Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#601554 - 12/09/12 05:06 PM Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ...
shjonescrk Offline
Member

Registered: 10/31/03
Posts: 1351
Loc: Airdrie, Scotland
So there's only one issue to go and Amazing Spider-Man will be no more. It will be replaced by the Superior Spider-Man - a hideous and ridiculous title. I've read 698 and 699 - art in 698 was bland rubbish but was much better in 699. The story - well, standard superhero fair - I won't spoiler it for you but if you read enough comics in your time, you'll have seen it before. There was a bit of a kerfuffle between John Byrne & Dan Slott over one scene in 699. the thread is no longer available which is standard Byrne and the scene in question - bad taste is all.

So fare thee well, Amazing Spider-Man.

The Lizard, Electro, Doctor Octopus, Green Goblin, Ringmaster & the Circus of Crime, the Scorpion, the Master Planner, the Big Man & the Enforcers, Mysterio, the Sinister Six, Bretty Brant, Gwen Stacy, J Jonah Jameson, Aunt May. Funny how all my favourite memories of Amazing Spider-Man are when Steve Ditko was there. If only, Stan Lee had been able to keep Steve happy, it would have been so much better.

So Amazing Spider-Man, my first & favourite comic.

Steve

PS I give it six months before Amazing Spider-Man is relaunched.

Top
#601556 - 12/09/12 09:32 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: shjonescrk]
Allen Montgomery Online   content
Member

Registered: 05/08/00
Posts: 7089
What's the deal with "Superior" Spider-Man? He's got claws or something? I saw the one picture, but I don't understand what it is they're trying to do.

Julie Delpy was on Craig Ferguson's show a couple of nights ago. She said that her four-year-old son is starting to ask questions about why Batman is sometimes in black and sometimes in gray. If comics publishers cared at all about keeping their properties relevant to new demographics, they would do everything they could to eliminate this kind of confusion.
_________________________
"The trouble with being a ghost writer or artist is that you must remain anonymous without credit.
If one wants the credit, one has to cease being a ghost and become a leader or innovator."
Bob Kane

Top
#601566 - 12/10/12 10:40 AM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: shjonescrk]
MBunge Offline
Member

Registered: 07/19/01
Posts: 3386
Loc: Waterloo, Iowa, United States
Originally Posted By: shjonescrk
So there's only one issue to go and Amazing Spider-Man will be no more.


Heaven knows there's plenty of things to criticize DC for, but at least it seems like the folks running it are interested in comics as an ongoing enterprise. Marvel seems to operate on the principle that the whole business is doomed, so just try and squeeze as much out of the ever-dwindling audience as possible.

Mike

Top
#601567 - 12/10/12 01:01 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
Charles Reece Offline
Member

Registered: 08/18/99
Posts: 10013
Loc: us of fuckin' a
Maybe they're returning Spidey to his Objectivist roots.
_________________________
The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written.

Top
#601568 - 12/10/12 02:52 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
shjonescrk Offline
Member

Registered: 10/31/03
Posts: 1351
Loc: Airdrie, Scotland
Originally Posted By: MBunge
Originally Posted By: shjonescrk
So there's only one issue to go and Amazing Spider-Man will be no more.


Heaven knows there's plenty of things to criticize DC for, but at least it seems like the folks running it are interested in comics as an ongoing enterprise. Marvel seems to operate on the principle that the whole business is doomed, so just try and squeeze as much out of the ever-dwindling audience as possible.

Mike


Personally, I don't see much difference between Marvel and DC. It is clear that they are both only catering for one small section of the market.

Anyway, aside from reading your old Marvel comics, the best place to get that classic Marvel vibe is watch the Marvel movies. The Avengers movie showed how to tell a superhero story.

Top
#601569 - 12/11/12 11:31 AM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: shjonescrk]
MBunge Offline
Member

Registered: 07/19/01
Posts: 3386
Loc: Waterloo, Iowa, United States
Originally Posted By: shjonescrk


Personally, I don't see much difference between Marvel and DC. It is clear that they are both only catering for one small section of the market.


I do think you can draw a distinction between DC and Marvel on three things.

1. Fewer company wide "event" crossovers. DC hasn't had one since Blackest Night in 2010.

2. Fewer rebooting of titles with new #1.

3. Publishing non-super-hero stuff like G.I. COMBAT, ALL STAR WESTERN, SWORD OF SORCERY, etc.

Mike

Top
#601570 - 12/11/12 01:20 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
shjonescrk Offline
Member

Registered: 10/31/03
Posts: 1351
Loc: Airdrie, Scotland
I'll give you point 3 but surely not for point 2 - the new 52 rebuts that point totally. Point 1 is a matter of degree.

Top
#601571 - 12/11/12 05:19 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: shjonescrk]
MBunge Offline
Member

Registered: 07/19/01
Posts: 3386
Loc: Waterloo, Iowa, United States
Originally Posted By: shjonescrk
I'll give you point 3 but surely not for point 2 - the new 52 rebuts that point totally. Point 1 is a matter of degree.


How many times has DC gone back to #1 with it's books? Once after CRISIS, once for the new 52, and...? Marvel has done it so often that it's practically a joke.

Mike

Top
#601573 - 12/12/12 12:55 AM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
Peter Urkowitz Offline
Member

Registered: 08/28/00
Posts: 3231
Loc: Salem, MA, USA
Mike, if you are talking about restarting the numbering across the whole line as a different thing than restarting individual titles, then yes, DC has only done that twice. But DC has certainly restarted individual titles many other times. Justice League (or JLA) has restarted several times. Also Green Lantern, Hawkman/Hawkgirl, Green Arrow, Flash, etc.

I am having a hard time thinking of ANY time when Marvel has restarted ALL of their titles at once. Even this new MARVEL NOW thing leaves a few of the older numberings intact, if only because they restarted within the last few years. But certainly I do agree that each individual Marvel title has been restarted so many times, and in such nonsensical ways, that it has become a running joke.

But I wouldn't say, just because DC does it somewhat less often, that this constitutes a concrete difference between them and Marvel. Jonesy's point about them both aiming for the same market is still quite valid, I think. They both make fitful attempts at reaching wider audiences, but nothing really convincing or confident.

Top
#601578 - 12/12/12 11:01 AM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: Peter Urkowitz]
MBunge Offline
Member

Registered: 07/19/01
Posts: 3386
Loc: Waterloo, Iowa, United States
Originally Posted By: Peter Urkowitz
Mike, if you are talking about restarting the numbering across the whole line as a different thing than restarting individual titles, then yes, DC has only done that twice. But DC has certainly restarted individual titles many other times. Justice League (or JLA) has restarted several times. Also Green Lantern, Hawkman/Hawkgirl, Green Arrow, Flash, etc.


There's a difference between genuinely cancelling a book and then bringing it back at some point in the future with a new #1. I also think it's a different thing if you fundamentally change a book and decide to relaunch it with a new #1, like bringing in Kyle Rayner as GL or bringing back Barry Allen or replacing Cap with Bucky.

However, there have been 6 new #1s for Captain America since 1996. There have been 2 new #1s for Daredevil since 1998. There have been 4 new Iron Man #1s since 1996. There have been 2 new Hulk #1s since 2000. As of next year, there will have been 4 new Avengers #1s since 1996. There have been 3 new Fantastic Four #1s since 1996. Heck, we've even seen two Moon Knight #1s since 2006!

I think DC only has one book that's guilty of constant new #1s, and with Justice League that's usually been accompanied by some kind of creative change to justify it.

I'm not saying DC is innocent of it, merely that they haven't been as guilty of exploiting this sales-boosting tactic as Marvel.

Mike


Edited by MBunge (12/12/12 11:04 AM)

Top
#601582 - 12/13/12 04:42 AM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
Gerald Offline
Member

Registered: 11/29/09
Posts: 1108
So what is the controversial panel about that Byrne and Slott got into it?

Anways, Allen
Click to reveal..
Doc Ock switches brains with Spider-man, because Otto is dying. So Otto's body dies with Peters's brain/mind in it.


I don't think it's a big deal that companies have different interpretations of the same character. As a kid I wished that the Batman comic looked more like the 89 film but I understood there were just differences between the mediums. Same thing with TMNT. The Archie comics were the cartoon spin-offs and the all-red masked turtles that appeared in black and white were the "real" versions, even though I was exposed to the cartoon first.
_________________________
"My head's lopsided *****!"-Red Gumby

Top
#601584 - 12/13/12 10:24 AM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: Gerald]
MBunge Offline
Member

Registered: 07/19/01
Posts: 3386
Loc: Waterloo, Iowa, United States
Originally Posted By: Gerald
So what is the controversial panel about that Byrne and Slott got into it?



Well...

Click to reveal..
He had Pete run through Ock's memories and get one of when Ock and Aunt May got married that implied some romantic/sexual encounter between them, with Pete would be experiencing as his own memory of bleeping his aunt. Slott admitted that he specifically designed the sequence so people could make up their own minds how naughty it was, then whined about those who complained that it was too incesty.


Mike

Top
#601585 - 12/13/12 02:41 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
shjonescrk Offline
Member

Registered: 10/31/03
Posts: 1351
Loc: Airdrie, Scotland
Here's bleedingcool article with the "offending" panels

Don't click if you are easily offended, ha ha

Byrne & Slott got it together at the Byrne board but the thread is now deleted.

But you can get the highlights here

Personally, I just thought it was in bad taste and not especially well drawn.

Top
#601587 - 12/13/12 05:23 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
Peter Urkowitz Offline
Member

Registered: 08/28/00
Posts: 3231
Loc: Salem, MA, USA
Originally Posted By: MBunge

There's a difference between genuinely cancelling a book and then bringing it back at some point in the future with a new #1. I also think it's a different thing if you fundamentally change a book and decide to relaunch it with a new #1, like bringing in Kyle Rayner as GL or bringing back Barry Allen or replacing Cap with Bucky.


Okay, I see what you're saying. But while you and I can understand that difference, I don't think it's all that perceptible to the wider reading public. They just see decades-old characters in titles that started very recently, either way.

And to the extent that it is perceptible, I think changing the identity of the main character is WORSE for public marketability. When somebody has just watched a movie or TV show and liked a character, it does not help if they pick up a comic, looking for that character, and find out that, oops, now it's some other guy.

Now, it's one thing if a creator is doing their own version of a character for a limited series or one shot, like Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns. Those standalone stories can vary from the established canon in all kinds of ways, and still do pretty well as evergreen bookstore properties. But when publishers keep messing around with the ongoing series, that's when chasing the monthly comic shop sales becomes counterproductive to longterm success, in my view.

Top
#601589 - 12/13/12 07:55 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
Gerald Offline
Member

Registered: 11/29/09
Posts: 1108
Originally Posted By: MBunge


Well...


Mike


Oh hell no. I was reading a similar thread at another forum and someone joked around that Peter would "see" Aunt May and Otto getting it on.

Fucking eww. And this is the shit that OMD brought us back to?
_________________________
"My head's lopsided *****!"-Red Gumby

Top
#601665 - 12/27/12 04:04 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: Gerald]
shjonescrk Offline
Member

Registered: 10/31/03
Posts: 1351
Loc: Airdrie, Scotland
Well, what do you think of issue 700? As comic book stories go, it was very good and quite exciting. One can debate the ending but I am sure everything will turn out alright in the end.

Even the English Papers are reporting on it - Daily Mail. There's a video of Stan Lee on the page and it calls him the co-creator, which is nice to see.

Top
#601666 - 12/27/12 05:53 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: shjonescrk]
MBunge Offline
Member

Registered: 07/19/01
Posts: 3386
Loc: Waterloo, Iowa, United States
Does the story rise and fall entirely on the whole "Peter Parker dying" thing? 'Cause if it does, then only a stone idiot could enjoy it because only a stone idiot could take that seriously. Maybe I'm wrong but offing Peter Parker should be truly world-shaking news, but it seems that more people outside comic fandom are jazzed about it than within.

Mike

Top
#601667 - 12/27/12 08:07 PM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
Gerald Offline
Member

Registered: 11/29/09
Posts: 1108
Comics are mostly only read by grown men that know that death is never final , so I agree, it detracts from the ride when you know how it's going to eventually turn out.

I'm surprised these things make the news. Maybe only because it's related to the multi-million dollar SONY Spider-man film franchise. I mean Superman being killed off made nation wide news and we all saw that it wasn't permanent. When superhero comics were relatively new I'm sure killing off a character was something very shocking. However, we all know that these corporations own these characters and names copyrighted and trademarked so they're never going to die or have anything permanently shake them up, or ever end.
_________________________
"My head's lopsided *****!"-Red Gumby

Top
#601669 - 12/28/12 12:42 AM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: Gerald]
HouseOfMisterE Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/02
Posts: 268
Loc: Huntsville, AL
The story is crap and the issue costs $7.99 plus tax.

<-----SPOILERS----->

Doc Ock is dying and has swapped bodies with Peter. Peter dies in Ock's body, but the remnants of his personality in his old body influences Ock to become the bestest Spider-man ever (or the Superior Spider-man, but whatever). Ock is already cuddling with Mary Jane, so I guess that he'll be raping her sometime soon. No one knows that Peter has died, so he goes un-mourned.

I don't see how anything short of a visit from Mephisto can fix this.

Top
#601670 - 12/28/12 02:48 AM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: HouseOfMisterE]
HouseOfMisterE Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/02
Posts: 268
Loc: Huntsville, AL
Hey, I wonder if they might bring Parker back as "Ghost Spider, The Wall-Crawlin' Joke-Crackin' Spirit of Vengeance"?

Top
#602264 - 07/23/13 12:03 AM Re: Amazing Spider-Man - this is the end ... [Re: MBunge]
Defiant1 Offline
Member

Registered: 03/07/04
Posts: 256
Loc: Atlanta GA
Originally Posted By: MBunge
Originally Posted By: Peter Urkowitz
Mike, if you are talking about restarting the numbering across the whole line as a different thing than restarting individual titles, then yes, DC has only done that twice. But DC has certainly restarted individual titles many other times. Justice League (or JLA) has restarted several times. Also Green Lantern, Hawkman/Hawkgirl, Green Arrow, Flash, etc.


There's a difference between genuinely cancelling a book and then bringing it back at some point in the future with a new #1. I also think it's a different thing if you fundamentally change a book and decide to relaunch it with a new #1, like bringing in Kyle Rayner as GL or bringing back Barry Allen or replacing Cap with Bucky.

However, there have been 6 new #1s for Captain America since 1996. There have been 2 new #1s for Daredevil since 1998. There have been 4 new Iron Man #1s since 1996. There have been 2 new Hulk #1s since 2000. As of next year, there will have been 4 new Avengers #1s since 1996. There have been 3 new Fantastic Four #1s since 1996. Heck, we've even seen two Moon Knight #1s since 2006!

I think DC only has one book that's guilty of constant new #1s, and with Justice League that's usually been accompanied by some kind of creative change to justify it.

I'm not saying DC is innocent of it, merely that they haven't been as guilty of exploiting this sales-boosting tactic as Marvel.

Mike


I used to converse with a small indy publisher. Once his series got up to issue #12 or so, he rebooted the numbering and released a new #1 for the character. I asked him why. He said Diamond told him he needed to do it because #1's get higher order numbers. It didn't. I think Diamond is a big reason publishers reboot.
_________________________
---
Comics Discussion Forum - http://comics.vforums.co.uk/

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >


Moderator:  Rick Veitch, Steve Conley