Marvel's 'Civil War' is the new 'Clone Saga'

There are times when I weep for the state of the comics industry.

Sometimes my tears are for the mistreatment of customers. Other times my tears are for the death of small shops that form the industry's backbone. But increasingly, my tears are shed for the horrible stories that are being told. And you can add to that list of horrible stories Marvel's 2006 miniseries "Civil War."

I'm late to review this tale for a variety of reasons, but the timing of this post is unimportant. What is important is that I caution you against reading a story that should have never made it past the proposal stage. It's that flawed, that poorly executed and that offensive to readers.

I consider "Civil War" as fundamentally flawed as the abhorrent "Clone Saga" story that Marvel wove through its Spider-Man comics during the mid 1990s. Here's why...

1. "Civil War" was a bad idea from the start. The very idea that Marvel's noble heroes would come to blows simply because the U.S. government wants them to become licensed operatives is ridiculous. Some characters would resent such a move, and others would doubtlessly run rogue, but to think that this would divide the community down the middle is absurd. Heroes back the law, they don't break it.

2. "Civil War" lazily changed characters to fit the story. Captain America, who's fought for decades to preserve the American Way, would not so abruptly rally his friends against the U.S. government. Spider-Man, who's gone to excruciating lengths to protect his identity, would not suddenly reveal it to the world. And Mr. Fantastic, who's known to deftly balance ethics and science, would not do half the things attributed to him in the story.

3. "Civil War" was offensively political. I am weary of the Orwellian, post-9/11 stories that some comic book writers have thrust upon us. What was once contemporary is now simply clichéd. I need not another allegorical tale that rhetorically asks how many freedoms we're willing to sacrifice to maintain security. I expected something different from writer Mark Millar, who previously posed these questions in his politically charged "Ultimates." For him to retread this path in "Civil War" was uninspired and disappointing.

4. "Civil War" did not form a coherent, standalone story. I understand that Marvel's intent was to hook readers with the main "Civil War" series, then pilfer their pocketbooks as they sought "the rest of the story" via its many crossovers. But that should not preclude the company from telling a solid story to those that spend $24.99 to read the seven main chapters. Unfortunately, it did. To truly understand plot points and character motivations that are given egregiously short shrift in the keystone volume, readers must buy many other books.

5. "Civil War" suffered egregious pacing problems. As noted above, too many details that are central to the "Civil War" story are given short shrift. This is apparently done so that the main series can focus on more knock-down, drag-out fights. But this slicing and dicing of the "Civil War" plot incurs serious pacing problems that would make any Hollywood film editor cringe. Moments that could have provided readers with a much stronger emotional punch, for example, are over as quickly as they began. It's an amateurish mistake.

6. "Civil War" inexplicably ignored super villains. Perhaps somewhere in the myriad "Civil War" crossovers is an explanation as to why Dr. Doom, Red Skull, Magneto, Kingpin and any number of other villains did not exploit the tumultuous environment and strike while the heroes were in disarray. But such an obvious and important point is not addressed in the main story.

7. "Civil War" ended with a whimper, not a bang. For a story that began in such a literally explosive way, the deus ex machina ending to "Civil War" was inadequate and unsatisfactory. Captain America's sudden realization that he was wrong to endanger his fellow citizens through an unnecessary struggle shortchanges readers and violates one of the basic rules of major comic book crossovers. Big battles require big climaxes. Instead, this tale merely yielded a broken universe and dispirited characters.

8. "Civil War" failed to include its most important and lasting event in the main series: the death of Captain America. Told instead in a "Civil War" epilogue issue within the main "Captain America" series, the death of Captain America was among the few significant changes "Civil War" made to the Marvel universe that has not yet been undone. That the best thing to come of "Civil War" was something that did not happen in "Civil War" is an irony not lost on me.

9. "Civil War," just like "Clone Saga," spurred me to stop reading Marvel. If this is the publisher's creme de la creme, there is no reason for me to abide increasing cover prices and other pains that returning customers suffer. I have on DVD-ROM a treasure trove of old Spider-Man, Fantastic Four and Avengers stories. It's high time that I looked to those archived tales for my escapist enjoyment. Call me old fashioned, but I hold the small fraction of these issues that I've read in far higher regard than "Civil War."

At the end of the day, I simply find it unfortunate that Marvel allowed one man to so completely sully their universe. I would say this should be a lesson to Marvel going forward, but history shows the company is rather stubborn in this regard.