Comics Amazing Spider-Man #595 - #599 "American Son" spoilers/discussion

[imdaly]

I LOVED Spidey's [blackout]mini Mark of Kaine move he did on Norman![/blackout]

 

[JerseyJoker]

it was a good issue and though the twist was easy to see coming back a few issues it was good, it was interesting with the notice of the stacey twins.

i like menaces new look, i'm surprised they have changed it so soon but it's a lot better than her orginal

Well i guess she either has the power to change her looks, or maybe Norman has given her a new formula that gives her a more "goblinesc" look.

 

[Donald Thomas]

Which is good in my opinion. Where's the appeal if the hero is stronger than the villian?

Aloha,
Which is why Spidey rules and ------- is a tool.
Spidey rules

 

[stillanerd]

Okay, here’s a couple of observations I had with this issue

Spoiler

--First of all, Joe Kelly can write pretty decent dialogue, especially witty dialogue. This has been one of the strong points of American Son so far, and it continues here. Each character’s voice is distinct and has their own mannerism, especially Spidey, Norah, and Bullseye. I also liked that, even while he’s being tortured, Spidey still manages to come up with a few sarcastic comebacks. Not to mention his treating the Venom mask like a hand puppet was something that just seemed so Spidey.

--I also liked how he was able to build tension out of Norman and Bullseye attempting to unmask Spider-Man. Because it gave Kelly an opportunity to show them being sadistic villains and for the readers to really want to kick their ass when the opportunity arose.

--However, with regards to Norman and Bullseye’s attempt to unmask him, there’s a few problems I had with it. For one thing, it proves how unnecessary last issue’s cliffhanger really was; what’s the point of shooting Spidey in the head if he’s not only going to survive, but if the plot was going to have him knocked-out then tortured by Norman Osborn anyway? Secondly, we’re told the Reed designed Venom costume he’s wearing is made of unstable molecules--the same kind the FF wear and which form fit and correspond to their powers. And yet, for some inexplicable reason, Reed decided, in order to protect Spidey’s identity, to make his mask not only bulletproof, but also able to quickly reform from virtually any damage--including laser blasts--while making the rest of his costume, despite being made of the same material, still capable of being torn and, as last issue shows, also able to be pierced by arrows. Meaning the mask is virtually indestructible, but the rest of his costume isn’t?!

--Another problem I had was when Norman was telling Spidey what his plans were for Harry in an attempt to uncover why he was so interested in his son. His whole “Plan B” of arranging his son to be a “martyr” in case Harry should prove to be too detrimental as American Son--I’m sorry, I’m calling bad characterization on that one. Norman is a lot of things, namely a psychotic, manipulative, evil bastard. But the one good quality he does have--even if he doesn’t want to admit it--is that, despite being disappointed in his son--his genuinely loves him. After all, this is the same Norman Osborn who collapsed into tears when he saw his son overdose on drugs. He’d NEVER would allow his son to die to further his own agenda. Maybe Kelly’s intention was that Norman was saying whatever he could to get a rise out of Spidey, but even so, it still was really, really off.

--Speaking of the story, that leads me to three other gripes I had with it. What started off in the beginning with an intriguing moral dilemma for Spider-Man in should he kill Norman and how much should he interfere with the life of Harry, and the intriguing possibility offered by disguising himself as Venom to gain access has essentially devolved into making Spidey both a victim to be saved by Harry yet again, but also by Spidey’s own observation, his incompetence.

--Second, this is the fourth issue and we’re only NOW getting to see Harry don his “American Son” armor. It suggests that, in terms of pacing, the over all story arc has been dragging a bit.

--Finally, the whole big twist that--surprise, surprise--Lily was working with Norman the whole time. I understand Kelly was trying to get across that Harry was blinded by his love for Lily, that he wanted to protect her and what he thought was their unborn child. But given that the readers saw how manipulative Lily could be in Character Assassination and knew she was rescued from incarceration by Norman Osborn, and that Harry experienced first hand how manipulative and insane she truly was, it makes Harry out to be a colossal idiot, not to mention is a twist completely devoid of what makes a twist work. I suppose Kelly tried to compensate this by having Lily’s baby be revealed as Norman’s, but even THAT a few folks could see coming since it underscores just how deep Norman and Lily’s partnership in manipulating Harry is (and geez, ANOTHER illegitimate sire of Norman Osborn. Really, Marvel? Having Gwen getting knocked up by Norman wasn't enough? But I guess now Peter and Harry have something in common to help their "bromance," don't they?)

--As for Siqueira’s art in this issue. It’s not bad, but towards the end, I think he might have rushed things because, towards the end, there were times when I got a bit confused. One minute, Lily is wearing normal street clothes and then, she’s in her new and improved Menace form and somehow in full costume (not to mention her skin has changed from her normal self to green). Then we see Harry able to get away from her while it looks like Lily is punching shrubbery, which I suppose was her calling her goblin glider. Then Harry, being chased by Lily, is about to pass a bleeding Spider-Man on the stairs, gets ahead of him, and yet finds Spidey being beat up by Norman in the testing lab. What?! And he watching Norman rip off Spidey’s mask? And then, presumably, not only do Spidey and Norman not see Harry during the fight or him put on the American Son costume, but that Norman gets invisibly punched by Harry?! WHAT?! The last couple of pages, it just seemed confusing and quickly slapped together.

All and all, this issue is not terrible, but like “New Ways to Die” and “Character Assassination” before it, I’m not feeling the enthusiasm for this story as I was in the beginning, and unless Kelly can deliver a really strong part 5 and conclusion, it’s going to suffer the same fate as those other two--strong starts put which collapse under promises it can’t ultimately deliver.

 

[mre]

I disagree, stillanerd, I don't think Norman ever has, or will care about Harry at all.

 

[Themanofbat]

I disagree, stillanerd, I don't think Norman ever has, or will care about Harry at all.

Ditto...

Early on in ASM, during the Stan era, maybe Norman had "feelings" towards his son, but as seen since his ressurection, Norman is simply an evil man who has no feelings for anyone but his own.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ No doubt! He's one selfish guy.

 

[JerseyJoker]

Did anyone read Dark Avengers?

Because it was one hell of an issue, with the end dealing with the Goblin creeping back up into taking over Norman's mind.

I been loving how Norman has been treated and used by a majority of the writers (i think the Spidey gang use him the best), but its just great.

 

[Themanofbat]

There was a one panel scene in ASM #598 where an angered Norman was beating down on Spidey with the Goblin spectre next to his face...

 

[stillanerd]

I disagree, stillanerd, I don't think Norman ever has, or will care about Harry at all.

Ditto...

Early on in ASM, during the Stan era, maybe Norman had "feelings" towards his son, but as seen since his ressurection, Norman is simply an evil man who has no feelings for anyone but his own.

^^ No doubt! He's one selfish guy.

Well, here's how I look at it: Norman Osborn is indeed selfish, obsessed with achieving personal power. However, one of the things which I think makes him a complex villain is that, even though he's obviously abusive, manipulative, and egotistical to the point of insanity, deep down he does love Harry--albeit of a conditional kind--despite believing he's weak and a disappointment, because, Harry is his flesh and blood, an extension of himself.

It's not just a twisted form of love, but also one of pride--like a parent who pushes their child to excel in academics or sports or business, Norman cannot allow Harry cannot fail because it would be an admission on Norman's part that he failed. If Norman was completely callous, he would have given up on Harry long ago. Yet, twisted as it was, he tried to treat his son for drug addiction. He faked his son's death and helped him recover in Europe. He orchestrated the entire clone saga for revenge against Spider-Man for what he believed Spidey did to his son.

And consider the entire premise of American Son. Norman has engaged in illegal human experimentation involving cloning, steroids, and gene manipulation; invested all sorts of technology into building an advanced body armor; has used Harry ex-girlfriend who is now pregnant with Norman's child--all for the express purpose of trying to recruit Harry to be his version of "Captain America" for the Avengers. He could have recruited ANYBODY, and yet he specifically chose Harry because he's his son. And why? Because in Norman's own twisted mind, he's actually trying to help Harry, to make him a better man, to show Harry how much he loves him and how proud of him he really is.

To suggest that Norman, after all of this, would be willing to let Harry die if he proves not live up to being the American Son would essentially be Norman admitting to himself that he failed. And for Norman, he cannot, must not fail. It's why he hates Spider-Man so much, after all. Because Spider-Man, time and time again, has made Norman Osborn fail. For that reason, he will not let anyone, including himself, intentionally kill Harry, not even to advance his own agenda.

 

[Themanofbat]

I don't think he would "kill" Harry, but if he were to die, I think he could care less for he would be rid of the "family embarrassment"... especially given the fact that he has another, and quite possibly a third son.

 

[JerseyJoker]

I've always seen it as, Norman cares as much about Harry to the degree of how it concerns him.

Like Harry's first death of drugs, that would come off as an embarrassment on Norman.

 

[Styleshift]

That's one thing about Brand New Day that kinds of pisses me off.

Finally got a Black chick....and not only is she a hoe,
but shes a psychotic supervillian. (I'm not ignorant, I know Glory)

heck I know what some people might say so I'll use both parts of my ethnicity for this one.
Vin the latino, was not only a lame jerk. But a corrupt cop.

I'm not shouting racism. I'm just wondering why in this day and age, can't we have some better ethnic people in these comics. Why is everyone evil? Or underplayed....
Greg Weisman has pointed this out and changed many ethnic backgrounds of characters on the spectacular spider-man.

Even Mr. Negative (an asian) is an evil character.
This really says something to me...some of you might not notice or even care.

I didn't notice this stuff until I read invincible which features a great spectrum of ethnicity both good and evil. Its obvious that kirkman writes about a persons character and not their skin color. But at the same time he DOES acknowledge race and skin color as we do in real life.

ASM? Not so much. Some of you may not notice but to me...just feels so one sided.

 

[Themanofbat]

I don't see Vin as a "corrupt" cop... just a decent cop, albeit over-zealous in his disdain of Spider-Man, who got caught up in a police scam to frame the web-slinger that went too far.

Vin made a mistake, one that he's paying for currently, but I don't necessarily see him as being "bad"... similarly to JJJ... not a great man, but neither a bad man... just a good man who can make mistakes.

Just my two cents...

 

[Themanofbat]

And Lilly Hollister's dad seems like a very decent and just man... and he's black.

Gloria Grant will be returning to the books soon, and she's black.

It's easy to point out the ethnic "bad guys", but ;et's not forget about the good ones...

I don't really believe in this day and age that Marvel would resort to bad ethnic stereotypes...

Again... just my two cents...

 

[Styleshift]

And Lilly Hollister's dad seems like a very decent and just man... and he's black.

Gloria Grant will be returning to the books soon, and she's black.

It's easy to point out the ethnic "bad guys", but ;et's not forget about the good ones...

I don't really believe in this day and age that Marvel would resort to bad ethnic stereotypes...

Again... just my two cents...

As I pointed out earlier,
I realize their are already characters out there. I'm not being ignorant of them.

That's just my point why should it be "easy" to point out the ethnic bad guys in the first place?

I'm not trying to cry racism, I'm not even remotely trying to find things to complain about. As I said earlier I haven't noticed this until I started reading Invincible. I hope no one feels offended, or thinks im just trying to cause trouble because I feel a little offended by something.

This may be all unintentional but I don't think its acceptable nor is there really good excuse for it.

EDIT: Gloria, Mayor canidate, Robbie, Randy, Hobbie Brown.
5 Good black characters? But look at it this way, because I'm multiracial this is how I see it.

Peter
Mary Jane
Gwen
Dr. Connors
Betty Brant
Flash Thompson
Ned leeds
Ben urich
Deborah Whitman
Felicia Hardy
JJJ
Ezekiel (before he went nuts)
the freakin kid who loves Spider-man.

They don't ALL have to continue to be white. Now we have new ethnic villains added to the Spider-mythos. If anything african americans have been blessed that we at least have 5 Good black characters. But what about native americans, asians, and hispanic cultures?

 

[Jack O Lantern]

Why should there be? There's nothing worse than characters who are the way they are because of their ethicity. You end up with a bunch of minorites acting white.

 

[Styleshift]

Why should there be? There's nothing worse than characters who are the way they are because of their ethicity. You end up with a bunch of minorites acting white.

How do you act white? Entertain me.

EDIT: I don't want this to become a nasty debate.
What happened to people being "themselves."?/

I have "black, puerto rican, white, native american, and creole" in my blood.
I sure can't act like all those things can I??

 

[Jack O Lantern]

How do you act white? Entertain me.

EDIT: I don't want this to become a nasty debate.
What happened to people being "themselves."?/

I have "black, puerto rican, white, native american, and creole" in my blood.
I sure can't act like all those things can I??

Pete Ross in Smallville is a perfect example. They cast a black actor to add a a black character but he was black in colour only.
All ethicites have their culture and a way of acting. I'm not talking about sterotypically have a black character say "DAWG" all the time or something stupid, but Micahel Jackson [ for a topical example] would not have created the same music if he were white. The colour of your skin effects your personality is some way. Like you said in this thread you may hav only noticed this because of your particular ethicity.

 

[Styleshift]

Pete Ross in Smallville is a perfect example. They cast a black actor to add a a black character but he was black in colour only.
All ethicites have their culture and a way of acting. I'm not talking about sterotypically have a black character say "DAWG" all the time or something stupid, but Micahel Jackson [ for a topical example] would not have created the same music if he were white. The colour of your skin effects your personality is some way. Like you said in this thread you may hav only noticed this because of your particular ethicity.

Thats not a good example. lol

Justin Timberlake and Emimee... (Forget it) M&M
They aren't black but they make "black" music.

Lenny Kravitz and the black dude from hootie and the blowfish.
They make "white" music.

To futher my point comedian "Tommy Davidson" was adopted and raised by a white family. Bet you couldn't tell if you've seen him before.

But I understand your point about Pete. They did cast him to balance out the cast. Same with Green Lantern on Justice League. (The difference being GL was useful and interesting)

I believe that sometimes skin color connects with people. They could possibly draw more readers. That's why the x-men were so popular.
yea sure its possible for Peter to be "comfortable" around White people.
But this hasn't been shown since he's developed close relationships with Randy, Gloria, and Robbie.

I'm just saying it makes sense to AT LEAST flesh out Peter's work related supporting cast with more respectable ethnic people. Asian, or whatever.

This is 2009 not 1953.

 

[Jack O Lantern]

I'm not saying they shouldn't. I just don't want them to create a character and them make them black or latin or whatever for the sake of it.

 

[imdaly]

To be fair, most of ANYONE who's in Peter's supporting cast has at some time or another been a "bad guy".

Of the names you listed, 6 of the 13 characters can or could've been viewed as a "bad guy" at some point: Dr. Connors, Flash Thompson, Ned leeds, Felicia Hardy, JJJ, Ezekiel.

It's just the kind of world that Peter finds himself in, his Parker Luck, that whenever Peter meets someone new, there's a good chance they're either going to be an adversary of Peter Parker or Spider-Man. It's because of this that it takes a long time for me to actually trust his supporting cast members and stop wondering when they'll be revealed to have some sort of corrupt side to them. Heck, I'm still not convinced that JJJ Sr isn't the Chameleon or Mysterio or some other bad guy.

 

[Styleshift]

I'm not saying they shouldn't. I just don't want them to create a character and them make them black or latin or whatever for the sake of it.

I think we're on two different pages buddy.
I know some of my examples have been kinda poor (I was pressed for time earleir) But my point is that lets not write races a "specific way".

Have you ever read "static" from milestone. It's a great read and anyone who loves Spidey will love that character. He's not written as a token black guy, but he does embrace his culture. It's not overdone. His cast is also more fleshed out.

I think whats bothering me the most is that, I've been reading other comics and starting to notice that Peter's main supporting cast is just all white.

No one is the same person, so we can't allow ourselves to think "someone acts white, someone acts black".

Now I could bring up these same arguments about other comics sure. but its no biggie. I just wanted to see what others thought.

To be fair, most of ANYONE who's in Peter's supporting cast has at some time or another been a "bad guy".

Of the names you listed, 6 of the 13 characters can or could've been viewed as a "bad guy" at some point: Dr. Connors, Flash Thompson, Ned leeds, Felicia Hardy, JJJ, Ezekiel.

It's just the kind of world that Peter finds himself in, his Parker Luck, that whenever Peter meets someone new, there's a good chance they're either going to be an adversary of Peter Parker or Spider-Man. It's because of this that it takes a long time for me to actually trust his supporting cast members and stop wondering when they'll be revealed to have some sort of corrupt side to them. Heck, I'm still not convinced that JJJ Sr isn't the Chameleon or Mysterio or some other bad guy.

True u brought up A GREAT point. that's why I love his cast. but c'mon...do you really think that lily hollister might change into a good guy?
That chick is nuts.

I'd rather them just completely write out Vin, and Mr. Negative...who knows. he doesn't seem like a bad person when he's not negative but since he's the strongest of the BND new set of villians I think they may give him a "clayface batman the animated series" twist. where he's a sympathetic villain.

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

It sure was cool how Norman became 1980's Marv Wolfman Lex Luthor.

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

I am ageless, I am a constant as the northern star, I am forever.