u/Sea_Connection9185

Marvel Set Reviews: X-Men Series II (1993)

Marvel Set Reviews: X-Men Series II (1993)

X-Men Series II, released in 1993, had the unenviable task of improving on perfection: Jim Lee had split off from Marvel to found Image Comics the year before, meaning that he was no longer drawing X-Men, and he certainly wasn't about to draw another set of trading cards. And yet, after the enormous success of Series I, combined with the rampant popularity of the X-Men line, something had to be done. Marvel tapped its fleet of X-Book artists to fill the void. Did the results live up to Series I? Let's find out.

The Gentlemen of Leisure have already been down this road, and their selection of notable cards differs a bit from mine, so consider checking out their review as well.

Background

  • Set Name: X-Men Series II
  • Publisher: SkyBox
  • Year: 1993
  • Size: 100 base cards (including checklist) + 9 Gold Foil inserts + 3 "holithograms" + 1 hologram

Art: 8/10

We've already seen some of the best that premium painted sets have to offer (MM 1992 and 1993 immediately set a high bar), as well as proof that hand-drawn sets can hold their own (X-Men Series I, in particular). And this set landed at a time when the X-Books were phenomenally popular: one of my personal favorite arcs of all time, X-Cutioner's Song, straddled the 1992-93 release window, and the characters are featured heavily in this set. To top it off, in Jim Lee's absence, Marvel mostly tapped the ongoing series artists (e.g., for X-Men, Excalibur, X-Force, and so on), and had them draw the same characters they were already drawing every day. They also gave a bit of stylistic latitude to juice up some of the poses beyond, say, the static framing of the Marvel Universe sets.

Some of these artists--notably Alan Davis, Joe Quesada, Joe Madureira--are extremely skilled, they do great work here, and they would go on to have huge careers. But unlike Series I, not every card is a winner, and in my view, it's gotta be one or two points lower than Lee's work in Series I.

Some favorites:

A lot of Bishop cards don't effectively show off his mutant power, which is to capture energy and return it as energy blasts. This one nails it.

Joe Quesada was drawing X-Factor at the time, so naturally, his Polaris is fantastic.

This is a pretty standard pose and setting for Rogue cards - in fact quite similar to the depiction in X-Men Series I - but Andy Kubert's art takes off visually in a way that not all do. Great lines, great coloring.

This one is Alan Davis, who was drawing Excalibur, and he perfectly captures Kitty Pryde's exuberance as she phases through a storm of bullets.

Another Joe Quesada piece. I'm not particularly a Strong Guy fan, but I love the heavily shadowed perspective that allows him to emphasize the glasses, teeth, and hair.

Due to technical caps on the number of images in one post, I'm going to group together some of my favorite villain cards, all of which pop, even in the case of new or third-tier characters like Gideon, Siena Blaze, Shinobi Shaw, and Tolliver. These cards look great, even if Shibobi stole his shoulder pads from an NFL linebacker.

https://preview.redd.it/5hiy8p5mu8kh1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8374eb6b7b2ff846fb6a903f93cd36ebdb43fd8a

Cardbacks: 8/10

The Series II cardbacks are portrayed as a bunch of stuff ripped from "Xavier's Files," which appears to be a manilla folder with some basic biographical info, a profile shot, an action shot, and a first-person "profile" in which Xavier typically speaks in superlatives or concedes he doesn't know much about the character. I enjoy that the notes are typed, but signed - he apparently didn't want any doubts as to authenticity. I also appreciate that although the images on the reverse are generally pretty low quality, they do serve to round out the character more than, say, a vapid quote or empty space.

These guys are the best. Utterly irrelevant, terrible names, and even Xavier characterizes them as \"expendable.\"

So much to love about this card. For whatever reason, Xavier wasn't comfortable just putting \"Siena Blaze\" under \"Real Name,\" but he also rather credulously assumes this isn't a stage name. And he's not going to get pinned down on \"place of birth,\" either: \"Possibly Las Cruces, New Mexico.\" Last, the height/weight are, canonically, not a typo - she's about as large as Cyclops.

I'm throwing the Fenris card front in here because it's hilarious, but also to contrast it with the stats described below on the cardback.

The fact that they have to be touching to use their powers is underplayed as a vulnerability - separate them in any way whatsoever, and they're helpless. But I'm mostly flagging this because Andreas is clearly a good 6 to 8 inches taller than Andrea on the card front, but on the back, they're listed as 5'9\" each, with him at a diminutive 150 lbs.

The Mutant Liberation Front card is notable mainly for one reason: they've got sixteen (!!!) team members! I can't think of another "team," at least documented on a single card, that has even remotely this many members. A few -- Zero, Rusty, Skids, Tempo, Forearm -- get their own card in a few other sets, or pop up in a book independently of Stryfe once in a while, but most of these guys are melee fodder.

https://preview.redd.it/p00onem1v8kh1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=72c26d614410d8c3c5965db422cc7fe47e563b2e

Curation: 9/10

This set offer 36 heroes (perfectly alphabetical, which you know I love); 18 cards grouped into 2-panel or 3-panel team battles called "Arch Enemies" sets, which nicely bisect the heroes and villains sets; 27 villain cards (all alphabetical except, weirdly, Hazard, who spoils the party between Shinobi and Siena Blaze); 9 team cards, and 9 stills from the X-Men animated series.

Other than the animated series excerpts, which are wildly unnecessary and capture none of the show's charm, these choices are solid. The heroes, battles, villains, teams framework shows some nice parallelism, and they're grouped into sets of 9, so they all sort perfectly in a binder. Major props for the set design on that point.

X-Cutioner's Song was over by the time this set came out, but this showdown would've been fresh in a lot of people's minds.

This depiction of Bishop doesn't hold up compared to his standalone card, but Fitzroy's armor deserves a little credit. It's an absurd but visually cool concept, and it gave him a distinctively villainous vibe during the Upstarts run.

The X-Men and Acolytes cards are, at best, forgettable rough sketches, but throw a commanding Magneto in the middle and the whole thing works well.

Here's the entire second page of Arch-Enemies, and it's obviously designed to look good in a binder. These are all good-looking, dynamic cards, and we have to respect the inclusion of the Nasty Boys. More on them later.

If I had to, or indeed, were permitted to, delete 9 cards from any 1990s Marvel set, these would be near the top. The art wasn't designed to impress in still format, and there's no reason I'd want to look at this when the show itself exists.

Inserts/Parallels: 7/10

The inserts in this set are just okay, in my opinion. First, we have a 9-card set of "All-Time Greats" cards with a gold foil treatment on the "30 years" sign in the lower right, that are otherwise indistinguishable from the base set (with the exception of Magneto, who doesn't get his own card in the base set, and here they simply zoom on his Arch-Enemies art). These were fairly rare (somewhere between 1:36 and 1:72 packs), but given the volume at which this set was printed, they're not hard to find. And that's fine, because they're also not that exciting.

https://preview.redd.it/zrd96k3iv8kh1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5b53dba5b9fd73841339b34f271de4e48f1c9691

Second, we have three "holithograms" -- a hand-drawn character image appearing over a shiny holographic background -- that were significantly more rare, at 1:180 packs. The Magneto is great; the Cable and Storm are only so-so. Overall, I'm not sure if the effect is quite as good as a full hologram. Probably not, but I don't blame them for trying something new.

https://preview.redd.it/3wtgmuhjv8kh1.jpg?width=3360&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=980c747fe293f8d7f7f89a98330d0b4b4f903bc3

Last up is the notorious "H-X" Wolverine hologram, depicting him clawing through a metal bulkhead of some sort, claws pointed at the viewer. This is reported to be roughly one per hobby box, and as with certain other holograms, there are reports of different colors, including a standard "green" version and a rarer "red" version. Speaking only as to the card I own, it looks green from some angles and orange/red from others. And on its own merits, it's not even that great of a hologram. The awkward head-on angle makes it somewhat difficult to appreciate the 3-D effect, and Wolverine's features are difficult to make out. I understand that some people love this card as the rarest relic of a cool set, but it's not going in my display case any time soon.

I did my best to get a picture of this card, but it's basically impossible.

Affordability/Availability: 9/10

As we continue onward in our review of early 1990s sets, one thing remains the same: they were all printed in huge quantities and remain readily available. You can get every card here for about a hundred bucks, which by current standards is a total bargain for collectors.

Overall Score: 41/50

We're eight sets into the 1990s, and we have quite a few left to go. But X-Men Series II is currently on the podium, and it's almost certain to stay in our top ten by the time all is said and done. I

Overall Set Ranking (in progress)

  1. X-Men Series I (1992) (46/50)
  2. Marvel Masterpieces (1992) (41/50)
  3. X-Men Series II (1993) (41/50)
  4. Marvel Universe II (1991) (39/50)
  5. Marvel Masterpieces (1993) (39/50)
  6. Marvel Universe III (1992) (36/50)
  7. Marvel Universe I (1990) (35/50)
  8. Marvel Universe IV (1993) (32/50)
u/Sea_Connection9185 — 1 day ago

Marvel Set Reviews: Marvel Masterpieces (1993)

It's October 1993. You're 10 years old. You walk into your local comics shop and spy a box of some card set called Marvel Masterpieces. They're more expensive than your usual jam, but you decide to splurge, and BOOM - Bill Sienkiewicz's nightmarishly abstract Wolverine slaps you in the face! You flip through the pack frantically, looking for anything familiar your young brain can cling to. Jim Lee? Rob Liefeld? No! Some dude named Kent Williams painted Nightcrawler looking like a slinky wretch! And Dave Dorman was paid to draw 100% of Venom's actual esophagus!

But maybe there's like, a cool hologram in there somewhere? Magneto, maybe, or Punisher? Also no! Only an inscrutable homage to some mid-90s X-Men 2099 C-listers!

As weird as this set must have seemed at the time, I'm there for it as an adult, first and foremost because the art is (mostly) unbelievable. But there's a lot of other fun, weird stuff going on. Let's hit the beat. Pre-read the wise words of the Gentlemen of Leisure or the crazy deep exposition of DynaEtch on Blowout Forums if you want more.

Background

  • Set Name: Marvel Masterpieces
  • Publisher: SkyBox
  • Year: 1993
  • Size: 90 base cards (including checklist) + 8 X-Men 2099 inserts

Art: 8/10

As probably anyone reading a review of an early 1990s Marvel card set knows, the 1992 Marvel Masterpieces set was painted, in its entirety, by the very talented Joe Jusko. And although it would have been cool indeed for every MM set to feature only a single artist, or perhaps a small set (e.g., the Hildebrandts in 1994, the fearsome foursome in 1995, or Vallejo/Bell in 1996), 1993 is the only set, excepting the oddball 2007/2008 batches, to feature a broad mix of artists. Joe Jusko again carried a lot of water with 16 cards, but other artists -- probably about 20 -- pitched in to varying degrees.

That decision was consequential, because although some of the resulting art is truly spectacular and consistent on an artist-by-artist basis, the stylistic divergence between artists is abrupt and distracting. That divergence is emphasized by the fact that each artist's cards are inserted pretty much randomly, rather than in sequential blocks. But for purposes of our review, I'm primarily going to group them.

We have to start with Bill Sienkiewicz. This guy (epic in the 1980s on New Mutants, and still working today) is insane in the best possible way. Although not the promo artist (Julie Bell's Iron Man and Silver Surfer appear on the packs), he kicks it off very strong with a fantastic Hulk, and then adds my personal all-time favorite Wolverine -- a portrait that to me conveys Wolvie splattering his own blood toward the viewer as he extends and brandishes his claws with an unhinged intensity. I'm lukewarm on his Sabretooth, but Ghost Rider is superb, and Vulture has a surprisingly whimsical, chill vibe for a dude whose whole thing is, like, abducting people off into the sky.

Look at how good these are! C'mon, let's find out who owns these paintings and invite ourselves over.

Next, Julie Bell. She's another favorite. Her particular brand of anatomically realist fantasy art -- which I view as sort of an elevated Jusko -- almost always delivers, and here she contributes not only the aforementioned Iron Man and Silver Surfer (which I think are just okay) but also a master-level Colossus and Psylocke.

A lot of people think Silver Surfer's expression and posture are more consistent with a guy falling OFF a surfboard. And once you see it, you don't blame them.

I don't know why Colossus is punching through that wall, but he looks GREAT doing it. It can't be easy to paint chrome like that, but here it's so real you can imagine reaching out and polishing that smooth Russian flat top.

I don't know where Julie Bell came up with this ninja pose, but the gracefully arced body and trailing psy-blade are perfection.

Kent Williams is another legitimate painter who is probably too good for this kind of work. His vibe isn't far from Sienkiewicz, but it's a little more otherworldly. In the books, Nightcrawler is constantly shunned for his unsettling appearance - and this version, unlike the rakish, smiling swashbuckler we usually see, is a legitimate creep.

You know somebody in Editorial looked at these and was, like, they're goddamn SUPERHEROES, Kent, not your weird night terrors.

Next, Jusko, who did 16 cards (far more than anyone else). Most of these are at least solid, but Iron Fist, Domino, and Deadpool are all true classics that jump off the page.

Jusko's set, with the exception of She-Hulk, Carnage, and the unsalvageable art direction of Ravage, works very well.

This card alone should've taken Domino straight to the top.

Deadpool, still pretty much just a murderer at this stage, again looks fantastic on a trading card.

If the entire set had been as good as 30 or so cards contributed by these four artists, we'd be able to close early and go home for the day. A handful of other cards match that level, as I detail below in the Curation section. But there are a couple artists who are an extreme tonal mismatch for the prevailing theme. I'm specifically thinking of Brett Blevins and a few others. Blevins's stuff may be fine or even great in other settings, but it doesn't jive with the "Masterpieces" vibe, and in general these cards seem maybe just a touch above the ubiquitous one-of-one sketches that are offered as inserts in every set for the last 15-20 years.

Seriously, Brett, they're not bad. They're fun. Rhino, Omega Red, and Scorpion are all playing with perspective in interesting ways. But you don't hang Dilbert next to the Mona Lisa, and Marvel shouldn't give us that Wolverine and then this Night Thrasher in the same set.

This card is just gross, and I think pretty much every other artist drawing Venom on a trading card has opted to avoid the unnecessary and unwanted throat-cavity angle.

Why is Spider-Man shrunk down to the size of an insect? And why are the fly's legs facing upward? Is he, like, SAVING the fly? Fighting it? It makes no sense.

Glenn Fabry has some very nice cards in this set, but the perspective on his Doom leaves the mask looking boxy, and his expression, such as it is, looks worried or uncertain. I can't tell if there are letters written on the mouthpiece, either. \"Help\"? It's not working for me.

So, where are we with the art? The highs are extremely high, and the artistic risks that pay off deserve a reward. But consistency suffers, and there's a lot of mid-tier filler, so I'm going to score it below our other iconic sets (X-Men Series I, 1992 MM, and a few upcoming others).

Cardbacks: 8/10

These cardbacks are quite good: they're split down the middle between a blurb on one side with name, group affiliation, first appearance, and some flavor text, and then an excerpt from an early character appearance on the other side, with a bonus fact running along the bottom. The front art is attributed (albeit in microscopic font), and although the total package is a bit crowded, it's a nice idea and the execution generally works.

The Real Gentlemen of Leisure review (cited above) outlines many instances where the "first appearance" fact is arguably wrong or at least misleading, as well as some other slightly weird inconsistencies with or glosses on then-current 1990s canon. I don't have the comics depth for that, but I do appreciate some of the more tongue-in-cheek choices for character art.

God bless whoever dug up that picture of Forge. And in many instances, these weird little snippets of dialogue work better than the generic high-minded quotes that cardbacks often feature.

Curation: 9/10

Just like with the 1992 MM, this set focuses on the characters. No team portraits, no versus battles, no cards dedicated exclusively to Quasar's arm bands. And I have no problem with that. Am I glad that we have 6 base set cards and all 8 inserts devoted to Marvel 2099 characters? Absolutely not, and in retrospect, it's embarrassing. But we can't totally blame Marvel for pumping its new stuff, and unlike Marvel Universe IV, the inclusions are mostly within the realm of reason.

Let's look at some other favorites:

The OG 1940s triptych of Human Torch, Captain America, and Namor is inexplicably not aligned in the set, so this is easy to miss, but grouped together, they look great. Kudos to Jim Steranko.

Lou Harrison is another artist at home with oil painting who mostly kills this set with hyper-realistic anatomy and detail. I will note some dissatisfaction with the canonically accurate but still weird coif of spiked hair in the front.

U.S. Agent never really did much for me, but the forceful, dynamic pose here by Frank Spinks is aces.

George Perez's Beast is a little more cartoony than most cards in this set, but look at those laser beams! The focus on Beast's agility pays off.

Spider-Man got a dud in this set, but Spider-Woman (by the excellent Tristan Schane) is fully dialed in. This one's indeed a masterpiece.

Inserts/Parallels: 4/10

This is going to upset people, but in my book, the 8-card DynaEtch X-Men 2099 set (inserted at 1:9 packs) is probably the worst 1990s Marvel insert package that comes to mind. I'll chalk a lot of my reaction up to the fact that I know literally nothing about these characters, so I have no emotional attachment and no mental framework for processing whether they're supposed to be intimidating, conflicted, heroic, whatever. But I think this is also far from Bob Larkin's best work - the female poses are all stiff, the Egyptian backgrounds make no sense to a non-reader of the book, and there is just nothing about these guys that interests me. Also, although the sparkly, embossed "DynaEtch" card tech could possibly be cool under other circumstances, it's certainly not as impressive as the assorted holograms in most other 1990s sets.

They're lame. They just are.

So it's a shame, but 1993 MM loses a lot of points on this metric, and that will prevent it from being a real player in our rankings.

Affordability/Availability: 10/10

They printed 350,000 boxes of this set and 840,000 of each base card, so they're, uh, pretty cheap. Like, give-'em-away cheap. I paid $50 for the best set and $25 for the chase cards last year, and if you're patient, you can probably snipe them on auction or at Goodwill for less than that.

Overall Score: 38/50

It should be obvious that I love this set. The character list is super tight, much of the art remains jaw-dropping, the cardbacks are cool, and the whole thing is super easy to collect. This is a binder that I'm always happy to flip through, and it's fortuitous that pretty much anyone can drop a few bucks and pick it up. But the lack of a decent chase set is pretty much fatal for purposes of the overall rankings.

Overall Set Ranking (in progress)

  1. X-Men Series I (1992) (46/50)
  2. Marvel Masterpieces (1992) (41/50)
  3. Marvel Universe II (1991) (39/50)
  4. Marvel Masterpieces (1993) (39/50)
  5. Marvel Universe III (1992) (36/50)
  6. Marvel Universe I (1990) (35/50)
  7. Marvel Universe IV (1993) (32/50)
u/Sea_Connection9185 — 8 days ago

Marvel Set Reviews: Marvel Universe IV (1993)

Let's get going on Marvel Universe IV! Released in 1993, this set continued the tradition of a big-tent release with ample capacity for both old favs and new releases. The set took a daring artistic turn by featuring all standalone characters in 9-panel spreads that combined to form a single picture. In my book, this set is notable for the sheer number of brand-new characters -- many of whom (maybe regrettably, maybe not) are mostly forgotten 30 years later. As usual, consider checking out a longer review by the erudite Gentlemen of Leisure before we jump in.

Background

  • Set Name: Marvel Universe IV
  • Publisher: Skybox
  • Year: 1992
  • Size: 180 base cards (including checklist) + 9 2099 inserts + 1 hologram

Art: 6/10

The big move here was to switch from standalone character portraits to full-page spreads that would theoretically look great when arranged in a binder. Whether this was a response to the spectacular success of the Danger Room set from X-Men Series I, or something that was in the works independently, I don't know. But it's hit or miss. The iconic Danger Room scene cleverly foregrounded several robots being absolutely demolished by Jim Lee's X-Men, making clear that the characters were unified and working together to defeat a common threat. But in Marvel Universe IV, with only a few exceptions, the characters are interacting with one another in scattershot fashion, some looking at one another, some looking at the viewer, rarely with any sort of obvious concerted action or goal. As a result, most of the pictures look busy but not cohesive.

These problems are worsened by the relative homogeneity of the art. Certainly there are a few spreads that are of higher quality, but by and large, this is not memorable stuff, and I've rarely seen anyone identify pieces from this set as top selections in their personal collection. And like previous Marvel Universe sets, the art is unattributed and much of it is unsigned, making it difficult to discern or even care who the artist is.

All that said, we have to admire the ambitious effort, and some of the spreads are still bangers. Here's what I found notable:

Spread #1 is a great illustration of the set's issues. Who are these guys all shooting at? Why is Hulk there? What's up with that weird, exploding techno-industrial backdrop? Steven Butler is clearly talented, but the ask here was too much.

Art Thibert did a passable Jim Lee impression, particularly Magneto and Wolverine, and this is one of the panels that I think works best.

This seems like a missed opportunity to have various characters battling for and against Galactus, rather than situating them visually in a format that suggests they're all heralds.

IMO, rather than tossing in Daredevil on the bottom right, this would have worked better with 8 villains going after Spider-Man in the middle.

Framing this against an elongated Mr. Fantastic is a cool idea, but again, we struggle to see where the conflicts are. And man, those early 1990s Fantastic Four costumes were, uh, a bit much. Canonically, the Thing is wearing a helmet because Wolverine clawed away a good chunk of his face. Mr. Fantastic's pouches were apparently a short-lived in-joke reacting to the multi-pouched trend in many X-books of the era. And Invisible Woman aired out her bad-girl \"Malice\" persona by ditching 80% of her costume.

One of the better solo portraits - great lines, cool backdrop.

Cardbacks: 6/10

The cardbacks in this set are a step backward from more comprehensive or interesting takes we've seen before. Probably the best that can be said is that you get not one but two additional images of each character -- a headshot and a full-body. Power ratings return, but they're heavily diluted. Of the eight available categories (strength, intelligence, durability, stamina, agility, fighting ability, energy projection, mental powers), each card features only four.

https://preview.redd.it/qowjs691sghh1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9fcdbbbceac4e22d6bb62deefaa2bc48781ae1f3

I've known about Beast for a solid 35 years, and not until reading this card just now did I realize he is an \"accomplished keyboard musician\" - live and learn!

Curation: 5/10

Marvel Universe IV, like its predecessors, has a robust roster of individual character cards as opposed to random subsets: excluding inserts, we get a full 135 characters (or, in some cases, groups or races), followed by 9 "unsolved mysteries," 35 "famous battles," and a checklist.

Marvel Universe IV unfortunately abuses that privilege with a myopic focus on early 90s rookies, most of whom were unknown to me at the time and unknown to me today. Show of hands: how many of you remember any of the following: Deadzone, Turbo, Rage, Slayback, Terror, Inc., Micromax, Wildheart, Cobweb, Hellstorm, Shock, Splice, Lyja, Occulus, Hardcore, Proctor, or Basilisk? And that's excluding the full 9-panel spread for the Marvel UK line, which featured such all-time greats as Black Axe, Bloodseed, Wild Thing, and Die-Cut.

Ok, Death's Head II is clearly a Predator rip-off, but he's cool! You can take the rest.

There's nothing wrong with a given set showcasing some of-the-moment characters whose longevity is untested. But with the benefit of hindsight, this one simply hasn't aged well, and from that perspective, it ends up more of a curiosity than a keepsake.

Guys, I'm thrilled you finally got your own card, but there's no need to get a big head about it.

The "Unsolved Mysteries" set is a cool concept, and as a kid, these left me appropriately intrigued. Little did I know that some would never be answered, and others would be answered in a way that involved a great deal of time-traveling and retcons.

This one seriously requires a solid 500 to 1,000 words, bare minimum, so we're gonna skip it.

This one lingered for a solid three years before Marvel editors decided... Onslaught?

The Famous Battles in this set are largely a whiff, mostly because the art is of noticeably lower quality. But

I have nothing personally against Kirk Jarvinen, but you will never convince me he spent more than 5 minutes on the pencils here.

War Machine versus... ? Right, got it. Just War Machine.

The \"head to head\" cardbacks and references to specific issues are some of the cool redeeming touches here.

Inserts/Parallels: 7/10

This set had two types of inserts: a 9-piece Marvel 2099 puzzle that tracked the formatting of the base set with a frequency of 1 card per 10 packs, and an extremely rare hologram (comparatively speaking) appearing 1 to 180 packs. Because they printed about a billion cards in this set, even the latter is fairly obtainable, although it'll set you back more than any other single hologram we've covered to date.

The 2099 cards have a very cool bright-red sheen that pops reasonably well.

https://preview.redd.it/dhlxzys8vghh1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ffddf3cc027352b62c1d4bd0cec25da42a1662c3

There's a lot to say about the crown jewel of this set, the H-IV Spider-Man vs. Venom hologram. It's a beautiful card, and technically probably more ambitious than anything in prior Marvel sets. Spider-Man himself looks great, and so does about 90% of Venom, except regrettably for his head, which is weirdly proportioned (even by Venom standards) and looks like it was done by a kid experimenting with modeling clay. Still, on the whole, a very cool card.

I've also read some strongly worded takes on whether this card was intentionally printed in delineated color-specific "versions" (i.e., green, red, teal) with different rarities. Personally, I think they just ran it with different inks at different times, resulting in different blends and varying reflective properties. But I haven't seen many of these in person and can't speak to their relative frequency. I don't begrudge anyone from framing their dark blue "grail," but for my own purposes, owning any single copy is enough to mark this set complete.

https://preview.redd.it/4q8inf49vghh1.jpg?width=1309&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c7c87e6f70836a40fd074034e2b34e4c5435321f

Affordability/Availability: 8/10

As with all of the sets we've covered so far, the print run here was enormous, so everything except the H-IV hologram is easy to track down. You can put together a complete set for under $125. We're marking it down a few points because most of that cost goes to one card.

Overall Score: 32/50

Marvel Universe IV doesn't hold up as well as many other Marvel sets of the early 1990s era -- the art is a large step down, the puzzle format doesn't totally land, many of the characters are flashes in the pan, and except for the Spidey/Venom hologram, the inserts are forgettable. This one is fun to own for nostalgia, and it's better than some of what we'll see in the mid-1990s, but it's at best a mid-tier entry in the Marvel cards canon.

Overall Set Ranking (in progress)

  1. X-Men Series I (1992) (46/50)
  2. Marvel Masterpieces (1992) (41/50)
  3. Marvel Universe II (1991) (39/50)
  4. Marvel Universe III (1992) (36/50)
  5. Marvel Universe I (1990) (35/50)
  6. Marvel Universe IV (1993) (32/50)
u/Sea_Connection9185 — 15 days ago

Marvel Set Reviews: X-Men Series I (1992) (plus Dauterman/Wilson add-on)

Finally, we reach the set that was, for me, the start of my Marvel cards collecting career, and if not the pinnacle, then very close. Do the math: the X-Men (the most popular animated characters on the planet), drawn exclusively by Jim Lee (the biggest name in comics at the time), in a set printed so heavily that these could be found in almost any retail establishment. It couldn't miss! But do they stand the test of time? Read the review to find out, and see a bonus mini-review of a spectacular add-on set printed much more recently.

As always, for differing takes, see the Real Gentlemen of Leisure's comments on this set here, and a truly epic multi-part walkthrough by ComicsByWalt here.

Let's kick it off with what I believe is the first Marvel 9-piece panel, and it's still the best one ever, showing at least 7 legit X-Men, plus Cable and Shatterstar, bustin' bots in the Danger Room. Here are the nine cards, patched together:

https://preview.redd.it/b1l9t062sheh1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=23357ba97770b6cc56f239d9459c31ec61233a97

Background

  • Set Name: X-Men Series I
  • Publisher: Impel
  • Year: 1992
  • Size: 100 base cards (including checklist) + 5 holograms

Art: 10/10

These cards are going to be iconic for as long as comics are printed for one reason: Jim Lee's take on the X-Men is unforgettable. He took characters that for the most part had already been drawn for 20 to 30 years, and injected them with a dynamic new physicality: costumes and physiques that pop off the page, without succumbing (mostly) to the overly muscled and pouched style of certain unnamed contemporaries. Sitting here today, this set contains almost no cards that I would even denigrate as "mediocre" - most are standard-setting. Many of these depictions, for me at least, are "best in class," i.e., they're the #1 image of the character ever to appear on a trading card (certainly for hand-drawn art, if not painted).

Let's not forget the work of colorist Paul Mounts, who also contributed to the entire set. I don't know enough about Lee's pencils and inking to know how much work the colors are doing here, but they're clearly exceptional. I'll cover the heroes first, then the villains below, under the curation section.

One of many examples of the subject partially breaking the frame, creating the illusion of motion and 3-D presence. Beast has never looked better in action.

Lee consistently finds new ways to convey the raw power of many X-Men, few more so than Havok.

Depicting Nightcrawler with a rapier is nothing new in comics, but it doesn't show up on many trading cards.

Love the sleek depiction of Domino. What kind of trouble is in here? We don't know, but she's probably going to get lucky.

I love Professor X in both Amazing X-Men and the Krakoan Era, but his sleek gold hoverchair is such a cool touch for a character projecting control.

Probably the best Cyclops card of all time, in my book.

Probably also the best Jean Grey!

So many unbelievable others that I don't have room for: Rogue, Forge, even less significant characters like Strong Guy and Lilandra get A-list treatment. But I will make room for my favorite team pic, and still my favorite team -- X-Men Blue:

https://preview.redd.it/u1x954qhsheh1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c1e88829b33dd427cb2b656a442af28f09149620

Cardbacks: 10/10

The gimmick here is that each card is a "Cerebro Scan" of the mutant in question, listing their real name, height, weight, group affiliation, first appearance, brief biography, and "x-tra fact." It also includes a portrait view of each character featuring a snippet of different artwork, often unmasked. I find it to be a clean, crisp presentation that looks great on a cardback.

As with both Marvel Universe II and III, this set contains "power ratings" that score each character across certain metrics (here, five: energy projection, mental powers, strength, fighting ability, intelligence). I've outlined my thoughts on power ratings in connection with earlier reviews (TLDR: I love them), and these are reasonably well-implemented. Some characters still struggle to find their strengths adequately appreciated, but for the most part, it tracks what you'd expect.

Tangentially, I've heard tell of a "Power Ratings" card included with the collector's tin, but I've never seen one. If you have an extra copy, hit me up, or at least send a pic!

https://preview.redd.it/go5e436wmheh1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dfd7b935d89ca52e683c01030d38cf4f765ec70d

I love this scoring for Wolverine. He's the best there is at what he does.

Curation: 10/10

Not much to critique here. In the base set, we've got 40 super heroes, 30 super villains, 10 teams, 5 former X-Men, 5 "allies," a 9-piece danger room puzzle, and a checklist. Super clean, no bloat. (It's not alphabetized, but unlike Marvel Masterpieces 1992, it doesn't coquettishly pretend to be alphabetized, so we're not docking points.) And it's bangers pretty much from top to bottom, bringing in just about every X-Man and villain that I'd want to see from this era. Since we covered our heroes above, let's do the villains here.

Deadpool - possibly never done better.

Magneto at the absolute height of his status as a villain.

I didn't know much about Proteus when I was collecting this set, but the fact that he was withering Wolverine and Nightcrawler made a big impression.

I love the Krakoa-era spin on Sinister, but this is certainly the most menacing.

Stryfe, looking like a total boss just in time for X-Cutioner's Song.

Was any villain cooler than Omega Red in 1992? Not a character that ever found much depth, unfortunately, but the art design was flawless.

Inserts/Parallels: 6/10

The one downside to this set was the relative lack of chase cards. The five holograms (Wolverine, Cable, Gambit, Magneto, X-Men) are no doubt awesome, but I'd almost prefer to see more of Lee's non-hologram art. And at one hologram per 18 packs, they could be collected or traded for with reasonable diligence.

I said they were not hard to obtain; they are, in fact, hard to photograph.

It's also well-documented that long before "autos" were a pack insert mainstay in comics cards, the set included an unnumbered set of cards personally autographed by Lee, with an embossed stamp for authenticity. Reports vary regarding how many of these exist; I don't own any, and I've never seen one in person. Presumably a vast number of them were inadvertently junked by kids who didn't know any better. Even as a completist who trends toward the more extreme end of the spectrum, I don't consider these necessary for a "complete" set, but if someone ever manages to put a set together, please throw it in a museum, or at least post it here on Reddit, so we can all take a look.

Affordability/Availability: 10/10

I don't know how many of these were printed, but it's an unfathomable number. I picked up a complete good-looking set in the last 12 months for about $65, including holograms. The fact that one of the best-looking sets is also one of the cheapest is maybe the biggest reason why this set will be difficult to beat in the overall rankings.

Overall Score: 46/50

This set hits in almost every category: the art, cardbacks, content curation, and affordability/availability are all next-level. It loses a few points for not bringing an S-tier chase set, but that can be overlooked. My guess is that most other sets we look -- even those with art of a similar quality -- will suffer in at least a few other areas. X-Men Series I will be, and should be, hard to beat.

Bonus Plug:

I wasn't aware until recently that two guys -- Russell Dauterman (pencils) and Matt Wilson (colors) -- somehow patched together a licensed 45-card "expansion" set of X-Men Series 1, published by Clover Press. They don't try to copy Lee's style, but the card formatting, front and back, tracks the original set, and the cardbacks even feature updated bios and power ratings. The art is quite good, the character curation allows for some new entries, and everything about it is high-quality. The inclusion of cards for Dauterman and Wilson themselves is a little, uh, self-aggrandizing, but under the circumstances, maybe not entirely unwarranted.

The fact that this exists is miraculous. If you're a fan of the original set, you should track these down as well and throw them right in the binder after the originals.

These cards take us right up to late-era Krakoa.

Overall Set Ranking (in progress)

  1. X-Men Series I (1992) (46/50)
  2. Marvel Masterpieces (1992) (41/50)
  3. Marvel Universe II (1991) (39/50)
  4. Marvel Universe III (1992) (36/50)
  5. Marvel Universe I (1990) (35/50)
reddit.com
u/Sea_Connection9185 — 1 month ago

Marvel Set Reviews: Marvel Masterpieces (1992)

The 1992 Marvel Masterpieces probably need no introduction. Featuring 109 individual paintings by renowned artist Joe Jusko, this set changed the game regarding what trading cards could look like. 32 years later, the set was re-released in an exceptionally popular “platinum” format, ensuring that these already iconic images would get passed around by a new generation.

As usual, someone has already covered the historical details in far more detail than I can manage. If you’re interested in seeing each of the many, many pieces of 92 MM collateral that drew from the same art collection, check out DynaEtch’s hard work on Blowout Forums. And I always love the Real Gentlemen of Leisure on these sets.

Jusko owes royalties to Todd McFarlane for this one, but we can't argue with results. It's an awesome pic.

Background

  • Set Name: Marvel Masterpieces
  • Publisher: Skybox
  • Year: 1992
  • Size: 100 base cards (including checklist) + 5 "Battle Spectra" + 5 "Lost Marvel"

Art: 8/10

Let’s start with the art: it’s awesome. Painted instead of drawn, these visuals bring a new level of realism and depth to the Marvel Universe. And because all 109 cards were painted by the same guy, they're visually consistent and almost equally impressive. The set both claimed and achieved the prestige label.

That said, Jusko—a guy who came up painting muscle-bound fantasy figures like Conan the Barbarian (while also briefly serving as a NYC police officer?!?)—was not yet at the height of his powers, and he did these paintings in an insanely short amount of time. When invited back to do the 2016 Marvel Masterpieces re-launch, his work shows significant development, featuring characters in more dynamic and interesting poses and environments. But he was still master-level even in 1994, and so many of these cards are unforgettable.

One knock is that the images suffer from a slight graininess and what, as a layperson, I would call oversaturation. I can't say for certain whether this is due to a painting technique or tech/printing limitation of the era, but in my view, it detracts slightly, and in some cases significantly, from the overall image quality, particularly with paintings heavy on red or orange (e.g., Hobgoblin). I’m thrilled they went through with this project, but later we’re going to see much higher quality images.

I'm also a bit puzzled about the lettering choices. In many instances, the bronze names are almost impossible to make out against the art. The 2024 re-issue corrected this by framing the text in thick black outline instead of muted shadowbox.

Last, Jusko’s not shy about his style: he goes big on muscles and curves, and when it comes to superheroes, they’ve naturally got a lot of both. But almost all of the female poses are basically pin-ups that lean heavily on the sexuality. That’s not to say superheroes can’t have charisma or sex appeal, and other artists do this more egregiously, but it’s still a vibe shift from the wholesomeness of Marvel Universe Series I-III. We're not deducting points, but we're flagging it.

We're going to pick just a few personal favorites for this set, when in truth I could probably throw 30 or 40 up there as noteworthy:

Cyclops look fantastically powerful here, notwithstanding the conspicuously pink optic blast.

Such a cool, maniacal picture of Electro, notwithstanding that he's gained about 80 lbs of muscle over his traditional depiction.

A very rad Shatterstar, setting aside that's jumping at the viewer... in space? from a black hole?

Dr. Octopus gets on the spandex train

Everyone agrees, this one's a banger

Is it ridiculous? Yes. But do we love it? Also yes.

But listen, there are some duds. Apocalypse, Wolverine, and Venom are unfortunately among them.

Why is he palming a green flame? I want to like this, but it just doesn't work for me.

This card is beloved, but the feral non-pupilated eyes combined with no mask are a huge minus in my book. And it's only a quibble, but the middle claw should not be longer than the others.

What is going on with the cartoony proportions here, and why an all-red backdrop? This is one of the few cards that doesn't mesh well with the rest of the set.

As noted, Jusko has a thing for doing curvaceous women rather than powerful ones, generally to a fault:

https://preview.redd.it/x9s7pzftu3dh1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0614f80a406c4757c58b096bb20fb3c03d128134

https://preview.redd.it/3jmon0ytu3dh1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e89990153ab5b2ad498cfc99b49b9992eb6b396f

https://preview.redd.it/b5qjeqjuu3dh1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a8271e2b8d4b204c6c709a492d4e3292395d45cb

Cardbacks: 8/10

The most noteworthy thing about the cardbacks in this set is the inclusion of the character’s first comic cover appearance, rather than simply listing the first appearance issue. This is a nice touch of historical context and often shows how far the character has moved, visually, between rising to prominence and 1992. And some of the covers are of course gorgeous in their own right.

The flavor text, like with many sets, is fairly generic, but it doesn’t offend me. So we’ll allow 8/10 points on this one.

https://preview.redd.it/52nfzxwvu3dh1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8187dfe10ba461be5bb001db3c110f87450b2739

Curation: 9/10

The focus here is on the characters, which I view as a plus: 104 unique portraits, and 5 versus battles. No filler, and only a couple head-scratchers that haven't aged well (Sleepwalker, Weapon Omega, Major Victory). Unlike Marvel Universe, they don’t split up heroes and villains into separate categories, so they’re all jammed together in spiritual kinship with the X-Men’s Krakoan Era. I like that.

The only thing keeping this from a perfect curation score is that the set is almost but not quite sorted alphabetically. Cards 1-10 run in backwards alphabetical order from Blob to Adam Warlock; 11-19 run from Darkhawk to Bullseye; and so on, until we incongruously end with Tombstone (#99) rather than Wonder Man (#93).

Why? Who knows. Probably a shipping or printing miscommunication. Either way, it's super annoying. We're docking a point for that!

Inserts/Parallels: 8/10

There are only two chase sets here: "Battle Spectra" inserts that become a staple in later editions of Marvel Masterpieces from 2016 onward, and five "Lost Marvel" cards distributed as exclusives in the tin collector's edition. The latter are harder to find because of a smaller print run (35,000 copies).

People like the Battle Spectra inserts, and I can't blame them. They've got a cool sparkly overlay on certain elements of the scene, the dynamic art pops off the cardstock, and the character selections are solid.

All but the Captain America-Red Skull are instant classics in my book

I said it was a prerequisite for each review that I own all of the cards. I did not say I needed to own all of the cards in good condition.

I appreciate the call-out to an unbelievable cover in its own right

The "Lost Ladies" are a set of five female characters who were, for whatever reason, not included in the standard print run. I don't know why, other than to guess that Jusko painted a few extras for possible inclusion, and the editors re-packaged the leftovers into a collector's edition exclusive. They're fine -- Scarlet Witch and Jubilee both hold up -- but atypically for inserts, there's nothing physical about the cards that distinguishes them from the base set.

https://preview.redd.it/rl1pzmn2v3dh1.jpg?width=4226&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=453ad12bbd4b67540a6fb16885c850c7de629bf2

Affordability/Availability: 8/10

Since almost a million of each of the base set cards were printed, it’s still quite easy to find them in great condition. The Battle Spectra are a touch harder to find, but not by much. Only the “Lost Ladies” are in high demand, and even they can be found for under $100 with patience. All told, this should be an achievable set for many collectors.

Overall Score: 41/50

The 1992 Marvel Masterpieces jump right to the top of our list as clubhouse leaders based on the memorable art and solid performance in all other categories. I personally have not collected the 2024 Platinum re-issue, but I know many do, and the art is absolutely worthy of that treatment. As further reviews will show, this is not my personal favorite set, but it's certainly in the conversation for many.

Tell'em, Nick: #1 with an (oversaturated) bullet

Overall Set Ranking (in progress)

  1. Marvel Masterpieces (1992) (41/50)
  2. Marvel Universe II (1991) (39/50)
  3. Marvel Universe III (1992) (36/50)
  4. Marvel Universe I (1990) (35/50)
reddit.com
u/Sea_Connection9185 — 1 month ago

Marvel Set Reviews: Marvel Universe III (1992)

Marvel Set Reviews: Marvel Universe III (1992)

With Marvel Universe III, Skybox (formerly Impel) proved that they could go much bigger than the previous two sets, largely by featuring lesser-known characters -- some deservedly so. And they evolve MU II's power ratings in a positive direction by adding scores that more accurately reward the full range of superhero powers. But they take a step backward in other respects that we'll discuss. On the whole, a worthy successor but not a game-changer in the Marvel Universe line.

Fantastic opener of Spider-Man by Erik Larsen (who shortly thereafter left to co-found Image Comics)

For alternative (and deeper in some respects) coverage, see this wonderful breakdown by the Real Gentleman of Leisure (2016).

Background

  • Set Name: Marvel Universe III
  • Publisher: Skybox
  • Year: 1992
  • Size: 200 base cards + 5 holograms

Art: 6/10

Similar to MU II, the art here is generally acceptable and in some cases quite good, but it doesn't approach what Jim Lee did in his outrageously good X-Men set or Joe Jusko's work in the first Marvel Masterpieces set, both of which came out the same year. At the same time, it's far better than the painful CGI-colored art that crowds much of the mid-90s, and many of the artists involved (at a minimum, Marc Silvestri, Mark Texeira, and Sam Kieth) are extremely talented. So, on card face art alone, I'd award a 7 for Marvel Universe III.

The problem here is that each character image is superimposed over a cosmic background and an arbitrarily shaped window depicting something else -- sometimes a familiar backdrop they're associated with, sometimes a cut-out framing an alternative version of them. But it's too much. Give me the random space background, or the standard background, but don't mix them with complex polyhedrons. We're going to dock a point for that.

Personal favorites:

Domino looks great in a style that will later be more closely associated with J. Scott Campbell

Sam Kieth, who sadly died earlier this year, contributed a handful of amazingly weird and wonderful pieces to this set before later hitting it big with The Maxx

Another killer Sam Kieth take convinced me, wrongly, that Cyber was a villain worth paying attention to

Marc Silvestri fully murders this piece of Archangel in his then-new costume, courtesy of Apocalypse

Another Erik Larsen jam that, apart from the weird background, would've made a great hologram

Professor X is usually depicted in a boring, static pose on trading cards, but here we get him mind-blasting someone with that trademark pink telepathic energy flare

There are only a few cards I don't care for, and chief among them, Charlie-27. What's going on with him? Does he always look like someone smushed the aspect ratio at the last minute before printing?

Get a load of the pouches on this guy! Waist double, double bandolier, and even CALF pouches? Seriously, open those up and let's inventory everything.

Cardbacks: 7/10

These cardbacks have a lot going on. First, the good: they retain and in fact enhance the Power Ratings from MU II, in this case ditching agility, stamina, and durability, and replacing them with energy projection, mental powers, and fighting ability. A fantastic decision! This still leaves room for weird debates -- does Magneto have mental powers or energy projection, and does fighting ability incorporate the use of abilities of that nature, or is it exclusively hand to hand physical combat? We don't have another set of handy reference cards to answer those questions, so we'll have to do it ourselves. But on the whole, it comes much closer to fairly awarding credit to superheroes whose powers are less about bodily attributes.

The quotation isn't doing a lot of work here

If you want to get in the weeds on the scores, there's a lot to discuss -- Wolverine and Captain America naturally both pull a '7' on fighting ability, but many other renowned battlers do not. And the inclusion of cosmic beings tips the scale -- how do we fairly score the Beyonder? But interestingly, apart from the Celestials (whose chart is stamped with "NOT APPLICABLE"), the top scorer is my boy Ego the Living Planet, an orbital pudge who somehow pulls a 7 in fighting ability and a 39 overall!

Absolutely love this guy

The cardbacks have a few other minor perks -- a portrait that differs from the card face, real name, first appearance. But there are two big problems that are going to drop the score. First, they start the unfortunate tradition of including character quotations, which really is of the lowest possible quality. Each character gets stuck with either the dullest or corniest one-liner, which serves mostly to flatten whatever cool nuance they might actually have, and to crowd what is already a busy scene. Second, the card faces are in portrait, but the card backs are in landscape. This requires a weird flip to go from looking at the front to looking at the back. Not a fan.

Mephisto does really well in everything except fighting ability?

Curation: 8/10

With this set, Marvel finally treats us to a greatly expanded roster of primary character cards -- 70 heroes, 40 villains, 9 rookies, and 11 "cosmic beings", for a total of 130 individual toons, several of whom are so obscure or ephemeral that they never get a dedicated Marvel card again (as best I can tell). I love it! The focus on cosmic beings, in particular, highlights some deep and complex lore cuts that rarely make their way into comparable sets.

The set features a variety of other content: team-ups, teams, and the vaguely defined "wars," "origins," and "milestones," most of which are fine introductory content to explain the relationships that would otherwise require (at the time, before Wikipedia or Marvel Unlimited) buying and reading a million comics. In retrospect, a lot here is vague and/or a little bit weird in light of what was actually happening in Marvel's 1992 lines, but hey, they presumably had a print date, and compromises had to be made.

The art on the team-ups, in particular, is generally very good, and the gimmick of having the duo tear through the page creates a dynamic effect. Ghost Rider, in particular--not usually one of my favorite guys--comes out looking stone cold awesome in most of them, thanks to Mark Texeira's fantastic work.

Mark Texeira is apparently the Ghost Rider artist for this set, and he brings the heat every time

https://preview.redd.it/0mlru4uf1qbh1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=33317ff8e6b573eb44e3e2288378aec7b9d1aaca

That creepy melting face in the middle is tough to forget!

Absolutely love this. I have no idea who they're fighting, or why, but it's great art.

Inserts/Parallels: 6/10

As with MU I and II, we again get a set of five holograms (Hulk, Thing, Wolverine, Venom, and Ghost Rider), but the twist here is that they're all color-blocked in a way that sort of tracks the character's color vibes. So for Hulk (recognizing there may be some prints in different colors for obscure reasons), the card is mostly green, and again features a pose that allows him to jump off the card and really show the 3-D effect. And something I appreciate: on the card back, they include the original art, presumably before it was sliced up for laser scanning.

For anyone collecting back in the day, these cards for sure had a place of honor in your 3-ring binder. But as with other holograms of this era, they're best appreciated by flippin' em around under a strong light source with your grubby little paws, not sending them in for grading: 458 PSA submissions on Hulk, 458 cards that are not a 10. You're going to lose money if you try it.

https://preview.redd.it/ymh7zxdw1qbh1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9cf7d4d17f1f1e1680edd896933dca163332a7b9

https://preview.redd.it/a4f8p0i12qbh1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6e61b96727b609aef020a709431463a3af60100e

These are solid holograms and will be memorable to anyone who collected this set as a kid. But they're arguably a step backwards from the 1991 set, and there's nothing else going on here that would make them any better than a mid-pile offering for overall chase cards.

Affordability/Availability: 9/10

This is another early nineties set that was published in extreme bulk and can be found all over the place. You can expect to pick up a full set in good condition, including holos, for $100 to $150.

Overall Score: 36/50

This set isn't an immediate first-ballot HOF'er for me, and it doesn't have as many cards that I immediately recall as some others, but it's stuffed to the gills with cool characters, and we could spend forever debating the power ratings and how that would translate to a head-to-head matchup. For anyone digging back into their old Marvel card collecting hobby, you can do a lot worse than picking up a set of Marvel Universe III.

Overall Set Ranking (in progress)

  1. Marvel Universe II (1991) (39/50)
  2. Marvel Universe III (1992) (36/50)
  3. Marvel Universe I (1990) (35/50)
reddit.com
u/Sea_Connection9185 — 1 month ago

Marvel Set Reviews: Marvel Universe II (1991)

Marvel Universe II: Another unequivocally classic set, MU II is an improvement on MU I in almost every way. With more dynamic hand-drawn art, new "Power Level" graphs for each character, fewer character duplicates, and superior holograms, this is where a lot of young Marvel collectors got their start - and it still holds up 35 years later. (A deep dive into the historical development of this set and others of the era are beyond the scope of this review, but if you're interested, this well-sourced 2014 longform piece from SKTCHD is fantastic.)

Background

  • Set Name: Marvel Universe II
  • Publisher: Impel
  • Year: 1991
  • Size: 162 base cards + 5 holograms

Art: 7/10

Some readers are going to interpret the '7' here as a reflection of mediocrity, but in practice, we're just leaving enough room on the scale to distinguish this set -- which features excellent artwork -- from later all-time classics like Jim Lee's work on X-Men Series I, Jim Jusko on Marvel Masterpieces 1992, the Hildebrandt brothers on Marvel Masterpieces 1994, and Boris Vallejo and Julie Bell on Marvel Masterpieces 1996. Much of the art in this set is indeed exceptional, particularly for being hand-drawn and scaled down to trading card format. But in my view, maybe because of the significant number of contributors, it doesn't consistently reach the same height as the very best sets.

As with MU I, the art here is unattributed on the cardback, but much of it is either recognizable or signed. Contributors apparently include Art Adams, Jim Lee, John Romita Jr., Ron Lim, Erik Larsen, Mark Bagley, and others. I wish I could tell you who did what, but after poking around online, I struggled to find a list, even on the usually authoritative Jeff Allender's House of Checklists. [If you know of one, drop a comment and I'll edit!]

Personal favorites:

Marvel Girl (#4) sports a cool, atypical costume that gives off Phoenix vibes.

Gambit (#17) appears in what may be his trading card debut, unforgettably drawn by Jim Lee.

Havok (#27), also a Jim Lee piece, looks particularly intense.

Firestar (#32) blasts off the page in what I believe is the only instance of layout putting the character’s feet in the foreground over the name text. Very cool effect.

Rogue (#41) looks ferocious in her green-and-black outfit.

Thanos (#85) is depicted with foreboding gravitas, standing confidently with a grim reaper over his shoulder.

  • Most questionable takes:

Kingpin (#55) -- I like a big Kingpin, but this is a caricature. Those poor little shoes...

Chameleon (#61) ... in a living room recliner? Not sure what this is trying to project.

Cardbacks: 9/10

MU II retained several info pieces also found on the info-packed MU I cardback -- height, weight, affiliation, first appearance, some biographical stats and trivia. But it added a small portrait (one that, unlike many later sets, differed from the art on the front) and, most notably, abandoned MU I's completely fictitious win-loss-tie stats and instead debuted a quantitative visual metric that offers much more fertile ground for debate: power ratings.

There's a lot going on here. Presumably recognizing that relative numbers alone wouldn't satisfy, the editorial gang convinced Impel to include three full cards devoted only to explaining the power ratings:

  • Strength: defined narrowly as "ability to lift weight above one's head with arms fully extended," strength ranges from 1 (Normal: able to lift one's own body weight or less) to 7 (Incalculable: able to lift over 100 tons).
  • Speed: ability to move by running or flying -- sorry, Namor, swimming doesn't count! Speed ranges from 1 (Slow: cannot attain 15 miles per hour) to 7 (Light Speed: 186,000 miles per second and faster), traditional physics be damned. Hard not to observe that quantitatively, 6 (Supersonic) is about twice as fast as 5 (Speed of Sound), whereas 7 (Light Speed) is 190,000 times faster than 6 (Supersonic).
  • Agility: ability to move the body with flexibility and coordination, ranging from 1 (Below Normal: clumsy) to 7 (Metahuman: extraordinarily beyond the natural limits of a human).
  • Stamina: ability to sustain peak exertion before fatigue impairs performance, ranging from 1 (Below Normal: unable to sustain for 1 minute) to 7 (never tires due to self-generating energy).
  • Durability: ability to resist or recover from bodily injury or disease, ranging from 1 (Below Normal: easily injured) to 7 (Indestructible: almost impossible to injure).
  • Intelligence: ability to think, ranging from 1 (Below Normal: mentally deficient) to 7 (Omniscient: possessing knowledge of all that is). Like with Speed, we see a functionally very large gap between 7 (Omniscient) and 6 (merely Super Genius).

https://preview.redd.it/2nrnn3uo4cah1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9dc18f176a77244ed7224c20f5ce84160a1c4acd

https://preview.redd.it/f8ketkwp4cah1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=084e85b88531677c67190c50ca126606fe865106

There's an obvious problem with these ratings that is corrected in most later efforts: they award no credit for non-physical powers. So, any character whose stock in trade is telepathy, energy projection, matter manipulation, or illusions? Sorry, dude, you're getting a lot of 2's. I’ll also note that every ”scale” card visually affiliates every rank with a different character portrait, and poor Aunt May is once again the butt of the joke, appearing last in several categories (with the notable exception of Intelligence, where Absorbing Man appears to be the only character of below-average intellect).

The heavy hitters (characters with two or more 7's) are probably not surprising: big bads like Thanos (35), Dark Phoenix (34), and Galactus (31), and your most powerful heroes like Silver Surfer (34) and Thor (30).

He's great. Just don't ask him to jump rope or run a marathon.

https://preview.redd.it/df7lmiiw4cah1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c4ab8dceaeb9a72853e3bb98bf16254f364ffaa3

On the other end of the spectrum, we see Jubilee (11), Chameleon (11), and Mojo (10) all competitive for the worst cumulative stats. Ironically, also among those "weakest" characters is none other than Scarlet Witch (11)... who would later cause perhaps the single most impactful use of powers other than Thanos's "snap" when she unilaterally de-powered almost every mutant on Earth during the events of M Day.

https://preview.redd.it/4ktutk025cah1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7e5a1302f3d7a4f27c462385fe390d9c19756df4

I'm not awarding this set a 10 for cardbacks because we'll see the Power Level feature done more effectively in other sets. But here, it's ambitiously novel, it sets a great precedent for debate about characters' relative strengths, and we're going to award it a lot of points even if it isn't perfect.

Curation: 6/10

This set improves somewhat on MU I's roster by featuring 54 Superheroes, 36 Super-Villains, and 12 Legends and Rookies, for just over 100 unique characters.

Unfortunately, it also again pads the list with 36 "Arch Enemies" cards featuring rivals squarely off in a format that rarely succeeds visually on a small trading card canvas. The "Teams" feature is similar, showing 11 line-ups that, although often well-loved, don't display a ton of discernible style.

Wolverine's outfit and expression are just not working here.

The stand-out for me is the set of 12 "Weapons" cards, each of which focus on a different well-known artifact such as Wolverine's Claws or the Ultimate Nullifier. Each is accompanied by some surely non-canonical tech specs and a cool blueprints-style model on the cardback. I can't be alone in thinking that a full set of these would be extremely cool.

https://preview.redd.it/9rbqk20j7cah1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f62170bd9fb841ca8c632e63da93153b158fc5f8

Quasar's a pretty strong dude, but 7 lbs on each wrist? Not easy!

Jim Lee's done this one a million times, but it always hits.

Anyone else not know that Wolverine has silicon seals around his claws that must be... periodically replaced?

Inserts/Parallels: 7/10

As with MU I, the chase cards were very limited -- just five holograms (one per box, officially) — but again they hit pretty hard. Spider-Man, Hulk, Punisher, and Doom all get a card, and of those, my favorite is the Hulk, with the giant fist popping off the card toward the viewer. Surprisingly, though, this set ends with the Fantastic Four vs. Mole Man -- a curious choice as the capstone chase card for an entire Marvel Universe set.

Unfortunately, for photographic purposes, they’re so reflective and lighting-dependent that still photos don’t really do them justice. And like the MU I holograms, don't even think about trying to grade them. The holos are again highly off-center in most cases, but because they have no visible white border, it doesn’t jump out to the same extent.

https://preview.redd.it/5poacg5w7cah1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9c3d0f98542d916ace4acdb949d78ef32146405a

https://preview.redd.it/n681p2fx7cah1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=60beadc95a5ffd54de7dc7fd14a9fa63333c2999

To be clear, these are wonderful cards, and they're going to score highly based on a mix of merit and nostalgia. But there's only five of them, and they're not the best holograms we're going to see.

Affordability/Availability: 10/10

Like MU I, you have even odds of finding these cards in just about any yard sale or flea market for the cost of the change in your pocket. Even including the holos, a full set goes for around $75 to $100 online. No reason for anything other than a max score on these guys.

Overall Score: 39/50

With MU I, Marvel showed that they can put together a solid set of trading cards with fun art and interesting card content. With MU II, they improved on the formula, bringing in more big-name artists, adding creative new Power Level scores, and somewhat broadening the roster to cover more characters. Overall, this is an excellent set, and I suspect it will maintain a high ranking even after we've looked at a lot more.

Side note: I'm considering whether these rankings would sort out better if we award, say, 20 points for art and 5 points for each of the other four categories, or some other weighted distribution. Art is arguably the most important criterion by a wide margin, and we'll eventually see that certain sets with great art are dragged down in the rankings by terrible cardbacks or limited affordability. But maybe that's a problem for another day.

Overall Set Ranking (in progress)

  1. Marvel Universe II (39/50)
  2. Marvel Universe I (35/50)
reddit.com
u/Sea_Connection9185 — 2 months ago

Marvel Set Reviews: Marvel Universe I (1990)

Let's kick off our mega Marvel card review project in the natural place: Marvel Universe I, the godfather of modern-era Marvel card sets. Others can weigh in separately on their love of the abysmal Donruss 1966 set and glut of mostly low-quality Comic Images sets, but for these purposes, this is where we start.

Background

  • Set Name: Marvel Universe I
  • Publisher: Impel
  • Year: 1990
  • Size: 162 base cards + 5 holograms

Art: 6/10

The unattributed art in this set appears in what I consider a classic, wholesome series of standard (or at least, now-standard) takes on mostly well-known characters. Super clean lines, bright colors, fun vibes. Not much you wouldn't find in a given comic issue of the day, and in retrospect, I find most of it mediocre. It's certainly not affirmatively bad in the vein of many sets we'll get to later, but not much of it jumps off the page based on any unique vision or execution.

Personal favorites include symbiote-suited Spider-Man (#2); Marvel Girl (#9); a truly iconic brown-and-yellow Wolverine (#10); Shadowcat posing with Lockheed (#25); and Captain Britain (#40) going full beefcake.

https://preview.redd.it/lx854k2d4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4a29510bc3ce8657c01fb9d8b728c97caf3c3a02

https://preview.redd.it/odejzi2d4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c3cf86151a14c779bd7efa9d46234063e47f2ccf

https://preview.redd.it/xv45pi2d4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3b493ff85b518594e739b8ee225843abbeca4c73

https://preview.redd.it/1arydl2d4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c60d25de38d6d1d3caabab2101a7b7a4a030ce86

https://preview.redd.it/9yc0aj2d4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=84e363074282460bec6c4be4e7eac653bc9a855a

Most questionable take: Cyclops (#8) looks bizarrely startled by his own optic blast, and those cuffs... not his best look.

https://preview.redd.it/hizlt8fg4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dc5c04e82e744a51a6a229826dc2e8f78d9664ec

Cardbacks: 9/10

Probably trying to match the stat-heavy sports cards of the era, Impel left nothing to chance on these cardbacks: name, height/weight, aliases, arch enemies, a fulsome biography, trivia, and most strikingly, a completely absurd non-canonical win/loss/tie record that raises far more questions than it answers. I can't emphasize enough how crazy this is, and how even on its own terms, the implementation is basically a disaster, but I adore that they had the gall to try it. (I also wonder whether they briefly assigned some guy(s) to look through all the comics and canonically calculate these numbers, and then quickly realized the almost impossible amount of research and weird judgment calls this would entail.)

Let's unpack these stats with a key acknowledgment up front: for several characters, the math doesn't math. Punisher, Invisible Woman, and Doctor Doom all boast win-loss-tie numbers that do not equal the computed "win percentage." Is this a big deal? No, but clearly the proofreader mentally checked out of this process at a very early stage.

Who are the big, uh, winners and losers from these statistics? Surprisingly, on the "Heroes" side of the ledger, Punisher boasts an insane win percentage of 86.9% (106-14-2), erroneously juiced up to 89%. We can presumably chalk this up to him firing actual, real bullets at loads of street-level thug opponents who thought worst-case scenario for their evening was getting punched by Luke Cage (more on that later). Trailing him, Invisible Woman and Nick Fury boast 80% wins; many of our classic X-Heroes are in the 55% to 65% range. (Note: nerds are going to point out that Deathlok and Foolkiller both have a 100% win rate, at 9-0-0 and 4-0-0, respectively. Well, that's just Marvel trying to pump their rookies, and as the judge here, I'm excluding anyone with fewer than 10 battles due to insufficient sample size.)

https://preview.redd.it/mjhcivyh4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=68f7ebd3dc0015e1a08fb6d642f156af089b11df

https://preview.redd.it/j5ujawyh4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6f9279493a323f3cf262d88cc0de00e2e1f9daa3

We also have to comment on what's going on in Hell's Kitchen. Punisher's success rate notwithstanding, we see Daredevil clocking in at 51% -- just a notch better than a coin flip -- and poor Luke Cage, described here as Power Man, rounds out the Heroes at a despondent 41%. I have nothing against LC, but man, winning hardly more than one out of three doesn't scream "superhero."

https://preview.redd.it/irf6vadj4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6863290f9ecec99275dfeed3b37954c4e396062e

https://preview.redd.it/lrgo7adj4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e687186cfa6472fe5a3c45fb7ef34c809a6aca96

As you might expect, things get even bleaker on the Super-Villains side of the equation. Baron Zemo and Blob come home with a win only 29% of the time, and Dr. Octopus, despite being described as the leader of the Sinister Six, has somehow won only 25% of his hundreds of battles.

https://preview.redd.it/vkacpjll4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=11a0046c2025131f60d78ec5ecacc6c5777a8b87

https://preview.redd.it/hx3ngjll4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=54e74af6a2fd587dba52c513beb18a4fde643160

Some other random oddities: Enchantress has 1,649 wins and 2,404 losses, but no ties. What's going on there? And for Dormammu, but not other quasi-immortal beings like Mephisto, Loki, and Galactus, they didn't even guess at the numbers.

There is probably a lot to say about the height and weight stats, but I'm just going to observe that they list Enchantress at 6'3", 450 lbs, and leave it there.

https://preview.redd.it/3ktbs0rm4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=54195694adea5216168a35a25da7c0d67e674448

Curation: 5/10

Our set designers know to play the hits throughout the 162-card base set, but in some cases they play them too often. There are three basically identical Wolverine cards (one is Patch, but if you're going to do that, put "Patch" or "Wolverine ("Patch") on the front!). There are several Spider-Mans with different win statistics, presumably based on how he performs in each costume. Storm, weirdly, appears twice. And Captain America's Motorcycle (#31), Punisher's Battle Van (#44), and Aunt May (#28) inexplicably get their own cards.

https://preview.redd.it/si2v5l8o4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0e470268bcd855711f8063104107037a3bc2473e

A full 36 cards are devoted to "Famous Battles" set in landscape. Other subsets include a now-hilarious set of "Most Valuable Comics" that have since inflated between 100x and 1000x the listed prices; a gallery of Team Pictures that are mostly unexceptional; and a series of immediately forgettable Spider-Man Presents cards featuring jokes that would not pass muster in a standard Spider-Man comic.

https://preview.redd.it/z8s1xg6p4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=39190f86838a38c6710034253474fe3748aa2c00

https://preview.redd.it/o4uzvh6p4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8bedf8a0f3dfa4413b0f6cacb32069c322447608

In short, I would have preferred something like 90 to 135 standard characters and 18 or so teams, but hey, it's fine!

Inserts/Parallels: 7/10

For many people here, the most memorable pieces of the set are probably the five holograms (1:10 packs). The art comes from the base set, and they chose pretty well -- Cosmic Spider-Man, Magneto, Silver Surfer, the aforementioned Wolverine, and a Spider-Man vs. Green Goblin battle.

https://preview.redd.it/vrgx3geq4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dce99e2dfd2dd34eb18725ed9f807b4c87938478

https://preview.redd.it/71pjjfeq4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3bb5cc5b7f5cc58e2442dc48ceee8f348cedd370

https://preview.redd.it/a2qtmfeq4y8h1.jpg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=54a6f78f13fd668a5d26dfe2e7327bce1b083bf7

The only problem with these beautiful cards, and it's a big one, is that the stamper guy at the Impel factory in 1990 was terrible at his job, or perhaps he was highly skilled but they didn't give him the machinery necessary to execute his vision, and as a result, virtually all of these holograms (including mine) are discernibly off-center in one or more directions. People refuse to accept this fact: dumbos have sent in literally 9,812 copies of the Wolverine hologram for PSA grading over the years, and only 51 of them -- 0.5% -- have come back gem mint. Rates are similar for the others. So unless you have just opened up a perfectly preserved pack, lifted this card directly onto an electron microscope with the soft, blameless fingers of a newborn, and validated the centering to within a few nanometers, please: just enjoy the card.

Affordability/Availability: 8/10

36 years after its print run, this set remains cheap and ubiquitous, which we should praise. The only downside is that many, many people are still finding a binder full of these cards in their uncle's attic, and almost daily, they log onto Reddit with one burning question: what's it worth? Well, brother, not much. Any buyer can pick up a pristine full base set on eBay for about $50, and a full set of the holograms for just a bit more.

Overall Score: 35/50

Let's sum up: the set has solid art and great, one-of-a-kind cardbacks. The roster is padded but the holograms are excellent. If you want to collect Marvel cards, it's the perfect place to start looking. And if you're a guy who wants to start evaluating some culturally waning trading card sets on the Internet, turns out it's a great place for that too! But seriously, I just got here, so please wait at least a few weeks before you do your own review.

Ranking (in progress)

  1. Marvel Universe I (35/50)
reddit.com
u/Sea_Connection9185 — 2 months ago
▲ 89 r/Zwift

Paul Seixas?

Anybody think this is the real deal? He blew by me today! The listed age is obviously wrong, but if it's not him, somebody is devoting a lot of time and effort to maintaining the bit.

EDIT: Consensus seems to be that this could be authentic!

u/Sea_Connection9185 — 2 months ago

Marvel Set Reviews

Fellow Marvel card enthusiasts -

I am considering a long-term project in which I "review" and evaluate various Marvel card sets, both overall and on various metrics: art, card backs, curation, inserts/parallels, and price/availability. For each set I would post my favorite 5-10 cards (and possibly some least favorite or most head-scratching inclusions) and run through some trivia. And I would then maintain a running list of my set ranking list from first to last.

The only real criteria are that the set has to involve Marvel characters and I have to own every card (excluding promos/autos/sketches). Naturally, we'd start with 1990 Impel Marvel Universe I, and probably wrap about 50-70 sets later, maybe one every week or two. We'd include all 1990s Marvel Universe (5x); Marvel Masterpieces (5x); Skybox X-Men (2x); Fleer Ultra X-Men (3x), Spider-Man (2x), Wolverine, Onslaught; Flair Annual (2x); the crossover sets (DC vs Marvel, Amalgam, Marvel vs Wildstorm); and a bunch of one-offs. From there, possibly on to the many excellent Rittenhouse sets (2008-2014 or so), the later Marvel Masterpieces, and some select choices from Upper Deck and Panini. Hard pass on Topps, at least so far.

Between the amazing and encyclopedic coverage of Marvel Masterpieces by DynaEtch on Blowout Forums, and the thoughtful series of Unstacking the Deck reviews by the Real Gentlemen of Leisure, much of this has already been done, and probably more authoritatively than I can do it. But when I look at the content on this sub, what I see is that people overwhelmingly do not care about, and do not engage with, the relentless tide of eBay spam, breaker self-hype, and "how much is this worth" posts. But we love anything that speaks to genuine appreciation for the cards: universally classic inserts, custom binders, stories about finding that one missing card at a flea market, memories of sharing the hobby with family. Let's do more of that and less of the other stuff.

Still up in the air on whether to do it all here, or instead link to a free Substack, which has better options for layout in a project like this. Interested in your thoughts on that and if you'd be interested in reading something like this.

SeaConn

reddit.com
u/Sea_Connection9185 — 2 months ago