ve been thinking about the new Thunderbolts since the announcement on Newsarama. After much pondering, I have decided that I am very unexcited about this change in both characters and creative team. It’s not because I hate Marvel, but because I don’t.


I have never been much of a Thunderbolts reader in any of its incarnations. I have flipped through an odd issue here and there, but overall it’s not something that I went out of my way to find. However, in the first month of Civil War (whenever that was) I made a point to pick up all the tie-ins. Of these, Thunderbolts was one of the issues I enjoyed the most. There was something about Todd Grummet’s pencils, coupled Fabian Nicieza writing that gave the comic a good, villains attempting redemption feel. I am also a huge fan of taking characters that have not been fully explored before and giving them a chance to shine. It’s cool to see Zemo, Songbird and Mach-IV get their moment—it had a kind of a Suicide Squad feel to it.

However, with Civil War #4 we see the end of these characters and a whole new roster.
Let’s look at this list.


There are some holdovers: Songbird, Radioactive Man and Swordsman. Then we have Green Goblin. Ugh. Venom. Double ugh. Bullseye. Triple ugh. A-list villains who possess no real mystery and, more importantly, A-list villains who would never be on the same team. Marvel really is going to have a lot of convincing to do if I’m going to believe that the line up is put together for any reason other than marketability. My real problem though is the motivation. Redemption is a great way to move a story. A bunch of psychos getting their jollies by hunting non-registered superheroes is not that interesting. It sounds like an excuse for Ellis to write really screwed up story lines.

I can’t say Marvel is going to lose a lot of money because I’ve never really collected Thurnderbolts but they have lost a little more of my respect.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home