Follow

    Spider-Man

    Character » Spider-Man appears in 17252 issues.

    Peter Parker was bitten by a radioactive spider as a teenager, granting him spider-like powers. After the death of his Uncle Ben, Peter learned that "with great power, comes great responsibility." Swearing to always protect the innocent from harm, Peter Parker became Spider-Man.

    what is wrong with slott

    • 77 results
    • 1
    • 2
    Avatar image for spider11211
    spider11211

    1428

    Forum Posts

    84

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #51  Edited By spider11211

    @kcomicfan said:
    @spider11211 said:

    This disconnect creates opposing views based on observation. This observational difference creates multiple interpretations of what the character is and who he should be. Would it not be fair to say that people that have read the series from the start tend to have a better overall view of the character?

    This seems to be the root of why the character is not viewed as the same anymore.

    There is nothing wrong with people having different interpretations of a character.

    No it would not be fair, You don't have to be there in the early days of a characters creation to understand who that character is. As long as someone has read enough of the character to know there basic characteristics and motivations and they like the character they can say they understand the character

    The problem is that they're no clear definition for"read enough". So are you saying knowing a person for years would not give a better understanding of them, that does not seem logical?

    My point is that different views mainly seem to be coming from different experiences with the character, would you not understand and know more about the character if you read more of the books? I tend to disagree with you, the more time you spend with someone the more you tend to understand them.

    My main point is the time spent with the character seems to be an issue that is creating division with the interpretation of the character.

    Avatar image for kcomicfan
    kcomicfan

    4690

    Forum Posts

    33

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 5

    @kcomicfan said:
    @spider11211 said:

    This disconnect creates opposing views based on observation. This observational difference creates multiple interpretations of what the character is and who he should be. Would it not be fair to say that people that have read the series from the start tend to have a better overall view of the character?

    This seems to be the root of why the character is not viewed as the same anymore.

    There is nothing wrong with people having different interpretations of a character.

    No it would not be fair, You don't have to be there in the early days of a characters creation to understand who that character is. As long as someone has read enough of the character to know there basic characteristics and motivations and they like the character they can say they understand the character

    The problem is that they're no clear definition for"read enough". So are you saying knowing a person for years would not give a better understanding of them, that does not seem logical?

    My point is that different views mainly seem to be coming from different experiences with the character, would you not understand and know more about the character if you read more of the books? I tend to disagree with you, the more time you spend with someone the more you tend to understand them.

    My main point is the time spent with the character seems to be an issue that is creating division with the interpretation of the character.

    I totally disagree. Just because you have known about a character for longer then someone else does not mean you know more about that character. It all depends on how much of the character you have read and how well you understand the character. Saying someone could know more about a character just because they have known of that character for longer is illogical and preposterous.

    Someone could say they have read enough when they fully understand the character.

    Avatar image for spider11211
    spider11211

    1428

    Forum Posts

    84

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #53  Edited By spider11211

    @kcomicfan said:
    @spider11211 said:
    @kcomicfan said:
    @spider11211 said:

    This disconnect creates opposing views based on observation. This observational difference creates multiple interpretations of what the character is and who he should be. Would it not be fair to say that people that have read the series from the start tend to have a better overall view of the character?

    This seems to be the root of why the character is not viewed as the same anymore.

    There is nothing wrong with people having different interpretations of a character.

    No it would not be fair, You don't have to be there in the early days of a characters creation to understand who that character is. As long as someone has read enough of the character to know there basic characteristics and motivations and they like the character they can say they understand the character

    The problem is that they're no clear definition for"read enough". So are you saying knowing a person for years would not give a better understanding of them, that does not seem logical?

    My point is that different views mainly seem to be coming from different experiences with the character, would you not understand and know more about the character if you read more of the books? I tend to disagree with you, the more time you spend with someone the more you tend to understand them.

    My main point is the time spent with the character seems to be an issue that is creating division with the interpretation of the character.

    I totally disagree. Just because you have known about a character for longer then someone else does not mean you know more about that character. It all depends on how much of the character you have read and how well you understand the character. Saying someone could know more about a character just because they have known of that character for longer is illogical and preposterous.

    Someone could say they have read enough when they fully understand the character.

    When I say know them longer I mean read more of the material. With that said is it not fair to say that a person that has read all of the characters issues may understand a character better than a person that has read 100 issues?

    As you said " It all depends on how much of the character you have read and how well you understand the character"

    It seems we may agree more than disagree here.

    "Someone could say they have read enough when they fully understand the character."

    How could you know if you "fully understand the character" if you have not read all of the books? The key mistake here is "fully".

    Avatar image for kcomicfan
    kcomicfan

    4690

    Forum Posts

    33

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 5

    #54  Edited By kcomicfan

    @kcomicfan said:
    @spider11211 said:
    @kcomicfan said:
    @spider11211 said:

    This disconnect creates opposing views based on observation. This observational difference creates multiple interpretations of what the character is and who he should be. Would it not be fair to say that people that have read the series from the start tend to have a better overall view of the character?

    This seems to be the root of why the character is not viewed as the same anymore.

    There is nothing wrong with people having different interpretations of a character.

    No it would not be fair, You don't have to be there in the early days of a characters creation to understand who that character is. As long as someone has read enough of the character to know there basic characteristics and motivations and they like the character they can say they understand the character

    The problem is that they're no clear definition for"read enough". So are you saying knowing a person for years would not give a better understanding of them, that does not seem logical?

    My point is that different views mainly seem to be coming from different experiences with the character, would you not understand and know more about the character if you read more of the books? I tend to disagree with you, the more time you spend with someone the more you tend to understand them.

    My main point is the time spent with the character seems to be an issue that is creating division with the interpretation of the character.

    I totally disagree. Just because you have known about a character for longer then someone else does not mean you know more about that character. It all depends on how much of the character you have read and how well you understand the character. Saying someone could know more about a character just because they have known of that character for longer is illogical and preposterous.

    Someone could say they have read enough when they fully understand the character.

    When I say know them longer I mean read more of the material. With that said is it not fair to say that a person that has read all of the characters issues may understand a character better than a person that has read 100 issues?

    As you said " It all depends on how much of the character you have read and how well you understand the character"

    It seems we may agree more than disagree here.

    "Someone could say they have read enough when they fully understand the character."

    How could you know if you "fully understand the character" if you have not read all of the books? The key mistake here is "fully".

    I think we are makeing the same point but we are misunderstanding each over. When you said reading the character for longer I assumed you were talking about the measurement of time for example: someone reading Spider-man for 20 years vs someone reading spider-man for 9 years.

    I agree that someone who has read almost all the issues of spider-man could have a better understanding of the character then someone who has read 100 Issues, But then again that is not a rule.

    Avatar image for spider11211
    spider11211

    1428

    Forum Posts

    84

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #55  Edited By spider11211

    @spider11211 said:
    @kcomicfan said:
    @spider11211 said:
    @kcomicfan said:
    @spider11211 said:

    This disconnect creates opposing views based on observation. This observational difference creates multiple interpretations of what the character is and who he should be. Would it not be fair to say that people that have read the series from the start tend to have a better overall view of the character?

    This seems to be the root of why the character is not viewed as the same anymore.

    There is nothing wrong with people having different interpretations of a character.

    No it would not be fair, You don't have to be there in the early days of a characters creation to understand who that character is. As long as someone has read enough of the character to know there basic characteristics and motivations and they like the character they can say they understand the character

    The problem is that they're no clear definition for"read enough". So are you saying knowing a person for years would not give a better understanding of them, that does not seem logical?

    My point is that different views mainly seem to be coming from different experiences with the character, would you not understand and know more about the character if you read more of the books? I tend to disagree with you, the more time you spend with someone the more you tend to understand them.

    My main point is the time spent with the character seems to be an issue that is creating division with the interpretation of the character.

    I totally disagree. Just because you have known about a character for longer then someone else does not mean you know more about that character. It all depends on how much of the character you have read and how well you understand the character. Saying someone could know more about a character just because they have known of that character for longer is illogical and preposterous.

    Someone could say they have read enough when they fully understand the character.

    When I say know them longer I mean read more of the material. With that said is it not fair to say that a person that has read all of the characters issues may understand a character better than a person that has read 100 issues?

    As you said " It all depends on how much of the character you have read and how well you understand the character"

    It seems we may agree more than disagree here.

    "Someone could say they have read enough when they fully understand the character."

    How could you know if you "fully understand the character" if you have not read all of the books? The key mistake here is "fully".

    I think we are makeing the same point but we are misunderstanding each over. When you said reading the character for longer I assumed you were talking about the measurement of time for example: someone reading Spider-man for 20 years vs someone reading spider-man for 9 years.

    I agree that someone who has read almost all the issues of spider-man could have a better understanding of the character then someone who has read 100 Issues, But then again that is not a rule.

    I guess we agree, fist bump!

    "I agree that someone who has read almost all the issues of spider-man could have a better understanding of the character then someone who has read 100 Issues, But then again that is not a rule."

    I guess we could also say that some people could read every issue and still not get the character LOL!

    Avatar image for knightsofdarkness2
    Knightsofdarkness2

    8155

    Forum Posts

    228

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    1. No understanding of Peter Parker's character.

    2. Uses simplistic clichéd dialogue akin to Saturday morning TV cartoons.

    3. Cannot write character driven stories, only loose plot driven ones.

    4. Thinks anyone can be Spider-Man.

    5. Hates Mary Jane's character.

    6. Has made Spider-Man a support character in his own title.

    7. Has turned Spider-Man into an ineffective, immature, philandering buffoon.

    8. Is a petulant man-child troll on the Internet.

    9. Put a megalomaniac (Doc Ock) in control of Peter's body.

    10. Spider-Verse: a "Where's Waldo" nonsensical event.

    11. Silk: a force fed, sex starved, bland character, an obvious Mary Sue character, whom after years in a bunker shows no signs of having suffered any trauma, abuse and neglect.

    12. Stories are nonsensical, endings are rushed, no character development, filled with plot holes, badly written with anti climatic, dull and unsatisfactory endings.

    13. Turned Black Cat into an inconsiderate heel of a person, in the worst way possible.

    THIS!

    Also, Spiderverse was just a ploy event to kill off well-liked alternate spider characters. Dan Slott just can't write Spiderman.

    Avatar image for kiba
    kiba

    3756

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @knightsofdarkness2: really? I thought it was a way to spread useless spiderman wannabes around.

    Avatar image for knightsofdarkness2
    Knightsofdarkness2

    8155

    Forum Posts

    228

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    @kiba: Nah, they could've left the characters alone after the event but they had to kill off a ton of the characters for cheap shock value.

    Avatar image for magnetic_eye
    magnetic_eye

    1739

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @kiba: Nah, they could've left the characters alone after the event but they had to kill off a ton of the characters for cheap shock value.

    Yep, just cheap fan-boy fiction. Gimmick after gimmick after gimmick.

    Avatar image for spider11211
    spider11211

    1428

    Forum Posts

    84

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @knightsofdarkness2 said:

    @kiba: Nah, they could've left the characters alone after the event but they had to kill off a ton of the characters for cheap shock value.

    Yep, just cheap fan-boy fiction. Gimmick after gimmick after gimmick.

    Out of ideas, use a gimmick!

    Avatar image for madripoor
    Madripoor

    1917

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #61  Edited By Madripoor

    Slott: that's what's wrong with him.

    Avatar image for muhabba
    muhabba

    411

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    As a older comics reader I can say this about Dan Slott, we read the same comics as kids. Everything I've read by Slott on Spider-Man I read 30 years ago. In my opinion he's just rehashing stories he read growing up and hoping younger readers haven't read. And now Peter is running a multinational company and Spider-Man is his bodyguard. I used to read Iron Man the same way Slott did.

    Avatar image for green_tea
    Green_Tea

    10857

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Is there anything left that i haven't said about Slott?

    Avatar image for theheaven_guardian10
    TheHeaven_Guardian10

    2523

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    Avatar image for green_tea
    Green_Tea

    10857

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
    deactivated-5a853424245e3

    4168

    Forum Posts

    587

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Is there anything left that i haven't said about Slott?

    You should tell everyone here the things you told me in private--Slott being your idol and whatnot.

    Avatar image for itsaworld
    ItsaWorld

    2376

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    these threads never die do they

    Avatar image for green_tea
    Green_Tea

    10857

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @solid_snake97 said:

    Is there anything left that i haven't said about Slott?

    You should tell everyone here the things you told me in private--Slott being your idol and whatnot.

    No Caption Provided

    Avatar image for ursaber
    ursaber

    11482

    Forum Posts

    84

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 15

    How many of these are there?

    I've posted in like 5 or 7 Slott sucks topics.

    Avatar image for tparks
    tparks

    13564

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 1

    He sucks.

    I thought Superior Spider-Man was a good idea though. It would have been an amazing elsewhere, what if?, or alternate universe book. It just shouldn't have been a replacement to Peter in 616. That's just disrespectful.

    Avatar image for green_tea
    Green_Tea

    10857

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @ursaber: to the point where it's unoriginal :p

    Avatar image for ursaber
    ursaber

    11482

    Forum Posts

    84

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 15

    @tparks said:

    He sucks.

    I thought Superior Spider-Man was a good idea though. It would have been an amazing elsewhere, what if?, or alternate universe book. It just shouldn't have been a replacement to Peter in 616. That's just disrespectful.

    That's where it started. That's where it started the idea of replacing heroes en masse within Marvel.

    Superior Spider Man could have been one of the best Spider Man stories ever. It could've finally evolved Peter Parker and launched him into a new era but instead we got Doc Ock mindjacking him for most of the story and Peter playing a supporting role in his own book. It destroyed his world and left many relationships in utter ruin primarily the one with Mary Jane. Their relation was already screwed up phenomenally with OMD and OMIT but Superior managed to sink it almost to the point of no repair. One of the most appealing aspects of Spider Man is Peter's personal life and love life and no other love interest was more important than Mary Jane. It disrespected her and Peter. And lets not forget what happened to Black Cat. This book regressed everything about Spider Man and now Marvel's flagship character is in his lowest point since the 90's clone saga.

    Avatar image for tparks
    tparks

    13564

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 1

    Avatar image for ursaber
    ursaber

    11482

    Forum Posts

    84

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 15

    Avatar image for spider-padre
    Spider-Padre

    1

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #76  Edited By Spider-Padre

    I've read nearly every Slott Spider-Man story (thank you, public library!). My ASM roots go back to the 1970s with Gerry Conway, then picked up again during the 1990s Clone Saga.

    Pros: Slott often thinks up stories with clever hooks ("Everyone in NYC develops a plague of spider-powers! Doc Ock takes over Peter's body and tries to outdo him at Spider-manning! Every Spider-Person in the multi-verse must stop a gang of space ghouls"), so they attracted interest and were easy to market. He used to be really good at story pacing. He did away with the roller-coaster inconsistency of the BND/Webhead trust. He's been willing to try out new scenarios (Horizons Lab, Parker Industries).

    Cons, in no particular order: His female characters are all cliches, Mary Sues, or interchangeable game-pieces. Mary Jane had to be moved to Iron Man in order to be written right. He says that Peter Parker is mentally 15 years old, and even though Peter is a math and science genius he supposedly can't balance his check-book. His stories hinge on magical coincidences and his characters (including Peter) being enormously, unaccountably stupid. His story conclusions don't land. People complained that J. Michael Strycinski didn't create memorable villains, but In eight years Slott has only created one memorable villain (Mr. Negative). Other characters have been outright duds (Alpha), or had to be turned into real characters by other writers (Silk). He doesn't pay any attention to the motives of well-known characters (e.g., Black Cat). He promises readers a lot of shocking, mind-bending stuff, then ends up with a cloned Ben Reilly. He challenges readers to figure out certain story mysteries, then he doesn't make it possible to do so. Mr. Slott's stories are of the spirit of Go Go Power Rangers.

    Avatar image for theheaven_guardian10
    TheHeaven_Guardian10

    2523

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    Slott needs to get the F off the books quick, fast and in a hurry.

    Avatar image for ursaber
    ursaber

    11482

    Forum Posts

    84

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 15

    #78  Edited By ursaber

    @spider-padre:

    Slott's problem is that he's running on fumes, is creatively dead and has nothing more to offer. Also he's a dick to the fans and anyone who disagrees with his views or legitimately criticism of him.

    He's had good ideas, concepts and plots but the matter of importance which is execution and conclusion, he fails miserably. The only development Spider Man has had the past ten years is him moving from photography to scientific engineer in Horizon Labs but his personal life and his very own character development are virtually non existent or non interesting.

    Avatar image for theheaven_guardian10
    TheHeaven_Guardian10

    2523

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    @ursaber: The only development Spider Man has had the past ten years is him moving from photography to scientific engineer in Horizon Labs but his personal life and his very own character development are virtually non existent or non interesting.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^ This right here is most likely biggest offense Slott has done to Peter. It he gets praise for developing, cause he made him into a millionaire. In the most asinine and disrespectful way.

    This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

    Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

    Comment and Save

    Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.