The Amazing Spider-Man I don't know what troubles me more...

[roach]

It's good you gave him permission to do so, that line is awesome

but its the truth...Nolan's Joker doesnt look like the comic Joker and people dont mind because he acted the way they thought he should.
....does anyone else give that leeway to Raimi's Green Goblin?

 

[Don Yoyo]

haha well i was discussing something that actually has a possibility of being in the movie from the comics....quips...and the ultimate approach...not Spy Parents

I haven't followed the whole debate, but from what I understand, some people here thinks that making Peter's parents spies kinda makes him 'special' from the get-go. But if I understand right, they were not super-spies, and nothing really remarkable. So, how is the ultimate approach better? I mean, his dad was a scientist considered brilliant enough to join the super-soldier program along with Hank Pym, Bruce Banner, Franklin Storm. And when that ended in a disaster, he went on to create an anti-cancer suit that could have revolutionized things had he been able to finish it. And oh, did I mention that Peter's webbings are based on a formula his father created?

However, Ultimate Peter was pretty cocky. I like the more humble Peter.

Cocky? Cocky to whom? He's a smartass to the villains, hasn't it been always Spider-Man's schtick?

 

[Dragon]

I haven't followed the whole debate, but from what I understand, some people here thinks that making Peter's parents spies kinda makes him 'special' from the get-go. But if I understand right, they were not super-spies, and nothing really remarkable. So, how is the ultimate approach better? I mean, his dad was a scientist considered brilliant enough to join the super-soldier program along with Hank Pym, Bruce Banner, Franklin Storm. And when that ended in a disaster, he went on to create an anti-cancer suit that could have revolutionized things had he been able to finish it. And oh, did I mention that Peter's webbings are based on a formula his father created?

Exactly my point. As spies Richard and Mary were essentially just information couriers. Nothing unbelievable.

But in Ultimate, you're really removing any normalcy of Peter's life by making his parents successful scientists. There's no logical reason that someone with Peter's pedigree in the Ultimate-verse would ever have to struggle to find work or earn a living. His parents rep would open doors for him that he hhas to fight to open in 616. Especially when its seen that Peter is something of a prodigy.

 

[Jack O Lantern]

Exactly my point. As spies Richard and Mary were essentially just information couriers. Nothing unbelievable.

But in Ultimate, you're really removing any normalcy of Peter's life by making his parents successful scientists. There's no logical reason that someone with Peter's pedigree in the Ultimate-verse would ever have to struggle to find work or earn a living. His parents rep would open doors for him that he hhas to fight to open in 616. Especially when its seen that Peter is something of a prodigy.

You mean like that scholarship he had, or the apartment in the city his friends Dad paid for, or the job that Marla Jameson got for him?

And what doors would be open to him after he graduates from college will not matter because in the ultimate universe he will be a kid forever.

 

[Dragon]

You mean like that scholarship he had, or the apartment in the city his friends Dad paid for, or the job that Marla Jameson got for him?

And what doors would be open to him after he graduates from college will not matter because in the ultimate universe he will be a kid forever.

Nope. i mean like being the son of successful sceientists means that he wouldn't need to go selling photos to the Daily Bugle to earn money to help pay his Aunt's mortgage. With his obvious scientific and the notoriety of his parents he could get money via grants, he could land a good paying internship. He likely wouldn't be in Midtown High, but a presitgious High School geared to students of Science.

Hell, it's quite likely that his parents would even have a nest-egg set-up for him.

In terms of social circles. he wouldn't be trying to may headway with the likes of Liz Allen or running afoul of Flash Thompson. He'd be hanging with other intelligencia.

Bottomline is that Peter would be very different than the guy we know.

 

[Don Yoyo]

But in Ultimate, you're really removing any normalcy of Peter's life by making his parents successful scientists.

Singular, not plurals. His father was a gifted scientist, his mother was apparently their P.R/marketing person for the Venom project.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Once again- please elaborate on how the life Peter's parents led- that he knew nothing about- changes who he was, is or will be?
What was the difference in Peter's life after he learned they were spies? His life was already pretty frickin' bizarre- so what's the difference here? Even after the revelation he barely ever mentioned his parents until their ill-conceived resurrection

Better question: what does it add? If it doesn't add anything useful, then there is no reason to do it. The spy parents didn't enhance the character in anyway, shape or form, so why bother addressing it or using it?

It's similar to the film, True Lies. Arnold's daughter was an average kid, despite her father being an actual James Bond-esque spy (Which Peter's parents weren't). At least until this life-style blew-up in their faces.

Their merely dying in a car accident is boring. When Stan decided to focus on what happened to them he just added some intrigue.

The car accident angle is not boring. It just involves less useless plots and special effects. But, emotionally, could be EASILY more effective.

And as far as Stan sayng Peter's life was average- he didn't mean average as in uneventful- he meant that he suffered from the same difficulties that real people do with money, relationships and so forth.

Yes, and I know the pain of having parents who were secretly spies

It's a stupid idea to use that story. It doesn't make Peter more interesting. Nor does it really seem to flow very well with a film establishing who the character is. It's a distraction, and a stupid one at that.

 

[Alchemyst]

Nope. i mean like being the son of successful sceientists means that he wouldn't need to go selling photos to the Daily Bugle to earn money to help pay his Aunt's mortgage. With his obvious scientific and the notoriety of his parents he could get money via grants, he could land a good paying internship. He likely wouldn't be in Midtown High, but a presitgious High School geared to students of Science.

Hell, it's quite likely that his parents would even have a nest-egg set-up for him.

In terms of social circles. he wouldn't be trying to may headway with the likes of Liz Allen or running afoul of Flash Thompson. He'd be hanging with other intelligencia.

Bottomline is that Peter would be very different than the guy we know.

IMO, they should leave Peter as is, if they were to make him different to that degree, it would seem kinda out of place. I think it's better for him to be humble and kind of an outsider. Once he gains his powers and dons his suit, his confidence is boosted due to him carrying on a different persona, and from there we can see the cocky attitude and quips.

 

[Dragon]

Better question: what does it add? If it doesn't add anything useful, then there is no reason to do it. The spy parents didn't enhance the character in anyway, shape or form, so why bother addressing it or using it?

It sparked another adventure in his life and opened up new possibilities for urther stories. It paralleled Peter's parents life to his, in that they were leading a secret life just as he does. It explains some of Peter's traits such as cool under pressure and inventiveness. It shows that Peter inherited these traits from his parents, but isn't as ham-fisted as making them scientists.

The car accident angle is not boring. It just involves less useless plots and special effects. But, emotionally, could be EASILY more effective.

No it isn't. Devoting a full story to them merely being in a car accident would be a gigantic snooze. The story needs to match the intensity of Peter's daily life.

Yes, and I know the pain of having parents who were secretly spies

Maybe you don't, but some people do. Including those who've lost parents in combat (Like me). Sorry that Stan didn't consult with you personally to compare your life to Peter's

It's a stupid idea to use that story. It doesn't make Peter more interesting. Nor does it really seem to flow very well with a film establishing who the character is. It's a distraction, and a stupid one at that.

And again we have a winner! As I've repeated now about 200 times in this thread- I never said the spy angle should be in the films. That is unless they had Peter avenging their deaths of course. Just as in the comics it doesn't need to be mentioned unless it's actually being dealt with. But that being said, it in and of itself isn't a bad idea at all. And no one has actually come up with a single reason why it would be. Your dislike of it is the same as my distaste for coconut.

His parents being involved in government espionage isn't in any way implausible.

 

[Dragon]

Singular, not plurals. His father was a gifted scientist, his mother was apparently their P.R/marketing person for the Venom project.

I stand corrected.

 

[Dragon]

IMO, they should leave Peter as is, if they were to make him different to that degree, it would seem kinda out of place. I think it's better for him to be humble and kind of an outsider. Once he gains his powers and dons his suit, his confidence is boosted due to him carrying on a different persona, and from there we can see the cocky attitude and quips.

Agreed.

 

[Alchemyst]

Once again- please elaborate on how the life Peter's parents led- that he knew nothing about- changes who he was, is or will be?
What was the difference in Peter's life after he learned they were spies? His life was already pretty frickin' bizarre- so what's the difference here? Even after the revelation he barely ever mentioned his parents until their ill-conceived resurrection

Better question: what does it add? If it doesn't add anything useful, then there is no reason to do it. The spy parents didn't enhance the character in anyway, shape or form, so why bother addressing it or using it?



The car accident angle is not boring. It just involves less useless plots and special effects. But, emotionally, could be EASILY more effective.



Yes, and I know the pain of having parents who were secretly spies

It's a stupid idea to use that story. It doesn't make Peter more interesting. Nor does it really seem to flow very well with a film establishing who the character is. It's a distraction, and a stupid one at that.

That's true. That kinda stuff works for Batman because the events leading up to his parents demise is what made him what he is. Spider-Man is different because his parents were in his life very little, so he relied on Uncle Ben and Aunt May, when death came knocking at Ben's door, it's more tragic because that was the father figure Peter had instead of his biological father.

 

[TheSlag]

It's a stupid idea to use that story. It doesn't make Peter more interesting. Nor does it really seem to flow very well with a film establishing who the character is. It's a distraction, and a stupid one at that.

That's true. That kinda stuff works for Batman because the events leading up to his parents demise is what made him what he is. Spider-Man is different because his parents were in his life very little, so he relied on Uncle Ben and Aunt May, when death came knocking at Ben's door, it's more tragic because that was the father figure Peter had instead of his biological father.

Exactly. The motivation for Pete should come from Uncle Ben's death arc, not from his parents'. The story that Peter lost his parents is enough, without adding to the storyline that they were spies, or died under strange/suspicious circumstances.

I also would rather see Capt Stacy's death arc told at some point in the reboot timeline (probably in the 2nd or 3rd movie). And if they do that, AND add in Peter's parents' deaths under suspicious circumstances, I think that is too much and takes away from the impact of the Capt Stacy's storyline (with Gwen blaming Spidey for the death of her father).

 

[Alchemyst]

Exactly. The motivation for Pete should come from Uncle Ben's death arc, not from his parents'. The story that Peter lost his parents is enough, without adding to the storyline that they were spies, or died under strange/suspicious circumstances.

I also would rather see Capt Stacy's death arc told at some point in the reboot timeline (probably in the 2nd or 3rd movie). And if they do that, AND add in Peter's parents' deaths under suspicious circumstances, I think that is too much and takes away from the impact of the Capt Stacy's storyline (with Gwen blaming Spidey for the death of her father).

yeah, it wouldnt be a good idea to place his parents deaths in a circumstance like that. Captain Stacy's death and Gwen blaming Spider-Man should deal more with how Spider-Man feels like he failed, and he should question whether or not the path he chose is the right path. Uncle Ben was the cause of him becoming Spider-Man, Capt Stacy should be the opposite

 

[Dragon]

yeah, it wouldnt be a good idea to place his parents deaths in a circumstance like that. Captain Stacy's death and Gwen blaming Spider-Man should deal more with how Spider-Man feels like he failed, and he should question whether or not the path he chose is the right path. Uncle Ben was the cause of him becoming Spider-Man, Capt Stacy should be the opposite

No, they should absolutely avoid that, IMO. Peter has already learned the lesson that he has the powers for a reason. He's also seen people die because he didn't use his powers. Captain Stacy's death isn't about his questioneing being Spider-Man. It's about the collateral damage of his being Spider-Man. Peter suffering through the fact that his life will always be plagued by tragedy.

I had wondered why in ASM #100 at the climax of the dream sequence it was Captain Stacy that Spidey faced, rather than Uncle Ben. But the reason was exactly for that reason. That Captain Stacy wasn't accusing him of failure, but reiterating to him from beyond that he can never be free of Spider-Man. And then he sprouts four extra arms. Classic. Although the sequence might have worked if he had seen both Ben and Captain Stacy.

 

[TheSlag]

yeah, it wouldnt be a good idea to place his parents deaths in a circumstance like that. Captain Stacy's death and Gwen blaming Spider-Man should deal more with how Spider-Man feels like he failed, and he should question whether or not the path he chose is the right path. Uncle Ben was the cause of him becoming Spider-Man, Capt Stacy should be the opposite

Agreed. Great storyline that ties so well to Uncle Ben's arc. With Uncle Ben, he chose not to use his great powers, and Uncle Ben paid the price. With Captain Stacy, even using his great powers, another loved one close to him paid the price (Captain Stacy with his life and Gwen losing her father). And it's a great story with Peter wondering what if he had not done this, or done that... would Captain Stacy had paid with his life. Add to that the storyline that Gwen (the only girl he loves) blames his alter-ego for the death of her father. And it adds such a contrast to Raimi's verse where MJ was basically a groupie (big fan) of Spider-Man.

Greatness!

 

[Chris Wallace]

but its the truth...Nolan's Joker doesnt look like the comic Joker and people dont mind because he acted the way they thought he should.
....does anyone else give that leeway to Raimi's Green Goblin?

Yeah. A small number that has been rapidly decreasing since 2007.

 

[chaseter]

but its the truth...Nolan's Joker doesnt look like the comic Joker and people dont mind because he acted the way they thought he should.
....does anyone else give that leeway to Raimi's Green Goblin?

Fanboys are selective. People will riot in the streets if Raimi makes Green Goblin wear helmet and not a mask but they will kiss the ground Nolan walks on if he makes Joker wear makeup and have a large smile from a horrific knife wound. Fanboys will beat their computer screens in with Mountain Dew cans if Raimi gives Ock a wife but they will mail Nolan the contents of their wallet if Harvey Dent's motivation for being evil was the death of Rachel Dawes.

 

[Spider-Fan]

It sparked another adventure in his life and opened up new possibilities for urther stories. It paralleled Peter's parents life to his, in that they were leading a secret life just as he does. It explains some of Peter's traits such as cool under pressure and inventiveness. It shows that Peter inherited these traits from his parents, but isn't as ham-fisted as making them scientists.

I didn't say make them scientists, either. I personally would rather his parents not be some grand people in the real world for Peter to aspire to, but maybe people Peter aspires to be due to what kind of people they were.

No it isn't. Devoting a full story to them merely being in a car accident would be a gigantic snooze. The story needs to match the intensity of Peter's daily life.

The ASM issue with Ben and the microscope thinks this point is stupid cause that was a great story. Sure, just 1 issue, but it was great. Also, I am mostly making this suggestion for film as it works better in film.

Maybe you don't, but some people do. Including those who've lost parents in combat (Like me). Sorry that Stan didn't consult with you personally to compare your life to Peter's

And this doesn't make me like the story anymore.

And again we have a winner! As I've repeated now about 200 times in this thread- I never said the spy angle should be in the films. That is unless they had Peter avenging their deaths of course. Just as in the comics it doesn't need to be mentioned unless it's actually being dealt with. But that being said, it in and of itself isn't a bad idea at all. And no one has actually come up with a single reason why it would be. Your dislike of it is the same as my distaste for coconut.

His parents being involved in government espionage isn't in any way implausible.

That hate of coconut can apply to ANYTHING. At the end of the day, it is always on a person by person basis, and I think the idea was stupid and I have stated why. When it comes to stories, there is no factual opinion. It's all up to tastes, and my tastes say the idea sucks.

 

[Dragon]

I didn't say make them scientists, either. I personally would rather his parents not be some grand people in the real world for Peter to aspire to, but maybe people Peter aspires to be due to what kind of people they were.

And in 616 Continuity, that was the case. They were by no means "grand" in their status as agents. They didn't defeat the Red Skull or bring down his organization. They were on a mission and died.

The ASM issue with Ben and the microscope thinks this point is stupid cause that was a great story. Sure, just 1 issue, but it was great.

Yeah, but Ben's death already involved intensity and tragedy. So any other little story was underlined by the fate we know that awaited Ben. And anyway, that Story wasn't just about Ben, but his relationship with Peter, who's life, again was high velocity. If, aside from their deaths in action, they wanted to do a side story about Peter's Mom and Dad taking him to the Zoo, that'd be fine, because their story is still charged with the energy of the fate that awaited them.

Also, I am mostly making this suggestion for film as it works better in film.

The only reason the spy thing isn't needed on film is because after Ben's death it becomes repetitive in the small scope of films that can be made. It certainly could be developed into a strong story, especially if it was made to be about more than Peter avenging their deaths which has certainly grown tiresme in action movies.

And this doesn't make me like the story anymore.

What you "like" is up to you. You asserted the story was "crap". And you haven't presented anything to back that up. Regarding Stan's run, I don't really get his fascination with The Kingpin. He has nearly as many appearances in the first 100 issues of Spidey's run as Ock, even though Ock was introduced in #3 and Fisk in #50. But I'm also not going to say that they were "crap" just because I'd have rather seen Spidey fight other villains.

That hate of coconut can apply to ANYTHING. At the end of the day, it is always on a person by person basis, and I think the idea was stupid and I have stated why. When it comes to stories, there is no factual opinion. It's all up to tastes, and my tastes say the idea sucks.

No pal. You not liking a story is one thing. Asserting that it's "stupid" is something else. Again, such an assertion suggests that the story is Implausible (There's no way they could be agents), Improbable (While maybe they could, it's unlikely that they would) or that it damages Peter as a character (Takes his life off course by making his established past and likely future unrealisitc). The story does none of those things. And it even, as I'd mentioned enhances Peter as a character, by presenting the basis of some of the characterisitics we know Peter to possess. It also presnts another interesting story that gave potential for future stories (Which was never exploited properly, however).

 

[LegendaryCaleb]

We still on the spy thing...really?
and you said you didnt want it in the movie? I really cant believe that now...lol

 

[Dragon]

Don't worry. Next on our schedule is an exhaustive discussion of "quips",,, "Where they come from and how not to get infected by them".

 

[Eddie Brock]

Fanboys are selective. People will riot in the streets if Raimi makes Green Goblin wear helmet and not a mask but they will kiss the ground Nolan walks on if he makes Joker wear makeup and have a large smile from a horrific knife wound. Fanboys will beat their computer screens in with Mountain Dew cans if Raimi gives Ock a wife but they will mail Nolan the contents of their wallet if Harvey Dent's motivation for being evil was the death of Rachel Dawes.

The difference is in the execution. I witnessed just as much outrage over the Joker wearing makeup prior to the release of The Dark Knight as any other major comic-to-screen change. (Also, the change to make Harvey Dent a sympathetic character isn't a great stretch by any means. He's often been portrayed as such in certain stories.)

 

[chaseter]

Norman looked fine for him wearing a goblin battle suit just like Joker looked fine for him wearing creepy clown makeup. Goblin had a pretty bad ass suit. People were just up in arms because it wasn't a direct comic translation just like people were upset that Joker wasn't perma white. The difference is the leeway the fanboys give the director. Fanboys love Nolan right now because he is on a hot streak. Raimi has one misstep from a fault not of his own and fanboys immediately turn against him. If Nolan screws up BB3, highly unlikely I know but you never know, then fanboys will turn on Nolan and call for him to leave the Batman franchise forever. So people forgave Nolan for Joker and accepted it but they still harp on Norman's Power Ranger suit.

Fanboys were up in arms that Otto had a wife...I mean seriously ridiculous stuff. Otto has been portrayed as mild mannered and soft spoken before his accident to which afterwards he becomes a maniacal villain. Ock's motivation then becomes science and crime which it did in the movie. Two-Face's motivation was in reaction to acid being thrown on his face. He developed a dual persona and his vision of right/wrong and good/evil were all decided from a side of a coin. He did not go on a killing spree against the people involved in Rachel's death. Two-Face's motivation on screen and in comic are two completely different things. It worked great in TDK but it smells of high hypocrisy when fanboys give Nolan a break but then turn around and persecute Raimi for the exact same stuff. Fanboys are so fickle.

 

[spider-neil]

Norman looked fine for him wearing a goblin battle suit just like Joker looked fine for him wearing creepy clown makeup. Goblin had a pretty bad ass suit. People were just up in arms because it wasn't a direct comic translation just like people were upset that Joker wasn't perma white. The difference is the leeway the fanboys give the director. Fanboys love Nolan right now because he is on a hot streak. Raimi has one misstep from a fault not of his own and fanboys immediately turn against him. If Nolan screws up BB3, highly unlikely I know but you never know, then fanboys will turn on Nolan and call for him to leave the Batman franchise forever. So people forgave Nolan for Joker and accepted it but they still harp on Norman's Power Ranger suit.

Fanboys were up in arms that Otto had a wife...I mean seriously ridiculous stuff. Otto has been portrayed as mild mannered and soft spoken before his accident to which afterwards he becomes a maniacal villain. Ock's motivation then becomes science and crime which it did in the movie. Two-Face's motivation was in reaction to acid being thrown on his face. He developed a dual persona and his vision of right/wrong and good/evil were all decided from a side of a coin. He did not go on a killing spree against the people involved in Rachel's death. Two-Face's motivation on screen and in comic are two completely different things. It worked great in TDK but it smells of high hypocrisy when fanboys give Nolan a break but then turn around and persecute Raimi for the exact same stuff. Fanboys are so fickle.

let's be honest here, dent's descent into madness is pretty freaking stupid unless you believe that one of the city's most law abiding citizens can go off the deep end if they become scarred and lose a loved one. nonsensical.