Comic Vine News


Latest Marvel Teaser - March 2013 A.U.

Can you crack the code?

Marvel does a lot of teasers. We got this one simply saying March 2013 A.U.

No Caption Provided

What? What could these numbers mean?

It doesn't take a genius (or former high school Mathematics teacher like myself) to figure out what this means. But to keep it fun and let you guess if you haven't figured it out, you can check out the spoiler tag below. I won't even tag this article with what it's about.


Each string of numbers represents a letter or space. This simply says:

A g e _ o f _ U l t r o n

It just got real, folks.

108 CommentsRefresh
Avatar image for redheadedatrocitus
Posted By RedheadedAtrocitus

I guess its something for Marvel NOW to compete with since next year DC's New 52 has the Trinity War to be dealt with...

Avatar image for donfelipe
Posted By DonFelipe

Brilliant idea - love the teaser!

Avatar image for ickyfanboysshoo
Posted By IckyFanboysSHOO

Ha! Ah, that was fun!

Avatar image for grey56
Edited By Grey56

@RPatrick said:

Well now. Seems to be a bit of an overly-aggressive reaction, but hell, I'll run with it.

As to who asked me my opinion, well, no one did, specifically. But it's a message's literally designed to be a forum where people share their thoughts and opinions.

I got your Onslaught reference. Loud and clear. Message received. However, Onslaught and Heroes Reborn were not "atrocities", they were comic-book storylined that weren't well- received. To compare them with the Arizona going down is a bit...extreme. I mean, I take comics as seriously as the next guy, but this is a bit much. Besides, they were stories told, like I said, over a decade ago. I have gotten over their mediocrity, and not re-read the back-issues since then (although some of the Onslaught stories had fairly good art... Joe Mad was on his game, back then, and Andy Kubert shone brightly as well.)

It's also fairly ludicrous to say that Marvel books have been objectively bad since that point, as you seemed to imply, and that people who have read any of the books and enjoyed them were, in effect, "eating manure and smiling," as you so eloquently overstated. If they read them and liked them, and you read them and didn't, it's not because those people in the first group drank the kool-aid and are too dumb to realize that they're consuming something's just that their tastes are different than yours. Your opinion, while valid and not without merit, may not be the opinion of others.

Like I said earlier...if you're so consistently disappointed by Marvel's creative output (or "disemboweling," as you seem to think of it) just stop wasting your time and money on the product. That simple. There are PLENTY of other books out there, both by big name publishers and indepentent creators that may be more to your taste. And if you yearn for the good ol' days of Kirby, Romita, Lee, Thomas, etc... guess what? Their old books are still out there. You can read them again, and enjoy them just as much as you did the first time. If you think the current creative teams are a "joke of what the original teams have been," well, that's because the original teams are from 50-plus years ago, and time marches on. Different audience, different time. Though, if you're looking for a more old-school representation of Marvel favorites, I'd suggest Waid's Daredevil run, Millar and/or Hickman's Fantastic Four arcs or some of the Slott-era Amazing Spider-Man. While modern enough, those books seem to have the older-Marvel sensibility (Hickman's Fantastic Four, in particular, takes Kirby-style big-ideas and runs with them in a really fun and engaging way.)

I would say though, that you seem to think that bitching and moaning about Marvel is going to make the slightest bit of difference ("...dissent is the most effacious tool for change...") but then you continue to give them your money and read the books. Given Marvel's more corporate way of thinking, I would imagine that they are of the mind that people vote with their pocketbooks. So you may come onto messageboards and say Marvel's been putting out bad story after bad story for a decade and a half, yadda yadda, but then you spend X amount of money on their output every week/month/whatever. Marvel doesn't care if you like the books so long as you're buying. I mean, I'm sure they would prefer that you enjoy yourself, but when it comes down to it, I'm sure that they'd rather have someone like you, who so blatantly resents them yet continues to give them money, than someone who downloads the books illegally and enjoys them immensely.

With that out of the way, I want to add that the entire tone of your post is unnecessarily condescending and inappropriately so. You don't need to be overly-intellectual or needlessly demeaning and patronizing in order to make a point. I get why you voiced your opinion "and the purpose behind it." Odd, then, that you would open your remarks by asking me who the hell asked me mine...or, at least, making a show of not asking me ("I imagine I could begin my summary inquisition of your statements by...")

Well...rant over. I think I'm going to go read a comic book.

Charming. Since you don't want to address my concerns and really just want to cry about your skinned knee as a result of my language and cite examples/alternatives which simply don't cover the bleeding artery - how's this; You're wrong. I would have though that through your six or so paragraphs of opining about things which didn't address my concerns adequately you might blunder into something more concrete. Ah well, I suppose that is what I get from attempting to have a discourse over something abstract with someone already too eager to chastise someone about their opinion. It is odd, as you say - that you would react in such feigned 'surprise/offense' manner after you in fact were the party to instigate the discourse. No matter. I'm sure you're unaccustomed to someone calling you out onto the carpet for rhetoric that you most likely wouldn't attempt in person.

Forgetting the fact that you never answered my initial query over whether some CV staff reviews (and resident bloggers for argument's sake) constituted a forfeit of my ire - it's interesting that as loudly as I was addressing the issue of the abortion that was the Onslaught story, you still miss the point. Instead, you created a straw-man to indicate my analogy was 'extreme' and did nothing to answer the heart of the matter. Here, let me help you; the passage of time doesn't diminish something that's already happened. Your defense of art within the stories is irrelevant to the point - again. Since that time and the sixty odd some crossovers/events from marvel - there have been at least three and in some cases four and five reboots to the main titles. I abhor this constant form of action and the marketing strategy inherent therein. This says nothing of my problem with the ethics in the story-line motif used within Onslaught. Hopefully this time - you hear that louder and clearer.

The one facet of my discussion you did manage to address was that I was 'ludicrous' in insinuating that Marvel's stories from that point were 'objectively bad'. Now in case you didn't know, comic publishers favor crossovers/events because they typically incite consumers into purchasing all related material which is of course a stable source of profit - this means more money just to be clear. In that pile of refuse within that link, I challenge you to find more than three stories which were multiple team crossover stories which were met with critical acclaim - and by that I mean by reputable literary sources a la the NY Times, Collegiate Periodical Publications, Peer Review and especially that from Industry Icons such as Smith, Gaiman, Miller, Moore. Coming back to the - wait for it - objective analysis that crossovers and events are near automatic money makers for publishing houses it is not an indication then that money/profit is always an indication of objectively good product. Oh and by the by - the most critically lauded series within that list ? It wasn't even a series that included the major teams within the mythos.

You also seem to be laboring under the notion that I continually support bad product from Marvel by subsidizing these stories in the form of my paycheck. Please pay attention because you missed one of the last points in my previous engagements; Dissent is the highest form of civil participation. You then go on into a ridiculous assumption that you can assist me by providing options to end my plight; reading back issues (while simultaneously insinuating that I should move on from bygone times) to accepting the fact that cultural milieus are the ultimate denominator in how the creative expression of the characters should be negotiated. I suppose you're right. Why don't we re-write the national anthem that it may be performed as rap written and composed by Justin Bieber. Or how about we start allowing graffiti along the Statue of Liberty that we may enable a more up to the moment expressionistic form of art. And instead of labeling this as 'extreme' in your mind - try then imagining your favorite character being rewritten in a direction that brings them in an ethical direction you find abhorrent. Imagine someone told you that your Iron Man mask was no longer chic because he now only wears the visage of a rubber duck or Hello Kitty. Hopefully that bone I threw to you will allow you to more properly personalize this discussion. Lastly - it's worth nothing that your currently published suggestions with the exception of Daredevil (rebooted 3 times and renumbered once since Onslaught) - are being rebooted. Again. Thus playing into my problem - but I doubt you noticed that as you were too upset over my harsh consonants and vowels.

Your last paragraph which so effortlessly ignores my discourse on the nature of exit, dissent and loyalty ( - try it, you might actually learn from someone who honestly is more informed than my rather pedestrian self) within a civic institution is akin to listening to someone attempting to make it through a public speaking course - only worse. I've already addressed this in one of my prior paragraphs, but I'll lay it out there again for you; I am not buying Marvel product I don't approve of. More-over, this site is designed for folks like myself to spark meaningful conversation about the things we spend our hard earned money on. I do so in the hope that folks may actually see this and begin to demand more out of their dollar. Do you get that, tiger ? Hopefully - because you didn't the first time. You didn't get why I voiced my opinion - at all. So, that said then - you may continue to go read your comics and when the 'Kool Aid' gets passed around ( by Marvel, you can drink on up. Enjoy.

Avatar image for gritterr
Posted By Gritterr

@Gambit1024 said:

So Hickman is definitely writing this, right?

I have my fingers crossed he is

Avatar image for gambit1024
Posted By Gambit1024

@Gritterr: sorry to be the one to break it to you, but they announced that he is :(

Avatar image for rpatrick
Posted By RPatrick

I'm looking forward to this. Ten-issue main story in three months? Sold. Only ten or so tie-in issues, none of them essential? Even more sold. I hope this is the format most events take from here on out...I can't stand when they get extended to the point where they take up half the year, and then three months later it's summertime again, and time for the next event...

But ten issues in three months seems about right for me. Though, I feel like this will probably read a lot better in trade form, as do most of Bendis' bigger stories. The art team(s) sounds great, though. I'm glad Brandon Peterson is finally getting some recognition and better gigs...his style has really improved from what it used to be.

All-in-all, sounds like it could be a good time...I'm on board.

Avatar image for kim793
Posted By kim793

@Loise, you make $27h...good for you! I make up to $85h working from home. My story is that I quit working at shoprite to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $45h to $85h…heres a good example of what i'm doing,