Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Comic Books >

Whither the Ultimate line?

Glenn Close But No Cigar

13:47 / 19.12.06

It's some 6 years since the launch of the Ultimate Universe, and I'm wondering what you make of it now. Has the 'thrill' of seeing Ultimate versions of 616 characters crop up in the ongoing titles waned? Do you feel a certain ennui at the prospect of 'Ultimate Demiurge'? Is it a problem that the logic of the UU project turns on old wine in new bottles, rather than the creation of NEW, non-616 leading characters (Hawk-Owl and Woody from 'Ultimate Adventures' are the only ones that spring to mind, and they were voted off Celebrity Love Island in the U-Decide readers' poll). Is the UU as tight a ship as you'd like, or would you prefer it to spiral into joyous, contradictory madness? Looking back, was the UU (beyond commercial considerations) a necessary move, or actually a form of creative cowardice? Finally, how does it compare (in theory and in practice) to the All Star method of approaching a set of interlinked characters / corporate properties?

14:06 / 19.12.06

I think a bit more continuity between projects would be nice to see. The Ultimates itself is practically happening in an alternate reality of its own due to the delays in issues coming out. (Look at all the Ultimate Galactus trilogys where they were having to put a note in saying it happens before Volume 2 of Ultimates).

Spiderman I can't comment on (although I enjoyed the first few collected sets). I've been nominally keeping abreast of U. X-men but it's not doing anything spectacularly orginal in my book.

Out of all of the Ultimate titles the one I enjoy on a regular basis is Ultimate Fantastic Four. It's storylines seem much fresher to me, and much less based on 616 continuity (could do with less of Human Torch spending entire arcs badly injured/diseased though).

I'm not too sure about Ultimate Power (the crossover with Supreme Power) yet. It could be interesting, it could just as easily flop.

Haus of Mystery

14:17 / 19.12.06

It could certainly be pointless.

14:40 / 19.12.06

Has the 'thrill' of seeing Ultimate versions of 616 characters crop up in the ongoing titles waned? ... Is it a problem that the logic of the UU project turns on old wine in new bottles, rather than the creation of NEW, non-616 leading characters

Yeah, I think one of the big problems with the Ultimate line is that six years ago or whatever, all you heard is how these were comics for brand-new readers. But they seem to have abandoned that altogether and gone right for courting existing readers with alternative versions of characters they already like, because the solicitations are all on the order of "Introducing Ultimate Stilt-Man! But this ain't the loser you're used to--now he's a bloodthirsty assassin working for the Yakuza!"

I also think it allows editorial to have their cake and eat it to, functioning as an excuse to do stuff like Civil War and say "Hey, if you don't LIKE Spider-Man in armor, an asshole Iron Man, and Reed Richards defending HUAC, why don't you read the relatively unspoiled Ultimate versions instead?"

Spyder Todd 2008

14:52 / 19.12.06

Of the Ultimate titles, I think that Spider-Man remains the most consistent in terms of quality, if only because the creative team hasn’t changed much since it started. Yes, Bendis needs to learn how to condense his stories better, and the series rarely does anything groundbreaking, but it’s generally fun to read. It’s emotionally engaging and filled with teenage angst and Peter and Kitty Pyrde are very cute together.

Ultimates is the Ultimates. It’s very violent and nice to look at, and it would be very nice if more than 2 issues came out a year. Seriously.

X-Men is kind of boring, really. It has a lot of potential, I think, and it consistently fails to live up to it. It’s mostly just fluff, and honestly, it doesn’t make me care about the characters like Spider-Man does. Meh. I love Invincible and Battle Pope, but Robert Kirkman’s X-Men is just bland.

I loved Millar’s run on Fantastic Four. I honestly thought it was the best thing he’d written since Red Son. It was well paced, it had some crazy crazy-stuff happen, he got rid of Goat-Doom (thank the gods), and it was cool to read. Greg Land draws very pretty pictures as well. But I really don’t care for Mike Carey’s work on anything at all, so I’m not reading it anymore.

14:53 / 19.12.06

I've enjoyed some of the more stripped-down Ultimate Universe books. I think they capture the essence of the original titles far better than the 616 books which have become, at this point, little more than caretakers of continuity. Ultimate FF has really mined the whole science adventure genre; the Ultimates has delivered on the "Big Bang" superhero paramilitary fun promise; and Ultimate Spider-Man has been a great soap opera, far more enjoyable when it plows the soap opera field than when it gets into super-battles.

I actually wish there was less continuity, and fewer 616 characters revamped for the Ultimate universe. A lot of the early Marvel characters had such great concepts that it's a shame to see them become little more than comic book episodes of "The Love Boat" with the emphasis placed on this month's guest stars.

What is the fascination with continuity anyways? "South Park" and "The Simpsons" totally ignore continuity and it's a strength rather than a weakness. When did the tail start wagging the dog?

Haus of Mystery

15:00 / 19.12.06

The Ultimate line is now revealed for what it always was; a way for Bendis and Millar to write the comics they wanted to write when they were 12. Marvel actually created an entire Universe for these two herberts to play around in.
To Bendice's credit he's stuck to his mandate of writing an uncluttered Spiderman comic, but the continual retreading of 'classic' storylines is something of a creative cul de sac. Howsabout some...NEW characters boys?

15:45 / 19.12.06

Y'see, I don't mind the retreading and reworking of old stories. As a Marvel reader that came in through Ultimate Spider-Man, I've not read those old stories, so the conflicts were fresh to me. I've been reading the book solidly since the first issue and I've really enjoyed it, a young Spider-Man just makes sense - it was how the character was designed. The set-up of Peter's homelife is pretty different from the 616 version too, Aunt May is a markedly different character and all the better for it and the Peter/Gwen/MJ triangle is particularly brilliant at the moment. The Ultimate Spidey universe is different enough to justify it's existence but familiar enough to entice new readers because you're getting an authentic take on some classic heroes but without the baggage of time, and that goes for the whole Ultimate line.

As for continuity, yes there is quite a bit by now, but by no means as much as the 616 universe. In fact, you could say it's a selling point. The backlog of books for a new reader is very manageable. They're all in print and only about 6 years worth of stories. Get a new reader hooked on Ultimate Spidey and they'll want to check out some older or subsequent trades, but they can also see that all the other books are available easily, so you can read the whole history of the Ultimate universe, should you so please, without having to hunt too much, or read too much obscure old tat.

Having spent some time with my Ultimate collection recently, I'm pretty impressed at the quality throughout the line and how Marvel has kept it that way. I've not read Ultimate X-Men (but plan on catching up via the trades), but the only misstep I can think of was the utterly forgetable Ultimate X-Men/Fantastic Four. The rest of the line has been very solid and occasionally pretty great comics.

17:13 / 19.12.06

To Bendice's credit he's stuck to his mandate of writing an uncluttered Spiderman comic, but the continual retreading of 'classic' storylines is something of a creative cul de sac. Howsabout some...NEW characters boys?

To be fair they might not have a lot of room to maneuver - there could well be some stringent editorial policies in place. Then again, maybe not.

For the record, I've enjoyed a lot of USM. Much, much better than the Ultimates, that's for sure.

Our Lady Has Left the Building

05:59 / 20.12.06

I've only read Millar's Ultimate X-Men and Ultimates Volume 1 but I have to say I only really like the latter. There's a few almost interesting ideas in X-Men but for the stories Millar bothers to tell it's incredibly long-winded and there's some awful artwork in there (Not Millar's fault but I'm thinking of the Hellfire Club storyline where at one point Wolverine, Cyclops and Kitty Pryde are in the Savage Land in some horrible computer-aided design stylee). I suspect it's written for the trade but even on reading them I feel short-changed.

I suspect I only like Ultimates due to the art. Millar is, at best, a competent scripter, I'd like to see something from him that moves me in any way whatsoever, but that's for a different topic. I did enjoy Ultimates the first time I read it but it doesn't have much to reward rereading.

I also believe it's aimed at people who read the regular comics anyway. I don't believe Ultimate Nightmare would have been commissioned if the line were genuinely for new readers, too much of it relies on knowing winks to the audience: "do you see what we did there?"

Hallo, Paper Spaceboy

06:22 / 20.12.06

Ultimate X-Men is fairly bland from what I've read, although I liked Immonen's artwork on it during the Magnetic North storyline and would actually read a book starring Frost's Ultimate Hellions (including baseline human genius Doug Ramsey). Ultimates has it's moments but ultimately never seemed to go anywhere significant and I couldn't ever really feel anything for its characters. And scheduling errors because apparently it takes a really long time to draw tons of splash page fight scenes.

Ultimate Fantastic Four is good at moments and I find I like storylines in particular and other ones not so much. Ellis's stuff was fun, at least, even with the Goat-Doom, because Doom was using bluetooth to make monster insect robot death machines. There was the original Ultimate Mad Thinker storyline which was suitably weird and I loved Rhona Burchill's dialogue -- her speech patterns are eerie fun. And Pascual Ferry's drawing some sexy pseudo-New God shizzit in the title right now. It's notable for being more cosmic than I would necessarily associate with the Ultimate Universe. I find the problem with a lot of the Ultimate stuff is that it's very -- flat. Colourless. It's trying very much to be grown up in some cases (the casual brutality of Ultimates, for example) but I'm ultimately (heh) left feeling like they've left out the colour.

I never really bothered with Ultimate Spiderman, mostly because I've never been much into him, and with him I *like* that there's been a change of status quo in the main universe.

yawn - thing's buddy

10:15 / 20.12.06

The first 6 issues of D'Ultimates (book wan) are very very good. the rest of the series - IMO - has barely been more than a substandard retread of those first six issues.

I haven't bothered with the rest of the Ul-titles - mainly because I've never felt close to Marvel - in the way I have to DC, say - but also because what I liked about Marvel was it's shiny naievety and lack of grit (generally).

Marvel Boy was an excellent upgrade of the Marvel universe. It held on to all the pop-tropes that made Marvel fun in the first place, but somehow brought all the grit, shit and gloom into play too, without it seeming doomy. It could have been a great template for a MU revamp . . . but would probably have been equally useless at securing new readers (it was still a bit 'dense' for fresh eyes I reckon)

DC's All-Star approach is clearly more flexible and probably more durable too. however it doesn't quite create the same commercial or critical buzz.

but it did lead to the production of that insanely ridiculous Batman and Robin comic by Frank Miller and Jim Lee.

which was nice.

Haus of Mystery

10:39 / 20.12.06

Reading that comic is like taking drugs and watching a car crash.

I can't decide if that's a good thing.

02:49 / 24.12.06

but also because what I liked about Marvel was it's shiny naievety and lack of grit (generally).

What the hell are you chattin', Scottish? Marvel is the one that's gritty and "on the streets". Mutant witchhunts, alternate futures that are always rubbish, Spider-man wanking in the rain over Gwen Stacey, Dared Devil in Hell's Kitchen. GRIT.

yawn - thing's buddy

12:30 / 24.12.06

yeah - tripples I see your point. you're right. that spidey-wanking stuff you talk of sounds very gritty indeed. and yeah, miler's daredevil at least, was for sure, hard and as street as fuck.

and of course, back in the '60s marvel was all about placing superheroes in the real world, giving them 'human' problems to deal with, peter parker and his aunt blah etc. so from that angle I've got it totally wrong.

but:

for me, DC universe is kinda like a realm of fallen ancient gods struggling with the dirt of 20th-21st century human society, whereas Marvel is more like a pop-science environment populated by augmented humans.

also, with DC's reinvention post dark-knight and watchmen - that's over 20 years ago now - and the subsequent launch of vertigo, I'd say that DC became the 'street' while marvel drifted away from it.

when I was a teenager, titles like hellblazer, swamp thing, watchmen, dark knight, killing joke seemed gritty.

xmen and the 'fall of the mutants' on the other hand, didnae (that's 'didn't', ya morris dancin' acolyte).

pays not to genenralise too often, spose.

Haus of Mystery

23:27 / 24.12.06

for me, DC universe is kinda like a realm of fallen ancient gods struggling with the dirt of 20th-21st century human society, whereas Marvel is more like a pop-science environment populated by augmented humans.

Maybe it's the whiskey, but that seems like the best summation of the Big Two I've ever read. Merry Christmas!

yawn - thing's buddy

10:33 / 25.12.06

dude: I love you! - hic -

Merry Christmas!!!!!!