Avengers 1- 3 (Hickman, 2012)

It might be that every character has a limited number of stories. Captain America, revived in the 1960s, might be reaching his sell-by date (although the Brubacker run, which ended in his temporary death, suggests that there is still life in the old warhorse). The Avengers, despite having a bunch of under-used characters, seems intent on proving this argument.

Avengers 1- 3 (Hickman, 2012) has solid and clear story-telling, and sweet panelling - no 1990s' mayhem here, just a precise illustration of a straight-forward plot. 

Where characterisation appears, Hickman does a fair job - the friendship between Cap and Tony Stark gets a few scenes, Thor plays macho god. But the plot is a tired retread: The Avengers have to expand (done before), there is a planetary level threat on Mars (a DC favourite, usually), and the bad guys are generic and feel like a riff on villains from when The Authority was still worth reading (probably the Quitely/Millar years). And although the tension is built over two issues, victory comes at a low cost. Captain Universe - a shallow hero - has a word with the baddies. And they agree not

to mess with the earth. 

It looks good, but Hickman is trawling the past. The lack of jeopardy, character development (Cap gets to be all heroic and noble, a cameo from New Mutants Cannonball and Sunspot is mildly homo-erotic but hardly presents them as dynamic or interesting), even interesting fights (Hulk smacking Thor, sigh) makes this a less than overwhelming introduction for what is introduced as a 'new era' for The Avengers. At least it doesn't have Bendis' tin ear for dialogue, but this is running on empty.

Age of Ultron: Plot Synopsis

So the action starts with the American heroes overwhelming a Nazi Mad Scientist. They get hold of his experiments and take them back to the USA, and tinker about with his gear.

Well, that doesn't sound likely at all.

Not sure what to say about this...

The well-meaning American scientists decide to use the nasty Nazi science to create a peace-keeping weapon. No sort of commentary here on the ethics of post-war science.

Then it blows up in everyone's faces, as the peace-keeper goes rogue. It's like the writers have completely ignored the way foreign policy works.

It all kicks off somewhere in central Europe, with super-powered individuals raging at American industry for indiscriminately selling weapons of war to aggressive militias. Oh, it is almost libel.

Then the Americans have to step in to sort out a mess that they created. That has never happened before. But then they win, so there is some basis in recent history.