What happened to the Fantastic Four? They were the first family of the Marvel Universe for 30-40 years. The Thing was in the top 5 most popular Marvel characters and very recognizable to non-comic readers (even if they just knew him as “Rockman”). But I’d say they’ve fallen off a lot in recent years. When did it go wrong for the FF?
Was it when John Byrne left the series? When Johnny married Alicia...who was later revealed to be a Skrull named Lija The Lazerfist? When the theatrical films were lackluster or terrible? When Jack Kirby left the book?
Man, you could probably write a college thesis on marketing-- or on pop culture-- or on serialized story-telling (literature)-- with just this question as the jumping-off point, I bet.
From about 1997 through about 2003 I did read through the entire run up to that point-- primarily as bed-time/long-trip reading with little HBSon-- and then of course remained a subscriber until about 5 years or so ago when I abandoned ship on all new comics-- it was right at the time that Johnny died "for real", and Spidey joined the team, and they had those. . . white uniforms. . . and then my subscription finally ran out, and I was free. . . FREE!!
I darned betcha there are at least five BIG contributing factors to the book's demise, but I'll just toss out one REAL quick before I run off for a busy day:
It was THE first book of the Marvel era. As such, it was going to be the first one of that stable of true mainstays to run through its lifespan and finally succumb to oblivion. John Byrne's incredible run on the book may have exacerbated the issue. How does any creator follow up on a run where the writer/artist was obviously deeply and personally invested in the book and the characters? Answer-- they really can't. So the book drifts into a years-long declining phase of endless gimmicks, cast expansion & changes, changes in creative teams- with WILDLY different styles and directions for the book, "getting back to the roots" overhauls, retcons, "for real" deaths (Reed had one before the year 2000, in fact!), yadda-yadda-yadda.
And thus, as the earliest title, it is also one of Marvel's first to fall into the interest-destroying pit of creating the "illusion" of change w/out ever actually changing the book's status-quo. Ben has been "cured" or been given that option or given control over his changes two DOZEN times if it's even been once. Johnny was actually displayed more maturity as a young man in the late 70's than he did in the early 2000's-- how does a character "grow" into being an immature kid? Dr Doom is never gonna die. Sue and Reed may have troubled times, but they'll never split up forever. The conflict is false because it is without consequence unless the writer truly commits to making a permanent change. (Pete & MJ getting married) And even then, it can be undone by the very next writer/editor team. (Brand New Day).
I point this out because, for me, this is a system-wide phenomenon-- and the FF was the first book that didn't have a way to navigate around it and stay afloat. . .
So--Cause #1-- provided by your Friendly Neighborhood HB!
I've written a few blog entires about this topic. Byrne's run was the last great one but he was still doing Lee and Kirby's Greatest Hits.
1. With so many other super teams, the Fantastic Four is less special 2. Since they share a common origin, it's harder to shake up the lineup. 3. The FF has a family concept but doesn't allow the family to progress in any meaningful way. Reed and Sue should be responsible parents and become supporting cast members. Johnny's Peter Parker's age but hasn't acted like it in decades. And Franklin has been a kid for forty years now.
I think Englehart's run had the potential to move things forward but he seemed more interested in tying up threads from West Coast Avengers and Comet Man. Once Crystal got pulled and he brought in Mantis, he was already on the way out.
Great question! I would think that's pretty hard to pin down. I guess one of the reasons being the movies weren't really that great and it certainly did help. Other characters like Spider-Man and the X-Men have had more exposure recently due to the movies and also a change in our culture. People want to embrace diversity more so they talk about the X-Men. The Fantastic Four in a way are a product of their time (not a bad thing mind you). They have more in common with 60's sci-fi adventure stories like Doc Savage or Lost in Space than the modern superhero. They dealt with family issues, big sci-fi problems and had all sorts of cool gadgets. The FF also occupy their own little corner in the Marvel Universe. The FF can stand on their own and that is one of the problems. You don't need to connect any other character to the FF for them to make sense. You don't need the FF for Spider-Man or Cap or the X-Men or any of the other characters to do their own thing. Another reason why they have probably fallen into obscurity is probably because they have a pretty small team roster. Other teams like the JL and Avengers have a changing roster so they can do new things and have new dynamics anytime. You can't really do that with the FF. When they have, it's for a short period and it just didn't feel the same. That's my thought
HB has constucted probably the best list of FF tropes that I've ever read, and I think he may have a point about the "'illuson of change'" having taken its toll on the FF. But I don't think it is due to the age of the book (if it were then we would be seeing the effects on the other books to a similar degree) rather than to the family dynamic at the heart of the FF.
I don't think in general that heroes having children is a good thing due to the temporal structure in which these characters exist. How can Franklin forever be a toddler? That's not to say it can't work, Byrne did it, but I do think that it weighs the book down. I was never really able to get into the FF after Byrne for all the reasons cited, but the deal-breaker for me was Valeria and the proliferation of children towards the end. The FF is not a nursery school!
Certain aspects of the core concept still work and DC is trying very hard to use it with the new series The Terrifics (4 joined together by circumstance) and you can include also the Incredibles (4 joined together by family). But X-Men eroded both those in favor of "identity," and the Avengers assumed "mission" as reason for their association. "Family" and "exploration" were what the FF was all about, and those haven't been executed well recently.
There's also the practical side of it. Marvel didn't (doesn't?) own the movie rights to the FF, and so there is no reason for them to give the book it's best to provide material for another company to rake in profits from the films where the real money is. That's why the book finally shuttered, and while I hear a restart is in the works, I wouldn't be surprised if that is ultimately dependent on the status of the films.
One of the claims I make in that essay is that the Marvel Universe has become too small for the FF, in the sense that its universe is so well established and detailed and self-referential, that it has become nearly impossible to have the FF explore and discover anything new like they used to (so much of the basic of the MU first appeared in the pages of FF - from the Skrulls to the Galactus to the Inhumans, the microverse, etc).
A new FF book is coming back in August, written by Dan Slott (meh) and drawn by Sara Pichelli (yay!). The Marvel 2-in-1 book featuring Ben and Johnny (and a trying to be reformed Doom) searching the multiverse for Reed and Sue and the kids has been pretty good, too (I reviewed an issue of it and other recent comics on my blog just today!)
Great conversation starter J.A. We mimicked the question over on twitter @backinthebronze and the conversation is rolling there too. Check it out.
Regarding the question, I think a lot of it is changing feelings for the old style in terms of the four’s dynamics - the interaction tends to get repetitive as mentioned. What’s new with the core group? It started to feel like an endless parade of repeats, and it probably jumped the shark with Lyja, Valeria, and other familial changes. I look at some of those characters like cousin Oliver on the Brady Bunch. But that really comes down to storytelling - the FF demands innovative creativity. They are no longer on the cutting edge of weird exploration and strange scientific devices. At its best the FF was family, pseudo science, politics, exploration and the unknown. It hasn’t been like that for decades.
Dr. O - That's a great essay. I wonder how much of the perceived smallness of the MU has to do with hardly any new ground being broken since Lee & Kirby left the FF. Rather than go somewhere new, each subsequent creative team has mined the familiar territory for material.
I first encountered the FF during the Bronze Age, around the Thomas/Wein/George Perez issues, and while I enjoyed a lot of the stories, the main characters themselves never held a candle to groups like the Avengers or the X-Men. With the exception of the Thing, they were all pretty bland and, as mentioned, the roster was too inflexible (not to mention small) compared to the other team books.
Byrne did some fun changes that felt like a big deal, like moving the Inhumans to the moon, switching Thing for She-Hulk (although it's too bad that cost the team its most interesting member) but it never kept the series at the forefront of "must buy" books for me (I was much more committed to his Alpha Flight run which, again, had a diverse, interesting, ever-changing roster to hold my interest).
For what it's worth, I've since gone back and read a lot of the classic Lee/Kirby issues and it still didn't make me a fan. While I appreciate the tons of characters and Marvel staples introduced in those pages, Lee dialogue just brings to the forefront the dated, hokey aspect of the characters.
Or as one blogger has mentioned, the FF have long seemed like Marvel's "Dave Clark 5" compared to the X-Men as "Beatles".
As far as Marvel teams go, I always preferred the Avengers to the FF. I've read the entire first volume, but the only stories that really stuck with me were the early issues (#1-70 or so) and Byrne's run. Everything else just seemed like so much filler. (And DeFalco's long run was kinda weird overall, if I remember right.)
John Byrne once said something to effect that only He and Stan Lee and Jack Kirby understood the Fantastic Four. And he was very probably correct in that assessment, as is evidenced by the fact that the FF became next to unreadable after Byrne left the book. I tried to stick around for as long as I could after that, (because the FF is one of my favorite teams). But the decline in the quality of the writing and artwork took it's toll on my sensibilities and I gave up on the book a few months after J.B.'s last issue.
In the years following that time, the FF just spiraled further downward with a mishmash of terrible stories and bad art. It's like Marvel just had no idea what to do with them in the 1990's. The wholesome family dynamic of the FF just wasn't "cool" enough for that era. So, Marvel tried (in vain) to make them cool. They beefed up the visuals with Liefeld style artwork, and they uber-sexualized Sue Richards, and they tried to make Johnny Storm "edgy", and they gave Reed Richards a leather jacket and… a vest, and none of it worked. Try as they might, they just couldn't turn the Fantastic Four into the X-Men. (And don't even get me started on the shameful "Heroes Reborn" era).
During the 90's and into the 2000's I tried to return the book on several occasions, but to no avail. I had high hopes when Mark Waid and Mike Wieringo took over the writing and art chores in the early 2000's, but even they failed to do Marvel's first family justice. So, I gave up and started re-reading the Lee/Kirby and Byrne issues, and now I just pretend that's all there is when it comes to the FF.
Thanks for all the replies, glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks about this topic.
For me, I'd say Byrne's departure was the beginning of the end, if not the "actual" end. I sort of enjoyed the era when Ben led the team, with Crystal and Ms. Marvel II (Sharon Ventura) were on the team, but I knew then it was a big drop-off in quality from the Byrne years. I stuck with the series until at least 1989, but much of it is a blur now.
I had actually stopped reading FF for a couple of years before Byrne took the reins. His reverence to the Lee/Kirby years pulled me back in and I stuck around for a few years afterward. I think the end might have come sooner if he hadn't gotten involved with the title. To me, it just didn't age well and like others have said, the membership was limiting.....I never did get too fired up about any of the replacements that showed up.
Great topic. I am a huge FF fan, but I will disagree with many of the opinions here. I think the FF can still be great. Sure, there have been bad writers and bad story arcs, but the framework for great stories is still there, and still sound.
Like many here said, the FF is about exploring the Marvel Universe, blazing a trail for others to follow. Byrne was good, no doubt, his work on Galactus and Doom in particular was top-shelf. But he was hardly the end. Walter Simonson did amazing work with his much too short run--exploring time travel and Doom and the foundations of the Marvel Universe. Millar told an ok tale, the Marquis of Death. Waid had good instincts, but his run was cut too short---lots of exploring new areas. Even Hickman had some great ideas---going out to the Multiverse for the Council of Ricks...ahem, the Council of Reeds, lol. The FF right now, Reed and Sue and the kids, are exploring the Multiverse---unlimited possibilities. The new 2-in-1 with Ben and Johnny is showing that, and is a good read.
The past 3 films were not great, the last one just horrible, but the potential is there, a good writer is all you need. (But not one to look backward...I did not enjoy Morrison's Fantastic Four 1234, even though I like much of his other work) Hopefully, once the final Disney buy-out of Fox is done, the Marvel Cinematic universe will do for the FF what they did for Spider-Man.
So, I for one, hold out hope for the FF making a big comeback this year!
16 comments:
What happened to the Fantastic Four? They were the first family of the Marvel Universe for 30-40 years. The Thing was in the top 5 most popular Marvel characters and very recognizable to non-comic readers (even if they just knew him as “Rockman”). But I’d say they’ve fallen off a lot in recent years. When did it go wrong for the FF?
Was it when John Byrne left the series?
When Johnny married Alicia...who was later revealed to be a Skrull named Lija The Lazerfist?
When the theatrical films were lackluster or terrible?
When Jack Kirby left the book?
Perplexing indeed.
Considering how most of the Marvel Universe sprang from the FF’s pages, they don’t even register a blip on the cultural radar.
The Incredibles’ continued popularity attests to the concept having huge traction and interest, since they are a basic ripoff/homage to the FF.
Let’s see what happens now that they are with Disney, who obviously knows what to do with their characters.
Yoyo
Man, you could probably write a college thesis on marketing-- or on pop culture-- or on serialized story-telling (literature)-- with just this question as the jumping-off point, I bet.
From about 1997 through about 2003 I did read through the entire run up to that point-- primarily as bed-time/long-trip reading with little HBSon-- and then of course remained a subscriber until about 5 years or so ago when I abandoned ship on all new comics-- it was right at the time that Johnny died "for real", and Spidey joined the team, and they had those. . . white uniforms. . . and then my subscription finally ran out, and I was free. . . FREE!!
I darned betcha there are at least five BIG contributing factors to the book's demise, but I'll just toss out one REAL quick before I run off for a busy day:
It was THE first book of the Marvel era. As such, it was going to be the first one of that stable of true mainstays to run through its lifespan and finally succumb to oblivion. John Byrne's incredible run on the book may have exacerbated the issue. How does any creator follow up on a run where the writer/artist was obviously deeply and personally invested in the book and the characters? Answer-- they really can't. So the book drifts into a years-long declining phase of endless gimmicks, cast expansion & changes, changes in creative teams- with WILDLY different styles and directions for the book, "getting back to the roots" overhauls, retcons, "for real" deaths (Reed had one before the year 2000, in fact!), yadda-yadda-yadda.
And thus, as the earliest title, it is also one of Marvel's first to fall into the interest-destroying pit of creating the "illusion" of change w/out ever actually changing the book's status-quo. Ben has been "cured" or been given that option or given control over his changes two DOZEN times if it's even been once. Johnny was actually displayed more maturity as a young man in the late 70's than he did in the early 2000's-- how does a character "grow" into being an immature kid? Dr Doom is never gonna die. Sue and Reed may have troubled times, but they'll never split up forever. The conflict is false because it is without consequence unless the writer truly commits to making a permanent change. (Pete & MJ getting married) And even then, it can be undone by the very next writer/editor team. (Brand New Day).
I point this out because, for me, this is a system-wide phenomenon-- and the FF was the first book that didn't have a way to navigate around it and stay afloat. . .
So--Cause #1-- provided by your Friendly Neighborhood HB!
I've written a few blog entires about this topic. Byrne's run was the last great one but he was still doing Lee and Kirby's Greatest Hits.
1. With so many other super teams, the Fantastic Four is less special
2. Since they share a common origin, it's harder to shake up the lineup.
3. The FF has a family concept but doesn't allow the family to progress in any meaningful way. Reed and Sue should be responsible parents and become supporting cast members. Johnny's Peter Parker's age but hasn't acted like it in decades. And Franklin has been a kid for forty years now.
I think Englehart's run had the potential to move things forward but he seemed more interested in tying up threads from West Coast Avengers and Comet Man. Once Crystal got pulled and he brought in Mantis, he was already on the way out.
Great question! I would think that's pretty hard to pin down. I guess one of the reasons being the movies weren't really that great and it certainly did help. Other characters like Spider-Man and the X-Men have had more exposure recently due to the movies and also a change in our culture. People want to embrace diversity more so they talk about the X-Men. The Fantastic Four in a way are a product of their time (not a bad thing mind you). They have more in common with 60's sci-fi adventure stories like Doc Savage or Lost in Space than the modern superhero. They dealt with family issues, big sci-fi problems and had all sorts of cool gadgets. The FF also occupy their own little corner in the Marvel Universe. The FF can stand on their own and that is one of the problems. You don't need to connect any other character to the FF for them to make sense. You don't need the FF for Spider-Man or Cap or the X-Men or any of the other characters to do their own thing. Another reason why they have probably fallen into obscurity is probably because they have a pretty small team roster. Other teams like the JL and Avengers have a changing roster so they can do new things and have new dynamics anytime. You can't really do that with the FF. When they have, it's for a short period and it just didn't feel the same. That's my thought
HB has constucted probably the best list of FF tropes that I've ever read, and I think he may have a point about the "'illuson of change'" having taken its toll on the FF. But I don't think it is due to the age of the book (if it were then we would be seeing the effects on the other books to a similar degree) rather than to the family dynamic at the heart of the FF.
I don't think in general that heroes having children is a good thing due to the temporal structure in which these characters exist. How can Franklin forever be a toddler? That's not to say it can't work, Byrne did it, but I do think that it weighs the book down. I was never really able to get into the FF after Byrne for all the reasons cited, but the deal-breaker for me was Valeria and the proliferation of children towards the end. The FF is not a nursery school!
Certain aspects of the core concept still work and DC is trying very hard to use it with the new series The Terrifics (4 joined together by circumstance) and you can include also the Incredibles (4 joined together by family). But X-Men eroded both those in favor of "identity," and the Avengers assumed "mission" as reason for their association. "Family" and "exploration" were what the FF was all about, and those haven't been executed well recently.
There's also the practical side of it. Marvel didn't (doesn't?) own the movie rights to the FF, and so there is no reason for them to give the book it's best to provide material for another company to rake in profits from the films where the real money is. That's why the book finally shuttered, and while I hear a restart is in the works, I wouldn't be surprised if that is ultimately dependent on the status of the films.
The FF are my favorite super-team, so I have thought about this a lot and even wrote about it for The Middle Spaces in a post called: “Lo, There Shall Be An Ending:” Meditations on the End of the Fantastic Four.
One of the claims I make in that essay is that the Marvel Universe has become too small for the FF, in the sense that its universe is so well established and detailed and self-referential, that it has become nearly impossible to have the FF explore and discover anything new like they used to (so much of the basic of the MU first appeared in the pages of FF - from the Skrulls to the Galactus to the Inhumans, the microverse, etc).
A new FF book is coming back in August, written by Dan Slott (meh) and drawn by Sara Pichelli (yay!). The Marvel 2-in-1 book featuring Ben and Johnny (and a trying to be reformed Doom) searching the multiverse for Reed and Sue and the kids has been pretty good, too (I reviewed an issue of it and other recent comics on my blog just today!)
For some reason the link to the post didn't work. Here it is again: “Lo, There Shall Be An Ending:” Meditations on the End of the Fantastic Four
Great conversation starter J.A. We mimicked the question over on twitter @backinthebronze and the conversation is rolling there too. Check it out.
Regarding the question, I think a lot of it is changing feelings for the old style in terms of the four’s dynamics - the interaction tends to get repetitive as mentioned. What’s new with the core group? It started to feel like an endless parade of repeats, and it probably jumped the shark with Lyja, Valeria, and other familial changes. I look at some of those characters like cousin Oliver on the Brady Bunch. But that really comes down to storytelling - the FF demands innovative creativity. They are no longer on the cutting edge of weird exploration and strange scientific devices. At its best the FF was family, pseudo science, politics, exploration and the unknown. It hasn’t been like that for decades.
Dr. O - That's a great essay. I wonder how much of the perceived smallness of the MU has to do with hardly any new ground being broken since Lee & Kirby left the FF. Rather than go somewhere new, each subsequent creative team has mined the familiar territory for material.
I first encountered the FF during the Bronze Age, around the Thomas/Wein/George Perez issues, and while I enjoyed a lot of the stories, the main characters themselves never held a candle to groups like the Avengers or the X-Men. With the exception of the Thing, they were all pretty bland and, as mentioned, the roster was too inflexible (not to mention small) compared to the other team books.
Byrne did some fun changes that felt like a big deal, like moving the Inhumans to the moon, switching Thing for She-Hulk (although it's too bad that cost the team its most interesting member) but it never kept the series at the forefront of "must buy" books for me (I was much more committed to his Alpha Flight run which, again, had a diverse, interesting, ever-changing roster to hold my interest).
For what it's worth, I've since gone back and read a lot of the classic Lee/Kirby issues and it still didn't make me a fan. While I appreciate the tons of characters and Marvel staples introduced in those pages, Lee dialogue just brings to the forefront the dated, hokey aspect of the characters.
Or as one blogger has mentioned, the FF have long seemed like Marvel's "Dave Clark 5" compared to the X-Men as "Beatles".
-david p.
As far as Marvel teams go, I always preferred the Avengers to the FF. I've read the entire first volume, but the only stories that really stuck with me were the early issues (#1-70 or so) and Byrne's run. Everything else just seemed like so much filler. (And DeFalco's long run was kinda weird overall, if I remember right.)
John Byrne once said something to effect that only He and Stan Lee and Jack Kirby understood the Fantastic Four. And he was very probably correct in that assessment, as is evidenced by the fact that the FF became next to unreadable after Byrne left the book. I tried to stick around for as long as I could after that, (because the FF is one of my favorite teams). But the decline in the quality of the writing and artwork took it's toll on my sensibilities and I gave up on the book a few months after J.B.'s last issue.
In the years following that time, the FF just spiraled further downward with a mishmash of terrible stories and bad art. It's like Marvel just had no idea what to do with them in the 1990's. The wholesome family dynamic of the FF just wasn't "cool" enough for that era. So, Marvel tried (in vain) to make them cool. They beefed up the visuals with Liefeld style artwork, and they uber-sexualized Sue Richards, and they tried to make Johnny Storm "edgy", and they gave Reed Richards a leather jacket and… a vest, and none of it worked. Try as they might, they just couldn't turn the Fantastic Four into the X-Men. (And don't even get me started on the shameful "Heroes Reborn" era).
During the 90's and into the 2000's I tried to return the book on several occasions, but to no avail. I had high hopes when Mark Waid and Mike Wieringo took over the writing and art chores in the early 2000's, but even they failed to do Marvel's first family justice. So, I gave up and started re-reading the Lee/Kirby and Byrne issues, and now I just pretend that's all there is when it comes to the FF.
Thanks for all the replies, glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks about this topic.
For me, I'd say Byrne's departure was the beginning of the end, if not the "actual" end. I sort of enjoyed the era when Ben led the team, with Crystal and Ms. Marvel II (Sharon Ventura) were on the team, but I knew then it was a big drop-off in quality from the Byrne years. I stuck with the series until at least 1989, but much of it is a blur now.
I had actually stopped reading FF for a couple of years before Byrne took the reins. His reverence to the Lee/Kirby years pulled me back in and I stuck around for a few years afterward. I think the end might have come sooner if he hadn't gotten involved with the title. To me, it just didn't age well and like others have said, the membership was limiting.....I never did get too fired up about any of the replacements that showed up.
Great topic. I am a huge FF fan, but I will disagree with many of the opinions here. I think the FF can still be great. Sure, there have been bad writers and bad story arcs, but the framework for great stories is still there, and still sound.
Like many here said, the FF is about exploring the Marvel Universe, blazing a trail for others to follow. Byrne was good, no doubt, his work on Galactus and Doom in particular was top-shelf. But he was hardly the end. Walter Simonson did amazing work with his much too short run--exploring time travel and Doom and the foundations of the Marvel Universe. Millar told an ok tale, the Marquis of Death. Waid had good instincts, but his run was cut too short---lots of exploring new areas. Even Hickman had some great ideas---going out to the Multiverse for the Council of Ricks...ahem, the Council of Reeds, lol. The FF right now, Reed and Sue and the kids, are exploring the Multiverse---unlimited possibilities. The new 2-in-1 with Ben and Johnny is showing that, and is a good read.
The past 3 films were not great, the last one just horrible, but the potential is there, a good writer is all you need. (But not one to look backward...I did not enjoy Morrison's Fantastic Four 1234, even though I like much of his other work) Hopefully, once the final Disney buy-out of Fox is done, the Marvel Cinematic universe will do for the FF what they did for Spider-Man.
So, I for one, hold out hope for the FF making a big comeback this year!
Post a Comment