Spider-Man

Posted On Today at 04:24:58 am EDT by Menshevik [Reply] [Quote] [New] Quote:Quote:What I'm on about is the way a lot of people seem to conflate "breaking a taboo" or "breaking the rules" with "good writing", to mistake the former with the latter. And I think Blargh's contention Quote:Quote:Quote:Quote:Without Bucky coming back from the dead, we would never have had Brubaker's wonderful runs on Cap and Winter Solider. Quote:Quote:comes dangerously close to that. So I wrote that if Brubaker is as great as his admirers say then I see no reason why his runs on Captain America and Winter Soldier couldn't have been as great with a Winter Soldier who wasn't Bucky Barnes. (It shouldn't surprise you that I think any competent writer should have been able to do this). This was not, as you seem to think, an attempt to have Brubaker judged on stories he didn't write. But I would like to remind people that breaking rules/taboo can be and all too often is just a sales ploy, a way of generating publicity. In this case, was resurrecting Bucky Barnes essential to the Winter Soldier stories, or was it primarily a way of attracting people to pick up those stories which, not being readers of Captain America, they might not have done with a Winter Soldier who wasn't Bucky Barnes? Quote:Quote:I think that if a rule is considered important (as the taboo against resurrecting certain characters was), it should generally apply to everyone. It should only be broken for a very important reason, and I do not consider the addition of yet another grim and gritty character to Marvel's roster of heroes important enough, not even for the (Golden Age and Cold War) nostalgia appeal, especially as we already have Jack Monroe. Quote:I guess I'm not one who thinks the rules should be followed just because it is a rule. If a good story can be told by breaking a rule then by all means break the rule. For example I personally enjoyed seeing Ben Grimm's Aunt Petunia and that she was presented as attractive instead of the old battleax Ben described her as. Everyone else but me probably hated it though. Well, I didn't say rules should be followed just because they are rules, and as you see from my statement above I was speaking of important rules and having them only broken for important reasons. The death of Gwen Stacey broke major taboos at the time (killing off the hero's major love interest, having this happen under circumstances that made the hero appear partially responsible for her death), but the effect was a major change of not only ASM but superhero comics in general. That FF story did not bother me at all, but it was very much a flash in the pan - Aunt Petunia made an appearance and then was basically never shown again. Had there actually been a significant taboo about showing her, what happened would have amounted to a waste of the effort of breaking it. But as far as I recall, she simply wasn't important enough. Even her "old battleaxe" image was largely extrapolated by the readers, as Ben Grimm would on several occasions invoke her, but never really described her and it wasn't even clear if she was a real person. Because Ben Grimm is middle-aged most people assumed that if Petunia is his aunt she must be older than him. So I'd say here it wasn't an actual rule, more an accidental habit developing into an unwritten tradition. It was not a hard and fast rule like e. g. never showing Dr. Doom's scarred face - which John Byrne broke for a story that I consider a big failure and so badly written that I would prefer it had never been printed. But in the words of Futurama, I watched it and I can't un-watch it. A story that a writer and editor may love is one that readers (or at least myself) consider rotten. Case in point: the return of Jean Grey, which managed to work a way around the rule Jim Shooter had set up, but the only rationale behind it was that some nos

Author: christian95Spider-ManEnglish, Rated: TAngst/DramaPeter P./Spider-Man & Doc Ock/Dr. OctopusChapters: 1, Words: 565, Reviews: 0, In-ProgressPeter Parker's last memories before getting erased *Spoiler Alert For Superior Spider man # 9*

If you tried to visit the site on Wednesday I’m sure you noticed that it was down. The site was hit with some malware and viruses and my webhost took it down because it was draining their systems. I had to buy a yearly site protector and do some tech support which isn’t cheap. So I thought how about I offset some of the costs of this upgrade by asking the visitors to help pay the bills. If you like the podcast, enjoy the message board, enjoy the news then please show your support. I’ve always had the tip button on the right hand side of the page, but rarely do people donate. I’d say once every few years.  So if you’d like to help pay the bills, please consider donating through paypal. I will personally thank you on the next podcast.

Posted On Today at 11:46:10 pm EDT by Nose Norton [Reply] [Quote] [New] No one ever lives happily ever after in superhero comics. Has anything crazy happened to Happy Hogan and Pepper Potts in the last 20 years? They're the only people I can think of who went on to better things when they went into limbo.

Posted On Today at 10:17:11 pm EDT by scottsnewpostingname [Reply] [Quote] [New] My sentiments exactly. I am going to go see the next Spider-man movie even if its as lame as the last one was...my preference would be to get some entertainment out of it and be pleasantly surprised. I would love to see Marvel get their hands back on this icon and blow the Avengers movie out of the ball park by doing this story right.

Posted On Today at 09:27:11 pm EDT by Comp [Reply] [Quote] [New] I wouldn't wish the film to do poorly, as unenthusiastic as I am about the particular screenwriters chosen. But I would so love to see what Marvel would do with this. -Comp

Posted On Today at 07:10:36 pm EDT by Jay23 [Reply] [Quote] [New] Sony (due to their long-standing financial troubles) are considering selling their Spider-Man movie rights back to Marvel Studios. Sony has said that it will consider a proposal from activist investor Daniel Loeb that the group should sell off parts of its music and movies business, which includes popular franchises Spider-Man and Resident Evil and the weepy ballads of Brit crooner Adele. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/22/sony_debates_movie_spinoff/ Would you wish that the next Spidey movie do poorly to increase their chances of selling it back to Marvel/ Disney ?

Posted On Today at 06:58:37 pm EDT by TheBechtloff [Reply] [Quote] [New] I agree, this issue was pretty meh. Not bad but really felt like filler. Also totally agree about Daredevil, it's a damn good book. Review of the week on Superior on my blog by the way. http://landsharkattacks.blogspot.com/2013/05/review-of-week-superior-spider-man-10.html

Posted On Today at 06:30:44 pm EDT by Reverend Meteor [Reply] [Quote] [New] Quote:Quote:Quote:But I have a problem with the contention that Brubaker's run on Captain America was only as great as you say it is because he resurrected Bucky Barnes. If Brubaker is as great as he say he is, then he should have been able to write stories that are as great or better without using Bucky Barnes for instance by using some other Golden Age character (resurrecting not Bucky Barnes, but the guy who replaced him in the closing stages of World War 2) or creating a new character with personal ties to Steve Rogers like e. g. Arnie Roth in the 1980s. Quote:Quote: But he didn't. He resurrected Bucky. Judging him on the merits of how good a writer he would be seen as if he never resurrected Bucky is sophistry.Quote:Quote:If his work's not good it's not good. Brubaker should be judged on the work he did not on how crappy you think he would be if he hadn't gotten away with violating the resurrecting Bucky taboo. Quote:What I'm on about is the way a lot of people seem to conflate "breaking a taboo" or "breaking the rules" with "good writing", to mistake the former with the latter. And I think Blargh's contention Quote:Quote:Quote:Quote:Without Bucky coming back from the dead, we would never have had Brubaker's wonderful runs on Cap and Winter Solider. Quote:comes dangerously close to that. So I wrote that if Brubaker is as great as his admirers say then I see no reason why his runs on Captain America and Winter Soldier couldn't have been as great with a Winter Soldier who wasn't Bucky Barnes. (It shouldn't surprise you that I think any competent writer should have been able to do this). This was not, as you seem to think, an attempt to have Brubaker judged on stories he didn't write. But I would like to remind people that breaking rules/taboo can be and all too often is just a sales ploy, a way of generating publicity. In this case, was resurrecting Bucky Barnes essential to the Winter Soldier stories, or was it primarily a way of attracting people to pick up those stories which, not being readers of Captain America, they might not have done with a Winter Soldier who wasn't Bucky Barnes? Quote:I think that if a rule is considered important (as the taboo against resurrecting certain characters was), it should generally apply to everyone. It should only be broken for a very important reason, and I do not consider the addition of yet another grim and gritty character to Marvel's roster of heroes important enough, not even for the (Golden Age and Cold War) nostalgia appeal, especially as we already have Jack Monroe. I guess I'm not one who thinks the rules should be followed just because it is a rule. If a good story can be told by breaking a rule then by all means break the rule. For example I personally enjoyed seeing Ben Grimm's Aunt Petunia and that she was presented as attractive instead of the old battleax Ben described her as. Everyone else but me probably hated it though. As to whether Bucky coming back was actually a good story...well your mileage may vary. I don't think you liked it, I'm indifferent and other people loved it. Any other writer could have brought Bucky back and Brubaker was the one deemed lucky enough to get away with it. I don't think bringing Bucky back should be the be all end all of determining whether his work is any good or not. I agree it comes off as a little flash in the pan though.

Posted On Today at 05:36:44 pm EDT by Menshevik [Reply] [Quote] [New] Quote:Quote:But I have a problem with the contention that Brubaker's run on Captain America was only as great as you say it is because he resurrected Bucky Barnes. If Brubaker is as great as he say he is, then he should have been able to write stories that are as great or better without using Bucky Barnes for instance by using some other Golden Age character (resurrecting not Bucky Barnes, but the guy who replaced him in the closing stages of World War 2) or creating a new character with personal ties to Steve Rogers like e. g. Arnie Roth in the 1980s. Quote: But he didn't. He resurrected Bucky. Judging him on the merits of how good a writer he would be seen as if he never resurrected Bucky is sophistry. Quote:If his work's not good it's not good. Brubaker should be judged on the work he did not on how crappy you think he would be if he hadn't gotten away with violating the resurrecting Bucky taboo. What I'm on about is the way a lot of people seem to conflate "breaking a taboo" or "breaking the rules" with "good writing", to mistake the former with the latter. And I think Blargh's contention Quote:Quote:Quote:Without Bucky coming back from the dead, we would never have had Brubaker's wonderful runs on Cap and Winter Solider. comes dangerously close to that. So I wrote that if Brubaker is as great as his admirers say then I see no reason why his runs on Captain America and Winter Soldier couldn't have been as great with a Winter Soldier who wasn't Bucky Barnes. (It shouldn't surprise you that I think any competent writer should have been able to do this). This was not, as you seem to think, an attempt to have Brubaker judged on stories he didn't write. But I would like to remind people that breaking rules/taboo can be and all too often is just a sales ploy, a way of generating publicity. In this case, was resurrecting Bucky Barnes essential to the Winter Soldier stories, or was it primarily a way of attracting people to pick up those stories which, not being readers of Captain America, they might not have done with a Winter Soldier who wasn't Bucky Barnes? I think that if a rule is considered important (as the taboo against resurrecting certain characters was), it should generally apply to everyone. It should only be broken for a very important reason, and I do not consider the addition of yet another grim and gritty character to Marvel's roster of heroes important enough, not even for the (Golden Age and Cold War) nostalgia appeal, especially as we already have Jack Monroe.