Comics Get ready people, JMS and Joe Q are planning ANOTHER Spider-Man event

[Herr Logan]

'Cause, like th' sig says, bunky, I don't think I'm Wolverine nor pretend to be him. If I did I'd be RPin' and I don't see an RP board around here, do you?

Now I will resume pretendin' yer father's condom didn't break when you were concieved until yer next moronic ******* outburst.

Okay, that last one was definitely better. It's a little cruder than Wolverine's usual insults, but the round-about manner (saying "yer father's condom didn't break" instead of "you were never born") is definitely his style. Good job.

 

[Gregatron]

This is pretty absolute, and I prefer a little more room to maneuver in comic book heroes, but you make some good points.

I also think your overall assertion in this thread that Spider-Man is supposed to be about the journey from teenhood to adulthood is a little subjective, too. That was certainly a major theme back in the day, and I personally enjoyed it. Still, to demand that it be the main focus of the saga doesn't leave a lot of freedom.

Again, I agree with you overall, I would just avoid the absolutes and polarized options.



I think you just put your finger on something that is definitely one of the main dynamics behind all the bull$hit that has happened in modern mainstream comics so far. This is another great piece of insight into the forces behind the decline of Marvel Comics, right up there with what you said about "cathartic realism" a while back.

Thanks for the support. Perhaps I've been a bit too black-and-white about this (I get militant when I'm hungry...). Certainly, there's room for interpretation and shades of grey, but I still think the basic rules laid down for the character should be obeyed.

 

[Gregatron]

You read 'Superman on the Couch,' didn't you?

Actually, no, I didn't! I think I leafed through it once, though. Does it talk about similar notions?

 

[Gregatron]

I knew it! You totally did read 'Superman on the Couch.'

Seriously, I didn't.

But I guess I should!

 

[shinlyle]

Please! Let's stop flaming each other and turn our anger tho the ones who righteously deserve it... Quesada and Company...
Anyone got Nachos??

No...dammit.

I had the wife pickup popcorn, and he got me the kind with no butter by mistake! I guess I'll get my butter when you get your nachos.

Anyone want to run to the store?

 

[Gregatron]

and the only way to make Spider-man a mythic, universally appealing, all ages type character is to make him a teenager and have him never grow up.
I dont know how many people on this board were alive when Amazing Fantasy #15 came out...that doesnt mean they dont get the character. Spider-man speaks out to people in different ways. I got my first Spiderman comic from my dad. I loved the character so much that I kept reading into my teenage years and beyond. I went back and got the old issues and reprints. Did I not understand Spiderman because i didnt read AF15 when it came out???? It is selfish because instead of wanting people to love the character for what speaks to them about the character you want to impose your will. So we just say FU to those who like Peter being married??? What should the kids think when Franklin Richards is aging faster than Peter?????
Do we have to keep rewriting Spiderman's origin since the way people talk have changed...I mean he is a teenage but why is he saying groovy?????? Do we rewrite him for every decade since teens in the 80's were different from the teens in the 90's and 2000's??????
How come he isnt on the computer like me and my friends are?????

I am reminded of a letter printed in a mid-70s issue of Amazing...when this debate raged.

The author said that Spider-Man needed to age and change, because he was a child of the 60s. If he didn't, the author said, then he would become a product of many generations, a college student in the 2000s who remembered doing the Twist in high school. Another letter said Peter wouldn't get a real job until 2001 (must've been psychic) is his aging moved so slow.


Franklin Richards shouldn't age, either.


As I've said, the classic example is Batman. Neither he nor Robin aged a day from 1940-1969. And when Robin suddenly was old enough to go to college, Batman STILL did not age a day.

Why do fictional characters "need" to follow our space/time rules?

I think the bias against Spider-Man in high school is because high school only lasts 4 years, real time. With college, there's more leeway, what with graduate school and all.

So, when 4, 5, 6 years pass by (real time), fanboys start wondering why Spider-Man is still in high school.

But is it ANY more "realistic" to have Batman or Superman eternally remain 30-years-old? Why do they get "iconic preferential aging treatment" and not Spider-Man?

Spider-Man was designed as a teenager trying to be a superhero. If he's an adult superhero (and making the same kinds of mistakes as a teenager, to boot), then he's just another guy in a costume beating up bad guys and swearing, and he has lost what made him unique.

 

[Gregatron]

I gotta disagree with you on this, Greg. Spider-Man was not fully or mostly fully defined in 'Amazing Fantasy' #15. His sense of humor and the more complex emotions reflected in his inner dialogue didn't show up until he had his own series, and the jokes didn't really start until 'Amazing Spider-Man' #3, I think.
Still, I'd say that's a fairly brief grace period before he hit his stride. I'm only arguing the technical aspect of what you said, but I agree that Spider-Man was molded very quickly into the character we know and love, and he stayed that way for decades before inferior writers decided to turn his comics into trashy, grocery-aisle magazines.

He made a joke or two in that first story. And true, the complex self-pity-issues and thought balloons didn't show up until later, but we still saw him agonize over the knowledge of his role in Ben's death.

But the core, most basic elements were there from the start. Over the next few issues, they were just expanded upon and refined.

I'd say by Amazing Spider-Man # 4, the Spider-Man we know so well was pretty much in place.

 

[Gregatron]

Erm when did dieing to save a comic book become logical ?

ack forget what i said even tho the powers and suit change its still the same old peter parker, i prefer change in doses and in quantites, if it wasnt for that i would of given up reading spiderman heck i gave up when they broke pete and MJ up, either way i like change and to others who do like change there okay in my book those who dont like change and prefer peter remain solo be moody all the freakin time and be an ass well thats your kicks either way bring on civil war, bring on the iron spidey HECK BRING ON Another clone saga as ill read it because the more arcs we get the more possibilities that open

I wasn't being literal. I was saying that I won't sit by quietly and let history be trodden on. The truth must be spoken.

If it were only changes in the powers or suit (the originals are perfect, though I do love the black costume, too), then that might be okay. But the man under the mask has been totally altered.

 

[Gregatron]

Okay, how about when they made Captain America the Captain? Or Iron Man an alcoholic? Or Jim Rhodes Iron Man? Or Reed and Sue left the FF?

Chracter progression is KEY in serialized mediums. That's how th' world works. You don't have that, you get rehashed refried ****.

Comics didn't become serialized until the "age and change" minority (which has now become the majority, due to almost everyone else leaving the genre) took over. Until then, they were complete-in-one issue stories that anyone could pick up and understand reasonably well.

 

[Gregatron]

Okay, how about when they made Captain America the Captain? Or Iron Man an alcoholic? Or Jim Rhodes Iron Man? Or Reed and Sue left the FF?

Chracter progression is KEY in serialized mediums. That's how th' world works. You don't have that, you get rehashed refried ****.

Comics didn't become serialized until the "age and change" minority (which has now become the majority, due to almost everyone else leaving the genre) took over. Until then, they were complete-in-one issue stories that anyone could pick up and understand reasonably well.

 

[Gregatron]

You can't hold against Quesada that fact that he got his position due to his ability to bring in the money. That's just logical.

However, you can hold against him the fact that his decisions are risky even in terms of sales. It seems very much like short-term thinking, and because they're butchering every single Marvel franchise, that has every chance of coming back to bite them in the ass.

Yes, there are a lot of shallow, unthinking sheep out there who support franchises that are blatantly badly written, for whatever puerile, tribalistic reasons they have. However, there are plenty of hardcore fans out there who used to spend a lot of money on several titles every week who have given up on this now corrupt publishing giant. I've wasted so much money over the years on comics. Hell, if I'd taken up a hobby that didn't cost so much, I could probably buy a new (used) car right now. And I still buy comics, because it's part of my personality and habits to do so, but I only buy Batman comics or reprints of Marvel Comics from back in the day. They're going to run out of Essential colletions for X-Men and Wolverine very soon, and those are pretty much the only ones I buy. That leaves nothing for Marvel publishing to offer me. I'm not alone in this, and it is absolutely the fault of people like Joey Q, JMS, Bendis, Jenkins, Morrison, Austin, and all the other writers who either can't write worth a damn to begin with (Bendis [at least as far as Marvel goes], Austin), those who are good writers with their own characters but insist on screwing up other people's (JMS, Morrison), and writers who just ran out of ideas and decided to recycle old ones to bastardize and retcon beloved characters (Jenkins... and also Joss Whedon, who will always be one of my favorite fiction writers of all time because of 'Firefly', but even he fecked up royally on that last story arc in 'Astonishing X-Men').

Joey Q can't be blamed for making money. He can be blamed for making money in the short term and alienating fans that haved put out a lot of money over the years.
I honestly never thought I would stop buying Spider-Man comics, up until a couple of years ago. And it's not because I've "outgrown" superheroes, it's because I outgrew this kind of trashy nonsense that plagues the books currently before I could even walk or talk. These people really should be ashamed of themselves. They're artists, and yet they've truly destroyed great art.

Pretty much spot-on.

Two things, though:

1. If you buy currently-published reprints, then you're still voting with your wallet. Try Ebay for the originals, like I do. I have not bought a single first-run (or reprint) Marvel comic since Amazing Spider-Man # 514. Only back issues. OLD back issues.

2. It's not just the "professionals" who are to blame. It's the "fans", and the fans who BECOME "professionals", and thus use the books to publish their salacious fan-fiction professionally.

As I've said, Marvel has become a collection of professionally published fanzines, NOT the professional comics of yore (when working on the books was a job, not a "hobby" or even an "art form").

 

[Gregatron]

Yeah, except JMS is clearly a liberal. Specifically, he's the kind of liberal that makes other liberals look bad. When you see the kind of irresponsible $hit that he says in his defense about 'Sins Past' and you see the political leanings of the people who defended that storyline, it's a little bit easier to see why some of the right-wing warhawks on this site make sweeping generalizations that villify left-leaning posters.

They're absolutely wrong to do it, mind you, but it's a little bit easier to see why.

Stan never used comics to voice any political opinions or take cheap shots at critics or anyone else (he only poked fun at the Distinguished Competition from time to time). When he got on his soapbox (the column as well at the stories themselves), he only preached about tolerance, peace, and brotherhood.

 

[Gregatron]

So, when you lost your temper and cursed me out yesterday, displaying your appalling inability to use the English language correctly (and no, I'm not talking about your Wolverine dialect... even grownups like to play-act), you were actually laughing at me?

When you throw childish, excruciatingly common insults at me, you're laughing? That's a sad image... and the only person I can see laughing while saying such things is a child.

...or a comic book fanboy.


Sigh.

 

[Gregatron]

The Clone Saga started with noble intentions, but became way too complex. The problem is that it relied on past continuity, and DISREGARDED that continuity, to boot. Worse, marketing took over, and the storyline lasted nearly 3 YEARS instead of 6 months. Add to that the Spectator Boom (and subsequent crash) of the 1990s, with all those multiple covers and other such tricks, and we had ourselves a big mess.

Up until that time, Spider-Man's history was rather simple, as it should have been. But then, it became mired in retroactive plots, smoke-and-mirrors deceptions, and seemingly every character who ever died coming back from the other side.



The horrifying thing is that history has repeated itself almost exactly. In yet another attempt to "fix" Spider-Man by going back into the past and mucking about with the establishment (the Totem stuff, Sins Past, the Other, etc.), the character has been left in even worse shape than he was during the Clone Saga. And we've also seen the return of the multiple covers and other gimmicks, as well. The primary difference between now and the 1990s, is that today's industry is writer-driven instead of artist-driven (meaning, many Marvel Zombies buy books solely on the basis of which "name" writer writes it).


There should be a moratorium on new stories which use old stories/history and/or retroactive continuity as a basis. No more "tilt the mirror" garabage. Break some new ground. Create. Don't destroy.

Maybe, just maybe, these "creators" should try creating instead of tearing down.

 

[Herr Logan]

Actually, no, I didn't! I think I leafed through it once, though. Does it talk about similar notions?

Seriously, I didn't.

But I guess I should!

Yes, it does talk about similar notions, and I think I remember it using the specific words "illusion of change" and "window dressing" when describing how serial format comics stay generally in the same place and the characters are static, even though it seems like there's evolution and growth because details and supporting characters change over the years.

I think the author even said that Superman and Spider-Man getting married is only "window dressing," although for Spider-Man I'm not sure I agree. Superman represents "traditional values" (but not those of fundamentalist bigots, etc., since he doesn't support prejudice, disenfranchisement or oppression, from what I understand), so him getting married is just the next step up from flirting with Lois for 50 or so years. Spider-Man, however, while still representing the same values that Superman does, did not come from a nuclear family (yes, Superman's adopted family was nuclear, and since he never knew his birth parents, they're the ones that count) and is not as "well-adjusted" as Superman, and was generally seen as more iconoclastic. He was a lot more self-centered, neurotic and witty than Superman. I'm not saying he didn't care for others, but he had a hell of a lot more personal problems to worry about than Superman. This is why it seems that more people in this generation are interested in Spider-Man than Superman, and I'm one of those people, even though I will always love Superman as he was the one who got me into superheroes for life.
Anyway, I think it changes things for Spider-Man to get married, while Superman carried on mostly the same as always, while having to make less excuses for his unpredictable comings and goings.


You should check that book out, although I can't say whether it would tell you anything you don't already know. You've obviously got a good understanding of this stuff.

 

[Herr Logan]

He made a joke or two in that first story. And true, the complex self-pity-issues and thought balloons didn't show up until later, but we still saw him agonize over the knowledge of his role in Ben's death.

But the core, most basic elements were there from the start. Over the next few issues, they were just expanded upon and refined.

I'd say by Amazing Spider-Man # 4, the Spider-Man we know so well was pretty much in place.

Agreed.

One thing I really like about #4 is that the Sandman had great banter with Spider-Man. I think he was the first who could really hold a "conversation" with Spider-Man at his own level (i.e. not as arrogant and pompous as Dr. Octopus, but not as dumb and witless as the average thug).

 

[Gregatron]

Yes, it does talk about similar notions, and I think I remember it using the specific words "illusion of change" and "window dressing" when describing how serial format comics stay generally in the same place and the characters are static, even though it seems like there's evolution and growth because details and supporting characters change over the years.

I think the author even said that Superman and Spider-Man getting married is only "window dressing," although for Spider-Man I'm not sure I agree. Superman represents "traditional values" (but not those of fundamentalist bigots, etc., since he doesn't support prejudice, disenfranchisement or oppression, from what I understand), so him getting married is just the next step up from flirting with Lois for 50 or so years. Spider-Man, however, while still representing the same values that Superman does, did not come from a nuclear family (yes, Superman's adopted family was nuclear, and since he never knew his birth parents, they're the ones that count) and is not as "well-adjusted" as Superman, and was generally seen as more iconoclastic. He was a lot more self-centered, neurotic and witty than Superman. I'm not saying he didn't care for others, but he had a hell of a lot more personal problems to worry about than Superman. This is why it seems that more people in this generation are interested in Spider-Man than Superman, and I'm one of those people, even though I will always love Superman as he was the one who got me into superheroes for life.
Anyway, I think it changes things for Spider-Man to get married, while Superman carried on mostly the same as always, while having to make less excuses for his unpredictable comings and goings.


You should check that book out, although I can't say whether it would tell you anything you don't already know. You've obviously got a good understanding of this stuff.

Thanks for the info.

Superman getting married disrupts the Clark-Lois-Superman love triangle that was integral to the character for so long. I'll bet the general public doesn't even know they're married.

Spider-Man getting married disrupts the "struggling youngster" aspect that was integral to the character for so long. I'll bet the general public doesn't even know he's married.

Those changes are NOT window-dressing.

 

[Gregatron]

Agreed.

One thing I really like about #4 is that the Sandman had great banter with Spider-Man. I think he was the first who could really hold a "conversation" with Spider-Man at his own level (i.e. not as arrogant and pompous as Dr. Octopus, but not as dumb and witless as the average thug).

I agree!


But, wait...I though Doc Ock was a nice guy who was being controlled by his evil, sentient tentacles, and the Sandman was married.

Oh, wait.

 

[Vile]

Well, going back to the original topic...

I never liked MJ. Never have, never will. If another stalker walked up behind her and put a bullet in the back of her head I wouldnt shed a tear.

That being said...

I really dont want Peter to revert to his slummin' teen-college days. Sweet jesus, I dont have the patience to read about how a 20-something year old can't afford his bills, has to take care of his elderly aunt and gosh golly gee, find a way to make it to his date tonight without Electro ruining everything.

But, I suppose it's really a moot point - as others have said repeatedly; if it bothers you...stop reading them and send a message to Marvel with yer wallet. It's said again and again, but I feel it's falling on deaf ears. Me? I stopped reading YEARS ago; dropped every title and I havent bought a marvel book yet. I flip through, I keep up with current events by way of the net...but Marvel isnt getting a dime from me.

Bottom line: They'll print it, you'll buy it and ***** the whole time.

 

[Gregatron]

I really dont want Peter to revert to his slummin' teen-college days. Sweet jesus, I dont have the patience to read about how a 20-something year old can't afford his bills, has to take care of his elderly aunt and gosh golly gee, find a way to make it to his date tonight without Electro ruining everything.

Then. Read. Something. Else.


Because if you're reading Spider-Man and it doesn't feature those elements, then it's NOT Spider-Man.

Instead, it's "the superhero who IS you", an aging fanboy, not "the superhero who COULD be you".


Sigh.


This is what I'm talking about. The "fans" who want a fictional character to BECOME THEM, instead of being what they were created as.

 

[Adrian Toomes]

I haven't read the whole thread, but I've sure gotten the gist.

I just don't think the issue is as black and white as people are trying to make it here.

I didn't care for the Other, I didn't care for Sins Past. I'm a late 30's devotee who has been collecting since the early 70's. Oh and my son is a huge Spidey fan too.

I would like the Spidey in the comics of today to still have the same feel as the classic character. On that, I am clear. However, I've enjoyed the run with the Avengers... living in Stark Tower, etc. I think you have to try things like that at some point. Even the goofy new costume. It's ok to try it for a bit.

But at the end of the day, I want Peter to be Peter. He wins when he loses, he loses when he wins. That's our Spidey.

Do I wish he never got married? Maybe. Do I wish Aunt May never found out his identity? I guess so. But I understand how, after 40 years of stories have been told, people want to try to do new things.

But I still think it's a crime that we don't see the daily bugle anymore. Anyone else who grew up reading Spidey in the 70's knows that the JJJ stuff provided the best moments. Teaching high school? no thanks.

And one thing about the Iron Man run, is Stark is talking about Peter flexing the science muscle he's let lapse. Amen to that.

The trick, I think, is to find a way to maintain the character that we loved, so that kids who just start reading the books will love him FOR THE SAME REASONS WE DID.

And I'm sorry, Ultimate doesn't do that. Before you go nuts, I like the books. They're fun. But in five years, they'll be saddled with the same continuity issues as well. And all in all, give me the real Green Goblin instead of the horned monster. So its not a solution. I loved Untold Stories. I was sad that left.

I guess what I'm saying is... this medium was never expected to last so long. When Stan and folks created these characters in the 60's, there's no way they thought in 2006 they'd still be going strong.

So there's no blueprint as to how to advance the characters while keeping them the same.

We just have to hope people who care about the characters get the play with them... and that good things come from that.

I'll keep reading no matter what. I've gone through some dry spots before.... and you never know when it will turn around.

 

[Gregatron]

I haven't read the whole thread, but I've sure gotten the gist.

I just don't think the issue is as black and white as people are trying to make it here.

I didn't care for the Other, I didn't care for Sins Past. I'm a late 30's devotee who has been collecting since the early 70's. Oh and my son is a huge Spidey fan too.

I would like the Spidey in the comics of today to still have the same feel as the classic character. On that, I am clear. However, I've enjoyed the run with the Avengers... living in Stark Tower, etc. I think you have to try things like that at some point. Even the goofy new costume. It's ok to try it for a bit.

But at the end of the day, I want Peter to be Peter. He wins when he loses, he loses when he wins. That's our Spidey.

Do I wish he never got married? Maybe. Do I wish Aunt May never found out his identity? I guess so. But I understand how, after 40 years of stories have been told, people want to try to do new things.

But I still think it's a crime that we don't see the daily bugle anymore. Anyone else who grew up reading Spidey in the 70's knows that the JJJ stuff provided the best moments. Teaching high school? no thanks.

And one thing about the Iron Man run, is Stark is talking about Peter flexing the science muscle he's let lapse. Amen to that.

The trick, I think, is to find a way to maintain the character that we loved, so that kids who just start reading the books will love him FOR THE SAME REASONS WE DID.

And I'm sorry, Ultimate doesn't do that. Before you go nuts, I like the books. They're fun. But in five years, they'll be saddled with the same continuity issues as well. And all in all, give me the real Green Goblin instead of the horned monster. So its not a solution. I loved Untold Stories. I was sad that left.

I guess what I'm saying is... this medium was never expected to last so long. When Stan and folks created these characters in the 60's, there's no way they thought in 2006 they'd still be going strong.

So there's no blueprint as to how to advance the characters while keeping them the same.

We just have to hope people who care about the characters get the play with them... and that good things come from that.

I'll keep reading no matter what. I've gone through some dry spots before.... and you never know when it will turn around.

I agree with much of that.

That last sentence is a major rough spot, though.

 

[Adrian Toomes]

I agree with much of that.

That last sentence is a major rough spot, though.

I know... but I don't want to abandon the character to those who could care less about it. I'd rather keep an eye on.

But I don't begrudge people who do bail. I just won't do it myself.

 

[Gregatron]

I know... but I don't want to abandon the character to those who could care less about it. I'd rather keep an eye on.

But I don't begrudge people who do bail. I just won't do it myself.

"Keeping an eye on" and "voting with your wallet" are two different things.


If one does not like, one does not buy.


Unless one is a drug addict who hates the drug, but can't quit.


I have not bought a single Marvel comic since ASM # 514, yet here I am, just as much a fan as ever. A fan of the character, not the company, or what the company has done to them.

There are other ways to observe and support a character one loves, you know.

 

[Herr Logan]

Pretty much spot-on.

Two things, though:

1. If you buy currently-published reprints, then you're still voting with your wallet. Try Ebay for the originals, like I do. I have not bought a single first-run (or reprint) Marvel comic since Amazing Spider-Man # 514. Only back issues. OLD back issues.

2. It's not just the "professionals" who are to blame. It's the "fans", and the fans who BECOME "professionals", and thus use the books to publish their salacious fan-fiction professionally.

As I've said, Marvel has become a collection of professionally published fanzines, NOT the professional comics of yore (when working on the books was a job, not a "hobby" or even an "art form").

I agree, but I don't feel the need to go through Ebay or other round-about process to get the things I buy from Marvel because it truly is only once every few months that I buy anything from them at all, and like I said, they're running out of Essentials that I'm willing to buy. They get very little from me, and in a couple years, there will probably be nothing at all.

I'm passionate, but I'm also lazy. I'd rather just get it over with at the comic book store or bookstore when I'm there to buy non-Marvel stuff anyway. I still get to complain about current stuff without being a hypocrite, though, since I read several Marvel titles just to keep informed, but I don't pay one damn cent for them. I feel like I have to buy at least one thing at the comic shop if I've just read a stack of comics I won't buy, and that's pretty much always a Batman comic or TPB.