Rage at "Superior Spiderman" (MAJOR SPOILERS)

[Aquatosic]

Who else is pissed that they killed Peter Parker and made Otto Octavius the new "dark and edgy" Spiderman?!! :furious::furious::furious:

[Logic]

Pretty much the entire internet.

On the subject:
Check out this man's take on the subject. (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/6686-Stuperior)

[Metahuman1]

Yeah, I'm not impressed by this stunt, at all.


Personally, the recurring theme in comics seems to be "It sucks to be the hero, it sucks to do the right thing, to be responsible, to control yourself. You should just throw it out the window if your smart."

I long for the days were he could periodically have FUN with the fact that he was out there doing things that should have been physically impossible for him to do and have all the great smart-mouthed witty comments.

[Mando Knight]

I kinda stopped caring about Spider-Man when they decided that selling Peter and MJ's marriage to Mephisto to save Aunt May's life was a good idea. When Aunt May being on her deathbed was nearly an annual plot device in the series.

[Acanous]

I kinda stopped caring about Spider-Man when they decided that selling Peter and MJ's marriage to Mephisto to save Aunt May's life was a good idea. When Aunt May being on her deathbed was nearly an annual plot device in the series.

^Killed it for me too. Lots of fans, really.

[The Glyphstone]

Have they brought back Uncle Ben yet?

[jebbewocky]

Not me, I've purchased every issue so far and love it.
If you've ever followed Spider-Man, and thought Pete was getting a happy ending, you were being silly.

[JackRose]

Who else is pissed that they killed Peter Parker and made Otto Octavius the new "dark and edgy" Spiderman?!! :furious::furious::furious:

I would be if I thought that was meant to be the new status quo. I'm still pretty sure, however, that we'll wind up with Peter back in the driver's seat eventually Ock's running around in Peter's body with Peter's memory, and being haunted by Peter's 'ghost'.

[Traab]

Pretty much the entire internet.

On the subject:
Check out this man's take on the subject. (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/6686-Stuperior)

See, I do agree with that guy mostly, but I think he misses one of the points, which i think is what annoys people the most about this. It is such a clearly telegraphed gimmick. Its already temporary the moment we saw it happen, so it instantly drains any impact it may have because we all know it WILL be reversed. The only question is how long will it be dragged out for before ock is the one who goes bye bye?

THAT is the problem with this twist. Yeah yeah, black spiderman suit, blah de blah, but at least with that, until stuff started going wrong, we could see it being his new look. It wasnt clear from the start how it was going to end.

[Ramza00]

Here is the 7 page thread we did earlier about this subject (december of last year to two months ago)

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=265647

[Soras Teva Gee]

The problem is that cheap stunts like this reliably sell books. You don't actually think good content is driving the industry do you?

Comics are like train wrecks except people actually pay money to stop and gawk.

[Lord Raziere]

…….naaaah, this is just so stupid it doesn't even provoke rage.

its just more evidence for my ongoing cynical view of corporations. what else is new?

[JackRose]

…….naaaah, this is just so stupid it doesn't even provoke rage.

its just more evidence for my ongoing cynical view of corporations. what else is new?

Now, there's plenty in the behavior of comic book companies to support a cynical view of humans as individuals or as organized into corporations (without getting into specific examples because I think that might break board rules, but it goes way back) but it's odd that you would pick a creative decision like this as an example of problems with corporations.

[Kitten Champion]

It's kind of sad how quickly they started introducing foreshadowing for Peter's return.

It's like going from Wrath of Khan to Search for Spock.

[Arcanist]

Have they brought back Uncle Ben yet?

I sincerely doubt that you have any idea how hard this made me laugh :smallamused:

[Yora]

So what? It's a superhero comic. He will be back in a months because it was all a dream, or a simulation, or whatever. Nobody ever dies in those comics.

[endoperez]

Yeah, I'm not impressed by this stunt, at all.


Personally, the recurring theme in comics seems to be "It sucks to be the hero, it sucks to do the right thing, to be responsible, to control yourself. You should just throw it out the window if your smart."

I long for the days were he could periodically have FUN with the fact that he was out there doing things that should have been physically impossible for him to do and have all the great smart-mouthed witty comments.

Actually, having read a bit of this, it seems like one of the themes in this series is going to be something like this:

"It sucks to do the right thing, to be responsible, to control yourself, when you're a mad scientist masquerading as a hero. However, as you forget yourself and throw it out of the window, thinking you're smart, you're actually ruining it all. Self control is a good thing to have."


Also, I don't know if it was brought up in the earlier thread, but Marvel and DC might be doing gimmicks like this to boost sales... but does it really matter?

In 2004-2005, Marvel made less money off of comic books than from toys. Both together are considerably less than what they get out of licensing. So yeah. Doctor Spider-Octopus will end up having mechanical tentacles or spiderlegs or something similar on his back, and that will be available as a toy, and that's that.

http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Marvel_Enterprises_(MVL)/Gross_Profit

[Bastian Weaver]

It's stupid, and it's old. Anyone remember Kraven's Last Hunt? You know... that old story arc when Kraven captured Peter, shot him, buried him, and then put on the costume and started acting as a "darker, edgier Spiderman"?

[The Glyphstone]

I sincerely doubt that you have any idea how hard this made me laugh :smallamused:

It was a half-serious question...that seems to be the only thing in comics that is still sacred, so it's only a matter of time before they desecrate it as well.

[Bastian Weaver]

Oh, they brought Uncle Ben back at least once, but then it was retconned.

[Janus]

Oh, they brought Uncle Ben back at least once, but then it was retconned.
Please tell me they made him a supervillain.

[Prime32]

I think he was from an alternate universe, or the Chameleon, or possibly both.

Also Uncle Ben was alive during the House of M crossover, when reality was rewritten to give every Marvel character their fondest wish (as part of the effect Spidey also became a superhero/wrestler with a publicly known identity, adored by everyone including J. Jonah Jameson, married to Gwen Stacy, and with the Sinister Six as employees who were undyingly loyal to him for turning their lives around).

[Deepbluediver]

The root of this latest outrage is, IMHO, the same as the reason I don't read a lot of comic-books lately. The biggest problem all the major publishers have is that the character still the exact same (pretty much) as they where 40, 50, even 60+ years ago.

Some one recently compared comics to manga, and pointed out that even the super-long running ones, (One Piece, DBZ, Sailor Moon) are done mostly by one artist of a single team, and eventually come to an end. And no one tries to rewrite them.
We all loved Harry Potter, but I don't see the books being reisued next year with pretty much the same plot, but set in, I dunnoh, lets say, Mexico or something. Which is basically what comic books are these days.

The stories for Superman, Ironman, Batman, Spiderman, etc, have been completely done to death, and now the ONLY originallity comes from these so-called stunts. Clark Kent has been Superman since the comics origin, the same as Peter Parker has been spiderman. There are a few of the more wacky varieites (like the time Superman was Russian Clark Kentovski or whatever) but by and large its the same stuff.

We all know who the heroes are, what's (mostly) going to happen, who the enemies will be....
And while there are still some good stories in there, I think the comic-book readership is starting to get a little fatigued by all the rewrites, retcons, and universal-spanning resets. Manga isn't free from problems; people have rightly pointed out that the characters can be shallow, the settings recycled, and the plots thin, but what it doesn't have is the mountain-sized pile of baggage that every single existing mainstream comic line has accumulated.

Many people have their favorite versions of the existing heros, and when something happens to change that, they get a little upset. We've become emotionally invested in some character, and now a new writer is basically telling us all that previous stuff was lies or doesn't count. And it's gotten to the point where however good the new stories are, we know it's all eventually going to get reset as well.
By now we've seen funny Batman, dark & scary batman, robot batman, vampire Batman, loner Batman, Batman on a team, some one else filling in for Batman (always temporary, of course), campy batman, crazy batman, etc etc etc.


The desire for things both original and not-rehashed is part of why I believe webcomics and independent publishers are seeing a big surge in sales and productivity. Just off the top of my head I can think of half a dozen webcomics that are full-time jobs for their artists/authors, and I only read a fraction of what's out there.
in case you're interested- Goblins, Gunnerkrigg Court, Girl Geniuse, OotS of course, CtrlAltDel & Penny Arcade, etc


If the mainstream publishers wanted to boost sales and challenge themselves to save their dying industry, they would write as many major existing heroes out of the storyline as they could, and swear off them for a period of at least 10 years. Its a running joke how often heroes come back from the dead, even amongst non-hardcore fans. Maybe comics could be taken a little more seriously if that didn't happen. Image in DC killed off Batman, permenantly. Say, the Joker finally gets him. And then Batman doesn't come back. The could have one of the robins take up his name, if they want, but Bruce Wayne is gone and buried.
Superman decideds to take a sabatical and see the rest of the universe.
The Guardians of Oa admit all the messes they've made haven't helped, and shut down the Green Latern core.
Iron man accidentally installs Windows OS in his armor and explodes in the middle of battle.

In other words, come up with some actually NEW material.

But honestly, I don't really see it happening. They've gotten too comfortable and would rather ride the old franchises all the way down their slow death spiral rather than take a chance on something truely risky and new.


/endrant.

[Prime32]

I thought the only reason Marvel/DC still made comics nowadays was to preserve their copyright for adaptations? :smalltongue:

[Selrahc]

In other words, come up with some actually NEW material.


So... like... have Doctor Octopus take control of Spider-man's body and try and live up to his heroic legacy? That sounds pretty new to me.

[Eldan]

THere's a reason I only read comics that are mostly removed from continuity and have a defined start and end.

[The Glyphstone]

So... like... have Doctor Octopus take control of Spider-man's body and try and live up to his heroic legacy? That sounds pretty new to me.

He means a permanent paradigm change. Here, the Impending Retcon/Reversal is written on the wall in gigantic neon glowing letters, since the status quo must eventually be restored.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I thought the only reason Marvel/DC still made comics nowadays was to preserve their copyright for adaptations? :smalltongue:

I suspect you have something a general point, however trademark/copyright is not that easy to loose and adaptations/merch should qualify all on their own just fine.

Comics themselves have been fairly stagnant over the last decade, I've posted several times that if you track down copies actually sold the numbers are pretty anemic. There some sign this may be changing in recent years, but my own analysis is that comics have become a complete niche market just waiting for the bottom to fall out. The best selling book in the last decade by a wiiiide margin is Spidey's crossover with President Obama.

Tippity-top runaway smash hit for the market right now seems to be 300,000 copies sold range. And that's up quite a bit in the past few years but only applies to single issues not anything like sustained sales, thus leaving me with the impression Marvel/DC have just gotten better at mobilizing their entire nerdbase to buy things.

And it doesn't make all that much money as far as things go. Amazing Spidey #700 sold 200,966 copies to comic shops, but at the vastly inflated price of $7.99 working out to a tidy 1.6 million dollars in sales, which isn't bad for a single issue but Superior Spidey # dropped to 188,182 copies at regular $3.99 so under half the money at 750k and it was still well above average. From there we have:

Superior #2: 112,546
Superior #3: 101,811
Superior #4: 95,892

You can do the money on that yourself. Figure from this site which track monopoly distributor Diamond. (http://www.comichron.com/) Of course DC/Marvel put out a lot of books but if you track down monthly sales you can't fill out top ten with books breaking 100k in copies sold. In a country of 313 million people that is just not a lot of customers.

Though the last few years have been growing so maybe the market is expanding, only time will tell.

I suspect as long as they turn a profit comics will continue to be made, for some basic marketing if nothing else. Can you have comicbook superheroes without comics? I think execs at Warner and Disney would keep even a niche market going in that context. And it can serve as a sort of test case breeding ground for other stories in different mediums. The Avengers movie is a mixture of the bare bones of their comic origin mixed with the Ultimates second arc. With fairly well liked idea added to the mix like the Cosmic Cube and Thanos.


(Sidenote: Since this pops up when I make this kinda argument... I know about trades and digital comics. I need actual figures on copies sold, not just dollars made. You have to control for the existing nerdbase simply sampling other formats. I bought plenty of trades for stuff I didn't read at the time in comics or were from back in the day)

[Reverent-One]

He means a permanent paradigm change. Here, the Impending Retcon/Reversal is written on the wall in gigantic neon glowing letters, since the status quo must eventually be restored.

On the other hand, this sort of story specifically works best if it's not permanent. Spidey dying in Doc Ocks body with no one knowing what happened is a horrible way for him to go as a final moment, even if he converts Doc Ock to the good side in the process. As a story arc though, it's an interesting concept that doesn't seem horrible to explore for a bit.

[Traab]

So what? It's a superhero comic. He will be back in a months because it was all a dream, or a simulation, or whatever. Nobody ever dies in those comics.

Ock will realize that petes memories/soul are overriding his own. Basically, he is being rejected by this body. So he will design his own. A clone, a cyborg, SOMETHING, and download his memories into it, leaving peter parker back in control and a new doc body to wreak havoc with after an appropriate hiatus.

[navar100]

I'm just generally mad that only superheroes die but supervillains live on and on to commit more dastardly deeds. Sometimes the superhero comes back, but still.

Flash
Flash again
Superman
Batman (back breaks)
Captain America
Professor X
Johnny Storm
Robin
Green Lantern (Hal Jordan, in a way)
Aquaman? (Not sure about this one. I thought I read a reference.)
and now Spiderman

Lex Luthor, Joker, Doctor Doom, Magneto, Red Skull, Loki, and so on just keep doing what they're doing without any true consequences.

[HandofShadows]

I kinda stopped caring about Spider-Man when they decided that selling Peter and MJ's marriage to Mephisto to save Aunt May's life was a good idea. When Aunt May being on her deathbed was nearly an annual plot device in the series.

Yeah, that is when I dropped all my comics other than Hellboy. The stick the broke the camels back as it where.

[LaZodiac]

On the other hand, this sort of story specifically works best if it's not permanent. Spidey dying in Doc Ocks body with no one knowing what happened is a horrible way for him to go as a final moment, even if he converts Doc Ock to the good side in the process. As a story arc though, it's an interesting concept that doesn't seem horrible to explore for a bit.

It's only a fitting end given he made a deal with the devil.


Ock will realize that petes memories/soul are overriding his own. Basically, he is being rejected by this body. So he will design his own. A clone, a cyborg, SOMETHING, and download his memories into it, leaving peter parker back in control and a new doc body to wreak havoc with after an appropriate hiatus.

My personal theory is that they didn't actually switch bodies, they just exchanged memories, and Peter didn't die, he just thinks he's Doc Ock. He'll get out of it, and then it'll be revealed Doc Ock set up a brain upload thing to put himself into a clone body in just this scenario, or something like that. Or we'll get another arc where the tentacles are alive again.

This is my major problem with comic books. To many retreads, and the whole "too many cooks spoil the pot" thing.

[Yora]

I don't even know anything about the characters or plot. But when I first read "spiderman is killed and his arch-nemesis assumed his role", I was instantly thinking that it's all just a delusion spiderman is having.

I've been meaning to ask my dad if they ever had people with such a delusion in their mental hospital.

[Reverent-One]

It's only a fitting end given he made a deal with the devil.

Not really, bad as that arc was, why let it ruin the character?

[Yora]

Wasn't it retconned out anyway?

[Aquatosic]

Pretty much the entire internet.

On the subject:
Check out this man's take on the subject. (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/6686-Stuperior)

You're right, even if your forum name is muy pretentious

[LaZodiac]

Not really, bad as that arc was, why let it ruin the character?

Because at this point I don't think Spiderman has anywhere to go from this point. His creed of great powers bringing great responsibility has been pretty well put to rest because of this. He revealed his identity during Civil War, a stupid, idiotic move. Aunt May gets shot because of it. Making a deal with the devil to reset all of that is a horrible result, and Peter should die alone and unloved in the body of one of his greatest enemies because of it.

But really, that's not the real problem. We shouldn't let it ruin the character, and you're right. It should just ruin the writers who thought these things would be a good idea.


Wasn't it retconned out anyway?

It was not, as far as I'm aware.

[Aquatosic]

four arms wasn't so bad though and OMD was just awful and the black costume seems fine

[Aquatosic]

when it does switch back, I hope Doc Ock doesn't go right back to villainy, that would be just as bad

[VanBuren]

Because at this point I don't think Spiderman has anywhere to go from this point. His creed of great powers bringing great responsibility has been pretty well put to rest because of this. He revealed his identity during Civil War, a stupid, idiotic move. Aunt May gets shot because of it. Making a deal with the devil to reset all of that is a horrible result, and Peter should die alone and unloved in the body of one of his greatest enemies because of it.

But really, that's not the real problem. We shouldn't let it ruin the character, and you're right. It should just ruin the writers who thought these things would be a good idea.



It was not, as far as I'm aware.

It's worth pointing out that OMD itself was the result of someone in charge having an axe to grind against the franchise. Just because the axe is different doesn't mean it suddenly becomes a good formula.

[Jayngfet]

It's worth pointing out that OMD itself was the result of someone in charge having an axe to grind against the franchise. Just because the axe is different doesn't mean it suddenly becomes a good formula.

Which is really a symptom rather than the root cause.

Quesada, Johns, and Leob all seem to be major comic people with major unresolved real life issues(Regarding dead family largely) that consistently affect their work and how it comes out. Rather than deal with it healthily in real life they've at some point in time or another tried dealing with it through their publiclly available work and at times it can get ugly.

I'm not saying anything any of these people do is bad, but it's certainly a driving factor for a number of things, a number of which aren't that great.

[Yora]

It was not, as far as I'm aware.

Apparently there was something called One Moment In Time, which established that One More Day never happened.

[Eldan]

On the other hand, this sort of story specifically works best if it's not permanent. Spidey dying in Doc Ocks body with no one knowing what happened is a horrible way for him to go as a final moment, even if he converts Doc Ock to the good side in the process. As a story arc though, it's an interesting concept that doesn't seem horrible to explore for a bit.

See, a hero ending up that way? That would be the kind of drama that would perhaps get me reading. But knowing that there would be no consequence to it? Meeeeeh.

[Yora]

I still remember how Captain America was killed a couple of years ago. I assume he got better by now?

It's no suprise these franchises are in decline. The big mystery is why they are still around?
Wasn't Superdickery always working by the concept that something dramatic would happen, but in the end everything turns out to be back to normal? So people must have known from the very beginning how things work the first time some major superhero died or lost his powers, or anything like that.

[MLai]

On the other hand, this sort of story specifically works best if it's not permanent. Spidey dying in Doc Ocks body with no one knowing what happened is a horrible way for him to go as a final moment,
How about the way Hercules officially died? And Hercules is the Superman of the ancient world.
Horrible is not an excuse.

Sidenote: When I was growing up, my big Western hero was (the original) Hercules, not Superman.
I also read Norse mythology, but what stuck with me from those were the stark extreme imagery (for a little kid). No character was as bonafide awesome as Herc.

[Eldan]

I guess so... I've only read the odd Batman comic that was recommended to me. Single closed stories, some of which were quite decent. I've tried two Superman comics (Red son (not bad, but a bit shallow for the premise) and Kingdom Come (Not very interesting and really confusing)), so I can't really comment on Superhero comics at all.
I can just consider the ideas as I read them written up by other people. The idea of a big continuity seems intriguing. The idea of using the same character in it for, what, eighty years now and never much changing them in a meaningful way, however, seems silly. Wasted potential.

[Soras Teva Gee]

Because at this point I don't think Spiderman has anywhere to go from this point. His creed of great powers bringing great responsibility has been pretty well put to rest because of this. He revealed his identity during Civil War, a stupid, idiotic move. Aunt May gets shot because of it. Making a deal with the devil to reset all of that is a horrible result, and Peter should die alone and unloved in the body of one of his greatest enemies because of it.

I think there's a subtle difference between CW unmasking, OMD, and this current stunt.

I think it was rapidly forgotten but in the lead up to that for something like a year (I only lightly sampled things at the time) Peter had been actually advancing as a character, what with joining the Avengers and becoming Tony Stark's quasi-apprentice. Because someone actually remembered that holy crap he's also supposed to be a damn genius too and thus has been wasting his talents for a long time. I liked a lot of the stuff going on at the time with the the whole Iron Spider thing, almost enough to get me reading the book. Also that was a great outfit and a reasonably handle upgrade for Spidey (unlike The Other) going with hey Peter Parker... growing up.

And the reveal decision itself was reasonably discussed before it happened by Peter and his family beforehand. In Amazing I believe, I remember it but not exactly. Actually setting up something pretty meaningful and showing everything that CW could have been, with the entire hero community growing the **** up. Oops can't have that gotta have idiotic villain balls shoved up the rectums of Stark/Pym/Richards/etc and have infantile "real world" subtext and then quietly eliminate the consequences of the events a little while later.

Also the whole targeting the loved ones thing, yeah that's a pretty knee-jerk reaction story I think can do with being put out to pasture. There are completely public heroes around, heck Marvel started out with four. The whole secret identity thing verges on being The Artifact for comics at the best of times. And those loved ones seem to end up in danger pretty often anyways. Tell it occaisonally (like happens anyways) and put out that its an accepted part of the life like being the SO of y'know a cop, but as it tends not to work out most villains stop trying.

[Traab]

LaZodiac, that is also a possible turn around. I tend to believe it was more of a possession thing. They really did switch bodies, but when pete "died" his soul was pulled into his actual living body, since it was right there afterall. And now his soul is slowly reestablishing itself. And before it can crush ock and reduce him to at most a schizophrenic voice in his head, ock will find a way to transfer himself to another body. Im guessing cybernetic, just so he can have his bonus arms again. :p

[VanBuren]

How about the way Hercules officially died? And Hercules is the Superman of the ancient world.
Horrible is not an excuse.

Sidenote: When I was growing up, my big Western hero was (the original) Hercules, not Superman.
I also read Norse mythology, but what stuck with me from those were the stark extreme imagery (for a little kid). No character was as bonafide awesome as Herc.

Well, sort of. It's not really fair to compare Greek sensibilities, because you're dealing with a whole new set of values. For one thing, while Superman would have been considered a hero, it would have been for entirely different reasons than most of us would consider. Heroism had very little to do with morality.

There was also a big focus on fate, and especially in the modern West, you'd probably not find that view as widely held. Ultimately the point being that just because the Greeks did it one way doesn't make it the right way to do it. What worked for their mythology and their characters fit a certain worldview and set of expectations that simply is not built in to the expectations of your mainstream comic book mythos.

Or to put it another way, the death of Heracles has about as much of a place in Superman as a happy ending would have in Oedipus Rex: The form just doesn't work like that. Now that's not to say that you can't have comic books and graphic novels that have endings like that, just like you can have plays that end well. But those plays aren't tragedies, just like Heracles isn't Superman.

(If we really want to be pedantic, and since this is the internet we do, Hercules didn't really have a story about his death. The Greek version Heracles did. Beyond just the name, the Roman version took on a number of somewhat contradictory characteristics and a literary tradition that almost makes him a different character that was inspired by Heracles rather than just a simple change of name.)

Also Heracles ascends to Olympus upon his death thanks to Zeus, so he makes out pretty well anyway, despite the whole agonizing Hydra poison death.

[MLai]

(If we really want to be pedantic, and since this is the internet we do, Hercules didn't really have a story about his death. The Greek version Heracles did. Beyond just the name, the Roman version took on a number of somewhat contradictory characteristics and a literary tradition that almost makes him a different character that was inspired by Heracles rather than just a simple change of name.)
Romans modified his story beyond the name? When/ where/ how? I've never heard of this b4.


Also Heracles ascends to Olympus upon his death thanks to Zeus, so he makes out pretty well anyway, despite the whole agonizing Hydra poison death.
There is a Christian Heaven/ Afterlife in Marvel.

[Yora]

Well, sort of. It's not really fair to compare Greek sensibilities, because you're dealing with a whole new set of values. For one thing, while Superman would have been considered a hero, it would have been for entirely different reasons than most of us would consider. Heroism had very little to do with morality.
Different sets of values are what I attribute to the success of these comics in America, while in Europe they never seemed to be a big deal.
Batman maybe, and the current movies have some decent summer popcorn cinema. But the whole idealism part of the comic always seemed rather... "incomprehensible" around here.

[Man on Fire]

I, for one, enjoy the change.
Aside from few rare cases when he was written in more mature way, most of time Peter was a self-centered egoistical hypocrite, who didn't cared about anybody else but himself and would let people suffer and die, as long as he could make an excuse why it isn't his fault. He could torture somebody and then potray himself as a hero to the entire world (http://toobusythinkingboutcomics.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/why-i-loathe-and-despise-spider-man.html). He could stop the only way to save human lives just because it would compromise his morality and then he would brag how it makes him a better person than the guy actually trying to save innocent people. Whenever he had his friends in need, he only cared how it affect him and if he tried to help them it was just to feel proud. He was always preaching about responsibility and rarerly accepted his own, always trying to run away or put the blame somewhere else. Yes, Otto is a horrible person, but at least nobody's trying to tell us he's not!


The root of this latest outrage is, IMHO, the same as the reason I don't read a lot of comic-books lately. The biggest problem all the major publishers have is that the character still the exact same (pretty much) as they where 40, 50, even 60+ years ago.


try something from smaller publishers, Boom! Studios, Image, Dynamite?

[Traab]

Want to know my view on that sandman thing? Considering he didnt seem to be in any pain, I look on it as the same as when batman or whoever drops someone from high up then stops them from going splat to make them talk. In other words, its a different visual on the exact same act committed from the very start of comics of every type. You threaten the bad guy till he talks. Whether its the high rise drop, the claws in front of your face, assorted random verbal threats, or dropping acid on a sand golem that wont hurt him but if it dissolves all his sand he dies. He even showed it in a later panel, just like the bluff of letting the thug fall 10 stories to the ground, spiderman was about a second away from stopping the acid so it wouldnt kill sandman. It was a scare tactic, nothing more.

[Reverent-One]

See, a hero ending up that way? That would be the kind of drama that would perhaps get me reading. But knowing that there would be no consequence to it? Meeeeeh.

An interesting story arc is an interesting story arc, whether or not it's permanent. Especially when there's enough hints from the get go that it's a temporary state of affairs, I see no reason to hold that it's a temporary change against it.

[Juhn]

I honestly don't understand everyone's problem with this storyarc. Yes, "Peter Parker gets replaced by Doc Ock" would be terrible if it were a permanent change, but it's been blindingly obvious since the start that this is only going to be temporary and Peter will end up back in the driver's seat eventually.

It's a temporary vacation from Peter Parker to see what one of the villains would do if they were Spider-Man, and having read every issue so far it's been quite a fun ride. We'll get Peter back when it's over, so I'm enjoying this while it lasts.

And we're actually learning a few interesting things about Otto's past and motivations while he's in the driver's seat, as Peter's free to go digging through his memories.

[Prime32]

I think there's a subtle difference between CW unmasking, OMD, and this current stunt.

I think it was rapidly forgotten but in the lead up to that for something like a year (I only lightly sampled things at the time) Peter had been actually advancing as a character, what with joining the Avengers and becoming Tony Stark's quasi-apprentice. Because someone actually remembered that holy crap he's also supposed to be a damn genius too and thus has been wasting his talents for a long time. I liked a lot of the stuff going on at the time with the the whole Iron Spider thing, almost enough to get me reading the book. Also that was a great outfit and a reasonably handle upgrade for Spidey (unlike The Other) going with hey Peter Parker... growing up.

And the reveal decision itself was reasonably discussed before it happened by Peter and his family beforehand. In Amazing I believe, I remember it but not exactly. Actually setting up something pretty meaningful and showing everything that CW could have been, with the entire hero community growing the **** up. Oops can't have that gotta have idiotic villain balls shoved up the rectums of Stark/Pym/Richards/etc and have infantile "real world" subtext and then quietly eliminate the consequences of the events a little while later.I agree with this. After all the stuff he's put up with, it's satisfying to see Pete marry his girlfriend, get a good job where he can put his talents to use, and earn respect from the world at large.

But it can never last, because his comics aren't allowed to have a conclusion. Happy endings are reserved for adaptations. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7EsS0WIFoU)

[VanBuren]

Romans modified his story beyond the name? When/ where/ how? I've never heard of this b4.

The Oxford Classical Dictionary goes lists Hercules and Heracles separately, and Wikipedia has a similar distinction; the talk pages of both cover most of the ground.

If nothing else, there exists a precedent to treat the two as different.


There is a Christian Heaven/ Afterlife in Marvel.

Yeah, but Heracles didn't go to Hades. He ascended to Olympus, his immortal side fully ascending to godhood. That's arguably a bit better.

[Deepbluediver]

So... like... have Doctor Octopus take control of Spider-man's body and try and live up to his heroic legacy? That sounds pretty new to me.

Super villians have been building brain-stealing devices since day 1, and while I don't have 60 years of spiderman comics stored up in my head, I'm pretty sure that Spiderman and Doc Oc have been enemies nearly as long.

Maybe it's new-ish for Marvel, but all I can think of is that time Lex Luthor got all of Superman's super-senses and instantly realized how terrible he'd been all his life. It seems like yet another rehash of the "Evil cannot comprehend good...except oh wait now it can" storyline.

I'm 98% certain this is going to play out exactly as follows: the good Doctor does alright for a little while, but eventually gets frustrated that things aren't improving fast enough, and goes vengeance-addled Blood Knigt on us, then Spidey shows up again, possibly with some of Marvel's other psycic/magic heroes, we have a "showdown/confrentation/intervention that takes place in spideys' mind. Peter kicks Doc Oc out and we go back to square 1.


He means a permanent paradigm change. Here, the Impending Retcon/Reversal is written on the wall in gigantic neon glowing letters, since the status quo must eventually be restored.

"Permenant paradigm change", I like the sound of that.

I don't think that they would need to NEVER write another main-stream hero comic, I just think they need to take a break for a little long while. Write some new stories and give the old ones a chance to rest.

Part of my consternation is that I don't think it would be all that hard to clear the air a little, if they just sucked up and did it.


It's worth pointing out that OMD itself was the result of someone in charge having an axe to grind against the franchise. Just because the axe is different doesn't mean it suddenly becomes a good formula.

And that was part of my original point- these stories and characters have been around for so long and been put through the wringer so many times they've lost any real substance, and any NEW writer first has to compensate for the huge anchor of past-history that is dragging down the comic in the first place.

Maybe it's just my perception, but I feel like every single arc and story keeps going through the same motions: New story starts our bright and bold. Then the writer feels the need to get serious and everyone starts to get all dramatic and scary. Then they feel the need to "prove their writing chops" and things get dramatic and scary to grimdark levels (as if depressing story somehow = skill).
Then sales drop because the comic isn't fun anymore, and the editors demand some sort of shock or gimmick or crossover to entice more people to buy. Repeat 3-6 times until things everything is so FUBAR and so many people are dead we need to wipe everything and hit the universal reset button.

Start again with a bright and bold new storyline....

[Traab]

Want to know something I have always wished the comic authors would do? Go generational. Take the DCU. We have the expanded justice league, which basically unites most of the worlds heroes, or at least gives them all links like a superhero facebook. What if we actually allowed heroes to grow older and introduced new heroes as they pop up? Meaning, people like batman, wally west, hal jordan, whoever, get older, and start to think about retirement. They may find someone to train, or even get assigned one through the JL network. This lets writers bring in new characters, gives them a chance at a test run to see if readers like them, while still keeping the old hands around for face recognition, as well as advice, backup, training, etc.

The DCU has an easier time because they have a much wider network to work with. While marvel has a lot of official teams, they generally dont have one overarching group to sort of be a go between for them. Doesnt mean it wouldnt work for marvel just as well, it just means it would be harder for say, spiderman, to pick up an apprentice to train in protecting new york city than it would be for someone like wally west since spiderman may have connections, but he isnt connected to ALL the groups around the world. And by harder i mean less total options to choose from for originalities sake.

What do you guys think? This way instead of just jamming yet another hero into the massively overpopulated by heroes city of new york, have a new apprentice get picked up by a hero looking to bow out from the 24/7 on call status and retire.

[SaintRidley]

Want to know something I have always wished the comic authors would do? Go generational. Take the DCU. We have the expanded justice league, which basically unites most of the worlds heroes, or at least gives them all links like a superhero facebook. What if we actually allowed heroes to grow older and introduced new heroes as they pop up? Meaning, people like batman, wally west, hal jordan, whoever, get older, and start to think about retirement. They may find someone to train, or even get assigned one through the JL network. This lets writers bring in new characters, gives them a chance at a test run to see if readers like them, while still keeping the old hands around for face recognition, as well as advice, backup, training, etc.

The DCU has an easier time because they have a much wider network to work with. While marvel has a lot of official teams, they generally dont have one overarching group to sort of be a go between for them. Doesnt mean it wouldnt work for marvel just as well, it just means it would be harder for say, spiderman, to pick up an apprentice to train in protecting new york city than it would be for someone like wally west since spiderman may have connections, but he isnt connected to ALL the groups around the world. And by harder i mean less total options to choose from for originalities sake.

What do you guys think? This way instead of just jamming yet another hero into the massively overpopulated by heroes city of new york, have a new apprentice get picked up by a hero looking to bow out from the 24/7 on call status and retire.

I think the problem with doing that, on the Marvel end, is the difference between how Marvel heroes tend to become heroes vs. how DC heroes do.

Many DC heroes are either born with their power and more or less eternal (Superman, Wonder Woman), have no actual power but lots of money and/or skills (Green Arrow, Batman), or their power comes in the form of some sort of gift (Green Lantern, The Flash). The first class sticks around, the second class can train newbies, and the third class gets newbies via the powers that be choosing newbies.

Marvel heroes, however, tend to become heroes due to accident. The Fantastic Four are wealthy, but their powers come from cosmic rays. Unless they throw some new people into space to get hit by those rays (would it work? It might not be a repeatable thing) then they aren't replacing themselves. Iron Man can work off the Batman model, and Thor might hand down the role of protector of Earth to his child when he is good and ready (but that could be centuries from now). Spider-Man gets a replacement in the Ultimate universe, but it's more or less another accident and not deliberate - Peter doesn't seem the type to engineer another radioactive spider event just to acquire an apprentice. Can't really get another Hulk (Is Hulk eternal?) as we see by all the other gamma accidents. There's kind of a tendency toward the training deal with the various mutant groups, but you're going to see a lot less Wolverine and X-23 and more Wolverine and Jubilee type pairings happening there due to the sheer variety of powers.

Basically, I think it's a bit harder to pull off in Marvel. In part because of how the heroes get to be heroes, and also because Marvel tends to want angsty heroes who don't always want to be heroes (and who therefore wouldn't want to rope someone else into doing it too).

[Maxios]

I think the Hulk being immortal varies from writer to writer. I've read comics before that were set a couple hundred years in the future, and the Hulk was still running around. But I've also read comics set in the future, and the Hulk was dead.

[Forum Explorer]

Yeah, but Heracles didn't go to Hades. He ascended to Olympus, his immortal side fully ascending to godhood. That's arguably a bit better.

Yeah but Hades is kinda crappy anyways.


Anyways this does actually sound interesting (not enough to get me to actually read it.) and I wish that it was a permanent change.

[VanBuren]

Yeah but Hades is kinda crappy anyways.

Yeah, I thought about that actually. Although Heracles probably qualified for an all-expenses paid trip to Elysium, right?

[Lord Raziere]

Now, there's plenty in the behavior of comic book companies to support a cynical view of humans as individuals or as organized into corporations (without getting into specific examples because I think that might break board rules, but it goes way back) but it's odd that you would pick a creative decision like this as an example of problems with corporations.

uh no. this is not really that creative. this is just "hey lets put Doc Oct in Spiderman's body!" for completely random reasons that won't have any effect on the story because Spiderman will just go back to normal anyways and everything will be reset.

I'm starting to think that the writers these days would be better off writing animated cartoons on superheroes than superhero comics, because a lot of these plots? sound like a cartoon plot. and these kinds of decisions are exactly the problems with corporations in any artistic medium: churning out any trashy thing as long as they get money doing it, instead of doing quality work.

[Traab]

I think the problem with doing that, on the Marvel end, is the difference between how Marvel heroes tend to become heroes vs. how DC heroes do.

Many DC heroes are either born with their power and more or less eternal (Superman, Wonder Woman), have no actual power but lots of money and/or skills (Green Arrow, Batman), or their power comes in the form of some sort of gift (Green Lantern, The Flash). The first class sticks around, the second class can train newbies, and the third class gets newbies via the powers that be choosing newbies.

Marvel heroes, however, tend to become heroes due to accident. The Fantastic Four are wealthy, but their powers come from cosmic rays. Unless they throw some new people into space to get hit by those rays (would it work? It might not be a repeatable thing) then they aren't replacing themselves. Iron Man can work off the Batman model, and Thor might hand down the role of protector of Earth to his child when he is good and ready (but that could be centuries from now). Spider-Man gets a replacement in the Ultimate universe, but it's more or less another accident and not deliberate - Peter doesn't seem the type to engineer another radioactive spider event just to acquire an apprentice. Can't really get another Hulk (Is Hulk eternal?) as we see by all the other gamma accidents. There's kind of a tendency toward the training deal with the various mutant groups, but you're going to see a lot less Wolverine and X-23 and more Wolverine and Jubilee type pairings happening there due to the sheer variety of powers.

Basically, I think it's a bit harder to pull off in Marvel. In part because of how the heroes get to be heroes, and also because Marvel tends to want angsty heroes who don't always want to be heroes (and who therefore wouldn't want to rope someone else into doing it too).

That is true to an extent, but, in the case of spiderman as an example, I didnt mean he should find himself a spiderboy to train. A new teenager gets powers and spiderman takes him under his wing and shows him the ropes. That sort of thing. Its not about the flash finding another flash to train, its about him finding someone worthy of handing off his turf too so they can protect it now. That is the basic idea. So it doesnt matter if the character is chosen by higher powers, falls into a vat of toxic waste, or is born a mutant. They dont have to be a mini richards to take over the fantastic four territory. Its about passing on the torch, not about finding a younger version of yourself.

There are some cases where that can happen. A new batman for example. Then the real story is how this ones personality, and his various strengths and weaknesses effect how gotham is protected. But in most cases, if Amazorb, the energy ball shooting maverick gets chosen to take over spideys patch, it wont be because he uses web shooters.

Another note is this also allows for new supervillains as the new guy stumbles across mortal enemies of his own, or, along similar lines to the green goblin franchise, new bad guys take up the costume or name and go in a different direction. It would give us a constantly evolving world. Weak heroes and bad guys can be phased out and new ones brought in, with a world that isnt just getting more and more bloated as hundreds of heroes and bad guys all converge in a single city yet somehow rarely ever meet.

[Tiki Snakes]

True continuity and a non-sliding timescale is how it really should be done, but never will be. (Because they are too timid to actually change).

It would work just as well for either company, as frankly 90% of all characters get old and retired over a roughly normal human lifespan (or less) anyway, it's just that they only get to do it in the meta sense of getting boring and being sidelined. If they were allowed to actually progress meaningfully then the narrative would have plenty of room to introduce new generations of heroes as well as allowing the older heroes to mature, have meaningful permanent story arcs and generally tell significantly more satisfying stories with the world permanently changing as they progress.

With the X-men only ever having been founded a couple of years ago, there can never really be any meaningful progression of the struggle between mutants and humans, Xaviers dreams and Magneto's fears remain a distant far-away concern and nothing ever really happens.

[Anteros]

Yet for all these "flaws" these companies have held onto a successful model, and kept it successful for the last 70+ years. It's hard to say that they're doing something wrong when they've managed to be obscenely profitable for the better part of a century.

[Man on Fire]

Yet for all these "flaws" these companies have held onto a successful model, and kept it successful for the last 70+ years. It's hard to say that they're doing something wrong when they've managed to be obscenely profitable for the better part of a century.

Profitable doesn't mean good. And quite frankly, we live in decade of popculture, where media telsl people what they want and programm them to but the product, even if it's horrible.

[Jerthanis]

Pretty much the entire internet.

On the subject:
Check out this man's take on the subject. (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/6686-Stuperior)

Weirdest thing about this guy is that... the stories he cites as being worse weren't actually that bad (IMHO), except for maybe Clone Saga, which honestly I personally don't hate as much as anyone else does.

It's like... he cites Black Suit as being equal in potential for nerd rage inducement if it were to take place in an age of instantaneous communication, but... Black Suit was kind of a runaway success of extreme popularity and even after losing the alien suit, the black suit stayed his signature look for another (doublechecks) 4 or 5 years. It's possible the look was reviled, I would have to go back and check the letters column or see if there are contemporary interviews about fans demanding the return of the red and blues, but my impression is that Black Suit was a popular look.

Personally... this idea, of Doc Oc being in Spider-Man's brain and Peter being ("no seriously, we swear") killed off for real is... not atrociously bad. I'm not writing angry letters to Marvel, and not just because everyone and their mom knows it will ultimately be reversed. The idea inspires in me questions of what it means to be an individual, how we're shaped by our experiences, what decides our personalities. I'm reminded of an episode where Spider-Man lost his memories and Doc Oc tried to convince him that he was a criminal.

It also evokes the idea of what it takes to not just redeem a person, but what does it take to change him? Super Hero comics have as one of the primary pillars of the storytelling form the question of identity. Asking WHO this person really is has potential to be fascinating.

However, the "No seriously, this is permanent, we swear, oh just kidding, it won't last for more than a year" is just insulting at this point. We know that status quo exists and will be returned to. The idea that we might want a Darker and Edgier Spider-Man is crazy because Spider-Man is generally pretty freaking dark!

My biggest issue with this is that it's a story that can never be resolved with finality. We never have to worry if Reed Richards and Dr. Doom are still inhabiting the other's body because both were alive to be reversed. If the two personalities are at war inside Spider-Oc's mind, and we're told Peter's personality wins out, and he returns to being Peter, it will always be a question whether it REALLY is Peter or if Doc Oc is just hibernating. It's a stain on his soul that will never come off.

A similar scenario is the question of whether Peter was the clone or Ben Reily was the clone, and that question was resolved when Ben died and turned to dust. I understand this was an issue that the Clone Saga had spent so long banging on about that it needed some resolution, but personally I didn't think it mattered. Peter was Peter, Ben was Ben. In this case, the question is much more important, because Doc Oc is culpable for serious crimes, and the issue of whether he must still be punished or is still a danger will continue to matter now forever. You would practically have to involve "It never happened" time travel or "You were only ever hypnotized to think you were Doc Oc, a true mind-swap never happened" to get a definitive picture that it's been undone for sure.

Finally, my issue with it is that it's too sudden and too dramatic of a character shift and for totally unrelatable reasons. No matter how Doc Oc behaves, it can be justified as being in character. He could be a saint and it'd be because he's overzealous in being Peter better than Peter ever was and proving he's better and be consistent. He could struggle greatly to do the right thing and fight temptations to be evil again and be consistent because of the struggle to overcome his nature because of his new perspective. Or he could be a total SOB and barely a hero at all and it'd be consistent because he's been so evil for so long.

There's no level of relatability, no standard for how this character SHOULD act, because it's so alien to everything we've ever been able to experience as real people, and it's because of the device of being the result of one and a half total mind swaps.

Of course, I think JMS' run (with the sole exception of One More Day) was perhaps the best run of Spider-Man content since Spider-Man #50, so I might be a Spider-Man heretic.

[Prime32]

I'm starting to think that the writers these days would be better off writing animated cartoons on superheroes than superhero comics, because a lot of these plots? sound like a cartoon plot. and these kinds of decisions are exactly the problems with corporations in any artistic medium: churning out any trashy thing as long as they get money doing it, instead of doing quality work.Wait, cartoons are supposed to have bad plots? What? :smallconfused: Most animated adaptations of comics are a lot more coherent than the originals.

[VanBuren]

Another reason I don't buy the permanence is that Marvel already has a playground to play around in where they're very open to shattering the status quo: Ultimate Marvel.

And even if they're going to shake up the status so it isn't quo in the mainline continuity, I don't believe for a second it's going to be by killing off the same character.

[Metahuman1]

Wait, cartoons are supposed to have bad plots? What? :smallconfused: Most animated adaptations of comics are a lot more coherent than the originals.

Case in point: In the comics, Jason Todd came back because Superboy punched reality in the face.

In the animated movie, he came back because Ra's Al Ghoul blew it on one of his big plans and ended up with a nasty guilt trip, so he tired to use his immortality trick to bring Jason Back in order to easy his own mind. An attempt that was only mostly successful.

[LaZodiac]

I think what he MIGHT mean is that, since cartoons are much more centralized and not full of editorial mandate and "to many cooks" causing errors, writers (even bad ones) might get a chance to come into their own and actually write GOOD (or atleast decent) plots if they went into cartoons.

Hell, look at the Spiderman animated series. They did the Clone Saga, parodied it with a few lines, and ended up making a better clone saga then the cartoons by virtue of not being full of idiot editors.

[Man on Fire]

There is as much executive meddling in cartoons as in the comics. Case in point, that same Spider-Man cartoon had a rule that said Spider-man cannot ever be shown punching somebody. Avenger's: Earth's Mightiest heroes' season 2 got a lot of bad things like dropping plotline that was important through entire season in favor of Galactus out of nowhere finale, and was forced to be more episodic, which hurted the quality of the show, whose strong charm was that there was a continuous plot or three involved and connecting the episodes - once in second season secret invasion ended, that was dropped becaue executive Jeph Loeb belives kids are too stupid to understand that. Similiarlly, Paul Dini complained that he wasn't allowed to write an episode with any sort of serious plot or character development for Ultimate Spider-Man, because the same executive told him kids are too stupid to get it.

[LaZodiac]

One would argue that it's the writers faults for not saying "No, they are smart enough, let me show you" and then go writing. I don't know 100%, but my understanding is that writers for shows have a bit more control then comic book writers. But I don't know for sure.

[Man on Fire]

One would argue that it's the writers faults for not saying "No, they are smart enough, let me show you" and then go writing.

I'm pretty sure they said that and then the executive told them "i'm the boss here, you will do what I say". Because that's how the system works, when your boss tells you to do something you don't do something completely opposite to prove a point, not if you want to keep the job.