• 89 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio

@inkbot:

Strange as it sounds to say it, thank you for the rant and the time you took in making it.

I agree that the vow is incredibly stupid. But there are a few things to take into consideration. First is that Peter is pretty screwed up from Uncle Ben's death. In fact, that's pretty much the whole premise for the character. It's apparent that he's got serious mental problems that arose from the death he blames on himself. Therefore it would not, in my opinion, be out of character for Peter to make that kind of vow. The second thing to consider is that Dan Slott knows how incredibly stupid that vow was. In fact, in ASM 688 (I believe) Mary Jane told Peter pretty much that. Aside from that, good points about the vow vs. creed thing.

It's way too early in Superior Spider-Man to judge the handling of Peter Parker's legacy. As far as we know, MAYBE HE'S NOT EVEN DEAD! Regardless of that, Carlie Cooper's probably about to figure out who Peter really is now. That will obviously open a lot of doors for exploring Peter's legacy.

What makes you think that Slott has no respect for Peter Parker, or that he disrespected the character by killing him off in that way? You apparently haven't read Superior Spider-Man #9, so I won't go into the crazy s*** that's been going through my mind after that. But Peter's death in ASM 700 was great in my opinion. If he had died a "hero's death" it would have been pretty epic, but bland at the same time because the tendency seems to be to make every superhero's death a "hero's death." It's not disrespect to make a superhero's death more moving by making it less normal. Then there's the replacement of Spider-Man with "a contemptible asshole." Yeah. You're exactly right: Ock is a contemptible asshole. But the whole premise of Superior Spider-Man is Otto Octavius trying to fill Peter Parker's shoes. In his opinion, he needs to buy some bigger shoes because he's outgrown Peter's, but it's pretty obvious that the reader is supposed to get the sense that he's wrong. He is undeniably a more efficient Spider-Man, but Slott isn't trying to make him a better hero. I would even go so far as to say that this might even be a story WRITTEN OUT OF RESPECT FOR PETER PARKER! Think about this: if Dan Slott did not have a huge amount of respect for the cultural icon that Parker is, then he could easily cheapen Pete's creed by allowing Octopus to simply realize everything Peter stood for and instantly turn his life around and basically make himself into Peter Parker. Instead, Slott has shown me (at least) just how great a character and hero Peter really is by having him replaced by an asshole. He's given me a whole new level of respect for the previous Spider-Man by showing just how hard it is to live by Peter's creed the right way, not Ock's way. GO FIGURE!

Moving on, then.

Hey, you're right. There is nothing wrong at all with being emotionally attached to any fictional character. HOWEVER. The reaction to Peter's death is not one of sadness and mourning, but one of anger and F**KING DEATH THREATS!!! Now that's just wrong. If a character dies in a movie, what do people do, at the worst? They cry. They don't start yelling at the screen or sending death threats to anyone involved in the movie.

Let me give an example from history of a huge emotional response to the death of a fictional character: the "death" of Sherlock Holmes. His fictional death evoked a huge display of emotion from England's reading public. But the response was more one of sadness than of anger.

Yet with the "death" of Peter Parker, the response is more one of anger than of sadness. Why? I think the reason his "death" has elicited this response is because a lot of people feel like they have some kind of part-ownership over the character. That's at least what I'm getting from most everybody on this thread except for people like @akbogert. It seems they think that they have a right to read new stories involving Peter Parker. I think what the people who enjoy SSM are doing differently is this: they are looking at the bigger picture. And the bigger picture involves a few things I've mentioned above in this and other posts, mainly that this is not Slott saying that Ock is somehow morally superior to Peter Parker. Another thing is that death isn't permanent in comics.

The argument that "Peter's return is inevitable" is absolutely true. But I don't think that's really the reason the people who like SSM enjoy it; it's just something a lot of us say in an attempt to calm angry haters down. I do try to avoid saying that because everyone else says it. Seriously, how can you keep a cultural icon dead for more than 5 years, tops?

I think that everything I've said above rebuts the arguments made in your 7th paragraph because I've pretty much proven that I, for one, don't have that "rinse and repeat" attitude. Nor do I keep coming back for more because I just love it so much that I'm willing to have my heart broken over and over like the abused wife in your example.

How do you respond to death threats? I think Dan Slott has handled it pretty damn well. Seriously, what would you do if you got death threats for your story decisions? Personally, I'd either break down or do what he's done, go troll the haters. If you'll notice, he actually only trolls the stupid ones and he's really damn good at it. In dealing with the ones that actually make intelligent arguments and good points, he responds quite respectfully. I suggest you do some research before making inaccurately broad statements like you made in your 8th paragraph. You could go look at some threads here on the Spider-Man forums for posts from him. You can even talk to @punyparker for proof of what I'm saying; punyparker (an SSM "hater," by the way) wrote Slott a very respectful post on the Marvel.com forums, to which Slott replied politely and logically.

It sounds to me like you hate Dan Slott even more than the idea of Superior Spider-Man. Tell me, would you hate Brian Michael Bendis this much if he had killed the Earth-616 Peter Parker in the same way Slott did? What about Stan Lee?

#52 Posted by PunyParker (8833 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy: Dude,i dont "hate" it......otherwise i wouldnt read it......i hate the handling.....Pete is a douche in the series....(Ock AND ghost Pete(R.I.P.))....Slott is showing that Peter put his fate above a little girl's life,in SSM#9.....700 issues of Amazing,160 issues of Ultimate and LOTS of side-books....you really think that Peter Benjamin Parker aka the AMAZING Spider-Man would put a LITTLE GIRL's life,at risk,to save his own butt??....i,in my humble opinion,dont.

I hate the idea of putting the second(you want it or not,Norman Osborn will always be #1) most deadly Spider-Man's villian in his own body,and giving him the control of the hero's life...that's a GREAT story plot,NOT A WHOLE SERIES!!....Seriously,is there any Spider-Man fan,who wants to read the "Adventures Of Doctor Octapus(btw his body sucks,so we had to use Spidey's....sorry!"....

And dear friends,Mr.Slott....all he's doing is posting on a Superior hate thread in Marvel.com.....i searched the other threads where he would,most likely, post(Superior SpiderMan,and etc) 3 pages in each post,nothing....only answers to haters.....verdict:He's asking for it!!
I made a post stating this to him(that he signed in here,to CV, only to argue about the sales,and argue with haters,nothing more) and i still dont have an answer.....
The post:

"Mr.Slott,just stop arguing with people and just talk about Superior Spider-Man details and post on OTHER FORUMS that you posted recently.....because you post here,as i see it,only to answer to people that bash the book!....

Just discuss other stuff,besides,sales and hate.....please. "

Just tell me if that's cool.....

#53 Posted by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy: Dude,i dont "hate" it......otherwise i wouldnt read it......i hate the handling.....Pete is a douche in the series....(Ock AND ghost Pete(R.I.P.))....Slott is showing that Peter put his fate above a little girl's life,in SSM#9.....700 issues of Amazing,160 issues of Ultimate and LOTS of side-books....you really think that Peter Benjamin Parker aka the AMAZING Spider-Man would put a LITTLE GIRL's life,at risk,to save his own butt??....i,in my humble opinion,dont.

I hate the idea of putting the second(you want it or not,Norman Osborn will always be #1) most deadly Spider-Man's villian in his own body,and giving him the control of the hero's life...that's a GREAT story plot,NOT A WHOLE SERIES!!....Seriously,is there any Spider-Man fan,who wants to read the "Adventures Of Doctor Octapus(btw his body sucks,so we had to use Spidey's....sorry!"....

And dear friends,Mr.Slott....all he's doing is posting on a Superior hate thread in Marvel.com.....i searched the other threads where he would,most likely, post(Superior SpiderMan,and etc) 3 pages in each post,nothing....only answers to haters.....verdict:He's asking for it!!

I made a post stating this to him(that he signed in here,to CV, only to argue about the sales,and argue with haters,nothing more) and i still dont have an answer.....

The post:

"Mr.Slott,just stop arguing with people and just talk about Superior Spider-Man details and post on OTHER FORUMS that you posted recently.....because you post here,as i see it,only to answer to people that bash the book!....

Just discuss other stuff,besides,sales and hate.....please. "

Just tell me if that's cool.....

Alright, sorry. I stand corrected. Do notice, though, that I put quotation marks around "hater"...

Anyway, I keep saying it over and over, do we know that it was Peter Parker who put the girl's life at risk, or was that just the part of Otto's consciousness that thought it knew what Peter would do?

Heh, well I like the idea and I'm fine with it being a whole series.

Well, who else would Slott respond to? The people who like the book have very few beefs about it! There's nothing wrong with him defending himself against people with real complaints about the book while trolling the idiots (y'know, the people who deserve to be trolled...). I think he would be more inclined to discuss things other than sales and hate if people would just calm the f*** down. However, those things other than "sales and hate" are generally reserved for official interviews...

#54 Posted by PunyParker (8833 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy said:


Alright, sorry. I stand corrected. Do notice, though, that I put quotation marks around "hater"...

Anyway, I keep saying it over and over, do we know that it was Peter Parker who put the girl's life at risk, or was that just the part of Otto's consciousness that thought it knew what Peter would do?

Heh, well I like the idea and I'm fine with it being a whole series.

Well, who else would Slott respond to? The people who like the book have very few beefs about it! There's nothing wrong with him defending himself against people with real complaints about the book while trolling the idiots (y'know, the people who deserve to be trolled...). I think he would be more inclined to discuss things other than sales and hate if people would just calm the f*** down. However, those things other than "sales and hate" are generally reserved for official interviews...

No need to be sorry,i already sent my people after you.I'm just kidding.....or am i?!

"Anyway, I keep saying it over and over, do we know that it was Peter Parker who put the girl's life at risk, or was that just the part of Otto's consciousness that thought it knew what Peter would do?"

That's the only reasonable explanation....admit it,if this isnt it,even you would've been bothered

Series....i will be happy when it ends,even if it leaves Pete with a lot of problems,and unresolved issues.....besides,i think this is the case here,Pete was having a great life,good paying job,Spidey stuff going well....He didnt have a girlfriend....everything good! (joke...we all need women)
So i believe this is a well played reboot...Ock will destroy the life Pete has now,and then Peter will be back to handle it.....1.Parker luck,2.Relatable aspect.

#55 Posted by frogdog (3215 posts) - - Show Bio

I agree that the vow is incredibly stupid. But there are a few things to take into consideration. First is that Peter is pretty screwed up from Uncle Ben's death. In fact, that's pretty much the whole premise for the character. It's apparent that he's got serious mental problems that arose from the death he blames on himself. Therefore it would not, in my opinion, be out of character for Peter to make that kind of vow. The second thing to consider is that Dan Slott knows how incredibly stupid that vow was. In fact, in ASM 688 (I believe) Mary Jane told Peter pretty much that. Aside from that, good points about the vow vs. creed thing.

Expect for the fact that since Uncle Ben, Peter has witness more people dying around him i.e. The Stacey family,. Death isn't something that alien to peter. Although it shows that slott doesn't understand peter parker.

What makes you think that Slott has no respect for Peter Parker, or that he disrespected the character by killing him off in that way?

When the death of character causes an outrage, it's a sign that the death was written badly.

But Peter's death in ASM 700 was great in my opinion. If he had died a "hero's death" it would have been pretty epic, but bland at the same time because the tendency seems to be to make every superhero's death a "hero's death."

That's the whole point of a hero's death, to go out in blazing glory. Seriously it's like as defenders of slott's trash can't find a better comeback than "hurr durr it's not mainstream"

HOWEVER. The reaction to Peter's death is not one of sadness and mourning, but one of anger and F**KING DEATH THREATS!!! Now that's just wrong. If a character dies in a movie, what do people do, at the worst? They cry. They don't start yelling at the screen or sending death threats to anyone involved in the movie.

Compare spider-man's death to ultimate spider-man, the former died alone with nobody noticing that somebody stole his life, while ultimate spider-man died protecting his loved ones with his last breath, with Uncle Ben carrying him to heaven. It's not that we can't handle death, It just that slott story sucks compared to Bendis.

Let me give an example from history of a huge emotional response to the death of a fictional character: the "death" of Sherlock Holmes. His fictional death evoked a huge display of emotion from England's reading public. But the response was more one of sadness than of anger.

If Sherlock Holmes didn't die that same way as peter, then your comparison holds no water.

Yet with the "death" of Peter Parker, the response is more one of anger than of sadness. Why? I think the reason his "death" has elicited this response is because a lot of people feel like they have some kind of part-ownership over the character. That's at least what I'm getting from most everybody on this thread except for people like @akbogert. It seems they think that they have a right to read new stories involving Peter Parker.

People like @akbogert are costumers, and if a costumer isn't satisfied, then they have their right to complain.

It seems they think that they have a right to read new stories involving Peter Parker. I think what the people who enjoy SSM are doing differently is this: they are looking at the bigger picture. And the bigger picture involves a few things I've mentioned above in this and other posts, mainly that this is not Slott saying that Ock is somehow morally superior to Peter Parker. Another thing is that death isn't permanent in comics.

The whole issue of SSM#9 was slott saying how great Doc Ock is, FFS it had peter parker forgetting his own name. We know that peter parker is going come back, the problem that we don't like this story and rather have him come sooner than later.

Seriously, how can you keep a cultural icon dead for more than 5 years, tops?

As if this gimmick will last more than year, parker already came back within the first issue as a ghost.

How do you respond to death threats? I think Dan Slott has handled it pretty damn well. Seriously, what would you do if you got death threats for your story decisions? Personally, I'd either break down or do what he's done, go troll the haters. If you'll notice, he actually only trolls the stupid ones and he's really damn good at it. In dealing with the ones that actually make intelligent arguments and good points, he responds quite respectfully. I suggest you do some research before making inaccurately broad statements like you made in your 8th paragraph. You could go look at some threads here on the Spider-Man forums for posts from him. You can even talk to@punyparker for proof of what I'm saying; punyparker (an SSM "hater," by the way) wrote Slott a very respectful post on the Marvel.com forums, to which Slott replied politely and logically.

More like you should research about how Dan Slott's takes Criticism

.

#56 Posted by inkBot (92 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy How do you "rebut" an opinion?

#57 Edited by akbogert (3180 posts) - - Show Bio

@frogdog: Thanks for sharing that video. That was incredibly well-made.

#58 Posted by frogdog (3215 posts) - - Show Bio

@akbogert said:

@frogdog: Thanks for sharing that video. That was incredibly well-made.

It was made by someone from of the spideycrawlspace boards.

#59 Posted by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio

@punyparker: Yeah, I'd have a problem with SSM 9 if it was made clear that it really was Peter being wiped from his own brain.

@inkbot said:

@impy How do you "rebut" an opinion?

Opinions can be rebutted. Lawyers do it all the time in court. Go spend some time in courtrooms, you'll hear rebuttals to closing arguments (which are, by nature, opinions).

@frogdog said:

I agree that the vow is incredibly stupid. But there are a few things to take into consideration. First is that Peter is pretty screwed up from Uncle Ben's death. In fact, that's pretty much the whole premise for the character. It's apparent that he's got serious mental problems that arose from the death he blames on himself. Therefore it would not, in my opinion, be out of character for Peter to make that kind of vow. The second thing to consider is that Dan Slott knows how incredibly stupid that vow was. In fact, in ASM 688 (I believe) Mary Jane told Peter pretty much that. Aside from that, good points about the vow vs. creed thing.

Expect for the fact that since Uncle Ben, Peter has witness more people dying around him i.e. The Stacey family,. Death isn't something that alien to peter. Although it shows that slott doesn't understand peter parker.

What makes you think that Slott has no respect for Peter Parker, or that he disrespected the character by killing him off in that way?

When the death of character causes an outrage, it's a sign that the death was written badly.

But Peter's death in ASM 700 was great in my opinion. If he had died a "hero's death" it would have been pretty epic, but bland at the same time because the tendency seems to be to make every superhero's death a "hero's death."

That's the whole point of a hero's death, to go out in blazing glory. Seriously it's like as defenders of slott's trash can't find a better comeback than "hurr durr it's not mainstream"

HOWEVER. The reaction to Peter's death is not one of sadness and mourning, but one of anger and F**KING DEATH THREATS!!! Now that's just wrong. If a character dies in a movie, what do people do, at the worst? They cry. They don't start yelling at the screen or sending death threats to anyone involved in the movie.

Compare spider-man's death to ultimate spider-man, the former died alone with nobody noticing that somebody stole his life, while ultimate spider-man died protecting his loved ones with his last breath, with Uncle Ben carrying him to heaven. It's not that we can't handle death, It just that slott story sucks compared to Bendis.

Let me give an example from history of a huge emotional response to the death of a fictional character: the "death" of Sherlock Holmes. His fictional death evoked a huge display of emotion from England's reading public. But the response was more one of sadness than of anger.

If Sherlock Holmes didn't die that same way as peter, then your comparison holds no water.

Yet with the "death" of Peter Parker, the response is more one of anger than of sadness. Why? I think the reason his "death" has elicited this response is because a lot of people feel like they have some kind of part-ownership over the character. That's at least what I'm getting from most everybody on this thread except for people like @akbogert. It seems they think that they have a right to read new stories involving Peter Parker.

People like @akbogert are costumers, and if a costumer isn't satisfied, then they have their right to complain.

It seems they think that they have a right to read new stories involving Peter Parker. I think what the people who enjoy SSM are doing differently is this: they are looking at the bigger picture. And the bigger picture involves a few things I've mentioned above in this and other posts, mainly that this is not Slott saying that Ock is somehow morally superior to Peter Parker. Another thing is that death isn't permanent in comics.

The whole issue of SSM#9 was slott saying how great Doc Ock is, FFS it had peter parker forgetting his own name. We know that peter parker is going come back, the problem that we don't like this story and rather have him come sooner than later.

Seriously, how can you keep a cultural icon dead for more than 5 years, tops?

As if this gimmick will last more than year, parker already came back within the first issue as a ghost.

How do you respond to death threats? I think Dan Slott has handled it pretty damn well. Seriously, what would you do if you got death threats for your story decisions? Personally, I'd either break down or do what he's done, go troll the haters. If you'll notice, he actually only trolls the stupid ones and he's really damn good at it. In dealing with the ones that actually make intelligent arguments and good points, he responds quite respectfully. I suggest you do some research before making inaccurately broad statements like you made in your 8th paragraph. You could go look at some threads here on the Spider-Man forums for posts from him. You can even talk to@punyparker for proof of what I'm saying; punyparker (an SSM "hater," by the way) wrote Slott a very respectful post on the Marvel.com forums, to which Slott replied politely and logically.

More like you should research about how Dan Slott's takes Criticism

Thank you very much for your commentary.

To that first comment...Wha??? At first it sounds as if you agree with me and that you're saying it's NOT out of character for Peter to make that vow...then you say that it shows that Slott doesn't understand the character he's written for years. That makes no sense whatsoever, sorry.

No, it's not a sign that the death was written badly because people don't send death threats to other people simply because of bad writing. There's got to be more to it. That something else is why I created this thread; I want to know what it is.

To criticize the writing of Peter's death on those grounds is wrong because it's too early to judge. Just because his death has gone mostly unnoticed so far does not mean at all that it will never be. Eventually, I believe, Carlie Cooper will prove and publicize her suspicions about Peter's real identity. Then Peter's death will be recognized, his legacy explored, and horrors will begin for the man who currently occupies his body. I can't comment on the Ultimate Spidey death story because I haven't read it.

Well, sir, you obviously haven't read Sherlock Holmes! You should, so I won't go into too much detail lest I spoil it. Basically, he "died" in such a manner that his body was irretrievable. Hardly a typical "hero's death" I'd say.

Mainstream is fine with me, but it can get boring. I think it's possible, as I said above, that Peter's death will eventually become a big deal to the people who knew him.

I was actually complimenting @akbogert, sorry if that wasn't clear. I was saying that he has somewhat of a different problem with Superior.

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT SLOTT THINKS OTTO IS TRULY BETTER THAN PETER? That was OTTO saying that he thinks he's better! And chances are, that wasn't even really Peter being wiped from Ock's brain! Even more likely is that Otto Octavius forgot Peter's name! Y'know what? Now that I think about it, I bet we'll see the fallout of that next week as Ock wonders frantically whose body he's in. LOL.

5 years was a VERY liberal time-frame.

For Pete's sake (PUN INTENDED I'M SO FUNNY), I read Slott's posts on the internet all the f***ing time!!! I know how he deals with criticism. Your response to that was little more than a cop-out.

#60 Edited by inkBot (92 posts) - - Show Bio
#61 Posted by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio
@inkbot said:

@impy said:

Except this isn't a courtroom, and in regards to this discussion, you're not a lawyer. You seem awful keen to tell people that their opinions are wrong. I won't waste more time on you.

Oh, this isn't a courtroom? I'm not a lawyer? Thanks for letting me know. I'm not an idiot, my good sir.

Maybe I am "awful keen" to tell people they're wrong, but if you'll notice I can very easily admit that I'm wrong or that someone else is right. This thread is intended for discussion, not full-on arguing, and I try to keep it that way. Sorry if I'm not doing a good job.

#62 Edited by TrueMarvel (194 posts) - - Show Bio

@inkbot said:

Was away at a con so didn't see this thread until today. Thought I'd toss in my $0.02.

I can't truly say that Slott is a bad writer, because I enjoyed Big Time a lot as well as Spider Island. But, just because you write some good stories, that doesn't mean you

only

write good stories. Quite the contrary, evidently.

The problem, for me, actually starts WAY before ASM 700, back in ASM 655. In the end of that issue Peter Parker makes the most annoyingly naive, stupid and completely unrealistic vow ever: ".. Whenever I'm around, wherever I am... ... no one dies!". Leading up to that we have an issue largely consisting of a dreamscape/mindscape checklist of events gone by and oh I wonder if we will ever see

that

again

.

The vow is stupid because it's completely unrealistic. After a lifetime of being Spider-Man, Peter would know this. Of course it's up to interpretation how far reaching the creed of "With great power... etc" reaches, but if you ask me, the vow Peter makes is something a child would say. Someone who doesn't yet understand that the unpredictable nature of life can cut anyone down at any time. Peter is far too intelligent to not see the flaw in that sort of vow. Sure, he was wrought with emotion at the time, but that's not an excuse. There's a reason I called "With great power..." a creed. That saying has guided almost everything Spider-Man has done and lived through. A vow is something you say, a creed is something you live.

Jumping forward to ASM 698-700 and "Superior". I'm not sure where to start really. Upon reflection I think the best place to start is at the end of 700, where Octopus lives through Peter's life as if it was his.

It's not just that Peter died. It's

how

he died and

why

. His death was nothing more than just another step in the plan for Slott to get to write the character he wanted to write, with no respect for the legacy of the character. Some may snort at the use of the word legacy, but think about it. Spider-Man MADE Marvel. He's the flagship character of the company, or at least was. With so many years worth of stories under his belt, so many peoples lives touched in whichever ways, calling it anything but a legacy is unfair. And how does he leave? Beaten, broken, knowing that no one he loves is aware he's dying and alone. You ask why a fictional characters death upsets people so much. I have answered that partly, but before I continue doing so, I want to ask. If a characters death means so little, why should you even read comics or stories? Is it because it's a comic? Is it fine for people to get emotionally attached to characters in books and films, but not comics?

But, it's not just that he died, he is replaced with a contemptible asshole. Yeah, that's awesome. Octopus didn't earn his stripes. He took a uniform from the laundry and wrestled his gut into it, and it hardly fits.

The showing ofOctopus living through Peter's memories isn't just borderline offensive (for perspective, I try to avoid using the word offensive because it's often used far too loosely imho) it's also a rehash of Slott falling back on story mechanics he's used far too often, as well as just ridiculous because in the end, it doesn't fucking stick. Sure, say what you want to say. Octopus is still Octopus, and I agree with you. But if you're going to go as far as using Peter's past to influence Octopus, at least make it fucking stick somewhere. Not that it'd matter really, because I felt disgusted enough to drop everything Spider-Man related after 700, at least in terms of giving the fuckers my money for shit I don't want.

As for this stupid damn argument: "We all know he'll be back."

Sure yeah, Peter'll be back sometime. So? Does that magically make Slott's assholery okay? Does it negate the ridiculous story choices? Three words. "No", and "hell no".

My reaction to it is similar to the question about why a fictional characters death bothers people. If my reaction to a bad story should be "I'll just wait till they reset the mythos and start fucking things up again. Then repeat."

Why would I want to keep reading? Well the answer is "I don't." I can't take this argument seriously, because it shows such a lack of standards, and again, the issue isn't that Peter died. If you (this is a general use of "you" btw) can't grasp that then I can't help you. To me, this argument is akin to the beaten housewife who defends their abusive husband.

Moving on to Slott's trolling of the fans. It wasn't enough that he writes something that made people furious, he had to pour gasoline on the fire. Why? Sales? Probably.

It's just mean spirited and unnecessary. Which brings me to my closing thoughts. Slott does not understand "With great power comes great responsibility." He may have used it in his writing, but he sure as fuck don't understand the meaning behind the words. Let's take his little trolling foray as an example, because it fits perfectly. Slott has the power to write Spider-Man the way he wants. He has the power to say what he wants about it. What does he do with that power? He points and laughs at people who have a legitimate beef with him. He points and laughs at people that are upset that a character that they have looked up to for so long, has been treated in the worst possible way. He laughs, and that's what sends me up a fucking wall.

The idea that this mean spirited asshole is in creative control of the character that almost singlehandedly made me choose to become an artist, it makes me sick.

Sorry for the rant, but you wanted to know. Now you do.

::Insert Clapping Gif/Meme::

#63 Edited by PunyParker (8833 posts) - - Show Bio

@frogdog: Great vid,i posted it in this forum,back in January(i believe)....

Reeeealy great vid which tell the truth.

#64 Edited by PunyParker (8833 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy: I spotted one continuity problem,Bendis had.....

This is from Ultimate Spider-Man #17


As you see he's introduced as Eddie Brock,a jurnalist for DG...and as we all know,Eddie later is revealed to be....

....a college stud.Peter's friend,who later becomes Venom and blah blah blah....

The point is,you're right....Bendis has this issue too....

#65 Edited by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio

@punyparker: Yeah. Stan Lee had issues with it also. I'm attempting to go through my Spider-Man collection and review all the issues I have (not posting them because of technical problems), and there's all kinds of stupid crap in his writing. It gets better as the series goes on, but my point is that the most revered authors in comic books hiccup. Heck, in this issue, it's implied that Peter Parker is on the Midtown High volleyball team...

#66 Edited by PunyParker (8833 posts) - - Show Bio
#67 Posted by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio
#68 Posted by muhabba (288 posts) - - Show Bio

It's so nice, after years and decades that a hero finally triumphs over a villain. That he hero finally gets to prove to the world how much better he is than his adversary. An adversary that has kept him down, refused to recognize his accomplishments, refused to allow him to use his vastly superior intellect to make the world a better place. After decades of being kept down, knocked in the dirt, laughed at, scorned and ridiculed, it is so nice to see the hero win. Oh, wait. Sorry, my bad. Switch hero with villain. So now, not only did the villain murder the hero, he's rewarded with the hero's life and girlfriend. I have no qualms about the writing because I refuse to read it. The entire concept is that if you are a murderous villain and you try really hard, you'll eventually succeed in murdering the hero and get rewarded by taking over his life and you'll never have to pay for it. The concept sounds good (actually it sounds like the movie "Megamind"). And if it wasn't an already established character I've been reading for 20 years I'd love to read it. But I have no interest in reading about Doctor Octopus murdering Spider-Man and then wearing his skin and trying to rape his girlfriend because he thinks it's ok just because he wearing Spider-Man's clothes.

#69 Posted by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio

@muhabba: So you're saying that you're just not interested in it?

#70 Posted by novi_homines (1330 posts) - - Show Bio

Give ultimate a try. Its really good.

#71 Posted by muhabba (288 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy: That, & Megamind was a far better version.

#72 Edited by jcolesamuels (20 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy: honestly we know he's coming back. we all know it but thats not what were angry about. you could say its a new direction but really its not. this is no different than ginyu or any of these other characters.

  • Manaphy/Phione (Pokemon); via Heart Swap
  • Karma (Marvel)
  • She-Hulk (Marvel)
  • Captain Ginyu (Dragonball Z)
  • Puppeteer (Top Cow's Freshmen)
  • Jen (MisFits)
  • Trafalgar Law (One Piece)
  • Ino Yamanaka (Naruto)
  • Inoichi Yamanaka (Naruto)
  • Yamanaka Clan (Naruto)
  • Charmcaster (Ben 10); using a spell
  • Cambiador (Combo Ninos)
  • Sam Beckett (Quantum Leap)
  • Patrick VanDusen (Super Smash Stadium)
  • Swapper (Lilo and Stitch: The Series)
  • Tren Krom (BIONICLE)
  • The Change (CardCaptor Sakura)
  • Astaroth (666 Satan/O-Parts Hunter)
  • Faith Lehane (Buffy the Vampire Slayer); using the Draconian Katra

i've seen most of these characters do this and all that happens is that they get exposed and have to swap again or they'll be killed or locked up. it's been done and is cut and dry. the only difference is that otto is smarter than most on the list. when i read 700 and saw what was happening i felt dissapointed because i liked how slott was going so far as it finally pushed peter to what he deserved and what he needed all along. with his brains i thought it was the dumbest thing to be at jamesons heels when all he needed to do was whip up something to help patrol. i thought peter was finally going to put his big ol brain into action instead of always letting reed or stark handle everything. and thanks to slott that happened. so no i'm not a hater on slott but come on this is just going to be another of the previous. i loved the idea of peter checking up on his old villians like the one that made those powerful magnets that peter told to come see him at horizon. in all what i finally realized was that dan had did something that not many had done for pete. he gave pete the spotlight and his inventions. he gave pete the recognition that he was due and it was a great read. but than what had happened with 700 had another terrible effect. it made me feel that all what the other writers for spider-man had a accomplished was for nothing. like how slott had basically said screw the moral fiber or screw the web of life- destiny. i stopped frequently reading spider-man like i used to cause of this issue. i still read the new comics its just not as much. i probably lost some of you but when he just swapped it like this i kinda felt hurt. the way mary jane was just there and didn't notice anything different was just numbing. and the fact that otto is now and hasn't touched on the fact that peter had everyones mind wiped despite his elitist ways and how he would be seriously pissed if someone was screwing with his mind. no reactions nothing. its also annoying that his whole speech pattern changed and theyre just rollin with it. its like he wasn't even trying to hide. but i'm rambling my point is. that he could have done way better than this.

i mean you probably don't remember but did you see read or hear what happened when superman died. super-man died to a random boss fight with doomsday. nothing real significant about him until wham he killed the man of steel. no build up, no weakness in either character it just happened and it took the country by storm people even had funeral services for this character. but no hate mail on this subject. sure they had mailed dc to see if this was the end for supes but to my knowledge no hate mail. so when i stack the deaths of each character even with sherlock holmes you can easily tell how each was viewed. weather they thought it was a good end or not. so when slott got those death threats i wasn't surprised or even appauled about it. i expected as much. he did something contreversal to a good character and a character that to its fandom and most of the world is a well loved character. hell from what i can tell he got off light especially how much the fandom cares for peter. any way thats just how i feel about it.

on a seperate note i know that brand new day was bad in my opinion but i actually like the other. how did yall feel about it. not to take over the thread just a small side quest because i can't find any ones thoughts on the matter

#73 Posted by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio

@muhabba: Are you suggesting that the whole idea of Superior Spider-Man was ripped from Megamind?

#74 Edited by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio

@jcolesamuels: Hey, thanks a lot for the interesting angle.You certainly know a lot more about manga than I do, so I'll have to take your word for it on most of these characters, and on the others I'll just take your word for it anyway :P

Can you please elaborate on what happened to She-Hulk? I'm quite interested in that and whether it happened during Dan Slott's run on the book.

I think I get what you're saying about the direction in which Slott had taken Peter. That was a really neat direction, and great reading. And your point about previous writers' contributions to Peter's character development was interesting. But I think if you read between the lines of Superior Spider-Man, you can see that Slott is actually still working on Peter as a character and exploring who he is. Any thoughts on that?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Mary Jane not having any suspicions until issue 6 of SSM was a problem and a flaw in the writing. But if you've read SSM issues 4 and 5, you've probably noticed that Max Modell thinks something is up and Uatu Jackson think's Peter's gone crazy. And Carlie Cooper pretty much knows that Otto is in Pete's body. So the issue isn't being ignored, right?

Chances are I wasn't really reading comics seriously when Superman died, so I don't remember. But honestly, that sounds like a fairly lame death, with no buildup or anything.

It kinda seems like you're condoning death threats. Are you? If so, that's disturbing. There's no justification in my mind for threatening to kill another person except in self-defense.

#75 Posted by muhabba (288 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy: Yep. Also, the difference between the Doomday story & this one is, IMO, Doomsday wasn't rewarded with Superman's life afterwards & he didn't try hooking up with Lois afterwards. Killing someone & then sleeping with their girlfriend is unsettling by itself. Pretending to be the boyfriend is beyond the pale.

#76 Posted by InnerVenom123 (29499 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy said:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT SLOTT THINKS OTTO IS TRULY BETTER THAN PETER?

Didn't you know, Impy?

Writers always agree with what the villains say.

That's why the Big Two employ various nazis and psychopaths.

@impy: I spotted one continuity problem,Bendis had.....

This is from Ultimate Spider-Man #17

As you see he's introduced as Eddie Brock,a jurnalist for DG...and as we all know,Eddie later is revealed to be....

....a college stud.Peter's friend,who later becomes Venom and blah blah blah....

The point is,you're right....Bendis has this issue too....

That's not a continuity problem. The first appearance was just a nod to the character back when Bendis thought he'd never do an Ultimate Venom arc.

#77 Posted by Impy (123 posts) - - Show Bio

@muhabba: But that was, like, the whole point of issue 2. It could easily have been titled "Otto Octavius is a Pervert and this is Really Really Wrong."

@innervenom123: Comic book writers must be under the influence of the magical zombie Illuminati unicorns that are controlling the world.

#78 Edited by jcolesamuels (20 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy: for the most important part. no im not condoning im just saying i wasn't surprised. concerning on what i saw of the past. i can't remember she-hulks author at the time of the swap at the moment cause i lost most of my books due to a flood. i don't think he was it though. and its not that they aren't finding out that is the problem its the order of who is getting suspicious. it shouldn't have taken her up to book 6 especially if carlie was with her since her arm was injured .a little annoyed that May also didn't suspect anything or the fact that they didn't give her a thought bubble. stemming from the fact that she also beat the chamelion when he was impersonating peter. kinda hope that otto knows that peter is allergic to almonds- i think can't remember. no clarks death wasn't lame in the slightest. i mean they kinda said that something was going to happen. and like doomsday was just hitting a wall toward the end of some comics. like a small fortelling of it but not something that took planning like what oct did. if you want to know more about supermans death and the time it occured you can watch the specials from superman doomsday. i watched it and my grandma told me of that time. i was pretty young when she told me. again sorry if this is pushing it since this is a superman vid on a spidey thread. but this is history and explains why i didn't get surprised for the actions of others over a ficticious character. actually it was weird that people are even asking why others go so far when it has already happened before.

#79 Edited by jcolesamuels (20 posts) - - Show Bio

refound the book-digital search. i miss my comics either way this was faster. no slott wasn't apart of it and the swap wasn't much of a mind swap it was more of a body swap. second character kinda gaining the strength. actually it was more like she could give others her strength it was kinda weird. almost useless most of the time. she doesn't use it that much anymore.

#80 Edited by w0nd (2717 posts) - - Show Bio

@muhabba said:

It's so nice, after years and decades that a hero finally triumphs over a villain. That he hero finally gets to prove to the world how much better he is than his adversary. An adversary that has kept him down, refused to recognize his accomplishments, refused to allow him to use his vastly superior intellect to make the world a better place. After decades of being kept down, knocked in the dirt, laughed at, scorned and ridiculed, it is so nice to see the hero win. Oh, wait. Sorry, my bad. Switch hero with villain. So now, not only did the villain murder the hero, he's rewarded with the hero's life and girlfriend. I have no qualms about the writing because I refuse to read it. The entire concept is that if you are a murderous villain and you try really hard, you'll eventually succeed in murdering the hero and get rewarded by taking over his life and you'll never have to pay for it. The concept sounds good (actually it sounds like the movie "Megamind"). And if it wasn't an already established character I've been reading for 20 years I'd love to read it. But I have no interest in reading about Doctor Octopus murdering Spider-Man and then wearing his skin and trying to rape his girlfriend because he thinks it's ok just because he wearing Spider-Man's clothes.

You admitted you didn't read it yes? So two things you complained about were covered already..

when did he try to rape his gf?....he actually avoided being with her altogether in the end...seems fine to me

"The entire concept is that if you are a murderous villain and you try really hard, you'll eventually succeed in murdering the hero and get rewarded by taking over his life and you'll never have to pay for it."

How do you know he will never have to pay for it....? You think peter is going to stay dead forever?

Do you know why his death seems meaningless here in comparison to ultimate? Because it was meaningless. Slot compared this to just another story arc involving the parker luck, bad sh!t will happen to him and he will pull through as usual. It's nothing more than another tale. If he stayed dead forever then sure I would be as livid as some people here. Heck i even avoided buying 700 because I honestly thought it was disrespectful to the character....but then I thought to myself is he actually going to stay dead? No, what is this other than a story arc....well nothing that's all it is.

Ock is a villain and you aren't supposed to like him...how many people are rooting for him? lol not that many, when peter finally comes back and wins it will be so sweet...it will be better than him beating up the bad guy and saving the day in a single issue.

#81 Posted by PunyParker (8833 posts) - - Show Bio

@impy said:

@innervenom123: Comic book writers must be under the influence of the magical zombie Illuminati unicorns that are controlling the world.

I just needed to find a way to express my thoughts....Thank You kind man.

#82 Posted by jcolesamuels (20 posts) - - Show Bio

Also how come mary jane didn't explain the psychic blindspot or the mind wipe to carlie. it would explain the reason he said things after spider-island.

#83 Edited by KuyaKikoy (10 posts) - - Show Bio

What Deadpool said. LOL.

#84 Posted by Phaedrusgr (1662 posts) - - Show Bio

@inkbot: That's the Voice of Reason. I couldn't possibly agree more with you.

#85 Edited by wolverine1610 (248 posts) - - Show Bio

to be honest i was upset about superior spider-man but after a while i realized that even though we all know its temporary this may be a good thing for comics.Like i couldn't remember the last time i was so shocked back to back to back with a comic series. I mean how many times have we seen spider-man punch the villain in the face. Or how his spider life interferes with his parker life or vice versa. Beside's his love life has anyone noticed that Ock is making Peter's life much better, i mean he's working on a ph.d, for Peter Parker, not to mention any bad ass inventions Ock will make in Peter Parker's name and the list goes on and on. Honestly i applaud Dan Slott for doing what barely any writers are willing to do, and that is to shake the very foundation and try new things in the comic instead of just writing the same thing over and over again (i'm looking at you batman). I mean yeah we know one day that Peter Parker will be back as spider-man but no time soon, and when he does come back he'll have a whole new life to live with and potential for a lot more good story telling. Slott has been subtly changing Peter's life for the better for a while now. After the superior spider-man his life will be much much better. Besides didn't Ock say something about the gold octobot having peter's personality and memories inside it or something? That could be the conduit of Peter Parker's return

#86 Posted by Phaedrusgr (1662 posts) - - Show Bio

I've just re-read SSM #09. I want to say that it's official for me now. I can't keep reading this travesty. I don't judge those fans that enjoy the run, congrats for you, guys, but I can't stand it anymore. In my point of view, it sucks big time. All this disrespect and bad writing got finally on my nerves. Peter or Peter's memories patterns sacrificing a little girl just to save his own a**? That's no Peter. The only SSM comic book I will read, will be the one that he meets Scarlet Spider, hoping the latter will open a can of whoop ass on that piece of travesty SpOck.

#87 Posted by muhabba (288 posts) - - Show Bio

I've noticed most peoples' defnce if SSM is that it won't last for ever, Peter will be back. My mother told me the same thing as a kid going to the dentist. Didn't mean I enjoyed it anymore or make it less painful. If you're enjoying the arc please continue, but for me I have not enjoyed it & won't be buying it.

#88 Posted by jcolesamuels (20 posts) - - Show Bio

@wolverine1610: didn't read that one to thoroughly. octavious erased that brain pattern

#89 Posted by wolverine1610 (248 posts) - - Show Bio

@wolverine1610: didn't read that one to thoroughly. octavious erased that brain pattern

aw man, had to re read it. well that sucks :/ idk how peter can possibly recover then

#90 Posted by Phaedrusgr (1662 posts) - - Show Bio

@wolverine1610: Sucks? It's awful! Peter risking a little girl's life just to protect his skin? Hey, Slott, are you kidding me? Have you ever read any Spiderman comic book??? And I don't want to hear any cheap excuses, it's not Peter, it's something else. Peter's memories re-formed a part of Peter's consciousness. So, practically whatever Ghost-Peter was, it was Peter's part, acting like him. And Slott disrespected Peter and his fans. Again. Again...Marvel keeps selling using our anger. That sucks. Superior sucks. Slott is awful and I don't want him near Peter Parker/Spiderman comic books. Defluo, Slott, defluo!!!!!!

#91 Edited by jcolesamuels (20 posts) - - Show Bio

i don't hate all of it really cause when hes fighting the baddies its awesome well not when he brutalized that girl. but everything else feels so cheaply done. i like the avenging tittles with him in it. its funny and nice. but his mainstream comics bore and infuriate me.