The Amazing Spider-Man

[Doc Destruction]

If your girlfriend breaks up with you, she is entitled to be with other guys, you know.

Or is that a little too real for you? :oldrazz:

No, it's just awful and retarded.

[BlackLantern]

If your girlfriend breaks up with you, she is entitled to be with other guys, you know.

Or is that a little too real for you? :oldrazz:

For all the Sally Sensitives in here....yes it is.....I believe MJ and Pete were involved and someone got left at the altar....

[moraldeficiency]

Here I fixed that so it actually relates to the current Brand New Day:

If your wife and you make a deal with the devil to force an old woman back to life against her will while at the same time magically aborting two children and destroying the memories of the entire world in the process, she is entitled to be with other guys, you know.

Or is that a little too real for you? :oldrazz:

Yep, definately too real for me.

[Blader5489]

Here I fixed that so it actually relates to the current Brand New Day:



Yep, definately too real for me.

Wow, was farmernudie ghostwriting that post?

[moraldeficiency]

no that's all me, no steriods either in case you were wondering.

[Jack O Lantern]

What two children were aborted?

I don't think that anybody liked One More Day; it goes aganist everything Spidey. Spider-Man has always been the friendly neighbour hood superhero and left the inter-galantic and mystical stories to the Fantastic Four, the X-Men etc. He shouldn't have a problem solved in this way; they even avoided it in the clone saga. Spider-Man has also always been about accepting responsiblity for your actions and striving forward; not throughing away your life so that a woman who has hand one foot in the grave since 1962 can live for another year or two. We who like Brand New Day get that. We really do.

But that doesn't change the fact that they are telling good stories now and progressing the character. It's a shame that it took a regression to get there but we got there. As for the marriage. let's not forget that the mrriage was artfecially thrust into the books by suits. so it's kind of fitting that it was taking away in the same way

[Doc Destruction]

Mayday and the second one, whoever that was supposed to be.

[BlackLantern]

Two children?? O i get it....this is like a game of Operator...the cost is going to go up and up as time goes on.....6 months from now it will be Pete and MJ gave up 3 children, 2 cats, a dog, and a rabbit for Aunt May

[moraldeficiency]

No, the first child was aborted and the second you saw in OMD. That makes two. This math lesson is free just to get you hooked, the next is gonna cost you.

[Jack O Lantern]

Mayday was already dead and they didn't know that the other girl was their daughter and it was made clear that Peter wouldn't have made the decision if he did know.

[BlackLantern]

you want May Parker read 'Spider-Girl' that's what it's there for.....

[moraldeficiency]

Mayday was already dead and they didn't know that the other girl was their daughter and it was made clear that Peter wouldn't have made the decision if he did know.

Dead, yes, but it's on record that now she never existed. So if you believe in a soul and obviously souls exist in the 616, so her soul itself was wiped out of existence.

Gee how could Peter Parker have possibly known that making a deal with the devil could have negative consequences?

[Jack O Lantern]

Dead, yes, but it's on record that now she never existed. So if you believe in a soul and obviously souls exist in the 616, so her soul itself was wiped out of existence

Gee how could Peter Parker have possibly known that making a deal with the devil could have negative consequences?

But we're not talking about negative consequences we talking about one specific consequence that he couldn't have known.

BTW the second child never existed right? She was never concieved but her soul seemed to be doing fine.

[TheCorpulent1]

you want May Parker read 'Spider-Girl' that's what it's there for.....
Yeah, it's quite good right now. They're entering their own sort of Clone Saga for May, only it looks like it'll be a thousand times better than Peter's, since it's just gonna be one or two arcs. :)

[moraldeficiency]

But we're not talking about negative consequences we talking about one specific consequence that he couldn't have known.

BTW the second child never existed right? She was never concieved but her soul seemed to be doing fine.

First off he knew making a deal with the devil wouldn't be all smiles and sunshine. The what may have been in question but he knew what was up, don't fool yourself.

Secondly, he got to meet her, if she was "meant to be the best of both of them" and considering time hoping is about as standard as sunday church so she did exist in some form. And since mephisto seemed to have control over her soul then I doubt "doing fine" is entirely accurate.

[Doc Destruction]

Blader and Lantern are in competiton for the worst viewpoint award of the century...I swear.

[Doc Destruction]

you want May Parker read 'Spider-Girl' that's what it's there for.....

Oh, I'm sorry...I don't know WHAT I was thinking, wanting to read my favorite hero in a book that doesn't suck ass.

My bad.

[Blader5489]

There was no "second child", the red-haired girl was Mayday.

[Blader5489]

Blader and Lantern are in competiton for the worst viewpoint award of the century...I swear.

"People are entitled to their opinions, but if they differ from my opinion, then they're wrong."

[TheCorpulent1]

Oh, I'm sorry...I don't know WHAT I was thinking, wanting to read my favorite hero in a book that doesn't suck ass.

My bad.
So what are you saying about Spider-Girl, cockwad? :cmad:

[moraldeficiency]

There was no "second child", the red-haired girl was Mayday.

Sure there was, the first was baby may dead from a while back. Mind you dead is not nonexistant. The second was the child they would have had, which I like to think of as May Day. That makes two.

[Blader5489]

Sure there was, the first was baby may dead from a while back. Mind you dead is not nonexistant. The second was the child they would have had, which I like to think of as May Day. That makes two.

The first (and only) baby never died, she was kidnapped by Osborn and it was made to look like a miscarriage. It was a plot point never addressed again, though it was hinted at later on that Kaine left for Europe to find the baby.

And the girl in OMD, Mayday, and the baby from the Clone saga are all one in the same. Keep in mind that Peter has never seen his daughter, which is why he doesn't recognize her until the very end of OMD.

[moraldeficiency]

The first (and only) baby never died, she was kidnapped by Osborn and it was made to look like a miscarriage. It was a plot point never addressed again, though it was hinted at later on that Kaine left for Europe to find the baby.

And the girl in OMD, Mayday, and the baby from the Clone saga are all one in the same. Keep in mind that Peter has never seen his daughter, which is why he doesn't recognize her until the very end of OMD.

That's a good point, the kid was never officially dead, they killed and aborted the child. That's kinda worse though.

The second was the child they were going to have, if may's still alive then she wouldn't have been phrased as such even without their knowledge, which means it's a different child.

[Doc Destruction]

So what are you saying about Spider-Girl, cockwad? :cmad:

Not a damn thing! She ROCKS!

I was commenting on Pink Lantern's defense that I have to read it to get good spider books.

[TheCorpulent1]

Oh, okay. Sorry about the "cockwad" comment, then.

[BlackLantern]

Not a damn thing! She ROCKS!

I was commenting on Pink Lantern's defense that I have to read it to get good spider books.

Now you're name calling because I happen to like how things are going...I happen to like not getting Aunt May and MJ crammed down my throat every issue.....

[Norman Osborn]

Now you're name calling because I happen to like how things are going...I happen to like not getting Aunt May and MJ crammed down my throat every issue.....

For all the Sally Sensitives in here.....

...........:o

[Doc Destruction]

Hahahah!

Pwned.

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

The first (and only) baby never died, she was kidnapped by Osborn and it was made to look like a miscarriage. It was a plot point never addressed again, though it was hinted at later on that Kaine left for Europe to find the baby.

And the girl in OMD, Mayday, and the baby from the Clone saga are all one in the same. Keep in mind that Peter has never seen his daughter, which is why he doesn't recognize her until the very end of OMD.

I'm not sure about that.

In one of the last issues of OMD MJ was seen throwing up in the bathroom and that may have been an indication that she was pregnant again.

So the read headed girl in OMD may have been their second child.

[BlackLantern]

...........:o

Sorry...I tend to differentiate between a general name call and an individual name call....but yes I have been foiled....in any case I have a greater respect for people that are refusing to buy the book as opposed to someone who keeps buying it week after week and does nothing but piss and moan about it

[I Am The Bat]

I think BND has been decent.

The story arc right before the paper villian sucked, but I think it has been decently written since then.

There isn't anything Epic or Deep going on at all. I think we got at least a year until Spider-Man has crazy **** happen to him again. In the mean time - Introduction to new villians and reintroductions of old ones.

Next big arc will probably be peter and mj getting back together again, IMO.

[fifthfiend]

Sorry...I tend to differentiate between a general name call and an individual name call

Because it's so much classier to insult a whole group of people all at once than just one person at a time?

[BlackLantern]

Because it's so much classier to insult a whole group of people all at once than just one person at a time?

Isn't it though....:yay:

[TheCorpulent1]

Classier and more efficient. :up:
Next big arc will probably be peter and mj getting back together again, IMO.
I doubt that'll ever happen as long as Joe Q's in charge.

[BlackLantern]

Hasn't Mephisto worked it so they won't or can't get back together?

[I Am The Bat]

Classier and more efficient. :up:

I doubt that'll ever happen as long as Joe Q's in charge.

Come on - You gotta wonder what MJ said.

Seriously that won't just close that door. It is open and when it comes time for Spider-Man 4 to hit theaters you'll see:

THE RETURN OF MJ!

[I Am The Bat]

Hasn't Mephisto worked it so they won't or can't get back together?

Haven't people died and came back to life 12 times over?

I don't mean to sound sarcastic, but anything is possible in comic books (or corny).

[DoomJester]

Hasn't Mephisto worked it so they won't or can't get back together?

See, that's the question I asked earlier. Someone told me that something happened to break them up (ie, there will probably be a whole story arc explaining what happened-- but didn't actually happen-- to break Peter and MJ up) but since they techincally love each other, and are yearning for each other (part of Mephisto's punishment to them), why can't MJ just say something to get Pete to come back to her?

I get the sense that there is more awkwardness between them than bad blood anyways.

[TheCorpulent1]

Haven't people died and came back to life 12 times over?

I don't mean to sound sarcastic, but anything is possible in comic books (or corny).
Anything is possible in comic books... except for things the Editor-in-Chief doesn't approve of. He hated the marriage and, by extension, he hated the idea of Peter settling down with one woman because it closed a lot of romantic avenues and love triangles, which Joe Q considers central to the Spider-Man formula. Why would he ever allow Peter and MJ to get back together again?

[Blader5489]

I'm not sure about that.

In one of the last issues of OMD MJ was seen throwing up in the bathroom and that may have been an indication that she was pregnant again.

So the read headed girl in OMD may have been their second child.

Hmm, that's interesting. I hadn't thought about that.

Anything is possible in comic books... except for things the Editor-in-Chief doesn't approve of. He hated the marriage and, by extension, he hated the idea of Peter settling down with one woman because it closed a lot of romantic avenues and love triangles, which Joe Q considers central to the Spider-Man formula. Why would he ever allow Peter and MJ to get back together again?

They can get back together, they just can't get married again. Quesada isn't opposed to MJ, he's opposed to marriage as a part of Peter's character.

[TheCorpulent1]

A serious, committed relationship is pretty much indistinguishable from a marriage, so that seems like semantics to me. The only difference is that it's easier to break up the former, which gets us right back to where we started. I maintain that Peter's probably not going to get into any major relationships anytime soon, and if he does, he'll probably be out of them again before long.

[I Am The Bat]

Anything is possible in comic books... except for things the Editor-in-Chief doesn't approve of. He hated the marriage and, by extension, he hated the idea of Peter settling down with one woman because it closed a lot of romantic avenues and love triangles, which Joe Q considers central to the Spider-Man formula. Why would he ever allow Peter and MJ to get back together again?

To sell more comic books?

Which would sell more:

Spider-Man's new love interest

OR

Peter Parker and Mary-Jane Wedding!

Wasn't that one of the most successful issues of all time?

[I Am The Bat]

A serious, committed relationship is pretty much indistinguishable from a marriage, so that seems like semantics to me. The only difference is that it's easier to break up the former, which gets us right back to where we started. I maintain that Peter's probably not going to get into any major relationships anytime soon, and if he does, he'll probably be out of them again before long.

I agree to the end that they won't just be together and not married.

[Doc Destruction]

Sorry...I tend to differentiate between a general name call and an individual name call....but yes I have been foiled....in any case I have a greater respect for people that are refusing to buy the book as opposed to someone who keeps buying it week after week and does nothing but piss and moan about it

Well then you should respect the HELL out of me then. Haven't bought a Spidey book in years.

[Arach Knight]

As i've stated in other threadas

1)Deals with Mephisto = lazy and unimagniative answer to the marriage.

2)I think Peter and MJ should be friends or date, but should not be married.

3)I think Peter was a lousy husband to MJ, though I think he did/does love her deeply.

4)OMD = Terrible. BND = So far so good

I don't expect every issue to be "epic." I believe the point of BND was to open up some more flexibility in the types of stories told. For a little while, writers really started to do drastic stuff just to keep things moving in Spider-Man, including changing his mythos (Spider Totem). I remember reading a few issues of Spectacular, during Ramos' time as the artist, and it too was nothing interesting. One arc involved fighting Doc Ock with the help of the police.

Another arc involved Peter and Black Cat breaking into a security installation. Of course there was Morlun...but then there was also The Queen (terrible). So older arcs when he was still with MJ, weren't necessarily so "epic." Every issue and Arc wasn't a "Black Costume" or "Venom" or "Cosmic Spidey" type of story.

I don't have such exaggerated expectations right now. I think getting Peter single again was more about giving the stories a better flow. And so far, that has happened to a modest degree. I do think they should bring MJ back though. I could care less about what she gave up to get the rest of the deal though. That is a part of the past I feel doesn't have to be looked upon too often if at all. I'm more about moving foward.

[I Am The Bat]

As i've stated in other threadas

1)Deals with Mephisto = lazy and unimagniative answer to the marriage.

2)I think Peter and MJ should be friends or date, but should not be married.

3)I think Peter was a lousy husband to MJ, though I think he did/does love her deeply.

4)OMD = Terrible. BND = So far so good

I don't expect every issue to be "epic." I believe the point of BND was to open up some more flexibility in the types of stories told. For a little while, writers really started to do drastic stuff just to keep things moving in Spider-Man, including changing his mythos (Spider Totem). I remember reading a few issues of Spectacular, during Ramos' time as the artist, and it too was nothing interesting. One arc involved fighting Doc Ock with the help of the police.

Another arc involved Peter and Black Cat breaking into a security installation. Of course there was Morlun...but then there was also The Queen (terrible). So older arcs when he was still with MJ, weren't necessarily so "epic." Every issue and Arc wasn't a "Black Costume" or "Venom" or "Cosmic Spidey" type of story.

I don't have such exaggerated expectations right now. I think getting Peter single again was more about giving the stories a better flow. And so far, that has happened to a modest degree. I do think they should bring MJ back though. I could care less about what she gave up to get the rest of the deal though. That is a part of the past I feel doesn't have to be looked upon too often if at all. I'm more about moving foward.

I'll conceed that every issue need not be epic - but I feel like I'm reading filler right now. I would like to read about some character development with Menace, Jackpot or even some other character.

Seems like they're just throwing all these characters at us just to test how we like them. Then throwing them on the back burner and go on testing more.

Epic wasn't the right word, but I think deep works. Don't get me wrong - I like the characters (from what I know about them) but I would like to see more substance to them.

I feel like they are trying really hard to create "new" villians - so that we may feel like we are reading old spider-man like when they introduced the Goblin, Vulture, Kraven, Venom, Scorpian, etc.

Maybe I'm the only one who feels like this, but this is what it feels like to me.

[Blader5489]

I'll conceed that every issue need not be epic - but I feel like I'm reading filler right now. I would like to read about some character development with Menace, Jackpot or even some other character.

Seems like they're just throwing all these characters at us just to test how we like them. Then throwing them on the back burner and go on testing more.

Epic wasn't the right word, but I think deep works. Don't get me wrong - I like the characters (from what I know about them) but I would like to see more substance to them.

I feel like they are trying really hard to create "new" villians - so that we may feel like we are reading old spider-man like when they introduced the Goblin, Vulture, Kraven, Venom, Scorpian, etc.

Maybe I'm the only one who feels like this, but this is what it feels like to me.

Yeah, and the Lee/Ditko run reads exactly like that: no earth-shattering stories, just new situations and characters every issue.

You're right, it is a bit like throwing everything to the wall and seeing what sticks, but that's just because they have a clean slate to work with now; it's the best opportunity to try out new things, and see what works and what doesn't.

In any case, "New Ways to Die" is essentially the conclusion to the Brand New Day saga, in that it's bringing together all of these new, disparate plot elements together and meshing them with some classic stuff: Venom vs. Anti-Venom (apparently connected to Mr. Negative and his Spider-Man blood sample), Oscorp holding Freak, Norman vs. Menace, etc. So there's only one more month of "filler" left.

[TheCorpulent1]

One more month after about three or four months already? I'm not saying it's good or bad, but that's a lot of "filler."

[Doc Destruction]

"Just wait and see" - the mantra of desperate Spidey fans PRAYING for the next arc to be the good one.

Been years, btw. YEARS.

[TheCorpulent1]

The last good one I recall is JMS' New Avengers arc. Before that, it was the Morlun/Ezekiel wrap-up. There was like a year and a half between those, I think.

[Blader5489]

One more month after about three or four months already? I'm not saying it's good or bad, but that's a lot of "filler."

Well, I wouldn't even consider them filler, because thus far they've been fairly interesting Spidey stories. The "problem" is that they aren't part of these huge, overarching plot, but rather are more flash-in-the-pan monthly stories.

Spidey fanboys are some of the biggest hypocrites: they claim that they don't want anymore life-changing Spider-Man events and just want regular stories again, but when they get that they complain that nothing is happening.

[Arach Knight]

I for one am in favor of the current Spidey status quo, with the exception that I think MJ should be brought back in as part of the regular cast. Otherwise, so far so good. Sometimes I feel like the comic market is dwindling (and it has been when you look at the fact that X-Men # 1 sold 8 million copies by itself where as now a days a good book may run 500k aftere reprints) because there is so much of an emphasis on these huge arcs that change the history of the books. That is not very inviting to new readers. Especially those who may be trying comic books based on the far more simple movies (which themselves are often based on antiquated versions of the characteres from the 60's).

When somebody pops in and all of the books are in the middle of something like Infinite Crisis or Civil War, that doesn't sound like fun to read. That sounds like more trouble than it is worth for something that is already over priced (at least with the current gas prices). When you have a story that is complete unto itself, yet still part of a larger occurence, you are more likely to interest people who will at least read from time to time as opposed to not at all.

This is what made Buffy The Vampire Slayer such a great show. There was always the "big bad" at the end of an "arc" but everything between introducing the big bad and showing their defeat, were smaller tales. Some stood alone and some contributed to building up the big bad. But at the end of the day, you didn't have to really be a hardcore fan. And at this point, with maxi sized events like 52, Countdown Civil War (which after Civil War, Civil War Frontline and various tie ins, had more issues than 52 did with tie ins), you don't really get that. You either know comics or you don't and that is a terrible business model. I applaud Marvel for at least correcting that even though they have done so haphazardly.

[Doc Destruction]

Well, I wouldn't even consider them filler, because thus far they've been fairly interesting Spidey stories. The "problem" is that they aren't part of these huge, overarching plot, but rather are more flash-in-the-pan monthly stories.

Spidey fanboys are some of the biggest hypocrites: they claim that they don't want anymore life-changing Spider-Man events and just want regular stories again, but when they get that they complain that nothing is happening.

Ummmm yeah, missing the point again are we?

The stories came at a huge sacrifice that makes the book suck ass. Don't just act like good stories dropped out of the sky and everyone hates them.

These stories could have been told, marriage intact, minus MJ bonking other men.

[gildea]

These stories could have been told, marriage intact, minus MJ bonking other men.

People repeat this like a mantra.

It's complete nonsense these stories would be so completely different in tone as to be completely different stories. They could not be told with the marraige.


(though thats not to say follow the same path (ie 3 times a month, spidey brain trust) and equally good or better stories couldn't be told with the marraige :( )

[UK_Stu]

Well, I wouldn't even consider them filler, because thus far they've been fairly interesting Spidey stories. The "problem" is that they aren't part of these huge, overarching plot, but rather are more flash-in-the-pan monthly stories.

Spidey fanboys are some of the biggest hypocrites: they claim that they don't want anymore life-changing Spider-Man events and just want regular stories again, but when they get that they complain that nothing is happening.

I don't think that's entirely true. What the stories need are both short monthly plots and larger overarching ones which can run potentially over a number of months or years. (See the Roger Stern era for how to do this well). Too often JMS's stories ran for 6 issues, were resolved and the story forgotten about. Some of the arcs were good and many were awful, but here was no real overarching storylines.

Spider-man shouldn't have too many life-changing events - thats a fact, but that doesn't mean the monthly stories can't be part of a larger story, with multiple plots that actually give the reader the impression something is happening and the story is leading tio something.

[J. J. Jameson]

I would just like to express for the 100000000000000000000th time that Bob Gale can NOT, nor should he EVER, write Amazing Spider-Man. Seriously...this week's issue was on par with the blah-ness that was the Freak story.

And in all of this, I fail to see why having MJ not there makes these stories any more compelling. In fact, it feels less compelling. No one is wondering if Peter is still alive or if he will ever come home because, oh that's right, no remembers that Peter is Spider-Man. A bed with two places and one of them empty is a lot more meaningful than just an empty bed.

[I Am The Bat]

I really don't understand WHY they are launches other Spider-Man titles.

I mean they killed off Sensational (Which was Marvel Knights first, right), Friendly Neighborhood SM, SM Loves MJ, and maybe another title I'm not remember. I thought the reasoning behind this is to condense the SM conflicting story-lines.

But then - I don't get how they are relaunching SM love MJ, Spider-Man Family, and New Avengers?

Also I'm hoping Bennet is just more than an annoying SOB - I want JJ back

[iloveclones]

I have to say that I respectfully disagree about this weeks Amazing. I thought it was very entertaining, and I didn't even like the first part of it.

Nothing earth-shattering took place, a few characters were given a little more depth (The Bookie and his Dad...I thought his Dad was really funny), Ox had a really good moment, and Spidey was TCoB. Not much advancing of the JJJ subplot, but they've been doing that every issue, so no biggie. And a small sub-plot is introduced at the F.E.A.S.T. center (if it has an acronym, something bad is going to happen there!)

Gale's Freak story was a little blah, a decent concept that could have been better, and the opener to this one was starting to convince me that it was a pattern, especially when he dragged on with the Bookie's lameness at home. I mean, he seemed so "cool" when we first saw him. But I think he ended it great.

[TheCorpulent1]

I really don't understand WHY they are launches other Spider-Man titles.

I mean they killed off Sensational (Which was Marvel Knights first, right), Friendly Neighborhood SM, SM Loves MJ, and maybe another title I'm not remember. I thought the reasoning behind this is to condense the SM conflicting story-lines.

But then - I don't get how they are relaunching SM love MJ, Spider-Man Family, and New Avengers?

Also I'm hoping Bennet is just more than an annoying SOB - I want JJ back
No, they just periodically shake up the character's publishing slate to boost sales. If Sensational's not selling well, they'll cancel it and then try it again with a relaunch in a few years, or they'll basically consolidate it into Amazing Spider-Man, as they've done now. Same with fringe titles like Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane--they tend to not get great sales numbers in comic format, but they do pretty well in digests. So Marvel cancels the comic and then restarts it with a new #1 to build buzz and get people interested again. It's kind of annoying to see half a dozen #1s of various comics over a period of 1 or 2 decades, but it does boost sales so comic publishers keep on doing it.

[Hans]

Well, I wouldn't even consider them filler, because thus far they've been fairly interesting Spidey stories. The "problem" is that they aren't part of these huge, overarching plot, but rather are more flash-in-the-pan monthly stories.

Spidey fanboys are some of the biggest hypocrites: they claim that they don't want anymore life-changing Spider-Man events and just want regular stories again, but when they get that they complain that nothing is happening.

I can't speak for everyone, but I fail to see how I could be described as a hypocrite. I'll give you an example that I'm sure even you can understand. Here:

If you'd been eating pizza for years, and all you wanted was a cheeseburger, and I finally gave you a cheeseburger but I took a fat **** right on it, would you complain? Or would you grin a literal **** eating grin and tell me you wanted some more?

[Doc Destruction]

GOOD analogy.

[gildea]

GOOD analogy.

you don't know the meaning of analogy do you........

[iloveclones]

Well, it is an analogy. Just a very crude and juevenile one.

[Hans]

Yet still effective. :up:

[TheCorpulent1]

Crude and juvenile analogies are some of the most fun. :)

[gildea]

Well, it is an analogy. Just a very crude and juevenile one.

It's not really by definition analogy has to be analogous, it's not.

Hans seem to be making an anlogy regarding the books quality to counter an argument made based on it's number of epic storylines.

Not the same thing.

[Hans]

I was just defending my position on BND's crapiness and how I'm not only completely within my right to have that opinion, but also not hypocritical in having it.

[gildea]

I was just defending my position on BND's crapiness and how I'm not only completely within my right to have that opinion, but also not hypocritical in having it.

sure thing but he wasn't calling you a hypocrite for that.

Only those complaining nothing is happening.

[DoomJester]

I can't speak for everyone, but I fail to see how I could be described as a hypocrite. I'll give you an example that I'm sure even you can understand. Here:

If you'd been eating pizza for years, and all you wanted was a cheeseburger, and I finally gave you a cheeseburger but I took a fat **** right on it, would you complain? Or would you grin a literal **** eating grin and tell me you wanted some more?

I just don't think it amounted to that. It would be more like someone handing you a bad cheesburger and you sending it back to the kitchen. Well, for the next one you'll be skeptical but if you just eat it you'll see the reason you sat down for a cheeseburger in the first place!

I mean, OMD was a bad story, it had long term effects, but OMD was a bad story, not BND. It is time to separate that story from the rest of the Spidey books. And let's not put Spidey or JMS run on a pedestal here-- it wasn't mind blowing, at times it was good, at times it was bad. I remember when people turned on him and were saying this same type of stuff about JMS for Sins Past and the Other. So it isn't like Spidey had this great run going and then all of a sudden someone ruined it.

And if you like MJ, then BND makes her a really important character because now every time you see her you will think "what's she going to do. What does this mean for Pete?" And you had to wait what? 3 months or so before MJ and Pete met up again? And in those three months we got 9 issues? I think that's great. And we know she's coming back for New Ways to Die. There's no reason to think other writers won't be using her as well, and if she is used right (like Slott did) you do get a new type of drama and tension that wasn't really possible before.

[iloveclones]

Crude and juvenile analogies are some of the most fun. :)

Probably. I find it usually just means that the person has nothing legitimate to add to the discussion.

[TheCorpulent1]

Probably. I find it usually just means that the person has nothing legitimate to add to the discussion.
People don't have anything legitimate to add to internet discussions about 70% of the time anyway. Might as well get some entertainment out of those illegitimate posts. :)

[Hans]

sure thing but he wasn't calling you a hypocrite for that.

Only those complaining nothing is happening.

Well, he was saying that people were being hypocrites for wanting simple, more light hearted stories and than complaining when Marvel gave them exactly what they wanted. He left out the fact that some of these stories have been horrible in quality. Which was my main point.

I just don't think it amounted to that. It would be more like someone handing you a bad cheesburger and you sending it back to the kitchen. Well, for the next one you'll be skeptical but if you just eat it you'll see the reason you sat down for a cheeseburger in the first place!

I mean, OMD was a bad story, it had long term effects, but OMD was a bad story, not BND. It is time to separate that story from the rest of the Spidey books. And let's not put Spidey or JMS run on a pedestal here-- it wasn't mind blowing, at times it was good, at times it was bad. I remember when people turned on him and were saying this same type of stuff about JMS for Sins Past and the Other. So it isn't like Spidey had this great run going and then all of a sudden someone ruined it.

And if you like MJ, then BND makes her a really important character because now every time you see her you will think "what's she going to do. What does this mean for Pete?" And you had to wait what? 3 months or so before MJ and Pete met up again? And in those three months we got 9 issues? I think that's great. And we know she's coming back for New Ways to Die. There's no reason to think other writers won't be using her as well, and if she is used right (like Slott did) you do get a new type of drama and tension that wasn't really possible before.

Okay, obviously you missed my point about Gale's last issue as being unreadable. It has NOTHING to do with the status quo of Spider-Man and EVERYTHING to do with the fact that in my opinion, it's just a poorly written book.

Probably. I find it usually just means that the person has nothing legitimate to add to the discussion.

HAHA! And what exactly have you added to this discussion?

[Doc Destruction]

you don't know the meaning of analogy do you........

You really are an idiot. Sigh.

[Doc Destruction]

It's not really by definition analogy has to be analogous, it's not.

Hans seem to be making an anlogy regarding the books quality to counter an argument made based on it's number of epic storylines.

Not the same thing.

The anology within his post is a valid analogy.

[moraldeficiency]

I add the drunken Irish stoner perspective, a highly valued demographic.

[DoomJester]

Okay, obviously you missed my point about Gale's last issue as being unreadable. It has NOTHING to do with the status quo of Spider-Man and EVERYTHING to do with the fact that in my opinion, it's just a poorly written book.



Sorry to have to break it to you like this Hans, but no, I didn't miss your point about Gale's issue being unreadable-- you run really close to equivocating or you just weren't making your argument as clear as you could. This was a discussion about the merits of BND. You said so yourself,

I was just defending my position on BND's crapiness and how I'm not only completely within my right to have that opinion, but also not hypocritical in having it.

Actually, you didn't even bring up Bob Gale until I critiqued your analogy. Don't play fast and lose with the terms-- all of a sudden you weren't talking about "BND" you were only talking about Bob Gale. Not so. While the differences in the argument may be subtle, they are important. Pick your meanings and stick to them.

[fifthfiend]

It's not really by definition analogy has to be analogous, it's not.

Hans seem to be making an anlogy regarding the books quality to counter an argument made based on it's number of epic storylines.

Not the same thing.

You're inventing distinctions to argue against that aren't anywhere in that post.

Epic arcs = pizza, simple spidey stories = cheeseburger, **** = OMD. It's actually pretty easy to understand.

[Anubis]

He's the devil's advocate. He has to disagree about something.

[Doc Destruction]

You're inventing distinctions to argue against that aren't anywhere in that post.

Epic arcs = pizza, simple spidey stories = cheeseburger, **** = OMD. It's actually pretty easy to understand.

Thank God...someone with the ability to read and reason.

[BlackLantern]

What tires me is that people say that "OMD is ****" and try to state it as fact, instead of an opinion....

[Doc Destruction]

No, it really is a fact. If the WRITER says it was crap, then it was crap.

[gildea]

You're inventing distinctions to argue against that aren't anywhere in that post.

Epic arcs = pizza, simple spidey stories = cheeseburger, **** = OMD. It's actually pretty easy to understand.

You are somewhat correct here.
I assumed (not invented) he was referring to quality of story and not type of story.

I assumed correctly btw as per the below quote:

he left out the fact that some of these stories have been horrible in quality. Which was my main point.

So basically my point is reasonably sound assumption and all.

[I Am The Bat]

No, it really is a fact. If the WRITER says it was crap, then it was crap.

Though, IMO, he really isn't making up too much with The Twelve - Not that it isn't good. It is. It isn't great though.

[gildea]

Thank God...someone with the ability to read and reason.

swing and miss...

[Blader5489]

Well, he was saying that people were being hypocrites for wanting simple, more light hearted stories and than complaining when Marvel gave them exactly what they wanted. He left out the fact that some of these stories have been horrible in quality. Which was my main point.

Whether you like the stories or not is your own opinion. But the fact of the matter is that these are the types of Spider-Man stories fans have been clamoring for all along. The quality of the stories is subjective, but the difference between the structure of pre-OMD and post-OMD stories is fact.

[Hans]

Sorry to have to break it to you like this Hans, but no, I didn't miss your point about Gale's issue being unreadable-- you run really close to equivocating or you just weren't making your argument as clear as you could. This was a discussion about the merits of BND. You said so yourself,

Before we get to the next part, let me just clarify a few things. One, I made a post in which I commented about my disdain for the quality of BND's stories. You responded to that with your own opinions about the status quo change and how, in your views, it's not so bad. Fine and dandy, but I wasn't talking about the new status quo. I wasn't even talking about OMD. You. Missed. The. Point.

Actually, you didn't even bring up Bob Gale until I critiqued your analogy. Don't play fast and lose with the terms-- all of a sudden you weren't talking about "BND" you were only talking about Bob Gale. Not so. While the differences in the argument may be subtle, they are important. Pick your meanings and stick to them.

I do. I don't like BND. Status quo aside, I don't like the stories or how they're told. I dislike Gale's stories the most. Again, it has nothing to do with OMD. Does that help you to understand?

You're inventing distinctions to argue against that aren't anywhere in that post.

Epic arcs = pizza, simple spidey stories = cheeseburger, **** = OMD. It's actually pretty easy to understand.

I would change "OMD" to "BND, specifically Gale's issues." Otherwise, spot on. :up:

[DoomJester]

No, it really is a fact. If the WRITER says it was crap, then it was crap.



Someone could've liked it. It is like arguing about music, it is fun to do it (at times, until someone says Led Zep is metal, at which point I leave), but in the end, as long as you enjoy it, good for you. And I never thought I'd hear myself espousing such relativism but that's my feeling on comics and music.

I always say this-- I legitimately enjoy ASBR, people hate it and think Miller is just trolling people but I don't even worry about it. I'm looking forward to it.

[I Am The Bat]

No, they just periodically shake up the character's publishing slate to boost sales. If Sensational's not selling well, they'll cancel it and then try it again with a relaunch in a few years, or they'll basically consolidate it into Amazing Spider-Man, as they've done now. Same with fringe titles like Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane--they tend to not get great sales numbers in comic format, but they do pretty well in digests. So Marvel cancels the comic and then restarts it with a new #1 to build buzz and get people interested again. It's kind of annoying to see half a dozen #1s of various comics over a period of 1 or 2 decades, but it does boost sales so comic publishers keep on doing it.

I guess I misunderstood - I thought the whole purpose of having AMS was to condense the story line.

It is annoying though

[Anubis]

Though, IMO, he really isn't making up too much with The Twelve - Not that it isn't good. It is. It isn't great though.


His Thor on the other hand is awesome.

[I Am The Bat]

His Thor on the other hand is awesome.

Oh yeah! I totally forgot he was writing that :cmad:

I'm enjoying what they are doing with Thor right now

[gildea]

I would change "OMD" to "BND, specifically Gale's issues." Otherwise, spot on. :up:

Maybe i am misreading you.

Shouldn't pizza simply = good stories?

[Hans]

Whether you like the stories or not is your own opinion. But the fact of the matter is that these are the types of Spider-Man stories fans have been clamoring for all along. The quality of the stories is subjective, but the difference between the structure of pre-OMD and post-OMD stories is fact.

And? I never argued that AT ALL. It's even a part of the original analogy; "cheesebugers with **** on top" = "simple Spider-Man stories that suck balls."

Now, you seem to be trying to insinuate that in order for the universe to be right with itself, I, as a Spider-Man fan who prefers simpler stories over "epic" storytelling like The Other, must not have the opinion that the simpler stories of BND are ****. Because, if so, I am clearly a hypocrite. Nevermind the quality of the stories. I ordered the beef and I got the cow's hoof. It's still beef, right?

Wrong.

[Hans]

Maybe i am misreading you.

Shouldn't pizza simply = good stories?

Heh. No, the pizza represented overarching storylines and conveluted retcons and the like. The Other, Sins Past. Stories like that.

[Blader5489]

And? I never argued that AT ALL. It's even a part of the original analogy; "cheesebugers with **** on top" = "simple Spider-Man stories that suck balls."

Now, you seem to be trying to insinuate that in order for the universe to be right with itself, I, as a Spider-Man fan who prefers simpler stories over "epic" storytelling like The Other, must not have the opinion that the simpler stories of BND are ****. Because, if so, I am clearly a hypocrite. Nevermind the quality of the stories. I ordered the beef and I got the cow's hoof. It's still beef, right?

Wrong.

Jeez, overreact much? There have been nearly 20 issues of BND thus far, and less than 1/3 of them have been less than average quality. That's not a **** burger, that's what a ****ing comic book is: some hits, some misses. Cut the melodrama already.

[gildea]

Heh. No, the pizza represented overarching storylines and conveluted retcons and the like. The Other, Sins Past. Stories like that.

oh in that case my last few posts have been completely wrong.

ignore them.

[Anubis]

But....pizza is good. You should have said....I don't know, liver and onions.

[DoomJester]

Before we get to the next part, let me just clarify a few things. One, I made a post in which I commented about my disdain for the quality of BND's stories. You responded to that with your own opinions about the status quo change and how, in your views, it's not so bad. Fine and dandy, but I wasn't talking about the new status quo. I wasn't even talking about OMD. You. Missed. The. Point.




For one thing, I was not directing what I said about OMD directly at you, it more for general consumption. I quoted you because I was speaking about your analogy and also, the quotes provide clarity. Breaking a sentence into single word non-sentences is really weak internet tough guy and it just doesn't make any grammatical sense. It won't encourage me to believe you more.


Also, your pizza analogy was terribly misleading-- eating pizza for years? You had to have meant pre OMD Spider-man stories. BND hasn't been coming out for years. So while eating the bad cheesburger is a comment on BND's stories, you analogy only makes sense if we accept that there was paradigm shift from pizza to burgers-- JMS Spidey to BND Spidey. Without that, your analogy is off. Without that distinction, there was no shift, just a decline in quality, in which case your analogy is suspect.

[gildea]

But....pizza is good. You should have said....I don't know, liver and onions.


yeah this is where i fell at the fence :(

[Hans]

Jeez, overreact much? There have been nearly 20 issues of BND thus far, and less than 1/3 of them have been less than average quality. That's not a **** burger, that's what a ****ing comic book is: some hits, some misses. Cut the melodrama already.

You're confusing sarcasm with melodrama. I'm not surprised, though.

But anyway, in the 20 issues of BND, I would say 6 of them were above average. That's 30%. That's not what a comic book is. That's what a bad comic book is. And of the 70% that is below average, 30% of that (six books) have been unreadable to me.

[gildea]

Also, your pizza analogy was terribly misleading-- eating pizza for years? You had to have meant pre OMD Spider-man stories. BND hasn't been coming out for years. So while eating the bad cheesburger is a comment on BND's stories, you analogy only makes sense if we accept that there was paradigm shift from pizza to burgers-- JMS Spidey to BND Spidey. Without that, your analogy is off. Without that distinction, there was no shift, just a decline in quality, in which case your analogy is suspect.

problem is thought because the original comment in which the analogy responds to doesn't itself take account of quality any attempt to force it with an analogy would be a stretch.

Basically the original premise is flawed.

[UK_Stu]

Jeez, overreact much? There have been nearly 20 issues of BND thus far, and less than 1/3 of them have been less than average quality. That's not a **** burger, that's what a ****ing comic book is: some hits, some misses. Cut the melodrama already.

Isn't that just it though? 20 issues in and what has really happened?

[DoomJester]

problem is thought because the original comment in which the analogy responds to doesn't itself take account of quality any attempt to force it with an analogy would be a stretch.

Basically the original premise is flawed.

Don't quite get you. Do you mean my premise or Hans'?

[Hans]

But....pizza is good. You should have said....I don't know, liver and onions.

My dad loves liver and onions. I can't get past the smell to actually try a bite. :(

For one thing, I was not directing what I said about OMD directly at you, it more for general consumption. I quoted you because I was speaking about your analogy and also, the quotes provide clarity. Breaking a sentence into single word non-sentences is really weak internet tough guy and it just doesn't make any grammatical sense. It won't encourage me to believe you more.

Ooooookay. :huh:

For future reference, if you're not replying directly to what someone said, it helps to not quote what that person said in your own post. I'm not going to speak for everyone there, it's just something I've always found helpful.

Also, your pizza analogy was terribly misleading-- eating pizza for years? You had to have meant pre OMD Spider-man stories. BND hasn't been coming out for years. So while eating the bad cheesburger is a comment on BND's stories, you analogy only makes sense if we accept that there was paradigm shift from pizza to burgers-- JMS Spidey to BND Spidey. Without that, your analogy is off. Without that distinction, there was no shift, just a decline in quality, in which case your analogy is suspect.

Um. I did mean pre-OMD Spider-Man stories. Perhaps you could read it again, including Blader's post which the analogy was in response to? I might have some sock puppets lying around to break it down further if it'd help...

[UK_Stu]

Hans is sounding like PhotoJones more and more each day...

[javi1024]

well i don't know where i'd placed on this hypocrite, s***burger/pizza discussion you guys got going on up there, but all i can say is i started reading ASM during JMS's run (in fact it was the issue Peter and MJ got back together) so that's the Spider-Man that i know. i enjoyed JMS run, i HATED OMD, i really like BND. i agree, i feel Gale is the weakest in the spidey brain trust, but his issues are still moving things along like who Speedball is, and the Spider-tracer Killer subplot.

I compare BND to a season of Smallville- sure not every issue/episode is spectacular, but each has its moments and they still progress the story to this final over-all ending we've yet to see, and that's why i keep reading.

one complaint though- enough with the editor comments! sure you can make notes to previous issues (i wish all the comics still did that), but i don't care to read that Quesada allowed a cover design or that i'm switching over to see what Aunt May is doing.

and am i the only one disappointed to see Jimenez is drawing the Daredevil team-up? hes not a bad artist by any means, i just don't like him for Spider-Man, and i've been waiting for this team-up for a long time and i was hoping for JRJR or (fingers crossed) McNiven.

[Hans]

well i don't know where i'd placed on this hypocrite, s***burger/pizza discussion you guys got going on up there, but all i can say is i started reading ASM during JMS's run (in fact it was the issue Peter and MJ got back together) so that's the Spider-Man that i know. i enjoyed JMS run, i HATED OMD, i really like BND. i agree, i feel Gale is the weakest in the spidey brain trust, but his issues are still moving things along like who Speedball is, and the Spider-tracer Killer subplot.

I compare BND to a season of Smallville- sure not every issue/episode is spectacular, but each has its moments and they still progress the story to this final over-all ending we've yet to see, and that's why i keep reading.

one complaint though- enough with the editor comments! sure you can make notes to previous issues (i wish all the comics still did that), but i don't care to read that Quesada allowed a cover design or that i'm switching over to see what Aunt May is doing.

and am i the only one disappointed to see Jimenez is drawing the Daredevil team-up? hes not a bad artist by any means, i just don't like him for Spider-Man, and i've been waiting for this team-up for a long time and i was hoping for JRJR or (fingers crossed) McNiven.

I don't mind the editor's notes actually. Marvel should bring them back full-force, as far as I'm concerned.

[gildea]

Don't quite get you. Do you mean my premise or Hans'?

Blader5489 really as it doesn't take account of quality.

Of course if Blader5489 didn't want to reference quality, then the Hans analogy as it tries to enforce a relationship between quality and epic story telling directly because and I have trouble believing that anyone prefers sins past and the other to BND flaws and all. Ie from his explanation both choices seem equally bad.

[TheCorpulent1]

I compare BND to a season of Smallville
That's... not a good thing. :dry:

[kguillou]

Originally Posted by javi1024 View Post
well i don't know where i'd placed on this hypocrite, s***burger/pizza discussion you guys got going on up there, but all i can say is i started reading ASM during JMS's run (in fact it was the issue Peter and MJ got back together) so that's the Spider-Man that i know. i enjoyed JMS run, i HATED OMD, i really like BND. i agree, i feel Gale is the weakest in the spidey brain trust, but his issues are still moving things along like who Speedball is, and the Spider-tracer Killer subplot.

I compare BND to a season of Smallville- sure not every issue/episode is spectacular, but each has its moments and they still progress the story to this final over-all ending we've yet to see, and that's why i keep reading.

one complaint though- enough with the editor comments! sure you can make notes to previous issues (i wish all the comics still did that), but i don't care to read that Quesada allowed a cover design or that i'm switching over to see what Aunt May is doing.

and am i the only one disappointed to see Jimenez is drawing the Daredevil team-up? hes not a bad artist by any means, i just don't like him for Spider-Man, and i've been waiting for this team-up for a long time and i was hoping for JRJR or (fingers crossed) McNiven.


I dunno, i feel like Jimenez is one of the better artists of BND. I really liked his art in Swing Shift, i didnt read Gale's 3 parter, so i cant really judge if his art is still on par, but the preview art from the Daredevil arc looks really good man. The only thing i'm worried about is Guggenheim's writing...(shivers)

[Hans]

I dunno, i feel like Jimenez is one of the better artists of BND. I really liked his art in Swing Shift, i didnt read Gale's 3 parter, so i cant really judge if his art is still on par, but the preview art from the Daredevil arc looks really good man. The only thing i'm worried about is Guggenheim's writing...(shivers)

I like Jimenez's art a lot. His Spider-Man looks like a combination of George Perez and Todd McFarlane.

[DoomJester]

Um. I did mean pre-OMD Spider-Man stories. Perhaps you could read it again, including Blader's post which the analogy was in response to? I might have some sock puppets lying around to break it down further if it'd help...

I don't get you Hans. Please, lets try the sock pupets-- perhaps they'd argue with a bit more clearly and graciously than you. Because I think your story is changing again.

Before we get to the next part, let me just clarify a few things. One, I made a post in which I commented about my disdain for the quality of BND's stories. You responded to that with your own opinions about the status quo change and how, in your views, it's not so bad. Fine and dandy, but I wasn't talking about the new status quo. I wasn't even talking about OMD. You. Missed. The. Point.

I do. I don't like BND. Status quo aside, I don't like the stories or how they're told. I dislike Gale's stories the most. Again, it has nothing to do with OMD. Does that help you to understand?


I went ahead and bolded one point where I don't get you. I understand that you don't like BND. But I'm really confused as to where you're going here. I mean, you can believe what you want about me and my capacity to understand things (I've got nothing against you) but I'm really confused as to what you're saying here, since I feel your argument is sliding around a lot. At this point I'm confused as whether you are talking about OMD or BND. At this point I'm doubting that you even like pizza or cheeseburgers :woot:

[javi1024]

That's... not a good thing. :dry:
well i was talking more about how the stories are structured. im not gonna argue if the show is good or not.

[Hans]

I don't get you Hans. Please, lets try the sock pupets-- perhaps they'd argue with a bit more clearly and graciously than you. Because I think your story is changing again.

Can you do me a favor and point out exactly where my story is changing? Because I can't find it for the life of me.

I went ahead and bolded one point where I don't get you. I understand that you don't like BND. But I'm really confused as to where you're going here. I mean, you can believe what you want about me and my capacity to understand things (I've got nothing against you) but I'm really confused as to what you're saying here, since I feel your argument is sliding around a lot. At this point I'm confused as whether you are talking about OMD or BND. At this point I'm doubting that you even like pizza or cheeseburgers :woot:

I was NEVER talking about OMD. I don't how you could be confused about that. And I think I've made it pretty clear as to just what I AM talking about and HAVE BEEN talking about, so your confusion confuses me.

[DoomJester]

Can you do me a favor and point out exactly where my story is changing? Because I can't find it for the life of me.



I was NEVER talking about OMD. I don't how you could be confused about that. And I think I've made it pretty clear as to just what I AM talking about and HAVE BEEN talking about, so your confusion confuses me.

Okay, basically, it all goes back to your analogy. Pre-OMD, cheese pizza. OMD-- first bad burger? Or was it BND? That distinction is kinda irrelevant. I chose to place the first burger at OMD. I then took issues with your critique of the subsequent stories/burgers. Then you say I missed the point with gale's last issue being unreadable.

I think you feel vindicated in that you never directly said OMD issues 1-4 were bad, so suddenly, I have misunderstood you cause I used the term OMD when you didn't, but I already said your pizza analogy has to presuppose OMD. So, I think the distinction, where I mentioned OMD and you didn't specifically, is a bit of a red herring.

Also, you really just keep saying I didn't understand, when you could just take issue with the content of the posts themselves.

[Doc Destruction]

Holy God this is SO not hard to understand.

The stories are half of the problem. The GETTING THERE SUCKS. That makes for a bad taste in people's mouths NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.

SO, therefore, the end result of OMD sucks, therefore the ENTIRETY of BND sucks for people who cannot get past the OMD part.

Wow. REALLY easy to understand.

[BlackLantern]

Holy God this is SO not hard to understand.

The stories are half of the problem. The GETTING THERE SUCKS. That makes for a bad taste in people's mouths NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.

SO, therefore, the end result of OMD sucks, therefore the ENTIRETY of BND sucks for people who cannot get past the OMD part.

Wow. REALLY easy to understand.

...and some of us don't feel that way...I'm not on a soapbox saying 'OMD' is the bestest ever, but you'd read posts in here and swear it was the worst thing written since the script for 'Batman & Robin'

[Doc Destruction]

Actually, it was worse.

[BlackLantern]

Actually, it was worse.

Stop it....:oldrazz: IMO the worst 'written' Bat film was Batman Returns.....the dialogue can actually make you retarded

[Hans]

Okay, basically, it all goes back to your analogy. Pre-OMD, cheese pizza. OMD-- first bad burger? Or was it BND? That distinction is kinda irrelevant. I chose to place the first burger at OMD. I then took issues with your critique of the subsequent stories/burgers. Then you say I missed the point with gale's last issue being unreadable.

I think you feel vindicated in that you never directly said OMD issues 1-4 were bad, so suddenly, I have misunderstood you cause I used the term OMD when you didn't, but I already said your pizza analogy has to presuppose OMD. So, I think the distinction, where I mentioned OMD and you didn't specifically, is a bit of a red herring.

Also, you really just keep saying I didn't understand, when you could just take issue with the content of the posts themselves.

Why do you keep thinking that I'm trying to pull one over on you? I didn't change my opinions. I didn't change my analogy. Nothing I have said has differed at all. And I cannot be held responsible if you cannot understand any or all of this. There are no red herrings and there's no vindication to be felt. At this point, I'm genuinely confused as to what is so hard for you to comprehend. Here's what has transpired:

1) I gave an analogy about not liking BND's stories, which has nothing to do with OMD.
2) You made a post about how BND isn't bad, and that if I liked MJ, hey, I should like BND, 'cause she's in it, or whatever.
3) I replied to that saying that you missed the point. I wasn't talking about the status quo, rather I was refering to the quality of the stories. I don't like them.

That should have been it, right? A simple clarification that should have ended that part of the discussion. But, no. Here's where it gets weird.

4) You replied, saying that I wasn't talking about BND (when I was) and that everything has changed because I now brought Bob Gale's name into the discussion. Gasp.
5) Again, I explained that it's not about OMD or the fact that BND spins out of it. I don't like BND because I don't think they're well written, especially Gale's.

Again, one would think this would be all that could be said. And again, one would be wrong. It gets even weirder.

6) You then make a post explaining that all this time, you actually weren't referring to anything I said, rather you were just throwing your opinions out there for "the general consumption." Now, this is quite a feat, considering you quoted me in each one of your posts and addressed (incorrectly) them as replies.
7) Obviously bewildered at this point, I offer up some helpful advice about message board posting and suggest you go back and reread the entire exchange, starting with the post of Blader's that I first replied to.
8) Defying all logic, you accuse me of changing my story, but then go on to say that you understand that I do not like BND (victory!), but that you are so confused because "my argument is sliding around a lot."
9) AGAIN, I reiterate my stance for the FIFTH time, none of which has changed one iota since the FIRST time, and ask if you would be so kind as to point out where you feel this "change" in my opinions or comments has occured.
10) Then you reply to that saying that it all stems from my initial analogy. You mention that you've "chosen" to interpret my analogy incorrectly and then accuse me of feeling of vindicated because I did not, in fact, mention OMD.

You're right, I didn't. Because it was never part of the discussion. Your complete failure to stop and listen and understand just what I am talking about is epic. That is why this has gone on for as long as it has. You have literally chosen (your own words) to misinterpret everything I said, despite my continual explanations, in order to have an argument.

There should be no more confusion at this point.

[spideyboy_1111]

Stop it....:oldrazz: IMO the worst 'written' Bat film was Batman Returns.....the dialogue can actually make you retarded

u just loose all sorts of credibility with that one.... i mean have you ever seen Bf or B&R? my god, at least Returns was beautifully done and felt like batman

[BlackLantern]

u just loose all sorts of credibility with that one.... i mean have you ever seen Bf or B&R? my god, at least Returns was beautifully done and felt like batman

the film itself looks fantastic but its written horribly....thats why I emphasized 'written'

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

u just loose all sorts of credibility with that one.... i mean have you ever seen Bf or B&R? my god, at least Returns was beautifully done and felt like batman

Felt like Batman??????

I agree that "Returns" was far better then "Forever" and "Batman&Robin" but "Returns" didnt feel like Batman ether.

Batman killed in "Returns" and that just doesnt feel like Batman to me.

[spideyboy_1111]

batman let die... similar to DD on the subway... he didn't murder. just didn't stop a death. Returns is by far my favorite of the old 4...

[Blader5489]

You're confusing sarcasm with melodrama. I'm not surprised, though.

But anyway, in the 20 issues of BND, I would say 6 of them were above average. That's 30%. That's not what a comic book is. That's what a bad comic book is. And of the 70% that is below average, 30% of that (six books) have been unreadable to me.

Again, that's your opinion. Personally, I think all of Slott's, Guggebheim's, and Wells' issues have been good.

But the fact of the matter is that there is huge difference in storytelling structure (i.e. "life-changing" events or lack thereof) between pre-OMD Spidey and post-OMD Spidey.

Hans is sounding like PhotoJones more and more each day...

I think you nailed it.

[kguillou]

Dude, how can u diss Batman Returns? Classic classic movie, plus michelle pfeiffer was a Hottt Catwoman.

[Hans]

Again, that's your opinion. Personally, I think all of Slott's, Guggebheim's, and Wells' issues have been good.

But the fact of the matter is that there is huge difference in storytelling structure (i.e. "life-changing" events or lack thereof) between pre-OMD Spidey and post-OMD Spidey.

I think you nailed it.

Why do you keep bringing up the fact of the matter about storytelling when I've never once disagreed with you about it? I mean really, why do you keep doing that?

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

batman let die... similar to DD on the subway... he didn't murder. just didn't stop a death. Returns is by far my favorite of the old 4...

No..in "Returns" Batman killed not let someone die.

He took that bomb and put it in the guys pants and then knocked him into a sewer.The guy then blew up and is seen flying threw the sky.

Batman murdered in "Returns" as he did in the first Tim Burton film.

[javi1024]

No..in "Returns" Batman killed not let someone die.

He took that bomb and put it in the guys pants and then knocked him into a sewer.The guy then blew up and is seen flying threw the sky.

Batman murdered in "Returns" as he did in the first Tim Burton film.
and dont forget that he also pushed the Ice Princess off that building. what? thats what that random man in the crowd 500ft below said he saw.:woot:

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

and dont forget that he also pushed the Ice Princess off that building. what? thats what that random man in the crowd 500ft below said he saw.:woot:

Hehe.

[TheCorpulent1]

No..in "Returns" Batman killed not let someone die.

He took that bomb and put it in the guys pants and then knocked him into a sewer.The guy then blew up and is seen flying threw the sky.

Batman murdered in "Returns" as he did in the first Tim Burton film.
Yeah, Burton never got the memo that Batman doesn't kill. I wasn't even all that happy with Nolan's take in Batman Begins of letting Ra's die by not helping him. That sort of thing's fine for Iron Man (and actually made for a great moment in his movie), but I prefer the Batman who's staunchly against taking life regardless of the circumstances.

[javi1024]

Yeah, Burton never got the memo that Batman doesn't kill. I wasn't even all that happy with Nolan's take in Batman Begins of letting Ra's die by not helping him. That sort of thing's fine for Iron Man (and actually made for a great moment in his movie), but I prefer the Batman who's staunchly against taking life regardless of the circumstances.
that didnt bother me really. at first it kinda did, but then i thought maybe he should have offered help (like comic Batman probably would have), but it probably would have come off really cheesy no matter how it was written. plus i'm sure Ra's wouldn't have taken his help anyway.

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Yeah, Burton never got the memo that Batman doesn't kill. I wasn't even all that happy with Nolan's take in Batman Begins of letting Ra's die by not helping him. That sort of thing's fine for Iron Man (and actually made for a great moment in his movie), but I prefer the Batman who's staunchly against taking life regardless of the circumstances.

Thats nothing.

Techniclly Bruce killed the guy posing as Ra's and all the other members of the League of Shadows that died in the fire.Plus all the other possible prisoners that they were keeping in that building.

[BlackLantern]

All right its starting to get all weird and smell like the Bat forums in here and nobody wants that.....to get things back on track....MJ has herpes

[spideyboy_1111]

and she got them from you ;). MJ rocks

[BlackLantern]

and she got them from you ;). MJ rocks

No...she got crabs from me....:oldrazz:

[javi1024]

is there any news on a Black Cat appearance? is she still a Hero for Hire?

[spideyboy_1111]

heroes for hire have been depressingly missing since WWH :(

[TheCorpulent1]

Didn't it get canceled?

[spideyboy_1111]

i guess.... not sure why :( i enjoyed it

[mathhater]

Holy God this is SO not hard to understand.

The stories are half of the problem. The GETTING THERE SUCKS. That makes for a bad taste in people's mouths NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.

SO, therefore, the end result of OMD sucks, therefore the ENTIRETY of BND sucks for people who cannot get past the OMD part.

Wow. REALLY easy to understand.

Nicely put. This is exactly the reason why my life is devoid of Spider-Man right now.

[Jack O Lantern]

Holy God this is SO not hard to understand.

The stories are half of the problem. The GETTING THERE SUCKS. That makes for a bad taste in people's mouths NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.

SO, therefore, the end result of OMD sucks, therefore the ENTIRETY of BND sucks for people who cannot get past the OMD part.

Wow. REALLY easy to understand.

It is hard to understand. You see the people who hate OMD and BND seem to like the marriage. Getting to the marriage made no sense; Peter asking MJ to marry him wasn't a natural progession. It just happened because Marvel wanted to keep up with a Stan Lee comic strip.

[spideyboy_1111]

it might have not made sense at the time of the proposal... but in the grand scheme of things i felt it always has made sense.

[Jack O Lantern]

So that, in your opinion, would be good stories growing out of poorly written changes?

[gildea]

Holy God this is SO not hard to understand.

The stories are half of the problem. The GETTING THERE SUCKS. That makes for a bad taste in people's mouths NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.

SO, therefore, the end result of OMD sucks, therefore the ENTIRETY of BND sucks for people who cannot get past the OMD part.

Wow. REALLY easy to understand.


Curious.

Can time take away the taste of OMD or would a retacon be needed?

[spideyboy_1111]

So that, in your opinion, would be good stories growing out of poorly written changes?

i think if you ignore the absence of MJ for a few years prior to the proposal yes... but over all i think esp with marvel time it made sense. they split, he dated around with black cat.. she dissed him, MJ came back into it, he proposed, she said no, they grew apart a lil bit and she came back admitting she knew he was spidey.. and then he proposed again and they got hitched. with the marvel time formula of 5 years equals about 1... it makes logical sense. Plus alot of great things have come from poorly written stories... House of M for instance.. we got decimation (which totally made new/young x-men awesome), X-factor, etc...

[javi1024]

Curious.

Can time take away the taste of OMD or would a retacon be needed?
im more than certain in 3 yrs or so OMD will just be another bad story in Spider-Man canon and things will go on like it never happened.

[spideyboy_1111]

im more than certain in 3 yrs or so OMD will just be another bad story in Spider-Man canon and things will go on like it never happened.

yup... "and now we play the waiting game"

[kguillou]

I feel the same way, people will come to accept the new status quo in time.

[venom892]

I'm just buying Back issues.Works for me.Got some Jenkins issues for a Quarter a pop.

[Themanofbat]

I have all the issues of all Spidey related series as well as ASM #1 to current, so I have no need to buy back issues.

Though I need an AF #15... and unlike Elijya, I hope I can find one without having my Dad buy one for me.

:cmad: :cmad: :cmad:

:csad:

[javi1024]

I have all the issues of all Spidey related series as well as ASM #1 to current, so I have no need to buy back issues.
wow. thats pretty impressive. when you say ASM #1 are you talking about Spider-Man vs. Fantastic Four, and first appearance of Chameleon #1? how much did that one send you back?

[Themanofbat]

wow. thats pretty impressive. when you say ASM #1 are you talking about Spider-Man vs. Fantastic Four, and first appearance of Chameleon #1? how much did that one send you back?

Yes, I mean the 1963 second appearance of Spider-Man #1...

Got it back in 1990... paid around $1000 for it... if it were CGC'd, it'd probably be between a 3.5 to a 4.5...

Started collecting around 1978, though I had been buying since 1975, got most of my Spider-Man back issues during the 80's, and the others that came from the 80's onward were simply bought off the rack.

:yay:

[Doc Destruction]

Curious.

Can time take away the taste of OMD or would a retacon be needed?

I'm going to say reset, retcon or ignoring - that would be a-ok with me.

[venom892]

Yes, I mean the 1963 second appearance of Spider-Man #1...

Got it back in 1990... paid around $1000 for it... if it were CGC'd, it'd probably be between a 3.5 to a 4.5...

Started collecting around 1978, though I had been buying since 1975, got most of my Spider-Man back issues during the 80's, and the others that came from the 80's onward were simply bought off the rack.

:yay:I have Spider-man #1...The Mcfarlane one.:oI hope one day to amass your collection.

[Arach Knight]

Double Post

[Arach Knight]

I think it stands to be said that the best we can do, is sit and wait for things to pan out, rather than dismissing BND simply because nothing "amazing" (no pun intended) hasn't happened yet. I seem to recall that pretty much every crappy Spider-Man story occured under Mary Jane's tenure...

-Clone Saga
-Sins Past
-The Other

And what really sucks is that part of Sins Past is Mary Jane's fault for not telling Peter in the first place, when she knew a little more than she was leading on. I'm not saying MJ ist terrible, nor is she directly to blame for the bad stories that happened in the past (with exception to Sins Past). But just because nothing impressive has happened yet without her, doesn't mean that everything impressive happened with her. At this point, at least Spidey has returned to exactly who he used to be, instead of a hypocrite (unmasking) with powers that make no sense (stinger shafts, bug telepathy etc). I'm still giving it a shot...and thus far, BND isn't as bad as message board hyperbole would lead one to believe.

[BlackLantern]

it just shows that MJ, like most women, are the root of all evil....

[fifthfiend]

it just shows that MJ, like most women, are the root of all evil....

I always suspected that OMD/BND fandom was rooted in outright misogyny but it's awesome to have it confirmed.:up:

[BlackLantern]

Misogyny?? I don't think so...considering the stuff I've read, you'd swear MJ was a pioneer for womens' rights, that Pete beats her and how dare anyone who reads Spider-Man not like her....Ive never seen more ardent white knighting in my life

[Arach Knight]

Actually that can be mathematically proven.

Women = Money x Time

Money = Time

Therefore

Women = Money ^2 (Money Squared or Money to the second power)

Money ^2 = Evil

The Square Root of Money ^2 gives us...

Money = Square Root of Evil.


Women therefore are the root of all evil.

(Please note this is sarcasm and a "forumula" that I have seen previously and find some what humorous, though obviously not true).

[Blader5489]

Yes, I mean the 1963 second appearance of Spider-Man #1...

Got it back in 1990... paid around $1000 for it... if it were CGC'd, it'd probably be between a 3.5 to a 4.5...

Started collecting around 1978, though I had been buying since 1975, got most of my Spider-Man back issues during the 80's, and the others that came from the 80's onward were simply bought off the rack.

:yay:

Holy hell. :wow:

[venom892]

I think it stands to be said that the best we can do, is sit and wait for things to pan out, rather than dismissing BND simply because nothing "amazing" (no pun intended) hasn't happened yet. I seem to recall that pretty much every crappy Spider-Man story occured under Mary Jane's tenure...

-Clone Saga
-Sins Past
-The Other

And what really sucks is that part of Sins Past is Mary Jane's fault for not telling Peter in the first place, when she knew a little more than she was leading on. I'm not saying MJ ist terrible, nor is she directly to blame for the bad stories that happened in the past (with exception to Sins Past). But just because nothing impressive has happened yet without her, doesn't mean that everything impressive happened with her. At this point, at least Spidey has returned to exactly who he used to be, instead of a hypocrite (unmasking) with powers that make no sense (stinger shafts, bug telepathy etc). I'm still giving it a shot...and thus far, BND isn't as bad as message board hyperbole would lead one to believe.A lot of great stories happened while Pete was married to MJ too.Kraven' Last Hunt,Spectacular #200, Etc..But It all depends on the Writer.A Writer or editor who says that marriage is holding a character back from great stories isn't a good writer and/or editor.I mean what Plot points from BND could of been hindered by the marriage?Except for maybe Pete not being able to date other women or MJ banging other guys?What about BND would be different if they were married?The same stories could still have taken place.Also I'm pissed May doesn't know his identity anymore.That really sucks because under JMS may's character improve ten fold and it just makes sense for her to know.Also the whole Harry thing sucks too.He shouldn't be back.This whole Spidey didn't have a supporting cast before BND is not true.In sensational and FN we got Deborah Witman,Flash,Betty Brant,Black Cat,Puma,Etc.So yea it doesn't fly.OMD was unnecessary and just plain ****ty.Whether or not BND is good is irrelevant.What I'm saying is reverting the status quo back that much was just stupid and as I said it's not just the marriage going that bothered me.Also you don't need a clean slate to introduce new villains. New Villains and supporting cast have been over the years introduced in Spidey books all the time.It they were popular they stuck{Hobgoblin,Venom,Glory Grant,Etc.}If they sucked you never heard from them again.So as I said a good writer{s}is all a book needs to be enjoyable.This sudden status quo change wasn't necessary to have simpler stories ether.So this whole BND day thing to me is all just a shame so people don't see just how much they changed things just for the EIC convenience.

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

I think it stands to be said that the best we can do, is sit and wait for things to pan out, rather than dismissing BND simply because nothing "amazing" (no pun intended) hasn't happened yet..

I hate to say it this way but.....How long are we expected to wait for BND to live up to the promise it was intended to bring.

I havent really completely enjoyed one single issue of BND.And the small parts that I did enjoy would have been the same if they had not change history.

So far the change in history has not improved the stories they have been telling and none of the stories so far told would have been very different if MJ and Pete were still married.

As far as I can tell the change in history was a big waste of time.

I seem to recall that pretty much every crappy Spider-Man story occured under Mary Jane's tenure...

-Clone Saga
-Sins Past
-The Other.

So your blaming a fictional character in a story for how bad the stories were.

Thats like blaming the bat for not connecting with the ball in a game of base ball.

Blame the writters or the editor not a fictional character.

[Arach Knight]

Actually if you had finished quoting me...I said...

"I'm not saying MJ ist terrible, nor is she directly to blame for the bad stories that happened in the past (with exception to Sins Past)."

I actually stated that terrible stories occured while MJ was around and that her absence has nothing to do with the current run of stories and their "goodness" or badness." Stories were bad with her, and to some (I for one like BND) stories so far have been bad without her. People act like if she returns and they are married again and he gets back stupid powers that made no sense (some people see stingers and bug telepathy as progression...but I just call it ridiculous) that suddenly the stories will improve. But I feel differently about it. I think people treat MJ like Linus (from Peanuts) treats his blanket. It just makes things more comfortable. If we stick to the idea that the writers are the problem, then it wouldn't matter if MJ were back because Dan Slott and the rest of the Brain Trust would still be writing the stories. This is why I keep saying that people need to give BND a chance. MJ doesn't make or break these stories.

[fifthfiend]

Misogyny?? I don't think so...considering the stuff I've read, you'd swear MJ was a pioneer for womens' rights, that Pete beats her and how dare anyone who reads Spider-Man not like her....Ive never seen more ardent white knighting in my life

Thank you for both totally missing the point of and also reconfirming my previous statement.:up:

People act like if she returns and they are married again and he gets back stupid powers that made no sense (some people see stingers and bug telepathy as progression...but I just call it ridiculous) that suddenly the stories will improve.

The voices you hear - do they tell you to do things?

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Actually if you had finished quoting me...I said...

"I'm not saying MJ ist terrible, nor is she directly to blame for the bad stories that happened in the past (with exception to Sins Past)."

I actually stated that terrible stories occured while MJ was around and that her absence has nothing to do with the current run of stories and their "goodness" or badness." Stories were bad with her, and to some (I for one like BND) stories so far have been bad without her. People act like if she returns and they are married again and he gets back stupid powers that made no sense (some people see stingers and bug telepathy as progression...but I just call it ridiculous) that suddenly the stories will improve. But I feel differently about it. I think people treat MJ like Linus (from Peanuts) treats his blanket. It just makes things more comfortable. If we stick to the idea that the writers are the problem, then it wouldn't matter if MJ were back because Dan Slott and the rest of the Brain Trust would still be writing the stories. This is why I keep saying that people need to give BND a chance. MJ doesn't make or break these stories.

I didnt finish quoting your post because I didnt feel the rest was relivent to the point I was trying to get across.

Now do I want MJ back....Yes.
Do I want any of those stupid powers back....No.

Do I think that MJ makes or breakes a story..........No.

And thats my point.

Joe Q went on for years about how it was MJ's fault that good Spidy stories couldnt be told and as BND proves thats just not true.

I'm not saying that all the BND stories sucked but MJ's absence did nothing to improve those stories.

Losing 20+ years of Spidy history has not improved the story telling one bit yet.

And I know that Joe Q has gone on an on saying that the history wasnt wiped but magically changed so that nobody rememberse it but it still happened but thats bull.

Whats the point of the history if no-one remembers it.

Jo Q effectively erased over 20 years of history just to reduse one characters importance on the promise that it would improve the stories and it hasent.

[iloveclones]

I always suspected that OMD/BND fandom was rooted in outright misogyny but it's awesome to have it confirmed.:up:

Actually, the OMD/BND detractors show that exact quality. What's their reasoning for having her around:

Pete deserves happiness
Pete deserves someone to come home to
Pete should have someone to talk to
Pete should have someone supporting him

They may as well just say they want her barefoot and in the kitchen. Someone even posted a statue that basically has her in that stereotype.

Never do they say how much they miss her career and its developments. Never do they say they miss her family and what that brings to the table. They never talk about MJs circle of friends (a party girl without friends, go figure) I've never once, not once, seen anyone ask, let alone clamor, for her own title.

All the MJ "fans" care about, is that she's there for her man. An object for Pete. If that's not misogyny, I don't know what is.

[BrianWilly]

Yeah that's...not misogyny. http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/sally/lol.gif Misogyny requires an actual hatred or disapproval of women. That's male chauvinism, and only barely so even with all that deliberate twisting of words and strawmanning that you've done.

[I Am The Bat]

Yes, I mean the 1963 second appearance of Spider-Man #1...

Got it back in 1990... paid around $1000 for it... if it were CGC'd, it'd probably be between a 3.5 to a 4.5...

Started collecting around 1978, though I had been buying since 1975, got most of my Spider-Man back issues during the 80's, and the others that came from the 80's onward were simply bought off the rack.

:yay:

That CGCing sure cost a lot of money - My dad has AF 15 and, from what I can remember, most spidey appearances after that. I was going to get the CGC thing for him a couple years back, but it seems like the more rare/valuable the comic is the more they charge.

P.S.

I love Pimps on Go-Karts

[iloveclones]

Yeah that's...not misogyny. http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/sally/lol.gif Misogyny requires an actual hatred or disapproval of women. That's male chauvinism, and only barely so even with all that deliberate twisting of words and strawmanning that you've done.

Sure it is. You've just taken the most narrow definition of the word. Hell, in the primaries, I was hearing the joke that you had to decide whether you were a racist or a misogynist. So if I'm misusing it, so is most of America. I took this off of wiki, but I'm sure I could find it in more "legitimate" places:

Traditional feminist theorist propose many different forms of misogyny. In its most overt expression, a misogynist will openly hate all women simply because they are female. Other forms of misogyny may be less overt. Some misogynists may simply be prejudiced against all women, or may hate women who do not fall into one or more acceptable categories. Entire cultures may be said to be misogynist if they treat women in ways that can be seen as harmful. Examples include forcing women to tend to all domestic responsibilities, not giving pregnant women jobs, or beating a woman. Subscribers to one model, the mother/whore dichotomy, hold that women can only be "mothers" or "whores." Another variant is the virgin/whore dichotomy, in which women who do not adhere to a saintly standard of moral purity are considered "whores".

The last part is extremely pertinent, since some "MJ fans" in these parts are now calling her a **** because she >gasp< was in bed with someone other than the chosen one. The horror. THE HORROR.

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position

Those above quotes are examples of things I have heard many, many times in this debate of this subject. If you can find the threads devoted to MJ's career,family, etc, I'd be more than glad to look at them. Otherwise, MJ only exists in the setting that I put out there (I actually shouldn't be taking credit/blame. I saw someone else make this case. I'm just kind of bumping it up).

Now I know, this will cause people to respond with the correct answer, since it's so readily available on the internet: But I betchya, without looking, that most of these "fans" of MJ couldn't even say whether or not she has a brother/sister, or what his/her name is.

[BlackLantern]

the bug telepathy was odd....but I didn't mind the stingers or the enhanced Spider sense....

[Themanofbat]

Holy hell. :wow:

I was 23 back then with a "real job" and more money than I knew what to do with it...

Bought lots of comics, records, got drunk a lot... good times...

:yay:

[Themanofbat]

That CGCing sure cost a lot of money - My dad has AF 15 and, from what I can remember, most spidey appearances after that. I was going to get the CGC thing for him a couple years back, but it seems like the more rare/valuable the comic is the more they charge.

P.S.

I love Pimps on Go-Karts

I don't think I'd ever get a comic CGC'd, because then I could never read it, touch it, smell it, etc...

People like it because it gives them some kind of "real" grading process, when the reality is that the CGC'd comic is graded based on the same guy who used to grade your comics G, VG, F, VF, NM & Mint...

:whatever: :whatever: :whatever:

I've worked in comic shops for almost 15 years of my life (managed one for 4 years), so I have a pretty good handle on how to "grade" my books... in fact, when I go to the shop I buy my books from, the owner will often ask me my opinion of what to grade certain back issues (he typically disagrees with me because I'm fairly honest mith my grading but he wants the higher priced value, so he'll disregard my reasons for it being a lower quality book :csad: )

I have a friend who is a HUGE Juggernaut fan and got his copy of Uncanny X-Men #12 CGC'd and within 2 years, he cracked open the case because he couldn't stand not having access to his book. :up:

:yay:

[moraldeficiency]

That's something I never really understood about collectors, sometimes it seems like they're much more interested in preserving the intregrity of the comic than actually enjoying it. It's part of the reason I give mine away so I don't get caught up in all that.

[Themanofbat]

Losing 20+ years of Spidy history has not improved the story telling one bit yet.

And I know that Joe Q has gone on an on saying that the history wasnt wiped but magically changed so that nobody rememberse it but it still happened but thats bull.

Whats the point of the history if no-one remembers it.

Jo Q effectively erased over 20 years of history just to reduse one characters importance on the promise that it would improve the stories and it hasent.

You're not getting it completely...

Everybody remembers their histories and those past stories...

What they don't remember is that Peter Parker is Spider-Man.

So stories involving a villain who knew his identity (Norman, Harry, Eddie Brock, as examples) still remember fighting Spider-Man, they just can't remember who he is currently (even though they knew who he was AT THE TIME... pre OMD).

Hopefully, with August/September's "New Ways to Die" storyline, it'll help us understand the new relationships with Norman & Eddie versus Peter.

:yay:

[TheCorpulent1]

What about the people who remember Harry dying? Has that been addressed yet?

[moraldeficiency]

You're not getting it completely...

Everybody remembers their histories and those past stories...

What they don't remember is that Peter Parker is Spider-Man.

So stories involving a villain who knew his identity (Norman, Harry, Eddie Brock, as examples) still remember fighting Spider-Man, they just can't remember who he is currently (even though they knew who he was AT THE TIME... pre OMD).

Hopefully, with August/September's "New Ways to Die" storyline, it'll help us understand the new relationships with Norman & Eddie versus Peter.

:yay:

It's fairly basic as a premise and it works as long as you don't acknowledge any of the stories or events that happened because someone knew his identity (like the time the black cat lived with peter parker) and you're willing to say that no one on earth really cared to understand why the civil war reveal of who spider-man really was became wiped from the minds of everyone on earth right before a massive alien takeover (because people don't question those things).

So if you can ignore the first and accept the second without question then welcome to a brand new day!

[Themanofbat]

That's something I never really understood about collectors, sometimes it seems like they're much more interested in preserving the intregrity of the comic than actually enjoying it. It's part of the reason I give mine away so I don't get caught up in all that.

I like to keep my comics in as best a shape as I can, but I'll still want to read them and enjoy them... because the reality is that I will never sell my Spider-Man collection, so the "value" is only something that I can brag to my friends/comic peers about...

It's like record collecting (which I do as well)... you want to keep playing those records from time to time, but you still have to keep them in decent shape.

:yay:

[Miss Webb]

I don't know, Peter just seems diminished to me. Back to a joke, third tier character in the marvel universe. i actually liked the Other because I thought it expanded on the spider mythos more than the hack, 60s James Bond sci fi bit. because really Peter never developed his scientific skills any further after the webshooters anyway. As far as Sins Past goes, I had no real problem with it EXCEPT for Osborne. It just seemed too implausible to think Gwen would hook up with him (although weirder things happen in real life with desperate, lonely people).

I don't get the complaints about his increased powers either. he rarely used them, they weren't often addressed, and it wasn't as if he could bend the universe to his will. but some spidey fans seemed to feel threatened by this, as if Peter no longer represented 'them' so they kept saying he was too powerful. Too powerful for what?

Also his spider side had the potential for many new friends and enemies from the other side of his heritage. All that gone now. so let's break out the popsicles, squint our eyes and pretend. That's pretty much all that's left.

And I rarely believe editors when they say something is permanent. Those other 'permanent' changes didn't even last a year.

[TheCorpulent1]

Those other "permanent" changes probably didn't have so many people who work at Marvel behind them, either. Joe Q's not the only one who wanted the marriage gone and Peter closer to his '70s status quo.

[BlackLantern]

so is something wrong with those at Marvel who weren't fans of Parker being married......??

[Themanofbat]

It's fairly basic as a premise and it works as long as you don't acknowledge any of the stories or events that happened because someone knew his identity (like the time the black cat lived with peter parker) and you're willing to say that no one on earth really cared to understand why the civil war reveal of who spider-man really was became wiped from the minds of everyone on earth right before a massive alien takeover (because people don't question those things).

So if you can ignore the first and accept the second without question then welcome to a brand new day!

And that is what many of us (I can only assume here) are doing... hoping that logical explanations will come (such as the aforementioned "New Ways to Die" storyline... I hope that will touch upon Peter's relations with Norman, Eddie and even the symbiote)...

Next month has a Daredevil team-up with Spidey, so maybe we'll see something there...

:yay:

[TheCorpulent1]

so is something wrong with those at Marvel who weren't fans of Parker being married......??
I don't know, is there? I certainly didn't imply that. :huh:

[moraldeficiency]

so is something wrong with those at Marvel who weren't fans of Parker being married......??

Not at all, and as I've said many times before it isn't ending the marriage that I'm (and others) are pissed about it's the way it was done.

Yesterday (I believe it was yesterday) blader and I had an actual debate as to how many mystical abortions Peter Parker had after he made a deal with the devil to force an old woman back to life against her will.

^think about that sentence for a moment. (I'll wait till you finish throwing up violently).....(done?).....(now?.... ok, good) That is a sentence and thought I never considered possible until recently and just looking at it..... there's no heroism or good that can come from that and that's what got us to Brand New Day (which is getting rather old especially since that title doesn't seem to be going anywhere, after how many months is something no longer new?).

And that in a nutshell is the reason most of us are boycotting the book.

[Themanofbat]

What about the people who remember Harry dying? Has that been addressed yet?

It hasn't been addressed yet, but the general thought is that Harry simply survived the ambulance ride to the hospital and then moved to Europe for rehabilitation.

[moraldeficiency]

And that is what many of us (I can only assume here) are doing... hoping that logical explanations will come (such as the aforementioned "New Ways to Die" storyline... I hope that will touch upon Peter's relations with Norman, Eddie and even the symbiote)...

Next month has a Daredevil team-up with Spidey, so maybe we'll see something there...

:yay:


Do you think Felicia will ever be explained? Or the reason why no one looked into why their memories were erased? Cause I'd think some people like Dr. Strange, Mr. Fantastic, JJJ, Tony Stark, Doctor Doom, Doctor Octopus, Norman Osborn, the staff of every news agency in the world, and plenty of others would probably not just write that off without an investigation.

[Themanofbat]

Do you think Felicia will ever be explained? Or the reason why no one looked into why their memories were erased? Cause I'd think some people like Dr. Strange, Mr. Fantastic, JJJ, Tony Stark, Doctor Doom, Doctor Octopus, Norman Osborn, the staff of every news agency in the world, and plenty of others would probably not just write that off without an investigation.

You're right... and while it may just simply be "shelved" at Marvel with a "let's just move on" attitude, it might also be a bigger background story that could culminate in ASM #600...

We've only had 6 months of BND, with the first 4 being the generic "let's get our writers' feet wet" stories... now we're starting to see Spidey more involved with other Marvel U. characters, and only time will tell as to whether Marvel will follow up on that.

30 years ago, some minor sub plot lines took over 2 years to develop (the burglar returning started in ASM #170 and ended in ASM #200 (and we only found out in ASM #193 that it was THE burglar)... so if Marvel plans on returning Spider-Man to THAT kind of storytelling, it could be a while before they flesh this out (that is IF they decide to go that route)...

:huh: :huh: :huh:

I wish I knew what to say... but I don't know what's going to happen, but I will enjoy the stories for what they are now... good ol' fun Spider-Man stories.

:yay:

[Doc Destruction]

Hope sells a lot of copies of ASM these days. Sheesh.

[moraldeficiency]

Hope sells a lot of copies of ASM these days. Sheesh.

ah, hope is losing sales apparently, I blame this on obama.

[BlackLantern]

the last sales figures I looked at had ASM selling OK...nothing extraordinary, but selling strong

[Darthphere]

Still selling better than pre-OMD Spider-Man books combined.

[TheCorpulent1]

We've only had 6 months of BND, with the first 4 being the generic "let's get our writers' feet wet" stories... now we're starting to see Spidey more involved with other Marvel U. characters, and only time will tell as to whether Marvel will follow up on that.

30 years ago, some minor sub plot lines took over 2 years to develop (the burglar returning started in ASM #170 and ended in ASM #200 (and we only found out in ASM #193 that it was THE burglar)... so if Marvel plans on returning Spider-Man to THAT kind of storytelling, it could be a while before they flesh this out (that is IF they decide to go that route)...
I honestly don't mean this to sound snarky or rude, but comics aren't the same now as they were 30 years ago. With creators leaving high-profile comics after just 6 or 8 issues and taking all their subplots with them while the next creator does his or her own thing, readers have come to expect a more immediate style of storytelling. In today's terms, 6 months is a long time, especially at 3 issues per month. That's the equivalent of a year and a half of any other comic except DC's weeklies. If readers are still complaining that there's little progress or questions aren't being answered after 18 issues, it seems pretty valid to me. That's just my outsider's perspective on it, since I'm not actually reading ASM.

[moraldeficiency]

You're right... and while it may just simply be "shelved" at Marvel with a "let's just move on" attitude, it might also be a bigger background story that could culminate in ASM #600...

We've only had 6 months of BND, with the first 4 being the generic "let's get our writers' feet wet" stories... now we're starting to see Spidey more involved with other Marvel U. characters, and only time will tell as to whether Marvel will follow up on that.

30 years ago, some minor sub plot lines took over 2 years to develop (the burglar returning started in ASM #170 and ended in ASM #200 (and we only found out in ASM #193 that it was THE burglar)... so if Marvel plans on returning Spider-Man to THAT kind of storytelling, it could be a while before they flesh this out (that is IF they decide to go that route)...

:huh: :huh: :huh:

I wish I knew what to say... but I don't know what's going to happen, but I will enjoy the stories for what they are now... good ol' fun Spider-Man stories.

:yay:

I can't really subscribe to the writer's getting their feet wet, when you come onto the keystone character for a universe you bring your A game right from the start or you don't bother. And with the almost weekly scheadule the writers have had more than a year in standard comic time to get to get us here and here isn't all that great, IMO. A lizard knock off that smokes crack (which was just a bad scene for ASM), another goblin wannabe (and I just can't wait for him to make his bones by kicking osborn's ass, super), Mr. Negative is kinda interesting but he'd be better if not so generic, pete living with his aunt, pete the pappo, the ever intriguing Jackpot, JJJ replaced by someone that looks like a bad copied version of himself, and the parker (parkour?) luck.

I don't mind long term storylines, I find them preferable actually. But there's a difference between a mystery and a plothole that needs to be addressed. Mysteries are created purposefully to add intrigue while plotholes are weakpoints that need to be worked out to avoid confusion and bad storytelling. Plothole's don't become mysteries over time either, despite what they're trying to pull here.

[kguillou]

^I completely 110% agree with that post, there is a difference between plotholes and mysteries. Right now the readers are more concerned with the plotholes rather than the mysteries, that shouldn't be. We should be concerned with "who is the spider tracer killer?", or "who is jackpot?" or "what will mr negative do with peter parker's blood sample?", and other stuff like that. Instead i think all the readers care about are " How the F%*$ is Harry alive?" and " How the F&*$ does no one remember the unmasking??" and " What did MJ whisper to Mephisto?", those are plotholes. In order to move on to the new mysteries, the plotholes need to be addressed.

[iloveclones]

Well, they only need to be addressed to the people who don't like BND. Those are the only people talking about it. And a fair number of them aren't even buying it (and Marvel doesn't need to cater to them at all). Those of us who are enjoying it don't really care about what you call plot holes. Just like I never cared about Baby May.

If you'd like Harry addressed, fine. It's really no more complex than it was for his father. Rather than dying in the ambulance, it turns out that he came close, maybe even went into cardiac failure, but they brought him back. It was then decided to secret him off to Europe and let people think he died, a sort of Witness Protection Program for rich people. It took exactly thirty seconds to think it up. I'm sure if you wanted to, you (or Slott, et al) could come up with something even better. I'm not the kind of person who needs everything spoon fed to me immediately. I can use my own imagination, and wait to see what they come up with. But in the end, if they never give any more explanation, that's fine with me.

[BlackLantern]

^^what he said....if they address it fine, but I won't hold my breath

[kguillou]

Yea, i undertsand what your saying, but here's the thing: it's one thing to do a big retcon, never mention it again and move on, like baby may. But its another thing, to do a big retcon and keep teasing us and reminding us about it. If they never mentioned or hinted at OMd ever again, i'd be fine with it, but thats not what they're doing. They're still using OMD plotholes to drive their new stories. If marvel wants us to truly forget OMD and move on then they should just close the door and leave it shut instead of constantly re-opening it. I wanna forget OMD and enjoy BND, but just when i was starting to, that had to have MJ appear and indicate that she still remembers everything. And this is obviously a big subplot thats going to be addressed later, which means that OMD isn't over yet. Do you see my point?

[Themanofbat]

Yea, i undertsand what your saying, but here's the thing: it's one thing to do a big retcon, never mention it again and move on, like baby may. But its another thing, to do a big retcon and keep teasing us and reminding us about it. If they never mentioned or hinted at OMd ever again, i'd be fine with it, but thats not what they're doing. They're still using OMD plotholes to drive their new stories. If marvel wants us to truly forget OMD and move on then they should just close the door and leave it shut instead of constantly re-opening it. I wanna forget OMD and enjoy BND, but just when i was starting to, that had to have MJ appear and indicate that she still remembers everything. And this is obviously a big subplot thats going to be addressed later, which means that OMD isn't over yet. Do you see my point?

And as I mentioned earlier, it's probably because the aftermath of OMD will "probably" be a bigger background story that could culminate in ASM #600...

But that's just specualtion on my part...

:huh: :huh: :huh:

:yay:

[moraldeficiency]

And as I mentioned earlier, it's probably because the aftermath of OMD will "probably" be a bigger background story that could culminate in ASM #600...

But that's just specualtion on my part...

:huh: :huh: :huh:

:yay:

If that's true and it ends with pete realizing what a stupid tool he is and getting back with MJ (they could kill her after that if they wanted, just do it well for god's sake), then I'll not only take back some of my comments (not all, some were deserved no matter what), I'll also pick up every trade I missed.


My personal theory is that ASM #666 will retcon this whole mess and that will be forced by poor sales and lack on interest a la clone saga.

[JackBauer]

If you'd like Harry addressed, fine. It's really no more complex than it was for his father. Rather than dying in the ambulance, it turns out that he came close, maybe even went into cardiac failure, but they brought him back. It was then decided to secret him off to Europe and let people think he died, a sort of Witness Protection Program for rich people. It took exactly thirty seconds to think it up. I'm sure if you wanted to, you (or Slott, et al) could come up with something even better. I'm not the kind of person who needs everything spoon fed to me immediately. I can use my own imagination, and wait to see what they come up with. But in the end, if they never give any more explanation, that's fine with me.

I think the real question regarding Harry is how in the blue f**k does Spidey and MJ not marrying and everyone forgetting who Spidey is being suddenly translates to Harry being alive. That's the real plothole the detractors want answered.

[Anubis]

Maybe that's what MJ whispered in Mephisto's ear. For Harry to come back. Cuz it has f**k all to do with them not getting hitched.

[iloveclones]

I think the real question regarding Harry is how in the blue f**k does Spidey and MJ not marrying and everyone forgetting who Spidey is being suddenly translates to Harry being alive. That's the real plothole the detractors want answered.

And as I've said, if the detractors aren't buying, why should Marvel really care what they think? Now if they are buying, and they are great in number (which I doubt) than it should be addressed. Me, I don't care.

[Anubis]

I'm not reading it and I don't care either way.

[TheCorpulent1]

I'm mildly curious to see how inept the explanation turns out, but I'm not buying.

[JackBauer]

I'm mildly curious to see how inept the explanation turns out, but I'm not buying.

Same here: not buying, but I have this morbid curiosity to see how the hell they'll try to make sense of this mess.

[TheCorpulent1]

S'why I keep up with this thread. :)

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

You're not getting it completely...

Everybody remembers their histories and those past stories...

What they don't remember is that Peter Parker is Spider-Man.

So stories involving a villain who knew his identity (Norman, Harry, Eddie Brock, as examples) still remember fighting Spider-Man, they just can't remember who he is currently (even though they knew who he was AT THE TIME... pre OMD).

Hopefully, with August/September's "New Ways to Die" storyline, it'll help us understand the new relationships with Norman & Eddie versus Peter.

:yay:

I get it and thats bull.

The marriage being removed from the equation changes the depth of the stories.It changes the meaning of why Pete made some of the choice and those things change the overall direction of each of those stories.

Every day of my life as a married man I make choices with my wifes intreast in mind and I take her needs and desires into account before I make those choices.

I've made some choices as a married man that I would never have even thought of if I were single.

As a single man I wouldnt even have to facter her into my choice making issues.

And thats how history was changed.

Even if Pete may have made the same choices marries or single how he came to make those choices is ultimately changed.

The choice had less depth and less feeling.

And it also changes the feeling of the connection between the reader and the story.

How many married guys felt for Pete when they were reading how he was put in those positions.

That connection that those readers felt with the charactee is damaged if not 100% completely lost.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

If the change benefited the character then fine....but so far nothings improved at all.

[BlackLantern]

How many Spider-Man readers are actually married? It seems a rather small number, IMO

[Hans]

How many comic book readers in general are married?

[moraldeficiency]

bad road to go down, it ends with generic nothingness as the rule of the day.

[TheCorpulent1]

Is this about relatability again? The idea that single people can't relate to a married guy seems to just be something thrown around to cover for the fact that the people writing Spider-Man at various times in his marriage simply cut out his entire personal life except for his wife. That's a fault of the writers, not relatability or the marriage. Plenty of married people still have friends and interesting personal lives.

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

How many Spider-Man readers are actually married? It seems a rather small number, IMO

How many comic book readers in general are married?

To answer both your questions....I suspect the number is greater then you think.

I'm 37 years old and I've been collection comics since I was 6 years old.

And in all my life everyone that I know or have knowen that reads comics and Spidy comics in particular is ether married or had been married more then once.

Every adult that shops at the local comic shop that I go to now has ether been married or is still married.

Granted its not a big shop.

But every one I grew up with that read comics was also married and still reading Spidy comics durring the late 80's and early 90's.

Is this about relatability again? The idea that single people can't relate to a married guy seems to just be something thrown around to cover for the fact that the people writing Spider-Man at various times in his marriage simply cut out his entire personal life except for his wife. That's a fault of the writers, not relatability or the marriage. Plenty of married people still have friends and interesting personal lives.

I couldnt have said it better.

[BlackLantern]

so why should Marvel be deferential to married Peter as opposed to single Peter?? Thats' what it sounds like to me

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

so why should Marvel be deferential to married Peter as opposed to single Peter?? Thats' what it sounds like to me

No ones saying they should.

But Marvel crossed that bridge when the married him off.It was their choice.They weren't forced to do it.

And yes its also their choice to do what they want to with the character now but at least the chances to the character should benfit the character [much like the change to Hal Jordens continuity has] and then the reader and so far the change has not proven worth it.

Even most of those that like BND so far have admitted that MJ's preseance wouldnt have changed the story at all really.

[TheCorpulent1]

I don't really care whether Peter's married or not. It was the whole deal with the devil aspect that soured me on OMD. I just think the cries of "marriage = unrelatable" are a giant crock of horse****.

[Hans]

If being able to relate to a character means you have to share the same kind qualities, then America has proven itself with Iron Man to be a nation of alcoholic billionaire, industrialist playboys.

[TheCorpulent1]

I know there's nothing I like more than making my personal jet wait while I work on my classic hot rod's engine. :up:

[Anubis]

Or getting lap dances from flight attendants.

[TheCorpulent1]

I cracked up so hard when I saw that pole rising up from the floor. So Tony. :D

[gildea]

I get it and thats bull.


Not what you said though, erased isn't altered. You've changed your argument.

The marriage being removed from the equation changes the depth of the stories.It changes the meaning of why Pete made some of the choice and those things change the overall direction of each of those stories.

No one was debating the story having changed, just that it was completely null and void.

Every day of my life as a married man I make choices with my wifes intreast in mind and I take her needs and desires into account before I make those choices.

I've made some choices as a married man that I would never have even thought of if I were single.

As a single man I wouldnt even have to facter her into my choice making issues.

And thats how history was changed.

Even if Pete may have made the same choices marries or single how he came to make those choices is ultimately changed.

The choice had less depth and less feeling.

And it also changes the feeling of the connection between the reader and the story.

How many married guys felt for Pete when they were reading how he was put in those positions.

That connection that those readers felt with the charactee is damaged if not 100% completely lost.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

If the change benefited the character then fine....but so far nothings improved at all.

I think you're giving waaaayyy to much credit to marvel writers here. He makes choics based on what they believe is an interesting story. Regardless if you really want to go down this route what you're saying still applies, peter made the choice to deal with mephisto so everything flows from a choice he made as a married man.

[gildea]

If being able to relate to a character means you have to share the same kind qualities, then America has proven itself with Iron Man to be a nation of alcoholic billionaire, industrialist playboys.

Peter is relatable.

Iron man is aspirational ;)

[Hans]

If you can relate to Peter Parker, than you're a ****ing loser, dude. :o

[gildea]

If you can relate to Peter Parker, than you're a ****ing loser, dude. :o

Yeah.

I don't even have superpowers :(

[Hans]

That's sad. Move out of your parents' basement and get a job, ya bum! :cmad:

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Not what you said though, erased isn't altered. You've changed your argument.

How am I changing my argument????Maybe you should go back and read my post more carfully.I never said that the stories were erased.

What I said was that they were effectively changed.


And I know that Joe Q has gone on an on saying that the history wasnt wiped but magically changed so that nobody rememberse it but it still happened but thats bull.

Whats the point of the history if no-one remembers it.

Jo Q effectively erased over 20 years of history just to reduse one characters importance on the promise that it would improve the stories and it hasent.

And thats what he did.

Joe made it so that yes the history happened but it has almost no bearing on the character and his life or on the lives of the others it involved.

Thats effectively erasing history.Because if theres no one to learn from history or to remember it becomes irrelevant.


No one was debating the story having changed, just that it was completely null and void.

And thats what they have pretty much become.Every choice Pete made and why he made them is now in question.And for what????The character nor the readers have really benefited from all this.

I think you're giving waaaayyy to much credit to marvel writers here. He makes choics based on what they believe is an interesting story.

True enough but the writters made those choices seem believable.......they made the readers feel like if they were in that position they would have made many of the same choices them selfs.

They put a dash of realism into the character and stories that people could relate to.

Regardless if you really want to go down this route what you're saying still applies, peter made the choice to deal with mephisto so everything flows from a choice he made as a married man.

And that choice was totally out of character for Pete.

The Spidy character that they were trying to bring back [the 70's version] would never have made such a deal.

He was pretty much put in that position by the Green Goblin and he refused which lead to Gwen's death.

So what Joe did was have Pete act totally out of character to return him to his status que of the 70's when even the 70's version of the character would never have done such a thing.

I've said this before and I'll say it again.......its the equivalent of asking the Devil to take you to Heaven.

Its like telling a cop that he has to break the law to bring crook to justice.

[BrianWilly]

I don't mind long term storylines, I find them preferable actually. But there's a difference between a mystery and a plothole that needs to be addressed. Mysteries are created purposefully to add intrigue while plotholes are weakpoints that need to be worked out to avoid confusion and bad storytelling. Plothole's don't become mysteries over time either, despite what they're trying to pull here.This x9999.

[gildea]

How am I changing my argument????Maybe you should go back and read my post more carfully.I never said that the stories were erased.

What I said was that they were effectively changed.

You said joe Q said they were changed which you said was bull and that they were effectively erased. Not the same thing. (to be fair you go back to this in the next paragraph).



And thats what he did.

Joe made it so that yes the history happened but it has almost no bearing on the character and his life or on the lives of the others it involved.

Thats effectively erasing history.Because if theres no one to learn from history or to remember it becomes irrelevant.

That would be correct if the stories were completely erased, but they haven't been they've been changed. Peter has still learned many things from them and it still informs his actions. Different yes! Irrelevant no.

I would agree though however that the readers standpoint has been almost effectively erased (which if this is what you meant initially i apologise, It's just from your bit later abot the marraige i assumed we were coming from peters viewpoint).

And thats what they have pretty much become.Every choice Pete made and why he made them is now in question.And for what????The character nor the readers have really benefited from all this.

This I actually completely agree with regarding the reader perspective.



True enough but the writters made those choices seem believable.......they made the readers feel like if they were in that position they would have made many of the same choices them selfs.

They put a dash of realism into the character and stories that people could relate to.

Can't agree, there were lots of ridiculous stories before the big change. As people commented the marraige itself was enforced (not that this justifies the stupid mephisto retacon as people seem to argue).



And that choice was totally out of character for Pete.

The Spidy character that they were trying to bring back [the 70's version] would never have made such a deal.

He was pretty much put in that position by the Green Goblin and he refused which lead to Gwen's death.

So what Joe did was have Pete act totally out of character to return him to his status que of the 70's when even the 70's version of the character would never have done such a thing.

I've said this before and I'll say it again.......its the equivalent of asking the Devil to take you to Heaven.

Its like telling a cop that he has to break the law to bring crook to justice.

Don't disagree with this. It was stupid.

[BrianWilly]

Sure it is. You've just taken the most narrow definition of the word. Hell, in the primaries, I was hearing the joke that you had to decide whether you were a racist or a misogynist. So if I'm misusing it, so is most of America.
Yeah see most of America are idiots, much less anyone who would make those sorts of comments; cheap, tactless political insults aren't really the best place to be gathering your definitions from.

I took this off of wiki, but I'm sure I could find it in more "legitimate" places: Originally Posted by wiki
Traditional feminist theorist propose many different forms of misogyny. In its most overt expression, a misogynist will openly hate all women simply because they are female. Other forms of misogyny may be less overt. Some misogynists may simply be prejudiced against all women, or may hate women who do not fall into one or more acceptable categories. Entire cultures may be said to be misogynist if they treat women in ways that can be seen as harmful. Examples include forcing women to tend to all domestic responsibilities, not giving pregnant women jobs, or beating a woman. Subscribers to one model, the mother/whore dichotomy, hold that women can only be "mothers" or "whores." Another variant is the virgin/whore dichotomy, in which women who do not adhere to a saintly standard of moral purity are considered "whores".

The last part is extremely pertinent, since some "MJ fans" in these parts are now calling her a **** because she >gasp< was in bed with someone other than the chosen one. The horror. THE HORROR.Please show me any post whatsoever wherein people who enjoyed Peter and MJ's marriage declared that she must attend to domestic duties or that she must remain jobless or -- and I'm not even sure why you highlighted this part -- that she must be beaten. Not to mention that none of this is even remotely close to the claims that you originally "quoted"...
Pete deserves happiness
Pete deserves someone to come home to
Pete should have someone to talk to
Pete should have someone supporting him...which is not only an entirely harmless and normal description of what a marriage even is, it isn't even related to gender issues at all! Are you saying that husbands and wives shouldn't be there for each other? That they shouldn't talk to each other? That they shouldn't support the other?

And people have called Peter a **** too, repeatedly so from the very first panel that BND began, for a far lesser "affair." So it's really not singling out MJ or her gender -- if anything, Peter has attacked far more -- as it is a general disgust at how both sides are being portrayed here. I'm not defending it, I'm just making it clear.

Those above quotes are examples of things I have heard many, many times in this debate of this subject. If you can find the threads devoted to MJ's career,family, etc, I'd be more than glad to look at them. Otherwise, MJ only exists in the setting that I put out there (I actually shouldn't be taking credit/blame. I saw someone else make this case. I'm just kind of bumping it up).Actually, I've seen several people in the course of this thread defend MJ's career as a realistic and acceptable character trait. Hell, one of the primary focuses for MJ-detractors was that she had a successful career as a model-actress, which made Peter less relatable:rolleyes: for some reason because real people don't marry model-actresses. Can you deny that this was amongst the most cited grievances from the anti-MJ camp, even from Quesada himself? I cannot remember even one single instance of anyone who supported the marriage EVER complaining that she shouldn't be successful or popular at her career; if you can, I'd love to hear even a vague description as to how that conversation went down.

So, yes, you have strawmanned, effectively misrepresented a viewpoint and taking it completely out of context and proportion as to make it easier to invalidate.

Now I know, this will cause people to respond with the correct answer, since it's so readily available on the internet: But I betchya, without looking, that most of these "fans" of MJ couldn't even say whether or not she has a brother/sister, or what his/her name is.Can anyone, without googling, name Peter's parents with 100% certainty? Jean Grey's sibling? Lois Lane's sibling or father? Tony Stark's father? This is not Trivial Pursuit. Just because we can't name a character's random side relations that haven't been highlighted by writers in years -- and whose fault is that, the writers' or the readers'? -- doesn't somehow equate to the notion that we don't still respect and enjoy the character for the character, much less some butchered accusations of misogyny.

[BlackLantern]

Richard and Mary Parker = Pete's parents

[spideyboy_1111]

are Mj's sis and cousin Gayle watson... but her most notorious relative is Kristy, her little cousin.:o

richard and mary are peters parents *yawn, very very easy one

[fifthfiend]

Actually, the OMD/BND detractors show that exact quality. What's their reasoning for having her around:

Pete deserves happiness
Pete deserves someone to come home to
Pete should have someone to talk to
Pete should have someone supporting him

They may as well just say they want her barefoot and in the kitchen. Someone even posted a statue that basically has her in that stereotype.

Never do they say how much they miss her career and its developments. Never do they say they miss her family and what that brings to the table. They never talk about MJs circle of friends (a party girl without friends, go figure) I've never once, not once, seen anyone ask, let alone clamor, for her own title.

All the MJ "fans" care about, is that she's there for her man. An object for Pete. If that's not misogyny, I don't know what is.

Are you hearing the same voices Arach Knight hears?

I understand they have medications for that these days.

[BrianWilly]

Richard and Mary Parker = Pete's parentsare Mj's sis and cousin Gayle watson... but her most notorious relative is Kristy, her little cousin.:o

richard and mary are peters parents *yawn, very very easy oneAnd thus congratulations, both of you have proved that you can name characters that have virtually never appeared and have nothing to do with stories from within the past...oh, let's be generous and say four years. What does this have to do with anything, much less the support and enjoyment of a character? I've no idea, apparently you're being something-ist if you can't.

[fifthfiend]

But no you're right OMD detractors are total misogynists. Like just a few pages ago when an OMD detractor said

it just shows that MJ, like most women, are the root of all evil....

Which is just the kind of misogynistic thing you'd expect from them.

I mean, er....

[BlackLantern]

Whoa whoa whoa...I am not an OMD detractor....at all....read this thread....I happen to like how things are going....

[fifthfiend]

Whoa whoa whoa...I am not an OMD detractor....at all....read this thread....I happen to like how things are going....

Oh god, promise me you won't ever change. You couldn't possibly be more perfect than the way you are right now.

[venom892]

Whoa whoa whoa...I am not an OMD detractor....at all....read this thread....I happen to like how things are going....He um was being sarcastic.

[kguillou]

Come on, who ISNT an OMD detractor?? Who actually LIKED the execution of OMD? I hated OMD, but I am liking Brand New Day and am looking forward to future stories, i just hate how we got here thats all and i think a lot of people agree with me on that point.

[BlackLantern]

A lot is not all.....have you spoken to every single Spider-Man reader and culled their opinions....this is what bothers me??....I understand if something is disliked, but don't claim it as fact when it is merely opinion....albeit a strong one....

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

You said joe Q said they were changed which you said was bull and that they were effectively erased. Not the same thing. (to be fair you go back to this in the next paragraph).

That would be correct if the stories were completely erased, but they haven't been they've been changed. Peter has still learned many things from them and it still informs his actions. Different yes! Irrelevant no.

Your misreading me again.

What I said was that Joe Q. has claimed that history has not been wiped clean just changed in a few areas.

And thats Bull $h*t.

Being married effects every choice a good husband makes.Every single choice.

Being married changes a person almost to the core....at least with what can be described as a good loving and carring husband.

And thats what Pete was when he was marries.Even when he put himself or his family in danger with some of his choices he still took them into consideration.

And there were quite a few times that it seems he made a choice just for them.

Now that he was no longer married durring those events he was in fact a different person making some of the same choices.He was not the same man who made those hard choices.

Even if events were partially the same in this changed history, the choices Pete made become less important because he had one less person to consider when making them.

The choices now have less depth because Pete had less to lose by makeing those choices.

And if you change the risk factor involved in those choices you change the outcome and the growth to the character.

And if you change all that then what you really have done is effectively erased history.

Because even if Pete learned many things from those events he didnt learn all the same things that he learned the first time around.

And the things that he learned the first time shaped the man he became.

And that man [character] is now lost.


I would agree though however that the readers standpoint has been almost effectively erased (which if this is what you meant initially i apologise, It's just from your bit later abot the marraige i assumed we were coming from peters viewpoint).

Actually I'm coming at it from both perspectives.

As a reader and as Pete.You already understand the readers perspective so I say a little about Pete's.

Being married effective the choices he made, being married shaped the man he was.

Now that he wasnt married the man he was is changed and the motivations behind the choices he made are also changed at the core.

So those choices dont hold the same weight.

So even if events roled out in a similar or the same fashion how those events effected Pete is now different.

The un-married Pete didnt have a wife worried wife waiting for him at home so he never had to consider any of that when he was out there in danger.

The un-married Pete never had to see his wife cry while she helped to clean his cuts and bruise's..

These kind of events shape a person.The place a sence of quits and sorrow in a persons heart.

These are the ways that the history change has effected the character Pete.


This I actually completely agree with regarding the reader perspective.

:grin:

Can't agree, there were lots of ridiculous stories before the big change.

And some of those stories almost seem like they were written ridiculously with the intention to make the marriage seem to be the fault.

But thats just my opinion.


As people commented the marraige itself was enforced (not that this justifies the stupid mephisto retacon as people seem to argue).

Enforced or not it was done.And Joe Q would try to have us all believe that the bad stories are all the fault of the marriage.

Don't disagree with this. It was stupid.

:grin::grin::grin::grin:At least we agree on a few points.

[iloveclones]

...which is not only an entirely harmless and normal description of what a marriage even is, it isn't even related to gender issues at all! Are you saying that husbands and wives shouldn't be there for each other? That they shouldn't talk to each other? That they shouldn't support the other?



Those phrases were clearly intended to show that people only care for Peter's welfare in all of this, and not MJ's. Because it is my opinion that they don't. Not really.

And for all your throwing around of the term straw man (which is a weak way to argue, the internet equivalent of "See, I took Debate. I know what I'm talking about"), that is exactly what you just did: misrepresent what I was saying to make an inpenetrable argument about the [cue the music] sanctity of the bond between man and woman [/cue the music] Because, obviously, I think the world, no, the universe would be better off if wives and their men didn't do those things.

[Themanofbat]

Your misreading me again.

What I said was that Joe Q. has claimed that history has not been wiped clean just changed in a few areas.

And thats Bull $h*t.

Being married effects every choice a good husband makes.Every single choice.

Being married changes a person almost to the core....at least with what can be described as a good loving and carring husband.

And thats what Pete was when he was marries.Even when he put himself or his family in danger with some of his choices he still took them into consideration.

And there were quite a few times that it seems he made a choice just for them.

Now that he was no longer married durring those events he was in fact a different person making some of the same choices.He was not the same man who made those hard choices.

Even if events were partially the same in this changed history, the choices Pete made become less important because he had one less person to consider when making them.

The choices now have less depth because Pete had less to lose by makeing those choices.

And if you change the risk factor involved in those choices you change the outcome and the growth to the character.

And if you change all that then what you really have done is effectively erased history.

Because even if Pete learned many things from those events he didnt learn all the same things that he learned the first time around.

And the things that he learned the first time shaped the man he became.

And that man [character] is now lost.

Actually I'm coming at it from both perspectives.

As a reader and as Pete.You already understand the readers perspective so I say a little about Pete's.

Being married effective the choices he made, being married shaped the man he was.

Now that he wasnt married the man he was is changed and the motivations behind the choices he made are also changed at the core.

So those choices dont hold the same weight.

So even if events roled out in a similar or the same fashion how those events effected Pete is now different.

The un-married Pete didnt have a wife worried wife waiting for him at home so he never had to consider any of that when he was out there in danger.

The un-married Pete never had to see his wife cry while she helped to clean his cuts and bruise's..

These kind of events shape a person.The place a sence of quits and sorrow in a persons heart.

These are the ways that the history change has effected the character Pete.

:grin:

And some of those stories almost seem like they were written ridiculously with the intention to make the marriage seem to be the fault.

But thats just my opinion.

Enforced or not it was done.And Joe Q would try to have us all believe that the bad stories are all the fault of the marriage.

:grin::grin::grin::grin:At least we agree on a few points.

I don't know... if the story is as described, then Peter had MJ at home to worry about, MJ did heal his bruises and bandaged him up, etc... those events still happened, just not as a married couple.

As clonesy put it, I'm aware that people want to put a bigger stamp on the [cue the music] sanctity of mawwiage between man and woman [/cue the music] (there's my "Life of Brian" impression), but that's not always the case... Peter is a selfless caring person, and there's no reason to think that he wouldn't be worried about MJ whenever he was in battle, akin to how he would worry about Gwen when he was in battle back in the day.

I can't figure out why peoplw just can't see that without getting all "holier-than-thou" about mawwiage.

:huh:

[BlackLantern]

^^^^my point exactly

[Kitsune]

Don't disagree with this. It was stupid.

You have a gift for understatement

[J. J. Jameson]

I don't know... if the story is as described, then Peter had MJ at home to worry about, MJ did heal his bruises and bandaged him up, etc... those events still happened, just not as a married couple.


Wait, so they were living together but not married, and that somehow invokes the true spirit of the Spidey titles??

I don't get it. Why not just say, "They were married, but now, with a little whatdoyoucallit, magic, they're not"? That way, while still being a...ahem...controversial decision, the 20+ years of history involving the marriage aren't invalidated.

[fifthfiend]

Those phrases were clearly intended to show that people only care for Peter's welfare in all of this, and not MJ's. Because it is my opinion that they don't. Not really.

And for all your throwing around of the term straw man (which is a weak way to argue, the internet equivalent of "See, I took Debate. I know what I'm talking about"), that is exactly what you just did: misrepresent what I was saying to make an inpenetrable argument about the [cue the music] sanctity of the bond between man and woman [/cue the music] Because, obviously, I think the world, no, the universe would be better off if wives and their men didn't do those things.

And yet whatever you intended, those phrases utterly failed to show that people only care for Peter's welfare in all this, because you yourself admit that those are all things that husbands and wives should do.

Maybe you should have taken Debate?

[Kitsune]

Wait, so they were living together but not married, and that somehow invokes the true spirit of the Spidey titles??

I don't get it. Why not just say, "They were married, but now, with a little whatdoyoucallit, magic, they're not"? That way, while still being a...ahem...controversial decision, the 20+ years of history involving the marriage aren't invalidated.

They were married they just magically don't remember that they were married.

[BlackLantern]

O am I supposed to care about MJ?....sorry...missed that one....

[Kitsune]

Whoa whoa whoa...I am not an OMD detractor....at all....read this thread....I happen to like how things are going....

No accounting for taste.

[Themanofbat]

Wait, so they were living together but not married, and that somehow invokes the true spirit of the Spidey titles??

I don't get it. Why not just say, "They were married, but now, with a little whatdoyoucallit, magic, they're not"? That way, while still being a...ahem...controversial decision, the 20+ years of history involving the marriage aren't invalidated.

Well, theoretically, they were married up until OMD, and after that, they don't remember that... what they do remember is that Peter and/or MJ walked away from the altar, yet they remained a couple afterwards... hence why the stories that we've read still happened as we've read them with the exception that Pete & MJ are "not" married.

In theory, the stories are not invalidated, but everybody's memories of them have been "tweaked".

[Themanofbat]

No accounting for taste.

Of course... just look at your avatar... :oldrazz: :oldrazz: :oldrazz:

:yay: