AVENGERS #150 was another book that was in the collection of my friend David Steckel, and which I borrowed from him to read at some point or another. It was a noteworthy issue for a couple of reasons, most of them not great. First off, it was one of if not the first comic book to make the point that a fiftieth issue was just as noteworthy and worth commemorating as a centennial issue. This was no doubt due to the fact that by this point, it had been proved that centennial anniversary issues tended to sell better than the ones around them, and wanting to hit that sort of jackpot without waiting every eight years or so. But the bigger point AVENGERS #150 is remembered for is the fact that half of the issue was an unannounced and unscheduled reprint, which completely undercut the planned celebration entirely. And in fact, a blurb on the cover promising the debut of a new Avengers line-up had to be removed at the last minute, though the question mark theme to the visuals couldn’t be so easily excised.
So what happened? Over on his blog, reader Alan Stewart attempted to gingerly answer that question in his own review of this issue and the next recently:
Alan tries to be even-handed and fair minded to all parties, not wanting to paint any of them as the bad guy in these events. But from what I’ve seen and what I know about how a company like Marvel operates, the person who fell down on things was writer Steve Englehart. He was late getting his material in, and when new EIC Gerry Conway informed him that a fill-in plot would have to be used instead, Steve decided to withhold his dialoguing of the back half of the issue, deciding that he’d force the company to go reprint on the issue as an act of revenge. This represented the end of Englehart’s time at Marvel in the 1970s, though he’d return a few years later in the 1980s and again later. It was an ignominious conclusion to what had been a stellar run of creativity and work, but Marvel was changing in ways that Englehart just wasn’t comfortable with.
Anyway, the plot for this issue is exactly what it was supposed to say on the cover: having wrapped up a series of interlocking adventures that had taken up most of the preceding year, the Avengers were gathering together to determine their new line-up moving forward. This hadn’t happened all that often, typically individual members might come and go, but having an entire story dedicated to selecting the new team was something of a novelty–though it had precedent in the very story that was partly reprinted to fill out the page count. Right away as the discussions begin, Thor steps down as Avengers leader and goes on a leave-of-absence, passing the gavel to Iron Man as the new chairman of the group.
But the issue wasn’t simply a conversation about the new line-up, it was also set up as an “album issue” that would recount the storied history of the organization through extended flashbacks narrated by news broadcaster Sam Reuther. Album Issues were another concept that Marvel had pioneered, and they helped to get across the idea that each individual story and comic book was only one small piece of a larger and more important tapestry: the Marvel Universe. As a relatively new Marvel fan, I loved an Album Issue for what it would tell me about older comics that I hadn’t yet had a chance to read. Here, it also gave relative newcomer George Perez the opportunity to re-create classic moments from throughout Avengers history, something he seemed to relish. In the short time he’d been working on the book, George had already made a big splash, and he was already considered one of the best artists ever to take on the series.
Unfortunately, even before the middle of the book, the story abruptly goes reprint, as a flashback to the very first Avengers line-up overhaul segues into an actual reprinting of the story in question. If I’m honest, as a young reader this didn’t really bother me (though, remember, I had borrowed this comic book rather than having dropped a quarter on it, so that may factor into my take here.) I was already a huge fan of Marvel’s 1960s output, and this story was one that I hadn’t yet experienced, so it made little difference to me that we were suddenly back at the point where Thor, Iron Man, Giant-Man and the Wasp gave way to Hawkeye, Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch, with Captain America remaining the only touch-point between the two incarnations of the team. I honestly kind of enjoyed experiencing it first hand. (Decades later, I reprinted this entire two-parter in the pages of AVENGERS (Volume 3)#27, which means that, yes, I reprinted a reprint.)
It’s also worth taking a moment to reflect on just what a brutal and unexpected move it was completely overhauling the Avengers series with this new cast of characters. Editor and scripter Stan Lee had been building the nascent Marvel Universe without entirely meaning to–he saw it primarily as a good way to promote all of the assorted titles in the company’s line. But as plotlines stretched out, often for months at a time, Lee began to receive a lot of mail from fans who questioned how, say, Iron Man could be in jeopardy in his own series yet perfectly fine in the pages of AVENGERS. Additionally, Stan had come to believe that the thing that was attracting a broader and older audience to his output was the soap opera interactions and personality conflicts between his assorted cast members. AVENGERS had relatively little of that, the group being made up of the stars of other solo series. So he instituted a sweeping change: dispatching Thor and Iron Man back to their own solo series and Giant-Man and the Wasp to temporary limbo (their initial strip had run its course after a lot of struggling to make it popular) and replacing them with a trio of characters who, while introduced as villains, had been played sympathetically: Hawkeye, Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch. Captain America’s solo series at the time was telling tales of his adventures in World War II, so there was no conflict there. And this new team of Avengers could bicker and adapt and grow and change more in the manner of the popular Fantastic Four, which was the sauce Lee was looking for.
It’s likely incorrect to say that Lee saved AVENGERS with this change; the series had been popular when it featured Marvel’s assorted solo super-stars–so much so that later writers Roy Thomas and Steve Englehart worked tirelessly to bring those characters back into the mix on a regular basis. But it did serve to both steep the book more in the flavor of what Stan and his cohorts were doing that was making an impact, while also firmly establishing the idea that the roster of the group could wildly fluctuate as necessary. So this reprinted tale set the stage for the new story that Englehart and Perez and friends were telling in the present–a tale whose conclusion I wouldn’t get to read for several years, as David Steckel didn’t own the second part to this adventure.
The Tom Brevoort Experience 
Cap’s Kooky Quartet was the least powerful super hero team in marvel history. Unless you count Rick Jones radio peeps. I loved all of the stories featuring those four.
LikeLike
There’s lots of cool stuff that happen in the first 16 issues of Avengers… but the team doesn’t interact all that much unless they’re on a mission, and with the exception of the Hulk… they all get along without much personal conflict. When the team becomes Cap, Quicksilver, Hawkeye and Scarlet Witch the book becomes much more character focused and cohesive imo. There are more interesting bits that happen between the members while they hang around and train. I attribute a lot of these bits to Don Heck…. who was an underrated plotter.
The Avengers’ bickering post issue #16 is similar to the FF, but the Avengers kept it simmering way longer I think… and their conflicts were more in keeping with a workplace dynamic. When Wolverine was first introduced he seemed much more like an argumentative Hawkeye than a Ben Grimm or Johnny Storm.
The reprint in 150 didn’t bother me either since I wasn’t familiar with the original. Likewise when I eventually read issue #16 it had a fair amount of story not in the reprint. It was all good.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I was a nine year old kid when I bought this off the rack at the local 7-11. I was a huge Avengers fan having been a collector since #122. So I was a bit disappointed about the reprint but I was loyal and gladly paid 25 cents each month to get my Avengers fix. My Dad would give my brothers and me a dollar each Saturday as our allowance for conducting various household chores. By then I had started to enjoy George Perez’s art so I quickly realized it was a reprint when I didn’t recognize the artist. I did enjoy the few panels Perez drew of the early Avengers. Lastly I just loved that Perez cover, especially the Vision as he was my favorite super-hero. Ironically the following issue had Jack Kirby draw the cover and Perez the inside story, pretty much the opposite of 150. I also liked the format of the 25 cent cover price at the top left which contrasted with the previous months’ “still only 25 cents!”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Having vented my spleen over this issue on Alan Stewart’s wonderful site, my focus today shifts more towards Tom’s explanation of why Stan Lee sent Iron Man and Thor packing. From a simple sales perspective, it never made sense to keep the “big guns” away. But I do understand the dramatic aspects. I also recall interviews with Roy Thomas about the challenges he had bringing them back to the series. Fortunately, he and Steve Englehart found a balance that maintained the Big Three as well as having enough other characters to supply the internal drama.
What I’ll add is that while “Cap’s Kooky Quartet” could dial up the soap, I did not care as much for their tenure. Villains like Power Man and Swordsman were a huge step down from Kang, Loki, Immortus and the Masters of Evil. Not wanting to incur anyone wrath, I will carefully say that I did not find Don Heck the right artist for the book at that time either.
Lastly, while I was unhappy with a reprint that I’d only recently purchased showing up in #150, I hadn’t considered that to a newer reader like Tom at that time, it would actually be an added treat. Always good to consider things from another perspective!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think the Don Heck era of Avengers looks pretty good… especially when inked by Giacoia, Romita, or Wood. I like Don’s inking of his own stuff generally though I think he was somewhat uneven when he inked himself on Avengers for some reason. I like the first Annual inked by Roussos(?) as well.
For my money he does seem to run out of steam towards the end of his run… though I like the issue where he pops back in when the Adaptoid attacks.
There are a number of good to great issues that feature just Goliath, Panther, Wasp, and Hawkeye.. but I do agree that the book perks up a bit when the founders rejoin.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good points, David. I’m actually less familiar with the book in the latter stages of Heck’s tenure. No question about the impact a certain inker can have and with someone who is not a natural superhero artist, that can be essential
LikeLike
I’ve seen some of Don Heck’s older comicbook work; guys in suits, women in dresses. Crime detective stuff, I think. I gained a greater appreciation for his skills. His use of ink to show light and shadow, his sheer ability to drew city blocks, cars, it wasn’t too far removed from Darwyn Cooe’s “retro” style, decades later. Less naturalistic than Al Williamson, but still impressive.
Before that, only I knew his 1970’s and 1980’s superhero stuff, and it just seemed to have run out of gas. Too bad no one thought to give him “Slam Bradley” in the 1980’s.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I don’t much care for Don’s return to Ironman in the 70’s, but I think he had a few shining moments here and there on other books. He unfortunately did the pencils for one of the worst looking books Marvel ever published imo (GS Avengers #4) and he could get saddled with inkers who didn’t suit him. His work never turned me off from a book though… and when he was cooking he could deliver solid work (Giant-Size Defenders #4)…. even when inked by Colletta.
Then there’s X-men #64 where Don inked by Palmer does a better than just passable Neal Adams. That said there must have been some ongoing frustration in the bullpen about Don’s work because I recall John Romita in an interview mentioning that they “tried to get Don to put more into it” in regards to the dynamic action in his work. John Buscema on the other hand thought Don was one of the best artists in the business.
For myself I think he was good at atmosphere, drew attractive women, and was very good with character bits. I think he generally struggled with super-hero action and power. He was more well suited for love, western, or sci-fi and horror comics. I think that if all of his super-hero work for Marvel was as well done as the origin of Ironman that his standing as an artist would be higher. He does a number of innovative things and the art looks attractive and confident throughout.
When he was at DC I think his Wonder Woman and Batgirl looked pretty good… as well as his art for Steel. A few years back I saw Don’s pencils for an unpublished issue of Steel and I can only describe them as “lush.”
Don Heck fun fact: I found out from Don’s niece that he had an above ground pool in his backyard that he stocked with goldfish. He loved fish.
LikeLiked by 3 people
From now on, this guy’s “Goldfish Donny” to me. :). Seriously, I think we’re on the same page. I liked that Defenders Annual as well as his Adams turn with Sunfire’s first appearance. As I believe I’ve mentioned before, Roy Thomas commented in an interview that superheroes were the bane of Heck’s existence as he was meant to draw Westerns. I haven’t read his DC material, but based on occasional images I come across, I would agree that it was a distinct improvement over his final tenure on Iron Man.
LikeLike
Speaking of other perspectives, I really should look up much more of Don Heck’s work outside of superhero comics. Whenever I think of his art, my mind immediately flashes to his final work on Iron Man back in 1971 or some of his other 70’s Marvel work.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Davis Plunkert, thanks very much. Interesting perspective. Good to know that John Buscema liked Don’s work. And the fish pool is notable, to say the least.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is true. John Buscema stated that “the guy’s gotta eat” and that he thought his art was fine. Wish I could recall the source so I could share it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cap’s Kooky Quartet was actually my first exposure to The Avengers, via the reprints in Marvel Triple Action. I had only been on board with the then-present day Avengers off and on for about 15-20 issues at this point, so the half-reprint issue seemed unusual, but I appreciated seeing that story for the first time.
LikeLike
Like Blue Is Love, Cap’s Kooky Quartet was my first Avengers, though in the original run (“When The Commissar Commands”). Probably my first Marvel period, which meant as far as I knew, the three new kids were all established legends. The found family aspect must have worked for me — it was the only Marvel book I bought semi-regularly, even though Spider-Man, in hindsight, was much better.
I hadn’t seen “the Old Order Changeth” so the reprint didn’t bother me. It fight neatly with the album aspect.
LikeLike
It took me a while to grow to appreciate Don Heck’s work. As with some of the other comments here, I developed much more of a fondness for him once I saw his art for genres outside of superheroes. For example, Heck penciled the second and third issues of the H.P. Lovecraft’s Cthulhu miniseries published by Millenium in 1992, just a few short years before he passed away, and his work on those comics honestly looked great. He was very well suited to drawing the horror genre.
Someone above mentioned Giant-Size Avengers #4. Yeah, that was a huge misfortune. Heck gets handed an incredibly complicated Steve Englehart plot to pencil in a very short amount of time, and to top it off he gets inked by John Tartaglione, whose work I never really cared for… it’s not surprising that GSA #4 looked bad. I really wish Dave Cockrum had been able to draw it as originally planned. Definitely a very disappointing conclusion to “The Celestial Madonna” storyline. But I don’t really blame Heck for it, I’m sure he did the best he could under difficult circumstances.
Anyway, I already shared my thoughts on Avengers #150 on Alan’s excellent blog post. So, I’ll just say that having been born in 1976, I first read #150-151 when Tom had them reprinted in Avengers vol 3 #27 in early 2000, so it did not especially bother me that a good chunk of the story was a reprint, but I’m sure if I was an older reader and had picked up #150 in real time it would have been very annoying.
LikeLike