ORGANICS SUCK!!!! (A Tribute Thread)

[dan1]

Originally Posted by Bill

If Peter Parker could create a web fluid that can be made cheaply from widely available chemicals, have a tensile strength that is stronger than any known metal fiber of equal weight, and dissolve without a trace after it has been used, he would never have to worry about paying the bills. He would have wealth to rival Tony Stark. It never made much sense to make him smart enough to do that, but be too stupid to market it and help fund his crime fighting and help himself and his aunt.

Organics Suck!

[Godzilla2014]

Originally Posted by Bill

If Peter Parker could create a web fluid that can be made cheaply from widely available chemicals, have a tensile strength that is stronger than any known metal fiber of equal weight, and dissolve without a trace after it has been used, he would never have to worry about paying the bills. He would have wealth to rival Tony Stark. It never made much sense to make him smart enough to do that, but be too stupid to market it and help fund his crime fighting and help himself and his aunt.

Agreed. I have no problems with the webshooters as a superpower rather than a device. While I understand the complaints such as no special webbing (which, let's face it, you wouldn't have seen anyway), it undermines the character's everyman appeal. If Peter isn't rich because he doesn't sell the ****ing webbing, that makes it harder for the audience to relate to him, because that would probably be the first thing they would do with such an opportunity. And it's not as though Peter has a legitamate reason not to do so in the comics, it's just because the writers want him to be poor.

As for the "Man-Spider Monster" arguement; That just seems asinine to me. So he's a MAN if he's super-strong, can crawl on walls, sense danger precognitively, and react with superhuman reflexes, yet he's a MONSTER if he's super-strong, can crawl on walls, sense danger precognitively, react with superhuman reflexes, and SPINS WEBS?

[©KAW]

Organics 10 years later still suck!

[Caprican]

The superhero genre is probably the most dethatched-from-reality form of fiction out there, so debating science or common sense in matter is pointless.
As a comic book reader I rather view it as a true modern-day mythology.
So, I apologize if this sounds snobbish, but I think the only concept worth talking about here is metaphor.
What do webshooters express as a symbol?
In my honest opinion, they represent Peter Parker's own contribution to his superpowers, which were granted to him only by dumb luck. By adding his own human ingenuity to the mix, he perfects an otherwise incomplete symbol of a 'spider-man'. And which in turn merges both Peter and Spidey into one character, allowing them to coexist and work together at all times, rather than shape-shifting into two completely different personas when he puts the mask on and off.
While organics have no such symbolic value and in fact separate Peter from Spider-Man even more.

I don't read comic books to learn about how to make a fortune with revolutionary adhesive manufacturing.
I read them to reinforce my own sense of justice and tolerance.

And even back in the day I thought that Sam Raimi’s argument of making Peter 'more relatable to the average audience' was just silly. Considering that he had no problem with him being able to tailor a costume that would cost millions of dollars to make.
Regardless, my humble self could probably relate more to a rock than a science nerd.
It's never been about being average. It's about being different.
I don't want to relate to him, I wanna be him.

On another note, organics sound plausible only because saying 'science did it!' is less susceptible to scrutiny than applying a layman's logic on webshooters. After all, there's nothing scientific about gaining superpowers after being bitten by a radioactive spider. It's used as a magical plot device only because the layman is unqualified to question it. Back in the 60s it was radiation, today it's genetic engineering...

[Godzilla2014]

Originally Posted by Caprican

The superhero genre is probably the most dethatched-from-reality form of fiction out there, so debating science or common sense in matter is pointless.
As a comic book reader I rather view it as a true modern-day mythology.
So, I apologize if this sounds snobbish, but I think the only concept worth talking about here is metaphor.
What do webshooters express as a symbol?
In my honest opinion, they represent Peter Parker's own contribution to his superpowers, which were granted to him only by dumb luck. By adding his own human ingenuity to the mix, he perfects an otherwise incomplete symbol of a 'spider-man'. And which in turn merges both Peter and Spidey into one character, allowing them to coexist and work together at all times, rather than shape-shifting into two completely different personas when he puts the mask on and off.
While organics have no such symbolic value and in fact separate Peter from Spider-Man even more.

I don't read comic books to learn about how to make a fortune with revolutionary adhesive manufacturing.
I read them to reinforce my own sense of justice and tolerance.

And even back in the day I thought that Sam Raimi’s argument of making Peter 'more relatable to the average audience' was just silly. Considering that he had no problem with him being able to tailor a costume that would cost millions of dollars to make.
Regardless, my humble self could probably relate more to a rock than a science nerd.
It's never been about been average. It's about being different.
I don't want to relate to him, I wanna be him.

On another note, organics sound plausible only because saying 'science did it!' is less susceptible to scrutiny than applying a layman's logic on webshooters. After all, there's nothing scientific about gaining superpowers after being bitten by a radioactive spider. It's used as a magical plot device only because the layman is unqualified to question it. Back in the 60s it was radiation, today it's genetic engineering...

I'd say that fantasy is more detached from reality than superheroes are, because superheroes like Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man live in a world much like own, even if it is a stylized one at that, as opposed to Middle Earth.
Still, it causes Peter's money problems to no resonate with the audience. The audience will not tolerate Peter Parker *****ing about, "I don't have enough money to help Aunt May", if he has an easy way to make a fortune.

[Caprican]

Originally Posted by Godzilla2014

I'd say that fantasy is more detached from reality than superheroes are, because superheroes like Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man live in a world much like own, even if it is a stylized one at that, as opposed to Middle Earth.

Perhaps but I'd personally put them both in the same category...along with something like Star Wars.
If fantasy uses magic, then SW treats science like magic. While superheroes have a mixture of both.
Basically, they have different settings/time-periods but all three use the same level of escapism.

Still, it causes Peter's money problems to no resonate with the audience. The audience will not tolerate Peter Parker *****ing about, "I don't have enough money to help Aunt May", if he has an easy way to make a fortune.

Let me ask you this - when you say 'the audience', do you mean yourself, or are you genuinely concerned for the perspective of the average moviegoer?

[Godzilla2014]

Originally Posted by Caprican

Perhaps but I'd personally put them both in the same category...along with something like Star Wars.
If fantasy uses magic, then SW treats science like magic. While superheroes have a mixture of both.
Basically, they have different settings/time-periods but all three use the same level of escapism.


Let me ask you this - when you say 'the audience', do you mean yourself, or are you genuinely concerned for the perspective of the average moviegoer?

A bit of both. I just don't buy it when Peter *****es about being poor when he's sitting on a ****ing gold mine. It's called a plot hole, which audiences and critics will notice.

[Caprican]

Originally Posted by Godzilla2014

A bit of both. I just don't buy it when Peter *****es about being poor when he's sitting on a ****ing gold mine. It's called a plot hole, which audiences and critics will notice.

Do you read current ASM issues?
I’m just asking because I jumped out of the loop after Straczynski's run (for obvious reasons), so you might know more than me.
Raimi's movies were free to use that plot device because they had organics.
But when was the last time they used it in comic books?

[Godzilla2014]

Originally Posted by Caprican

Do you read current ASM issues?
I’m just asking because I jumped out of the loop after Straczynski's run (for obvious reasons), so you might know more than me.
Raimi's movies were free to use that plot device because they had organics.
But when was the last time they used it in comic books?

I actually have stopped giving a damn about Spider-Man (at least in comics) after One More Day & Brand New Day, and Marvel's refusal to reverse it.
As for the plot device, I don't remember, but it's supposed to be most relatable aspects of the character. For me, even though I am not wealthy like Batman, I can relate more to Bruce Wayne's wealth than I can Peter Parker's arbitrary lack of wealth because, if I invented web-fluid, I would sell that **** faster than you can say "super-strong adhesive". Spider-Man in general seems to preach that there is only altruism or harming others for personal gain, which is a load of ****.

[Caprican]

Originally Posted by Godzilla2014

I actually have stopped giving a damn about Spider-Man (at least in comics) after One More Day & Brand New Day, and Marvel's refusal to reverse it.

Yeah, me too. But I still have all those graphic novels from the past that I enjoy. And I might start reading the new version of Ultimate Spider-Man pretty soon.
Do you still like Spider-Man at least?

As for the plot device, I don't remember, but it's supposed to be most relatable aspects of the character.

That might be something that the character began with but that doesn't mean that they're still running with that cliché for appeal...although as far as we both know they might just be doing that right now...

For me, even though I am not wealthy like Batman, I can relate more to Bruce Wayne's wealth than I can Peter Parker's arbitrary lack of wealth because, if I invented web-fluid, I would sell that **** faster than you can say "super-strong adhesive". Spider-Man in general seems to preach that there is only altruism or harming others for personal gain, which is a load of ****.

Well, for one, I myself reject the idea that superheroes are supposed to comply with audience’s ideals. I don’t have to agree with a character to enjoy his story objectively.

And as much as I like to avoid such scrutinizing, I could humor you and list a few reasons for Peter’s lack of interest in making a profit:
- There’s not much use in an adhesive that dissolves after an hour (*sigh* silly pseudoscientific excuse, I know);
- Peter has no knack for being an entrepreneur. Not all people prefer to follow their exact qualifications...
- He tried to make a career in showbusiness once, it didn’t work, so he feels guilty about using his powers for personal gain ever since. Power and responsibility and all that jazz...
- He feels that if he becomes a CEO of a multimillion dollar corporation, he might compromise his superhero career;
Or how about this wild psychological one:
- Even if he would never admit it, deep down he can’t stand Aunt May and her constantly dragging him down and preventing him from fulfilling his true potential as a crime fighter, so he's mentally blocking himself from helping her more than he has to...
Alright, that last one was ********.

Otherwise, why don’t you come up with your own reason?
I can see this particular matter bothers you quite a bit.
So if one enjoys and cares about a story enough, why not go the extra mile and fill in all the plotholes with your own creativity? It’s fiction after all. Why should the artist always spoon feed the audience? Why can’t the audience involve itself deeper into the story? Many fanboys seem to manage with that quite well.

However, that’s all secondary. Because I could make the same argument of why couldn’t Peter use all the rest of his powers, including organic webbing, for personal gain?
Didn’t quite work out in wrestling? Well, why don’t you try again?
Why couldn’t Bruce Wayne simply use all his wealth and influence to fight corruption as a normal man?
It’s all because their true calling is to fight crime with violence.
That’s the whole point of the superhero genre.
That’s why we read them in the first place.
Oh, I don’t want to paint them all as nothing more than action saturated pulp. Most of them are far from it.
But all that character development is just so they’d be more emotionally appealing to us than just another bland cookie-cutter action hero.
And identifying with a character emotionally is quite different from identifying with him personally.
Being an atheist I shouldn’t even want to be associated with Peter for all those times when he ‘tries to talk to god’, especially considering that he has to be a ‘man of science’. And yet, here I am...

[Mary Jane Watson]

Carpican. Well said.
All I can say is O.r.a.n.g.i.c.s.S.u.c.k.

Hey thread-manager, can u close this thread. plz?? It is getting too old (10 yrs) and pointless.

kaythanksbye.

[Agent 194]

"If Peter Parker could create a web fluid that can be made cheaply from widely available chemicals, have a tensile strength that is stronger than any known metal fiber of equal weight, and dissolve without a trace after it has been used, he would never have to worry about paying the bills. He would have wealth to rival Tony Stark. It never made much sense to make him smart enough to do that, but be too stupid to market it and help fund his crime fighting and help himself and his aunt."

@Bill.

It's a comic book and like everything else in the comic book world I bought it hook, line and sinker. But as I say often, then again, I'm the guy who bought every bit of Adam West's performance as Batman when I was a kid. And...I took it seriously.

[Daisy]

Originally Posted by spiderfan24

Carpican. Well said.
All I can say is O.r.a.n.g.i.c.s.S.u.c.k.

Hey thread-manager, can u close this thread. plz?? It is getting too old (10 yrs) and pointless.

kaythanksbye.

It's not a 10-year-old thread.

And I think you missed the point.

Maybe you should pay more attention.

kyathanksbye.

[Daisy]

Originally Posted by Caprican

And as much as I like to avoid such scrutinizing, I could humor you and list a few reasons for Peter’s lack of interest in making a profit:
- There’s not much use in an adhesive that dissolves after an hour (*sigh* silly pseudoscientific excuse, I know);

I find myself wondering how many people have actually read (or even skimmed) the "classic" Spider-Man comics (anything pre-Venom)? This actually was the reason (ASM 18). He's turned down because of how quickly it disolves.

[Mary Jane Watson]

Yes it is. Ever since when SM1 announced that there is going be organics not mach one.
So thats like 10 years ago.
It is a "10-year-old- thread".

Maybe you should pay more attention

kaythanksbye.

[Daisy]

Mind-boggling.

[Mary Jane Watson]

Yes, I know. I am sorry about that.

[Godzilla2014]

Originally Posted by Agent 194

"If Peter Parker could create a web fluid that can be made cheaply from widely available chemicals, have a tensile strength that is stronger than any known metal fiber of equal weight, and dissolve without a trace after it has been used, he would never have to worry about paying the bills. He would have wealth to rival Tony Stark. It never made much sense to make him smart enough to do that, but be too stupid to market it and help fund his crime fighting and help himself and his aunt."

@Bill.

It's a comic book and like everything else in the comic book world I bought it hook, line and sinker. But as I say often, then again, I'm the guy who bought every bit of Adam West's performance as Batman when I was a kid. And...I took it seriously.

This is something that I don't feel the "It's a comic book/movie/what the **** ever" excuse really flies. I can accept that Peter has spider-powers, but I don't get why, if he has money problems and a solution for them, why he wouldn't use it. He may have super powers, but he should make realistic choices.

[Jerkofwonder]

I think ultimate did it pretty well in having it be something primarily done by Peter's dad that Peter just finished. And I'd guess he wouldn't market it for fear that it could possibly expose him as spiderman.

[Godzilla2014]

Originally Posted by Jerkofwonder

I think ultimate did it pretty well in having it be something primarily done by Peter's dad that Peter just finished. And I'd guess he wouldn't market it for fear that it could possibly expose him as spiderman.

That does kind of make sense. As for exposing his identity, assuming that holds up, then I never understood why he wouldn't do it after he revealed his secret identity to the public.

[dan1]

Organics Suck!

[The Lizard]

As much as I hate to give ammunition to the pro-organics argument...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/13382903

"Tarantulas eject silk through their feet to anchor themselves to slippery, vertical surfaces, say scientists.

The discovery, published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, shows how these large but very fragile spiders avoid potentially lethal falls.

The team designed an experiment to dislodge the spiders' feet slightly, by gently shaking a glass tank as they climbed up the side.

Examining glass slides from under the tarantulas' feet revealed their secret. "

[dan1]

Organics Suck!

[MessiahDecoy123]

Originally Posted by The Lizard

As much as I hate to give ammunition to the pro-organics argument...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/13382903

"Tarantulas eject silk through their feet to anchor themselves to slippery, vertical surfaces, say scientists.

The discovery, published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, shows how these large but very fragile spiders avoid potentially lethal falls.

The team designed an experiment to dislodge the spiders' feet slightly, by gently shaking a glass tank as they climbed up the side.

Examining glass slides from under the tarantulas' feet revealed their secret. "

But Peter wasn't bit by a Tarantula so how did he get that webbing location?

[Daisy]

Originally Posted by The Lizard

As much as I hate to give ammunition to the pro-organics argument...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/13382903

"Tarantulas eject silk through their feet to anchor themselves to slippery, vertical surfaces, say scientists.

The discovery, published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, shows how these large but very fragile spiders avoid potentially lethal falls.

The team designed an experiment to dislodge the spiders' feet slightly, by gently shaking a glass tank as they climbed up the side.

Examining glass slides from under the tarantulas' feet revealed their secret. "

Somehow, I don't see this deterring the valiant Mr Parker and his esteemed sidekick bakerboy.