• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

Comics ASM 581 the uninspired super lame explanation why Harry Osborn is alive

My initial thoughts about how Harry came back:

I suppose the revelation that Harry actually being rendered unconscious presumably from the Goblin formula rather than dying was expected, as was Norman Osborn, once again, being involved in getting his son out of there--although technically that completely screws up his whole reason for coming back during the Clone Saga.

However, having Mysterio be involved I must admit is a bit unexpected. I would imagine that Dan Slott having Quentin Beck appear in a flashback would suggest that the Spider-Man writers have plans on bringing this character back from the dead sometime down the road. Say, perhaps, reveal that MJ's new boyfriend, Bobby Carr, is actually Beck in disguise and a servant of Mephisto (he did reveal in one of PAD Friendly Neighborhood issues that he was in service to hell, after all) and that this is all part of Mephisto sticking to his deal to keep Peter and MJ separate and not rekindling their love, etc. etc.

But there is something that's bugging me. Even though Harry never died, there still was a "body" and a funeral, courtesy of Norman and Mysterio. So, for about a couple of years Marvel time, at least, everyone pretty much thinks Harry is dead, thus the whole "all the stories still happened" mantra Marvel has been putting out, right? So far, and I'm assuming it will be addressed next issue, we'll be given a glimpse of Harry's "return from the dead" and character's reaction to it via flashback. This suggests that Harry "returned" sometime during the "mysterious gap of missing time," you know, the one that Quesada said happened in-between the last time Peter and MJ were married and when Peter woke up to go to Harry's return from rehab party. Now remember how one of the problems the Civil War event had in that the Superhero Registration Act wasn't clearly defined or written down thus causing confusion for the readers and inconsistency among the tie-ins? Well, I have a similar question:

How long was this f***ing gap of missing time in Spider-Man?

Because during this gap--which includes Peter Parker being inactive as Spidey for three months-- you presumably have Harry's "return from the dead," him falling off the wagon again, divorcing Liz Allen, marrying and divorcing two other times, going back to Europe for rehab, meeting Lily Hollister and dating her long enough for him to get close to her family, and buy the Coffee Bean and start a possible franchise business. If it's too short a time, then it seems highly implausible all this stuff took place, and if it's too long, then it doesn't square up continuity wise with the rest of the Marvel Universe, unless everything moved forward one year and we weren't made aware of it. I would think that Marvel, for the sake of clarity, ought to say just how long this period of "missing time" was rather than just giving some vague generality. Even Lost, with it's periods of "missing time" with their flashbacks and flashforwards, at least gives one an idea of how long a period it has been.

The reason Norman returned was not because Harry died, but because his plan to drive Peter insane had failed, so he decided to take matters into his own hands. IIRC, Norman was actually disgusted that his son had been beaten, and regarded Harry's "death" was an embarrassment to the Osborn name.

The missing gap of time, as we've been told on several occasions already, was 100 days. You're overcomplicating the Harry timeline:

-If Harry is declared dead, then Liz is automatically divorced from him.

-He didn't return, relapse, head back to Europe for rehab, and then return again. We already know from both this issue and past issues that there was no rehab, it was a cover for Harry's "resurrection" as well as some business that Harry was doing for OsCorp.

-And I think, knowing the kind of person Harry is, it's not inconceivable that he'd start dating Lilly and buy the Coffee Bean. After all, he has been gone a while, and it stands to reason that he'd want to get back into the swing of things--socially and financially--as soon as possible.
 
So in the event that what you speculate is true, what's wrong with that?

As it stands now, I wouldn't have seen that coming...

:yay:

Which part. The part where [blackout]Peter and Carlie might go out on a date (in which case I say "No, Pete. You're supposed to be with MJ, dummy!"[/blackout]? Or the part where [blackout]Menace might actually be Carlie, which,might actually do something for both characters.[/blackout]? :yay:

The reason Norman returned was not because Harry died, but because his plan to drive Peter insane had failed, so he decided to take matters into his own hands. IIRC, Norman was actually disgusted that his son had been beaten, and regarded Harry's "death" was an embarrassment to the Osborn name.

You forgot about the part where he also lies in his own diary. :woot:

The missing gap of time, as we've been told on several occasions already, was 100 days. You're overcomplicating the Harry timeline:

-If Harry is declared dead, then Liz is automatically divorced from him.

-He didn't return, relapse, head back to Europe for rehab, and then return again. We already know from both this issue and past issues that there was no rehab, it was a cover for Harry's "resurrection" as well as some business that Harry was doing for OsCorp.

-And I think, knowing the kind of person Harry is, it's not inconceivable that he'd start dating Lilly and buy the Coffee Bean. After all, he has been gone a while, and it stands to reason that he'd want to get back into the swing of things--socially and financially--as soon as possible.

Was it officially stated by Marvel it was 100 days? Or was that just limited to Spider-Man not being active for 100 days? Because I seem to recall some of the Marvel writers at comic cons saying it could have been up to at least a year and a half. As to your other points, I'm not saying all of those are impossible. Just wondering if all of that could have happened within that "missing gap of time."
 
Aint Mysterio dead?

If you mean Quentin Beck, then yes. His appearance in this issue was a flashback well before he committed suicide in Daredevil. The last current appearance where we saw the original Mysterio was in Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man issues #11-13.
 
You forgot about the part where he also lies in his own diary. :woot:

That whole diary is unreliable anyway. :oldrazz:

stillanerd said:
Was it officially stated by Marvel it was 100 days? Or was that just limited to Spider-Man not being active for 100 days? Because I seem to recall some of the Marvel writers at comic cons saying it could have been up to at least a year and a half. As to your other points, I'm not saying all of those are impossible. Just wondering if all of that could have happened within that "missing gap of time."

Ah, maybe you're right, I don't know if Marvel definitively stated that it was 100 days, that's just the time period given in the comic.
 
Thank god I gave up on this crap. Every new plot feels more forced than the one before. And that because the writers really doesn't have anything to say.
 
Thank god I gave up on this crap. Every new plot feels more forced than the one before. And that because the writers really doesn't have anything to say.

I love how you call it "crap" based on people's opinions... :whatever:

Read the damn comics in your store if you're too cheap to buy them andmake your own judgements...

Sheesh...

:csad:
 
Which part. The part where [blackout]Peter and Carlie might go out on a date (in which case I say "No, Pete. You're supposed to be with MJ, dummy!"[/blackout]? Or the part where [blackout]Menace might actually be Carlie, which,might actually do something for both characters.[/blackout]? :yay:



Was it officially stated by Marvel it was 100 days? Or was that just limited to Spider-Man not being active for 100 days? Because I seem to recall some of the Marvel writers at comic cons saying it could have been up to at least a year and a half. As to your other points, I'm not saying all of those are impossible. Just wondering if all of that could have happened within that "missing gap of time."

The part about [blackout]Menace might actually be Carlie...[/blackout]

In ASM #546, there's a newspaper on the ground that states that 100 days has passed since Spider-Man's last appearance (other than the brief one he made in Swing Shift... which is also stated in the same issue by the tv newsreporter).

:yay:
 
The part about [blackout]Menace might actually be Carlie...[/blackout]

I thought as much. :cwink:

In ASM #546, there's a newspaper on the ground that states that 100 days has passed since Spider-Man's last appearance (other than the brief one he made in Swing Shift... which is also stated in the same issue by the tv newsreporter).

:yay:

As I told Blader, is that how long the actual gap was, or is that just limited to how long Spider-Man was last seen in public?
 
I love how you call it "crap" based on people's opinions... :whatever:

Read the damn comics in your store if you're too cheap to buy them andmake your own judgements...

Sheesh...

:csad:

Well, Spider-Man has been crap most of the time the last twenty years. I don't need to read this, because it isn't what I want to read. I don't find any pleasure in reading plot-driven stories with one-dimensional characters. I thought The Da Vinci Code was a crap book, and I wasn't too impressed with the Harry Potter-novels either. I want stories with a heart and a soul. So why would I spend the entire life reading a worthless comicbook that goes on and on and on without really getting anywhere?
 
The reason Norman returned was not because Harry died.

Not to be a nitpicker, but I'm pretty sure when Norman first came back waaay back in SSPM#75 (wow, 12 years ago!), Peter and him had an exchange that went something like this (paraphrasing cuz I don't have it with me)

"But you saw to it that I had to come back."

"Why?"

"You killed my son."
 
LOL! Jeez, you really do have to feel for Glenn Greenberg considering all the work he put into the Osborn Journal. Now it's been debunked twice!

Well, not only the Aunt May and Harry thing, but little things like Norman saying he returned to the US for the "first time since his death" after he had the smokestack destroyed and it showed the spider-skeleton. That was first debunked in a relaunch issue of Spider-Man by Jenkins that showed him watching Peter watching his grandson being born. And that was reinforced this issue with him being there when Harry "died." And then there's weird omissions like the Goblin twins thing. If that REALLY happened, I'm sure it would have been talked about in a journal.

It's a shame it's been invalidated, because he made great pains to try and make a good story out of a crap plot-twist.
 
Are people really not understanding why Mark is wanting to kill Harry???

I thought it was made pretty clear.

Because of Harry's "death", Liz was able to get TONS of insurance money, which Liz used to make that room in her home to work on the cure for Mark's condition. Now that it's been revealed that Harry never actually died, the insurance company cut off their insurance pay-out, thus cutting off the finances needed to continue the work. So now he's just left to stay locked up in that room where he can keep himself for becoming a threat to Liz and little Normie. Mark hears that Harry is at the house and goes into a fit.

I mean, come on...they literally spelled it out for us.
 
Well, Spider-Man has been crap most of the time the last twenty years. I don't need to read this, because it isn't what I want to read. I don't find any pleasure in reading plot-driven stories with one-dimensional characters. I thought The Da Vinci Code was a crap book, and I wasn't too impressed with the Harry Potter-novels either. I want stories with a heart and a soul. So why would I spend the entire life reading a worthless comicbook that goes on and on and on without really getting anywhere?

Nobody cares whether you read it or not. His point is that you can't form a fair opinion on a story without actually reading it.
 
Not to be a nitpicker, but I'm pretty sure when Norman first came back waaay back in SSPM#75 (wow, 12 years ago!), Peter and him had an exchange that went something like this (paraphrasing cuz I don't have it with me)

"But you saw to it that I had to come back."

"Why?"

"You killed my son."


Yah, but he also said he was tired of Peter persevering through everything he had thrown at him over the years. So it was a combination of the two, at least back then.
 
Even if those were Norm's reasons for coming back "as he stated", Mysterio told him in this issue that he had to play along like Harry died, so why would Norm tell him otherwise at the time? Even in the current issue, Mysterio makes a comment to Norm along the lines of "when you come back..."
 
I thought they were crap from pure speculation, and then I've read them in my shop and still thought they were crap! Do I get a cookie?
 
Really? Truly and Seriously? The comics that you pre-judged turned out to be exactly what you thought they would be? Surely the gods are teasing us with such cases of synchronicity.
 
^ i hated them too....but that is a REAL funny response....lol....kudos!
 
I was betting myself that no matter what the explanation was, it would be declared, "the lamest thing ever." I win.

Let's not go crazy here...it's not "It was an actor that really died" bad. :whatever:

As for claiming "this is not the first time we've had a sucky resurrection story." (not you clonesy :yay:)

It doesn't matter how many bad apples are in the basket...it doesn't make this story any less spoiled.

Although In my opinion bringing back Norman was done pretty well. But this Harry reveal is right up there with the "no one remembers" theme they have with the unmasking. :csad:

It was just poorly done all over. Peter should have questioned it.
 
By the way, I haven't read the issue yet, but I'm betting it's the greatest issue I've ever read! (Actual opinion to follow.....)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,263
Messages
22,074,606
Members
45,875
Latest member
kedenlewis
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"