The Superior Spider-Man

[Naked Shia]

You might think it's silly, try arguing that in court. We're not talking about someone who lied about being married or something like that. She clearly wouldn't sleep with Ock if she knew his identity and that he'd stolen Peter's.

Putting Ock in court might prove quite hard ^^

 

[The Infernal]

Putting Ock in court might prove quite hard ^^

lol, yeah. Though it's really a non-issue as I don't think Slott is stupid. We're not going to see that, especially now since we have 'ghost Peter' playing Ock's better side.

 

[moraldeficiency]

You might think it's silly, try arguing that in court. We're not talking about someone who lied about being married or something like that. She clearly wouldn't sleep with Ock if she knew his identity and that he'd stolen Peter's.

If I looked like brad pitt and told a girl I was, that's just me being me. I don't think it's illegal.

If the idea a woman clearly wouldn't sleep with a guy if she knew all about him first was something real most sex in this life wouldn't happen. People lie to get laid. The main point I'd say is if you impersonate someone already in a relationship with someone to assume their role and take over an already active sex life (this has actually happened with criminals impersonating someone's husband in the dark) then you've raped someone. But if you lie about who you are to START a sexual relationship not already active then you're just being a man.

Here's the thing, peter wasn't going after that. Ock did. So without ock the relationship wouldn't exist. Plus peter's mind, body and soul are right there, ock is just in there as well so it could be argued it's still peter as well.

So yeah, as someone that's known people that have actually been raped it is a silly correlation. You might have some grounds for false impersonation (though with the body mind and soul still there I doubt that would stand, especially as peter has been shown to be able to stop ock from acting, so if he wanted to he could stop that as well) but that's about it.

 

[JewishHobbit]

Well something crawled up TMoB's butt

I'd really like to know how ANYBODY felt like a fool after reading ASM #700 & SSM #1...

This I am not a part of but I've read plenty of replies like such on various forums and all that. Now, most of them were people who over reacted and Alonzo or whoever (forget off hand) bad mouthed those sort of people on some inverviews (likely Newsarama but possibly CBR... I forget where exactly I read it). And now those people see that the promise of Peter being dead forever was not true and they feel foolish for how they acted.

I'm not saying they were justified in their reaction to #700, but Marvel played #700 one way and then switched it in Superior #1 while ridiculing people's reactions. Heck, Dan Slott was posting them on his Twitter feed to the laugh of other people. So yeah, they bated people and then ridiculed their reactions (knowing where the story was going), making them feel foolish.

And what lies?

That Peter Parker died? He did die.

I never said he didn't. The lie is that he was going to be dead and that this was going to be an ongoing thing. It isn't... at all. I've been around long enough to know that it wouldn't happen and when people like me made those comments about this not lasting then Wacker or whoever, again, criticised those people calling them wrong in interviews at CBR and Newsarama. One issue later people like me were proven right. They said it was forever, it lasted 1 issue, they lied.

I wasn't fooled, as weren't many other experienced readers, but non-readers, gullible readers, and new readers were, and they felt lied to. I know my shop said quite a few new customers came in to buy Amazing #700 due to the death with the intent to hold onto it and save it since it's such a monumentous occassion. We knew they were wrong but they bought the issues (multiple copies at times) and now we know that the issue will be worth squat because nothing that happened in it matters in any long run scenerio. Those people were fooled.

That the new status quo was going to last forever? While it hasn't changed back, so technically, that's not a lie (yet), but as a long time reader of comics, you know that "death" means little in comics, and nothing lasts forever in comics... and when it was announced that this new "status" was forever... PEOPLE GOT MAD!!!! and now that we know it'll only be for a few months/years... PEOPLE ARE MAD!!!!

First off, I know that death means nothing in comics which is why I was so annoyed that they played that angle up so much as if it meant something (and ultimately, it didn't). The people who are mad are angry because of story not equating to the promotion. The people who were mad initially due to the death are either relieved at his return or angrier because they felt all of this jumping through the hoops for higher sales business was unnecessary (and I agree with that to an extent).

I mean, shouldn't we still be seeing that AWESOME storyline playing out with Peter taking on his young sidekick?! They played that up like it was going to be some humungous life-changing deal for Peter and it lasted one arc. The frustration I get from Marvel's promotions is that they play everything up bigger than it is to the point where I'm burnt out. I just assume that nothing is as big a deal as they make it. Amazing/Superior was just the next thing on the long list of let downs (well, not for me since I was never interested to begin with, but I'm sure for people like me).

So in regards to all the pissy little babies out there... Marvel is damned if they do, and damned if they don't...

Actually I think they'd be better off if they didn't. They build themselves up and then let the fans down. If they didn't build it up to begin with then they'd have to just rely on the strength of the story and people's reaction to it's plot. In this scenerio, I guarentee you people would have loved this direction if it wasn't made such a big deal with all the gimmicks and talk. Slott's a good enough writer that his stories can stand on their own. Why befuddle that with gimmicks and relaunches and misinformation and rude editors or whoever? Just tell the story.

Sure... and we all know how well that works... we got all kinds of ads for the new Defenders book last year as well as LOTS of build up... and we all know where that book ended.

When it started it was actually doing pretty well. It ranked decently, better than I'd have expected anyway. It was Fraction's boring plot that bled readers like mad. I'd say the normal promotion did fine... as did the idea of giving fans what they want (crazy idea, I know). People wanted Iron Fist, people wanted a Defenders similar to the original (this had almost all of the originals plus a guest stint by Hulk), and people wanted a good team. People got that, they showed up, they were let down by the bad storyline on Fraction's part.

Not to mention that ads in comics and solits will only attract the PEOPLE who are already reading comics... isn't it a good thing if Marvel goes off the grid to try and grab some new readers...

So they tell new readers, who aren't familiar with comic books, that Spider-Man is going to die (the second time in a couple years mind you with Ultimate Spidey) to bring in new people. They come and realize one issue later that the hype that brought them in was a lie and that he's back.

Is that a way to keep that customer? I'd rather play up a story straight than pull the wool over someone's eye for a month or two until you show them you weren't really playing ball like you were promoting.

even if most "new" people that bought the book never buy another issue... think of that one reader that will continue to buy....

Now compare that one person who continues to buy with all of those other "new" people who were burnt and won't buy into the gimmick again? I doubt that math would work in Marvel's favor. Not to mention anyone else already reading the book that they've annoyed and sent packing.

In the last 12 months, we've seen about 80 books (between Marvel & DC) get new #1's... many of them were from cancelled titles with long numbered runs... let's face it... whether you agree with it or not, a shiny #1 gets new readers... do I like it? Of course not. But can you blame a company for relaunching a title when they know they can get a sales boost?

It's a short term boost that gets old and will eventually stop working. They need to come up with something better instead of doing this year after year after year. Heck, they've gotten so addicted to it that they've rebooted titles that were selling decently only to hurt the book and make it worse (New X-Men is an example of that... and another one recently that I can't remember off hand)

And were you mad at the promotion of Crisis on Infinite Earths #7? Superman #75? Batman #428? (that last one had a 1-900 phone number that encouraged readers to kill or save Jason Todd (Robin) from being killed by the Joker... he didn't make it), Captain America #25? Final Crisis #6 (I think that's the one where bruce is killed)?

I wasn't around for most of those DC ones (or just didn't read at the time). Captain America #25... no, I thought it was cheap, but at least the death lasted a while and had potential to last with how Bucky was played up. Final Crisis #6 also bugged me but it wasn't so bad because by the end of the storyline they did exactly what I say Marvel should have done with Spidey. They showed the reader that he's not really dead. They didn't insult the readers' intelligence by stating he was dead forever and all that jazz only to flip it an issue later. They killed him and an issue later (in the same story) they showed that he was trapped in the past. That was handled much better. It wasn't the promotion of Peter's death that bothered me, it was the insistence that it was forever in the face of everyone knowing better... and then not even having the balls to follow up with it. If that's not where your story was going, then why argue it?

All of those comics (just to name a few) were ALL promoted based on the death of a character... Superman #75 made headlines all over the world... how is ASM #700 any different? It's all part of an on-going story that started before we were born and will go on long after we're dead... it's nothing new, so I'm really stunned at why you're so mad about this one in particular...

Because they promoted it differently. And with Superman, it lasted a while. I don't care when someone dies and it's promoted as their death. Fine. But make it mean something, make it last. This stupid one or two issue death crap being promoted as the be all end all is what gets me. The marketing for Bucky, Thor, and Spider-Man's deaths were cheap promotional stunts and nothing more.

I'd like to know who bad-mouthed who... because that point doesn't make any sense to me... perhaps you could shed some light...

Read more interviews. They weren't exactly hidden. Nor were they hidden on various Twitter feeds. I'm not the first to bring this up.

And as best as I can tell, you DID NOT BUY THE PRODUCT... so why are you so-hell-bent at Marvel for doing the SAME GOD-DAMN THING that EVERY OTHER company in America does...

Because I've bought "this product" the first 2 or 3 times they did the exact same thing. Fortunately, I'm smart enough to know better now. It doesn't make the practice somehow better.

And to the best of my knowledge... that McDonalds commercial doesn't promise to make their quarter pounders into half pounders, but then when you come in and have already spent your irrefundable money, they just laugh about how it was a slight of hand and that it was a quarter pounder all along and how you should just enjoy the burger you did get and keep buying them.

At the end of the day, Marvel is out to make money... pure and simple.

I know this, I've never had a problem with this. How a business goes about making that money... that's what I have a problem with. Marvel has horrible business practices.

To claim that they have no respect for fans... well, as a company, who knows... but to all the creators, writers, artists... they respect the fans... they understand that the fans give them their paycheques... and as painful as this might be for you to hear... while you may feel disrespected over certain storylines involving your favourite characters, other fans love what's been done...

And I've never said they shouldn't be able to. I'm not smacking around fans who enjoy buying into false-hype or calling them sheep or Marvel zombies or fanboys. I just criticise the hype itself. If someone takes that personally then that's their own insecurities.

And again, I don't criticize the creative teams. It's the promotions.

That last statement of yours is just a dumb blanket statement because YOU don't like certain things that have happened to certain characters.

Okay... let me say this one more time, listen... I'm tired of saying it... here it goes... are you listening?

I AM NOT CRITICISING THE STORIES!!!!! I'M NOT CRITICIZING THE CHARACTERS!!!! I'M CRITICIZING THE PROMOTIONS & PRACTICES!!!!

Okay, did you hear me that time? The last time I heavily criticized a story for the story was AvX and I certainly wasn't alone. I never raised my voice about it and I honestly didn't think anything of it after posting my initial thoughts. Before that was OMD and that was years ago.

If you're frustrated over people complaining about Spider-Man's plot... take that to them. I don't care a lick about that plot.

Will you teach your kids that in order to vent your frustrations about things in life, you have to go on line and cry like a baby and make dumb blanket statements?

I doubt it.

Nah, they do that on their own. They're kids

So get some perspective... and maybe some personal growth.

Thanks for listening.

Says the man who just used my children to insult me.

Have a nice day.

 

[Spider-Gnome]

I've no problem with anyone's opinion on how they found the story of the book one way or the other, but I think it's sad that some feel the need to misrepresent others arguments about how things such as the hype were handled and generally talk down to them because their opinion doesn't match up.

I had no intentions of talking down to anyone, and if it came across as such, I apologize. I guess tying hype into everything is expected, especially on a sight named superherohype.com.

I guess I was tired of hearing people saying Marvel "cheated" when they said Pete was dying. Would you have felt better if they actually killed the character? Stuff like what Wacker was saying about Pete fans "fading away" was all tongue-in-cheeck, at least to me.

I think the main reason the reveal of Pete being around so soon was because Dan knew exactly the uproar this would cause. That's why we said he would go into hiding and come back after Superior debut. I guess he didn't want the usual OMD-type backlash by revealing Pete early, as oppose to building up the drama first. I myself wish they kept up the "instinct" idea a little longer, before revealing it was actually Pete doing it, fighting for control.

As TMOB said, damned if you do, damned if you don't...

so basically they have you for life, because you will wait it out, no matter the time frame.. just for that one good era that eventually comes.?

i felt the same way eventually at one point but to each there own.. but with the rise in prices... and the disrespect towards fans, massive events, etc.. enough was enough. If i want to read a good spidey story i havent someday... ill just buy a Trade book of it

No. Just that I haven't found the story that would keep me off for good. But, I understand comic prices are crazy (they were 20 cents when I started reading them!) and if you don't like it, by all means, don't buy it.

PS: When I stopped reading and during the Clone Saga, Trades were not what they are now...

 

[moraldeficiency]

I'd really like to know how ANYBODY felt like a fool after reading ASM #700 & SSM #1...

And what lies?

That Peter Parker died? He did die.

That the new status quo was going to last forever? While it hasn't changed back, so technically, that's not a lie (yet), but as a long time reader of comics, you know that "death" means little in comics, and nothing lasts forever in comics... and when it was announced that this new "status" was forever... PEOPLE GOT MAD!!!! and now that we know it'll only be for a few months/years... PEOPLE ARE MAD!!!!

So in regards to all the pissy little babies out there... Marvel is damned if they do, and damned if they don't...



Sure... and we all know how well that works... we got all kinds of ads for the new Defenders book last year as well as LOTS of build up... and we all know where that book ended.

Not to mention that ads in comics and solits will only attract the PEOPLE who are already reading comics... isn't it a good thing if Marvel goes off the grid to try and grab some new readers... even if most "new" people that bought the book never buy another issue... think of that one reader that will continue to buy....



In the last 12 months, we've seen about 80 books (between Marvel & DC) get new #1's... many of them were from cancelled titles with long numbered runs... let's face it... whether you agree with it or not, a shiny #1 gets new readers... do I like it? Of course not. But can you blame a company for relaunching a title when they know they can get a sales boost?

And were you mad at the promotion of Crisis on Infinite Earths #7? Superman #75? Batman #428? (that last one had a 1-900 phone number that encouraged readers to kill or save Jason Todd (Robin) from being killed by the Joker... he didn't make it), Captain America #25? Final Crisis #6 (I think that's the one where bruce is killed)?

All of those comics (just to name a few) were ALL promoted based on the death of a character... Superman #75 made headlines all over the world... how is ASM #700 any different? It's all part of an on-going story that started before we were born and will go on long after we're dead... it's nothing new, so I'm really stunned at why you're so mad about this one in particular...

I'd like to know who bad-mouthed who... because that point doesn't make any sense to me... perhaps you could shed some light...

And again? Lying?

Where's the lie?

Peter Parker is dead. He died. It happened.



I'd really like to know who bad-mouthed you in order to get your money.

Nobody bad mouthed me... and I know a few other posters in here who read the book that do not feel bad-mouthed...

Explain please...

However, in regards to what was said before the books were released vis-a-vis what has now come out, there was a "sleigh of hand" so to speak about the wording... no lies, but maybe some misdirection... but for christ's sakes... you get that from ALL kinds of advertizing every 10 minutes when you watch TV... do you really believe all the commercials on TV? Do you really think the products do what they claim to do? To some minor extent, probably... but not the way the ad tells you... it's all misdirection to get you to BUY THE PRODUCT...

And as best as I can tell, you DID NOT BUY THE PRODUCT... so why are you so-hell-bent at Marvel for doing the SAME GOD-DAMN THING that EVERY OTHER company in America does...



At the end of the day, Marvel is out to make money... pure and simple.

To claim that they have no respect for fans... well, as a company, who knows... but to all the creators, writers, artists... they respect the fans... they understand that the fans give them their paycheques... and as painful as this might be for you to hear... while you may feel disrespected over certain storylines involving your favourite characters, other fans love what's been done...

That last statement of yours is just a dumb blanket statement because YOU don't like certain things that have happened to certain characters.

Will you teach your kids that in order to vent your frustrations about things in life, you have to go on line and cry like a baby and make dumb blanket statements?

I doubt it.

So get some perspective... and maybe some personal growth.

Thanks for listening.

Have a nice day.



I can't wait for moraldefeciency (sic) to reply to this and tear me a new one... I love it when he does that.

Ok, I'll give you what you want, but you won't like it.

Peter didn't die, his mind, body and soul are still alive in his original vessel.

As for the rest, blah blah blah, I will say how fun it is when you call anyone that disagrees with you "pissy little babies" but if someone calls you a sucker for paying hundreds to get every variant cover you run to report them quickly.

I'd say more but you're so touchy now and every other post from you is "I'm offended, I shall report you" which just makes you kinda a buzz kill to debate or even talk to. I liked you better when you actually spoke like a person and didn't get all up in arms about everything you didn't like, now I just hope you either change back to someone with a sense of humor or someone gives you a taste of your own medicine and reports you for blanket insulting everyone that has a differing opinion.

 

[The Infernal]

If I looked like brad pitt and told a girl I was, that's just me being me. I don't think it's illegal.

If the idea a woman clearly wouldn't sleep with a guy if she knew all about him first was something real most sex in this life wouldn't happen. People lie to get laid. The main point I'd say is if you impersonate someone already in a relationship with someone to assume their role and take over an already active sex life (this has actually happened with criminals impersonating someone's husband in the dark) then you've raped someone. But if you lie about who you are to START a sexual relationship not already active then you're just being a man.

Here's the thing, peter wasn't going after that. Ock did. So without ock the relationship wouldn't exist. Plus peter's mind, body and soul are right there, ock is just in there as well so it could be argued it's still peter as well.

So yeah, as someone that's known people that have actually been raped it is a silly correlation. You might have some grounds for false impersonation (though with the body mind and soul still there I doubt that would stand, especially as peter has been shown to be able to stop ock from acting, so if he wanted to he could stop that as well) but that's about it.

Yeah, I'm a bit confused. Your judgement as to whether a situation is rape or not is dependent on a relationship status. Seems incredibly flimsy to me. Your argument seems to be if she treats sex so brazenly then it's only her own fault if it turns out she was deceived. Also, your point about knowing someone who has been raped isn't really relevant and besides, we all could play that card. None of us really get special points for that.

 

[JewishHobbit]

No. Just that I haven't found the story that would keep me off for good. But, I understand comic prices are crazy (they were 20 cents when I started reading them!) and if you don't like it, by all means, don't buy it.

PS: When I stopped reading and during the Clone Saga, Trades were not what they are now...

OMD's the only story to make me stop buying a book. It takes a lot for me to quit something I love. Heck, I have to cut books due to financial reasons and I struggle to cut books I just sorta like. I mean, if I've hung on to X-Men this long I'll never leave it.

The prices are the main factor to my Marvel frustrations these days. $4 for most of their books is just too much for my tastes. I hate that I buy as much as I do and am constantly looking for dropping points.

 

[moraldeficiency]

Yeah, I'm a bit confused. Your judgement as to whether a situation is rape or not is dependent on a relationship status. Seems incredibly flimsy to me. Your argument seems to be if she treats sex so brazenly then it's only her own fault if it turns out she was deceived.

That's actually the legal grounds for it. If I lie about who I am to start a relationship it isn't rape, if I impersonate someone already in a sexual relationship then it's rape.

It's not my argument, it's how the law is. People lie about who they are to get sex. So long as you don't impersonate a public office figure, someone in the military or someone already in a physical relationship with the other person you've broken no laws. It's slimy sure I'll give you that, but it's nothing like rape.

It's not her fault, don't pin that mindset on me. She was tricked, but then most sexual relationships start with lies and deception of one type or another. This would be a bad one, but peter has been shown to be able to stop ocks actions, he didn't and his mind and soul are in this vessel.

The guilt is on ock, but he isn't raping her and it seems like when you acquit lying to get laid with actually raping another human being (one of the most horrific acts of hate one can do to another) then you're lessening actual rape.

But we can disagree on this, I think ock is just being scummy, you think he's a raper. That's fine, legally he isn't but I'm certainly not knocking your moral stance on it, it isn't right and you're quite correct in that regard.

 

[The Infernal]

I had no intentions of talking down to anyone, and if it came across as such, I apologize.

Sorry, Spider-gnome. That wasn't really aimed at you.

 

[Spider-Gnome]

OMD's the only story to make me stop buying a book. It takes a lot for me to quit something I love. Heck, I have to cut books due to financial reasons and I struggle to cut books I just sorta like. I mean, if I've hung on to X-Men this long I'll never leave it.

The prices are the main factor to my Marvel frustrations these days. $4 for most of their books is just too much for my tastes. I hate that I buy as much as I do and am constantly looking for dropping points.

I agree, if anything, OMD would do it. But, see, the outrage following the Ben Reilly reveal caused a retcon (and I actually liked Norman returning, my favorite villain) that I thought it would happen with OMD. Sadly it didn't. I have grudgingly accepted Pete & MJ "never married" and Dan has come along and done a bang up job, that I'm enjoying the stories again, and he knows how to write Pete, not the loser slacker having drunken one night stands of BND. Plus there are hints of Pete & MJ getting together again (not talking about this whole SpOck thing, which I don't think they will go through with).

Sorry, Spider-gnome. That wasn't really aimed at you.

Oh, no worries.

 

[The Infernal]

*snip*

Fair enough. I'll just leave it there rather than prolong the argument.

 

[wobbly]

Side note, I don't see ock having sex with MJ as rape. That's silly. People lie to people to get laid, it happens. It might be different if Peter and MJ were in a relationship already but obviously peter parker wasn't interested, ock initiated the change from friendship to physical acts. Ock was the one that kissed MJ not peter. That to me is a major difference. Basically Ock has more balls then peter when it comes to actually living life in many ways. He is lying about who he is, but he's the one that started the relationship when there wasn't one.

While I understand your logic up to a point it would only really apply here if the real Peter and MJ had never really known each other and never had a sexual relationship before. They obviously did though, and for quite some time too as they were living together instead of being married for all those years.

Bottom line is Ock is not really starting a 'new' relationship with MJ at all, as he isn't some stranger telling lies about himself to impress MJ so as to bed her. He is pretending to be someone she has known and loved for many years, has been intimate with, and is using that history to try and rekindle the original relationship so he can get into MJ's pants for himself.

Ignore for a minute that a mind swap took place. Say Ock was still alive and well, and somehow transformed his body to look and sound exactly like Peter's, and while pretending to be him took the opportunity to use the real Peters history with MJ as a shortcut into her pants.

Would you not think that is rape by deception then?

Anyway's, I think this will be a moot point as I don't think they will go there (least I certainly hope they don't...). Pete's already had to endure finding out his first great love was ###ed by his greatest enemy, having his 2nd ####ed by another, with him stuck in the background this time having to silently witness it all to boot...That would be pushing it and then some.

 

[moraldeficiency]

While I understand your logic up to a point it would only really apply here if the real Peter and MJ had never really known each other and never had a sexual relationship before. They obviously did though, and for quite some time too as they were living together instead of being married for all those years.

Bottom line is Ock is not really starting a 'new' relationship with MJ at all, as he isn't some stranger telling lies about himself to impress MJ so as to bed her. He is pretending to be someone she has known and loved for many years, has been intimate with, and is using that history to try and rekindle the original relationship so he can get into MJ's pants for himself.

Ignore for a minute that a mind swap took place. Say Ock was still alive and well, and somehow transformed his body to look and sound exactly like Peter's, and while pretending to be him took the opportunity to use the real Peters history with MJ as a shortcut into her pants.

Would you not think that is rape by deception then?

Anyway's, I think this will be a moot point as I don't think they will go there (least I certainly hope they don't...). Pete's already had to endure finding out his first great love was ###ed by his greatest enemy, having his 2nd ####ed by another, with him stuck in the background this time having to silently witness it all to boot...That would be pushing it and then some.

Now that is a fair point but every time you wave off then reengage in a relationship it counts as a new relationship. If you get divorced and remarried in the eyes of the law you've been married twice and your current wife is both your first and your second.

Bottom line and what I'm saying, what ock did isn't legally rape in the eyes of the law especially when you factor in peter parker's body mind and soul are still in the vessel. While you could argue this is a new and changed peter it's still peter parker.

Now your argument is interesting with the ock just impersonating peter parker. Legally speaking if peter and MJ weren't in a relationship at the time then it wouldn't be rape. At least by current laws (which don't take into account cloned body doubles). That said I don't think just an ock without peter's memories could or even would want to be with MJ.

I think they're totally going there, one thing about post OMD is weird disturbing sex relationships are very much the norm (Pete and Black Cat(aka, "don't you look me in the eyes when I'm doing you")/his roommate, Aunt May and JJJSR/Doc Ock, Spock and MJ, Norman and Harry's girl). As with all comics it'll only be implied and never directly mentioned and I'm sure Slott will do his usual "it's up to interpretation but they didn't have sex and I'm so mad anyone would think that, but it's up to interpretation" dance but it'll be obvious to most people that don't want to jedi mind block it out it's happening.

All that said, I personally think the only funny and enjoyable parts of 700 and SSM1 have been the ock and MJ scenes. I wanted an ock minded peter and those are the only parts that seem to actually have that flavor. I will say it's beginning to strain imagination that no one in Peter's supporting cast has the intelligence and common sense of a four year old.

 

[stillanerd]

Welp, here's my more extensive take on Superior Spider-Man #1. Feel free to disagree and comment at your leisure.

 

[Themanofbat]

Ok, I'll give you what you want, but you won't like it.

Peter didn't die, his mind, body and soul are still alive in his original vessel.

As for the rest, blah blah blah, I will say how fun it is when you call anyone that disagrees with you "pissy little babies" but if someone calls you a sucker for paying hundreds to get every variant cover you run to report them quickly.

I'd say more but you're so touchy now and every other post from you is "I'm offended, I shall report you" which just makes you kinda a buzz kill to debate or even talk to. I liked you better when you actually spoke like a person and didn't get all up in arms about everything you didn't like, now I just hope you either change back to someone with a sense of humor or someone gives you a taste of your own medicine and reports you for blanket insulting everyone that has a differing opinion.

Two quickies...

1) My "pissy little crybabies" was in relation to people who complain about nothing... this is regardless of whether I agree with them or not... so your comment is moot in this case.

2) I don't like being called names... even one as lame as "sucker"... I gave the guy an opportuntity to take it back, and he basically told me to piss off.... yet somehow, this makes me "touchy"...



As usual, you're wrong... but it's always a pleasure.

 

[moraldeficiency]

Two quickies...

1) My "pissy little crybabies" was in relation to people who complain about nothing... this is regardless of whether I agree with them or not... so your comment is moot in this case.

2) I don't like being called names... even one as lame as "sucker"... I gave the guy an opportuntity to take it back, and he basically told me to piss off.... yet somehow, this makes me "touchy"...



As usual, you're wrong... but it's always a pleasure.

It was a group generalization in the same way people who buy overpriced items which will never appreciate are suckers. Your statement was just meaner, and more directed.

I've been called plenty of names, plenty by you in fact. I've never threatened or reported anyone. With you it seems any post you take umbrage with means they must be banned. Giving someone the opportunity to take back and generalized comment about an item which due to the collector class will never appreciate in value and is pretty much the definition of a sucker (economically speaking) isn't you being nice. It's you trying to put someone in their place while you have no issue insulting enmass. Glass house, stones, you.

I miss clones. That guy you could disagree with even heatedly and there was no talk of reporting, even the condescension was in good fun. Rather than just saying no, you're wrong he would give reasons and even if I disagreed with them they were fair and valid points.

 

[moraldeficiency]

Welp, here's my more extensive take on Superior Spider-Man #1. Feel free to disagree and comment at your leisure.

I thought this was rather good. I liked how you caught the idea that if peter can stop ock then the MJ thing is doubly creepy.

The only part that I thought could have been expanded is where you spoke about how Peter's new attitudes and mannerisms were being taken in by the rest of his supporting cast. I think that was one of the major odd points of the issue.

Great review though keep it up.

 

[Themanofbat]

It was a group generalization in the same way people who buy overpriced items which will never appreciate are suckers. Your statement was just meaner, and more directed.

Nope... it was a direct comment at the fact the we were suckers for continuing to buy ASM in spite of what happened in ASM #700...

Nice try. Strike One.

Try again.

I've been called plenty of names, plenty by you in fact. I've never threatened or reported anyone. With you it seems any post you take umbrage with means they must be banned. Giving someone the opportunity to take back and generalized comment about an item which due to the collector class will never appreciate in value and is pretty much the definition of a sucker (economically speaking) isn't you being nice. It's you trying to put someone in their place while you have no issue insulting enmass. Glass house, stones, you.

If what you say is true, then I could have reported you many times over the years.... because you have said far worse to me than that particular guy did...

Sorry. Strike two.

Try again.

I miss clones. That guy you could disagree with even heatedly and there was no talk of reporting, even the condescension was in good fun. Rather than just saying no, you're wrong he would give reasons and even if I disagreed with them they were fair and valid points.

I miss clones as well... Ball one.

I like how after 12 1/2 years of posting here, I make ONE threat of reporting a post and suddenly, I've been doing it all along... or maybe you just like to throw it in there to support your air of condescension in your endless efforts to make me look bad...

Admittedly, I can make myself look bad all by myself... fortunately, it doesn't happen all that often... regardless of what you think.

Strike Three.

 

[JewishHobbit]

Well now I'm genuinely curious. Who did you complain on and why?

 

[Themanofbat]

Send me an email... not a PM... and I'll give you details...

 

[Doc Ock]

I went in to barnes and noble today to see if they had the first issue of Superior and didn't see it but I saw ASM #700 and picked it up immediately.

The first comic book I have bought in about 10 years. I was so excited to take it home and read, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I haven't kept completely up to speed in the world of ASM( just ordered Big Time Ultimate Collection off of amazon) but I quite liked it and felt very nostalgic.

My New Years resolution was to start collecting comics again focusing on my favorite character which is Spider-Man so I chose to get ASM as it was the final issue and begin picking up Superior every month. Hopefully I can find Superior #1 this weekend. There arent many comic stores if any in my area. (I'd go for other comics too if I had more money)

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I referring to his example about sex through deception.

Well, he'd be right to say you can't fake an identity, that's illegal. He'd have to find me a court case where that's a grounds for rape? It's usually a stolen identity or impersonating an identity, perhaps impersonating an officer. I mean it could be charged as some form of sex crime. Wouldn't be aggravated assault, could still be an assault charge.

Taking the full assumed story into account. There's no our world legal precedent for body swapping. Intoxication maybe? If he's Peter Parker, that's his body, and he has all his identification and memory, can be positively ID'ed as Parker by next of kin the courts would treat him as Peter Parker. Most likely any claim otherwise but be seen as special pleading. Seems rather unprovable.

Perhaps DareDevil can find some tangible evidence, like hormones or something to prove its Ock. Otherwise the courts will rule it a mental disorder.

 

[wobbly]

I think what's legal in our world is kinda irrelevant considering the nature of this one. Better to consider what's simply moral in any world?

Spock bedding MJ would count for me as rape by deception. He is pretending to be someone MJ already knows, loves, and has been intimate with before, and is using that history to try and screw her.

On the whole legal thing though....Now I don't know about the US but there was a recent (and certainly bizarre) case in the UK where a young woman pretended to be a boy. Not just one boy either, but 3 different ones, and the weird thing is she was pretending this all within the same group of 'Girlfriends', who even knew her as a girl before the pretence, and all knew each alias, but all failed to see through her various 'disguises'. She went on to be intimate with them sexually with some assistance from the lights being turned off, not taking off her clothes, and the cunning use of a fake appendage (the story is here for anyone interested: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2184539/The-girl-boys-I-idea-boyfriend-girl.html )

I watched the program on it and was bemused at how they got away with it in the first place*, never mind it carrying on for months. In the end she got 2.5 years in Jail for it all when she was finally exposed (quite literally) by the Police.

So with that in mind would what Spock is attempting be illegal if the whole mind swap deal were possible in the real world? Well, I don't know, but I'm sure as hell it'd be damned immoral at best.

Remains to be seen whether Slott will go through with it but I hope he doesn't. It's all rather tacky and stains MJ's character even if she is shown to be willing to sleep with Spock but something prevents it (like the real Peter's influence giving Spock erectile dysfunction perhaps....now that'd be kinda funny come to think of it...). I mean, her not being able to see through him at all atm and realise this guy is not the same Peter she knows very well is already making her seem somewhat dim.

*Going back to that story...Sometimes truth is just as strange as fiction. If there are girls in the real world who cannot see their mate from school has dressed themselves up as 3 different fellas, then maybe it's not so hard to beleive Peters supporting cast are not seeing the obvious changes in Peters personality either. Well, the dim one's at any rate...

 

[stillanerd]

I thought this was rather good. I liked how you caught the idea that if peter can stop ock then the MJ thing is doubly creepy.

The only part that I thought could have been expanded is where you spoke about how Peter's new attitudes and mannerisms were being taken in by the rest of his supporting cast. I think that was one of the major odd points of the issue.

Great review though keep it up.

Thanks, moraldeficency.

And yeah, I didn't dwell too much onto the supporting cast seemingly just taking SpOck's jerk-ass behavior for granted (and in some cases outright oblivious towards) is because, I said in the review, it's something that carried over from Amazing Spider-Man #700 which I went more into into that review. Although, I do agree; it's one of the big problems with the whole Doc Ock pretending to be Peter and Spider-Man. The other, of course, is the so-called "relationship" between him and Mary Jane. At least thus far. Again, thanks for feedback.