Comics So JMS and Joey Q know they screwed up...

[Gregatron]

Do you really believe JMS is a fan of Spidey? Reading Molten Man 2, Sins Past, Other, and the ever annoying Adventures of Spidey the side kick, I'm convinced he's not only "not" a fan...I sincerely doubt he picked up a Spidey book before he came aboard.

I think he likes Spider-Man. I know he doesn't understand Spider-Man.


When I say fans took over, I'm not talking about guys like Roy Thomas, John Byrne, Walt Simonson, Frank Miller, etc. I'm talking about the obsessive, anal-retentive types who don't have a clue about the characters. The kind who can answer any trivia question, but don't understand the basic conceits of the characters or how they work. I'm talking about the people who want to put their stamp on everything and look KEWL to their pals.

JMS is an exception. He's one of the new breed. The influx of Hollywood-types who don't know beans about the language of the comic medium and write comics as if they were movies or tv shows.


Remember, Sam Raimi was a "fan" as a kid, and look where that got us. Organic web-shooters, Power Ranger-Goblin, and the kindly scientist under the control of his evil, sentient tenticles.

 

[Norman Osborn]

I think he likes Spider-Man. I know he doesn't understand Spider-Man..

Common ground!!...now I can go work out!

 

[Dyeathrose]

As I've said, there's nothing wrong with a healthy marriage, and I like Peter and Mary Jane as a couple.

But, setting that aside, the fact is that Spider-Man was created to be the ultimate loner, the ultimate hard-luck case.

Roger Stern once said classic Marvel died with Marvel Team-Up # 1 in 1972, when Spider-Man, the ultimate misunderstood loner, suddenly teamed up with a different hero every month. That's when it started being more about money and gimmicks than about the character. I tend to agree.

Spider-man is indeed a loner, and I can agree with that notion; I don't like him living with the Avengers, and I do think he'd much rather be alone than living off someone else. He can share a room (as he and Harry did), but even then he felt guilty because he couldn't bring his fair share into it. I don't think that him having a partner in MJ (life partner, Marvel, not crime fighting partner) takes too much away from that, no matter how beautiful she is supposed to be compared to.

Having him team up every now and then, as in one in a blue moon, not a bad thing. I liked him and Daredevil when they would team up. However, I do think Roger Stern is right, to a point. Since team-up and vs. sell so much (Hulk and Thing are the first I think of), they want to make the big names clash in the same comic. Spider-man success in the movies and being introduced in that way to a completely new generation has helped that, so they want him everywhere.

 

[Dyeathrose]

JMS is an exception. He's one of the new breed. The influx of Hollywood-types who don't know beans about the language of the comic medium and write comics as if they were movies or tv shows.

Sorry to cut in, but when I read that, I thought of a certain Black Cat arc and groaned inwardly. *sighs*

 

[Gregatron]

Spider-man is indeed a loner, and I can agree with that notion; I don't like him living with the Avengers, and I do think he'd much rather be alone than living off someone else. He can share a room (as he and Harry did), but even then he felt guilty because he couldn't bring his fair share into it. I don't think that him having a partner in MJ (life partner, Marvel, not crime fighting partner) takes too much away from that, no matter how beautiful she is supposed to be compared to.

Having him team up every now and then, as in one in a blue moon, not a bad thing. I liked him and Daredevil when they would team up. However, I do think Roger Stern is right, to a point. Since team-up and vs. sell so much (Hulk and Thing are the first I think of), they want to make the big names clash in the same comic. Spider-man success in the movies and being introduced in that way to a completely new generation has helped that, so they want him everywhere.

Remember when he tried to join the FF way back when, and how well that turned out?

There have been great Spidey team-ups in the past. But a series devoted to them was pure marketing, and defied the core of the character.

And really, how many "classic" stories did Marvel Team-Up Vol. 1 produce? Not many.

"The City Stealers", anyone?


As for MJ, well, Peter having a female confidante/partner in on all his secrets kinda (male ego talking here) takes him away from all the lonely male readers serving as his one and only confidant.

 

[Gregatron]

Sorry to cut in, but when I read that, I thought of a certain Black Cat arc and groaned inwardly. *sighs*

I mentioned Smith, then cut him out of my post before posting. Too easy a target.

 

[Gregatron]

I've been reading through Spidey's entire history in order recently (the Marvel Chronology weblist for Spidey and the Official Marvel Index were helpful in putting the stories in order), and seeing it all in context, I realized just how great the Lee-Ditko stories are. I was surprised by my disappointment when I moved into the Romita era, and surprised by the decline in quality (though that's not saying much, since those stories are also fantastic). I'm currently on the cusp of Conway's original Clone Saga.

Having only looked at the stories in a piecemeal fashion over the years, I never realized just how unbelievably good and fun and complex the original stories were.



Compared to that, the stuff on the stands today is empty junk food.

 

[spider greg]

As I've said, there's nothing wrong with a healthy marriage, and I like Peter and Mary Jane as a couple.

But, setting that aside, the fact is that Spider-Man was created to be the ultimate loner, the ultimate hard-luck case.

Roger Stern once said classic Marvel died with Marvel Team-Up # 1 in 1972, when Spider-Man, the ultimate misunderstood loner, suddenly teamed up with a different hero every month. That's when it started being more about money and gimmicks than about the character. I tend to agree.

Roger Stern's brilliant, that's a guy who knows his Spider-Man.

 

[Doc_OCK_4MUGEN]

JMS is an exception. He's one of the new breed. The influx of Hollywood-types who don't know beans about the language of the comic medium and write comics as if they were movies or tv shows.

I don't like to disscet posts but, this fragment here defines JMS... Thanks Greg!

Remember, Sam Raimi was a "fan" as a kid, and look where that got us. Organic web-shooters, Power Ranger-Goblin, and the kindly scientist under the control of his evil, sentient tenticles.

The problem with Sam is that he's bent Spidey over for the studio too much... But even if it isn't Spidey PRIME... It's somewhat enjoyable... wouldn't want to see Uwe Boll's Spidey...

And Compared to the classics... (Ignoring the Nostalgia factor completely) this JMS 5p1d3r J35u5 thing is not junk food, but the brown torpedoes one leaves on the toilet after eating too many bean burritos...

 

[Doc Destruction]

I think a lot of the anger you're feeling here, Greg, is that many of us who've been with the character for a very long time have been griping about the obvious bad changes in the books, while some people have been defending it to the death for reasons I cannot possibly comprehend.

SOME of the changes have been very good, IMO. May finding out Peter is Spidey, May dating Jarvis, Spidey joining the Avengers (wish they were the REAL Avengers though), etc.

However, the bad changes are FREAKING bad, and I don't need to state them for the nine millionth time. That has caused us to be rather salty around here.

I think some of us are arguing on the same side of the fence.

 

[WOLVERINE25TH]

JMS' Spidey was just fine until th' totem crap.

As fer things making "fun" of th' genre, that happens. You can't take this too seriously, 'cause when ya do is when you stop enjoyin' anything. Parodies are a way of life, and in th' end they EXPOSE th' genre, not detract from it.

And movies are movies. They can't be 100% like th' comics (and anybody who says Sin City will be shot). Comic stories are a serial medium, you hafta make changes in order to fit an entire story which normally spanned a major number of issues into 2 hours or less. You gotta change things up 'cause some things translated to real life are just too silly. Organic web-shooters? Overdue as far as I'm concerned. I was all fanboy about them when I first heard, but in th' end they made more sense. Comic version coulda used a better intro....

Although I do hate Supe's costume an' Lois Lane is NOT th' motherly type...dunno what Bryan was smokin' there....

 

[SpideyInATree]

Do you really believe JMS is a fan of Spidey? Reading Molten Man 2, Sins Past, Other, and the ever annoying Adventures of Spidey the side kick, I'm convinced he's not only "not" a fan...I sincerely doubt he picked up a Spidey book before he came aboard.

I agree that JMS isn't a fan of Spider-Man.

In every interview I've read with JMS talking about Spider-Man you can tell he isn't a fan and doesn't have a lot of knowledge about him. That's been pretty obvious. One thing that he has done is he's done well with the core characters of the series, Peter Parker, Mary Jane, and Aunt May.

I think when JMS first jumped on board of the series he was exactly what it needed, AT THE TIME! It needed a jump start to bring back attention from some of the fans it lost during the Clone Saga and Reboot, etc.

Him not being a fan of Spider-Man sort of helped. You can tell JMS knew the core basics of the book and Peter Parker. But he didn't have that known history that other writers have had. He didn't have that traditional view, so to speak.

He got me back into Spider-Man after about a four to five year absence from reading. I thought his run was amazing.

Though, personally, and looking back at things with hindsight...his run should have ended with the Book of Ezekiel. That would have been the perfect ending to his run and probably have saved him from so much animosity that he receives. Sins Past...was the absolute proof that the man didn't feel anything for the Spider-Man character.

Would Jeph Loeb have written Sins Past? Hell No!

Would J.M. DeMatteis ever written something like Sins Past? Pft, the Clone Saga was enough for him!

Would Tom Defalco have written something like that for Spider-Man? No way. Proof? See Spider-Girl.

Is JMS a bad writer? Hell no! He's a good writer but should he have been writing the core Spider-Man title that was started by Stan "The Man" Lee and Steve Ditko? Hell...no.

So, should JMS and Joe Quesada, from a fans point of view, be doing a Spider-Man miniseries that "fixes" anything? Hell No! Who can fix things? Well, you've got an amazing stable of writers who respect the Spider-Man character immensely, just open your eyes.

*cough* Dan Slott *cough*

Sorry, I'm a smoker.

If JMS' run would have ended at the Book of Ezekiel...things would most likely have been in a completely different direction.

 

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Or rather, had BoE remained AMBIGUOUS.

 

[Doc Destruction]

Yep, I think if the totem stuff was left alone at the end of BoE, I would have been happy with that.

And I agree, Slott should be writing a big Spidey book.

 

[Norman Osborn]

I agree that JMS isn't a fan of Spider-Man.

In every interview I've read with JMS talking about Spider-Man you can tell he isn't a fan and doesn't have a lot of knowledge about him. That's been pretty obvious. One thing that he has done is he's done well with the core characters of the series, Peter Parker, Mary Jane, and Aunt May.

I think when JMS first jumped on board of the series he was exactly what it needed, AT THE TIME! It needed a jump start to bring back attention from some of the fans it lost during the Clone Saga and Reboot, etc.

Him not being a fan of Spider-Man sort of helped. You can tell JMS knew the core basics of the book and Peter Parker. But he didn't have that known history that other writers have had. He didn't have that traditional view, so to speak.

He got me back into Spider-Man after about a four to five year absence from reading. I thought his run was amazing.

Though, personally, and looking back at things with hindsight...his run should have ended with the Book of Ezekiel. That would have been the perfect ending to his run and probably have saved him from so much animosity that he receives. Sins Past...was the absolute proof that the man didn't feel anything for the Spider-Man character.

Would Jeph Loeb have written Sins Past? Hell No!

Would J.M. DeMatteis ever written something like Sins Past? Pft, the Clone Saga was enough for him!

Would Tom Defalco have written something like that for Spider-Man? No way. Proof? See Spider-Girl.

Is JMS a bad writer? Hell no! He's a good writer but should he have been writing the core Spider-Man title that was started by Stan "The Man" Lee and Steve Ditko? Hell...no.

So, should JMS and Joe Quesada, from a fans point of view, be doing a Spider-Man miniseries that "fixes" anything? Hell No! Who can fix things? Well, you've got an amazing stable of writers who respect the Spider-Man character immensely, just open your eyes.

*cough* Dan Slott *cough*

Sorry, I'm a smoker.

If JMS' run would have ended at the Book of Ezekiel...things would most likely have been in a completely different direction.

 

[shinlyle]

I agree that JMS isn't a fan of Spider-Man.

In every interview I've read with JMS talking about Spider-Man you can tell he isn't a fan and doesn't have a lot of knowledge about him. That's been pretty obvious. One thing that he has done is he's done well with the core characters of the series, Peter Parker, Mary Jane, and Aunt May.

I think when JMS first jumped on board of the series he was exactly what it needed, AT THE TIME! It needed a jump start to bring back attention from some of the fans it lost during the Clone Saga and Reboot, etc.

Him not being a fan of Spider-Man sort of helped. You can tell JMS knew the core basics of the book and Peter Parker. But he didn't have that known history that other writers have had. He didn't have that traditional view, so to speak.

He got me back into Spider-Man after about a four to five year absence from reading. I thought his run was amazing.

Though, personally, and looking back at things with hindsight...his run should have ended with the Book of Ezekiel. That would have been the perfect ending to his run and probably have saved him from so much animosity that he receives. Sins Past...was the absolute proof that the man didn't feel anything for the Spider-Man character.

Would Jeph Loeb have written Sins Past? Hell No!

Would J.M. DeMatteis ever written something like Sins Past? Pft, the Clone Saga was enough for him!

Would Tom Defalco have written something like that for Spider-Man? No way. Proof? See Spider-Girl.

Is JMS a bad writer? Hell no! He's a good writer but should he have been writing the core Spider-Man title that was started by Stan "The Man" Lee and Steve Ditko? Hell...no.

So, should JMS and Joe Quesada, from a fans point of view, be doing a Spider-Man miniseries that "fixes" anything? Hell No! Who can fix things? Well, you've got an amazing stable of writers who respect the Spider-Man character immensely, just open your eyes.

*cough* Dan Slott *cough*

Sorry, I'm a smoker.

If JMS' run would have ended at the Book of Ezekiel...things would most likely have been in a completely different direction.

Agree 100%, man.

Why Joey Q and JMS believe they can "fix" Spider-Man is beyond me. They are the reason he's in such sad shape right now. You want to fix him and get the fans back on your side? Do you? Then get a good writer who understands the character and a stellar artist to do it

*cough* Dan Slott*cough*J. Scott Campbell*cough*Jeph Loeb*cough*Steve McNiven*cough

Damn...and I'm not even a smoker....

 

[WOLVERINE25TH]

We need to make our own Merry Marvel Marching Society...

The Slurry Slott Slouching Society!

Er, the Stuffy Shirts for Slott Society?

Slottastic Slott for Spidey?

Slott Saves Spidey?

Eh, I'll work on it. Slott for Spidey.

 

[Gregatron]

I think a lot of the anger you're feeling here, Greg, is that many of us who've been with the character for a very long time have been griping about the obvious bad changes in the books, while some people have been defending it to the death for reasons I cannot possibly comprehend.

SOME of the changes have been very good, IMO. May finding out Peter is Spidey, May dating Jarvis, Spidey joining the Avengers (wish they were the REAL Avengers though), etc.

However, the bad changes are FREAKING bad, and I don't need to state them for the nine millionth time. That has caused us to be rather salty around here.

I think some of us are arguing on the same side of the fence.

No offense, but I feel the changes you like are "freaking bad".

 

[Gregatron]

JMS' Spidey was just fine until th' totem crap.

As fer things making "fun" of th' genre, that happens. You can't take this too seriously, 'cause when ya do is when you stop enjoyin' anything. Parodies are a way of life, and in th' end they EXPOSE th' genre, not detract from it.

And movies are movies. They can't be 100% like th' comics (and anybody who says Sin City will be shot). Comic stories are a serial medium, you hafta make changes in order to fit an entire story which normally spanned a major number of issues into 2 hours or less. You gotta change things up 'cause some things translated to real life are just too silly. Organic web-shooters? Overdue as far as I'm concerned. I was all fanboy about them when I first heard, but in th' end they made more sense. Comic version coulda used a better intro....

Although I do hate Supe's costume an' Lois Lane is NOT th' motherly type...dunno what Bryan was smokin' there....

JMS' run was flawed from the start. But it wasn't until later that I realized that. I, like so many others, hoped he'd be some kind of savior instead of a sinner.


When Stan and Jack parodied themselves in books like Not Brand Ecchh, it worked.

When outsiders (and now, self-professed "fans") do it, it's picking on an easy target.


I will never understand why "fans" of comics enjoy mocking and picking apart that which they profess to "like".


And before visual effects in movies reached the level they're at now, comics did things movies couldn't.

Really, besides updating topical references and fashions, wouldn't a straight adaptation of, say, Fantastic Four # 1 make a great movie?

The Hollywood mentality is that "comics are not movies". But really, what is more cinematic than a comic book?

Why can't moviemakers retain the elements that made these characters great, instead of making them "realistic" and "cool"?

And, as I've said before, comics were not created as a serial medium.


Seems to me there are three options when it comes to comic movies:

1. Retell the origin.

2. Retell the origin and then splice it together with a condensed and butchered version of the most famous story in the character's history (the Death of Gwen Stacy, the Elektra Saga, etc.).

3. Retell the origin and then tell a completely original story not based on the comics (the end of the first Superman and Batman films, etc.).


And no, the organic web-shooters are incredibly stupid, and far less "realistic" than what Lee and Ditko came up with.


If it's not too silly for the comics, why is it too silly for a movie based on the comics?

Answer: Because the basement-dwellers can read in private. In a movie theater full of people, they will be embarassed in front of a crowd for liking something "silly".

 

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Except yer bein' short sighted and forgetting comic movies aren't just fer comic fans. They have to APPEAL to th' ENTIRE mass public. Not everyone reads comics fer th' simple fact they think they're kid stuff. But people see movies 'cause they look cool. Now, if you do a 100% perfect translation of all th' source material, yer gonna drive people away unless you REMOVE th' more campy elements.

Brightly colored costumes don't look good on film.

There wouldn't be an experiment on radiation fer Peter to go to 'cause radiation is outdated (Stan himself said he used it a lot 'cause it was a fairly new thing back then).

You can't have th' FF blast off into space without filling in some gaps on th' whys and hows, which would mean some changes.

Comics are NOT th' same as movies. Movies are NOT th' same as comics. There have to be changes done. Granted, some take things a bit too far (FF, Hulk) but others make sense.

Let's look at yer argument; Amazing Fantasy #15 wouldn't be enough fer ONE movie. Spidey wouldn't even appear until th' last half hour, and then you'd have to build up and elaborate on scenes in th' comic to extend it. Now, it could carry over into ASM #1, 2, 3, etc, but then you have th' FF whose rights you'd need to acquire, plus several villains. Comics have no budget, movies do. If you were to do a 100% faithful translation of Spidey with several villains and following each story exactly, it would never get made.

 

[Gregatron]

Except yer bein' short sighted and forgetting comic movies aren't just fer comic fans. They have to APPEAL to th' ENTIRE mass public. Not everyone reads comics fer th' simple fact they think they're kid stuff. But people see movies 'cause they look cool. Now, if you do a 100% perfect translation of all th' source material, yer gonna drive people away unless you REMOVE th' more campy elements.

Brightly colored costumes don't look good on film.

There wouldn't be an experiment on radiation fer Peter to go to 'cause radiation is outdated (Stan himself said he used it a lot 'cause it was a fairly new thing back then).

You can't have th' FF blast off into space without filling in some gaps on th' whys and hows, which would mean some changes.

Comics are NOT th' same as movies. Movies are NOT th' same as comics. There have to be changes done. Granted, some take things a bit too far (FF, Hulk) but others make sense.

Let's look at yer argument; Amazing Fantasy #15 wouldn't be enough fer ONE movie. Spidey wouldn't even appear until th' last half hour, and then you'd have to build up and elaborate on scenes in th' comic to extend it. Now, it could carry over into ASM #1, 2, 3, etc, but then you have th' FF whose rights you'd need to acquire, plus several villains. Comics have no budget, movies do. If you were to do a 100% faithful translation of Spidey with several villains and following each story exactly, it would never get made.

The Superman (1978) costume looked great and was accepted by everyone. The movie was the biggest hit in Warner Brothers history. Why are other characters held to a lower standard?

Answer: Because Hollywood doesn't think people can suspend disbelief. But if audiences can believe that Tom Cruise can put on a life-like mask of Phillip Seymour Hoffman in MI:3, then they can believe that Norman Osborn has a life-like, rubber Green Goblin mask instead of a Power-Ranger-helmet.

There's little point in making a movie based on a comic character if that character is unrecognizable (physically or character-wise).


And yes, a little expansion would be necessary for an FF # 1 adaptation. But nothing to change the story or characters. Just fleshing out details.

A fusion of Amazing Fantasy # 15 and Amazing Spider-Man # 3 would be a perfect movie.

A few minor details (such as the radiation experiment and some dialogue) would have to be tinkered with ever so slightly, but other than that, it would be SPIDER-MAN up on the screen.

 

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Aha! And that's what th' Spidey movie did, they did AF 15, ASM 14 and every Spidey/Goblin comic inbetween until 122. They took th' ENTIRE Goblin saga and condensed it down into a 2 hour movie where you need a clear beginning, middle and end.

They took more liberties with 2, but in th' end th' box office speaks fer what people like, and they liked these movies. Again, they're not EXCLUSIVELY fer us. They're fer everyone.

Advice: try to expand yer thinking a bit, you've got a serious case of tunnel vision on this subject which'll only be a detriment to yer arguments.

 

[Gregatron]

Aha! And that's what th' Spidey movie did, they did AF 15, ASM 14 and every Spidey/Goblin comic inbetween until 122. They took th' ENTIRE Goblin saga and condensed it down into a 2 hour movie where you need a clear beginning, middle and end.

They took more liberties with 2, but in th' end th' box office speaks fer what people like, and they liked these movies. Again, they're not EXCLUSIVELY fer us. They're fer everyone.

Advice: try to expand yer thinking a bit, you've got a serious case of tunnel vision on this subject which'll only be a detriment to yer arguments.

Now let's be fair...a movie called Spider-Man would probably have done great business no matter how good or bad it was, because Spidey is an icon around the world. Remember, the movie made most of its money in the first week or so.


Even the Schumacher Batman movies did very well in terms of box office, remember? Because everyone knows Batman.


Logic then dictates that Hollywood need not make a bunch of pointless changes to the characters, because the name Spider-Man will draw them in anyway.

 

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Yeah, but a vast majority hated th' Schumaker Batmans. A vast majority loved th' Spider-Man films. Th' name draws th' crowd, but ultimately it's th' story that sells it. Ergo...

 

[Gregatron]

Yeah, but a vast majority hated th' Schumaker Batmans. A vast majority loved th' Spider-Man films. Th' name draws th' crowd, but ultimately it's th' story that sells it. Ergo...

A vast majority of comic fans hated them.

When I got dragged to see Fantastic Four, the audience applauded at the end.


Ergo, if the general public doesn't hold these things to the standards we do, why not do them right and make everyone happy?