#I was a big Spidey fan as a teen but the like decade since then has kinda expanded that in a way I haven’t caught up with

[joyfuladorable]

I meant more of a… in relation to how she’d feel about saving her father from the Canon. How would she balance her father’s willingness to sacrifice for the greater good versus her desire to hypothetically save his life? And how would she connect that to Miles?

Ohh! Thanks for the additional context!

She’d probably be pretty damn conflicted!! She’s a hero! She wants to save people!! But, she’s also a kid and now has peers who are older and more experienced than her telling her about Canon and how “things are supposed to go” to preserve the Multiverse. Miguel has “proof” that deviating would lead to disaster!

And she’d try to find comfort in the idea of fate, I think. Presumably, after ITSV, she experiences some BIG Tragedies and likely gets support and empathy from the other Spideys who’d be like “sorry, kid, it just Has to be this way.” I don’t think that mentality would stick, at first? Maybe she’d run an algorithm or calculations or make theories because (like Pavitr like Miles like Hobie) she’d believe that there’s a way to do Both, save people despite Canon and preserve the Multiverse.

But maybe the math keeps just not Working and she just gets tired and more Tired. And what does it really matter? It’s not like she can go back in time and save her dad anyways…. He made his choice (heroic yet tragic) and she’s had to mourn and live with it ever since. It’s not like she could’ve stopped all the Other Things that have happened since, either…

And then comes Miles. A friend, a teen she’d dismissed at first cuz he wasn’t up to snuff and there were other more competent Spideys to collaborate with… then their attempt to keep him safe failed and he proved them all Wrong. Peni watches as he learns about Canon Events and realizes his dad is going to Die.

But he doesn’t accept it. He’s going to prove them wrong, save his dad, stop Spot. He has the chance, and he’s going to Take It.

Maybe that wakes Peni up from this fugue state of resignation. She’s a Hero. She Wants to Save People. She didn’t get that chance with her dad, but she can sure as hell help Miles save his.

[hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger]

One More Day 10 years later

I know some people might be bummed by the realization that we’ve been living with the burning garbage pile that is post-One More Day Spider-Man for a full decade now.

So I’d like to make this post for people to look on the bright side of this sorry situation.

To begin with, we have Renew Your Vows.

This isn’t just a big deal because it goes some way to filling that big married/family orientated Spider-Man shaped hole we’ve had since December 2007.

There mere existence of this title and its success at the time of this writing is genuinely important contributors to the hopeful reversal of One More Day. In a day and age where some Marvel titles struggle to make it a full year Renew Your Vows has passed that milestone and so far shows no signs of stopping.

Now I preach caution. This is an out of universe title that just shook up it’s status quo, lost big name and popular writer/artist team in exchange for ones of comparatively lesser status, has a new status quo too similar to other more well known/popular characters and represents something Marvel have been shown to be institutionally opposed to.

So as much as we don’t want it to happen, enjoy the ride while it lasts and be prepared for the series to get cancelled sooner or later, probably within the forthcoming year.

But always remember RYV volume 2 and the original 5 issues have when you really grade them fairly been clear cut successes, both financially, critically and creatively.

All three of those things sing in defiance of Marvel’s basic contentions that:

 a)      An older/married/family man Peter Parker wouldn’t sell well

b)      That an older/married/family man Peter Parker limits storytelling opportunities.

 These sentiments are also to a lesser extent echoed in the ASM newspaper strip that has continued to depict a married Spider-Man throughout the post-OMD period, which carried additional weight to it since that has more direct involvement of Stan Lee himself, effectively demonstrating that Spider-Man’s co-creator opposed OMD.

 But that ain’t all. However you feel about how they use her, Marvel have clearly demonstrated an at least basic acknowledgement that Mary Jane is a popular character in her own right which greatly helps the cause of reversing OMD. Just 2 years ago her brief appearances in Invincible Iron Man sent TWO issues of that title into multiple printings.

 Furthermore let’s remember that ever since Amazing #600 at the earliest and Power Play most recently Marvel have teased the possible reversal of OMD or at least reunion of Peter and Mary Jane as a way to spike sales. And it’s usually worked. Equally they know that pouring salt in that wound gets the fanbase riled up, which in their deluded minds is a good thing.

 Marvel KNOW there is a very large and very vocal group of Spider-Man fans out there who WANT the marriage back and they KNOW they can make money off of that. In fact they know that group constitutes the majority, hence why we never got a Peter Parker married to Gwen Stacy or Black Cat Secret Wars mini-series or continuation. And literally every poll ever conducted since 2007 (regardless of their legitimacy) has shown clear cut preference for OMD to be reversed/for Spider-Man to be married to Mary Jane.

 That’s only a good thing for the cause.

  We can even see some glimmer of hope in unlikely places. As controversial as Michelle was in Spider-Man: Homecoming if she is indeed (as many interpret her to be) a take on Mary Jane Marvel Studios is on some level feeding a mass pop culture incentive for people to know, like and indeed EXPECT Mary Jane in their Spidey media.

  The 5 year long Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon, despite it’s poor quality, did much the same thing. Even if these also push a teenage Spider-Man they also push a Spider-Man for whom Mary Jane is clearly a part of his life. This goes even moreso for the much anticipated Spider-Man Playstation 4 video game where (to my understanding) Mary Jane is even a playable character!

 Want some more good news? It seems two of the biggest and most influential detractors of the Spider Marriage are leaving positions of power. Dan Slott will end a 10 year run on Amazing Spider-Man and hopefully forever leave Spider-Man work behind him. His work was in fact the very first to mean spiritedly rub salt in the wound of Spider Marriage lovers and he has been strongly outspoken against the marriage’s existence and in favour of the need for One More Day. Losing his can only be a good thing for anyone who wants OMD reversed. We are also losing Axel Alonso who is also an opponent of the marriage and has been since his days editing the Spider books. Replacing his as EIC of Marvel is Cebulski who, based upon his work, is at least not actively opposed to the marriage.

 Finally some food for thought.

 Consider that sales of Amazing Spider-Man whilst better than the rest of Marvel are still lower than they were during Straczynski’s run when the market place technically was worse off, when there were not as many gimmicks and events artificially inflating sales and the Spider Marriage was both in place and promoted heavily/positively.

 Consider that it is inevitable that the powers that be at Marvel comics will someday be replaced by those who are from a generation when the marriage existed and was promoted positively. It is also highly likely that these new people in power will be Spider-Man fans (and therefore likely proponents of the marriage) due to Spider-Man’s perennial popularity which (thanks to films, TV shows, video games, merchandise and a guy named Venom) reached new heights during the years he was married. During this period merchandise and wider media also promoted Mary Jane as Spidey’s key love interest (and even depicted her married to him).

 As the current regime has so aptly demonstrated, there is a tendency for better or for worse (usually for worse) for a creative team to try and on some level recreate their childhoods with whatever characters they are working on. This more than anything was the most powerful motivator for OMD, not the nonsense about ‘creative limitations’. Joe Quesada and others within Marvel grew up on an unmarried Spider-Man and never liked the fact that that changed, and so resolved to change it back.

 They felt this way in response to, at worst, a C grade Spider-Man story that (to them) upended the Spider-Man they knew and loved. Putting aside how mass Spider-Man fandom at that time felt very differently and were supportive of the marriage, it stands to reason that future generations who grew up with the marriage will feel the same way about what One More Day did to Spider-Man.

 Only tenfold because One More Day not only retconned their childhoods, changed the status quo they knew and loved but also led to stories that actively took a piss on what they knew and loved. Oh and isn’t merely a C grade story but widely recognized as one of the absolute WORST Marvel stories of all time and unquestionably THE worst Spider-Man story across his 55 year history.

 One way or another, sooner or later, that WILL be erased I promise you.

 Want some proof?

 Well for starters way back in 2008 former Spider-Man editor Stephen Wacker outright SAID that in 20 years time (the same time period the marriage lasted) One More Day will probably be undone.

 But if you want something more substantial than that look at DC Comics’ history.

 Acclaimed comics writer Goeff Johns and former DC EIC Dan Didio have made practically made their careers from taking DC’s characters in directions that reconstruct the status quos of their own childhoods.

 But even more significantly than that DC have demonstrated multiple times an ability to course correct their characters even YEARS after they have been taken in controversial directions.

 Hal Jordan became a mass murdering villain in the infamous Emerald Twilight storyline of the 1990s before around 10 years later Johns redeemed the character, brought him back to life and manoeuvred him into the role of the main Green Lantern in an acclaimed storyline.

 In 2016 DC started to course correct their entire universe after rebooting it in 2011.

 After making Wonder Woman unrecognizable DC hired her former writer Greg Rucka to return to the title and reinstate much of the continuity and philosophy that defined her character.

 Johns worked his old tricks to have Barry Allan redeemed for causing the reboot in the first place.

 But no example should give Spider Marriage fans more hope than Superman’s situation.

 In 2011 DC took Superman from a married man in his 30s who staunchly regarded himself as human in spite of his alien heritage and made him a man in his 20s, who’d never been married and felt himself an isolated alien God amongst men. Lois Lane, his iconic lover, was demonized and pushed aside in favour of him dating fellow heroine Wonder Woman thus fulfilling the fanfiction shipper desires of many within DC editorial.

 But in 2015 DC RE-introduced the old married Superman and even made him a father. Then they went a step further and had him live in the shadows within the main DC universe, watching his younger counterpart. Then in 2016 they took the bold move of killing off their new 2011 reboot Superman and replacing him with the old Superman. The Superman who now was approaching his 40s, who’d been married for years, had a young pre-teen son and came with a history that had (give or take) lasted between 1986 to 2011.

 THAT was who DC made their main Superman, complete with old and beloved Superman scribe Dan Jurgens at the helm.

 And it WORKED.

 Sales and critical acclaim greatly increased on the Superman titles.

 Then DC went one step further in a 2017 storyline where they outright ERASED the 2011 rebooted version of Superman and essentially within their newly rebooted universe reinstated most of Superman’s history dating back to 1986, effectively RE-canonizing it.

 And again...sales and critical acclaim were in a healthier place than before. In fact many Superman fans have declared the past 2 years or so a true renaissance for the character.

 DC’s decisions with Superman and it’s success bode incredibly well for the hopes and ambitions most Spider-Man fans have for the eventual reversal of One More Day and the restoration of the Spider-Marriage.

 As bad as the past 10 years have been try to bear some of this stuff in mind going into the future.

[mrmichaelchadler]

In the '90s, Batman was at its best in Mask of the Phantasm

Before Christopher Nolan’s trilogy, the only movie that took Batman seriously was a cartoon.

Originally a direct-to-video release, Warner Bros. Animation rushed “Batman: Mask of the Phantasm” into theaters 25 years ago next month. Created by the Emmy award-winning team behind “Batman: The Animated Series,” this feature-length animated film was thrown into theaters during the 1993 Christmas season alongside heavyweights like “Schindler’s List” and ���Philadelphia.” Of course, “Mask of the Phantasm” flopped.

Even as Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel praised its 1994 home video release, “Mask of the Phantasm” existed as an overlooked stop-gap between Tim Burton and Joel Schumacher’s live action entries, 1992’s “Batman Returns” and 1995’s “Batman Forever.” However, “Mask of the Phantasm” did what Burton and Schumacher couldn’t—it gave us a reason to care about Batman. Until the ‘00s, “Mask of the Phantasm” was the only Batman movie that made Batman the subject of its film, not an accessory.

Directed by Eric Radomski and Bruce W. Timm from a story penned by “The Animated Series” vet Alan Burnett, “Mask of the Phantasm” shows The Dark Knight investigating another masked vigilante named the Phantasm. The new presence appears in a cloud of smoke, with a blade for a fist, attacking Gotham City mobsters. At the same time, Wayne’s old flame, Andrea Beaumont (voiced by Dana Delaney), has returned. Could she be the Phantasm?

Through film noir-style flashbacks, “Mask of the Phantasm” presents a vulnerable Bruce Wayne (voiced by Kevin Conroy) reckoning with his past while facing a violent future as Batman.

While other Batman movies flirt with Wayne’s haunted past, this is the main focus of “Mask of the Phantasm.” Not only did Wayne lose his parents at a young age, he also lost the love of his life, his only semblance of normalcy, in Beaumont. The audience is finally given displays of his anger, guilt and disappointment. In the midst of making another challenging decision, Wayne stares at his parents’ portrait in his manor, wondering if he’ll reconnect with Beaumont. In flashbacks, Wayne visits his parents’ grave, seeking advice about his love for Beaumont, and later asking permission to become Batman.

The movie also shows Wayne’s difficult transition into a superhero. A man who brazenly fights crime, be it in a ski mask or blue sweatshirt, becomes Batman. After these sequences, we see Wayne bloody, bandaged and bruised, which felt like a first at the time. Even after he has become the famed vigilante, Wayne perks himself atop a skyscraper as Batman. While in costume, Wayne is preoccupied with the past as he spies on Beaumont going on a date with councilman Arthur Reeves (voiced by Hart Bochner). The rain pours as Batman grimaces, focusing his binoculars on Reeves and Beaumont sharing a romantic moment. Those types of details were never delivered in live-action Batman movies until “Batman Begins.”

Unlike every live-action Batman movie, “Mask of the Phantasm” runs under 80 minutes. Rather than stretching out a movie over two hours, it excels as a lesson in tight storytelling. As Siskel noted in his review, “Every image counts.” Each scene moves the story along at a rapid pace. There are no lulls. Just as soon as the Phantasm is introduced, taking out crime boss Chuckie Sol, the film moves to Reeves yelling for Batman’s head, then Wayne hearing of Beaumont’s return.

Ebert added that “Mask of the Phantasm” worked well because “animation can do some things live-action can’t.” An obvious statement, but it’s spot-on and still applicable to modern day comic-book movies. Here, Wayne climbs the grill of an 18-wheeler and throws spiked bombs at its tires. The truck flips, creating an impressive sequence that countless action movies have duplicated with success and failure. Later, Wayne confronts a gang of punks, jumping towards one motorcycle-riding baddie and landing a punch. It’s an acrobatic stunt modern CGI still can’t replicate as naturally.

In contrast, Burton and Schumacher’s Batman movies are two-hour-long time capsules of each director’s style. “Batman” is dark, and then Jack Nicholson appears as The Joker, jamming some Prince. “Batman Returns” is full of Burton’s quirks (leather, prosthetics, an appearance by Paul Reubens) and not much else. Burton’s films are both more interested in their villains—Joker & Penguin/Catwoman—than the hero himself.

Schumacher’s aren’t really interested in anything at all. The director lit scenes with neon pinks, greens and blues, shot action at canted angles, and overstuffed his casts with big names playing meaningless parts (hello, Drew Barrymore, Debi Mazar, Alicia Silverstone, Vivica A. Fox and Elle Macpherson). Two decades later, even Schumacher admitted that “Batman & Robin” was a toy commercial.

In comparison, “Mask of the Phantasm” doesn’t feel like a product of the ‘90s. Instead, half of the movie feels like it’s set in the 1940s. The creators credited “Citizen Kane” as inspiration for the film’s flashbacks. You can find more examples of that classic feel in “Mask of the Phantasm”’s score, architecture and automobile design, and mobsters using Tommy guns. Even Mark Hamill’s performance as Joker is exaggerated with one-liners like, “So, what’s an old-timer want with a two-timer like me?” and “Very cute, but I can blow smoke too, toots!” More than anything, Batman’s chief occupation, in the early comics and here in the film, is that of a private eye.

12 years after “Mask of the Phantasm,” Christopher Nolan solved the live-action Batman dilemma with his trilogy, creating three box-office hits that were dark and had stakes. But by 2016, Batman was back to a supporting role, huffing and puffing in “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice,” “Justice League,” and appearing out of nowhere in “Suicide Squad.” Nowadays, Batman is better served in LEGO movies.

While Batman himself may be in a transitional phase in American entertainment, DC and Warner Bros. Animation were ahead of the curve with “Mask of the Phantasm.” Since that release, the DC animated universe has continued to impress with direct-to-video titles such as “Superman: Doomsday,” “Batman: Under the Red Hood,” and “Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths,” to name a few. But with the influx of movies in theaters and on demand, what isn’t playing on 3,000 screens can be easily ignored.

There is some reason to hope, though. Besides “The LEGO Batman Movie”’s success, DC released another animated movie this summer with “Teen Titans Go! To the Movies.” While “Teen Titans Go!” wasn’t a box-office smash, it grossed more than $51 million worldwide, recouping its $10 million budget. “Mask of thePhantasm” couldn’t make its $6 million budget back. Like Marvel’s “Deadpool” and Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Teen Titans Go!” is also full of non-stop humor and gags that make more sense to adults (Nicolas Cage as Superman is a nice touch for geeks who wanted “Superman Lives”). But, here comes Marvel quick to respond with the upcoming “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” headlined by Miles Morales (voiced by Sameik Moore), a half-Puerto Rican and half-African-American teenager with Spidey sense.

Unlike “Mask of the Phantasm,” “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” is backed by an unrushed promotional campaign, and an awareness that anything can be done with animated storytelling. Marvel knows it can add elements like Spider-Ham (John Mulaney), an older Peter Parker (Jake Johnson), and Daredevil villain Kingpin (Liev Schreiber). Sure, it’s a gamble, but “Into the Spider-Verse” will come closer to its source than any live-action adaptation possibly could because it’s drawn just like the comic books. Already, fans are salivating at the prospect of seeing a cartoon Spidey as its trailer has nearly 30 million hits on YouTube.

The likely success of “Spider-Verse” could lead to a number of other high-profile animated projects: Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale’s Superman For All Seasons would be a perfect feature-length animated film; Martian Manhunter is the type of character whose story would get botched by CGI. And why would anyone try to make a live-action Watchmen again, when you could make that an excellent animated miniseries? With “Mask of the Phantasm,” DC seemingly knew how well its characters were served by feature-length cartoons. Now, 25 years later, it looks like DC and Warner Bros. Animation are once again chasing Marvel.

Like Bruce Wayne, DC is constantly reckoning with its past mistakes, trying to force a new future. If DC’s next move is to rush an animated feature out to theaters, no matter how great it is, it might take another 25 years for audiences to come around. With regards to “Mask of the Phantasm,” it’s a shame it took so long, because in the ‘90s, it was the only Batman movie that mattered.

from All Content https://ift.tt/2DbEe7w