Spider-Man: Pre-Brand New Day or Post-Brand New Day?

[iloveclones]

Sorry, but Soap Operas are one of the most devoutly followed forms of serialized fiction in our lifetime. And adding soap opera elements to the comic medium is one of the big innovations that Stan was PROUD to bring to Marvel Comics.

I'm so glad you brought that up. For years, I've maintained that the comics I read as a kid had the exact structure of a soap opera. The pacing, the cuts, following multiple characters, cliffhanger endings, the illusion-of-change of characters, and most importantly....the story never ends. Even what is so argued in this threads, coming back from the dead, is a staple for popular characters in soaps. And Dan, if you're ever made the One and Only writer on ASM (as rumors are now teasing us...), I hope you maintain and amp up that kind of structure.

I don't really think the bringing them back is the problem, it's the willy-nilly killing them in the first place. People talk about lazy writing (one of my least favorite, over-used terms) all the time. But using a death to inject a little false drama into a story does seem a bit lazy to me. (I would say that about the death of Billy Connors, also. In my mind, unless they can bring him back in a credible way, I could never look at the Lizard sympathetically again. To me, he's now like the Ben Roethlisberger of comics...no fun anymore, just icky.)

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I agree that death is overused in the first place. It doesn't really make things anymore dramatic or entertaining. We all grew up on formulaic cartoons and TV shows with stable casts, and they still managed to entertain us without throwing any of the characters' gruesome deaths in our faces. It's as much the fault of writers' killing characters off so often as it is the fault of writers' bringing those same characters back in a few months or years that death is thought of as a complete joke in comics at this point. I understand and accept it as part of the medium, but if the people in charge ever wanted to change that perception, they should really start by looking at why and how characters are killed off in the first place rather than how often they're brought back.

Examples: Steve Rogers' death? Good because of the major influence it had on a host of stories, many of which couldn't have been told if he were still around. Hornet's death? Bad because it subtracts a great character from the universe without actually having his death be addressed or have meaning beyond simply "Wolverine killed some guy when he was brainwashed." I was content for Steve to stay dead for however long Brubaker's story demanded it; I'm just counting down the days until Hornet comes back and I can finally get my Slingers reunion (shut up, it could happen! ).

 

[fifthfiend]

This's the you-can-never-win angle of the "rehash" argument. If you don't get the characters or the world of Spidey right, they nail you for it. If you DO get 'em right, they say, "Seen it! Rehash!"

Wow, check out this guy who thinks making Eddie Brock a murderous vigilante = 'getting it right'

 

[fifthfiend]

I mean no it was so good the first time, I can see why you'd want to revisit this classoh god no I just can't, oh god I'm in tears here

 

[fifthfiend]

Coming soon from Marvel Comics: Dan Slott returns the Punisher to his roots as a magical hitman for Heaven.

"We're getting it right!" Slott proclaims!

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Geez, fifth, you're in a mocking mood today.

 

[Dan_Slott]

Wow, check out this guy who thinks making Eddie Brock a murderous vigilante = 'getting it right'

Eddie has always felt wronged-- and that what he was doing as Venom was justified. That's always stayed constant with the character. He got the symbiote when he praying for revenge. The current path he's taking as Anti-Venom is playing off his character from that starting point.

Coming soon from Marvel Comics: Dan Slott returns the Punisher to his roots as a magical hitman for Heaven.

"We're getting it right!" Slott proclaims!

Nah. Punisher's a murderous vigilante waging a war on crime.
But maybe if you were running the show it'd be "Coming soon: fifthfiend returns the Punisher to his roots as The Jackal's Lackey."
"I can self-righteous snark with the best of 'em!" says fifthfiend!

 

[Jennifer Walters]

I do have to say Anti-Venom, Norah Winters, J. Jonah's Father marrying Aunt May, Slott's 600th issue story with Ock. These are all things I loved about BND. I have no problems with any of those developments.

But can we please do something about Harry being alive and useless, MJ being just ''there", Felicia being regressed to being nothing more than a petty sex ****, and for god sakes get rid of Carlie Cooper already.

 

[Dan_Slott]

I do have to say Anti-Venom, Norah Winters, J. Jonah's Father marrying Aunt May, Slott's 600th issue story with Ock. These are all things I loved about BND. I have no problems with any of those developments.

I'll take whatever I can get!

 

[kguillou]

I agree that death is overused in the first place. It doesn't really make things anymore dramatic or entertaining. We all grew up on formulaic cartoons and TV shows with stable casts, and they still managed to entertain us without throwing any of the characters' gruesome deaths in our faces. It's as much the fault of writers' killing characters off so often as it is the fault of writers' bringing those same characters back in a few months or years that death is thought of as a complete joke in comics at this point. I understand and accept it as part of the medium, but if the people in charge ever wanted to change that perception, they should really start by looking at why and how characters are killed off in the first place rather than how often they're brought back.

Examples: Steve Rogers' death? Good because of the major influence it had on a host of stories, many of which couldn't have been told if he were still around. Hornet's death? Bad because it subtracts a great character from the universe without actually having his death be addressed or have meaning beyond simply "Wolverine killed some guy when he was brainwashed." I was content for Steve to stay dead for however long Brubaker's story demanded it; I'm just counting down the days until Hornet comes back and I can finally get my Slingers reunion (shut up, it could happen! ).

I agree completely. I think marvel is already feeling the side effects a little of overusing death. They tried to kill off ms marvel to build hype for her book and it still didnt sell and got canceled anyway. The same gimmick can only work so many times. It did wonders for Thor and Captain America but that doesnt mean it'll work for everybody else. If your going to kill someone, kill them and commit to keeping them dead for a long long time. that way when you DO bring them back, people'll be like " Oh wow, Ms Marvel's back? Damn she's been dead for 10 years!"

Although i will admit that theres another side of the coin. If some writer comes along and has a great idea for a character thats already dead, is it really fair to that writer that he or she can't use them? If Whedon couldnt resurrect Colossus then we wouldnt have gotten those amazing x-men stories out of him. Or imagine if Brubaker couldnt bring Bucky back? Or if JMS couldnt bring Thor back? Its a double edged sword but i feel like there has to be a middle ground but death is rapidly losing its shock value.

 

[venom892]

Uh oh. "Something as major happening to a recurring supporting character." Better not do THAT again.

Not what I meant.I was merely pointing out that doing that to flash wasn't as original as you were trying to make it out to be.

So you're going ON RECORD as saying CLOSE-TO-MARRIAGE is just AS good AS an ACTUAL-MARRIAGE. Good to know. Let me file that away for later. No take-backsies!t:

I was saying Aunt May having a relationship after Ben's death wasn't new Marriage or not.That isn't the same as me saying it's the same as marriage.Again I was merely pointing out that it was not as original as you made it out to be.Also you must realize that the marriage isn't the only thing BND has bought that some fans aren't happy with.

Quick note: Photojournalism is now officially an IMMATURE profession. All you photojournalists out there in your mid-20's or older? venom892 thinks you need to grow the hell up!

Just so you know I'm a Journalism major.When I said he matured out of it I meant he found something else that he was good at and passionate about.He didn't need to freelance anymore.

Not ignored. Just not relevant to this story. And while you feel the story has "been done to death", even you admit that Connors LOSING his fight to his reptile side AND Billy's fate were outcomes to Lizard stories that we've NEVER seen before. That's the definition of new-- or rather NOT the definition of "rehash".

True never seen before but it completely rendered any other Lizard story from here on out useless.Now the Lizard will only be a physical threat to peter and the whole drama that come with their confrontations is gone.You might as well have killed him because he's pretty useless now.

Also you ignored my previous post where I asked why you didn't think it be a good idea to bring back Gwen.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Quick note: Photojournalism is now officially an IMMATURE profession. All you photojournalists out there in your mid-20's or older? venom892 thinks you need to grow the hell up!

To be fair photojournalism, especially that for a newspaper is becoming more and more irrelevant in today's age considering that pretty much everyone has a camera on them nowadays and the closure of countless magazines and newspapers.

I think that BND provided a good excuse on why Peter wasn't hired as a teacher again (considering his duties as Spider-Man, being a teacher is a horrible idea IMO), but it's time to find a new career for Peter.

 

[iloveclones]

As soon as I saw JustABill, I knew he would close with Carlie Cooper. And you guys say Marvel re-hashes?!?!?

 

[TheCorpulent1]

There's no onus on us armchair critics to be original. Stories will always be in need of criticism; it keeps the writers honest. Hell, Slott should be halfway to outdoing honest Abe Lincoln by now.

 

[Spider-Gnome]

I do have to say Anti-Venom, Norah Winters, J. Jonah's Father marrying Aunt May, Slott's 600th issue story with Ock. These are all things I loved about BND. I have no problems with any of those developments.

I can do without Aunt May's wedding (and Pete's discovery of the relationship), but I agree with you. Add on the development of Norman coming to power. I liked it when it was touched on (New Ways & American Son), but I felt in general, a LOT of potential was wasted for Spidey being involved in the greater Marvel Universe during Dark Reign.

Again, this coincides with trying to set up BND, keeping Spidey out of the big picture as they set-up the new status quo. So, I would add that as another thing OMD/BND messed up.

Regarding the two incidents with Flash: Flash becoming a vegetable was part of a Goblin storyline and linked into Flash's alcoholism. It was organic to the story.

The losing legs felt like a cheap shock to throw at us. Flash had been out of the service for years (decades in reality). They threw him back into Iraq out of nowhere in the same issue he comes back home without legs.

 

[Silvermoth]

wow, I had no idea the result of the poll would be like this. I knew a few people didn't like the Brand New Day direction but wow, that's alot of people!

 

[Themanofbat]

wow, I had no idea the result of the poll would be like this. I knew a few people didn't like the Brand New Day direction but wow, that's alot of people!

I would bet a LOT that at least half of the people that voted for pre-BND Spider-Man have either read none of the issues or a mere handful... and while reading them with a pre-determined disdain in their thoughts instead of an open mind.

Even Corpy admitted that he voted "pre" without having read any "post" ASM issues...

So the poll is flawed... you would only get accurate results if the votes were by people who have read the majority of both pre & post BND issues... imo.

 

[uchiha_itachi]

As anyone who is following the book regularly knows, the Aunt May change was temporary. I cited it to refute an earlier post that the book was only doing "rehashes"-- which it's clearly not.
And even though the Aunt May change only lasted a few arcs, it did advance the story, and readers will be seeing a repercussion from it later in the year.


1. OMD was the story that changed the status quo. BND stories were by a different editorial and creative team.
2. "Deaths"? Plural? The only death that was undone was Harry's.


Characters that are off the canvas can't tell new stories, characters that are on the canvas can. I would've said the same thing about Norman Osborn's "death". But since he's been back he's been part of some great stories. Same thing for Aunt May. One of the JMS stories that you say you liked couldn't have happened if she'd stayed dead.
And going by the positive reaction and tons of fan mail we've gotten on Joe Kelly's AMERICAN SON arc, there'd be a lot of fans who'd disagree with you and think that there was plenty of reasons to bring Harry back.


1. OMD was the story that changed the status quo. BND were the stories that came after.
2. When you start to say things like how a story was "sullied" or how things were "killed" it gets a little silly. Who the hell says "sullied" anymore? What? Were you fanning yourself on the veranda of your Southern plantation, perusing the latest Spider-Man periodical while sipping on a mint julep? "Lord have mercy! They have done brought back Harold T. Osborn! Why I never! They have SULLIED the good name a' Marvel Comics! I shant stand for it, y'hear?! Fetch me my pearl-handled pistols! We shall duel at the setting of the sun!"


1. Shouldn't Aunt May have stayed "dead" after ASM #400? Doesn't that break your rule?
2. Those stories still exist and they still happened.
3. Even before the unmasking, too many people knew Pete was Spider-Man in his supporting cast. And during the years before BND, Pete's supporting cast had kinda shrunk down to MJ and Aunt May. It got to the point where Pete didn't have a civilian life and relate to people as JUST Pete.


That story is still there and it still happened.


Marvel CAN write married stories about a married Peter Parker. A lot of the current Spidey team has. They're choosing to tell new stories about a single Peter Parker. And despite the insult of cowardice that you'd like to throw out there, I think that it's obvious from your ire, that the exact opposite is true-- that Marvel knew it was taking a huge RISK by taking the marriage out-- but that it was a necessary thing to do for the long term health of the franchise.

Regarding the "single" Spider-man and the "married" Spider-man, Wouldn't it of been a better risk to bring Ben Reilly back for a single Spider-man and keep Peter how he is? Yeah..People HATED the clone saga, some people loved it. I reckon more people HATE OMD... In the end if it didn't work out Reilly could just go away travelling or whatever, decide he needs a break. Then you have all of Spidey's history intact. The fact the he was a Teacher and married was a really awesome natural progression for him and you guys thought actually lets just get rid of the character development and rewind him. If you guys wanted to mind f£$k fans bring Kaine back with Peter's daughter.

While I do agree BND has brought on some amazing stories, really Peter being married or not doesn't make any difference to that. Hell he could of gone to Doctor Strange to erase people's memories regarding his identity. Harry could of come back in the same way he did. Fact is erasing the marriage is a massive "f%^K you" to fans. There was no reason for it, or no respectable reason for it.

Oh and I don't know who wrote the story but really....GWEN STACY AND NORMAN OSBORNE?? what crack was that guy smoking exactly when he thought that was a good idea. That is also a MASSIVE slap in the face and worst of all it makes no sense.

rant over.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Oh and I don't know who wrote the story but really....GWEN STACY AND NORMAN OSBORNE?? what crack was that guy smoking exactly when he thought that was a good idea. That is also a MASSIVE slap in the face and worst of all it makes no sense.

That would be JMS, and originally, they were meant to be Pete's illegitimate kids with Gwen. So, yeah, what crack was he on is a pretty damn good question, because both concepts are dumb as **** to begin with.

I guess to be fair, even he didn't know what crack he was on, and was pretty dissatisfied with the story in the end. Wanted to recton it in OMD originally by bringing back Gwen and restarting the status quo back to 1975. You know, the whole fighting dumb with mind-killingly idiotic technique that always works out great. I guess to be even more fair, *allegedly he still wanted to recton it even without bringing back Gwen, but still wasn't allowed for whatever reason. I assumed, at that point, no one gave a **** anymore.

*I say allegedly because people say this, but I never actually read this or anything. I only knew about the wanting to bring Gwen back thing. But, in the continuation of being fair, I never cared enough to actually go searching for that ****

 

[kguillou]

That is the one case in which i believe Quesada was 100% right. Its a good thing he made JMS change the kids to be Norman's, cause honestly, giving peter two fully grown, illegitimate kids would have been catastrophic to the character. I've always been a supporter of making Peter a father but not like this. I love JMS but he was out of his ***kin' mind if he thought that idea would work.

 

[uchiha_itachi]

I cannot even fathom the time line for it either. One of the kids resurfaced recently didn't they?

 

[runawayboulder]

I cannot even fathom the time line for it either. One of the kids resurfaced recently didn't they?

Yeah Gabriel Stacy is running around as American Son in the AS mini. I think after that he's gonna be in the storyline after OMIT about Norman/Lily's kid.

 

[Artistsean]

I just finished reading all my Brand New Day comic stuff, that I have.
Brand New Day vol. 1 and 3, Kraven's First Hunt, New Ways to Die, Crime and Punisher, and Election Day. And they are awesome, I recommend them to everyone. I liked Peter with MJ, I loved Aunt May knowing (and that still happened, no one remembers though, so she would still react like that if she did know)
I loved Peter having that support, but I liked these comics too.
I want to buy the other issues I am missing from this stuff too, like Shocker int eh Subway, Aunt May getting married.

I loved the new enemies created for Spider-Man like Paper Doll.

I was appossed to the idea of Peter and MJ breaking up, I liked that they were married and it worked, and I wasn't going to like it no matter what. I hadn't read Spider-Man regularly for a while, but I wasn't going to start because of this.

But I liked it, and the fact that they didn't break up because Peter had an affair or MJ did, or because of anything human, the fact that they were forced apart was good too, because that means they still loved each other and the writers didn't change that. Their relationship was still working, Mephisto forced them apart.
In other words its not like on a TV series where they bring to characters together for a few seasons and then break them up because the story became boring.

I like these stories, I am still wondering when MJ and Peter will get back together and what will happen if Peter remembers everything.
But I liked them both, wish I could add that into the poll.

 

[JewishHobbit]

I thought about responding to a few things here but it's been responded to death and I'd add nothing new. I'll just say that I voted Pre-OMD. I've read a majority of New Ways to Die, American Son, the Clone arc, the Juggernaut arc, and a couple things here and there outside of that, and I've at least skimmed a majority of the book at the comic shop without buying them, hoping to find something I enjoyed again to justify picking it up. While I still can't stand the BND status quo, yes, I'll admit there were some good stories, but those stories are tainted for me in that they're in the BND status quo. This may be a vague resemblance to the Spider-Man that I loved but it's not Peter Parker in the slightest... and so many people just don't get that... and maybe it's just something you get or you don't get. And really, Spider-Man's awesome, but Peter Parker is what makes the character great and when that is messed with it really harms the book.

Maybe that's why I prefer to read Bendis's Spider-Man in New Avengers. Spider-Man is Spider-Man, but I'll take Bendis's non-existant Peter Parker over Amazing Spider-Man's messed up Peter Parker.

Again, all my opinion, but that's how I feel about it.

 

[runawayboulder]

My question for the folks that voted pre-BND: Be honest did you really like the comics before BND or is it that your judgment is that clouded by your hate for OMD that it's making you vote that way....?

Because as much as I hated OMD, the stories for the past 15 years (other than 70% of JMS's run) were complete dogs**t. Like I said before, the quality of storytelling and artwork since BND has been very good. Some has been tough to stomach for me (like Azaceta's art and some of Kelly's stories) but for the most part it's a lot better than the Clone Saga, Identity Crisis, Byrne/Mackie era's ect that spanned from 94-01.