Comic Books


Price: $3.99
iFanboy Community Pick of the Week Percentage: 0.0%


Viktorr08/27/09YesRead Review
changingshades08/27/09YesRead Review
ohcaroline08/27/09YesRead Review
coltrane6808/26/09YesRead Review
Avg Rating: 3.3
Users who pulled this comic:


  1. I can’t beleive this is still going.  I like dark avengers.  Please bring that back.

  2. I think this may be my last Dark Avengers issue, atleast in issues.

  3. Dark Avengers #7 was the weakest bit of Utopia so far (Still not getting precisely where the title of the mini-event is coming from…) I hope this picks up.

    A friend of mine tried to subscribe to Dark Avengers through Marvel in December and couldn’t get one. I’ve also heard nothing to imply the book will continue beyond 12 issues. 

  4. ugh.. i hope utopia ends soon. i couldn’t care less.

  5. awesome! can’t wait!

    (yes, I often feel the need to balance the scales) 

  6. @ PraxJarvin:

    The main definition of Utopia is ‘an ideal or perfect state.’ Well, from who’s point of view. From the looks of the mini-series, that points to Norman Osborn. Norman is trying to forge the world as he sees fit, making it HIS Utopia. 

    This is a little overboard, but one of my majors is Philosophy, so I have to read and write about these things. Utopia was first used by Thomas More, a 16th century philosopher. When first conceived by More, it was used to contrast the moral decadence and disunity of Christian Europe with the tolerance and prosperity More imagined as his ideal state of Utopia, which is run on secular, socialist principles.

  7. I think it’s just called Utopia because Fraction thought that was a cool-sounding term that seemed to hold meaning. If it’s supposed to be a Utopia from Norman’s perspective, well, a Utopia-of-one is kind of a contradiction in terms. Originally, I thought maybe it was called Utopia as some sort of ironic statement, because San Francisco is supposedly so tolerant…but I really don’t think it’s that deep. I don’t think there’s any real meaning behind it whatsoever. I have to admit that it’s a cool-sounding title for this arc, though.

    As far as More’s Utopia being more "tolerant"…BULLSHIT! In the book Utopia every household was given two slaves!

    I’m not minding this crossover, though. As crossovers go, this one’s been fun and interesting enough for me.

  8. P.S. To clarify, I would say that More’s Utopia was more free than England at the time. More pretty much just wanted the Monarchy off people’s back; he didn’t want the King to be the head of the Church of England. So in that sense More’s vision was more "tolerant" by degree, I guess. But given what we mean by "tolerance" as a buzzword today, More’s Utopia really doesn’t match up with that.

  9. @ Flapjaxx:

    As you know, Utopia is an unrealistic idea that is impossible to achieve. 

    You say that "a Utopia-of-one is kind of a contradiction in terms." Well, isn’t the idea of Utopia a contradiction of itself? That is why Utopia is impossible to achieve. Every living person on this Earth has a different idea of what a Utopia would consist of. It’s only when a person wields absolute power that he or she is able to enforce their vision of Utopia onto others. In the Marvel Universe, Norman Osborn wields the power to change the world as he sees fit, his vision of Utopia.

  10. @supertrackmonkey You misunderstood me I think. I know perfectly well where Utopia originates and indeed count it among my favorite books. My issue is… I don’t quite understand it’s application to the storyline. At first I took it to mean a Mutant Utopia in San Fran but that doesn’t quite seem to be the case. And there doesn’t seem to be any commentary on it either being one or failing to do so. I’m puzzled by what the move to SF has done for the team. This same riot could have been held in NYC. ::shrug.:: I really don’t see that it hast anything to do with the Dark X-Men or Osborne either. He’s not worried about creating a Utopia at all, hence my confusion. So is the "Utopia" with an Anarchy symbol inscribed on it supposed to mean something? I really don’t think so. I think they chose a cool sounding title and then tried to make it fit. Which seems to happen a lot more often. However, I have to agree with Flapjaxx, you said he was making his perfect world which is a different horse from creating a Utopia. The concept of Utopia is a boon to all, not a boon to one (whatever technical/philosophical reasoning/limitations aside).

  11. Only reading this book for the X-Crossover.  I hope they stop with the crossovers for a bit.  It gets a little daunting.

  12. Yeah I’m pretty underwhelmed by the crossover, but there is one question i can’t come up with an answer for, after it is done should i continue buying uncanny x-men?

  13. @ PraxJarvin:

    What is your personal idea of a Utopia? What if you had the means to create your vision of Utopia. Do you think that no one would oppose/disagree with you? Utopia is an abstract concept, with each person having a different vision of it.

    Seeing as how a Utopia is very socialist/communist, I think that the concept of Utopia does indeed fit. Using a Rule Utilitarian view, what is greatest possible good for the majority is the best/correct answer. Notice the reactions of the people in the book. Not the title characters, but the civilians. What are those people saying is the greatest good for the state? (That question was meant to be rhetorical, but then I realized that I haven’t read a Utopia title in about a month, Utopia #2, and couldn’t find the past issues to check back on what the people were actually doing.)

    I am also puzzled by the move to San Fran. To me, the best reason for the move was to separate the X-Men from every-other hero/team in the Marvel Universe. 

  14. @Supertrackmonkey That’s my issue, people aren’t reacting to it. We’re seeing two sides of the story painted in broad strokes and told one is right and correct and the other is wrong. But the Mutants aren’t commenting on it, they’re more worried about asking Psylocke why she’s in a wetsuit. And if takes this level of analysis to get a decent, but grasping, idea of what the title is supposed to reflect, it doesn’t work. Thank you for the interesting conversation, though.

  15. @PraxJarvin @supertrackmonkey @flapjaxx: Honestly I believe it is overly simple and Fraction used the term "Utopia" because SF is the ideal place for mutants.  It could be that Osborn sees mutants as a threat of bringing down his "Utopia" that he created. However, the only way to be sure is to ask the man. As for the Anarchy symbol in the title, I think that  is just Fraction trying to be ironic but who knows?

    I haven’t really cared at all for this crossover.  It’s not really that bad, I am just having a hard time connecting to it.  This whole crossover seems bland and uninteresting to me.  I can’t wait for Dark Avengers to get back on track.  I’d also like to see other titles like Nova get out of the "tie-in/crossover" funk and get back to telling good stories. 

  16. this was probly the weakest book so far.  but im still digging it.  just one more to go.

  17. I like this book and everything… but wake me up when the X-Men are far away from this title okay?

  18. are we all clear on why it’s called "Utopia" now?

  19. I do have to agree that there’s no reason for this to be an issue of Dark Avengers.  I don’t think any of the DA characters had any lines except for Dakken, and Norman who’s in everything anyway.

  20. @ohcaroline  Bullseye had a couple of lines, but you’re right this was way more x-men

  21. I enjoyed this issue up until the conclusion. My first thought was: I really enjoyed this story when it was called "Magneto Rex." So instead of being thematic the title is based solely on a MacGuffin introduced at the last two pages of the story? (I knew it had nothing to do with Osborne!). The revelations at the end of this issue about half the Dark Team seem to negate the purpose of the Dark X-Men Beginnings mini. And really… this had no business being in Dark Avengers. 3/5 from me, even after all of that. I’m getting frustrated that apparently there are no new ideas in the X-Men universe. Oh well. I would have been far happier if they just brought back Ship/Prosh. 

  22. Where the hell was the X-23 vs Daken I wanted to see?


    Other then that I loved this issue that had no Avenger time.

  23. This was the first issue of this crossover where the sheer number of characters overwhelmed me and I couldn’t keep everyone straight.  I’m going to have to go back and read all of these issues at one sitting once it’s done to see if that clarifies anything.

Leave a Comment