Board Logo
« The Amazing Spider-Man »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Sep 19th, 2017, 2:50pm



« Previous Topic | Next Topic »
Pages: 1 2  Notify Send Topic Print
 hotthread  Author  Topic: The Amazing Spider-Man  (Read 4913 times)
snipe
Administrator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Master Dick


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1952
xx Re: The Amazing Spider-Man
« Reply #15 on: Mar 12th, 2009, 05:14am »

on Mar 11th, 2009, 5:17pm, midLfinger wrote:
it is "the worst piece of shit comic ever." [...]This SUCKED!

Then, sir, I'm glad you didn't buy it from me. If it makes you feel any better, JMS wanted his name removed from the "by" pages - editorial forced the story on him and told him (this last part I've not heard confirmed) that he couldn't write Thor if he didn't write One More Day.
User IP Logged

midLfinger

ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

"I was mumbling to myself like the Joker in Dark Knight, "C'mon, hit me!" I had a Tommy gun in my right hand & I was firing at the moon. Bapapap!"

YIM YIM AIM
Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 735
xx Re: The Amazing Spider-Man
« Reply #16 on: Mar 12th, 2009, 07:32am »

on Mar 12th, 2009, 05:14am, snipe wrote:
Then, sir, I'm glad you didn't buy it from me. If it makes you feel any better, JMS wanted his name removed from the "by" pages - editorial forced the story on him and told him (this last part I've not heard confirmed) that he couldn't write Thor if he didn't write One More Day.


I didn't buy it at all but, speaking of which, I'd like to buy it and any other Spider-Man back issues you have since you opened your shop. I do hate ebay, though. You gotta PM me a price and based off of that I'll buy in increments based on how much of the money I have every two weeks. That is, if you still have some. I won't have any cash until next week but name your price so I can get some Spidey in my life, Snipe ol' buddy ol' pal.
User IP Logged

"baby gon hyo & chu look like the bears from star wars"

-- My wife on kittenwar.com (08/30/2005, 12:38:22 AM)

User Image

midLfinger on Twitter!
midLfinger

ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

"I was mumbling to myself like the Joker in Dark Knight, "C'mon, hit me!" I had a Tommy gun in my right hand & I was firing at the moon. Bapapap!"

YIM YIM AIM
Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 735
xx Re: The Amazing Spider-Man
« Reply #17 on: Mar 12th, 2009, 9:57pm »

on Oct 4th, 2008, 07:10am, snipe wrote:
No, it's selling like shit for us.


Just outta curiousity. How'd the Obama issue sell? And how many did you keep to sell for tons more later on?
User IP Logged

"baby gon hyo & chu look like the bears from star wars"

-- My wife on kittenwar.com (08/30/2005, 12:38:22 AM)

User Image

midLfinger on Twitter!
Will

ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 706
xx Re: The Amazing Spider-Man
« Reply #18 on: Feb 15th, 2011, 09:24am »

Spider-Man might be the ultimate example -- the fulcrum -- of what plagues modern comic book continuity. And that is, that continuity itself.

Am I someone that believes continuity is an unwanted nuisance? No, not really. Not at all, actually.

Conversely, I think it's been so mangled that some sort of reset -- either altogether, or a reset of this reset-that-"isn't" -- needs to take place. Quesada was a rather talented artist (his stuff with the Kevin Smith DareDevil run, and the introduction of Azrael in the long, long ago was striking), but he's an absolute disaster as head of Marvel, its continuity and as a steward of its posterity.

And that's what's been disrespected with this reboot-that-can't-really-be-called-that. The idea at Marvel was, I believe, that they "got it right the first time". That time dating back to Lee, Ditko and Kirby. The idea of comics that are based around character exploration and growth.

But that also requires the characters to change, even to age. And it's clear that, while they talk about making their franchise standard-bearer more "now", that this crap is just a mixture of crass pop culture window dressing (the now portion) with an overall character-placement that has been retarded to about 1972.

A bunch of forty/fifty-somethings pretending that they're still kids, that the character can never be as relevant as when they were going through puberty and bar mitzvahs. A crock of shit, especially as regards both market creation and storytelling prowess (oxymoron).

They throw out about half of the character's history, while pretending that this hasn't happened at all. Continuity as something that they can't be bothered with, even as or because they're concurrently carrying on with its destruction.

Further, as laid out by Quesada, what future does this character have? What can ever truly change for him, considering the restrictions to "good" plotting, storytelling and characterization that has been enforced and propagated as its own truth?

The idea of Spider-Man, ironically, was never better dealt with -- better defined and made simplistically, emotionally clear -- than in the middle of the clone saga, the brain trust at Marvel's first attempt to reset things.

This moment, or issue, is #400 of The Amazing Spider-Man. Aunt May comes out of her coma, hears about Mary Jane's pregnancy, and reveals that she had known Peter's secret, only to then pass on in her bedroom, with Peter watching over her.

Looking at it, the point is clear (and I, as boy at the time, was naive enough to think that this was the plan for ongoing plotting): another phase and responsibility in Peter Parker's life. Another statement as to that responsibility, and the idea of moving forward with a new family; the idea capped by the contrasting quotations from Peter Pan -- that Peter is no longer an adolescent, and that there's no going back.

It's one of the best issues of Spider-Man ever put to print. And within 3 years it was undone. Just ripped apart.

The real laugh being not, then, the clone saga itself, but the attempts to "fix" it that followed. This, truly, is when continuity became a hated and foreign concept at Marvel.

I do think that this horror at allowing Peter to continue to become more and more of a Spider-Man in a literal or obvious manner -- the manner argued by Stan Lee so long ago as the basis of this character -- is what pushed Straczynski in some very odd directions. The idea of growth was very constrained, thus creating lateral storylines as relates to greater truths being found in some conflation of Darwinism and the metaphysical -- thus in many ways focusing on the Spider in place of the man.

While that was going on, he also managed to create some of the best storylines -- and run of consistent character-growth through the marriage -- that the character had seen in a very long time.

But Straczynski only managed to put off the inevitable for a number of particularly brilliant years (mainly before Sins Past). That they had to threaten and cajole him into writing out the marriage and, altogether, his run with the character is telling and ugly enough.

Why bother with what followed? A rhetorical question.

For the point of Peter Pan is to forever be stuck in a moment; the ideal of that. An ideal that runs counter to Spider-Man as we knew him for so many years. That even runs counter to his creed.

No wonder that issue of Amazing was thrown aside so quickly within continuity or broader relevance going forward. Somehow that makes it all the more relevant, now, when considering how Spider-Man went so wrong.
« Last Edit: Feb 15th, 2011, 10:58am by Will » User IP Logged

TheMidnighter

ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1224
xx Re: The Amazing Spider-Man
« Reply #19 on: Jun 27th, 2012, 08:43am »

I didn't know if I had to place this in this thread, in the news/rumours thread or in the Death of the MArvel Universe thread...

Sp1d3y getZ 4 t33n sidekick!!!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!1!!!!

The man who gave up years of his own history to save the life of his aunt -- which was mandated by the editorial staff to make Peter Parker seem young again -- now gets to play the adult role in spite of everything to a teen version of himself? Even the origin story isn't original...

I shuddered when I realised April 1st had come and gone already.
User IP Logged

"One among you will shortly perish."

My free music
Will

ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 706
xx Re: The Amazing Spider-Man
« Reply #20 on: Jun 28th, 2012, 1:46pm »

A married Peter Parker was a buzzkill. But Peter Parker with an under-aged teen sidekick is every man's fantasy.

The more the middle-aged fanboys implement policy, the more I realize that Wertham was right.

This is really just more of the same: recycled ideas trotted out as something "new". And even more than that (well, the square-root-as-ideal), the Quixotic attempts, over and over, not only to "de-age" Parker, but somehow return the format, if not character, to high school.

It's romanticizing something that was short-lived in the character's history. Just how long was he in high school in the original run? Yet this is the Holy Grail?

Peter Parker+Peter Pan=User Image
« Last Edit: Jun 28th, 2012, 1:53pm by Will » User IP Logged

Pages: 1 2  Notify Send Topic Print
« Previous Topic | Next Topic »

Donate $6.99 for 50,000 Ad-Free Pageviews!

| Conforums Support |

This forum powered for FREE by Conforums ©
Sign up for your own Free Message Board today!
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Conforums Support | Parental Controls