|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 4, 2008 5:48:50 GMT
ROFL! That's a great 'Joephisto' Hec! Did you make it?
|
|
|
Post by hector on Jan 4, 2008 5:51:54 GMT
Nah, I just found it somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by hector on Jan 9, 2008 1:35:14 GMT
Madgoblin chimes in. As usual, very interesting and well-thought. Also, long-winded and extremely boring, so there is little chance I'll ever read it completely. And it's not as if I care about Spider-Man that much. But some of you might like it.
|
|
Max
Chaosite
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Imagine all the people...
Posts: 610
|
Post by Max on Jan 11, 2008 16:58:52 GMT
Well here's the first few pages of Brand New Day. blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=92159514&blogID=343976793I don't care what pathetic explanations or spin Joe Q throws at fans but this ain't Spider-Man. This is alternate universe 'What If' Spider-Man. And I thought Civil War [Censored]ed up the Marvel Universe enough. A lot of the other guys at spiderfan are considering giving up ASM, the others are just hoping that this is over with quickly. I'm just glad I stopped reading all monthly Marvel titles about a year ago.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 11, 2008 17:28:43 GMT
Hec...
Good find. Madgoblin is always interesting - if long, as you say! ;D
***
Max...
I've gotta say if they stick with ASM as it is, Joe will take it as his position being vindicated no matter what protests are made. He'll only reverse this if there's a definite sales drop. 'Hanging on and hoping' is not a smart attitude if those fans want Marvel to listen.
If Q was going to listen to verbal protests alone, he'd never have gone through with this.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 11, 2008 18:45:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Gray Lensman on Jan 11, 2008 20:31:50 GMT
Good stuff there, folks. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) Right now, Joe Quesada's attitude is basically "Just shut the **** up and give me your money". Pretty much every interview I've seen with anyone at Marvel on this issue pretty much reflects that. Every criticism about the stupidity of this direction is dismissed with a variant of "don't think about it, just enjoy the stories". Marvel has gotten too arrogant for its own good, because they're used to pitching any old crap and having it sell anyway. I really don't think Marvel will get rid of Spidey-666 without a sales drop. Marvel won't change if all people do is sit there and take it, and hope that somehow it'll go away. People need to indicate that they won't follow this, and they need to hold to it. Oh, and I loved the Giffen piece. He's got some good points. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by hector on Jan 12, 2008 1:01:37 GMT
Actually, the Spider-Man featured in Brand New Day is more Spider-Man than he has ever been in decades.
|
|
|
Post by peterh on Jan 12, 2008 1:11:40 GMT
Actually, the Spider-Man featured in Brand New Day is more Spider-Man than he has ever been in decades. More like the character was originally concieved, you mean? Oh, and don't you think my ava is cool? Great use of Joker ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
Max
Chaosite
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Imagine all the people...
Posts: 610
|
Post by Max on Jan 12, 2008 12:18:21 GMT
But it's so obviously a feeble attempt to roll back the years to a place where Spider-Man has moved on from, just because Marvel don't know where to go next with him. Peter living with his aunt and having no job was all well and fine all those years ago but characters develop and grow up.
Peter's been through all that and it's only right that he should change and not just be retconned and turn back time "to attact a younger readership" or whatever spin Joe Q throws at it.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 12, 2008 12:32:27 GMT
I'm not sure it was ever a problem to anyone at Marvel except Joe, honestly. Peter being married or not married is not a thing I've heard any other industry figure particularly care about. Certainly not to the point of going on about it at length.
It's like complaining that Batman has a sidekick: you don't want to write about Robin that much - don't! Plenty of good writers have done just that.
MJ is out shopping; MJ is visiting Aunt Anna (Or Aunt May); MJ is helping her Sister out... there are tons of good reasons to not involve her in every issue that can be covered in one line. But if you want her there, she's easy enough to write back in again.
It's a pretty poor writer who can't think of some great ways to involve her too, I'd say.
|
|
|
Post by Gray Lensman on Jan 12, 2008 16:43:39 GMT
I've done some recent thinking on this question, and this is what I'm getting out of this...
I think Quesada is the only one who cared enough to push this move. That said, I think there's a number of people at Marvel who probably are not objecting to this, and may even like the new status quo, but until now they were content to leave things the way they were. I think generally Marvel sees it as Spidey returning to "the way he should be", and are willing to overlook the means because of the end result. I'm not even sure they realize how much OMD taints any future stories they could possibly do. It's utter lunacy.
I sense a massive disconnect between Marvel editorial and their fanbase on this issue. I suspect it's because Marvel is largely staffed by people who started reading during the 70's, who are producing comics for fans who started reading during the past 20 years or so. Hence we get the current mess, which is the same Spider-Man from 30 years ago with a new paint job, and Marvel doesn't seem to understand why so many fans are disgusted with this.
And yes, there are many story possibilities with a married Spider-Man, if they really wanted to explore them. Personally, I don't see how many times Peter can get involved with someone, only to break up with her because she can't deal with him being Spider-Man. But that's just me.
|
|
Max
Chaosite
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Imagine all the people...
Posts: 610
|
Post by Max on Jan 12, 2008 20:07:23 GMT
I know I never had a problem in the slightest with Peter being married. If Joe thinks that Peter being single will magically attract younger readers he's sorely mistaken. Does he really think kids so stupid that they will be turned off a character because he's married? I was about 10 or 11 when I first read Spidey and it didn't matter to me whether he was married or not, and I beleive it was the same for many, many fans.
Characters should be able to grow up and mature, it allows for a much deeper and realistic character. And I just can't read Brand New Day, it doesn't feel like ASM, it doesn't feel like the Spider-Man that has developed over the last two decades. I can't be interested in the story when I always know this is some spin-off, alternate universe created by magic that they try to pass off as the 'real' Marvel Universe.
I would honestly prefer to be reading Howard Mackie and John Byrne on ASM than this, cause for me the real Spider-Man's continuity ended on ASM #545.
Rant over.
|
|
|
Post by hector on Jan 13, 2008 2:00:48 GMT
More like the character was originally concieved, you mean? And how it has been portrayed in almost every single media, yes. My lawyers don't want me to comment on an ongoing case of plagiarism. I'm not sure it was ever a problem to anyone at Marvel except Joe, honestly. If that were the case, it would be the first time they had attempted to get rid of the marriage. But that's far from the case. The Clone Saga was, at its heart, an attempt to do that, Mackie and Byrne's relaunch? The same. Quesada is far from being the only one who has considered the marriage an albatross around Peter's neck., nor is the first one to have attempted to undo it. Also, all this talk about 'growth' and 'maturing', Spider-Man? Really? Despite whatever number years of comic book time has passes, Peter is the same whiny, sissy ass he always have been. Except being older and married makes him even more of a loser.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 13, 2008 3:03:06 GMT
OK, I'll amend... Not a problem to anyone currently except Joe ;D
Just wish I understood what the problem was with a married Spidey. There are a lot of characters that marriage would not really suit - at least a successful marriage ;D - but Spidey is not one of them.
|
|
|
Post by hector on Jan 14, 2008 4:51:58 GMT
OK, I'll amend... Not a problem to anyone currently except Joe ;D According to several interviews, no. That's far from the case. Fans may or not agree, but it's not true that Quesada is the only one who considered the marriage a mistake. With the exception of Batman, I can't think of a single comic book character to whom marriage could be worse than it is for Spider-Man. Goes against practically everything about him.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 14, 2008 12:36:14 GMT
Spidey is all about responsibility isn't he, Hec? Plus right from the beginning, wasn't he always the character agonising over whether he should marry his GF or not? "Should I marry Gwen?" was virtually his mantra.
I'd say Spidey was one of the MOST suited purely on those grounds. He's never been a playa, he's always been looking for The One.
I couldn't possibly disagree with you more on this one. There's just no way adding MORE responsibility to Spidey goes against everything about him - or indeed ANYthing about him.
|
|
|
Post by SPS on Jan 18, 2008 19:09:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 18, 2008 20:08:31 GMT
Good find, SPS ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) I think if Erik Larsen were in charge of Spidey there'd be a lot fewer unhappy readers.
|
|
|
Post by Gray Lensman on Jan 18, 2008 21:50:31 GMT
Good article. I'd be much happier with the Larsen solution over the current crap we're dealing with now. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|