Just Like the Bad Old Days, Almost: Dark Avengers #186

Mike Cassella

It's not quite the Bad Old Days of writer Jeff Parker's original Thunderbolts--the days when anything could happen and the consequences would be lasting. Not quite, but it almost could be…

Dark Avengers #186

Publisher: Marvel
Length: 22 pages
Writer: Jeff Parker, Mirco Pierfederici
Price: $3.99
Publication Date: 2013-04

To me the biggest problem with modern comics is their status as intellectual property that is licensed for existing on multiple media platforms. Without stakes, no story can truly be exciting or enticing beyond watching familiar characters engage each other in some way and maybe go through enough narrative steps until completion of a plot trope only to see it undone by an editorial or corporate mandate in a few months time.

Spider-man will not stay replaced by Doctor Octopus, for example. We know this because the character is too prevalent in media as an intellectual property. Gone are the days where Jean Grey could die after being possessed by the Phoenix or Barry Allen could sacrifice his life for the multiverse. Even supporting characters have to remain intact. Mary Jane Watson and Lois Lane won’t go anywhere no matter the story beats that may kill them off.

With all of these constraints put on a writer to adhere to, it’s a small wonder that anything can happen in a story involving superheroes anymore. At least in the 80s and 90s, there were “second tier” or “third tier” heroes that could be affected by a story but even those characters have been licensed to the hilt thanks to their involvement in the Avengers or Justice League franchises.

This brings to the Dark Avengers (formerly the Thunderbolts) by the unappreciated, yet supremely talented, hands of Jeff Parker with artistic support from Neil Edwards. Since its inception, Thunderbolts has been a book where the standard has always been change and the unexpected has always been name of the game. Since Kurt Busiek introduced the concept of villains masquerading as heroes and then, once exposed, trying to redeem themselves, the title has always been a place for truly suspenseful superheroics.

The main reason this title has always managed to set itself up as a book where anything can happen is that when your protagonists are villains that are not on lunchboxes or don't have a movie coming out next summer, anything can happen and often does. When the last version of the title picked up under Parker back during Marvel’s "Heroic Age", the book went through multiple phases with stories involving prisoners of the superhero prison, the Raft, released on probation to prove their rehabilitation and then watched as those characters suddenly were thrust into a time travel storyline that Quantum Leap-ed the team through multiple points in Marvel’s colorful history. The aftermath of this adventure saw characters introduced by Brian Michael Bendis in New Avengers become the new protagonists: The Dark Avengers.

This new team of villains with few morals and scruples masqueraded as heroes to gain the public trust were now thrust into an adventure where they must save an alternate world harkens back to the original stories by Busiek back in the original Thunderbolts title. The main difference lies in subtleties that Parker chooses to use by setting his team against an alternate New York City populated by corrupted versions of Iron Man, Ben Grimm, Doctor Strange, and Reed Richards who rule areas of Manhattan like ganglords. The inversion of the narrative pits the classic Marvel heroes, now taking on the roles of monstrous villains, against the only possible saviors: villainous analogues of the Avengers such as Trickshot, Toxie Doxie, and Ragnarok. Leading the “team” is US Agent and Skaar: Son of the Hulk as the only two heroes of the bunch and the only moral compass left for any of the characters.

The good news is that Parker manages to give us back that “who-knows-what’s-going-to-happen-next” fun that the book’s predecessor always evoked. The bad news is that there are areas of the book that seem to show the hand that the book itself is not going to be around much longer. Too much happens at once involving too many characters that the reader is assumed to instantly know the backstories of in order to be aware of why their “corrupt version” is acting a certain way. In this current issue alone we have references to the Mole Man, the Awesome Android, Clea, Namor, Venom, and Hawkeye with little in terms of exposition to explain what any of it really means to the main plot. It’s not Parker’s fault in anyway, though, as it seems that he is trying to tell a large-scale story in a very short amount of time using as many of the toys in the toybox as possible.

The other issue the book has going against it is that, frankly, none of the Dark Avengers are likeable. Sure, US Agent and Skaar seem to have some ability to evoke support from the audience, but they’re barely the focus of the book. Consequently haven’t gotten very many opportunities to stand out as protagonists. The expectation when the title launched out of Thunderbolts was that readers would have read New Avengers and been aware of who these Dark Avengers were and what their backstories and motivations were all about.

Frankly, I’ve read a great deal of Marvel comics over the years and wasn’t familiar with any of the team outside of Ragnarok (a Thor clone/android introduced during "Civil War"). With very little introduction, the group instantly being an unlikeable bunch, the only hook became the promise of US Agent being back on his feet and leading the team and the incredibly unpredictable adventures in an alternate reality. The latest issue, though, leads me to believe that with so many plates spinning, the storyline will not resonate as well as Parker’s previous Thunderbolts issues where the unscrupulous protagonists stole your heart whilst traveling through time and space.

It’s rare for a comic to exist using established superheroes and being unpredictable in terms of possibilities. Characters don’t often have consequences befall them like they used to and the rare moment when a book comes along with the promise of that kind of consequence, yields hope for a fun and entertaining time. Because Jeff Parker is a trust name for me in comics, I will continue with this storyline until completion to judge. So far elements are fun and off the wall, but it seems that every third beat falls a little flat and that feels more like the fault of unlikable characters he’s mandated to use more than his own flaws moving the pieces around.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.