I agree that if you like to shoot wide, the 35L and 24L are much better than the 17-40mm, although neither are ultrawide (for that, I went with the 16-35L II). I have the 35L and it's a gret lens.
Back to your question of 100L Macro vs. 135L - I have both, and both are excellent. As you state, the 100L does very well for portraits, and you can get decent OOF blur with f/2.8 on FF (the same as f/1.8 on your old crop body). The 135L does focus a bit faster, so it's better for shooting action, but then, the 5DII is a handicap there. So, in your place, I think of those two, I'd go for the 100mm L Macro first.
You also need to consider your intended uses for the lens. If what you're looking for is a great lens for portraits, that you plan to use mostly or only for portraits, then the 135L is the best choice. The 100L Macro is not quite as good as a portrait lens, but is a much more versatile lens overall, including the macro capability.