Get ready people, JMS and Joe Q are planning ANOTHER Spider-Man event

[stillanerd]

Yes, folks, you read that heading right. In the latest issue of (http://www.wizarduniverse.com/magazines/wizard/WZ20060425-onsale.cfm)Wizard Magazine:

JMS and Joe Quesada address Spider-Man's busy summer story, what they feel is off-kilter with Spidey right now and how they plan to team up in 2007 to "tear your heart out." (http://www.superherohype.com/forums/JMS%20and%20Joe%20Quesada%20address%20Spider-Man%27s%20busy%20summer%20story,%20what%20they%20f eel%20is%20off-kilter%20with%20Spidey%20right%20now%20and%20how%2 0they%20plan%20to%20team%20up%20in%202007%20to%20)

According to one guy over at (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=121527&page=1&pp=15)CBR message boards who has already read the article, JMS will be doing the writing chores and Joe Q will be the artist for this mini. Apparently, they've sort of confessed that "The Other:Evolve or Die" and the "Iron Spidey" costume aren't working out as well as they had hoped they would (surprise, surprise) and so THIS TIME, they're going to address what they see as Spider-Man's problems and "fix them" with this mini. Oh, and once again, Joe Q makes Spidey's marriage to Mary Jane the scapegoat.

Wizard: What's the biggest problem with Spider-Man right now?

JOE: I've said it before: that darn marriage to Mary Jane. It has been one of the biggest problems in writing Spider-Man stories for new and younger readers. Let me put it clearly - Spider-Man is one of the greatest if not the greatest teen superhero ever created. He's supposed to be a young, viable, single character. And over the course of 40-some-odd years, as writers grew older and got married and stuff, they took Peter Parker along for the ride, forgetting about the fact that there were 9-year-olds who wanted to get into Peter Parker in the same way that they all did, which was a young guy. Peter grew old and married a supermodel. Peter became Billy Joel.

[ragingdemon155]

I give up...

[ragingdemon155]

Also, I really really hope that Joe wasn't stupid enough to make a comment about the marriage like that.

Seriously, the marriage between Peter and MJ is probably THE ONLY thing that fans in general are happy about. They've pretty much stripped Spidey of all the aspects of his character that we loved. I don't think he realizes that fans of the character have GROWN up also and would enjoy the character maturing along with them. If you want a "teen" Spider-man that's what USM is there for.

Spider-man can't be saved...The character's dead.:(

[James"007"Bond]

Joe Q please, just die!

[James"007"Bond]

Joe Q please, just die!

[Marc]

I give up...

I've given up, gone home and am now sitting in a dark corner shivering. I'd hang my head more but I can't get it lower than the floor, although I have tried headbutting it.

Stupidity is one thing, imposed ignorence another, but incessant retarded decisions like these mean the world would be a better place without them. Where the fv-ck does joe get off telling the story of 'how things went wrong for spider-man' when he is directly responsable for the WORST period of spider-man, EVER! Where does crap get off telling perfume "you stink". I'm so sick of it, but there is nothing more I can do to stop this than dropping every spidey title which I have since issue #500. I would be willing to contribute twenty pounds or more to a save spidey campaign or hire a hitman collection... whatever.

[Doc_OCK_4MUGEN]

And this is why the Marvel fans (with brains) HATE Joey Q and JMS...
The problem is the disregard to the character... Spidey stopped being a teen when he became (20 MST)... during college... he can't stay 16 forever... no matter what Big Moron BendThis says... or Joe Quesadilla and Just Murdered Spidey say... the marriage is no the problem... This Unholy Trinity is... The A-hole, The hack, and the babbling foo'...

[3dman27]

i'm with you doc

[MaxCarnage]

JMS and Joe Quesada address Spider-Man's busy summer story, what they feel is off-kilter with Spidey right now and how they plan to team up in 2007 to "tear your heart out."

Again?

Is this metaphorical, as in they are going to make me weep at watching my favorite superhero be run so far into the ground that I can no longer recognize him, or literal, like when Morlun ripped out Peter's eye?

These two are so far out of touch with the fanbase it's gone beyond comical and become seriously pathetic. I'm telling you, if you want to stop this now before it's too late, you have to stop buying Spider-Man comics. I am thinking of canceling USM just so I am not contributing to Marvel anymore. I can't sit idly by and watch this garbage continue.

And what exactly is it about his marriage to MJ that makes him so hard to relate to for younger readers? If he weren't married, what would he be doing? Sleeping around? Is that relatable to nine-year-olds? I guess if he and MJ got divorced, 50% of the kids in America could relate to the situation, if not to Pete himself. Which is a sad statement in and of itself.

I want to smack some sense into Quesada. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't gain anymore sense, but at least I got to smack him.

[Norman Osborn]

and so THIS TIME, they're going to address what they see as Spider-Man's problems and "fix them" with this mini. Oh, and once again, Joe Q makes Spidey's marriage to Mary Jane the scapegoat.

Anyone else just shaking their heads at the irony of the bolded statement?......

Joe Q is a modern day Homer Simpson........I can actually envision him dancing around a silver age pic of Spidey burning, singing "I am so smart, I am so smart, S- M-RT, I mean S-M-A-R-T.....when does denial cross the line into "not mentally fit to stand trial?"

:(

[shinlyle]

That....
****ing....
does it.....

JMS and Joe Q. are the biggest idiots on the planet. Period.

The "Other" and "Iron Spidey" aren't being as well-recieved as you had hoped?! NO ****, Sherlock?!?!

So...now, you have to do another mini, and milk more money out of a weary, and impoverished audience that doesn't trust you?! FAT CHANCE!!! I'm not buying it. You're going to "FIX" Spider-Man?! He wasn't broken until you two fat ****s started tinkering with his origin!!! Don't you get it?!!? You two are the freakin' problem!!! Not the fans....not the marriage, which was just hunky dory until you two decided that it was a "problem".

Spider-Man's supposed to be a teenager?! That's why you started up the Ultimate Universe, so kids could read about Spider-Man as a kid!! Even Stan Lee has said that he wanted Peter to grow up as the stories went along....and I'd think he should know what's best for the character....not a has-been artist turned Editor and a Sci-fi writer who has seen his heyday come and go.

Do us all a favor: Hire Geog Johns, Dan Slott, and keep Jeph Loeb around. Retcon the "Other" and every other piece of crap since JMS started it up, and hire an editor who knows something about freakin' continuity, you ass-wipes!!!

You guys would be GREAT mechanics.

Joe Q:"Hey, Joe..."

Joe S:"Yeah, Joe?"

Joe Q:"This thing keeps overheating. I think it's the radio."

Joe S:"Yeah, it's probably the radio. "

Joe Q:"This car hasn't been the same since those guys put a radio in it."

Joe S:"The radio ruined this car."

Car Owner: "Guys....couldn't it be the hole you two put in the radiator earlier?"

Joe Q: "No....it's the radio. It's what was always been wrong with the car."

Joe S: "Yeah, we know what we're doing here. Now....we're going to have to charge you for that hole we had to put in your radiator, and the new radio."

Car Owner 2: "LOL ROTL LMAO!! I lvoe having hles in my radiator! The mechanics are always right! We need a new radio! LOLROTFLMAO!!!"

Car Owner: "Sigh...it never ends...."

Now, that being said, it's time to gloat.

HAHA!! We told you "The Other" and "Iron Spidey" sucked! Make fun of us "Purist Geeks", will you?! Eat it, LOSERS!!

:p :p :p

[deathshead2]

Hmm I guess I will never read spider-man as long as JMS is writing :(. When will the big events stop.

[The Joker]

So they recognise his marriage to MJ as a problem,and in the summer of next year they plan to tear our hearts out.

Hmmmm could it be the end of the marriage for MJ and Pete??

Either way I sense more lame and cheap shock value,right along the lines of the other trash they've thrown at us in the past 2 years.

[Mister J]

Christ. I was looking forward to 616 Spidey turning around in 2007. This doesn't look promising at all.

They're probably thinking of how to completely destroy MJ's character right now. :down

[deathshead2]

Christ. I was looking forward to 616 Spidey turning around in 2007. This doesn't look promising at all.

They're probably thinking of how to completely destroy MJ's character right now. :downI bet she gets powers and gwen comes back.And we find out Peter is really Ben:down :( :mad:

[shinlyle]

It's all cheap shock value. That's all JMS and Joey Q know how to do. The thought of them actually having Spidey move forward scares the hell out of them, because they don't know how to do it. They only know how to screw up his past, and change who he is.

These imbeciles truly have no clue what they are doing anymore. You want to "shock" us? Try telling good stories with what is already there, you asses! Brubaker is doing it with Daredevil....and Captain America. Whedon is doing it with Astonishing X-Men. Dan Slott does it with She-Hulk, Spidey/Human Torch, and the Thing. It. Can. Be. Done.

The problem with JMS and Joey Q. is that they are far too lazy to think of anything new and exciting that doesn't totally shift Peter's life into areas it doesn't need to go. "Peter's dead girlfriend's kids are out to kill him!" "Peter is one of many Spider-Man throughout history" (which, for those idiot supporters out there, this was the same plot device behind the terrible "Catwoman" film a few years ago....how'd that go, again?). "Let's make Spider-Man Iron Man's sidekick".

All of these ideas are garbage. Everything these two have turned out for the past few years has been garbage. Yeah, the Hydra arc was good....and that's about it.

I can't even believe these two imbeciles. They should have died long ago from trying to re-invent the laws of physics by jumping off buildings until gravity no longer applied, or something.

I'm dropping FNSM and probably SSM. I can't take this **** anymore. Ultimate is all the Spidey I'm going to read from here on out. 616 Spidey is dead....they killed him off in FNSM #3, and I haven't seen a sign on his return, yet.

[Dragon]

What should we expect? It's what we've long seen on the horizon. These dolts can 't do anything but cheap gimmicks. They're the Siegfried & Roy of comics.

And scape-goating the marriage is again a step in the wrong direction and shows just how little grasp Joe Q has on storytelling. I've expressed my own displeasure with the Spider-Marriage. But- it isn't, as Joe Q makes it out to be that Spidey is married-at-all- merely the handling of the marriage. based on joe Q's thinking, spidey can't have a lasting relationship at all.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Ya know, I ain't a big fan of retcons, so you know it's serious when I start sayin' RETCON THIS ****!

Th' only problem Marvel needs to fix with Spidey is th' jackasses runnin' things. That, and this new editorial policy of rippin' th' internet in half every year.

DC IS TAKING OVER, MORONS! WHY DO YOU THINK THAT IS?

[wolvie2020]

That....
****ing....
does it.....

JMS and Joe Q. are the biggest idiots on the planet. Period.

The "Other" and "Iron Spidey" aren't being as well-recieved as you had hoped?! NO ****, Sherlock?!?!

So...now, you have to do another mini, and milk more money out of a weary, and impoverished audience that doesn't trust you?! FAT CHANCE!!! I'm not buying it. You're going to "FIX" Spider-Man?! He wasn't broken until you two fat ****s started tinkering with his origin!!! Don't you get it?!!? You two are the freakin' problem!!! Not the fans....not the marriage, which was just hunky dory until you two decided that it was a "problem".


Spider-Man's supposed to be a teenager?! That's why you started up the Ultimate Universe, so kids could read about Spider-Man as a kid!! Even Stan Lee has said that he wanted Peter to grow up as the stories went along....and I'd think he should know what's best for the character....not a has-been artist turned Editor and a Sci-fi writer who has seen his heyday come and go.

Do us all a favor: Hire Geog Johns, Dan Slott, and keep Jeph Loeb around. Retcon the "Other" and every other piece of crap since JMS started it up, and hire an editor who knows something about freakin' continuity, you ass-wipes!!!

You guys would be GREAT mechanics.

Joe Q:"Hey, Joe..."

Joe S:"Yeah, Joe?"

Joe Q:"This thing keeps overheating. I think it's the radio."

Joe S:"Yeah, it's probably the radio. "

Joe Q:"This car hasn't been the same since those guys put a radio in it."

Joe S:"The radio ruined this car."

Car Owner: "Guys....couldn't it be the hole you two put in the radiator earlier?"

Joe Q: "No....it's the radio. It's what was always been wrong with the car."

Joe S: "Yeah, we know what we're doing here. Now....we're going to have to charge you for that hole we had to put in your radiator, and the new radio."

Car Owner 2: "LOL ROTL LMAO!! I lvoe having hles in my radiator! The mechanics are always right! We need a new radio! LOLROTFLMAO!!!"

Car Owner: "Sigh...it never ends...."

Now, that being said, it's time to gloat.

HAHA!! We told you "The Other" and "Iron Spidey" sucked! Make fun of us "Purist Geeks", will you?! Eat it, LOSERS!!

:p :p :p

:up: Yea!

[wolvie2020]

What I don't get is, WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY can't they see what the hell most of the world thinks!

When I was a kid, one of the greatest things I loved about Spidey comics was that he's married! I was a kid, and a HELL of a lot of the people here, and around the world that read Spider-Man comics were kids when they got married, and WE ALL BUY SPIDER-MAN comics!

When they tried to make her dissapear, fans were pissed and shouted until she came back! It was great moment for ALL Spidey fans when she got back with him! The whole damn reason that she was brought back was the fact that people HATED that she was gone!

Spidey was well into his 20's when I started reading, ALL Spider-Man animated shows since the 80's have had him as a YOUNG ADULT, in College! quite easily 20-21! Don't they ever think, WHY that is! People like Peter Parker as an adult!

WHERE IN THE HELL DOES THIS DAMN TEENAGE THING COME INTO PLACE!!!!!!!!!

As I grew older, and I thought I was going to read about other heroes, I found out Spidey was mature in the comics, which made me feel like I was reading mature work, about mature charachters! DO they not realise if write stories about whiny teenagers forever, readers get bored and think less of the work?

His ideas are so financially driven, to me it just sounds like he wants Spider-Man to be stuck in a perpetual state of The O.C. meets super heroes, this way, teenagers, (the people who have the most disposable income in the Western world,) will always pick up this soap opera comic book when they are a teenager, to find out about the MU, and then graduate to other charachters

Even Hollywood knew it was a bad idea to keep him really young for too long a time. He's only in High School for the 1st half of the 1st movie!

Damn... 1st hayfever, now this!

[Doc_OCK_4MUGEN]

Somehow WE'LL get the blame (as well as the Pete &MJ Marriage) if it flops... which most likely will... See T3h 0th3r and T3h 1r0n 5p1d3r suit... God! I hate 733t speak... almost as much as what the unholy trinity is doing to Pete...

[shinlyle]

What I don't get is, WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY can't they see what the hell most of the world thinks!

When I was a kid, one of the greatest things I loved about Spidey comics was that he's married! I was a kid, and a HELL of a lot of the people here, and around the world that read Spider-Man comics were kids when they got married, and WE ALL BUY SPIDER-MAN comics!

When they tried to make her dissapear, fans were pissed and shouted until she came back! It was great moment for ALL Spidey fans when she got back with him! The whole damn reason that she was brought back was the fact that people HATED that she was gone!

Spidey was well into his 20's when I started reading, ALL Spider-Man animated shows since the 80's have had him as a YOUNG ADULT, in College! quite easily 20-21! Don't they ever think, WHY that is! People like Peter Parker as an adult!

WHERE IN THE HELL DOES THIS DAMN TEENAGE THING COME INTO PLACE!!!!!!!!!

As I grew older, and I thought I was going to read about other heroes, I found out Spidey was mature in the comics, which made me feel like I was reading mature work, about mature charachters! DO they not realise if write stories about whiny teenagers forever, readers get bored and think less of the work?

His ideas are so financially driven, to me it just sounds like he wants Spider-Man to be stuck in a perpetual state of The O.C. meets super heroes, this way, teenagers, (the people who have the most disposable income in the Western world,) will always pick up this soap opera comic book when they are a teenager, to find out about the MU, and then graduate to other charachters

Even Hollywood knew it was a bad idea to keep him really young for too long a time. He's only in High School for the 1st half of the 1st movie!

Damn... 1st hayfever, now this!


The sad thing is, many of the people that will join us by b****ing and complaining will STILL buy this crap!! What the hell?! People continue to buy this crap that they hate, and they wonder why the comics are utter crap?! Morons...

As for the "Married Spidey" thing, I'm one of those that grew up with a married Spider-Man, and that's how I've always thought of him! It made him a little more realistic to me. Also, if you really want to make Peter seem old, then make him a Divorcee or a Widower. Oh yeah....so many kids can relate to a bitter divorcee Spider-man or a Widower Peter Parker.....jackasses. :rolleyes:

The readers grow up. They grow up and get married and have kids and get jobs and have hardships and change jobs and move around...and there's no reason that Spider-Man, the character we all can relate to, shouldn't go through the same changes as the rest of us.

Joe Q and JMS should go back and read the Essentials. Start from the beginning and work their way up....Maybe then, they'll remember how good it felt to see Peter graduate High School, get a girlfriend, move out of his Aunt's house, lose his first love tragically, move on, fall in love, get married...

Maybe if they go through all of that with Peter, like we have, maybe then they'll see that Peter has earned, at the very least, the right to some happiness with a wife who loves him....and yes, it should be Mary Jane Watson-Parker.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

I've actually come to a decision. Th' day this mini hits th' stands is when I drop th' Spider-books. Well, ASM an' possibly Friendly. Have to see about Sensational. Fer right now, I'm stickin' with it fer Civil War.

And I said it once, I'll say it again; if I could get a hottie, so could Peter Parker. So lay th' **** off th' marriage, you dumb ****s.

[Eye Doc]

I've gone on record as saying that I like MJ, but i think the Parker marriage was bit rushed and has never really lived up to it's potential. That said, I don't think Peter being married is the "biggest problem" with Spider-Man. The main problem stems from the point that the stories just aren't that good.

If you take MJ out of all of the big events of the past several yrs., it wouldn't change a thing. The Other, Sins Past, and the Ezekiel arc all failed to satisfy in the end because they were average to mediocre at best. Each started with an interesting premise, but the resolutions all fell flat bc the were anticlimatic or just plain ill conceived.

To make matters worse, the classic supporting cast has all but vanished. No significant additions have been added in years. Peter only has meaningful interaction with MJ and May. That's it. Flash has just returned in FNS, but he's been around for about 3 issues, and nothing has happened yet. Jonah, Robbie, Liz, and Betty no longer play a significant no role in pete's life. Peter's personal life use to be interesting. He's a teacher now but I couldn't name one person he works with. The above things have hurt Peter far more than the marriage has.

The villian portrayals are weak. Norman and Venom have become jokes. We haven't seen an introduction of a meaningful villian in years. his rogues gallery is probably comics' best, but you can't tell by the way they're written these days.

I've never thought MJ is a necessity in Spider-Man. But if Marvel doesn't address the points above, getting rid of her isn't going to make things right again.

Eye Doc

[WOLVERINE25TH]

It's never been about makin' things right...it's simply them living out their fanboy vendettas finally.

[SpideyLad]

Is there honestly anything wrong with his marriage? And secondly, why the hell do we need these stupid arcs now that "Shake Spidey's foundations to its very core!"?

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Because Marvel's core books are devoid of any actual talent so they hafta hide it?

[Norman Osborn]

So they recognise his marriage to MJ as a problem,and in the summer of next year they plan to tear our hearts out.

Hmmmm could it be the end of the marriage for MJ and Pete??

Either way I sense more lame and cheap shock value,right along the lines of the other trash they've thrown at us in the past 2 years.

I believe JQ has always been supportive of the marriage and was quoted as saying he can't just have them divorced because of the message it would send kids :rolleyes: ...Spidey eating Morlun's head apparently a fine message!!

....ever since SM3 announced Gwen Stacy was going to be in the sequel I've had a really bad feeling in the pit of my stomach...and it's gotten worse since reading this.......Gwen's coming back....she was never dead...and MJ knew it all along (and don't anyone dare tell me it's a stretch after Sins Pat)

...I'm sure it's just the eternal optimist in me but I was really putting a lot of faith into Civil War bringing everything back to some semblance of normalcy......One individual is apparently behind CW so is it a stretch that this person was also behind Spidey's new found mystical powers?...and we know GG has a presence hence the opportunity to retcon SP......

......looks like It'll be after JMS and JQ are gone before I pick up another Spidey title :(

[The Joker]

I believe JQ has always been supportive of the marriage and was quoted as saying he can't just have them divorced because of the message it would send kids :rolleyes:

LOL! But wives keeping HUGE secrets from their husbands for years,like MJ knowing of Gwen's dirty secret in Sins Past,is a fine message to send out about marriage :rolleyes:

ever since SM3 announced Gwen Stacy was going to be in the sequel I've had a really bad feeling in the pit of my stomach...and it's gotten worse since reading this.......Gwen's coming back....she was never dead...and MJ knew it all along (and don't anyone dare tell me it's a stretch after Sins Pat)

Bingo.

When a character get's put into the movies,it opens the floodgates for appearances from that character in the comics.Expect to see Sandman minis galore coming soon.

But Gwen is dead.The only way she should come back is Spider-Man:Blue style.

I'm sure it's just the eternal optimist in me but I was really putting a lot of faith into Civil War bringing everything back to some semblance of normalcy......One individual is apparently behind CW so is it a stretch that this person was also behind Spidey's new found mystical powers?...and we know GG has a presence hence the opportunity to retcon SP

One person is behind civil war?? Norman Osborn again probably :rolleyes:

And they won't retcon Sins Past,not yet anyway.Joe Q said he loved it.

looks like It'll be after JMS and JQ are gone before I pick up another Spidey title :(

That's could be a very loooooooooooooooooong time my friend.The old school comics are your friend.Go spend your cash on those.

[Norman Osborn]

But Gwen is dead.The only way she should come back is Spider-Man:Blue style.

Although I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment...(And I absolutely loved Blue :) ) it's whether or not JQ and JMS agree with it....and giving their current record of b&^&* slapping continuity/canon and the Spidey mythos.....*sigh*

[Themanofbat]

That's could be a very loooooooooooooooooong time my friend.The old school comics are your friend.Go spend your cash on those.

But I already own every Spider-Man comic... :(

...except for Amazing Fantasy #15... :( :( :(

My Daddy would never buy me one of those... :(

Come to think of it, my Dad has never bought me a comic. :mad:

:(

[spahn]

i agree with shinlyle, the thing that draws people to spidey is the ability to relate to him. if we wanted a superhero that was "single", we could choose millions of superheroes out there.

part of the draw to spidey is that he is married and that he has ups and downs in his marriage but in the end they are able to work it out.

and the argument could be made that this spidey will not relate to the younger generation, but i disagree. teenagers have there boyfriends and girlfriends and they can get some value out of the struggles that peter and mj go through. and if they want teenagers to relate to a younger spiderman, then have them read Ultimate Spider-Man.

but like someone stated earlier, we will be in line buying the comics when they come out.

[Norman Osborn]

but like someone stated earlier, we will be in line buying the comics when they come out.

Not all of us......I dropped ASM right after the "Other" and "FNSM" just recently....I now spend those hard earned dollars on something far more satisfying....good comics!!:up:

[Dragon]

But Gwen is dead.The only way she should come back is Spider-Man:Blue style.


Then again, it'd be easy enough for them to do a "Ben Reilly". The Gwen that "died" on the bridge was the clone. The one we've thought all this time was a clone was the real Gwen.

No, I'm not saying Marvel should do this. I'm just saying they can. As much as I love Gwen- or perhaps because I love Gwen, I don't want her brought back into the hands of these hacks.

Although her resurrection might be on the slate of Loeb's new Spidey title.

[3dman27]

maybe jms and joe q need to get thier walking papers

[Rambo, John J]

I actually thought he was on the right track - i.e. he was willing to admit his culpability in the poor status of Spidey comics in the recent past and take steps to rectify it - until he mentioned the marriage which, correct me if i'm wrong, hasn't he always supported?

What happened you JQ? You used to be someone I could trust.

No-prize for whoever gets the reference.

:(

[Citizen_Kaine]

"This is bull****!" *Clap, Clap, Clap Clap Clap!* "This is bull****!" *Clap, Clap, Clap Clap Clap!*

As stated above by my little chant, Marvel wants to fix all the damage to Spider Man thats happened, By writing another overpriced mini featuring both JMS and Joey Q as a team!? :eek:

*Head Explodes*

[The Joker]

But I already own every Spider-Man comic... :(

...except for Amazing Fantasy #15... :( :( :(



Wow you lucky devil.Are they in original format,reprint,or a mixture of the two??

Then again, it'd be easy enough for them to do a "Ben Reilly". The Gwen that "died" on the bridge was the clone. The one we've thought all this time was a clone was the real Gwen

And if they did that,then they would have officially and completely pissed all over ASM#121 and 122.Because not only would Gwen have died because she was refusing Norman access to their kids [not because Norman wanted to punish Peter],but the Gwen that actually died was not the real Gwen.

Ugh what a croc of s***

No, I'm not saying Marvel should do this. I'm just saying they can. As much as I love Gwen- or perhaps because I love Gwen, I don't want her brought back into the hands of these hacks.

Although her resurrection might be on the slate of Loeb's new Spidey title.

I'm getting sick of Gwen's ghost haunting Peter.

She's DEAD!!!

Yes it was tragic,and she was his first real love,and he blames himself for her death etc etc.But he's dealt with it.He's grieved for her.He's moved on.He's married now.It's all in the past.

I swear I wish someone would go to Gwen's grave,dig it up and bury a stake in her heart,just to ensure she's not ever coming back.

[Themanofbat]

Wow you lucky devil.Are they in original format,reprint,or a mixture of the two??

They're all original copies.

I bought them off the rack from ASM #183 to 441, then 471 to current..

The rest were picked up over the years as back issues.

:)

[Doc_OCK_4MUGEN]

And chop her head, fill her mouth with Garlic and expose her dead body to sunlight, Then Blow the corpse into millions of Tiny pieces, just to make sure...

JMS: Gee Joe, what are we doing tonight?
JQ: The same thing we do every night Joe, Try to tasnish Spider-man!!!
*Cue Pinky and the Brain song...*
They're Quesada & JMS, Quesada & JMS
One is an idiot, the other's one as well...
They're Marvel Comics hacks... and Spidey they despise...
They're idiots, Quesada &JMS-S-S-S
S-S-S-S... SPOO!
JQ: Are you pondering what I'm pondering
JMS: I think so Joe, Why does Donald duck wear a towel when he gets out of the shower, when normally he doesn't wear any pants?
JQ: No, Joe, I've figured another plan to destroy Spider-man...
JMS:Spoo! Totem! Sins Past, Joe! what's the plan?
JQ: We'll retcon the other and iron spider, making it look like we're pleasing the fans, then you'll write a story in which aunt may and peter had sex with mj while watching a babylon 5 marathon... not at the same time... and that's not all... we'll have a flashback sequence in qhich we show T3nt@cl3 s3>< with Ock and aunt May... This will be a 69 issue story... and you can plug any crap you want on the story... you can add new villains like thae paper pusher, he will give spidey's toughest battle yet... his powers he can push papers... YES!
JMS: Spoo!

They're idiots, Quesada &JMS-S-S-S
S-S-S-S... SPOO!

[dan1]

Just
Murdered
Spidey
the hack

Joe Quesada
The fanboy who sold his soul for 6 figures.

And we say it again. "I told you so."

[stillanerd]

Somehow WE'LL get the blame (as well as the Pete &MJ Marriage) if it flops... which most likely will... See T3h 0th3r and T3h 1r0n 5p1d3r suit... God! I hate 733t speak... almost as much as what the unholy trinity is doing to Pete...

Oh, you know very well they will. I can just hear Joe Q and JMS now, "First you complain about the changes we made to try and develop Spider-Man and want us to fix him and make him how he should be. Now you're complaining about us trying to fix the problems and make him how he should be and you start complaining, blah, blah, blah."

Excuse me Mr. Quesada and Mr. Straczynski, but that's not the point. The point is that YOU AND YOUR HOLLYWOOD FLUNKIES were the very people who were responsible for the state Spidey is in and one which was so obviously avoidable. You guys didn't accidently knock over the vase and break it--you guys purposefully took a hammer to it and smashed it. And of course, after you guys started gluing the broken shards back together, the vase looks nothing like it was when you broke it, and when we fail to buy it from you, you decide to smash it and reglue it again. And you know what Joe Q, JMS, and all the rest of you Hollywood flunkies? "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." That should've been what you at Marvel must have learned after the Clone Saga and the reboot, but obviously you haven't because your own egos made you deaf, dumb, and blind. I sort of figured this was your game plan when I made this "evolved but not changed" thread (http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=228395) and this news confirms my suspicions. And some people a lot more insightful and wiser than myself saw this all along.

Maybe this mini will get things back to a classical template but given your track record, it will probably end up creating more problems as a result.

[Mara Jane]

Well... time to start packing my bags, then. It's sad that 2007 is Pete & MJ's 20th anniversary. They deserve so much better than all this crap. I'll probably mourn for quite a while... and when this mini comes, it'll be the last Spidey book I ever buy.

On a side note... I really don't see what bringing Gwen back would accomplish. Even if she and Pete hooked up, he'd end up right back in the same place: stuck with one girl. You really are S-M-R-T, Mr. Q. :rolleyes:

[Daniel_Lioneye]

Wizard: What's the biggest problem with Spider-Man right now?

JOE: I've said it before: that darn marriage to Mary Jane. It has been one of the biggest problems in writing Spider-Man stories for new and younger readers. Let me put it clearly - Spider-Man is one of the greatest if not the greatest teen superhero ever created. He's supposed to be a young, viable, single character. And over the course of 40-some-odd years, as writers grew older and got married and stuff, they took Peter Parker along for the ride, forgetting about the fact that there were 9-year-olds who wanted to get into Peter Parker in the same way that they all did, which was a young guy. Peter grew old and married a supermodel. Peter became Billy Joel.



...........And that's why people read Ultimate Spider-man! If they don't want to deal with all the baggage, they read the book without it. This has gotten ridiculous, I haven't bought a 616 Spider-man book since I can remember because somehow marvel can take their best character and never cease to misuse him. Batman is arguably DC's biggest character(either him or Superman), and the reason people haven't been up in arms the last several years over Batman is no matter what they do to Batman's universe, they almost never change Batman himself, because they know that's what people bought the book for. If Batman isn't acting like Batman anymore, Batman fans won't want to read it anymore, it's that simple. Sure they misfire like everyone does, but never on a scale this big.

I found it very amusing when they called The Other: Evolve or Die, since the last several years they have done everything they can to de-evolve Spider-man. Now he folds like a cheap card table when Iron Man tells him to wear red and gold underpants, and the thing that made him special(the randomness of his being bitten by the spider and going from a weaker person to a hero) has been turned into a spider-god ordained event. That's not Spider-man!!

And even things that could have been incredible stories in a capable writers hands are wasted. Spider-man always vowed never to kill, but finally did when he finished off Morlun. So of all the villains he has faced, all the horrendous things done to him by Norman Satan Osborn, Morlun is the one who pushed him too far?? That would be like having Batman finally kill someone, but instead of the Joker who has done everything he can to ruin his life, he kills the Ventriloquist(yes I know Wesker is dead already.)

I love Spider-man, he is easily Marvel's icon, so why they want to ruin him is beyond me. It's like a country winning their independence so they can piss on their own flag.

[Dragon]

And if they did that,then they would have officially and completely pissed all over ASM#121 and 122.Because not only would Gwen have died because she was refusing Norman access to their kids [not because Norman wanted to punish Peter],but the Gwen that actually died was not the real Gwen.

Ugh what a croc of s***

They've already done that with Sins Past. They've pretty much pissed over Peter and the legacy of Spider-Man regardless.

[MC2Spiderman]

if they want to make us enjoy the comics bring back Ben :) or at least another clone but not bring in the whole clone saga shebang

[MaxCarnage]

if they want to make us enjoy the comics bring back Ben :) or at least another clone but not bring in the whole clone saga shebang

:eek: :mad: :down

[Dragon]

Well... time to start packing my bags, then. It's sad that 2007 is Pete & MJ's 20th anniversary. They deserve so much better than all this crap. I'll probably mourn for quite a while... and when this mini comes, it'll be the last Spidey book I ever buy.

On a side note... I really don't see what bringing Gwen back would accomplish. Even if she and Pete hooked up, he'd end up right back in the same place: stuck with one girl. You really are S-M-R-T, Mr. Q. :rolleyes:

Like I said before, while Gwen is a fav, I agree with you. If they can't handle one relationship, they won't be able to handle another.

Maybe they'll have Peter break-up with MJ, get together with Gwen, and when things go stale, they'll have him break-up with Gwen and return to his REAL FIRST LOVE, Betty. Then he'll break up with Betty after a few years and return to his soulmate, MJ. Then he'll break up with MJ and return to the woman that holds his heart, Gwen, etc. etc.. It'll be a fun little rotation.

[MaxCarnage]

Like I said before, while Gwen is a fav, I agree with you. If they can't handle one relationship, they won't be able to handle another.

Maybe they'll have Peter break-up with MJ, get together with Gwen, and when things go stale, they'll have him break-up with Gwen and return to his REAL FIRST LOVE, Betty. Then he'll break up with Betty after a few years and return to his soulmate, MJ. Then he'll break up with MJ and return to the woman that holds his heart, Gwen, etc. etc.. It'll be a fun little rotation.

They oughtta just have him go "Big Love" and marry all three. Let Polygamist Spider-Man hilarity ensue!

[MC2Spiderman]

i think they should go onto the next step which is kids for pete and MJ, it would also give more dangers but a sense of more responsibility for peter

[stillanerd]

Like I said before, while Gwen is a fav, I agree with you. If they can't handle one relationship, they won't be able to handle another.

Maybe they'll have Peter break-up with MJ, get together with Gwen, and when things go stale, they'll have him break-up with Gwen and return to his REAL FIRST LOVE, Betty. Then he'll break up with Betty after a few years and return to his soulmate, MJ. Then he'll break up with MJ and return to the woman that holds his heart, Gwen, etc. etc.. It'll be a fun little rotation.

Yes, and in the meanwhile they'll get Kevin Smith to write another mini three years in the making which will get Spidey and Black Cat back together doing the nasty. And after that, they'll start having Peter court Liz Osborn and play the whole "dating the single mom" angle. Maybe they'll drag out Amy Powell and Debra Whitman again. Then they'll have him be in a polyamorous relationship with both Gwen and her clone. After that, Jill Stacy. Then the daughter of the Burglar. While there at it, why not have Peter wear leisure suits and open necked shirts with large collars, start wearing gold chains, and grow a fro like Greg Brady as well as a mustache--then he'll truly be the young, hip swinger Joe Q wants him to be.

[Captivated]

Yes, folks, you read that heading right. In the latest issue of Wizard Magazine: JMS and Joe Quesada address Spider-Man's busy summer story, what they feel is off-kilter with Spidey right now and how they plan to team up in 2007 to "tear your heart out."

According to one guy over at CBR message boards who has already read the article, JMS will be doing the writing chores and Joe Q will be the artist for this mini. Apparently, they've sort of confessed that "The Other:Evolve or Die" and the "Iron Spidey" costume aren't working out as well as they had hoped they would (surprise, surprise) and so THIS TIME, they're going to address what they see as Spider-Man's problems and "fix them" with this mini. Oh, and once again, Joe Q makes Spidey's marriage to Mary Jane the scapegoat.

Quote:
Wizard: What's the biggest problem with Spider-Man right now?

JOE: I've said it before: that darn marriage to Mary Jane. It has been one of the biggest problems in writing Spider-Man stories for new and younger readers. Let me put it clearly - Spider-Man is one of the greatest if not the greatest teen superhero ever created. He's supposed to be a young, viable, single character. And over the course of 40-some-odd years, as writers grew older and got married and stuff, they took Peter Parker along for the ride, forgetting about the fact that there were 9-year-olds who wanted to get into Peter Parker in the same way that they all did, which was a young guy. Peter grew old and married a supermodel. Peter became Billy Joel. IS HE INSANE??!!! I thought he was just out of touch and had made some stupid decisions... but now I see I was wrong... he is completely out of his freakin mind!!! :eek:

And who are these 9 year-olds? Are THEY the people JMS/JQ were trying to appeal to with the Sins Past story arc? There is no way these stories have been appropriate for "kids" that age, and it has NOTHING to do with "the marriage."

What is with the comment about him being a great "teen" super-hero? Yeah, he was... those foundational stories are still there to be enjoyed by all ages. I know, I've been a fan for two years now, and I love all of them! New stories of Spidey as a teen hero are being told in USM, and I like those too. (But wait... I'm not a teen-ager... how is that possible... I thought I'm not supposed to relate to people older/younger than myself...??? )

The fact is, 616 Spider-Man is NOT a teen-ager anymore! He hasn't been a teen-ager in the comics (USM aside) in more than 30 years! How can you have him "regress" realistically at this point? A kid out of high school, or even in college, at loose ends... trying to "find" himself... uncommitted... is understandable. Someone who has been through that, in their late 20's... acting immature... how is THAT appealing to most readers. No. Just no. Good grief, that is one of the reasons Bendis writing a 616 Spidey in the New Avengers has been irritating.

And where do they get the convoluted idea that 1) kids can't relate to heroes older than themselves and 2) the BULK of their comic readership is or ever would be that young in the first place.

The fact is, Peter is a responsible guy... and anyone with half an ounce of discernment, who reads any of his history, can see that Peter has always wanted (since high school) to fall in love and get married. It was logical for the character to eventually go in that direction. Now he loves and is devoted to his wife, which is one of the more positive role model aspects of the character. It sets him apart and makes him more relatable than most other comic book characters, because MOST people do aspire to fall in love and get married. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT EVEN KIDS CAN RELATE TOO. Heck... it surprises me how early "relationship drama" happens with kids these days. Most KIDS I know have crushes on someone... there are "who likes who" dramas going on, even in elementary school.

The problem is NOT that Peter is married... and it's not that he has grown into a young adult. It's the writers who seem to be out of touch with the character, NOT the fans. It's the writers who also seem to be clueless about what the fans want. You know... the FANS... the people who weekly make an INVESTMENT of time, money and emotion in the character.

I can't believe he actually compared PETER to an old Billy Joel... The stupidity leaves me speechless... I really hope there is more to this interview, and the direction, than what we see here... cause this is un-freakin-believable. :(

[Gregatron]

Quesada is right in that the marriage is the root of many of Spider-Man's problems.

But he's wrong in making Mary Jane the one-and-only scapegoat for ALL of Spider-Man's problems.

The marriage can't be undone without someone getting unhappy. If Mary Jane is killed, then Peter becomes a widower and we may very well have another "Gwen Stacy Syndrome" (in which Mary Jane and her death are brought up every ten seconds).

If Peter and Mary Jane get divorced, then that will drag the book into the wrong tone. Also, divorce, while common in today's world, is still seen as wrong by many, and Spider-Man will be branded as a divorcee for the rest of his days (however few they may be).

The only solution that is marginally acceptable is some sort of time-warp that will restore the mythos and cast away the unsavory elements that have latched onto Spider-Man in recent years.

[stillanerd]

Quesada is right in that the marriage is the root of many of Spider-Man's problems.

But he's wrong in making Mary Jane the one-and-only scapegoat for ALL of Spider-Man's problems.

The marriage can't be undone without someone getting unhappy. If Mary Jane is killed, then Peter becomes a widower and we may very well have another "Gwen Stacy Syndrome" (in which Mary Jane and her death are brought up every ten seconds).

If Peter and Mary Jane get divorced, then that will drag the book into the wrong tone. Also, divorce, while common in today's world, is still seen as wrong by many, and Spider-Man will be branded as a divorcee for the rest of his days (however few they may be).

The only solution that is marginally acceptable is some sort of time-warp that will restore the mythos and cast away the unsavory elements that have latched onto Spider-Man in recent years.

You know, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if that last "solution" is what the mini involves given JMS obession with cosmic happenings shrouded in mysticism. Heck, I'd lay money on the idea that if does pull a "retcon punch" on Spider-Man, you can bet the whole new age, mystical spider-totem crap will be involved. And just think of the havoc that makes on continuity.

[stillanerd]

IS HE INSANE??!!! I thought he was just out of touch and had made some stupid decisions... but now I see I was wrong... he is completely out of his freakin mind!!! :eek:

And who are these 9 year-olds? Are THEY the people JMS/JQ were trying to appeal to with the Sins Past story arc? There is no way these stories have been appropriate for "kids" that age, and it has NOTHING to do with "the marriage."

What is with the comment about him being a great "teen" super-hero? Yeah, he was... those foundational stories are still there to be enjoyed by all ages. I know, I've been a fan for two years now, and I love all of them! New stories of Spidey as a teen hero are being told in USM, and I like those too. (But wait... I'm not a teen-ager... how is that possible... I thought I'm not supposed to relate to people older/younger than myself...??? )

The fact is, 616 Spider-Man is NOT a teen-ager anymore! He hasn't been a teen-ager in the comics (USM aside) in more than 30 years! How can you have him "regress" realistically at this point? A kid out of high school, or even in college, at loose ends... trying to "find" himself... uncommitted... is understandable. Someone who has been through that, in their late 20's... acting immature... how is THAT appealing to most readers. No. Just no. Good grief, that is one of the reasons Bendis writing a 616 Spidey in the New Avengers has been irritating.

And where do they get the convoluted idea that 1) kids can't relate to heroes older than themselves and 2) the BULK of their comic readership is or ever would be that young in the first place.

The fact is, Peter is a responsible guy... and anyone with half an ounce of discernment, who reads any of his history, can see that Peter has always wanted (since high school) to fall in love and get married. It was logical for the character to eventually go in that direction. Now he loves and is devoted to his wife, which is one of the more positive role model aspects of the character. It sets him apart and makes him more relatable than most other comic book characters, because MOST people do aspire to fall in love and get married. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT EVEN KIDS CAN RELATE TOO. Heck... it surprises me how early "relationship drama" happens with kids these days. Most KIDS I know have crushes on someone... there are "who likes who" dramas going on, even in elementary school.

The problem is NOT that Peter is married... and it's not that he has grown into a young adult. It's the writers who seem to be out of touch with the character, NOT the fans. It's the writers who also seem to be clueless about what the fans want. You know... the FANS... the people who weekly make an INVESTMENT of time, money and emotion in the character.

I can't believe he actually compared PETER to an old Billy Joel... The stupidity leaves me speechless... I really hope there is more to this interview, and the direction, than what we see here... cause this is un-freakin-believable. :(

Amen, Captivated. Amen.

[Captivated]

Quesada is right in that the marriage is the root of many of Spider-Man's problems. I STRONGLY disagree with this. It's the WRITER'S additude towards the marriage that has been the root of much crap in the stories.

The only solution that is marginally acceptable is some sort of time-warp that will restore the mythos and cast away the unsavory elements that have latched onto Spider-Man in recent years.Sounds essentially like what they tried to do with the Clone Saga... I would HATE that... purple passion hate. :mad:

[stillanerd]

Sounds essentially like what they tried to do with the Clone Saga... I would HATE that... purple passion hate. :mad:

And then Joe Q can respond to that by breaking out a kareoke machine and start singing Billy Joel's "We Didn't Start the Fire."

[Captivated]

Amen, Captivated. Amen.
Have you heard what the popular reaction has been to this article?

Any chance this is a little "testing of the waters" while they figure out where to go with this story?

[stillanerd]

Have you heard what the popular reaction has been to this article?

Any chance this is a little "testing of the waters" while they figure out where to go with this story?

That's certainly possible. Based on what I've read on other boards like CBR and even Comicboards the reaction has been pretty negative, although there are a few "wait and see" types. Actually, Gregatron's whole "time-altering retcon" idea may have some basis. See the preview of Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man #8 yet?

[Gregatron]

You know, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if that last "solution" is what the mini involves given JMS obession with cosmic happenings shrouded in mysticism. Heck, I'd lay money on the idea that if does pull a "retcon punch" on Spider-Man, you can bet the whole new age, mystical spider-totem crap will be involved. And just think of the havoc that makes on continuity.


But instead of RESTORING what has been lost, he they will likely use the opportunity to completely retool and overhaul Spider-Man's history from the start officially, instead of using the "stealth reboots" (to borrow a Byrne-ism) JMS has been sneaking into the mythos for the past five years.

[Gregatron]

I STRONGLY disagree with this. It's the WRITER'S additude towards the marriage that has been the root of much crap in the stories.

Sounds essentially like what they tried to do with the Clone Saga... I would HATE that... purple passion hate. :mad:


The marriage IS a problem, have no doubt. I like Mary Jane. I like Peter and Mary Jane being together.

But the notion of a married Spider-Man is a paradigm shift that has led to the utter destruction of the caracter's core concepts.

It has limited his appeal and has limited story potential.


Spider-Man was created to be the ultimate TEENAGE escapism fantasy. A vital part of that is Peter's lack of stability in his life, and his bad luck with girls.

[Cyclops]

Really? I thought Spider-Man was created as an everyman who comicbook readers can relate to.

Remember this - if kids want to read the adventures of an unmarried Spider-Man, they have those nifty little Marvel Age books that are specifically designed for the younger reader. Remember those? Leave the Spidey we grew up with to grow up with us.

That's the thing with fictional characters - you can have it all. Adult readers can read the adventures of an adult Spider-Man who's been around for a long time and now lives as an adult, has a wife, an adult job, adult friends...

You've got TWO books with younger Spider-Man in them. Ultimate and Marvel Age or whatever they're calling it now.

[Symbiotica]

* * *

[Cyclops]

Or how about Mary Jane secretly BEING Norman Osborn in disguise all these years?! :eek: :eek:

How's THAT for a shocker?

[Gregatron]

Really? I thought Spider-Man was created as an everyman who comicbook readers can relate to.

Remember this - if kids want to read the adventures of an unmarried Spider-Man, they have those nifty little Marvel Age books that are specifically designed for the younger reader. Remember those? Leave the Spidey we grew up with to grow up with us.

That's the thing with fictional characters - you can have it all. Adult readers can read the adventures of an adult Spider-Man who's been around for a long time and now lives as an adult, has a wife, an adult job, adult friends...

You've got TWO books with younger Spider-Man in them. Ultimate and Marvel Age or whatever they're calling it now.


Spider-Man was created as a teenager that kids (and adults who had been kids) could relate to.

Although we can relate to Peter's real-life problems (work, school, girls, rent, etc.), the notion that he's an "everyman" is somewhat incorrect.

In reality, Peter is a near-genius-level intellect, and he's better than most of us, in terms of his morality and heroism.

But the candy-coating of "realistic" problems made him easier to relate to, even though he was basically as heroic and mythic as any superhero before him.


And you miss the point.

I want Spider-Man to be Spider-Man. I don't want "adult" Spider-Man or "children's" Spider-Man, or ten other versions.

For years and years, there was one, GOOD version of the character appropriate for all ages. And sales proved the strength of that concept.

Now, there's a different Spider-Man for every taste, season, and age group, and no consistency, and sales are dismal. Longtime fans who remember glories long past are cringing in horror.


The fact that there are 76,658 versions of Spider-Man running around cannot and should not give permission to Marvel to have carte blanche with the original Marvel Universe Spider-Man created in 1962. That's NOT a vaild excuse for the insults being heaped onto the character (and the readers).

And to use that as an excuse to insist that the original version of Spider-Man "age and change along with us" is just plain selfish.

Comics are TIMELESS FICTION. Only topical references and window dressing should change to make the stories APPEAR "relevant" to the time and place they are published in.

[Cyclops]

I don't see Spider-Man being a married adult as insulting. That's not a problem. The problem is Spider-Man being a mystically fated guardian of some sort with stingers, organically excreted webbing, the ability to talk to insects, and so on and soforth.

You want to save readers from insult? Turning Spider-Man into a teenage kid all over again won't do that. Remember, Stan Lee HIMSELF had Peter Parker graduate from high school and go to college. Before Pete's 50th issue, even. So while he was created as a teenager, his creator didn't keep him as a teenager for very long. So this whole "Spider-Man is supposed to be an eternal teenager" thing you've got going is total bupkis.

Just make his stories fun again. That's all he needs. Take the focus away from earth-shattering events that will shake the very foundation of Spider-Man's history to the core and just focus on writing fun stories that readers can enjoy, and guess what?

Spider-Man is saved! And you don't have to revert him to the teenager he was for a few years or so to do it!

[Gregatron]

I don't see Spider-Man being a married adult as insulting. That's not a problem. The problem is Spider-Man being a mystically fated guardian of some sort with stingers, organically excreted webbing, the ability to talk to insects, and so on and soforth.

You want to save readers from insult? Turning Spider-Man into a teenage kid all over again won't do that. Remember, Stan Lee HIMSELF had Peter Parker graduate from high school and go to college. Before Pete's 50th issue, even. So while he was created as a teenager, his creator didn't keep him as a teenager for very long. So this whole "Spider-Man is supposed to be an eternal teenager" thing you've got going is total bupkis.

Just make his stories fun again. That's all he needs. Take the focus away from earth-shattering events that will shake the very foundation of Spider-Man's history to the core and just focus on writing fun stories that readers can enjoy, and guess what?

Spider-Man is saved! And you don't have to revert him to the teenager he was for a few years or so to do it!


Stan and Steve didn't realize that Marvel would last, so they moved Spidey to college. Thus, Peter was in high school for 3 or so years of real time.

BUT, when Stan realized that Marvel wasn't a flash in the pan, the chronological brakes were put on. Thus, Peter was in college for 13 years, real time (and in graduate school for another 10 or so years, on and off, after that). Spidey aged veeeerrrryyyy slllloooowwwwwlllyyy.

Then the letters started coming in in the mid-70s, demanding that Spidey age and change.

And that led to the mess we're in now.

If Spidey had stayed a college-age single forever, that would have been great (although the high school version is the pures and most vital version of the character)...

...but it's too late to even go back to THAT.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Limited story potential? Greg, are you even a writer? There's plenty of story potential there if you give two craps about what you do. Writers didn't give a crap about th' marriage, so they treated it like ****. Pure and simple.

Although I shouldn't be surprised based on that poll ya made where ya told me it's impossible fer a book to have all th' qualities you listed at one time.

[Cyclops]

Yeah, well unfortunately, characters who are continuously written over a long period of time have TWO choices and two choices only.

Develop or stagnate. I'd much rather see the stories of the Spider-Man who has DEVELOPED over the past 44 years rather than make him into a character who has reverted to a stagnant position.

Growing up's not a problem for Spider-Man because guess what? Everybody does it. And if they don't, it means they die in childhood. Which sucks.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Presactly. I think if he was still in college by now you'd stop relating.

[Gregatron]

Yeah, well unfortunately, characters who are continuously written over a long period of time have TWO choices and two choices only.

Develop or stagnate. I'd much rather see the stories of the Spider-Man who has DEVELOPED over the past 44 years rather than make him into a character who has reverted to a stagnant position.

Growing up's not a problem for Spider-Man because guess what? Everybody does it. And if they don't, it means they die in childhood. Which sucks.


Sigh.


Comics are timelss fiction. Accept the conceits or move on.

A character is not stagnant to a new reader. And a new reader should grow up and move on when they get bored, or accept the basic conceits of the character and genre if they're going to stay on.

To use a Byrne-ism: don't buy a porshe and then demand that it turn into a stationwagon with room for the wife and kids.

[Gregatron]

Limited story potential? Greg, are you even a writer? There's plenty of story potential there if you give two craps about what you do. Writers didn't give a crap about th' marriage, so they treated it like ****. Pure and simple.

Although I shouldn't be surprised based on that poll ya made where ya told me it's impossible fer a book to have all th' qualities you listed at one time.


Fact is, the core conception of Spider-Man does not allow for a stable, married life. The marriage (as history has shown) serves as a ball and chain.

And yes, story potential was limted. A key element of the character is the notion of his bad luck with girls (and what happens when old girlfriends pop back into his life at just the wrong time). The marriage has eliminated most of the character's romantic tension, and Mary Jane has stolen the position of "spidey's confidante" from the READERS.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

I had bad luck with girls too, but guess what? I ended up with a girl way hotter than I ever should've. So, what a shock! stuff like that ACTUALLY happens. It's relatable. It's realistic. Hey, there's Spidey!

And th' key element to Spidey is "with great power comes great responsibility." Dorks, geeks an' nerds, fer th' most part, can grow up and change. It's also been done. Again, there's Spidey.

Spidey is perfectly relatable before all this Other Crap, and story potential was there fer th' marriage. If you knew jack about story-telling you'd see it. But you don't, so ya can't, so go back to sleep.

[Cullen]

Fact is, the core conception of Spider-Man does not allow for a stable, married life. The marriage (as history has shown) serves as a ball and chain.

And yes, story potential was limted. A key element of the character is the notion of his bad luck with girls (and what happens when old girlfriends pop back into his life at just the wrong time). The marriage has eliminated most of the character's romantic tension, and Mary Jane has stolen the position of "spidey's confidante" from the READERS.Not as it's been, no. However, I think a Nick and Nora Charles type relationship might not be a bad fit. Someone who is as involved in Spider-man as Peter is...

[Gregatron]

The point is, a married Spider-Man is a 180-degree turn that deviated from the original conception of the character (which is still the BEST conception of the character).

Answer me this: If Spider-Man were introduced in 1962 as he is today, would he have been successful?

[WOLVERINE25TH]

And another thing, who in th' hell ever said it was stable? It's had it's moments. I'd equate it to th' life of a young married police couple. Th' cop goes off to work leavin' th' wife at home wonderin' if he's gonna come home that night or not.

Hey hey! More relatability! Granted, not fer those outside of dangerous lines of work, but it doesn't take much to stretch th' imagination. Of course, I forget, this is th' century of not thinking so maybe it does require an effort.

[Gregatron]

I had bad luck with girls too, but guess what? I ended up with a girl way hotter than I ever should've. So, what a shock! stuff like that ACTUALLY happens. It's relatable. It's realistic. Hey, there's Spidey!

And th' key element to Spidey is "with great power comes great responsibility." Dorks, geeks an' nerds, fer th' most part, can grow up and change. It's also been done. Again, there's Spidey.

Spidey is perfectly relatable before all this Other Crap, and story potential was there fer th' marriage. If you knew jack about story-telling you'd see it. But you don't, so ya can't, so go back to sleep.


Down, boy.


(At least I don't pretend I'm a fictional character when I post...and I write in complete sentences, too!).

Can't we all just hold hands and agree to disagree?

[Gregatron]

And another thing, who in th' hell ever said it was stable? It's had it's moments. I'd equate it to th' life of a young married police couple. Th' cop goes off to work leavin' th' wife at home wonderin' if he's gonna come home that night or not.

Hey hey! More relatability! Granted, not fer those outside of dangerous lines of work, but it doesn't take much to stretch th' imagination. Of course, I forget, this is th' century of not thinking so maybe it does require an effort.


That's all good and fine, but it's not SPIDER-MAN.

[MC2Spiderman]

no offence but i disagree gregatron there has been many romantic tension moments since they have gotten married, since spiderman started he was a teenager and has grown up into a man, he has dated and then married, the next step for him to take is what is next for most and thats to start a family, with that he gains more responsibility not only as spiderman but as a father to protect his wife and child.

spiderman isnt a teen superhero, he is just that a super hero we can relate to who we have grown up with, for him not to marry would mean we couldnt relate, and also means he would be a batman rip off staying the bachelor all the time, one thing that is constant is that we all have to grow up, and spiderman has done that, and he should continue to do so

[Upset Spideyfan]

Oh well, at least we'll have eight thousand variant covers before it's all over. :rolleyes:

[Gregatron]

no offence but i disagree gregatron there has been many romantic tension moments since they have gotten married, since spiderman started he was a teenager and has grown up into a man, he has dated and then married, the next step for him to take is what is next for most and thats to start a family, with that he gains more responsibility not only as spiderman but as a father to protect his wife and child.

spiderman isnt a teen superhero, he is just that a super hero we can relate to who we have grown up with, for him not to marry would mean we couldnt relate, and also means he would be a batman rip off staying the bachelor all the time, one thing that is constant is that we all have to grow up, and spiderman has done that, and he should continue to do so


And THIS is why Spider-Man is crashing and burning. Because "we HAVE to relate to him", because "he HAS to grow up and change at the same rate WE do".

By the way...who's "spiderman"? Some banker? "Hi, my name is Frank Spiderman"?



While we're at it, I want to see Superman turn 40 and have some kids with Lois.

[MC2Spiderman]

no the reason spiderman is crashing and burning is both the creators and fans, the way i see it most fans dont like change either it be agood or bad heck look at the recent costume change they hate it and have allways said stick to the classic in that it brings the downfall of the comic, and leaves the writer to wonder what to do does he dare do something outrageous or just continue with the stale safetyness of usual.

the next step is for peter to move on, do whats next on what we all do, he loves MJ to bits they have had there troubles like every marriage on the planet but they keep at it, the next step would be for him to start a family as that brings again dangers and responsibilities. but alas i guess that wont happen as the fans would go nuts blah blah blah as they would rather the comic to continue to drivel into staleness than except a change or an evolution of the character

[Gregatron]

no the reason spiderman is crashing and burning is both the creators and fans, the way i see it most fans dont like change either it be agood or bad heck look at the recent costume change they hate it and have allways said stick to the classic in that it brings the downfall of the comic, and leaves the writer to wonder what to do does he dare do something outrageous or just continue with the stale safetyness of usual.

the next step is for peter to move on, do whats next on what we all do, he loves MJ to bits they have had there troubles like every marriage on the planet but they keep at it, the next step would be for him to start a family as that brings again dangers and responsibilities. but alas i guess that wont happen as the fans would go nuts blah blah blah as they would rather the comic to continue to drivel into staleness than except a change or an evolution of the character


Then the end will come soon, and Spider-Man can retire and live a happy life with his wife and 2.5 kids. End of series.

So many small minds thinking in the short-term, thinking only of instant gratification, thinking only of themselves. Sigh.


I am so ****ing sick of buzzwords like "evolution" "stagnant" and "moving on".

Superman and Batman were exactly the same for 30 years in the Golden Age (Robin, for example, didn't age a day between 1940 and 1969), and sales were huge (because kids knew to move on and grow up, while the next generation was introduced to the characters).

Today, one or two generations wants to hoard the characters to themselves. Sick.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

That's not Spider-Man, that's not Spider-Man...ARE YOU ****ING STUPID?! That's EXACTLY Spider-Man, you flipping moron. That's all the things that made Spidey so popular AFTER th' whole first teen non-sidekick thing! And maybe if you bothered to learn ANYTHING about ANYTHING, you'd know this.

And by the way, dumbass, DC had to do a Crisis to save their books because people weren't reading them like they used to. Think about that. Superman and Batman AIN'T like they were in the Golden Age. Gee...I wonder why?

[XSpidercideX]

If Spidey and MJ break up Im quitting comics, even the non spidey ones.

[MC2Spiderman]

well sorry to say Evolution is the next step if you stay still youll just wither away,

[Gregatron]

That's not Spider-Man, that's not Spider-Man...ARE YOU ****ING STUPID?! That's EXACTLY Spider-Man, you flipping moron. That's all the things that made Spidey so popular AFTER th' whole first teen non-sidekick thing! And maybe if you bothered to learn ANYTHING about ANYTHING, you'd know this.

And by the way, dumbass, DC had to do a Crisis to save their books because people weren't reading them like they used to. Think about that.


A character has defined characteristics and unspoken rules.

Relatability IS Spider-Man.

Marriage is not.

Marriage defies what made Spider-Man universally popular, and limited his appeal.

Kids today may enjoy reading about a married Spider-Man, but they will not relate to him as kids in 1962 did.

[MC2Spiderman]

maybe because this isnt 1962 anymore, things change

[Symbiotica]

* * *

[MC2Spiderman]

the ultimateverse is doing a great job getting the kids to read it, from there if they want to know more they read the 616 universe stuff, either way to degrade peter back to what he was would be stupid i would say, the logical and most best choice would for him to move on, start a family, have a tradegy(kill aunt may or mj) etc it would also progress the story and allow new areas to be used.

[Gregatron]

"Marriage is not relatable"?

I daresay most people here are married. If not, they one day will be. There are plenty of unmarried heros out there, including the DC stable.

I cannot agree with this idea that Peter should forever remain 21. For one thing, that straitjackets your story possibilities. For the second thing, that probably would have meant an eternity of us looking at Felicia as Peter's love interest.

Can't agree with that on any count... and as for kids wanting to see unmarried Spider-Man, we have Marvel Age for that.


No. Marriage is not Spider-Man.

[Gregatron]

the ultimateverse is doing a great job getting the kids to read it, from there if they want to know more they read the 616 universe stuff, either way to degrade peter back to what he was would be stupid i would say, the logical and most best choice would for him to move on, start a family, have a tradegy(kill aunt may or mj) etc it would also progress the story and allow new areas to be used.


I might actually have understood that if it:

A. Wasn't a run-on sentence.

B. Made sense.

[MC2Spiderman]

sorry my grammer and punctuation sucks in other words devolving peter back to his teenage days=BAD, Progressing the story either by evolution or character growning up to the next level= good

[Gregatron]

sorry my grammer and punctuation sucks in other words devolving peter back to his teenage days=BAD, Progressing the story either by evolution or character growning up to the next level= good


The character has been "evolving" for some time now, with an inversely proportionate drop in sales and readers.

If you wish to cling to the mentality that has sunk the ship, please continue to do so. As long as you enjoy "good stories", great.

But I do not enjoy "good stories" at the cost of what attracted me (and so many others) to the characters in the first place.


This is really the "Ship of Theseus" problem.

Link for those who don't know what that is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus


If a part of the ship is replaced one plank at a time, is it still the same ship when ALL the planks have been replaced?


The core elements of Spider-Man have been so gradually perverted and replaced, that there's little left of the character, and we are now reading about what is essentially a replacement character with the same name.

And those who have been conned insist nothing has changed. Those who don't get it insist that "things MUST change".

Those who HAVEN'T been conned and DO get it look on from afar with tears in their eyes, and try to open other people's eyes, with mixed results.

This is why Spider-Man is effectively dead. Because the "fans" and the "fans" who became "professionals" killed him.

Just because a few books currently being published bear the title "Spider-Man" on the cover doesn't mean the character isn't dead.

Everything that he was, everything he stood for, every theme, every emotion, every event, has been trodden on, defiled, or "retooled".

Is there room for interpretation? Yes.

But a character is a character is a character. When Spider-Man was created, THAT is who that character was. It was set in stone. ANY major deviation from that character is NOT that character, and is merely a poor imitation.

I will fight to my last breath to prevent the history books from saying that the character of Spider-Man was "created by" JMS and/or Bendis, or that said writers wrote the very best stories in the character's history (and that everything prior was just childish garbage).

[SpyderDan]

Wow, I am at a loss for words.

I have actually spent a lot of time defending Joe Q and JMS (please, no flaming). I used to really love JMS's work on ASM, until Sins Past. But they've both seemingly gone off the deep end. It's ridiculous.

And Peter and MJ's marriage has always been the one constant in the books that's been excellent. Gregatron's argument that the marriage defies the character is inaccurate. I was introduced to Spider-Man in the early 1990s. They had already been married for several years and even when I was like six years old, I loved it. Young children don't love Spider-Man for a specific reason like whether or not he's relatable. I, personally, didn't relate to him so much as I looked up to him. And quite frankly, I always hoped to be happily married one day, probably because of their relationship.

I will fight to my last breath to prevent the history books from saying that the character of Spider-Man was "created by" JMS and/or Bendis, or that said writers wrote the very best stories in the character's history (and that everything prior was just childish garbage).

Dude...haven't you been paying attention? That is the complete opposite of what everyone here has been saying.

[Gregatron]

Wow, I am at a loss for words.

I have actually spent a lot of time defending Joe Q and JMS (please, no flaming). I used to really love JMS's work on ASM, until Sins Past. But they've both seemingly gone off the deep end. It's ridiculous.

And Peter and MJ's marriage has always been the one constant in the books that's been excellent. Gregatron's argument that the marriage defies the character is inaccurate. I was introduced to Spider-Man in the early 1990s. They had already been married for several years and even when I was like six years old, I loved it. Young children don't love Spider-Man for a specific reason like whether or not he's relatable. I, personally, didn't relate to him so much as I looked up to him. And quite frankly, I always hoped to be happily married one day, probably because of their relationship.


You loved it because it was what you were first exposed to (as I was).

But in terms of creative integrity, one must ALWAYS go back to the original source material.


As I said, I like Peter and Mary Jane being together.

But in the end, it's just NOT what Spider-Man is supposed to be about.

What would Star Trek have been if Kirk had married Yeoman Rand early on?

[SpyderDan]

You loved it because it was what you were first exposed to (as I was).

But in terms of creative integrity, one must ALWAYS go back to the original source material.

Wow, that was a fast response.

You can't split up the actual comics into sections of "source material." Every single issue is part of the same source material, for better or for worse.

[SpyderDan]

As I said, I like Peter and Mary Jane being together.

But in the end, it's just NOT what Spider-Man is supposed to be about.

What would Star Trek have been if Kirk had married Yeoman Rand early on?

I don't understand that argument, since I'm not a Star Trek fan.

But Spider-Man was always a coming of age story. Peter Parker's story is on going. And he was always going to get married eventually.

[Gregatron]

Wow, that was a fast response.

You can't split up the actual comics into sections of "source material." Every single issue is part of the same source material, for better or for worse.


The original source material is the initial Lee-Ditko run. Everything else stems from that.

Guys like Conway, Wein, Wolfman, Stern, and DeFalco understood that, and tried to retain that spirit and remain faithful to what the character was in the old days.

But, as a copy of a copy of a copy loses quality with each successive generation, later creative teams looked back only a little, and then only to the creative team immediately preceeding them.

To restore Spider-Man, one must examine what made the original Lee-Ditko and Lee-Romita runs so very successful.

[Gregatron]

I don't understand that argument, since I'm not a Star Trek fan.

But Spider-Man was always a coming of age story. Peter Parker's story is on going. And he was always going to get married eventually.


If he had married Gwen, who knows where we'd be today. But Marvel knew better then. They knew then that what has happened today would happen if they'd done it then.

Spider-Man's story originally was that he learned an important and painful life lesson, then fumbled his way along trying to live up to it, in the awkward way that teenagers do.

It was not supposed to be a chronicle of Peter's education, career, and marriage. That only came when the fans grew older (though they didn't GROW UP), and demanded that Peter get dragged along with them into old age.


I grow weary and hungry. We can continue this another time.

[Ultimate Hero]

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't Stan the man himself the one who first married MJ and Peter (in his newspaper strip I believe)? You can hardly say it goes against the character when the creator himself had it happen.

I do see where your arguement is coming from, but I've always seen the marriage as a good thing. I know a lot of people would probably lose interest if they disposed of MJ, including myself.

In regards to Joe Q...... wtf? I'm sure a lot more 9 year olds can understand the concept of marriage much better than what we've seen in The Other and all this Iron Spidey stuff. My ten year old brother is a perfect example; he loves comics, when he can get a hold of them, and also loves Spider-Man (and Iron Man for that matter). Yet even he finds the idea of Iron Man making Spidey a suit kind of dumb, and to be honest he thinks almost everything in the Marvel world is cool.

[SpyderDan]

If he had married Gwen, who knows where we'd be today. But Marvel knew better then. They knew then that what has happened today would happen if they'd done it then.

Spider-Man's story originally was that he learned an important and painful life lesson, then fumbled his way along trying to live up to it, in the awkward way that teenagers do.

It was not supposed to be a chronicle of Peter's education, career, and marriage. That only came when the fans grew older (though they didn't GROW UP), and demanded that Peter get dragged along with them into old age.

I remember hearing some place that Stan Lee said that Gwen was killed off because she was boring.

That's his origin, not his whole story.

Quite frankly, I'm glad he's grown up.

I grow weary and hungry. We can continue this another time.

Oh yes, wise one. :rolleyes:

[Fathermithras]

I've seriously been willing to let them off on alot of their recent antics... I've been hopeful, waited out questionable story arcs....And thought "Well, maybe it'll turn out okay."
Bull****. The Other ended up as ****. Making changes is good, but implementing them in such a way as they did was utter crap, and wasn't in the theme of Spidey. They tore his character a new ******* with this ****ing sidekick bull**** and though I don't mind a temporary new suit... The whole deal has been written like monkeys on typewriters slamming their banana laden fingers into the history of a beloved character.
THIS is the last straw. The marriage is the only good thing they've kept in Spider-man. I'll be the first to admit I was skeptical of it for a long time, and thought maybe they should end it. But since then...It's proved to be the one consistently good thing in comics. **** you JOE. Eat **** and die.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Spyder, I think you should realize you're arguin' with a guy who thinks a comic can't have at th' same time...let's see if I get this right:

Simple, basic entertainment.
Slavish devotion to continuity/details.
Respect for the characters' history.
Consistency of character and theme.
Innovation/change.

In his little world, it's one or none, which shows how limited his scope is.

Marriage doesn't steal from a character's core, it's a DEVELOPMENT. These are serialized dramas and over time things have to progress. You can't read th' same **** that was goin' on in 1962. "It's time for the spring formal, but will Peter Parker make his date on time or will he be...shattered by the Shocker?!"

That may work just fine in th' world of Riverdale, but Spidey is supposed to take place in th' real world. His popularity comes from his EVERYMAN appeal. Underneath that mask, he could be ANYONE. He had problems where heroes were all perfect. You say Spidey isn't supposed to be relatable...on what ****ing planet? THAT is th' whole core concept behind th' character. Yes, he started out as th' first teenaged superhero, but what kept th' fans was th' fact people could see his life and go "Hey! That could be me!" And guess what? In life, people get MARRIED.

Also, 1962? Really? Half this stuff today...no, screw today. Half th' stuff from th' 90s wouldn't've even made it past th' comics code. 1962 is a different era with different sensibilities. You CAN'T exchange th' two. Stan Lee's stuff was great back in 1962, but in 1994 you have Tom Defalco an' company. Again, progression. Evolution.

And this **** today is just that; ****. It's change fer th' sake of change 'cause these guys don't have a clue.

'Nuff said!

[gliderpilotgirl]

*sigh* sounds like the guys at Marvel are going to learn their lesson all over again..Kill MJ/get rid of her..fans revolt, sales drop..bring her back and whine about it while we rejoice.. Go figure! If they do permanently get rid of her..I'm joining the club..no more 616 Spidey.

[The Infernal]

I can't believe it (not a literal statement, I happen to actually believe it). I've heard people here say that writers can't portray Peter and MJ together because they lack the imagination. Now though, I can't help but feel they're right. I used to think there was more to it than that but clearly they are determined to ruin it for him because they want to portray Spidey as a ladies man.

They talk about selling it to younger kids and have to keep in mind what they would probably want to read. For one thing I doubt they asked many, if at all. And secondly, keeping in mind I'm not a moralist, but that isn't exactly a positive image to show to a child.

I have never even thought about dropping any Spidey titles, including with what he has went through recently but if they go the distance with this plan to destroy their relationship then I would have to seriously think about how much enjoyment the titles will hold for me without MJ being Peter's one and only.

Then there is the fact that they are going to 'address' as they put it, Spidey's recent development. Though unpopular and there are some parts that even I was weary of, I can't help but think this is cowardice and ill timed. I think that even if you have went down a route that was wrong then you should deal with it. By that I don't mean pressing reset but making the best of the story and slowly developing the character to where they ought to be. I'm not sure how many of these 'events' people can take.

I also hope that they don't take him off the New Avengers anytime soon either.

[Langoth]

Well, at least now my Spider-Fan brothers know how I feel about my poor X-men.

I knew he'd try something like this eventually, its pathetic. By the time Quesada is done as EiC, the Marvel side of the industry will lie in ruin.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Well, I started out as X-Men, so I've been feelin' th' pain since E for Extinction.

[Anti-Moderator]

This is a direct quote from JQ when asked if the new costume was a success.....

"When we announced the new costume, the pre-orders on the issues it appeared in went up by a third to two-thirds. Literally overnight. Fan reaction is tough to judge. The only way you can really tell at the end of the day is by the sales on the book."



If everyone is so upset STOP buying the books NOW. You can complain on this board until your fingers are bleeding it will not change anything. All this idiot sees is sales....he said it himself. Show him the product he and JMS are putting out isn't worth the paper they are printed on. Or keep buying these books and look forward to the next event when we find out Uncle Ben touched Peter's danger zone when he was 10.

[Langoth]

Seriously guys, thats what I do with X-men when they suck, I just Bryne-steal.

[TheWhiteSpider]

I said recently in another thread:


Bringing back Ben with the notion: "Peter still learned that With.." diminishes Peter's origin and 40+ year history, making it no more important or significant than the following: Aunt May's [actress'] "death," the House of M universe, and/or any other gimmick or event story where the hero "carries with him" the after affects of things that happened, or lives lived, but not really.

It would be no different than the writers having Peter awaken the morning after the spider bite, having been shown the future that awaited him if he failed to use his spider-god given powers wisely. Peter still remembers that whole history, after all. He still knows all those lessons of life. Does it matter that is was all a dream? Does it matter if the entire Spider-Man mythos was a really long "What If" as long as there's a lasting impact?

Marvel is essentially telling us: "The history of these characters, the 2,000 stories before yesterday and the themes of the aforementioned no longer matter. All that matters is that you and the character[s] remember something like that occuring. Now, buy our repackaged, star-creator-customized characters and shut up."

Honestly, I've no emotions or money I'm willing invest in today's creator owned copies of Spider-Man and his cast. Spidey has been "fixed" so thoroughly and his world "rocked" and "torn apart" so completely that Marvel has, finally, accomplished a spectacular feat! After 20 years of following the life and adventures of Spider-Man, I no. longer. care.

Bringing Ben back permanently? Fine. Gwen's been living as a troll the last 10 years under GW bridge? Ok. MJ has cancer, A.I.D.S. and chronic arthritis? Sure. Spidey's outing himself as Peter Parker and the one TRUE Hobgoblin? There's somebody with a credit card and an "I heart Morlun" T-Shirt that'll pick up the trade. As for me, I've already seen, read, and plan to discuss the greatest Spider-Man stories ever written -- for years to come.

No amount of BS, baggage, pseudomysticism, necrophilia etc., can undo the spirit, worth or intent of those stories. Alex Ross' beautiful, and sadly necessary, rendition of Spider-Man protecting Gwen from ravenous hands represents a certain fact. The fact that thousands of us know and take to heart what Peter, Gwen and the mythos were and had actually been about for all those years. Its true themes. Readers like Captivated, who began collecting Spidey in more recent times, rather than as a 7 year old like myself, very clearly understand those things, as well. No amount of present day pomp and shoddy writing can undo the original intent and quality of those tales.

Marvel has a "screw you" attitude towards fans like us -- those who refuse to silently ignore the inherent contradictions in today's stories in light of the rich history that came before. Interestingly, I never see the writers articulating their "extremely valid" points and "solutions" for Spidey's "ills" on these forums. F.Y.I. JQ, JMS, PAD: screw your cheap, magical, soul-eating, molted side-kick, killer version of Spider-Man. I reject it. I reject your "creative" approaches and ability, and I reject your poorly plotted books. 'Nuff said.




If one man's trash is another man's treasure, Marvel will never go bankrupt again.

[Abaddon]

I remember hearing some place that Stan Lee said that Gwen was killed off because she was boring.




I think you heard wrong.Stan was kinda pissed that Gwen was killed off.

[KingOfDreams]

Argh! ****ing Hell! As if the Spider-Man books aren't bad enough right now. Damn you, Joe Q. You may be a great artist but damn you! :mad: :down

[stillanerd]

I said recently in another thread:


Bringing back Ben with the notion: "Peter still learned that With.." diminishes Peter's origin and 40+ year history, making it no more important or significant than the following: Aunt May's [actress'] "death," the House of M universe, and/or any other gimmick or event story where the hero "carries with him" the after affects of things that happened, or lives lived, but not really.

It would be no different than the writers having Peter awaken the morning after the spider bite, having been shown the future that awaited him if he failed to use his spider-god given powers wisely. Peter still remembers that whole history, after all. He still knows all those lessons of life. Does it matter that is was all a dream? Does it matter if the entire Spider-Man mythos was a really long "What If" as long as there's a lasting impact?

Marvel is essentially telling us: "The history of these characters, the 2,000 stories before yesterday and the themes of the aforementioned no longer matter. All that matters is that you and the character[s] remember something like that occuring. Now, buy our repackaged, star-creator-customized characters and shut up."

Honestly, I've no emotions or money I'm willing invest in today's creator owned copies of Spider-Man and his cast. Spidey has been "fixed" so thoroughly and his world "rocked" and "torn apart" so completely that Marvel has, finally, accomplished a spectacular feat! After 20 years of following the life and adventures of Spider-Man, I no. longer. care.

Bringing Ben back permanently? Fine. Gwen's been living as a troll the last 10 years under GW bridge? Ok. MJ has cancer, A.I.D.S. and chronic arthritis? Sure. Spidey's outing himself as Peter Parker and the one TRUE Hobgoblin? There's somebody with a credit card and an "I heart Morlun" T-Shirt that'll pick up the trade. As for me, I've already seen, read, and plan to discuss the greatest Spider-Man stories ever written -- for years to come.

No amount of BS, baggage, pseudomysticism, necrophilia etc., can undo the spirit, worth or intent of those stories. Alex Ross' beautiful, and sadly necessary, rendition of Spider-Man protecting Gwen from ravenous hands represents a certain fact. The fact that thousands of us know and take to heart what Peter, Gwen and the mythos were and had actually been about for all those years. Its true themes. Readers like Captivated, who began collecting Spidey in more recent times, rather than as a 7 year old like myself, very clearly understand those things, as well. No amount of present day pomp and shoddy writing can undo the original intent and quality of those tales.

Marvel has a "screw you" attitude towards fans like us -- those who refuse to silently ignore the inherent contradictions in today's stories in light of the rich history that came before. Interestingly, I never see the writers articulating their "extremely valid" points and "solutions" for Spidey's "ills" on these forums. F.Y.I. JQ, JMS, PAD: screw your cheap, magical, soul-eating, molted side-kick, killer version of Spider-Man. I reject it. I reject your "creative" approaches and ability, and I reject your poorly plotted books. 'Nuff said.




If one man's trash is another man's treasure, Marvel will never go bankrupt again.

I feel your pain, WS, especially at rereading those prophetic words of yours. But somehow I have some degree of optimism that one day, Marvel will know what to do with the 'ol webhead. BTW, here's something else from the same Wizard article that's guaranteed to make you scream in frustation.

Joe Q: "His [Spider-Man's] cast is gone. Harry Osborn's dead. Flash is in a coma. Gwen was killed. I would like to see him have a cast like the old gang."

JMS: "If we opened up the toy box and just said, "Pick someone that was always around and bring them back" obviously Flash is off the map, Harry too. Gwen would be great. But thats not possible at this point."

At least they FINALLY acknowledge that he needed a supporting cast other than other superheroes. But then whose fault was that, hmmm? :rolleyes:

[littleredhat]

I just want to point out that Mary-Jane has gotten so popular that she has stared in two of her own mini-series (Mary Jane and Mary Jane Homcoming) and she currently has her own book(Spider-man Loves Mary Jane) all of which have become quite popular.(Read them they are amazing)

Don't these idiots know? Mary Jane is to Spider-man what Lois Lane is to Superman.

An OTP

One True Pairing. Jane & Tarzan. Sue and Reed.

If anyone even mentions spliting these splitting these two up and thus retconning one of the greatest love stories in comics the fans will boil over into a frothing mass of outrage.

And another thing.

Peter is the not in any way a swinging bachalor. The guy has probably wanted to get married since he was four.

He's a total commitment freak. He even fantasized about familly life with the Black Cat.

He's a domestic type who would rather stay home and watch videos with his wife or have a home cooked meal with his elderly aunt than go out clubbing.

Still don't believe me?

How many times has he proposed to a girl? I know he asked MJ twice.

Didn't they try this a couple of times already?

Well it turned out pretty bad the last ten times they tried it but I'm sure that it will work out great this time.:down


The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.:spidey:

[TheWhiteSpider]

I feel your pain, WS, especially at rereading those prophetic words of yours. But somehow I have some degree of optimism that one day, Marvel will know what to do with the 'ol webhead. BTW, here's something else from the same Wizard article that's guaranteed to make you scream in frustation.

At this point I'm not surprised. Actually, the last time I screamed in frustration was when you pulled out the Norman "love" pics on me, twice, in one weekend. (*WhiteSpider clenches his fists and looks upwards* "STILLANERD!")


At least they FINALLY acknowledge that he needed a supporting cast other than other superheroes. But then whose fault was that, hmmm? :rolleyes:

I admire your faith, Still. If the character of Spider-Man ever truly reemerges from this let me know. You, me, Dragon and the Caps ["tivated" and "Stacy"] will throw a party to remember.



If one man's trash is another man's treasure, Marvel will never go bankrupt again.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Quite frankly, there's really only one true response any Spidey fan can give this news:

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!

[Cyclops]

Not even a long, drawn-out

"Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!"?

[stillanerd]

At this point I'm not surprised. Actually, the last time I screamed in frustration was when you pulled out the Norman "love" pics on me, twice, in one weekend. (*WhiteSpider clenches his fists and looks upwards* "STILLANERD!")

What can I say, I'm eeeeevil. :gg::bomb::D



I admire your faith, Still. If the character of Spider-Man ever truly reemerges from this let me know. You, me, Dragon and the Caps ["tivated" and "Stacy"] will throw a party to remember.



If one man's trash is another man's treasure, Marvel will never go bankrupt again.

I'm chilling the champagne right now in preperation (although it will probably have to stay in the frigdge for a good long while yet.) :)

[onceasaint]

I honestly think Id pay money to buy an issue where Pete does nothing but go grocerry shopping with his little old Aunt, carrying bags for her and watches a ball game, than read another "turn his world upside down inside out tearing it apart" story.

The whole stingers thing with him makes me think of The Monarch from Venture Bros. There's a running joke where he (a guy modeling his costume after a monarch butterfly) talks about having attributes and abilities that butterflies dont have.


The Monarch: You see, just like the flawless monarch butterfly from which I take my name, the Monarch has many ways to sting.
Dying Cabbie: Monarchs . . . . don't sting.

[dan1]

IS HE INSANE??!!! I thought he was just out of touch and had made some stupid decisions... but now I see I was wrong... he is completely out of his freakin mind!!! :eek:


Yeah. The guy is all over the place. Some things for sure, he's meddling and underhanded and he thinks 'sales first, fans second.'

These are attributes that I believe are mostly opposite of Stan the man Lee's EIC run.

I didn't trust this guy as soon as I saw him allow and participate in continuity going to s**t. Then things got worse when he let the movie version intrude into the comics version. The whole time he's smiling, quipping, walking the company line, lying to the fans that he is essentially like all of them.

So I go back and read this guys' bio and realize, yeah he's worked for Marvel for awhile, but not nearly as long as I originally thought.

This guy definitely stepped in *hit when he got this job. He got it based on SALES merits. Creating different lines that sold DESPITE them having nothing to do with continuity or the 616 Universe.

The movies' success gave him carte' blanche over 616 universe too.

But Joe Quesada's actions should never have been a surprise to any of you. He made his success on re-writing Marvel history.

In a Chris Rock impersonated Luke (2 Live Crew) Skywalker voice:
"That's his bread and butter mey' "

[dan1]

Excuse me Mr. Quesada and Mr. Straczynski, but that's not the point. The point is that YOU AND YOUR HOLLYWOOD FLUNKIES were the very people who were responsible for the state Spidey is in and one which was so obviously avoidable. You guys didn't accidently knock over the vase and break it--you guys purposefully took a hammer to it and smashed it. And of course, after you guys started gluing the broken shards back together, the vase looks nothing like it was when you broke it, and when we fail to buy it from you, you decide to smash it and reglue it again. And you know what Joe Q, JMS, and all the rest of you Hollywood flunkies? "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." That should've been what you at Marvel must have learned after the Clone Saga and the reboot, but obviously you haven't because your own egos made you deaf, dumb, and blind. I sort of figured this was your game plan when I made this "evolved but not changed" thread (http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=228395) and this news confirms my suspicions. And some people a lot more insightful and wiser than myself saw this all along.

Yeah man.

So many ways we have eloquently and descriptively communicated this on paper, it can only point to us being truthful, not whining like some like to paint us.

I DO have things I like in this world that I don't complain about. Spider-Man comics were definitely one of them for many, many years.

I don't see this as whining, I see this as educating. I won't let this current Marvel leadership "burn" books without speaking up and maybe the kids out there can read this and know that these Peers of ours, not the kids out there, but the Peers of the 30 and 40 somethings on this board are trashing Spider-Man comics and I'm sorry for our generation on this one kids.

Your grandfathers' generation did a much better job and I suggest you buy and read those back issues.

Maybe you guys will eventually return Spider-Man to your grandfathers' glory.

[OtepApe]

I remember hearing some place that Stan Lee said that Gwen was killed off because she was boring.



I heard it as, Stan tried everything he could to make Gwen an interesting character, but the fans were just so much more keen on MJ. Stan really liked the Gwen character and he thought it was a shame that she never gained the popularity of MJ.

Personally, I loved the Gwen character. But I will be honest, the choice to kill her off was a good one imo.


So Marvel are planning yet another event with Spidey. Ah *****!

When are they going to learn???

To be honest, I do blame Marvel but I blame the fans more. Marvel are going on that you can only judge reactions by sales, but yet people still buy this. Spider-man is constantly a top selling book, I can understand people have a loyalty to Spidey, I have one myself. But the only way Marvel will listen is to stop buying the books. If you hate what's going on with Spidey, then hit Marvel where it hurts.

If you are a rabid collector that needs every issue regardless of the crap they are pulling, then wait a few months before buying the issue, then it can be bought as a back issue and Marvel won't get any of the money.

If people continue to buy the Spidey books as they are doing now, then these 'mega' events are never going to stop.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

I'm just sticking around fer Civil War. Once that's over, Spidey go bye-bye.

[shinlyle]

I'm very disillusioned at this point. I'm not as angry as I was yesterday, but I'm still not going to buy anymore of this crap. FNSM gets the boot as soon as I can get my ass to the comic shop. That'll leave me with SSM...

Aside from Civil War and SSM, I won't be reading ANY 616 Spidey. This is just the last straw for me.

I seriously consider any so-called Spidey-Fan that supports this crap a total moron, totally unaware of who Spider-Man/Peter Parker is, or both.

There is no excuse for supporting these clowns any longer. Completists, wake up. New fans, learn to listen to those who've been reading the book a little longer. Old fans, remember what good stories are.

Drop this crap from your pull list and vote with your wallets, or stop complaining. I'm going to do with FNSM like I'v done with ASM: read it in the shop. If I care anymore, which I really don't. In fact, I think reading an issue of ASM for free is still paying too much, seeing as how it costs me valuable time.

[roach]

I read the article in my LCS and put back all my Marvel books....I cant believe this.
And for the person who believes Peter should still be 15 fighting crime...Welcome to the Hype J.Q.
Sorry but I like it when people grow up. When Robin became Nightwing, when Wally became the Flash...these were moments when the hero grew up.
Peter marrying MJ was a natural progression of the story. This is the one thing that truely makes Peter "real" for me. Real people grow up and get married.

[Hoban]

I honestly think Id pay money to buy an issue where Pete does nothing but go grocerry shopping with his little old Aunt, carrying bags for her and watches a ball game, than read another "turn his world upside down inside out tearing it apart" story.


Read the Peter Parker: Spider Man issue called "Maybe Next Year" (I forget the issue number) by Paul Jenkins. It's a fantastic Peter Parker and Uncle Ben story. It's my very favorite Spider-Man comic.

I wish Jenkins was writing ASM, or at least still on a Spidey title.:(

[shinlyle]

And for the person who believes Peter should still be 15 fighting crime...Welcome to the Hype J.Q.

Exactly. That's the only person dumb enough to buy into this crap.

[roach]

I think I died a little inside when I read that article in Wizard

[Herr Logan]

Really? I thought Spider-Man was created as an everyman who comicbook readers can relate to.

How is he an everyman?

Peter Parker is a genius, an orphan, obsessed with doing the right thing, and consistently suffers from depression and anxiety. Considering how the majority of posters here act toward others who express depressed and anxious feelings and those who ask for help, they are unequivocally not in any way as moral as Peter Parker (we're not talking risking lives, we're talking about common decency and compassion) and they can't seem to relate with psychologically troubled people. People here don't seem to like people that complain. Parker complained constantly. It's no wonder there are so few real Spider-Man fans around here.

The "everyman" argument has always been completely invalid. There's absolutely nothing to back it up, and if anything, Quesada is trying to move things toward making Peter into an everyman. In other words, Peter should not be an everyman, but rather the way he was written toward the beginning of his career.

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

I'm very disillusioned at this point. I'm not as angry as I was yesterday, but I'm still not going to buy anymore of this crap. FNSM gets the boot as soon as I can get my ass to the comic shop. That'll leave me with SSM...

Aside from Civil War and SSM, I won't be reading ANY 616 Spidey. This is just the last straw for me.

I seriously consider any so-called Spidey-Fan that supports this crap a total moron, totally unaware of who Spider-Man/Peter Parker is, or both.

There is no excuse for supporting these clowns any longer. Completists, wake up. New fans, learn to listen to those who've been reading the book a little longer. Old fans, remember what good stories are.

Drop this crap from your pull list and vote with your wallets, or stop complaining. I'm going to do with FNSM like I'v done with ASM: read it in the shop. If I care anymore, which I really don't. In fact, I think reading an issue of ASM for free is still paying too much, seeing as how it costs me valuable time.

LOUDER!!

Tell it to the back o' the auditorium!! :up:

:wolverine

[WOLVERINE25TH]

His everyman quality came from th' fact his life wasn't perfect, he had to pay bills, get to work, study fer school...as soon as he put on th' costume he coulda been anyone.

[Herr Logan]

His everyman quality came from th' fact his life wasn't perfect, he had to pay bills, get to work, study fer school...as soon as he put on th' costume he coulda been anyone.

So, he's an everyman simply because he isn't a robot and he isn't the Batman...

Okay, now I see.

:wolverine

[wolvie2020]

Stan and Steve didn't realize that Marvel would last, so they moved Spidey to college. Thus, Peter was in high school for 3 or so years of real time.

BUT, when Stan realized that Marvel wasn't a flash in the pan, the chronological brakes were put on. Thus, Peter was in college for 13 years, real time (and in graduate school for another 10 or so years, on and off, after that). Spidey aged veeeerrrryyyy slllloooowwwwwlllyyy.

Then the letters started coming in in the mid-70s, demanding that Spidey age and change.

And that led to the mess we're in now.

If Spidey had stayed a college-age single forever, that would have been great (although the high school version is the pures and most vital version of the character)...

...but it's too late to even go back to THAT.

You know, your not quite as in the right as you constantly seem to think, (but I'm only pointing out this simple fact.)

Stan Lee has always been the man to age Spider-Man, that's one of the main things he always intended to push forward.

Of course, Stan made the change for everything to slow down, but in the 80's, Stan was the one to marry Pete to MJ in the Spidey newspaper strip. This proved so popular, they married him off in the comics too.

Also, this mess you keep talking about doesn't really exist. There was no mess, until this totem thing, sins past, boring stories, new avengers thing, lack of supporting cast, blah, blah, happened. It wasn't that long ago that Spidey was experiencing another one of his heydays. Paul Jenkins was great, and proved very popular. JMS, at first was superb, and injected new life into Spidey, (at first,) and the debut of SSM got tons of people talking, and the Millar's run of MKSM was a hell of a lot of fun, and had great sales. They turned all the s**t of the clone saga around, and made Spider-Man a popular franchise again! This is fact.

Spidey WAS in the right path after the clone saga. The early Jenkins/JMS issues are still wildly popular. They WERE considers saviours after the clone saga.

and before the clone saga things were great, Spider-Man reached one of the all time highs of his popularity in the late 80's/early 90's. His books surpassed all sales of Batman and the X-Men, during the time where X-Men was gold, Burtons Batman was in cinemas, and DKR and Batman: Year One was all the rage.

So maybe YOUR fave era was the college years, but to MILLIONS of people around the world, Spidey stories were much more interesting afterwards. Spideys all time best sales were AFTER he married MJ. And when I say sales, I mean what percentage he takes of the comic market as a whole. We all know comics don't sell like they did in the early 90's! lol

So we had a great high during the 80's, which went on until the Clone Saga. And then there was a great high JUST after the turn of the century, and 5 years later, it's gone to s**t again. The problem is, what writers are doing now, they're NOT leaving 'back doors,' to the storylines. Leaving no easy retcon for some SERIOUSLY controversial storylines. This is stupid, if you know you''re onto gold, that's different. If you know, that there is a LARGE chance a story may backfire, you leave a back door. There were tons of back doors with the clone saga, that's how Spidei survived it fairly easily

[wolvie2020]

How is he an everyman?

Peter Parker is a genius, an orphan, obsessed with doing the right thing, and consistently suffers from depression and anxiety. Considering how the majority of posters here act toward others who express depressed and anxious feelings and those who ask for help, they are unequivocally not in any way as moral as Peter Parker (we're not talking risking lives, we're talking about common decency and compassion) and they can't seem to relate with psychologically troubled people. People here don't seem to like people that complain. Parker complained constantly. It's no wonder there are so few real Spider-Man fans around here.

The "everyman" argument has always been completely invalid. There's absolutely nothing to back it up, and if anything, Quesada is trying to move things toward making Peter into an everyman. In other words, Peter should not be an everyman, but rather the way he was written toward the beginning of his career.

:wolverine

Well, that may be your opinion, but read ANY interview, watch AND documentary, or ANY books studying the cases and philosophies on comic books as an art form, and that's what Spider-Man has always been noted as, the super-hero worlds' everyman

Stan Lee himself has always said, that he tried to make Spidey as REALISTIC as possible, as HUMANLY relatable a super hero comic could be, and to this day, he beieves that is the reason Spider-Man is still so popular. He wanted readers to think, hey! That's JUST like me! You have to accept the fact, that we are reading fiction on a fantastic level, so certain things need to be stretched for it to apply to the comic world. So a clever guy, a nerd, becomes a borderline genius, it makes sense otherwise how the hell is he supposed to save the city against Doc Ock! Lol It also gives something for people to aim towards

You may not think if him as an everyman, but millions of people around the world disagree with you, (2nd time I've said that in a row! Lol!) Sorry, that is just a fact, I have tons of books/articles/DVD's/and just general info I could throw you towards if you need to see

[roach]

So, he's an everyman simply because he isn't a robot and he isn't the Batman...

Okay, now I see.

:wolverine


I dont think he was an everyman but he has everyman qualities....he is a regular person thrown into extraordiary circumstances. Yes he has problems that I have and he is relateable but I dont see him as an everyman. If he was an everyman then anyone could be under the mask...and I think the Clone Saga proved that theory works:down

[The Joker]

So, he's an everyman simply because he isn't a robot and he isn't the Batman...

Okay, now I see.

:wolverine

Stan Lee never described him as an everyman.He said he tried to make Peter relatable,in the fact that he gave him every day problems that kids his age might typically face.

He had money problems,he was bullied at school,he was unpopular with girls,he worried about his loved ones,things rarely worked out the way he wanted.

These are problems we've all had at some time or another.And back then when Stan first created Spider-Man,those types of problems were not what super heros faced.People like the FF or Batman etc.Their problems didn't run along the lines of girl trouble,or worrying about school exams,or where their next pay cheque was coming from.

Stan wanted the average reader to think "Hey that could be me".And it seemed to work :)

[Herr Logan]

Well, that may be your opinion, but read ANY interview, watch AND documentary, or ANY books studying the cases and philosophies on comic books as an art form, and that's what Spider-Man has always been noted as, the super-hero worlds' everyman

Stan Lee himself has always said, that he tried to make Spidey as REALISTIC as possible, as HUMANLY relatable a super hero comic could be, and to this day, he beieves that is the reason Spider-Man is still so popular. He wanted readers to think, hey! That's JUST like me! You have to accept the fact, that we are reading fiction on a fantastic level, so certain things need to be stretched for it to apply to the comic world. So a clever guy, a nerd, becomes a borderline genius, it makes sense otherwise how the hell is he supposed to save the city against Doc Ock! Lol It also gives something for people to aim towards

You may not think if him as an everyman, but millions of people around the world disagree with you, (2nd time I've said that in a row! Lol!) Sorry, that is just a fact, I have tons of books/articles/DVD's/and just general info I could throw you towards if you need to see

Here's the definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=everyman) of "everyman."

Thus, I am right. That was much too easy.


Peter Parker is not an ordinary person. It's not my fault that all those people giving interviews and writing books didn't use the right word. I don't give a damn about what they have to say if they can't use the English language properly.

Yes, Stan Lee and Steve Ditko did create a "realistic" character in terms of psychology and behavior, but that does not make him an everyman. Not even close. What, you think there aren't real people who obsess over doing the right thing and suffer from the anxiety and self-pity that Spider-Man does? By the way, Stan Lee is also known to have said that he wrote his characters so that he would like them. Especially Spider-Man, since that last issue of 'Amazing Fantasy' was supposed to be his last story for Marvel (he was going to quit and he wrote it for himself, not because he thought it would sell).

Judging from all the people who insist that the movies were faithful representations of the comics, it's pretty obvious that they do not truly relate to the character. They seem to think that all there is to Spider-Man is a longing romance for Mary Jane, and even that wasn't true in the comics in any similar way to the movie. They didn't grow up together, it wasn't love at first sight, and he didn't spend all his time obsessing over her. Spider-Man was witty, self-aware of his flaws and inner conflicts, and an excellent character that intelligent people could fully appreciate. Here's a big newsflash for you: Stan Lee is smarter than most people on Earth. I don't need an IQ test to see that he's got very high verbal intelligence and that he understands tge practical aspects of human psychology. It's all right there in the early comics for the world to see. It's because people are too damn ignorant to both see the big picture and analyze the material critically that they support things like the watered-down, vapid version of Spider-Man in the movies and all of the events JQ and JMS have engineered that have brought us to this lowpoint in Spider-Man history. Further proof of this ignorance is that you all buy into this "everyman" crap. I have no doubt in my mind that if Stan Lee ever used that word to describe Spider-Man, he was either talking down (not in a malicious way) to the people who don't know how to use that word, or he's under the delusion that most people are as smart as he and Peter Parker (not in a scientific way, but the other types of intelligence he showed) are. Stan had and still has a magnificent vocabulary, so don't tell me he was as ignorant as the rest of these plebeians when it came to that.

Yes, Stan Lee can relate to him, and clearly lots of other people did as well. Here's another thing you may want to consider: Spider-Man is a character who appeals to lots of different people for lots of different reasons. You know how 'The Simpsons' appeals to smart people and idiots alike? That's because it works on different levels. Spider-Man is the same. Even if you can't keep up with the intellectual, psychological and philosophical content from those early days, he still makes some quips that even morons can understand and find funny, and he's one of the most dynamic action heroes ever. His combination of powers and gadgets are superior to other heroes, so as action comics go, Spider-Man is way up there. Different levels, different dimensions. That's what makes Spider-Man so popular and "relatable." I see proof on these boards every day that a huge chunk of so-called "fans" don't understand anything about Spider-Man other than "He does good things" and "He jumps real nice" and other such obvious, banal, puerile observations. No, nobody says those things in those words, but that's what they recognize. I don't give much credit to the intelligence and analytic prowess of most posters here, and I've proven right every single day with the thousands of empty platitudes "change is good," "it has to be 'realistic,'" "I have faith in Raimi," "JMS saved Spider-Man," and other such nonsense worthy of troglodytes.

Still reading? Here's hoping you understood most of it.


And don't bother calling me "arrogant" or "condescending." That's like saying I have a keyboard. Everyone knows it, and nobody is interested in hearing something that obvious.

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

I dont think he was an everyman but he has everyman qualities....he is a regular person thrown into extraordiary circumstances. Yes he has problems that I have and he is relateable but I dont see him as an everyman. If he was an everyman then anyone could be under the mask...and I think the Clone Saga proved that theory works:down

I'm confused by that last sentence. Do you mean that it doesn't work?

:wolverine

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Yes, he meant it didn't work 'cause nobody likes th' Clone Saga.

And dude, seriously? Get a life.

[roach]

Yes, he meant it didn't work 'cause nobody likes th' Clone Saga.

And dude, seriously? Get a life.


that's what I meant......

...Uh Oh WOLVERINE FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Herr Logan]

Stan Lee never described him as an everyman.He said he tried to make Peter relatable,in the fact that he gave him every day problems that kids his age might typically face.

He had money problems,he was bullied at school,he was unpopular with girls,he worried about his loved ones,things rarely worked out the way he wanted.

These are problems we've all had at some time or another.And back then when Stan first created Spider-Man,those types of problems were not what super heros faced.People like the FF or Batman etc.Their problems didn't run along the lines of girl trouble,or worrying about school exams,or where their next pay cheque was coming from.

Stan wanted the average reader to think "Hey that could be me".And it seemed to work :)

This is true. I just hate how all these people think that "relatable" = "everyman." That's just not true. I can relate to Spider-Man, and I'm not an "everyman."

I'm very intelligent verbally and have a mind for psychology and philosophy like Spider-Man does, but I don't have a God damn clue when it comes to math or science or even photography, and I have less social skills than he had when he was still in high school (see how easily he impressed Doris Whatsherface, the Human Torch's girlfriend, without even trying). I never had two knockout women fighting over me in college. I don't share Spider-Man's moral code ('yes' to the power/responsibility thing, but 'no' to the 'no killing rule'), either. I'm not an orphan and never had to support a relative monetarily, etc. I can relate to some things, but not all things, but I still appreciate basically all of what's at work in the early days of Spider-Man, because I can allow for the fact that there are people to whom the 'no killing' rule and other things I don't share do apply, while I can revel in the psychology/philosophy aspects (his inner monologues).

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

Yes, he meant it didn't work 'cause nobody likes th' Clone Saga.

And dude, seriously? Get a life.

I realize I made some "nobody" generalizations earlier (and won't protest if anyone wants to point them out and challenge them), so I'm not going to be a hard-ass about the fact that you said "nobody likes th' Clone Saga" when I know for a fact that's not true. No, I don't remember which member here likes it, but there's more than one and they've said it publically.


Okay, "Get a life"? That's all?

Yeah, that stings. Really. You may as well take your ball and go home, bub.

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

that's what I meant......

Okay, just checking. :up:


...Uh Oh WOLVERINE FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No. No Wolverine fight. He pulled out the big guns with "Get a life," so I'm too distraught and afraid to stand up to him. I can't handle that level of wit.

:wolverine

[shinlyle]

Well, befor ewe get everyoen up in arms about who Spidey is, let's acknwledge who we think he is:

1) He's someone relatable that you could meet in the real world. He's Peter Parker. He's the nice, nerdy guy from your high school that was picked on (probably by you), and yet, he was never anythign but nice and easygoing (in my case, I was the geek for a couple of years, then became like Peter in the college years...natch!)

2) He's uncommonly responsible. He takes responsibility for everyone he comes in contact with. If he's rushing someone to the hospital, and they die, he considers it his fault. If he was sitting beside a guy on the subway, and that guy dies after Peter gets off the car, Peter would entertain the notion of it somehow being his fault. Peter is like our conscience....the way our conscience would be if we cared for everythign and everyone the way we should.

3) Peter is naive. He assumes the best of everyone, he assumes everyone can be saved, can be helped, and that everyone wants to do good. He even tried to look for the good in Cletus for awhile. (Maximum Carnage)

4) Peter wants to be normal and fit in. Like every geek, Peter just wants to be able to blend in with the crowd, be happy, and just fit in. It's part of that common human desire to "belong"....and Peter rarely feels that way, even amongst other super-people, he always feels like he shouldn't be there.

This, in my honest opinion, is what I think about Peter. He reminds me of some friends I've had through the years, and, at times, of myself. Trying to get the girl, losing the girl for reasons beyond his control, tragedies that he blames himself for. These are all things I went through as a teenager, and they are things I have experienced since.

Other things I have done:

I've gotten different jobs. I've gotten married. I've had to grow up. I've grown apart from my old friends and made new ones. I've had fights with my wife (verbally...not the Ike/Tina kind). I've had disagreements with family.

All these things happen to all of us. To deny Peter the same experiences and keep him in a perpetual state of suspended animation and permanently in high school limbo so as to make him more relatable to a fanbase that, quite honestly, has it's greatest numbers in the 20-30 year old range, is ridiculous.

Do kids read comics? Yes. Do they care if Spider-Man is married or not? Doubt it. Superman is married. Kids still read Superman. Why can't it be the same for Spider-Man?

I think what is really going on here is that JOE Q. doesn't like the marriage. Joe Q. has problems with it. Joe Q. wants it gone. He just thinks that he knows best for all thigns Marvel, and doesn't give two s***s what the actual fanbase thinks of it. Just like "The Other" and the "Iron Spidey" suit, he's going to go full steam ahead with these preposterous changes, whether the fans like it or not, and then, when he sees the irrefutable backlash from said events, he'll wiggle out of it, and say that it is HIS plan to return Peter Parker back to his "status quo".

It's a vicious cycle...one that won't end until Joe gets a brain transplant, or there is new management in the Marvel offices.

[Herr Logan]

Well, befor ewe get everyoen up in arms about who Spidey is, let's acknwledge who we think he is:

1) He's someone relatable that you could meet in the real world. He's Peter Parker. He's the nice, nerdy guy from your high school that was picked on (probably by you), and yet, he was never anythign but nice and easygoing (in my case, I was the geek for a couple of years, then became like Peter in the college years...natch!)

2) He's uncommonly responsible. He takes responsibility for everyone he comes in contact with. If he's rushing someone to the hospital, and they die, he considers it his fault. If he was sitting beside a guy on the subway, and that guy dies after Peter gets off the car, Peter would entertain the notion of it somehow being his fault. Peter is like our conscience....the way our conscience would be if we cared for everythign and everyone the way we should.

3) Peter is naive. He assumes the best of everyone, he assumes everyone can be saved, can be helped, and that everyone wants to do good. He even tried to look for the good in Cletus for awhile. (Maximum Carnage)

4) Peter wants to be normal and fit in. Like every geek, Peter just wants to be able to blend in with the crowd, be happy, and just fit in. It's part of that common human desire to "belong"....and Peter rarely feels that way, even amongst other super-people, he always feels like he shouldn't be there.

This, in my honest opinion, is what I think about Peter. He reminds me of some friends I've had through the years, and, at times, of myself. Trying to get the girl, losing the girl for reasons beyond his control, tragedies that he blames himself for. These are all things I went through as a teenager, and they are things I have experienced since.

Other things I have done:

I've gotten different jobs. I've gotten married. I've had to grow up. I've grown apart from my old friends and made new ones. I've had fights with my wife (verbally...not the Ike/Tina kind). I've had disagreements with family.

All these things happen to all of us. To deny Peter the same experiences and keep him in a perpetual state of suspended animation and permanently in high school limbo so as to make him more relatable to a fanbase that, quite honestly, has it's greatest numbers in the 20-30 year old range, is ridiculous.

Do kids read comics? Yes. Do they care if Spider-Man is married or not? Doubt it. Superman is married. Kids still read Superman. Why can't it be the same for Spider-Man?

I think what is really going on here is that JOE Q. doesn't like the marriage. Joe Q. has problems with it. Joe Q. wants it gone. He just thinks that he knows best for all thigns Marvel, and doesn't give two s***s what the actual fanbase thinks of it. Just like "The Other" and the "Iron Spidey" suit, he's going to go full steam ahead with these preposterous changes, whether the fans like it or not, and then, when he sees the irrefutable backlash from said events, he'll wiggle out of it, and say that it is HIS plan to return Peter Parker back to his "status quo".

It's a vicious cycle...one that won't end until Joe gets a brain transplant, or there is new management in the Marvel offices.

Great analysis, Shinlyle. :up:


I have to admit, I'm not thrilled with Spider-Man being married myself. I don't feel quite as strongly as Gregatron, but I would prefer if Peter had stayed single, because there is more room for him to move that way, and I did enjoy college-age Peter better.

I'm not saying that if I was the editor in chief that I would split Peter and MJ up or having MJ die. I'm saying if I was editor in chief back in the 80's, I wouldn't have had them marry in the first place. At present time, I know that Peter would never truly get over it if he broke up with Mary Jane, and he mopes enough as it is. You do the best with the hand you're dealt-- something Joey Q, JMS, Jenkins, and even Peter David have not been doing.

:wolverine

[Dragon]

I heard it as, Stan tried everything he could to make Gwen an interesting character, but the fans were just so much more keen on MJ. Stan really liked the Gwen character and he thought it was a shame that she never gained the popularity of MJ.



None of that is correct. Stan was writing Gwen as the woman he meant for Peter to marry.

Stan left the book (and regular comic writing in general) in 1972. Spidey was assigned to Gerry Conway, who was then 19 years old. Conway, Editor Roy Thomas, and art director John Romita were looking for a way to inject some heat into the Spidey comic. So they figured it was time for another death. They decided on Gwen because that would have the most impact. Obviously, if she wasn't a popular character, the death wouldn't have mattered. Also, Conway, at 19 wasn't equipped to write a serious married couple. He wasn't even equipped to write a loving relationship, since once he got Peter and MJ together, he left the book.

Stan wasn't involved in the decision process of killing Gwen, and some stories even say he was away on vacation when the decision was made. Once it was done, he signed off on it. But Stan never wanted Gwen killed, and even said so in an interview around the time of the release of Sins Past.

Stan said, around the time that Peter & MJ were to be married that MJ was more fun to write than Gwen. But why wouldn't she be? When Stan was on the book, MJ was a supporting character, and all she did was stand in the background and make wise-cracks. She had no dramatic weight. Whereas with Gwen she had to be the one worrying and weeping over Peter. She had to carry all the drama on her shoulders. And MJ became just as tiresome when she had the drama placed on her, which is why she's been giving her walking papers numerous times as well.

MJ also had an advantage that Gwen didn't. When MJ returned to the Spidey books after refusing Peter's first proposal, the way comcis were produced was different. thus you could have whole stories devoted to supporting characters. This is how MJ was fleshed out, whereas Gwen never was developed as an independent character.

[roach]

and people will still buy it because they dont want a hole in their collections(like you get an award for having a full run). I'd rather have a hole in my collection than an "A hole" writing/editing my favorite characters. Drop this book if you dont like it. Drop the title if you dont like the proposed direction. Drop these books and when things get better go back issue diving...the only things these guys see are dollars...that is how you let them know you didnt like something...Internet whinning means nothing to them. Look at what he said..."Based on sales". That is all they care about. Drop these books and send a clear message to JMS and JQ that you are mad as hell and you arent going to take this anymore. Stop messing with Spider-man!!!!

[stillanerd]

Well, befor ewe get everyoen up in arms about who Spidey is, let's acknwledge who we think he is:

1) He's someone relatable that you could meet in the real world. He's Peter Parker. He's the nice, nerdy guy from your high school that was picked on (probably by you), and yet, he was never anythign but nice and easygoing (in my case, I was the geek for a couple of years, then became like Peter in the college years...natch!)

2) He's uncommonly responsible. He takes responsibility for everyone he comes in contact with. If he's rushing someone to the hospital, and they die, he considers it his fault. If he was sitting beside a guy on the subway, and that guy dies after Peter gets off the car, Peter would entertain the notion of it somehow being his fault. Peter is like our conscience....the way our conscience would be if we cared for everythign and everyone the way we should.

3) Peter is naive. He assumes the best of everyone, he assumes everyone can be saved, can be helped, and that everyone wants to do good. He even tried to look for the good in Cletus for awhile. (Maximum Carnage)

4) Peter wants to be normal and fit in. Like every geek, Peter just wants to be able to blend in with the crowd, be happy, and just fit in. It's part of that common human desire to "belong"....and Peter rarely feels that way, even amongst other super-people, he always feels like he shouldn't be there.

This, in my honest opinion, is what I think about Peter. He reminds me of some friends I've had through the years, and, at times, of myself. Trying to get the girl, losing the girl for reasons beyond his control, tragedies that he blames himself for. These are all things I went through as a teenager, and they are things I have experienced since.

Other things I have done:

I've gotten different jobs. I've gotten married. I've had to grow up. I've grown apart from my old friends and made new ones. I've had fights with my wife (verbally...not the Ike/Tina kind). I've had disagreements with family.

All these things happen to all of us. To deny Peter the same experiences and keep him in a perpetual state of suspended animation and permanently in high school limbo so as to make him more relatable to a fanbase that, quite honestly, has it's greatest numbers in the 20-30 year old range, is ridiculous.

Do kids read comics? Yes. Do they care if Spider-Man is married or not? Doubt it. Superman is married. Kids still read Superman. Why can't it be the same for Spider-Man?

I think what is really going on here is that JOE Q. doesn't like the marriage. Joe Q. has problems with it. Joe Q. wants it gone. He just thinks that he knows best for all thigns Marvel, and doesn't give two s***s what the actual fanbase thinks of it. Just like "The Other" and the "Iron Spidey" suit, he's going to go full steam ahead with these preposterous changes, whether the fans like it or not, and then, when he sees the irrefutable backlash from said events, he'll wiggle out of it, and say that it is HIS plan to return Peter Parker back to his "status quo".

It's a vicious cycle...one that won't end until Joe gets a brain transplant, or there is new management in the Marvel offices.

You forgot:

5) Peter Parker is an unappreciated scientific genuis, as evident from the fact that he invented his web-shooters, spider-tracers, etc. The reason why he wasn't in some gifted program was because his aunt and uncle were too poor to send him to some specialized private school where his talents could flourish so HE HAD TO GO to a public school. Plus because of his being Spider-Man, he couldn't be the full-fledged scientist that he wanted to be, but sacrificed that dream for the greater good of being Spider-Man.

6) He has a sense of humor, often self-depricating, designed to throw his enemies off their game and to help boost his own confidence.

Other than that, the rest of your analysis is spot on.

[roach]

Yes, he meant it didn't work 'cause nobody likes th' Clone Saga.

And dude, seriously? Get a life.

regardless if people like the Clone Saga or not the series fell flat for many when they tried to replace Peter with Ben

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Yeah, Herr, I liked th' Clone Saga. I even started a thread. That was more sarcasm mixed with a serious answer.

And you need to get a life 'cause only a complete and utter pig-****er would go look up a dictionary definition then write a novel about why THEY'RE right, instead of maybe pointin' out how people may be MISTAKEN. I left it at that 'cause you said it; people know yer a moronic *******, so was no reason to go back into it. But if a novel-sized response is all yer receptive too, then fine...I'll elaborate. Yer views have no merit 'cause yer a self-serving egomaniac and frankly, people rather laugh at you than consider takin' you seriously. Drop th' holier than thou attitude and MAYBE people will give a **** what you think. And th' best part is, you probably don't even REALIZE it!

Lose th' arrogance, pal. Yer **** stinks like everyone else's.

[shinlyle]

You forgot:

5) Peter Parker is an unappreciated scientific genuis, as evident from the fact that he invented his web-shooters, spider-tracers, etc. The reason why he wasn't in some gifted program was because his aunt and uncle were too poor to send him to some specialized private school where his talents could flourish so HE HAD TO GO to a public school. Plus because of his being Spider-Man, he couldn't be the full-fledged scientist that he wanted to be, but sacrificed that dream for the greater good of being Spider-Man.

6) He has a sense of humor, often self-depricating, designed to throw his enemies off their game and to help boost his own confidence.

Other than that, the rest of your analysis is spot on.

I knew someone here would get my back. ;)

[shinlyle]

Yeah, Herr, I liked th' Clone Saga. I even started a thread. That was more sarcasm mixed with a serious answer.

And you need to get a life 'cause only a complete and utter pig-****er would go look up a dictionary definition then write a novel about why THEY'RE right, instead of maybe pointin' out how people may be MISTAKEN. I left it at that 'cause you said it; people know yer a moronic *******, so was no reason to go back into it. But if a novel-sized response is all yer receptive too, then fine...I'll elaborate. Yer views have no merit 'cause yer a self-serving egomaniac and frankly, people rather laugh at you than consider takin' you seriously. Drop th' holier than thou attitude and MAYBE people will give a **** what you think. And th' best part is, you probably don't even REALIZE it!

Lose th' arrogance, pal. Yer **** stinks like everyone else's.


Wrong.
Wrong.
Wrong.

Herr Logan is a hot-headed prick, but he's a good friend, too. I've not always been on the same side of the argument as he is, but he's always been cordial and respective of my opinion and those with whom he is debating, so long as their attitudes and responses warrant him to be so. He's a good guy, and I've not seen him be anything but playfully offensive with you. He hasn't been as mean as he can be to you. He often reserves that for those who don't feel the same way as he does. You are actually on the same side of the argument (wanting Spidey back to the way he was), but you're letting a minuscule and irrelevant point turn this thread, which WAS civil, into a flame war.

When people make mistakes, he corrects them. I often do the same, and I am certain that I have had posters on these boards leave responses about me similar to the one you just made about HL. I just didn't see anything in the past few pages of this thread that required this harsh of a response from you, man.

That being said, I'll stand back and let Herr Logan have his way with you, as I'm sure he's probably posted a response while I was typing mine.

I just hate watching people that I consider to be friends tear each other apart.

[roach]

*looks at Wolverine25th while eating popcorn*

[stillanerd]

I knew someone here would get my back. ;)

No problem.

Other things that just occurred to me:

7) Even though he can be pushed to the edge, in no way does Spider-Man cross the line and kill someone because he knows that by doing so he is no better than the kind of scum who took the life of his uncle Ben. Technically, he's strong enough to kill a normal person with just his fists, but he intentionally pulls his punches. Plus he doesn't need weapons, especially foot-long poison tipped bone spears.

8) Often times he doubts himself and his own abilities, even to the point that he's considering quitting. But he always manages to pull through and go on because it's the right thing to do not because he has a death wish.

9) His powers are derived from psuedo-science due to a irradiated spider biting him, which caused its DNA to intermix with Peter's body chemistry via its venom. They are not mystical or totemistic in nature and the spider that bit Peter was not some magical servant of the Great Weaver or Anasai or whatever mythical new age spider-god that was stupid enough to walk into radioactive rays.

If anyone can think of a #10, then these "Ten Commandments of Spider-Man" can then be set it stone and sent to the Marvel offices and put in a place where Joe Q, JMS, and the rest of the Hollywood cronies at Marvel are forced to walk by it everyday. Or better yet, can be used to club them over the head repeatedly until they get it, preferably by Stan "The Man" Lee and Steve Ditko themselves.

[shinlyle]

No problem.

Other things that just occurred to me:

7) Even though he can be pushed to the edge, in no way does Spider-Man cross the line and kill someone because he knows that by doing so he is no better than the kind of scum who took the life of his uncle Ben. Technically, he's strong enough to kill a normal person with just his fists, but he intentionally pulls his punches. Plus he doesn't need weapons, especially foot-long poison tipped bone spears.

8) Often times he doubts himself and his own abilities, even to the point that he's considering quitting. But he always manages to pull through and go on because it's the right thing to do not because he has a death wish.

9) His powers are derived from psuedo-science due to a irradiated spider biting him, which caused its DNA to intermix with Peter's body chemistry via its venom. They are not mystical or totemistic in nature and the spider that bit Peter was not some magical servant of the Great Weaver or Anasai or whatever mythical new age spider-god that was stupid enough to walk into radioactive rays.

If anyone can think of a #10, then these "Ten Commandments of Spider-Man" can then be set it stone and sent to the Marvel offices and put in a place where Joe Q, JMS, and the rest of the Hollywood cronies at Marvel are forced to walk by it everyday. Or better yet, can be used to club them over the head repeatedly until they get it, preferably by Stan "The Man" Lee and Steve Ditko themselves.

10) He wears a classic Red & Blue costume. He may switch to an alternate for an issue or two, but he will always wear the Red & Blues. This is how it was in the beginning, and this is how it shall be in the end. There will always be other costumes for him to wear, but two things should be remembered when it comes to new costumes:

a) It will only be temporary...
b) it will neverreplace the Reb & Blues....for that is the costume that pops into our heads when we hear "Spider-man".

[onceasaint]

Read the Peter Parker: Spider Man issue called "Maybe Next Year" (I forget the issue number) by Paul Jenkins. It's a fantastic Peter Parker and Uncle Ben story. It's my very favorite Spider-Man comic.

I wish Jenkins was writing ASM, or at least still on a Spidey title.:(

I'll see if I can find it. Sometimes stories where Peter isnt even doing anything that amazing or spectacular seem pretty entertaining to me. Not all the time, but every now and then its fun to see something other than the scariest villain eeeevverr.

[stillanerd]

10) He wears a classic Red & Blue costume. He may switch to an alternate for an issue or two, but he will always wear the Red & Blues. This is how it was in the beginning, and this is how it shall be in the end. There will always be other costumes for him to wear, but two things should be remembered when it comes to new costumes:

a) It will only be temporary...
b) it will neverreplace the Reb & Blues....for that is the costume that pops into our heads when we hear "Spider-man".

So, baring heavenly fire to carve these "10 Commandment of Spider-Man" who here knows anything about stone masonry? :)

[roach]

So, baring heavenly fire to carve these "10 Commandment of Spider-Man" who here knows anything about stone masonry? :)

I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night

[shinlyle]

I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night

Best.
Comedic.
Timing.
Ever.
:up:

[Gregatron]

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't Stan the man himself the one who first married MJ and Peter (in his newspaper strip I believe)? You can hardly say it goes against the character when the creator himself had it happen.

I do see where your arguement is coming from, but I've always seen the marriage as a good thing. I know a lot of people would probably lose interest if they disposed of MJ, including myself.

In regards to Joe Q...... wtf? I'm sure a lot more 9 year olds can understand the concept of marriage much better than what we've seen in The Other and all this Iron Spidey stuff. My ten year old brother is a perfect example; he loves comics, when he can get a hold of them, and also loves Spider-Man (and Iron Man for that matter). Yet even he finds the idea of Iron Man making Spidey a suit kind of dumb, and to be honest he thinks almost everything in the Marvel world is cool.

Stan wanted them married in the newspaper strip because the basis conceits of a newspaper strip would be easier to work with if Spidey had a wife/confidante.

But Jim Shooter insisted that they get married in the actual comics, too (as opposed to DeFalco/Frenz's "MJ leaves Peter at the altar" story that they'd been planning).

[Gregatron]

Spyder, I think you should realize you're arguin' with a guy who thinks a comic can't have at th' same time...let's see if I get this right:

Simple, basic entertainment.
Slavish devotion to continuity/details.
Respect for the characters' history.
Consistency of character and theme.
Innovation/change.

In his little world, it's one or none, which shows how limited his scope is.

Marriage doesn't steal from a character's core, it's a DEVELOPMENT. These are serialized dramas and over time things have to progress. You can't read th' same **** that was goin' on in 1962. "It's time for the spring formal, but will Peter Parker make his date on time or will he be...shattered by the Shocker?!"

That may work just fine in th' world of Riverdale, but Spidey is supposed to take place in th' real world. His popularity comes from his EVERYMAN appeal. Underneath that mask, he could be ANYONE. He had problems where heroes were all perfect. You say Spidey isn't supposed to be relatable...on what ****ing planet? THAT is th' whole core concept behind th' character. Yes, he started out as th' first teenaged superhero, but what kept th' fans was th' fact people could see his life and go "Hey! That could be me!" And guess what? In life, people get MARRIED.

Also, 1962? Really? Half this stuff today...no, screw today. Half th' stuff from th' 90s wouldn't've even made it past th' comics code. 1962 is a different era with different sensibilities. You CAN'T exchange th' two. Stan Lee's stuff was great back in 1962, but in 1994 you have Tom Defalco an' company. Again, progression. Evolution.

And this **** today is just that; ****. It's change fer th' sake of change 'cause these guys don't have a clue.

'Nuff said!


Okay, okay, I had low blood sugar the day I posted that poll. Leave it alone.

And you illuminate a problem. PETER PARKER is behind Spider-Man's mask. But today's readers/writers want THEMSELVES (and all their realistic problems) behind the mask.

[Gregatron]

I said recently in another thread:


Bringing back Ben with the notion: "Peter still learned that With.." diminishes Peter's origin and 40+ year history, making it no more important or significant than the following: Aunt May's [actress'] "death," the House of M universe, and/or any other gimmick or event story where the hero "carries with him" the after affects of things that happened, or lives lived, but not really.

It would be no different than the writers having Peter awaken the morning after the spider bite, having been shown the future that awaited him if he failed to use his spider-god given powers wisely. Peter still remembers that whole history, after all. He still knows all those lessons of life. Does it matter that is was all a dream? Does it matter if the entire Spider-Man mythos was a really long "What If" as long as there's a lasting impact?

Marvel is essentially telling us: "The history of these characters, the 2,000 stories before yesterday and the themes of the aforementioned no longer matter. All that matters is that you and the character[s] remember something like that occuring. Now, buy our repackaged, star-creator-customized characters and shut up."

Honestly, I've no emotions or money I'm willing invest in today's creator owned copies of Spider-Man and his cast. Spidey has been "fixed" so thoroughly and his world "rocked" and "torn apart" so completely that Marvel has, finally, accomplished a spectacular feat! After 20 years of following the life and adventures of Spider-Man, I no. longer. care.

Bringing Ben back permanently? Fine. Gwen's been living as a troll the last 10 years under GW bridge? Ok. MJ has cancer, A.I.D.S. and chronic arthritis? Sure. Spidey's outing himself as Peter Parker and the one TRUE Hobgoblin? There's somebody with a credit card and an "I heart Morlun" T-Shirt that'll pick up the trade. As for me, I've already seen, read, and plan to discuss the greatest Spider-Man stories ever written -- for years to come.

No amount of BS, baggage, pseudomysticism, necrophilia etc., can undo the spirit, worth or intent of those stories. Alex Ross' beautiful, and sadly necessary, rendition of Spider-Man protecting Gwen from ravenous hands represents a certain fact. The fact that thousands of us know and take to heart what Peter, Gwen and the mythos were and had actually been about for all those years. Its true themes. Readers like Captivated, who began collecting Spidey in more recent times, rather than as a 7 year old like myself, very clearly understand those things, as well. No amount of present day pomp and shoddy writing can undo the original intent and quality of those tales.

Marvel has a "screw you" attitude towards fans like us -- those who refuse to silently ignore the inherent contradictions in today's stories in light of the rich history that came before. Interestingly, I never see the writers articulating their "extremely valid" points and "solutions" for Spidey's "ills" on these forums. F.Y.I. JQ, JMS, PAD: screw your cheap, magical, soul-eating, molted side-kick, killer version of Spider-Man. I reject it. I reject your "creative" approaches and ability, and I reject your poorly plotted books. 'Nuff said.




If one man's trash is another man's treasure, Marvel will never go bankrupt again.


All that sounds just about right.

[stillanerd]

Stan wanted them married in the newspaper strip because the basis conceits of a newspaper strip would be easier to work with if Spidey had a wife/confidante.

But Jim Shooter insisted that they get married in the actual comics, too (as opposed to DeFalco/Frenz's "MJ leaves Peter at the altar" story that they'd been planning).

Well the idea is that if it MJ can be Peter's wife/confidante in the newspaper strip, why not in the comics and thus have a little cohesion? Even so, the whole "MJ leaves Peter at the altar" idea could've been done, but it just would've been a retread of what Marv Wolfman did, although I'm sure DeFlaco could've used that angle to have Peter and MJ take it slow for awhile to explore them trying to rebuild their relationship again, instead of the whole rushed feeling it had.

PETER: "MJ, I know I just had sex with the Black Cat. But once you showed up and caught me by surprise, I realize now your the one for me. What do you say we get married?
MJ: Ummm....

[Gregatron]

I'm just sticking around fer Civil War. Once that's over, Spidey go bye-bye.


Then Marvel wins again.

[Gregatron]

I read the article in my LCS and put back all my Marvel books....I cant believe this.
And for the person who believes Peter should still be 15 fighting crime...Welcome to the Hype J.Q.
Sorry but I like it when people grow up. When Robin became Nightwing, when Wally became the Flash...these were moments when the hero grew up.
Peter marrying MJ was a natural progression of the story. This is the one thing that truely makes Peter "real" for me. Real people grow up and get married.

SUPERHEROES are not real people.

The are mythic, timeless fiction.

[Gregatron]

How is he an everyman?

Peter Parker is a genius, an orphan, obsessed with doing the right thing, and consistently suffers from depression and anxiety. Considering how the majority of posters here act toward others who express depressed and anxious feelings and those who ask for help, they are unequivocally not in any way as moral as Peter Parker (we're not talking risking lives, we're talking about common decency and compassion) and they can't seem to relate with psychologically troubled people. People here don't seem to like people that complain. Parker complained constantly. It's no wonder there are so few real Spider-Man fans around here.

The "everyman" argument has always been completely invalid. There's absolutely nothing to back it up, and if anything, Quesada is trying to move things toward making Peter into an everyman. In other words, Peter should not be an everyman, but rather the way he was written toward the beginning of his career.

:wolverine


Exactly.

And remember, Sam Raimi gave Peter organic web-shooters in the movies because HE, RAIMI HIMSELF, was not smart enough to build devices like that at age 15.

[roach]

SUPERHEROES are not real people.

The are mythic, timeless fiction.

yet if you want the character to seem like he is one of us then he needs to grow. People grow in fiction all the time.
Luke Skywalker goes from farm boy to Jedi master
Buffy goes from cheerleader into master vampire hunter

[Gregatron]

You know, your not quite as in the right as you constantly seem to think, (but I'm only pointing out this simple fact.)

Stan Lee has always been the man to age Spider-Man, that's one of the main things he always intended to push forward.

Of course, Stan made the change for everything to slow down, but in the 80's, Stan was the one to marry Pete to MJ in the Spidey newspaper strip. This proved so popular, they married him off in the comics too.

Also, this mess you keep talking about doesn't really exist. There was no mess, until this totem thing, sins past, boring stories, new avengers thing, lack of supporting cast, blah, blah, happened. It wasn't that long ago that Spidey was experiencing another one of his heydays. Paul Jenkins was great, and proved very popular. JMS, at first was superb, and injected new life into Spidey, (at first,) and the debut of SSM got tons of people talking, and the Millar's run of MKSM was a hell of a lot of fun, and had great sales. They turned all the s**t of the clone saga around, and made Spider-Man a popular franchise again! This is fact.

Spidey WAS in the right path after the clone saga. The early Jenkins/JMS issues are still wildly popular. They WERE considers saviours after the clone saga.

and before the clone saga things were great, Spider-Man reached one of the all time highs of his popularity in the late 80's/early 90's. His books surpassed all sales of Batman and the X-Men, during the time where X-Men was gold, Burtons Batman was in cinemas, and DKR and Batman: Year One was all the rage.

So maybe YOUR fave era was the college years, but to MILLIONS of people around the world, Spidey stories were much more interesting afterwards. Spideys all time best sales were AFTER he married MJ. And when I say sales, I mean what percentage he takes of the comic market as a whole. We all know comics don't sell like they did in the early 90's! lol

So we had a great high during the 80's, which went on until the Clone Saga. And then there was a great high JUST after the turn of the century, and 5 years later, it's gone to s**t again. The problem is, what writers are doing now, they're NOT leaving 'back doors,' to the storylines. Leaving no easy retcon for some SERIOUSLY controversial storylines. This is stupid, if you know you''re onto gold, that's different. If you know, that there is a LARGE chance a story may backfire, you leave a back door. There were tons of back doors with the clone saga, that's how Spidei survived it fairly easily


Even Stan made mistakes, largely because he underestimated the longevity of the characters.

The first strss marks appeared when Peter went to college. Then Gwen died, and that created a major "aging tentpole" moment in Spider-history that writer after writer would refer to. The marriage ground out many aspects of Spidey's originality/popularity, and aged him even more, and the Clone Saga mucked about with continuity badly.

Now, that said, there were still fantastic stories told throughout the years.

But the Clone Saga was, perhaps, the point of no return.

And the "saviors" turned out to be the ones to completely bury and defile the mythos, perhaps permanently.

[dan1]

If Spider-Man comics were not the alternative-continuity, piss on the past hooey that they have become under JMS and JoeQ, and Marvel decided to kill MJ off, without telling you it was going to possibly happen, it would piss off 1/2 the freaking fans......

BUT....We'd all have to accept it and move on and see what would happen next.

Fact is JMS and JoeQ have mistreated Spider-Man comics and its fans so poorly, that killing MJ or even these two getting to be the ones to break them up, is uncalled for and is only being done as another shock value tactic for more sales and another notch on their belt for most major changes to Spider-Man. If they had put ANY effort into upholding continuity, and that means not only the timeline, but the characters personality growth, supporting cast, etc, etc. then maybe a major life altering event of theirs' would become a classic, but we know better now, don't we? And that's not really a question.

These two pudding heads have done enough. Is anyone at Marvel, worth their salt, going to do something about this?

[Gregatron]

Well, that may be your opinion, but read ANY interview, watch AND documentary, or ANY books studying the cases and philosophies on comic books as an art form, and that's what Spider-Man has always been noted as, the super-hero worlds' everyman

Stan Lee himself has always said, that he tried to make Spidey as REALISTIC as possible, as HUMANLY relatable a super hero comic could be, and to this day, he beieves that is the reason Spider-Man is still so popular. He wanted readers to think, hey! That's JUST like me! You have to accept the fact, that we are reading fiction on a fantastic level, so certain things need to be stretched for it to apply to the comic world. So a clever guy, a nerd, becomes a borderline genius, it makes sense otherwise how the hell is he supposed to save the city against Doc Ock! Lol It also gives something for people to aim towards

You may not think if him as an everyman, but millions of people around the world disagree with you, (2nd time I've said that in a row! Lol!) Sorry, that is just a fact, I have tons of books/articles/DVD's/and just general info I could throw you towards if you need to see


Spider-Man is "the superhero who could be you" in that he is a working-class joe who deals with real-life issues (like school, rent, and work).

But Peter Parker is just as mythic and heroic as any other superhero. He is us, and he is BETTER than us at the same time.

Yet these "fans" just keep coming along, wanting to drag him down to their level, morally, intellectually, etc.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Okay, I can forgive ya fer th' blood sugar thing.

And Marvel doesn't win, I'm interested in th' story. If I coulda bought all th' Infinite Crisis books I woulda, just so happens I already buy all th' Marvels so I can wait until CW is over before I begin to massacre my list.

[Gregatron]

Here's the definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=everyman) of "everyman."

Thus, I am right. That was much too easy.


Peter Parker is not an ordinary person. It's not my fault that all those people giving interviews and writing books didn't use the right word. I don't give a damn about what they have to say if they can't use the English language properly.

Yes, Stan Lee and Steve Ditko did create a "realistic" character in terms of psychology and behavior, but that does not make him an everyman. Not even close. What, you think there aren't real people who obsess over doing the right thing and suffer from the anxiety and self-pity that Spider-Man does? By the way, Stan Lee is also known to have said that he wrote his characters so that he would like them. Especially Spider-Man, since that last issue of 'Amazing Fantasy' was supposed to be his last story for Marvel (he was going to quit and he wrote it for himself, not because he thought it would sell).

Judging from all the people who insist that the movies were faithful representations of the comics, it's pretty obvious that they do not truly relate to the character. They seem to think that all there is to Spider-Man is a longing romance for Mary Jane, and even that wasn't true in the comics in any similar way to the movie. They didn't grow up together, it wasn't love at first sight, and he didn't spend all his time obsessing over her. Spider-Man was witty, self-aware of his flaws and inner conflicts, and an excellent character that intelligent people could fully appreciate. Here's a big newsflash for you: Stan Lee is smarter than most people on Earth. I don't need an IQ test to see that he's got very high verbal intelligence and that he understands tge practical aspects of human psychology. It's all right there in the early comics for the world to see. It's because people are too damn ignorant to both see the big picture and analyze the material critically that they support things like the watered-down, vapid version of Spider-Man in the movies and all of the events JQ and JMS have engineered that have brought us to this lowpoint in Spider-Man history. Further proof of this ignorance is that you all buy into this "everyman" crap. I have no doubt in my mind that if Stan Lee ever used that word to describe Spider-Man, he was either talking down (not in a malicious way) to the people who don't know how to use that word, or he's under the delusion that most people are as smart as he and Peter Parker (not in a scientific way, but the other types of intelligence he showed) are. Stan had and still has a magnificent vocabulary, so don't tell me he was as ignorant as the rest of these plebeians when it came to that.

Yes, Stan Lee can relate to him, and clearly lots of other people did as well. Here's another thing you may want to consider: Spider-Man is a character who appeals to lots of different people for lots of different reasons. You know how 'The Simpsons' appeals to smart people and idiots alike? That's because it works on different levels. Spider-Man is the same. Even if you can't keep up with the intellectual, psychological and philosophical content from those early days, he still makes some quips that even morons can understand and find funny, and he's one of the most dynamic action heroes ever. His combination of powers and gadgets are superior to other heroes, so as action comics go, Spider-Man is way up there. Different levels, different dimensions. That's what makes Spider-Man so popular and "relatable." I see proof on these boards every day that a huge chunk of so-called "fans" don't understand anything about Spider-Man other than "He does good things" and "He jumps real nice" and other such obvious, banal, puerile observations. No, nobody says those things in those words, but that's what they recognize. I don't give much credit to the intelligence and analytic prowess of most posters here, and I've proven right every single day with the thousands of empty platitudes "change is good," "it has to be 'realistic,'" "I have faith in Raimi," "JMS saved Spider-Man," and other such nonsense worthy of troglodytes.

Still reading? Here's hoping you understood most of it.


And don't bother calling me "arrogant" or "condescending." That's like saying I have a keyboard. Everyone knows it, and nobody is interested in hearing something that obvious.

:wolverine


Amen, mein Herr.


In terms of the movies, it seems as long as the characters have the same names as their comic book inspirations, but everything else is changed, then that's somehow "okay".


As I've said in the past, Spider-Man used to be the most well-defined character in comics, in terms of his morality, intellect, personality, etc.

Now, he's become fractured into so many versions, and has become so generic, that he's a total stranger to me.

[Infinity9999x]

well there's still Ultimate....:(

[Gregatron]

It all comes down to this:

Either Spider-Man is infinite or finite.


If he is infinite, then the initial conception of the character should last forever. He should remain eternally frozen in time (only topical reference will change), with nothing but that glorious core concept carrying him along, and only the illusion of change spicing things up from time to time. Readers go along with him for a few years, then grow up and move on to more "adult" entertainment (unless they can still enjoy the material without forgetting the conceits of the character and the genre). New readers then come aboard and experience the character just as the older readers left him. Spider-Man thus remains an immortal, eternal symbol of youth and vitality, one which generation after generation can enjoy.


If he is finite, on the other hand, then he will age and change and grow. He will learn life lessons. He will have major changes in his life. He will develop, and get married, and have kids, and eventually die. For, if he is indeed finite, if he is indeed truly "one of us", if he is someone who "must grow and change", then we must acknowledge the fact that there will be an end to his adventures in the future, as he ages and changes and dies.


In my opinion, those who insist, nay, demand that he (and other characters) be finite, those who demand he age and change, those who think writing for kids means "dumbing down" (juvenile fiction need not be childish or dumbed down, y'know), those who demand that fictional SUPERHEROES age and change and swear and have sex and kill, are living vicariously through comic books. They are trying to turn a product written in layers for all ages to enjoy into a product that will appeal to them, and only them, perhaps so that they will seem "sophisticated" to their peers, who would ordinarily laugh at them for reading "kiddie books". So they worship "professionals" who exhibit such "sophistication ("sophistication", which is, in fact, very immature and grotesque).

[roach]

It all comes down to this:

Either Spider-Man is infinite or finite.


If he is infinite, then the initial conception of the character should last forever. He should remain eternally frozen in time (only topical reference will change), with nothing but that glorious core concept carrying him along, and only the illusion of change spicing things up from time to time. Readers go along with him for a few years, then grow up and move on to more "adult" entertainment (unless they can still enjoy the material without forgetting the conceits of the character and the genre). New readers then come aboard and experience the character just as the older readers left him. Spider-Man thus remains an immortal, eternal symbol of youth and vitality, one which generation after generation can enjoy.


If he is finite, on the other hand, then he will age and change and grow. He will learn life lessons. He will have major changes in his life. He will develop, and get married, and have kids, and eventually die. For, if he is indeed finite, if he is indeed truly "one of us", if he is someone who "must grow and change", then we must acknowledge the fact that there will be an end to his adventures in the future, as he ages and changes and dies.


In my opinion, those who insist, nay, demand that he (and other characters) be finite, those who demand he age and change, those who think writing for kids means "dumbing down" (juvenile fiction need not be childish or dumbed down, y'know), those who demand that fictional SUPERHEROES age and change and swear and have sex and kill, are living vicariously through comic books. They are trying to turn a product written in layers for all ages to enjoy into a product that will appeal to them, and only them, perhaps so that they will seem "sophisticated" to their peers, who would ordinarily laugh at them for reading "kiddie books". So they worship "professionals" who exhibit such "sophistication ("sophistication", which is, in fact, very immature and grotesque).

is everything so black and white with you????

[stillanerd]

It all comes down to this:

Either Spider-Man is infinite or finite.


If he is infinite, then the initial conception of the character should last forever. He should remain eternally frozen in time (only topical reference will change), with nothing but that glorious core concept carrying him along, and only the illusion of change spicing things up from time to time. Readers go along with him for a few years, then grow up and move on to more "adult" entertainment (unless they can still enjoy the material without forgetting the conceits of the character and the genre). New readers then come aboard and experience the character just as the older readers left him. Spider-Man thus remains an immortal, eternal symbol of youth and vitality, one which generation after generation can enjoy.


If he is finite, on the other hand, then he will age and change and grow. He will learn life lessons. He will have major changes in his life. He will develop, and get married, and have kids, and eventually die. For, if he is indeed finite, if he is indeed truly "one of us", if he is someone who "must grow and change", then we must acknowledge the fact that there will be an end to his adventures in the future, as he ages and changes and dies.


In my opinion, those who insist, nay, demand that he (and other characters) be finite, those who demand he age and change, those who think writing for kids means "dumbing down" (juvenile fiction need not be childish or dumbed down, y'know), those who demand that fictional SUPERHEROES age and change and swear and have sex and kill, are living vicariously through comic books. They are trying to turn a product written in layers for all ages to enjoy into a product that will appeal to them, and only them, perhaps so that they will seem "sophisticated" to their peers, who would ordinarily laugh at them for reading "kiddie books". So they worship "professionals" who exhibit such "sophistication ("sophistication", which is, in fact, very immature and grotesque).

I believe it IS possible to have character development in comics, Gregatron, and would argue that Spider-Man was all about a teenage boy learning how to grow up into a man. And yes, marriage (and having kids) is a part of that process. However, that does not mean that Spider-Man has to be made into the equivalent of some HBO series. It is possible to have character development and deal with relevancy and still appeal to all ages, especially kids who the character is marketed to, considering all the merchandise is usually geared towards them.

But I definately agree with your stance regarding the attidute the some of the current crop of writers have towards comic books. Fact is, because they want to be seen as more than just a creator of "funny books" and instead be treated as "artists" that we end up with comics attempting to be "relevant" and as a result end up alienating the target audience. Sure grim n gritty attracted readers initially since it seemed different than the usual comic book superhero fare, but then the writers and editors went so overboard on it that, in the end, the only ones who seemed to stick around were the die-hard collectors and speculators while most readers walked away in disgust over the "earth shattering events" and "multi-part crossovers" as the prices for what essentially is nothing more than 32 pages of newsprint climbed. Sounds familair, don't you think?

Basically, as I've said before, Joe Q let success in terms of SALES regarding Marvel Knights, the Ultimate line, and the movies, as well as his restructing the Marvel Universe that he's become obessed with sales gimmicks and crossovers, not unlike Jim Shooter when he was EIC. And as a result, Joe Q is pulling the same stunts Marvel did back in the early 90s that help contribute to them almost becoming bankrupt. Hell, if there is any single proof that Joe Q and Tom Breevot are obessed with this decade, they've commissioned Rob Leifeld (along with Jeph Loeb) to revisit Heroes Reborn and Onslaught for it's tenth anniversary.

And yet we're supposed to believe that Quesada and JMS--the very guys who put Spidey in the current mess he's in--to somehow fix him to go back to the "Stan Lee days?" The same bunch that claimed the Other was going to be Spidey's new status quo, and now they've sort of said "Oops. Guess we spoke too soon on that one." So you can understand why I and most other posters here are a little skeptical.

[MaxCarnage]

It all comes down to this:

Either Spider-Man is infinite or finite.


If he is infinite, then the initial conception of the character should last forever. He should remain eternally frozen in time (only topical reference will change), with nothing but that glorious core concept carrying him along, and only the illusion of change spicing things up from time to time. Readers go along with him for a few years, then grow up and move on to more "adult" entertainment (unless they can still enjoy the material without forgetting the conceits of the character and the genre). New readers then come aboard and experience the character just as the older readers left him. Spider-Man thus remains an immortal, eternal symbol of youth and vitality, one which generation after generation can enjoy.


If he is finite, on the other hand, then he will age and change and grow. He will learn life lessons. He will have major changes in his life. He will develop, and get married, and have kids, and eventually die. For, if he is indeed finite, if he is indeed truly "one of us", if he is someone who "must grow and change", then we must acknowledge the fact that there will be an end to his adventures in the future, as he ages and changes and dies.


In my opinion, those who insist, nay, demand that he (and other characters) be finite, those who demand he age and change, those who think writing for kids means "dumbing down" (juvenile fiction need not be childish or dumbed down, y'know), those who demand that fictional SUPERHEROES age and change and swear and have sex and kill, are living vicariously through comic books. They are trying to turn a product written in layers for all ages to enjoy into a product that will appeal to them, and only them, perhaps so that they will seem "sophisticated" to their peers, who would ordinarily laugh at them for reading "kiddie books". So they worship "professionals" who exhibit such "sophistication ("sophistication", which is, in fact, very immature and grotesque).

The fact that the Ultimate universe exists proves that you're wrong. Spider-Man can grow up and evolve into a fully-realized, three dimensional character while existing in other forms as the teen many remember him to be. I am 24; I got into Spider-Man after he was grown-up and really after he was married (before the Clone Saga). I still enjoyed him and I believe that I still understood his core concepts.

And people who use 'nay' in everyday conversations should be banned. ;)

[Gregatron]

I believe it IS possible to have character development in comics, Gregatron, and would argue that Spider-Man was all about a teenage boy learning how to grow up into a man. And yes, marriage (and having kids) is a part of that process. However, that does not mean that Spider-Man has to be made into the equivalent of some HBO series. It is possible to have character development and deal with relevancy and still appeal to all ages, especially kids who the character is marketed to, considering all the merchandise is usually geared towards them.

But I definately agree with your stance regarding the attidute the some of the current crop of writers have towards comic books. Fact is, because they want to be seen as more than just a creator of "funny books" and instead be treated as "artists" that we end up with comics attempting to be "relevant" and as a result end up alienating the target audience. Sure grim n gritty attracted readers initially since it seemed different than the usual comic book superhero fare, but then the writers and editors went so overboard on it that, in the end, the only ones who seemed to stick around were the die-hard collectors and speculators while most readers walked away in disgust over the "earth shattering events" and "multi-part crossovers" as the prices for what essentially is nothing more than 32 pages of newsprint climbed. Sounds familair, don't you think?

Basically, as I've said before, Joe Q let success in terms of SALES regarding Marvel Knights, the Ultimate line, and the movies, as well as his restructing the Marvel Universe that he's become obessed with sales gimmicks and crossovers, not unlike Jim Shooter when he was EIC. And as a result, Joe Q is pulling the same stunts Marvel did back in the early 90s that help contribute to them almost becoming bankrupt. Hell, if there is any single proof that Joe Q and Tom Breevot are obessed with this decade, they've commissioned Rob Leifeld (along with Jeph Loeb) to revisit Heroes Reborn and Onslaught for it's tenth anniversary.

And yet we're supposed to believe that Quesada and JMS--the very guys who put Spidey in the current mess he's in--to somehow fix him to go back to the "Stan Lee days?" The same bunch that claimed the Other was going to be Spidey's new status quo, and now they've sort of said "Oops. Guess we spoke too soon on that one." So you can understand why I and most other posters here are a little skeptical.


"Those who forget history..."


Anyway, change can be dangerous. Bad changes can stick forever. Spider-Man should alway be about the journey to adulthood/responsibility.

The nature of the comic medium sorta demands that, if longevity is to be maintained, then things go back to the status quo all the time, with only the ILLUSION that the hero learned a big, important lesson in his latest story.

[Gregatron]

The fact that the Ultimate universe exists proves that you're wrong. Spider-Man can grow up and evolve into a fully-realized, three dimensional character while existing in other forms as the teen many remember him to be. I am 24; I got into Spider-Man after he was grown-up and really after he was married (before the Clone Saga). I still enjoyed him and I believe that I still understood his core concepts.

And people who use 'nay' in everyday conversations should be banned. ;)


Thor will smite thee for thine insolence.


And I think one who feels that Spider-Man being married is great does not understand the core concepts of the character. But then, that character seems to be dead, so I guess it's fine for the Guy Posing As Spider-Man today.

And anyone who thinks that Spider-Man wasn't a fully-realized, three-dimensional character before he got married is a fool.

[roach]

Thor will smite thee for thine insolence.


And I think one who feels that Spider-Man being married is great does not understand the core concepts of the character. But then, that character seems to be dead, so I guess it's fine for the Guy Posing As Spider-Man today.

And anyone who thinks that Spider-Man wasn't a fully-realized, three-dimensional character before he got married is a fool.


actually I am beginning to think you dont understand the core concepts of the character. It seems to me that the only way you'll be happy is if Marvel just reprinted the old back issues and claim them to be new.

[Gregatron]

I've said it before, I'll say it again: Why change a winning formula?

But, then, I've been proven right by recent events. "New Coke" hasn't exactly been a stellar success, eh?


Oh, wait. If I don't like it, I can alway read Ultimate, or read Marvel Adventures, or watch the movies, or play the video games, or read the novels.


Except, none of those are Spider-Man.





This is not Spider-Man:

http://comicsmedia.ign.com/comics/image/article/680/680863/spider-man-20060111050340080-000.jpg


This is not Spider-Man:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2d/Movie_poster_spiderman_2.jpg/200px-Movie_poster_spiderman_2.jpg


This is not Spider-Man:

http://www.fumettopoli.net/gadgets/images/poster/ultimate%20spiderman.jpg


This is not Spider-Man:

http://loloracaud.free.fr/vo/marvelagespiderman/1.jpg





THIS IS Spider-Man:

http://g.courtial.free.fr/spiderman_af15.jpg


THIS is Spider-Man:

http://www5c.biglobe.ne.jp/~spa-girl/63148548/5cspa-girl3f95755e28da6.jpg



THIS is Spider-Man:

http://www.ditko.comics.org/ditko/covers/marvel/asm038.jpg



THIS is Spider-Man:

http://www.splashcomics.de/images/specials/40jahre_spider-man/amazing_spider-man_vol1_050.jpg



THIS is Spider-Man:

http://images.heritagecoin.com/images/HNAI/75/818/818032027r.jpg

[Gregatron]

actually I am beginning to think you dont understand the core concepts of the character. It seems to me that the only way you'll be happy is if Marvel just reprinted the old back issues and claim them to be new.


That might actually be a start.

[MaxCarnage]

Thor will smite thee for thine insolence.


And I think one who feels that Spider-Man being married is great does not understand the core concepts of the character. But then, that character seems to be dead, so I guess it's fine for the Guy Posing As Spider-Man today.

And anyone who thinks that Spider-Man wasn't a fully-realized, three-dimensional character before he got married is a fool.

Getting married didn't do that by itself; it was a part of the evolution of Peter Parker's character. Everything that's occured since Amazing #15 has contributed to it, but his aging and becoming a man have continued to add to his depth.

There's nothing wrong with a character growing. The comics industry has proven that a character can grow old and then be "rebooted" for the next generation.

[roach]

That might actually be a start.

then there would never be new spiderman comics...by your logic only Lee and Ditko could write the character

[Gregatron]

Getting married didn't do that by itself; it was a part of the evolution of Peter Parker's character. Everything that's occured since Amazing #15 has contributed to it, but his aging and becoming a man have continued to add to his depth.

There's nothing wrong with a character growing. The comics industry has proven that a character can grow old and then be "rebooted" for the next generation.


Yet it seems that everytime they're rebooted, readers drop away.


What can't a character be evergreen?

Why does the formula have to be mucked up?

Why does a character NEED to be "rebooted"?


As the old saying goes, Marvel doesn't (or make that "didn't) need to reboot their characters. They got their characters right the first time.

[Gregatron]

then there would never be new spiderman comics...by your logic only Lee and Ditko could write the character


Everyone who would prefer even reprints to what's currently going on today, raise their hands.

[roach]

when something stays the same and doesnt change it's called being stagnant
name a character that has been sucessful that has remain as is

[gildea]

I kinda agree with gregatron.

Change generally only works in comics if it is over a short term basis.

Sometimes however changes do happen that stick, the spider wedding rightly or wrongly is one of them.

I do agree though that aging characters can damage them significantly and that the problem as greg cites is that comics characters of spidey's ilk have an infinite time horizon which means significant changes have to be limited.

[Gregatron]

when something stays the same and doesnt change it's called being stagnant
name a character that has been sucessful that has remain as is


Batman, for one, particularly from 1941 or so (after the bugs had been worked out) to around 1965.

You know, back when readers knew when to quit, didn't demand growth and change, didn't ask why Robin didn't age, and when sales topped 1 million copies per issue.


Something only becomes stagnant when you stay with it too long. To anyone just coming in, it's called "new" and "fun".

[Gregatron]

I kinda agree with gregatron.

Change generally only works in comics if it is over a short term basis.

Sometimes however changes do happen that stick, the spider wedding rightly or wrongly is one of them.

I do agree though that aging characters can damage them significantly and that the problem as greg cites is that comics characters of spidey's ilk have an infinite time horizon which means significant changes have to be limited.


To survive, these characters must be perpetual and, by their very nature, self-renewing.

That does not mean locking them onto a single track of instability and "growth" until they whither and die.

[gildea]

To survive, these characters must be perpetual and, by their very nature, self-renewing.

That does not mean locking them onto a single track of instability and "growth" until they whither and die.


whilst I agree in principal with you would you conceed in practice it is extremely hard to avoid 'growth' by accident or design?
Also given the current climate of the comic book market sales may demand growth to satisfy the small audience.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

You know, I love it...people hate things that become forumlaic 'cause everything's th' same...but now, in this here thread, we got people demandin' a formulaic approach.

Wise-up...formulas are DULL. You read th' same **** forever yer gonna get BORED. Change is not bad, people. Not at all. Change fer th' sake of change, however, is.

[gildea]

i think it's more change to the concept of the character that is debated rather than change itself.

[Herr Logan]

Yeah, Herr, I liked th' Clone Saga. I even started a thread. That was more sarcasm mixed with a serious answer.

And you need to get a life 'cause only a complete and utter pig-****er would go look up a dictionary definition then write a novel about why THEY'RE right, instead of maybe pointin' out how people may be MISTAKEN. I left it at that 'cause you said it; people know yer a moronic *******, so was no reason to go back into it. But if a novel-sized response is all yer receptive too, then fine...I'll elaborate. Yer views have no merit 'cause yer a self-serving egomaniac and frankly, people rather laugh at you than consider takin' you seriously. Drop th' holier than thou attitude and MAYBE people will give a **** what you think. And th' best part is, you probably don't even REALIZE it!

Lose th' arrogance, pal. Yer **** stinks like everyone else's.

Feel better? Done stamping your feet and shaking your fist?

Look back at the statement in bold and then look back at my "novel" (see the noun definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=novel) for "novel" and notice how you, yet again, use words you don't understand). Did you somehow fail to understand that I know I'm arrogant? I guess I wasn't clear enough earlier. Hopefully reading this will get the point across: I REALIZE IT!

So basically all you have to say for yourself-- in your "novel" length post-- is that I'm a bunch of words that the filter bleeps out (very creative and mature of you, by the way) and that I'm arrogant (which I already indicated the last time I chose to speak to you). Very nice. :up:

Did it ever occur to you that I don't need or even want everyone here to "take [me] seriously?" As long as the decent, intelligent posters can make a connection with me, that's all I need. It makes me uncomfortable when ignorant and petty people respect me. If people are lauging at me, then my presence is a boon in itself, since laughter is the best medicine. Speaking of which, thank you, sir, for the laughs you've given me today.
That said, you go right ahead hating this arrogant *******. God knows it's easier than actually learning definitions of the words you use or saying something that engenders critical thinking.

Love,

~Your Friendly Neighborhood Pig-****er

:wolverine

[Gregatron]

i think it's more change to the concept of the character that is debated rather than change itself.


Changing window dressing= Good.

Blowing core concepts to atoms= Bad.


Examples of good "window dressing changes that don't actually change anything":


Reed Richards and Sue Storm getting married (their relationship and the group dynamic of the FF didn't change a whit).

Thor growing a beard.

Spider-Man gaining/losing supporting cast members.

New characters being introduced.

The FF going from blue-and-black to black-and-white costumes.

Iron Man tinkering with the look of his armor.

The Avengers moving into new headquarters for a time.

Jonah Jameson stepping down as editor-in-chief of the Bugle.

[Gregatron]

Y'know I think the anger, irrationality, and bitterness that has spread throughout this thread is the result of everyone contracting the madness afflicting Marvel. It seems their admission that they need to "fix" things has infected the thread with a particularly virulent strain of madness.

[The Infernal]

Someone here said that Spider-man lacks a supporting cast, which to an extent they have attempted to remedy with other superheroes but that doesn't work. For one thing they are all stars of their own comics and not appropriate to play second fiddle all the time and secondly having all superheroes is one sided as Peter needs more than MJ and Aunt May in his life.

Though many would disagree I would argue bringing back Harry. I don't know exactly the circumstances surrounding his death but from what I've read about it, I think it wouldn't be too unbelievable considering Norman came back. Though since it's been so ingrained in everyone they may treat it similar to Uncle Ben being brought back. To me Uncle Ben and Gwen shouldn't ever come back.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Well, Pig-****er, if you were REALLY as intelligent as you CLAIM to be, you'd've noticed I acknowledged you said yer an *******, and noticed that last jab was towards th' fact yer clueless to how yer viewed. Which only shows how dumb a **** you really are.

A flashy vocabulary don't make you "intelligent", bunky. Methinks you need to reconsult yer dictionaries and learn what does.

[Gregatron]

Someone here said that Spider-man lacks a supporting cast, which to an extent they have attempted to remedy with other superheroes but that doesn't work. For one thing they are all stars of their own comics and not appropriate to play second fiddle all the time and secondly having all superheroes is one sided as Peter needs more than MJ and Aunt May in his life.

Though many would disagree I would argue bringing back Harry. I don't know exactly the circumstances surrounding his death but from what I've read about it, I think it wouldn't be too unbelievable considering Norman came back. Though since it's been so ingrained in everyone they may treat it similar to Uncle Ben being brought back. To me Uncle Ben and Gwen shouldn't ever come back.


Peter Parker's supporting cast consists of the people in his life: friends, family, co-workers.

Spider-Man has no supporting cast. He is a loner, and prefers it that way.

[roach]

Batman, for one, particularly from 1941 or so (after the bugs had been worked out) to around 1965.

You know, back when readers knew when to quit, didn't demand growth and change, didn't ask why Robin didn't age, and when sales topped 1 million copies per issue.


Something only becomes stagnant when you stay with it too long. To anyone just coming in, it's called "new" and "fun".


Batman LMAO
Batman who was killing criminals or the Batman who wore multicolored batsuits and cruised the universe.

[Gregatron]

Well, Pig-****er, if you were REALLY as intelligent as you CLAIM to be, you'd've noticed I acknowledged you said yer an *******, and noticed that last jab was towards th' fact yer clueless to how yer viewed. Which only shows how dumb a **** you really are.

A flashy vocabulary don't make you "intelligent", bunky. Methinks you need to reconsult yer dictionaries and learn what does.


Intelligence is the ability to acquire and apply knowledge/information.

Herr Logan has demonstrated this ability.

[gildea]

Spider-Man has no supporting cast. He is a loner, and prefers it that way.

disagree.
Black cat, human torch, curt conners, capt stacy & jean de wolfe (when they were with us), jjj and robbie also count for spidey as well as peter.

Spider-man is a loner but he is not alone. In fact concept wise you could make a case for him having a larger cast than peter. Pete after all was the wallflower who transformed himself into an outgoing wise cracking and charming hero.

[roach]

You know, back when readers knew when to quit


and when should readers quit reading comics????

[Gregatron]

Batman LMAO
Batman who was killing criminals or the Batman who wore multicolored batsuits and cruised the universe.


The Batman who killed was dropped early on (after the bugs were worked out, as I said). Rainbow costumes and aliens were WINDOW DRESSING. In all those years, Batman was still BATMAN, and acted like Batman.

[roach]

The Batman who killed was dropped early on (after the bugs were worked out, as I said). Rainbow costumes and aliens were WINDOW DRESSING. In all those years, Batman was still BATMAN, and acted like Batman.


But that is the Batman that Kane and Finger created...everything other than that is a change to the character and character change is bad right????

[Gregatron]

and when should readers quit reading comics????


When they:

A. Stop loving the characters (if they ever did) by insisting they become something they're not;

B. Stop understanding the unspoken conceits of the genre and start applying absurd mathematical formulas to break comics down into "Marvel-Time", and such;

C. Forget who the target audience for these books is;

D. Become selfish, argumentative trolls who wonder about superheroes' sex lives, and think swearing is "sophisticated.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Sorry, Batman's always been dark and brooding? Does that mean th' happy talkin' Batman of th' 60s with th' bright blue costume was just a fluke?

[Herr Logan]

Exactly.

And remember, Sam Raimi gave Peter organic web-shooters in the movies because HE, RAIMI HIMSELF, was not smart enough to build devices like that at age 15.

He didn't say it in those words, did he?

All I know is, all the non-comic fans I've talked to about the organic webshooters have said that it's no more realistic than mechanical ones.
Talk about "relatability," who the hell can relate to shooting super-strong protein strands out of their damn wrists??

The only problem I would have with the mechanical webshooters in a live-action movie is that you would have to show the web-shooters (which don't have to be bulky, but they are noticable) on his wrists, and a utility belt on his waist.
Still, it's just a minor annoyance, and I wouldn't even consider just writing them out completely. For appearance's sake, have him paint the web-shooters and belt red and maybe paint some thin black web-lines on them so they blend in better.
The other option is to do what they do in the comics and cartoons and just not have them shown when he's fully in costume, but effects-wise, he can still shoot webs. That, however, would be blatant cheating, and I'd rather do it with the props just so the anti-source material people won't have one more excuse to complain that it's "unrealistic." Red web-shooters are fine, and they're necessary for a faithful Spider-Man. Are they more important than getting the personality right? No, but then again, they didn't get that right, either, and only people who didn't read the comics or did read and are just shallow and easily influence think they did.

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

PETER: "MJ, I know I just had sex with the Black Cat. But once you showed up and caught me by surprise, I realize now your the one for me. What do you say we get married?
MJ: Ummm....

Hahahahahah! :D

:wolverine

[Gregatron]

But that is the Batman that Kane and Finger created...everything other than that is a change to the character and character change is bad right????


Sigh. Different strokes for different folks (and characters).

Some characters take a little while to perfect. Batman killing was one of the VERY few elements that was changed early on. Other than that, his essential character was established within 6 issues.

Spider-Man, on the other hand, was 99.9% defined in his first appearance. All that was missing then was his location (New York), his job, and members of his supporting cast and rogue's gallery.

[Herr Logan]

Wrong.
Wrong.
Wrong.

Herr Logan is a hot-headed prick, but he's a good friend, too. I've not always been on the same side of the argument as he is, but he's always been cordial and respective of my opinion and those with whom he is debating, so long as their attitudes and responses warrant him to be so. He's a good guy, and I've not seen him be anything but playfully offensive with you. He hasn't been as mean as he can be to you. He often reserves that for those who don't feel the same way as he does. You are actually on the same side of the argument (wanting Spidey back to the way he was), but you're letting a minuscule and irrelevant point turn this thread, which WAS civil, into a flame war.

When people make mistakes, he corrects them. I often do the same, and I am certain that I have had posters on these boards leave responses about me similar to the one you just made about HL. I just didn't see anything in the past few pages of this thread that required this harsh of a response from you, man.

That being said, I'll stand back and let Herr Logan have his way with you, as I'm sure he's probably posted a response while I was typing mine.

I just hate watching people that I consider to be friends tear each other apart.
I...I... I just can't stop blushing! I don't know what to say. :O


Thanks a lot, Shinlyle. :)

:wolverine

[Gregatron]

Sorry, Batman's always been dark and brooding? Does that mean th' happy talkin' Batman of th' 60s with th' bright blue costume was just a fluke?

Batman didn't become dark and brooding until Frank Miller came along.

Before that, he was a well-adusted, albeit mysterious, swashbuckler devoted to justice.

It's only because he broke his vow in Dark Knight that he became a "psycho". Unfortunately, the mainstream DCU picked up on that (without understanding it).

[Gregatron]

He didn't say it in those words, did he?

All I know is, all the non-comic fans I've talked to about the organic webshooters have said that it's no more realistic than mechanical ones.
Talk about "relatability," who the hell can relate to shooting super-strong protein strands out of their damn wrists??

The only problem I would have with the mechanical webshooters in a live-action movie is that you would have to show the web-shooters (which don't have to be bulky, but they are noticable) on his wrists, and a utility belt on his waist.
Still, it's just a minor annoyance, and I wouldn't even consider just writing them out completely. For appearance's sake, have him paint the web-shooters and belt red and maybe paint some thin black web-lines on them so they blend in better.
The other option is to do what they do in the comics and cartoons and just not have them shown when he's fully in costume, but effects-wise, he can still shoot webs. That, however, would be blatant cheating, and I'd rather do it with the props just so the anti-source material people won't have one more excuse to complain that it's "unrealistic." Red web-shooters are fine, and they're necessary for a faithful Spider-Man. Are they more important than getting the personality right? No, but then again, they didn't get that right, either, and only people who didn't read the comics or did read and are just shallow and easily influence think they did.

:wolverine



Excerpt from my essay (link in sig):

And speaking of the organic webs...they don't work. They are stupid. They are a clunky attempt to make an inherently fantastic character more "realistic" (By, amazingly enough, making him even more *unrealistic*!).

Spider-Man's costume, powers, and equipment have remained basically the same for some 40 years. Because they work. Because they are PERFECT. The web-shooters were an ingenious, elegant solution to a problem Stan Lee and Steve Ditko had back in 1962: If they had given Spider-Man organic web-shooters, he would have been perceived as even creepier than he already was (Remember, Lee's publisher, Martin Goodman, predicted that Spider-Man would fail because most people hate spiders and think they're disgusting and frightening.).

The web-shooters also serve a thematic purpose in the origin story in Amazing Fantasy # 15. When the shy-but-brilliant Peter Parker gains super-powers, his buried creativity (and ego) are unleashed. He ultilizes his underappreciated genuis to come up with a stage name, design and create a flashy costume, and build web-shooting devices ALL ON HIS OWN, with no outside help or inspiration. Because that's who Peter Parker is!


Compare that to the Peter Parker of Ultimate Spider-Man, who was given the costume for his wrestling job (he only added the web-pattern and spider symbols), and whose late father invented the web-fluid formula, which Peter perfected.


Compare that to the Peter Parker of the Spider-Man movies, in which the web-shooters are a natural part of his super-powers, in which the name "Spider-Man" comes from an outside source, and in which the Spider-Man costume pops up with NO EXPLANATION whatsoever (We saw Peter's first homemade costume in the wrestling ring, and it was pathetic.). Maybe he got the ornately detailed costume--which cost $100,000 to make in real life--from a costume shop? Yeah, that's it. Sure.


In the 1990s, writer-director James Cameron was attached to the troubled development of the first Spider-Man movie. In a story treatment he wrote, Cameron gave Peter Parker organic web-shooters, using them as a not-so-subtle metaphor for adolescent development (In the treatment, Peter awoke one morning covered in sticky white webbing. That's right. He had a..."web dream". Ahem.).

When director Sam Raimi was attached to the project, he decided to keep this concept in his Spider-Man film. Raimi stated in interviews that it made sense because it would give Peter one more thing to be ashamed about. Huh? In the original origin story, Peter is enamored of his powers, and doesn't at all feel like a freak.

Anyway, more importantly, Raimi chose to keep the organic webs because he, Raimi himself, could not have invented web-shooters and web-fluid when he was Peter Parker's age.

Let me repeat that.

He said that Spider-Man would have organic web-shooters in the movie because he, *Raimi*, could not have invented mechanical web-shooters at age 16.

*Ahem*. As established in the comics, Peter Parker is a scientific genius. He's just stuck in a crappy local high school because of his family's financial situation, and can't become a scientist because he's just too darn busy trying to make ends meet while also being Spider-Man. The guy in the Spider-Man movies ain't Spider-Man! He's just a regular teen who happened to win a science scholarship (and who also whipped up a $100,000 costume with no explanation...).

From an interview with Raimi:

RAIMI: "The main reason was, it was an idea that James Cameron came up with in a treatment. It was just a subtle riff on Stan Lee's original concept anyways, whether he shoots web mechanically or organic. Finally, in a nutshell, the strength of the movie was always going to be for us, as it was in Stan Lee's comics, was Peter Parker is one of us. It's what made Spider-Man a unique story, a unique superhero. He's a kid like us. We soar with him when he becomes this hero. So, we decided to do everything we could to keep that concept alive and real and potent to the audience. We wanted him to be someone we really identified with, so that when it came time to talk about the story aspect where he could create the web-shooters and have the technological ability to create such a mechanical device in his little Queens bedroom and have the ability of a chemical engineer to the degree that he could create this incredible substance that doesn't really exist in our world, we felt that Cameron's idea would be better for the movie. I'm not saying for the comics. I love Stan Lee's idea, but for the movie, to make him a real person, to stick to that theme and stick with it through the course of the picture, we felt that was a change we had to make."


The classic Peter Parker of the comic books may be the "Everyman's Super-Hero", but he's also larger than life at the same time. He is US (the everyman who has to deal with work, school, and girls), and he is also BETTER than us in many ways (his intelligence, his moral drive, his compassion). This unique dichotomy gives us both a hero we can see ourselves in AND look up to at the same time.


Anyway, in Spider-Man 2, at least, Peter's intellect is given more focus. Yet, how come he can talk about the highly technical details of a cold-fusion reactor with Dr. Otto Octavius (which no normal college student would be able to comprehend), yet NOT be "smart enough" to build mechanical web-shooters? Sheesh.

It's called "suspension of disbelief", people!

[roach]

Sigh. Different strokes for different folks (and characters).

Some characters take a little while to perfect. Batman killing was one of the VERY few elements that was changed early on. Other than that, his essential character was established within 6 issues.

Spider-Man, on the other hand, was 99.9% defined in his first appearance. All that was missing then was his location (New York), his job, and members of his supporting cast and rogue's gallery.


that is quite hypocritical of you. Change is good for one character but not for another.

In the first 6 issues he wasnt a detective

[The Infernal]

Peter Parker's supporting cast consists of the people in his life: friends, family, co-workers.

Spider-Man has no supporting cast. He is a loner, and prefers it that way.

Yes, but Peter's supporting cast depending on the particular title or time can be few. I mean Flash only 'just' got out of his coma, I haven't seen Betty Brant in a bit, JJJ doesn't turn up as much as he does. I think they tried introducing Peter's workmates as supporting cast but we have't seen much of them either or his neighbours. I remember seeing them quite a bit when Liz Osborne was taking care of Flash, now she's gone too. It's just that for a while now it's simply been MJ and Aunt May.

As for his role as Spider-man I'd have to say that's innacurate. Though he has been a loner for quite some time in the way he operates and even with the NA he finds the time to do his own thing, but he has had supporting cast before. For instance Black Cat and on lesser occasions (which are way more frequent now he's a NA), team-ups with other heroes. Though there are certain heroes he's known for being more friendly with such as Johnny Storm and Dare Devil.

Though you view him that I way I just think of him differently. He may have been a loner in some respects but he still has to grow up.

[roach]

Excerpt from my essay (link in sig):

And speaking of the organic webs...they don't work. They are stupid. They are a clunky attempt to make an inherently fantastic character more "realistic" (By, amazingly enough, making him even more *unrealistic*!).

Spider-Man's costume, powers, and equipment have remained basically the same for some 40 years. Because they work. Because they are PERFECT. The web-shooters were an ingenious, elegant solution to a problem Stan Lee and Steve Ditko had back in 1962: If they had given Spider-Man organic web-shooters, he would have been perceived as even creepier than he already was (Remember, Lee's publisher, Martin Goodman, predicted that Spider-Man would fail because most people hate spiders and think they're disgusting and frightening.).

The web-shooters also serve a thematic purpose in the origin story in Amazing Fantasy # 15. When the shy-but-brilliant Peter Parker gains super-powers, his buried creativity (and ego) are unleashed. He ultilizes his underappreciated genuis to come up with a stage name, design and create a flashy costume, and build web-shooting devices ALL ON HIS OWN, with no outside help or inspiration. Because that's who Peter Parker is!


Compare that to the Peter Parker of Ultimate Spider-Man, who was given the costume for his wrestling job (he only added the web-pattern and spider symbols), and whose late father invented the web-fluid formula, which Peter perfected.


Compare that to the Peter Parker of the Spider-Man movies, in which the web-shooters are a natural part of his super-powers, in which the name "Spider-Man" comes from an outside source, and in which the Spider-Man costume pops up with NO EXPLANATION whatsoever (We saw Peter's first homemade costume in the wrestling ring, and it was pathetic.). Maybe he got the ornately detailed costume--which cost $100,000 to make in real life--from a costume shop? Yeah, that's it. Sure.


In the 1990s, writer-director James Cameron was attached to the troubled development of the first Spider-Man movie. In a story treatment he wrote, Cameron gave Peter Parker organic web-shooters, using them as a not-so-subtle metaphor for adolescent development (In the treatment, Peter awoke one morning covered in sticky white webbing. That's right. He had a..."web dream". Ahem.).

When director Sam Raimi was attached to the project, he decided to keep this concept in his Spider-Man film. Raimi stated in interviews that it made sense because it would give Peter one more thing to be ashamed about. Huh? In the original origin story, Peter is enamored of his powers, and doesn't at all feel like a freak.

Anyway, more importantly, Raimi chose to keep the organic webs because he, Raimi himself, could not have invented web-shooters and web-fluid when he was Peter Parker's age.

Let me repeat that.

He said that Spider-Man would have organic web-shooters in the movie because he, *Raimi*, could not have invented mechanical web-shooters at age 16.

*Ahem*. As established in the comics, Peter Parker is a scientific genius. He's just stuck in a crappy local high school because of his family's financial situation, and can't become a scientist because he's just too darn busy trying to make ends meet while also being Spider-Man. The guy in the Spider-Man movies ain't Spider-Man! He's just a regular teen who happened to win a science scholarship (and who also whipped up a $100,000 costume with no explanation...).

From an interview with Raimi:

RAIMI: "The main reason was, it was an idea that James Cameron came up with in a treatment. It was just a subtle riff on Stan Lee's original concept anyways, whether he shoots web mechanically or organic. Finally, in a nutshell, the strength of the movie was always going to be for us, as it was in Stan Lee's comics, was Peter Parker is one of us. It's what made Spider-Man a unique story, a unique superhero. He's a kid like us. We soar with him when he becomes this hero. So, we decided to do everything we could to keep that concept alive and real and potent to the audience. We wanted him to be someone we really identified with, so that when it came time to talk about the story aspect where he could create the web-shooters and have the technological ability to create such a mechanical device in his little Queens bedroom and have the ability of a chemical engineer to the degree that he could create this incredible substance that doesn't really exist in our world, we felt that Cameron's idea would be better for the movie. I'm not saying for the comics. I love Stan Lee's idea, but for the movie, to make him a real person, to stick to that theme and stick with it through the course of the picture, we felt that was a change we had to make."


The classic Peter Parker of the comic books may be the "Everyman's Super-Hero", but he's also larger than life at the same time. He is US (the everyman who has to deal with work, school, and girls), and he is also BETTER than us in many ways (his intelligence, his moral drive, his compassion). This unique dichotomy gives us both a hero we can see ourselves in AND look up to at the same time.


Anyway, in Spider-Man 2, at least, Peter's intellect is given more focus. Yet, how come he can talk about the highly technical details of a cold-fusion reactor with Dr. Otto Octavius (which no normal college student would be able to comprehend), yet NOT be "smart enough" to build mechanical web-shooters? Sheesh.

It's called "suspension of disbelief", people!

ah ha so it is your way or no way. Your vision of Spider-man is correct and everyone elses is wrong

[Gregatron]

that is quite hypocritical of you. Change is good for one character but not for another.

In the first 6 issues he wasnt a detective


Fine-tuning is not "changing". It's "finding the character", finding what WORKS for the character.


And the character was introduced in DETECTIVE COMICS, and solved mysteries.


I grow wear of those who exist only to prove me wrong because they do not understand.

[Gregatron]

ah ha so it is your way or no way. Your vision of Spider-man is correct and everyone elses is wrong


No. Stan and Steve and Co.'s version is correct, because it was there first. It was what was created, and what earned popularity. Anything that is NOT that character (and I don't mean differences like high school vs. college) is a waste of material. It is not Spider-Man.

There is alway room for "interpretation". But "interpretation" does not mean "pissing on it and making it yours, and yours alone".

[roach]

Fine-tuning is not "changing". It's "finding the character", finding what WORKS for the character.


And the character was introduced in DETECTIVE COMICS, and solved mysteries.


I grow wear of those who exist only to prove me wrong because they do not understand.


Oh I do understand. You are self centered and believe that only your vision of Spiderman should exist. You'd rather that we'd still be reading about a teenage Spiderman as if it was Archie comics.
Im sorry but your views are wrong. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars.

[Gregatron]

Oh I do understand. You are self centered and believe that only your vision of Spiderman should exist. You'd rather that we'd still be reading about a teenage Spiderman as if it was Archie comics.
Im sorry but your views are wrong. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars.


Sigh.

Who is "Spiderman"? Some banker in a two-piece suit?


I want Spider-Man to be the mythic, universally-appealing, all-ages-type character that he once was. I want him to outlast my lifespan. I take offense when selfish fanboys whine about how he must grow and change along with them. I weep for the future generations who will never understand what made Spider-Man successful.

Is that selfish?


"ohmyghod LOL! I just wanna sea a guy in spandex named Frank spiderman beat bad guys into s*** and then go home a f*** his smokin' hot wife and then get it on with his hot old Auntie Em and his back-to-life uncle! And I want 10 different covers! And I just want to but it cuz Brain Mike Bendis' name is on thee metal-laced cover! And I want too tilt the mirror on all those crappy old stories and look way Kewl to all my fanboy pals!!! LMAOAMRER!!!! ;>>;>!!!"


I grow weary and hungry. We may continue the proceedings of this kangaroo court another time.

[roach]

Sigh.

Who is "Spiderman"? Some banker in a two-piece suit?


I want Spider-Man to be the mythic, universally-appealing, all-ages-type character that he once was. I want him to outlast my lifespan. I take offense when selfish fanboys whine about how he must grow and change along with them. I weep for the future generations who will never understand what made Spider-Man successful.



What was your first issue of Spider-man????

[Herr Logan]

Amen, mein Herr.


In terms of the movies, it seems as long as the characters have the same names as their comic book inspirations, but everything else is changed, then that's somehow "okay".


As I've said in the past, Spider-Man used to be the most well-defined character in comics, in terms of his morality, intellect, personality, etc.

Now, he's become fractured into so many versions, and has become so generic, that he's a total stranger to me.

Amen to you, too, Greg. I couldn't agree more.

As I said before about Spider-Man appealing to people on different levels, I got into him because I thought his powers were awesome and he was funny. However, I didn't fully appreciate him until I bought the Essential TPBs and saw just how brilliantly Stan Lee wrote him and Steve Ditko plotted these stories. Yes, there's silliness, but screw that! They couldn't do straight-forward crime fiction because of the Comics Code Authority, so they used childish concepts and made something that only an adult can fully appreciate. Stan Lee wasn't writing from the point of view of a teenager (although he started writing for Marvel when he was in his late teens), he was somewhere around 40 years old, and as I said before, he's a very intelligent and witty man. That's why Spider-Man, despite his occasional immaturity, was already more mature than the average person his age. That's why I'd be fine with keeping him young, since he was beyond his years in his personality from the beginning.

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

It all comes down to this:

Either Spider-Man is infinite or finite.


If he is infinite, then the initial conception of the character should last forever. He should remain eternally frozen in time (only topical reference will change), with nothing but that glorious core concept carrying him along, and only the illusion of change spicing things up from time to time. Readers go along with him for a few years, then grow up and move on to more "adult" entertainment (unless they can still enjoy the material without forgetting the conceits of the character and the genre). New readers then come aboard and experience the character just as the older readers left him. Spider-Man thus remains an immortal, eternal symbol of youth and vitality, one which generation after generation can enjoy.


If he is finite, on the other hand, then he will age and change and grow. He will learn life lessons. He will have major changes in his life. He will develop, and get married, and have kids, and eventually die. For, if he is indeed finite, if he is indeed truly "one of us", if he is someone who "must grow and change", then we must acknowledge the fact that there will be an end to his adventures in the future, as he ages and changes and dies.

This is pretty absolute, and I prefer a little more room to maneuver in comic book heroes, but you make some good points.

I also think your overall assertion in this thread that Spider-Man is supposed to be about the journey from teenhood to adulthood is a little subjective, too. That was certainly a major theme back in the day, and I personally enjoyed it. Still, to demand that it be the main focus of the saga doesn't leave a lot of freedom.

Again, I agree with you overall, I would just avoid the absolutes and polarized options.

In my opinion, those who insist, nay, demand that he (and other characters) be finite, those who demand he age and change, those who think writing for kids means "dumbing down" (juvenile fiction need not be childish or dumbed down, y'know), those who demand that fictional SUPERHEROES age and change and swear and have sex and kill, are living vicariously through comic books. They are trying to turn a product written in layers for all ages to enjoy into a product that will appeal to them, and only them, perhaps so that they will seem "sophisticated" to their peers, who would ordinarily laugh at them for reading "kiddie books". So they worship "professionals" who exhibit such "sophistication ("sophistication", which is, in fact, very immature and grotesque).

I think you just put your finger on something that is definitely one of the main dynamics behind all the bull***** that has happened in modern mainstream comics so far. This is another great piece of insight into the forces behind the decline of Marvel Comics, right up there with what you said about "cathartic realism" a while back. :up:

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

"Those who forget history..."


Anyway, change can be dangerous. Bad changes can stick forever. Spider-Man should alway be about the journey to adulthood/responsibility.

The nature of the comic medium sorta demands that, if longevity is to be maintained, then things go back to the status quo all the time, with only the ILLUSION that the hero learned a big, important lesson in his latest story.

You read 'Superman on the Couch,' didn't you? ;)

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

Changing window dressing= Good.

Blowing core concepts to atoms= Bad.


Examples of good "window dressing changes that don't actually change anything":


Reed Richards and Sue Storm getting married (their relationship and the group dynamic of the FF didn't change a whit).

Thor growing a beard.

Spider-Man gaining/losing supporting cast members.

New characters being introduced.

The FF going from blue-and-black to black-and-white costumes.

Iron Man tinkering with the look of his armor.

The Avengers moving into new headquarters for a time.

Jonah Jameson stepping down as editor-in-chief of the Bugle.

I knew it! You totally did read 'Superman on the Couch.' :D

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

Well, Pig-****er, if you were REALLY as intelligent as you CLAIM to be, you'd've noticed I acknowledged you said yer an *******, and noticed that last jab was towards th' fact yer clueless to how yer viewed. Which only shows how dumb a **** you really are.

A flashy vocabulary don't make you "intelligent", bunky. Methinks you need to reconsult yer dictionaries and learn what does.

But... I said I did know how I'm viewed...

Why, oh why does the education system let so many promising children slip through the cracks? :(

:wolverine

[roach]

Sigh.

Who is "Spiderman"? Some banker in a two-piece suit?


I want Spider-Man to be the mythic, universally-appealing, all-ages-type character that he once was. I want him to outlast my lifespan. I take offense when selfish fanboys whine about how he must grow and change along with them. I weep for the future generations who will never understand what made Spider-Man successful.

Is that selfish?

and the only way to make Spider-man a mythic, universally appealing, all ages type character is to make him a teenager and have him never grow up.
I dont know how many people on this board were alive when Amazing Fantasy #15 came out...that doesnt mean they dont get the character. Spider-man speaks out to people in different ways. I got my first Spiderman comic from my dad. I loved the character so much that I kept reading into my teenage years and beyond. I went back and got the old issues and reprints. Did I not understand Spiderman because i didnt read AF15 when it came out???? It is selfish because instead of wanting people to love the character for what speaks to them about the character you want to impose your will. So we just say FU to those who like Peter being married??? What should the kids think when Franklin Richards is aging faster than Peter?????
Do we have to keep rewriting Spiderman's origin since the way people talk have changed...I mean he is a teenage but why is he saying groovy?????? Do we rewrite him for every decade since teens in the 80's were different from the teens in the 90's and 2000's??????
How come he isnt on the computer like me and my friends are?????

[Herr Logan]

The Batman who killed was dropped early on (after the bugs were worked out, as I said). Rainbow costumes and aliens were WINDOW DRESSING. In all those years, Batman was still BATMAN, and acted like Batman.

Well, that's both true and untrue.

I think it's pretty safe to say that the Batman has changed a lot over the years in terms of his tactics and interpersonal behavior (and probably other things as well), but a few things have stayed the same throughout.
He has always been a detective. He has always taken his mission seriously, and although he has been able to crack a smile and a joke at various times, he's more solemn than not, all the way through his run. Even Adam West's rendition of the Batman was pretty serious. I don't care if he and Robin looked silly or not, West's Batman was a straight-edge (a "square," if you will... and you will...) who had his mind on the business at hand for the most part. That's a constant for the Batman; the focused, unyielding, ever-vigilante detective.

Spider-Man, on the other hand, was 99.9% defined in his first appearance. All that was missing then was his location (New York), his job, and members of his supporting cast and rogue's gallery.

I gotta disagree with you on this, Greg. Spider-Man was not fully or mostly fully defined in 'Amazing Fantasy' #15. His sense of humor and the more complex emotions reflected in his inner dialogue didn't show up until he had his own series, and the jokes didn't really start until 'Amazing Spider-Man' #3, I think.
Still, I'd say that's a fairly brief grace period before he hit his stride. I'm only arguing the technical aspect of what you said, but I agree that Spider-Man was molded very quickly into the character we know and love, and he stayed that way for decades before inferior writers decided to turn his comics into trashy, grocery-aisle magazines.

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

Excerpt from my essay (link in sig):

And speaking of the organic webs...they don't work. They are stupid. They are a clunky attempt to make an inherently fantastic character more "realistic" (By, amazingly enough, making him even more *unrealistic*!).

Spider-Man's costume, powers, and equipment have remained basically the same for some 40 years. Because they work. Because they are PERFECT. The web-shooters were an ingenious, elegant solution to a problem Stan Lee and Steve Ditko had back in 1962: If they had given Spider-Man organic web-shooters, he would have been perceived as even creepier than he already was (Remember, Lee's publisher, Martin Goodman, predicted that Spider-Man would fail because most people hate spiders and think they're disgusting and frightening.).

The web-shooters also serve a thematic purpose in the origin story in Amazing Fantasy # 15. When the shy-but-brilliant Peter Parker gains super-powers, his buried creativity (and ego) are unleashed. He ultilizes his underappreciated genuis to come up with a stage name, design and create a flashy costume, and build web-shooting devices ALL ON HIS OWN, with no outside help or inspiration. Because that's who Peter Parker is!


Compare that to the Peter Parker of Ultimate Spider-Man, who was given the costume for his wrestling job (he only added the web-pattern and spider symbols), and whose late father invented the web-fluid formula, which Peter perfected.


Compare that to the Peter Parker of the Spider-Man movies, in which the web-shooters are a natural part of his super-powers, in which the name "Spider-Man" comes from an outside source, and in which the Spider-Man costume pops up with NO EXPLANATION whatsoever (We saw Peter's first homemade costume in the wrestling ring, and it was pathetic.). Maybe he got the ornately detailed costume--which cost $100,000 to make in real life--from a costume shop? Yeah, that's it. Sure.


In the 1990s, writer-director James Cameron was attached to the troubled development of the first Spider-Man movie. In a story treatment he wrote, Cameron gave Peter Parker organic web-shooters, using them as a not-so-subtle metaphor for adolescent development (In the treatment, Peter awoke one morning covered in sticky white webbing. That's right. He had a..."web dream". Ahem.).

When director Sam Raimi was attached to the project, he decided to keep this concept in his Spider-Man film. Raimi stated in interviews that it made sense because it would give Peter one more thing to be ashamed about. Huh? In the original origin story, Peter is enamored of his powers, and doesn't at all feel like a freak.

Anyway, more importantly, Raimi chose to keep the organic webs because he, Raimi himself, could not have invented web-shooters and web-fluid when he was Peter Parker's age.

Let me repeat that.

He said that Spider-Man would have organic web-shooters in the movie because he, *Raimi*, could not have invented mechanical web-shooters at age 16.

*Ahem*. As established in the comics, Peter Parker is a scientific genius. He's just stuck in a crappy local high school because of his family's financial situation, and can't become a scientist because he's just too darn busy trying to make ends meet while also being Spider-Man. The guy in the Spider-Man movies ain't Spider-Man! He's just a regular teen who happened to win a science scholarship (and who also whipped up a $100,000 costume with no explanation...).

From an interview with Raimi:

RAIMI: "The main reason was, it was an idea that James Cameron came up with in a treatment. It was just a subtle riff on Stan Lee's original concept anyways, whether he shoots web mechanically or organic. Finally, in a nutshell, the strength of the movie was always going to be for us, as it was in Stan Lee's comics, was Peter Parker is one of us. It's what made Spider-Man a unique story, a unique superhero. He's a kid like us. We soar with him when he becomes this hero. So, we decided to do everything we could to keep that concept alive and real and potent to the audience. We wanted him to be someone we really identified with, so that when it came time to talk about the story aspect where he could create the web-shooters and have the technological ability to create such a mechanical device in his little Queens bedroom and have the ability of a chemical engineer to the degree that he could create this incredible substance that doesn't really exist in our world, we felt that Cameron's idea would be better for the movie. I'm not saying for the comics. I love Stan Lee's idea, but for the movie, to make him a real person, to stick to that theme and stick with it through the course of the picture, we felt that was a change we had to make."


The classic Peter Parker of the comic books may be the "Everyman's Super-Hero", but he's also larger than life at the same time. He is US (the everyman who has to deal with work, school, and girls), and he is also BETTER than us in many ways (his intelligence, his moral drive, his compassion). This unique dichotomy gives us both a hero we can see ourselves in AND look up to at the same time.


Anyway, in Spider-Man 2, at least, Peter's intellect is given more focus. Yet, how come he can talk about the highly technical details of a cold-fusion reactor with Dr. Otto Octavius (which no normal college student would be able to comprehend), yet NOT be "smart enough" to build mechanical web-shooters? Sheesh.

It's called "suspension of disbelief", people!

Raimi doesn't understand a God damn thing about what makes Spider-Man unique. Otherwise, Movie!Spider-Man would have been witty, self-aware and Movie!Peter wouldn't come off like a useless, slack-jawed mute who keeps saying "I don't know" whenever anyone asks him a question about what he wants or thinks.

Yeah, he's "one of us." That's why he was so popular in high school and the early days of college, right? That's why he was the one kid at his school to get a science scholarship. That's why he's willing to tutor a girl --after he had lost his attraction for her-- who previously rejected and ridiculed him. Feh!

:wolverine

[Cullen]

Part of the fun of threads like this is that you learn so much. You see so many different points of view. Wrongheaded, genius, different, enlightening. All here. All potentiall worthy of thought and response.

I feel so guilty that I have nothing useful to contribute. Maybe later. Maybe next thread.

[Herr Logan]

Part of the fun of threads like this is that you learn so much. You see so many different points of view. Wrongheaded, genius, different, enlightening. All here. All potentiall worthy of thought and response.

I feel so guilty that I have nothing useful to contribute. Maybe later. Maybe next thread.

"Wrongheaded"?

Pray tell, Cullen... who's "wrongheaded" in this thread?

Speak up!

:wolverine

[MC2Spiderman]

Link for those who don't know what that is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus


If a part of the ship is replaced one plank at a time, is it still the same ship when ALL the planks have been replaced?


The core elements of Spider-Man have been so gradually perverted and replaced, that there's little left of the character, and we are now reading about what is essentially a replacement character with the same name.

And those who have been conned insist nothing has changed. Those who don't get it insist that "things MUST change".

Those who HAVEN'T been conned and DO get it look on from afar with tears in their eyes, and try to open other people's eyes, with mixed results.

This is why Spider-Man is effectively dead. Because the "fans" and the "fans" who became "professionals" killed him.

Just because a few books currently being published bear the title "Spider-Man" on the cover doesn't mean the character isn't dead.

Everything that he was, everything he stood for, every theme, every emotion, every event, has been trodden on, defiled, or "retooled".

Is there room for interpretation? Yes.

But a character is a character is a character. When Spider-Man was created, THAT is who that character was. It was set in stone. ANY major deviation from that character is NOT that character, and is merely a poor imitation.

I will fight to my last breath to prevent the history books from saying that the character of Spider-Man was "created by" JMS and/or Bendis, or that said writers wrote the very best stories in the character's history (and that everything prior was just childish garbage).

Erm when did dieing to save a comic book become logical ?

ack forget what i said even tho the powers and suit change its still the same old peter parker, i prefer change in doses and in quantites, if it wasnt for that i would of given up reading spiderman heck i gave up when they broke pete and MJ up, either way i like change and to others who do like change there okay in my book those who dont like change and prefer peter remain solo be moody all the freakin time and be an ass well thats your kicks either way bring on civil war, bring on the iron spidey HECK BRING ON Another clone saga as ill read it because the more arcs we get the more possibilities that open

[Cullen]

"Wrongheaded"?

Pray tell, Cullen... who's "wrongheaded" in this thread?

Speak up!

:wolverineI'm not going to name names, but I did post one other time on this thread. I could easily be referring to myself.

(Not you. Relax.)

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Okay, how about when they made Captain America the Captain? Or Iron Man an alcoholic? Or Jim Rhodes Iron Man? Or Reed and Sue left the FF?

Chracter progression is KEY in serialized mediums. That's how th' world works. You don't have that, you get rehashed refried ****.

[Herr Logan]

I'm not going to name names, but I did post one other time on this thread. I could easily be referring to myself.

(Not you. Relax.)

Re... lax? :confused:

What is this "Relax" of which you speak?

:wolverine

[Cullen]

Re... lax? :confused:

What is this "Relax" of which you speak?

:wolverineWell it's...

Uh...

Damned if I know...:confused:

[deemar325]

I wish Cancer on Joey Q.

It's a bad thing to say, but that's how I really feel.

[deemar325]

Joe Q please, just die!

Of cancer.

Slow and painful.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Hey, welcome to th' crap fest, dee. Scroll down a bit to find that thread I mentioned.

[deemar325]

Will do.

Also Wolvie I think my heart is broken.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Heart, spirit, soul...join th' club, we've got jackets.

[deemar325]

I guess I'm gonna have to buy me one of those jackets.


Jeez! I'm steaming right now, I wish you could see the expression on my face.

[dan1]

Basically, as I've said before, Joe Q let success in terms of SALES regarding Marvel Knights, the Ultimate line, and the movies, as well as his restructing the Marvel Universe that he's become obessed with sales gimmicks and crossovers, not unlike Jim Shooter when he was EIC. And as a result, Joe Q is pulling the same stunts Marvel did back in the early 90s that help contribute to them almost becoming bankrupt. Hell, if there is any single proof that Joe Q and Tom Breevot are obessed with this decade, they've commissioned Rob Leifeld (along with Jeph Loeb) to revisit Heroes Reborn and Onslaught for it's tenth anniversary.

And yet we're supposed to believe that Quesada and JMS--the very guys who put Spidey in the current mess he's in--to somehow fix him to go back to the "Stan Lee days?" The same bunch that claimed the Other was going to be Spidey's new status quo, and now they've sort of said "Oops. Guess we spoke too soon on that one." So you can understand why I and most other posters here are a little skeptical.

Exactly Stilla. JoeQ got his merit based on SALES and created new lines that forego the 616 universe continuity.

He's a slam dunker with no outside touch, and everyone assumes because he's worked for Marvel for a good while, that he will start making consistant free-throws. He can't. He can only make the slam dunk that has no outcome on the game as a hole, in fact, he makes a couple of slam dunks and proclaims victory because he got a bunch of people to spend money and come to his flashy game. But his team is a shell of what it was. No teamwork, no creative plays within the system, no pride in the teams history. Just a bunch of "all stars" running around the court, aimlessly looking for their own slam dunk ally oop opportunity from Quesada.

Why anyone is surprised that Joe Quesada went this route with his EIC leadership is really beyond me. It was pretty easy to see, right when he first came on board and said that Peter should have never gotten married and he can't divorce him, because that would be "creepy," but..(and he left that up to our imaginations) and when he had JMS actually rub in our face that the Clone Saga supposedly never happened when Ezekial was the first person so similar to Spidey that he ever "fought side by side with." JoeQ stated that the Clone Saga was mum. But there is a difference from being mum to re-writing like it didn't exist. There is an arrogance to it (foreshadowing).

Who wants to be George Bailey(It's a Wonderful Life) when he didn't exist! No one, that's the nightmare itself. If you want to ask when Marvel "Jumped the shark," it wasn't the Clone Saga, or even the ill conceived re-boot. It was when Marvel started pretending and writing as if the Clone Saga never happened. Then they snowballed that in Pretending a lot of other things never happened.

It's ok to make mistakes, but to pretend you didn't make them is far worse.

Clone Saga, for the 50 billionth time, was too long and became contrived nonsense eventually, BUT, the team always strove to keep the continuity intact. The effort was there.

Joe Quesada serendipitously got the EIC job based on his SALES wins. With his market positioning and the sure-thing Movie coming out, he was given the longest leash in comic book HISTORY.

He did not earn it the 616 Marvel way.

JoeQ's intentions were foretold. MJ will probably be killed off. 616 Spider-Man will probably continue to forsake continuity and eventually Joseph Quesada's Ultimate Universe will become the only Marvel Universe.

That is, if he continues to reign supreme.

[Kirsten-Is-Hot!]

Atleast its only going to be a mini but I really don't want them on Spidey any more. Someone else should fix their mess not them, they cannot be trusted.

[gildea]

I wish Cancer on Joey Q.

It's a bad thing to say, but that's how I really feel.


You should probably stop reading comics then as evidently it is making you insane.

[Dangerous]

I don't wish cancer on the man, but I would'nt mind if he fell off a cliff.:)

[shinlyle]

Well, Pig-****er, if you were REALLY as intelligent as you CLAIM to be, you'd've noticed I acknowledged you said yer an *******, and noticed that last jab was towards th' fact yer clueless to how yer viewed. Which only shows how dumb a **** you really are.

A flashy vocabulary don't make you "intelligent", bunky. Methinks you need to reconsult yer dictionaries and learn what does.

I think you meant to use the contraction "doesn't", right? I mean....seeing as how you're so intelligent and all....

[shinlyle]

Erm when did dieing to save a comic book become logical ?

ack forget what i said even tho the powers and suit change its still the same old peter parker, i prefer change in doses and in quantites, if it wasnt for that i would of given up reading spiderman heck i gave up when they broke pete and MJ up, either way i like change and to others who do like change there okay in my book those who dont like change and prefer peter remain solo be moody all the freakin time and be an ass well thats your kicks either way bring on civil war, bring on the iron spidey HECK BRING ON Another clone saga as ill read it because the more arcs we get the more possibilities that open

Ugh....your post....hurts to read it...

Man, please use some punctuation and capitalization. It would make you at least seem less inept.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

I talk like I talk, Shin, and I write like I talk. When ya deal with morons ya don't waste th' time on stuff like proper grammar.

Frankly, Joe Q's really got his business sense skewed. By avoidin' all fan commentary an' goin' by sales only he's only gettin' half th' picture. Especially since his recent sales were boosted by umpteen variant covers.