What Do You Think Of This Variant Cover?

#1 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

Hi Everyone.

I've just seen this 50 Years Of The Avengers variant cover for Avengers #19, and I find it a little odd.

Considering the first issue of The Avengers was released in September of 1963, it seems strange to me that they would choose to include Captain America in the picture, as he obviously didn't join until #4, in March of 1964. I realise he's become a much more important member than The Hulk, but given that this is an anniversary of the first issue, I think it would have made more sense to include Hulk rather than Captain America.

It seems to actually be an homage to this panel from Avengers #4 where Captain America joins the team:

If we take it to be that this cover is celebrating the early anniversary of Avengers #4 for whatever reason, then I suppose it makes sense that Hank Pym is appearing as Giant Man. If it turns out to be that they're doing several covers depicting important early Avengers moments, then this cover will be almost fine.

A problem I have though is that Wasp isn't named on the cover, despite appearing in the main image, and the corner image(which was first used on the cover of Avengers #7). The names at the top are clearly an homage to Avengers #1, where she also wasn't named for some reason, but if they're willing to change two of the names, would it really be so hard to add another? Especially as she's a founding member, whilst Captain America is not. No idea why they've done this. Seems unfair to me.

Anyway, apart from the aforementioned flaws, and possible strange choices, I think it's a pretty nice cover. Anyone got any thoughts on it?

Scarlotte.

#2 Posted by Wolverine08 (45540 posts) - - Show Bio

Sweet!

#3 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

Bump? Anyone else got any thoughts?

#4 Posted by spinningbirdcake (1430 posts) - - Show Bio

I love pointy mask Iron Man

#5 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

There are more, so the first one makes a little more sense now. Still annoyed about the Wasp name thing though.

#6 Posted by PeppeyHare (4310 posts) - - Show Bio

Ehh it kinda makes sense since Cap is still considered a founding member. Hulk never regained that status did he?

#7 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio
#8 Posted by PeppeyHare (4310 posts) - - Show Bio

@peppeyhare: Still considered by who?

The marvel universe..? Since Hulk left in #2 and Cap joined #4 they gave him founder status

#9 Posted by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

Damn these are great! Love JC's work.

On the Wasp thing, it looked like they were just trying to save space. I don't know, maybe she just doesn't get top-billing.

#10 Posted by PeppeyHare (4310 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

Damn these are great! Love JC's work.

On the Wasp thing, it looked like they were just trying to save space. I don't know, maybe she just doesn't get top-billing.

Wasn't it that way on the original covers as well?

#11 Edited by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

Damn these are great! Love JC's work.

On the Wasp thing, it looked like they were just trying to save space. I don't know, maybe she just doesn't get top-billing.

Wasn't it that way on the original covers as well?

In the first issue yeah, but I think her name was on a later issue.

#12 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose said:

@peppeyhare: Still considered by who?

The marvel universe..? Since Hulk left in #2 and Cap joined #4 they gave him founder status

He might have been given founder status, but he wasn't actually a founding member. If they're trying to suggest that this is the founding then that's just incorrect.

Maybe there'll be a cover depicting the real founding too though, in which case this cover would just be celebrating Captain America joining.

#13 Posted by knighthood (1744 posts) - - Show Bio

@peppeyhare said:

@v_scarlotte_rose said:

@peppeyhare: Still considered by who?

The marvel universe..? Since Hulk left in #2 and Cap joined #4 they gave him founder status

He might have been given founder status, but he wasn't actually a founding member. If they're trying to suggest that this is the founding then that's just incorrect.

Maybe there'll be a cover depicting the real founding too though, in which case this cover would just be celebrating Captain America joining.

Interesting covers. I agree with the Wasp snub. Plus, I never considered Cap a founder.

#14 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

@knighthood: It just seems so bizarre to leave her name off considering she named the team, and it was her and Hanks idea for the team to be an ongoing thing in the first place.

I think that makes her important enough to the Avengers history to get her name on the cover.

#15 Edited by knighthood (1744 posts) - - Show Bio

@knighthood:

It just seems so bizarre to leave her name off considering she named the team, and it was her and Hanks idea for the team to be an ongoing thing in the first place.

I think that makes her important enough to the Avengers history to get her name on the cover.

I had no idea. That's crazy.

#16 Edited by lykopis (10746 posts) - - Show Bio

@knighthood:

It just seems so bizarre to leave her name off considering she named the team, and it was her and Hanks idea for the team to be an ongoing thing in the first place.

I think that makes her important enough to the Avengers history to get her name on the cover.

It's a glaring omission - her name should definitely be on the cover.

#17 Edited by Riot_Sqrrl (262 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis: Perhaps her name was exposed to Pym Particles and one just has to be in a Microverse to see it?

#18 Edited by chem86 (401 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose: It does seem odd they would use Cap instead of hulk for this, but I don't hate it. I enjoy these throwback style issues, mixing the old style with the new. Like you said, I think it's more so celebrating the old school avengers as a whole rather than just a remake of issue 1. I'm also sure a big part of who to put on the cover is related to money.

#19 Posted by lykopis (10746 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis: Perhaps her name was exposed to Pym Particles and one just has to be in a Microverse to see it?

Sad thing is, it's a viable excuse (after getting your head hit with a falling Marvel anvil, that is). :P

#20 Edited by TheFirstLantern (1510 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose: I like the covers but I have to agree with your point about the Wasp. I think that Marvel generally doesn't expose Ant-Man and Wasp as equally as other characters which sucks.

#21 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

@thefirstlantern: The way I see it, in Avengers celebratory things, they probably should get the most attention, or at least more than certain other members. Other characters who have prominent solo careers get enough attention already, so this should be the place to display the team players who get overlooked.

@lykopis: @knighthood: It just seems so unfair to me for them to leave her off when she has just as much, or arguably more reason to be there.

#22 Edited by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

I've just remember that a very similar thing has happened before. The cover of Mighty Avengers #12 is a direct homage to Avengers #4, and recreates the picture its' entirety, apart from Wasp:

Now, Giant Mans right arm and leg, Captain Americas left foot, Iron Mans left hand, and the corner of Namors panel look cut off, compared to how the original is.

Does it look to anyone else like Wasp could have been in the original picture, but was cropped out for the cover?

#23 Posted by TheFirstLantern (1510 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose: I think since Ant-Man and Wasp don't have their own solo books(Avenges A.I, to me doesn't count as a Hank Pym book) they should get more recongition in things like this just like you said. Marvel just keeps shoving them to the side.

#24 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

Well, now we know what these covers are all about. They're each representing 1 of 5 decades.

60s

70s

80s

90s

and 00s

I can't help but feel that they could have just had Captain America on one of them, and used that space to show off more members.

But all of my 9 favourite Avengers are represented, so that's kind of cool. :)

Anyone disappointed to not see certain characters included?

#25 Posted by THORSON (2518 posts) - - Show Bio

cool

#26 Posted by spider11211 (1143 posts) - - Show Bio

I like them, I miss Thunderstrike.

Cap needs to be on each he is like the glue of the team.

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.