Hey Marvel! If you really want to copy DC, then try this!!!!

Marvel Now seems to be a response to DC's New 52. I for one, think it's the crappiest idea from the "House of Ideas" since AvX. Instead of keeping books with original numbering and swapping creative teams. They wipe the entire slate clean, change creative teams and entire concepts. Which, isn't at all like anything DC would have thought of.

Let's try copying something from DC that might actually seem original, or at the very least refreshing. How about we wipe the entire Max imprint clean and go in an entirely new direction! How about we do something similar to Vertigo. We have plenty of characters that lend themselves perfectly to mature writing. How about books for Hellstorm, Dr. Strange, Ghost Rider, Deathlok, Punisher, possibly some Golden Age rehashes. Give writers free range on some characters that can benefit from free range. Maybe if when you guys had Grant Morrison on roster, instead of saying "what can you do with X-Men?" you said "cut loose on Hellstorm!" Instead of having Bendis write every company crossover, what if you let him do his thing with Dr. Strange. Instead of following in DC's footsteps with New 52, you could do much better with following in their footsteps with Vertigo. Just a Thought.

53 Comments
53 Comments
  • 53 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by EnSabahNurX

>_> They can't wipe the slate clean it would interfere with their franchises.

DC couldn't even wipe the slate clean hence the relaunch

Clean slates are for smaller companies or if marvel was crashing and burning in sales(like heading towards bankruptcy)

Edited by Dernman

Marvel Now isn't a bad idea in itself. Marvel Now is just different directions for different characters. Some will be good and some will be bad depending on you opinion. No back stories are getting changed. Marvel Now isn't like DC's 52 at all.

Posted by BlueLantern1995

@Dernman said:

Marvel Now isn't a bad idea in itself. Marvel Now is just different directions for different characters. Some will be good and some will be bad depending on you opinion. No back stories are getting changed. Marvel Now isn't like DC's 52 at all.

This

Posted by desmond006

@Dernman said:

Marvel Now isn't a bad idea in itself. Marvel Now is just different directions for different characters. Some will be good and some will be bad depending on you opinion. No back stories are getting changed. Marvel Now isn't like DC's 52 at all.

Pretty much this

Posted by Jodez

@Dernman said:

Marvel Now isn't a bad idea in itself. Marvel Now is just different directions for different characters. Some will be good and some will be bad depending on you opinion. No back stories are getting changed. Marvel Now isn't like DC's 52 at all.

Exactly this

Posted by Funrush

@Dernman said:

Marvel Now isn't a bad idea in itself. Marvel Now is just different directions for different characters. Some will be good and some will be bad depending on you opinion. No back stories are getting changed. Marvel Now isn't like DC's 52 at all.

Um... what exactly is Marvel Now? All I thought was that it was introducing a few new books, more jumping on points (as long as they aren't .1's ~sigh~) and changing the cover positions.

Edited by Adnan

Isn't the Icon imprint supposed to be Marvel's Vertigo? I'm aware they don't release much but still

Posted by Dernman
@Funrush said:

@Dernman said:

Marvel Now isn't a bad idea in itself. Marvel Now is just different directions for different characters. Some will be good and some will be bad depending on you opinion. No back stories are getting changed. Marvel Now isn't like DC's 52 at all.

Um... what exactly is Marvel Now? All I thought was that it was introducing a few new books, more jumping on points (as long as they aren't .1's ~sigh~) and changing the cover positions.

The will be introducing new books. Some books will be renamed and/or renumbered. New creative teams which will push books in a different direction then they were before. Also the X books and cosmic universe will be brought closer to the main marvel universe and stop feeling like a separate entity of their own. 
Posted by imbackwimps

dc is the worst what is dc new 52 nothing but Ultimate Marvel is an imprint of comic books published by Marvel Comics, featuring reimagined and updated versions of the company's superhero characters, including Spider-Man, the X-Men, the Avengers, and the Fantastic Four. The imprint was launched in 2000 with the publication of the series Ultimate Spider-Man and Ultimate X-Men. The characters have new origins, freeing them from the sometimes convoluted back-histories of the original versions. The universe has been designated as Earth-1610 within the Marvel Multiverse, which comprises an infinite number of alternate universes. NOW WHO IS COPYING WHO HERE

Posted by Blood1991

@Dernman said:

Marvel Now isn't a bad idea in itself. Marvel Now is just different directions for different characters. Some will be good and some will be bad depending on you opinion. No back stories are getting changed. Marvel Now isn't like DC's 52 at all.

Yep. Uncle Ben is still dead so it isn't like the new 52.

Posted by Zomboid

@imbackwimps: Ultimate Marvel and DC's new 52 are nothing alike whatsoever...they're two entirely different concepts. Ultimate is just stories taking place in an alternate universe to create new beginnings and versions of characters without changing the main 616 universe characters. The new 52 is a revamp/relaunch of the main DC universe, bringing all of their comics back to issue 1. They're the real characters still, not alternate universe versions.

Posted by Uno_Oscuro

@Dernman said:

Marvel Now isn't a bad idea in itself. Marvel Now is just different directions for different characters. Some will be good and some will be bad depending on you opinion. No back stories are getting changed. Marvel Now isn't like DC's 52 at all.

This

Its not a reboot at all like DC.

Posted by imbackwimps

@Zomboid said:

@imbackwimps: Ultimate Marvel and DC's new 52 are nothing alike whatsoever...they're two entirely different concepts. Ultimate is just stories taking place in an alternate universe to create new beginnings and versions of characters without changing the main 616 universe characters. The new 52 is a revamp/relaunch of the main DC universe, bringing all of their comics back to issue 1. They're the real characters still, not alternate universe versions.

what are talking about your not making any sense it is alike both made there comics start over with there heroes only difference is that dc did there main line and marvel started a new comic book series thats it but if anybody is a copy cat its dc ULTIMATE MARVEL IS DC 52 NOTHING NEW DC DID

Posted by darth_brendroid

Marvel decides to do new versions of characters in an alternate universe to introduce characters to new readers. Okay, Ultimate Marvel.

DC decides to wind the clock back on their characters and reboot some titles so as to attract new readers. Okay, New 52.

Marvel decides to launch a new wave of books starring major characters as jumping on points for new readers. Okay, Marvel Now.

If anything DC's rehashing what they did in 1985 after Crisis; maybe it's not identical to back then but that's the feel I get from it. Marvel's just doing what they've been trying to do the past ten years; attract new readers. That's what Ultimate Marvel was about, that's what Tsunami was about, that's what Marvel Next was about and it's what Marvel Now is about.

Posted by DickGrayson

Amen.

Posted by Jodez

Those reasons are kinda half-assed to be honest... the relaunch is a bad idea because DC books are cheaper? Really? The new 52 didn't attract new readers? That's just not true, The creative teams could potentially be restriced? Maybe or you know maybe we'll get some great stories from great writers

Posted by Jnr6Lil

Marvel's rebooting?

Posted by Nova`Prime`

@Jnr6Lil said:

Marvel's rebooting?

Not rebooting, there are just switching up creative teams to new titles and renumbering. From everything I've read about this Marvel Now none of the back stories of characters are being changed. So in fact it is nothing like the new 52.

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@Nova`Prime` said:

@Jnr6Lil said:

Marvel's rebooting?

Not rebooting, there are just switching up creative teams to new titles and renumbering. From everything I've read about this Marvel Now none of the back stories of characters are being changed. So in fact it is nothing like the new 52.

The OP is throwing people off than.

Posted by Nova`Prime`

@Jnr6Lil: Can't fault people for being misinformed, many people just read a thread title, or a news headline. And when DC did reboot they kept calling it a relaunch, so now DC fans reboot=relaunch, when in fact they are totally different. Maybe I am reading into the Marvel Now wrong and maybe Marvel is pulling the wool over our eyes, but I doubt it. They don't have a history of scrubbing years of character history when they relaunch, unlike DC, Marvel just ignores its history :)

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@Nova`Prime`: Reboot and relaunch are the same thing.

Posted by Jackson_Hartley

I'd say we just see what happens.

Whether it's like New 52 or not, it only comes down to your own opinion of like or dislike. Some people love 52 and some utterly despise it.

This is close to the argument of DC Vs Marvel, to which my usual response is: "Think of it like Coke or Pepsi. They're basically the same product; just go with the one you like best."

My response is still the same, only this time it's "Coke Zero or Pepsi Max."

Me, I drink both... none of the cherry flavors though. Just not my thing.

... I think I'm lost, am I still talking about comics?

Posted by Night Thrasher

@Jackson_Hartley: @Jnr6Lil: @Nova`Prime`: The whole parallel to New 52 IMO is the "restructuring" of an entire line. The backstories might not be changing, but the direction and tone for an entire lineup is. It's as much as a reboot you can have without having an actual reboot. My whole point of the blog is simply "Don't try to lure in new readers with new #1's on some already solid titles. How about giving us something newer and bolder, a line of comics that can actually capture the Vertigo crowd who seems to be much maligned right now. Some darker themed Ghost Rider stories could capture a piece of the market that Marvel really hasn't been doing well in for at least a decade."

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@Night Thrasher: More of a revamp than a reboot?

Posted by Night Thrasher

@Jnr6Lil: For me it's not about the "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" so much as it is about relaunching. How many times are we going to get the same title relaunched just so we can have another #1? Let the numbering continue, write good stories and don't worry about gimmicks. Did you really have to start Avengers over to get me interested? Just having Hickman on the title has my mouth watering. It seems to me as if it's just another set up to another event that's going to be lackluster and probably lead to another "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" that's starting to get redundant. Also don't forget they're bringing back the 60's X-Men and making some pretty drastic changes to established characters. I just don't see it being a "bold new direction" as much as it's a "bold attention grab" to get more #1's on the market and grab some market share!

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@Night Thrasher: Reboot is relaunch

Posted by danhimself

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil: For me it's not about the "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" so much as it is about relaunching. How many times are we going to get the same title relaunched just so we can have another #1? Let the numbering continue, write good stories and don't worry about gimmicks. Did you really have to start Avengers over to get me interested? Just having Hickman on the title has my mouth watering. It seems to me as if it's just another set up to another event that's going to be lackluster and probably lead to another "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" that's starting to get redundant. Also don't forget they're bringing back the 60's X-Men and making some pretty drastic changes to established characters. I just don't see it being a "bold new direction" as much as it's a "bold attention grab" to get more #1's on the market and grab some market share!

it's not about getting YOU interested...it's about getting new readers interested...new readers are more likely to pick up Avengers #1 than they are to pick up Avengers #635 or whatever number they'd be on

Posted by Funrush

@Dernman said:

@Funrush said:

@Dernman said:

Marvel Now isn't a bad idea in itself. Marvel Now is just different directions for different characters. Some will be good and some will be bad depending on you opinion. No back stories are getting changed. Marvel Now isn't like DC's 52 at all.

Um... what exactly is Marvel Now? All I thought was that it was introducing a few new books, more jumping on points (as long as they aren't .1's ~sigh~) and changing the cover positions.

The will be introducing new books. Some books will be renamed and/or renumbered. New creative teams which will push books in a different direction then they were before. Also the X books and cosmic universe will be brought closer to the main marvel universe and stop feeling like a separate entity of their own.

Ah, I see

@Night Thrasher said:

http://www.uproxx.com/gammasquad/2012/07/five-reasons-marvel-now-is-terrible-idea/

Can you post or PM me what it says? I've never been on that site and my comp is crap, so I don't want to risk it.

Posted by Night Thrasher

@Jnr6Lil: Semantics, to me a reboot is an entirely new direction, continuity changes, new creative team. Ala Crisis on Infinite Earths. Relaunch is new series, same characters, possibly new creative team. Ala newest Uncanny X-Men.

Posted by Night Thrasher

@danhimself: If a billion dollar movie isn't gonna bring in new readers then slapping a 1 on the cover isn't gonna do that much more of a difference.

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@danhimself said:

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil: For me it's not about the "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" so much as it is about relaunching. How many times are we going to get the same title relaunched just so we can have another #1? Let the numbering continue, write good stories and don't worry about gimmicks. Did you really have to start Avengers over to get me interested? Just having Hickman on the title has my mouth watering. It seems to me as if it's just another set up to another event that's going to be lackluster and probably lead to another "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" that's starting to get redundant. Also don't forget they're bringing back the 60's X-Men and making some pretty drastic changes to established characters. I just don't see it being a "bold new direction" as much as it's a "bold attention grab" to get more #1's on the market and grab some market share!

it's not about getting YOU interested...it's about getting new readers interested...new readers are more likely to pick up Avengers #1 than they are to pick up Avengers #635 or whatever number they'd be on

Exactly, same reason why I'm a comic fan who doesnt read comics, It's simply too late in the game to start.

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil: Semantics, to me a reboot is an entirely new direction, continuity changes, new creative team. Ala Crisis on Infinite Earths. Relaunch is new series, same characters, possibly new creative team. Ala newest Uncanny X-Men.

That makes sense. Relaunch is just a start over of the series, while Reboot is a startover of the universe?

Posted by Night Thrasher

@Jnr6Lil said:

@danhimself said:

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil: For me it's not about the "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" so much as it is about relaunching. How many times are we going to get the same title relaunched just so we can have another #1? Let the numbering continue, write good stories and don't worry about gimmicks. Did you really have to start Avengers over to get me interested? Just having Hickman on the title has my mouth watering. It seems to me as if it's just another set up to another event that's going to be lackluster and probably lead to another "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" that's starting to get redundant. Also don't forget they're bringing back the 60's X-Men and making some pretty drastic changes to established characters. I just don't see it being a "bold new direction" as much as it's a "bold attention grab" to get more #1's on the market and grab some market share!

it's not about getting YOU interested...it's about getting new readers interested...new readers are more likely to pick up Avengers #1 than they are to pick up Avengers #635 or whatever number they'd be on

Exactly, same reason why I'm a comic fan who doesnt read comics, It's simply too late in the game to start.

Honestly Marvel has been exceptionally well with new readers. The recap page is very informative, the .1 issues do a good job getting new readers caught up. Many of the characters with high interest fan bases have multiple titles and most of the line is still in the late 20's to 50's. A new reader could probably pick up a copy of any of the titles that isn't directly involved in an event and jump right in.

Posted by Night Thrasher

@Jnr6Lil said:

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil: Semantics, to me a reboot is an entirely new direction, continuity changes, new creative team. Ala Crisis on Infinite Earths. Relaunch is new series, same characters, possibly new creative team. Ala newest Uncanny X-Men.

That makes sense. Relaunch is just a start over of the series, while Reboot is a startover of the universe?

Yes..exactly!

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil said:

@danhimself said:

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil: For me it's not about the "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" so much as it is about relaunching. How many times are we going to get the same title relaunched just so we can have another #1? Let the numbering continue, write good stories and don't worry about gimmicks. Did you really have to start Avengers over to get me interested? Just having Hickman on the title has my mouth watering. It seems to me as if it's just another set up to another event that's going to be lackluster and probably lead to another "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" that's starting to get redundant. Also don't forget they're bringing back the 60's X-Men and making some pretty drastic changes to established characters. I just don't see it being a "bold new direction" as much as it's a "bold attention grab" to get more #1's on the market and grab some market share!

it's not about getting YOU interested...it's about getting new readers interested...new readers are more likely to pick up Avengers #1 than they are to pick up Avengers #635 or whatever number they'd be on

Exactly, same reason why I'm a comic fan who doesnt read comics, It's simply too late in the game to start.

Honestly Marvel has been exceptionally well with new readers. The recap page is very informative, the .1 issues do a good job getting new readers caught up. Many of the characters with high interest fan bases have multiple titles and most of the line is still in the late 20's to 50's. A new reader could probably pick up a copy of any of the titles that isn't directly involved in an event and jump right in.

DC's DCU Origins also help also

Posted by Night Thrasher

@Jnr6Lil said:

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil said:

@danhimself said:

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil: For me it's not about the "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" so much as it is about relaunching. How many times are we going to get the same title relaunched just so we can have another #1? Let the numbering continue, write good stories and don't worry about gimmicks. Did you really have to start Avengers over to get me interested? Just having Hickman on the title has my mouth watering. It seems to me as if it's just another set up to another event that's going to be lackluster and probably lead to another "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" that's starting to get redundant. Also don't forget they're bringing back the 60's X-Men and making some pretty drastic changes to established characters. I just don't see it being a "bold new direction" as much as it's a "bold attention grab" to get more #1's on the market and grab some market share!

it's not about getting YOU interested...it's about getting new readers interested...new readers are more likely to pick up Avengers #1 than they are to pick up Avengers #635 or whatever number they'd be on

Exactly, same reason why I'm a comic fan who doesnt read comics, It's simply too late in the game to start.

Honestly Marvel has been exceptionally well with new readers. The recap page is very informative, the .1 issues do a good job getting new readers caught up. Many of the characters with high interest fan bases have multiple titles and most of the line is still in the late 20's to 50's. A new reader could probably pick up a copy of any of the titles that isn't directly involved in an event and jump right in.

DC's DCU Origins also help also

For DC I find that the Who's Who was what helped me a lot when first jumping in. I really started reading DC after 52 and only really knew a handful of the B listers so the Who's Who caught me up to speed on many of them. Especially Hawkman.

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil said:

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil said:

@danhimself said:

@Night Thrasher said:

@Jnr6Lil: For me it's not about the "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" so much as it is about relaunching. How many times are we going to get the same title relaunched just so we can have another #1? Let the numbering continue, write good stories and don't worry about gimmicks. Did you really have to start Avengers over to get me interested? Just having Hickman on the title has my mouth watering. It seems to me as if it's just another set up to another event that's going to be lackluster and probably lead to another "(re)vamp,boot,structuring" that's starting to get redundant. Also don't forget they're bringing back the 60's X-Men and making some pretty drastic changes to established characters. I just don't see it being a "bold new direction" as much as it's a "bold attention grab" to get more #1's on the market and grab some market share!

it's not about getting YOU interested...it's about getting new readers interested...new readers are more likely to pick up Avengers #1 than they are to pick up Avengers #635 or whatever number they'd be on

Exactly, same reason why I'm a comic fan who doesnt read comics, It's simply too late in the game to start.

Honestly Marvel has been exceptionally well with new readers. The recap page is very informative, the .1 issues do a good job getting new readers caught up. Many of the characters with high interest fan bases have multiple titles and most of the line is still in the late 20's to 50's. A new reader could probably pick up a copy of any of the titles that isn't directly involved in an event and jump right in.

DC's DCU Origins also help also

For DC I find that the Who's Who was what helped me a lot when first jumping in. I really started reading DC after 52 and only really knew a handful of the B listers so the Who's Who caught me up to speed on many of them. Especially Hawkman.

Ah. Comic book tv shows help new readers also.

Posted by GR2Blackout

Marvel Now isn't exactly a reboot. There just changing there comics. I'm not sure how, but thats what they said on there website, in interviews, yadda, yadda.

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@GR2Blackout said:

Marvel Now isn't exactly a reboot. There just changing there comics. I'm not sure how, but thats what they said on there website, in interviews, yadda, yadda.

So a revamp

Posted by Nova`Prime`

@Jnr6Lil said:

@Nova`Prime`: Reboot and relaunch are the same thing.

No they aren't. A reboot is when the background of a character is changed and a relaunch is generally a cosmetic change like numbering and creative teams.

Posted by Nova`Prime`

@Night Thrasher: I agree with your Vertigo statement, Marvel has a great imprint for just such stories in the MAX titles. They really should have thought about expanding that before doing surface changes to the already established titles. I think a Ghost Rider MAX would be a step in the right direction same with Man-Thing and Doc. Stange. Those would all be great MAX horror books.

Posted by Jnr6Lil

@Nova`Prime` said:

@Jnr6Lil said:

@Nova`Prime`: Reboot and relaunch are the same thing.

No they aren't. A reboot is when the background of a character is changed and a relaunch is generally a cosmetic change like numbering and creative teams.

That would be a revamp.

Posted by Night Thrasher

@Nova`Prime` said:

@Night Thrasher: I agree with your Vertigo statement, Marvel has a great imprint for just such stories in the MAX titles. They really should have thought about expanding that before doing surface changes to the already established titles. I think a Ghost Rider MAX would be a step in the right direction same with Man-Thing and Doc. Stange. Those would all be great MAX horror books.

I've been praying for years that they would do something interesting with Marvel Max other than Punisher. Maybe expanding on Mystic Aracana would be nice. Give us some of the old Midnight Sons in a proper fashion. How many disgruntled Vertigo guys could you get with Werewolf by Night or Ghost Rider. I even have the pitch to the writer.

"Dear Neil Gaiman/Warren Ellis: Come over here and do some of our Max series where we give you free range to go nuts; and we'll cut you in on that sweet Icon deal like Mark Millar. You know, the deal where you get to publish whatever you want, own the rights, and it instantly turns into a movie. You know, that deal!"

Edited by Nova`Prime`

@Night Thrasher said:

I've been praying for years that they would do something interesting with Marvel Max other than Punisher. Maybe expanding on Mystic Aracana would be nice. Give us some of the old Midnight Sons in a proper fashion. How many disgruntled Vertigo guys could you get with Werewolf by Night or Ghost Rider. I even have the pitch to the writer.

"Dear Neil Gaiman/Warren Ellis: Come over here and do some of our Max series where we give you free range to go nuts; and we'll cut you in on that sweet Icon deal like Mark Millar. You know, the deal where you get to publish whatever you want, own the rights, and it instantly turns into a movie. You know, that deal!"

That sounds like a perfect pitch... although Ellis knows all about MAX after all he's the one that put the Punisher back on the map.

Posted by Night Thrasher

@Nova`Prime` said:

@Night Thrasher said:

I've been praying for years that they would do something interesting with Marvel Max other than Punisher. Maybe expanding on Mystic Aracana would be nice. Give us some of the old Midnight Sons in a proper fashion. How many disgruntled Vertigo guys could you get with Werewolf by Night or Ghost Rider. I even have the pitch to the writer.

"Dear Neil Gaiman/Warren Ellis: Come over here and do some of our Max series where we give you free range to go nuts; and we'll cut you in on that sweet Icon deal like Mark Millar. You know, the deal where you get to publish whatever you want, own the rights, and it instantly turns into a movie. You know, that deal!"

That sounds like a perfect pitch... although Ellis knows all about MAX after all he's the one that put the Punisher back on the map.

Ennis..

Edited by Nova`Prime`

@Night Thrasher said:

@Nova`Prime` said:

@Night Thrasher said:

I've been praying for years that they would do something interesting with Marvel Max other than Punisher. Maybe expanding on Mystic Aracana would be nice. Give us some of the old Midnight Sons in a proper fashion. How many disgruntled Vertigo guys could you get with Werewolf by Night or Ghost Rider. I even have the pitch to the writer.

"Dear Neil Gaiman/Warren Ellis: Come over here and do some of our Max series where we give you free range to go nuts; and we'll cut you in on that sweet Icon deal like Mark Millar. You know, the deal where you get to publish whatever you want, own the rights, and it instantly turns into a movie. You know, that deal!"

That sounds like a perfect pitch... although Ellis knows all about MAX after all he's the one that put the Punisher back on the map.

Ennis..

So I was off by two letters and a first name, sue me :P

But thanks for the correction, I'll edit my post.

Although Ennis's work on Punisher's MAX line could have helped him launch The Boys.

Posted by Night Thrasher

@Nova`Prime` said:

@Night Thrasher said:

@Nova`Prime` said:

@Night Thrasher said:

I've been praying for years that they would do something interesting with Marvel Max other than Punisher. Maybe expanding on Mystic Aracana would be nice. Give us some of the old Midnight Sons in a proper fashion. How many disgruntled Vertigo guys could you get with Werewolf by Night or Ghost Rider. I even have the pitch to the writer.

"Dear Neil Gaiman/Warren Ellis: Come over here and do some of our Max series where we give you free range to go nuts; and we'll cut you in on that sweet Icon deal like Mark Millar. You know, the deal where you get to publish whatever you want, own the rights, and it instantly turns into a movie. You know, that deal!"

That sounds like a perfect pitch... although Ellis knows all about MAX after all he's the one that put the Punisher back on the map.

Ennis..

So I was off by two letters and a first name, sue me :P

But thanks for the correction, I'll edit my post.

I do it all the time too...

Posted by JayMar89

im looking forward to it im new to comics and am glad there will be some jumping on points for marvel

Posted by Night Thrasher

@JayMar89: Honestly almost every book is a "jumping on" point. I "jumped on" to Spider-Man during the Clone Saga. If you like the characters you pick it up and catch up along the way. My first comic book guy got me in during the Clone Saga and gave me some good advice on what to read from the $.25 bin.

  • 53 results
  • 1
  • 2