Bought/Thought Dec 26th (Spoilers within)

[Dread]

Maybe you've already read this it is a few days old but because you said that I had to post;



from CBR

[/QUOTE]

Going by what Joe has said in the past, that means Gwen will be back. Every time he gives that speech, he does the exact opposite within a year. Got to love adult ADHD.

Technically speaking, there IS that leftover clone of Gwen who "faded into the background crowd" a decade ago.

I still find it hilarious that they decided to revive Harry immediately after SPIDER-MAN 3 broke world records in a film that killed him off. Way to be behind the ball, guys.

Hopefully, Slott can create some NEW supporting characters? I mean, working for a high school should be a gold mine, if even that is still allowed.

They created an Ultimate "pick and choose" continuity for Peter, for a writer like Slott who really didn't need it. Then they shove Bendis, a writer who is best without having to adhere with anyone's continuity but his own, into one massive crossover vehicle in 616 after the other.

I've tried to credit Joe Q for some of the good things Marvel has done in 2007, and there are many of 'em, but when he goes and makes blunders like this...it just doesn't fit. I guess the projects with the most direct influence usually fade and the ones where he just nods and goes, "okay, do it!" to the creators at hand for the pitch usually goes off better.

 

[PhotoJones]

Watching PhotoJones and Dan Slott go head to head was rather interesting. I never thought someone would be more polarizing on an issue, any issue, as in seeing nothing but Black and White than myself, but hot damn, PJ takes the cake. I bet he blames any hapless cleaning lady who swept the rug for the Creator Summit responsible for OMD, too.

You mean to tell me that you don't?

 

[Dread]

You mean to tell me that you don't?

No.

I never thought I'd see the day when I came across as more reasonable on an issue.

 

[PhotoJones]

Nah, you're never reasonable. You're just so in love with Slott's past work, you're willing forgive whatever involvement he had in the worst 4 issues of Spider-Man I have ever read in my entire life.

 

[BrianWilly]

It's a pretty fair question, once you most past Photo's uncanny talent for pissing off anything with a pulse. The consensus across the board seems to be "Yikes, One More Day was such trash, blech...but oh, surely SuperSlott will make it all better for us with Brand New Day! Huzzah and likewise!"

Which is nice, but...c'mon, the only thing you're all basing that off is pure blind devotion. We have no idea what the story will be, we have no idea which of the hated elements of OMD are going to carry over, we don't know anything about cast or direction or tone, so on and so forth. All that we know for certain is that it's meant to build off of what may or may not be the single most disliked storyline in the history of the character.

That's a piss-poor recommendation for any series, no matter how good a writer may be. I'm not saying it can't be done -- hell, if Simone can save Wonder Woman after Amazons Attack then anything is possible -- but let's be honest, the Pure Blind Devotion is pretty damn palpable, here.

 

[iloveclones]

Oh, come on. Everyone has their favorites (Whedon anyone?), and they follow them. So what? If they have a track record that I like, I'll buy it. Brubaker, Slott, Kolins, JRJR...these are (a few of) the guys that I'll give the benefit of the doubt to for a couple of issues. I mean, isn't PJ going to buy Ghost Rider merely because the writer did Scalped? What exactly is the difference?

 

[Dread]

Nah, you're never reasonable. You're just so in love with Slott's past work, you're willing forgive whatever involvement he had in the worst 4 issues of Spider-Man I have ever read in my entire life.

And to the best of our knowledge, Slott's "involvement" was being there for the planning stage, and not doing something drastic to derail it, likely because nothing would have. Like I said, you pretty much expected him to walk out the door and literally throw his comic career away to move to TV. He wrote an episode of FF:WGH, so it isn't like he CAN'T. I am saying that is pretty extreme. From what I understand, Joe Q and a few of the editors were gunning for it. JMS had the task to actually write (or co-write) the thing and by the end his tempers were flared. Slott was at the summit, but I really doubt he was the guy who said, "Hey, get rid of MJ with a deal with Mephisto". Whether he said Yay or Nay, it was coming anyway. His is the role of getting it on his lap.

You're reminding me of Leonides from 300, who LITERALLY killed the messenger. Maybe you're "stoic" enough to sacrifice your entire career to rally against something that is inevitable, but not everyone is as professionally suicidal. I don't blame Slott for his position. I kind of feel sorry for the crappy hand he has been dealt.

It's a pretty fair question, once you most past Photo's uncanny talent for pissing off anything with a pulse. The consensus across the board seems to be "Yikes, One More Day was such trash, blech...but oh, surely SuperSlott will make it all better for us with Brand New Day! Huzzah and likewise!"

Which is nice, but...c'mon, the only thing you're all basing that off is pure blind devotion. We have no idea what the story will be, we have no idea which of the hated elements of OMD are going to carry over, we don't know anything about cast or direction or tone, so on and so forth. All that we know for certain is that it's meant to build off of what may or may not be the single most disliked storyline in the history of the character.

That's a piss-poor recommendation for any series, no matter how good a writer may be. I'm not saying it can't be done -- hell, if Simone can save Wonder Woman after Amazons Attack then anything is possible -- but let's be honest, the Pure Blind Devotion is pretty damn palpable, here.

I could take that rant seriously if not for the fact that you swoon for anything that Joss Whedon has written. Your only defense is you go, "Uh, one season of Angel/Buffy sucked", but I bet you bought it on DVD to complete the collection, anyway. If Joss Whedon and not Slott was attached to ASM, you'd herald it as the second coming, and don't you deny it. Normally I don't care, but when you act high and mighty about the "biases" of others, that is when I feel like going, "those in glass houses" and all that.

 

[iloveclones]

I said the same thing that he said, but with less words. Conciseness, Dread.

 

[BrianWilly]

Oh, come on. Everyone has their favorites (Whedon anyone?), and they follow them. So what? If they have a track record that I like, I'll buy it. Brubaker, Slott, Kolins, JRJR...these are (a few of) the guys that I'll give the benefit of the doubt to for a couple of issues. I mean, isn't PJ going to buy Ghost Rider merely because the writer did Scalped? What exactly is the difference?

Damn, I thought it would be Dread that brought up Whedon first, but you beat him to it.

What exactly is the difference, then, between this sort of situation and when fans adamantly held faith in New Avengers being a good comic after being horribly slighted by Disassembled? This sort of thing goes both ways. Lest we forget, no one thought Bendis would end up being a running gag, either.

 

[Dread]

I said the same thing that he said, but with less words. Conciseness, Dread.

I was typing while you had posted during then. It was unintentional.

I had to delete some words because I used some angry language at PJ and I scimmed it and realized it wasn't appropriate so I reworded. That adds time between posts.

 

[stillanerd]

It's a pretty fair question, once you most past Photo's uncanny talent for pissing off anything with a pulse. The consensus across the board seems to be "Yikes, One More Day was such trash, blech...but oh, surely SuperSlott will make it all better for us with Brand New Day! Huzzah and likewise!"
Which is nice, but...c'mon, the only thing you're all basing that off is pure blind devotion. We have no idea what the story will be, we have no idea which of the hated elements of OMD are going to carry over, we don't know anything about cast or direction or tone, so on and so forth. All that we know for certain is that it's meant to build off of what may or may not be the single most disliked storyline in the history of the character.
That's a piss-poor recommendation for any series, no matter how good a writer may be. I'm not saying it can't be done -- hell, if Simone can save Wonder Woman after Amazons Attack then anything is possible -- but let's be honest, the Pure Blind Devotion is pretty damn palpable, here.

Well, that's a basic tool of marketing with regards to entertainment: hoping that you watch or read something based upon the person's past record. How many times have you seen, "From the makers who brought you [insert very popular movie here]?" Same thing going on. Plus, Marvel did this trick with bringing JMS on Amazing Spider-Man and suggesting that he was going to get the title back on track after years of bad stories. Difference here is that Dan Slott has at least written a well received mini-series involving Spider-Man, and again, that is being used to promote BND. Of course, that was the goal all along because, privately, they knew that the fan reaction to OMD would be negative. In the most recent Marvel Spotlight, one of the upcoming writers working on Amazing Spider-Man, Bob Gale, mentioned this:

I hope the fans embrace it. Dan and I were just talking the other day about how no matter what we do there's going to be a lot of people out there that hate it because they are so invested in the Peter Parker/Mary Jane thing. As I said, Spider-Man belongs to everybody, which is why people get so upset. But there are also people that look forward to a breath of fresh air, and we're going to give it to them.

And what does that "fresh air" involve. Well, Gale also mentioned this:

We're proceeding under the idea that Peter is unaware of what happened in "One More Day." There is now this alternate history of what happened during Civil War and the unmasking is erased from everyone's consciousness, including his own. There's going to be some geeks out there who try to fit this all into a particular time bubble and piece together what happened. They can waste their time doing that, but I say just read these books and enjoy them.

But for at least the first year, we're not going to go there with Mephisto or anything that relates to "One More Day."

So basically, after making erasing the marriage and altering the Marvel Universe as a result, with the exception of a few little nuggets here and there (like perhaps MJ remembering what reality used to be like, for example) they're not going to even bother answering the numerous questions that they just raised. At least until the next event the following year, anyway. But of course, it exactly what counts and what doesn't count after taking a pair of scissors to the past 20 years worth of comics that's got everybody mad to begin with.

 

[Dread]

Damn, I thought it would be Dread that brought up Whedon first, but you beat him to it.

What exactly is the difference, then, between this sort of situation and when fans adamantly held faith in New Avengers being a good comic after being horribly slighted by Disassembled? This sort of thing goes both ways. Lest we forget, no one thought Bendis would end up being a running gag, either.

I always hated NA. Issue #2 still ranks as one of the worst comics I ever read, at least before OMD #4.

So, what is your point?

 

[iloveclones]

I was typing while you had posted during then. It was unintentional.

I had to delete some words because I used some angry language at PJ and I scimmed it and realized it wasn't appropriate so I reworded. That adds time between posts.

Yet another collatoral effect of swearing. Mom was right....

 

[Dread]

Yet another collatoral effect of swearing. Mom was right....

It actually wasn't a swear, this time.

 

[Dread]

Well, that's a basic tool of marketing with regards to entertainment: hoping that you watch or read something based upon the person's past record. How many times have you seen, "From the makers who brought you [insert very popular movie here]?" Same thing going on. Plus, Marvel did this trick with bringing JMS on Amazing Spider-Man and suggesting that he was going to get the title back on track after years of bad stories. Difference here is that Dan Slott has at least written a well received mini-series involving Spider-Man, and again, that is being used to promote BND. Of course, that was the goal all along because, privately, they knew that the fan reaction to OMD would be negative. In the most recent Marvel Spotlight, one of the upcoming writers working on Amazing Spider-Man, Bob Gale, mentioned this:



And what does that "fresh air" involve. Well, Gale also mentioned this:



[/B]So basically, after making erasing the marriage and altering the Marvel Universe as a result, with the exception of a few little nuggets here and there (like perhaps MJ remembering what reality used to be like, for example) they're not going to even bother answering the numerous questions that they just raised. At least until the next event the following year, anyway. But of course, it exactly what counts and what doesn't count after taking a pair of scissors to the past 20 years worth of comics that's got everybody mad to begin with.

So they're going with the omission/"Just Play Along when we Nix out the bits that are inconvient, even if they made sense and could in theory been handled well?"

That reminds me of the cover-up after the Clone Saga, where notions of "miscarriages" were never uttered again (nor was Johnny Storm's marriage to who he thought was Alicia Masters, but was Lyja the Skrull, after HEROES REBORN). And these almost always feel cheap, like in a debate when you make a valid point and your opponent just ignores it and figures that is the same as challenging it or reversing it. That isn't the same. ANYONE can omit what isn't 100% suited for them, it is the true artists who can make it work for them.

And I believed Slott could have done that. A shame we won't get to see that.

I still defy someone from Marvel to tell us exactly the difference between ASM and USM now, besides Bendis and age ("Duhh, one is High School Peter who is never allowed to get hitched or mature, and the other is Post-Grad School Peter who is never allowed to get hitched or mature"). That title is now officially redundant. 8 years ago, USM was supposed to fulfill this need for the audience that never liked seeing Spidey grow up. Now, what, because it almost has a decade unto itself of arcs, time to rewash the 616!? Joe Q's entire tenure seems to be saying one thing, and doing nearly the exact opposite given enough time, even when he contradicts himself or hypocritically poo-poo's the generation of editors before him. And then they wonder, golly, why are the fans so hostile? Periodically lying does that.

One thing you have to give Archie comics, there's no pretention about what it is. It is the same since the 40's and no one pretends to make it anything more.

 

[FatalEnergy]

I always hated NA. Issue #2 still ranks as one of the worst comics I ever read, at least before OMD #4.

So, what is your point?

may I ask why? I don't want to start a big argument or anything, I would just like to know your reasoning. I don't really like NA as a whole too much but from what I remember issue 2 didn't seem too terrible.

 

[Dread]

may I ask why? I don't want to start a big argument or anything, I would just like to know your reasoning. I don't really like NA as a whole too much but from what I remember issue 2 didn't seem too terrible.

Bendis got the powers of several characters wrong (Nefaria, Carnage), the group fight had two villains who literally killed each other who don't even bat an eye at each other, and of course, Jigsaw, a completely human mobster, breaking Spider-Man's arm like he was a $5 hooker. Bendis is a fan of humiliating Spider-Man, in Ultimate or 616, and this was one of 'em (a character who has literally battled the Fantastic Four and the X-Men to a standstill solo is helpless before a handful of mooks grabbing at him, "spidey sense" be damned). Then, you throw in Sentry, randomly killing Carnage about 4 years after anyone stopped caring about him. I just hated that issue completely.

 

[BrianWilly]

I could take that rant seriously if not for the fact that you swoon for anything that Joss Whedon has written. Your only defense is you go, "Uh, one season of Angel/Buffy sucked", but I bet you bought it on DVD to complete the collection, anyway. If Joss Whedon and not Slott was attached to ASM, you'd herald it as the second coming, and don't you deny it. Normally I don't care, but when you act high and mighty about the "biases" of others, that is when I feel like going, "those in glass houses" and all that.

Oh, but the race was so close! Good job, both of you.

Oh, Dread. Call me crazy, I've actually been waiting for the perfect time to say this to you. Two things:

1) Comparing your own fandom of Slott to my fandom of Whedon and then calling my fandom of Whedon a biased obsession is possibly not the best way of showing that your fandom of Slott is not a biased obsession. It is, however, a very good way of disregarding any points I made, so kudos on that.

2) Right from the outset, you've made a far bigger deal about this whole Whedon thing than both PhotoJones and CConn combined which, let me tell you, is no small feat. On the other hand, unlike many other posters here, you've made no effort to engage me on any level regarding it so, really, at the end of the day you have absolutely no idea what my fandom is like. At the end of the day, you have no idea what exactly I like about him, what exactly I'm fond of, and what exactly I'm not. The people who have actually talked to me about Whedon-related subjects find that I can be just as critical of his resume as I've been towards anything else. You probably wouldn't believe me but, again, seeing as how you've never bothered to develop any understanding of it beyond "LULZ HE'S TOTALY BIASED ABOUT WHEDON," I don't begrudge that. What I have a bit more difficulty stomaching is why you -- lacking any real understanding of my opinions, as we've established -- would then presume to know anything at all about what I would or would not support from the man. Don't kid yourself, please. You wouldn't know anything I might or might not like Whedon to write because you haven't bothered to find out, because you've somehow gotten it into your head that my..."bias" of Whedon is just some laughable, irritable thing for you to either condemn or use against me in a dismissal of my points. Don't get me wrong, I couldn't possibly care less that you've never had an interest in my fandom. I merely think it's laughable bull**** that you've never had an interest in my fandom and yet presume to tell me what I think. It's a mark of a much lesser mind than yours, and yet has gotten to be a pretty standard habit for you.

And, no, I didn't buy the DVD of the season of Angel I hated, thanks. I have nothing but contempt for the collector's mentality.

I always hated NA. Issue #2 still ranks as one of the worst comics I ever read, at least before OMD #4.

So, what is your point?

Which is all well and fine for you, but still doesn't negate the fact that it's a pretty darn comparable phenomenon.

Disassembled was crap, and yet people continued to buy its follow-up, hoping that it'll be good. OMD is crap, and yet people continue to buy its follow-up, hoping that it'll be good.

 

[Dread]

Oh, but the race was so close! Good job, both of you.

Oh, Dread. Call me crazy, I've actually been waiting for the perfect time to say this to you.

I bet you have.

Two things:

1) Comparing your own fandom of Slott to my fandom of Whedon and then calling my fandom of Whedon a biased obsession is possibly not the best way of showing that your fandom of Slott is not a biased obsession. It is, however, a very good way of disregarding any points I made, so kudos on that.

But, see, I brought it up because you were the one who is going, basically, "You're letting ******ed love for Slott blind you". And I find that silly because you are someone who literally advertises your bias as your message board member title. Pot calling the kettle black.

2) Right from the outset, you've made a far bigger deal about this whole Whedon thing than both PhotoJones and CConn combined which, let me tell you, is no small feat. On the other hand, unlike many other posters here, you've made no effort to engage me on any level regarding it so, really, at the end of the day you have absolutely no idea what my fandom is like. At the end of the day, you have no idea what exactly I like about him, what exactly I'm fond of, and what exactly I'm not. The people who have actually talked to me about Whedon-related subjects find that I can be just as critical of his resume as I've been towards anything else. You probably wouldn't believe me but, again, seeing as how you've never bothered to develop any understanding of it beyond "LULZ HE'S TOTALY BIASED ABOUT WHEDON," I don't begrudge that. What I have a bit more difficulty stomaching is why you -- lacking any real understanding of my opinions, as we've established -- would then presume to know anything at all about what I would or would not support from the man. Don't kid yourself, please. You wouldn't know anything I might or might not like Whedon to write because you haven't bothered to find out, because you've somehow gotten it into your head that my..."bias" of Whedon is just some laughable, irritable thing for you to either condemn or use against me in a dismissal of my points. Don't get me wrong, I couldn't possibly care less that you've never had an interest in my fandom. I merely think it's laughable bull**** that you've never had an interest in my fandom and yet presume to tell me what I think. It's a mark of a much lesser mind than yours, and yet has gotten to be a pretty standard habit for you.

You've never bothered to ask me about my fandom for Slott, or some of the other writers whose work I sometimes chase around (BKV, Fraction, Brubaker, etc). Never realized my underlying layers of complexity regarding it, and all that baloney. I don't cry a river about it.

You're angry with me for not doing what you would never, under any circumstances, do with me. Lovely awesome.

If nobody could judge the opinions of others without first gathering a first-date's worth of information about it, there would be no posts on MB's anywhere. Suck it up. If you don't want to be judged as a disciple of Whedon from the Church of Joss, then, I don't know, alter your title and grade something he writes below a 7 once in a while.

It is almost like PJ logic: If you don't want to be seen as a Whedon-Loving Groupie, than stop being a Whedon-Loving Groupie. It would be like if someone had an issue with me liking Casey Jones, and then I wondered, "oh, how EVER did you come up with THAT?"

The irony is I look forward to your reviews and I actually LIKE that you're so up front and honest about your bias; no illusion about where you stand. But when you judge people who are acting like "groupies" for some other writer, I can't help but note it makes you like rather hypocritical.

Which is all well and fine for you, but still doesn't negate the fact that it's a pretty darn comparable phenomenon.

Disassembled was crap, and yet people continued to buy its follow-up, hoping that it'll be good. OMD is crap, and yet people continue to buy its follow-up, hoping that it'll be good.

It would if Slott personally wrote, co-wrote, plotted, edited, or had anything personally to do with the narrative beyond sitting in the room when it was first planned and not, I dunno, organizing a strike or something.

Bendis wrote DISASSEMBLED, and then wrote NEW AVENGERS to this day.

JMS and Joe Q wrote OMD. JMS wrote ASM for about 6 years. Dan Slott has never written ASM. His past Spider-Man works are the much-heralded SPIDER-MAN/HUMAN TORCH mini, and various guest stints from SHE-HULK to THE THING to AVENGERS: THE INITIATIVE where he seems to grasp the character, whether single, young, or married & unmasked. Regardless of the circumstances leading up to it, he is a NEW writer to the title, and his past work on the character is promising. It ISN'T the same situation as the one you describe for this reason alone.

I was really excited for Slott on ASM, but OMD has created that ill will. Trade-waiting would be an appropriate compromise.

 

[BrianWilly]

But, see, I brought it up because you were the one who is going, basically, "You're letting ******ed love for Slott blind you". And I find that silly because you are someone who literally advertises your bias as your message board member title. Pot calling the kettle black.

"******ed" is your word and your word alone. Find me anywhere -- anywhere -- I've ever even alluded that being a Dan Slott fan was a bad thing. Hell, my post above wasn't even directed at Slott fans exclusively, much less you alone.

It's almost as if you're projecting or something, but certainly that couldn't be the case.

You've never bothered to ask me about my fandom for Slott. Never realized my underlying layers of complexity regarding it, and all that baloney. I don't cry a river about it.

You're angry with me for not doing what you would never, under any circumstances, do with me. Lovely awesome.

And yet, I've also never, ever said "Dread is going to molest this new Slott series no matter how shtty it is!"

Go on, let's compare some more.

And actually, if you recall, I have asked you before about your opinions re: Slott. And, if you recall, at the time you blew up at me over what was through and through an harmless question about your views on the Initiative. I remember that at the time, you cited some nonsense Whedon bias speechifying at me and then proceeded to not answer the question as well.

Sounds familiar. Wanna ring up that link for everyone else to see?

If nobody could judge the opinions of others without first gathering a first-date's worth of information about it, there would be no posts on MB's anywhere. Suck it up. If you don't want to be judged as a disciple of Whedon from the Church of Joss, then, I don't know, alter your title and grade something he writes below a 7 once in a while.

It is almost like PJ logic: If you don't want to be seen as a Whedon-Loving Groupie, than stop being a Whedon-Loving Groupie. It would be like if someone had an issue with me liking Casey Jones, and then I wondered, "oh, how EVER did you come up with THAT?"

You're defending your prejudice against me by...saying that you were prejudiced against me?

Though I must say, if your barometer for ascertaining a poster's attitude and opinions truly starts and ends at their title and location, then truly it would explain a lot.

 

[iloveclones]

may I ask why? I don't want to start a big argument or anything, I would just like to know your reasoning. I don't really like NA as a whole too much but from what I remember issue 2 didn't seem too terrible.

Because the last thing we would want around here is a big argument.....

 

[Dread]

"******ed" is your word and your word alone. Find me anywhere -- anywhere -- I've ever even alluded that being a Dan Slott fan was a bad thing. Hell, my post above wasn't even directed at Slott fans exclusively, much less you alone.

It's almost as if you're projecting or something, but certainly that couldn't be the case.

I was summarizing. I know you didn't use that term. I was cutting to the chase of your argument. Relax.

And yet, I've also never, ever said "Dread is going to molest this new Slott series no matter how shtty it is!"

Go on, let's compare some more.

No, but you've maintained your "holier than thou" aura judging others for, at least in your eyes, giving Slott a pass because they like his prior work.

And actually, if you recall, I have asked you before about your opinions re: Slott. And, if you recall, at the time you blew up at me over what was through and through an harmless question about your views on the Initiative. I remember that at the time, you cited some nonsense Whedon bias speechifying at me and then proceeded to not answer the question as well.

Sounds familiar. Wanna ring up that link for everyone else to see?

I don't feel like digging. It's your point, ring up the link yourself.

You had some sort of snarky, arrogant way of typing that question, I believe it was in the wake of the Gauntlet incident or something else, maybe the Scarlet Spider/Remasking thing in #8, and I got the impression that it was judgemental, such as you seeming to believe that I was giving Slott a pass because I liked him, and how illogical it was, considering my Bendis-bias or general pessimism for most things.

You're defending your prejudice against me by...saying that you were prejudiced against me?

I'm saying you're acting like this is the first time someone has presumed you to be a Whedon Fanboy, and you can't possibly imagine how that happened. I've never seen you criticize or question any comic he has written or given it below a 7 out of 10 regardless. Now, like I said, normally I would have no issue with it. But when you come out and scoff at anyone who shows even the least bit of optimism about Slott on ASM, even after OMD, I can't stand it. I see you as the Poster Child of Blind Fanboyism for Whedon. You have zero right in my eyes to question someone else's fanboyism, much less condemn it, unless you at least tuck some Whedon back. That's my opinion, naturally.

I have to face people criticizing my opinions and trying to logically prove why I am full of **** on a daily or weekly basis. I have complained about it but after a while I have to suck it up and realize this is just how the MB's work. I do it to others and others do it to me. It is a fluid discussion. People have opinions about me that are right, wrong, or a little of both, but I have learned that yelling at them about it won't change.

I mean I didn't mean to horribly offend your immortal soul and that of the Messiah Joss Whedon, but if you took it that offensively, hot damn, I am sorry. Please don't ask him to turn me into a puppet.

 

[Darthphere]

Nah, you're never reasonable. You're just so in love with Slott's past work, you're willing forgive whatever involvement he had in the worst 4 issues of Spider-Man I have ever read in my entire life.

Hey, Joey Q mentioned that Brubaker pitched in ideas too, oh well, I guess you're not going to read Captain America now.

 

[Darthphere]

It's a pretty fair question, once you most past Photo's uncanny talent for pissing off anything with a pulse. The consensus across the board seems to be "Yikes, One More Day was such trash, blech...but oh, surely SuperSlott will make it all better for us with Brand New Day! Huzzah and likewise!"

Which is nice, but...c'mon, the only thing you're all basing that off is pure blind devotion. We have no idea what the story will be, we have no idea which of the hated elements of OMD are going to carry over, we don't know anything about cast or direction or tone, so on and so forth. All that we know for certain is that it's meant to build off of what may or may not be the single most disliked storyline in the history of the character.

That's a piss-poor recommendation for any series, no matter how good a writer may be. I'm not saying it can't be done -- hell, if Simone can save Wonder Woman after Amazons Attack then anything is possible -- but let's be honest, the Pure Blind Devotion is pretty damn palpable, here.

The thing is, you're right, and so is PJ, you just possess something PJ lacks, tact.

 

[deemar325]

Hate OMD still, I'll be buying the Slott issues of BND