#omds i actually hate it save me | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 5 years ago

Text

Toughts on this deviantart post?

Found this https://www.deviantart.com/hotwar696/art/Who-is-the-real-Gary-Stu-835695208 it’s pretty bad i think. Or at least misleading. Toughts?

Let’s throw up the image and text for full context

A lot of Conway/Romita fans think that Venom is an awful Gary Stu. Ironically they like the post clone saga Norman Osborn who is not even the same character as the one back the in Conway/Romita days. Despising Harry Osborn when back in the days he simply did not have enough time for him. Also despite what post clone saga stories might have told you he only became a villain because an accident gave him brain damage. Yes, that’s right with the exception of the animated Spider-Man series from 1994 the pre clone saga Norman Osborn was not some inhuman monster who became insane. He was a tragic bussinessman who lost his wife and got brain damage after an explosion to his face. Becoming a villain after an explosion to the face by the way is also the villain origin for Dr. Octopus so yeah Norman Osborn was not a very original villain even before becoming the Gary Stu version of Lex Luthor.Image size

I am going to address every point here, but let me get the most important thing out of the way first.

This is not a valid point to make for two big reasons.

1) The first is that antagonists* do not count as Gary/Marty Stus/Mary Sues.

The function of an antagonists within fiction is to oppose and challenge the protagonists. By having them be extremely powerful, hyper capable, have immense accomplishments and so on, you build them up as a challenge to over come, as someone the protagonist is the underdog in comparison to.

A classic example from manga and anime is Freeza from Dragon Ball. As originally portrayed he can reduce whole planets to dust with a single finger and the true limits of his power are beyond imagining. Had the protagonists all attacked him at once along with all of Freeza’s subordinates they still would’ve lost because he is more powerful and all of them combined. He withstands the most powerful version of the most powerful technique in the series up until that point.

Were this character the protagonist he’d almost certainly a Marty Stu. But as the antagonist he is a supremely effective challenge for the heroes to over come precisely because he does outstrip them so throughly.

2) It’s very obvious the OP is reacting against arguments he’s heard from one specific or several specific people on an incredibly narrow topic. That’s fine. But he’s broadbrushing it as though it’s a widely held opinion when it’s at best widely held within a niche within a niche within another niche.

Like, this is obviously a discussion he’s had at Toonzone or some other similar forum because he references BTAS, Spec Spidey and has drawn both Norman and Venom in their 1994 designs.

But let’s talk about the broader points made.

- None of that symbiote crap. I don’t disagree that it’s myopic and disingenuous to dismiss symbiotes on principle. Putting aside how they’ve been a staple for over 30 years now (and their recent stories have been very good in fact), it smacks of failing to look beyond your own preferences. There are bad symbiote stories and characters. There are even things that inherently suck on principle within Spider-Man. But the symbiotes are not among them. They are exceptions to the rule and proven that over and over. The person the OP is referncing is entitled to not like them but not to dismiss them on principle. I hate Screwball but I don’t think her concept is inherently shit. I liked her in he Fake Red manga!

- Joker in BTAS was a wuss, Spec cartoon Norman was better. I mean, maybe that’s true. there can be extenuating circumstances applying to both. But the Joke screaming doesn’t make him a wuss. if he was a wuss he wouldn’t have taken on Superman or Batman repeatedly. Norman might have been scared but so full of spite that he wasn’t going to give Vulture the satisfaction.

- He technically killed Spider-Man because he killed Ben Reilly. Well, first of all he was trying to kill Peter. Second of all ben didn’t look stupid. he looked identical to Peter but with blonde hair; how is that stupid? Third of all killing a clone of Spider-Man isn’t technically killing him, if it was Norman would’ve routinely been murdering Spidey clone. Fourth of all the OP is framing this as a grand win for Norman because he got to kill Spidey technically. it is a win for him but not for that reason. Ben sacrificed himself to save Peter who Norman was really aiming at

- Killing off baby May, apart from being debatable at all due to the presentation of that story, didn’t prevent Peter from maturing. it prevented him from maturing a specific way but it didn’t stop him from maturing period. Dealing with a miscarriage is an experience that can age a person. Peter went back to ESU to complete his education immediately after that and some years later he became a teacher under JMS’ run. That’s also a totally meta-textual point to make and therefore doesn’t apply to Norman being a Gary Stu. Successfully preventing character development is something you attribute to writers not the characters.

- I don’t get rh point about Nathanial Gray or Von Strucker

- Yes he was the Kingpin of Europe. How does that make him a Gary Stu? Wison Fisk was the Kingpin of America as were many other characters.

- Yes he was President of the USA but only in an out of continuity story, Earth X (and maybe other ones too). The argumentation of the OP is broken because he is conflating multiple different versions as the same thing. pre-OMD, post-OMD, Spec cartoon, Earth X etc. By this logic Venom would also be a Gary Stu and so would countless other characters. Superman would be a Gary Stu because he is DC’s Jesus but also DC’s Hitler.

- The next point is a total strawman. Putting aside how in my experience people throw more shade at Norman than is deserved, even Norman fans like myself do not deny BAD stories with the character exist. What’s ironic is that he has chosen the more obvious targets like the Gathering of Five or the Final Chapter.

Both of those stories are in most respects much worse than Sins Past and the element that makes Sins past bad isn’t even the fact that Norman slept with Gwen. It’s the simple fact that a woman who was clearly not pregnant in the Romita years apparently was and neither she nor MJ seemed to give a shit about the children after they were born. The further irony of his referencing this story is that he’s framed his argument as Silver Age stans are ignoring stuff like Sins Past. the reality is it is Silver/Bronze Age stans who HATE Sins Past more than anyone else in the Spider-Fandom precisely because it messes with the stuff they stan

His referencing of the Clone Saga is also divorced from context. Everyone worth their salt is aware Norman was never originally intended as the villain of the Clone Saga. That was a late addition, and noticeably a late addition at a time when the Clone Saga stories being told were on the whole actually good! Norman’s return story was on balance good! It got a trade paperback in the 1990s when only the most popular stories got such treatment. It is utterly disingenuous to hold the worst of the Clone Saga up as a Norman Osborn story because those were never written with him in mind as the villain.

Additionally I do not know why he is referencing Maximum Carnage or Superior Spider-Man. Okay, maybe he means the former is a symbiote story as opposed to a Carnage story specifically. But if he’s trying to prove Norman is a gary Stu but Venom is not why would you treat Maximum Carnage as a general symbiote story rather than cite a Venom specific story? And it still wouldn’t explain citing Superior Spider-Man. This is about contrasting Norman and Venom, what did Doc Ock have to do with any of this?

- Citing Morlun is equally confusing. The point the OP is trying to make is that silver/bronze age fans put Norman on a pedestal and look down on Venom. Putting aside how that really misrepresents the situation, why would you cite a villain who is not only NOT a silver/bronze age character but appeared long after Venom and if anything gets more disdain than Venom does. Old school fans who dislike Venom or symbiotes on principle do not generally like Morlun, if anything they dislike him more than Venom as they regard mysticism even more inappropriate for Spider-Man than aliens.

- The OP finally cites the Final Chapter but failed to do it at the appropriate point in his rant and also misrepresents it. He’s conflated the bomb implanted into Aunt May’s head in that story with the revelation that she was impersonated by an actress in ASm #400. He’s combined both characters and events. How do you fuck up that badly? The actress died of natural causes and then much later we got the implanted bomb. Norman never killed the actress, the actress agreed to work with him specifically because she was already dying. Also the guy’s grammar is messed up. I’m pretty sure ‘operated into her’ isn’t a real phrase.

- ‘A chad lady killer’…um…what? Isn’t that term intended to be slang for a kind of James Bond figure? A ‘man’s man’ who has lots of sex with women? It doesn’t mean a man who kills women is a manly. Whether people use the term chad ironically or sincerely the overwhelming majority aren’t going around proclaiming Jack the Ripper as the ultimate real life Chad.

- The framing of Norman’s relationship with Gwen is misrepresentative of what happened. It pretends like Norman had se with Gwen specifically to get one over on Peter. He didn’t. He wasn’t even aware he was the Goblin at that time, that Peter was Spider-Man and very likely didn’t know Peter had feelings for Gwen as they weren’t dating at that time. Norman had sex with Gwen because they were both vulnerable and had a moment of passion.

I’d also question his designating Gwen as Peter’s second love interest. I guess that’d be accurate if you are speaking strictly in terms of Peter’s regular girlfriends. But normally love interest means someone the readers are aware is being framed as potential romantic partner for the protagonist. In this sense Liz was the first love interest, Betty was the second and Gwen was the third.

- WTF does shit was so cash even mean?

Now for the text.

-A lot of Conway/Romita fans think that Venom is an awful Gary Stu. Ironically they like the post clone saga Norman Osborn who is not even the same character as the one back the in Conway/Romita days.

Yeah, there isn’t a lot. The vast majority of Conway/Romita stans do not like post-Clone Saga Norman.

And is he not the same character s he was before.

From a certain POV that’s true. But that’s chiefly because silver Age Norman was usually an amnesic who wasn’t his true self. His Goblin persona in the Silver Age is actually fairly similar to his post-Clone Saga self. The reason for the different presentation is simply a passage of time. Doc Ock in the 1990s wasn’t presented identically to how he was in the silver age just because times had changed. The Joker wasn’t presented the same way in the post-Killing Joke or Death in the Family eras of Batman as he was back in the 1940s.

The core of the character, that this guy was a real nasty, egotistical, sadistic and power hungry monster? No, that was all the same it was just ramped up. Norman’s ‘ghost’ had evolved in the interim between his death and his return too. In a sense his place and framing within the mythos had always evolved with the times. It’s just that when he came back suddenly that wasn’t a metaphorical ghost but a flesh and blood character.

But the same can be said of any successful character over time as I outlined above. Shit Absolute Carnage depicted Carnage in a way that is not identical to how he was initially presented. But it was most definitily an evolution of that.

- “Despising Harry Osborn when back in the days he simply did not have enough time for him.”

Not true. The first time Norman began to remember he was the Goblin he got passive aggressive towards Harry. When he got his powers he was downright mean to him as depicted in ASM #40. But he also never despised Harry either. Norman always loved Harry in a toxic manner, through neglect or abuse. That was true post-Clone Saga.

In fact the entire reason Norman initiated the Clone Saga was specifically because he wanted revenge for Harry’s death.

And again, the OP is treating this as a wholesale invention of the post-clone saga era when it wasn’t. Norman being an abusive father was introduced long before anyone was thinking about the Clone Saga. It was established in the Child Within circa 1991 IIRC. Later (when the Clone Saga was being planned I think) it was further explored in Spec annual 1994, but that just added to what we already knew from the forrmer story. Shit, this depiction of Harry and Norman’s relationship was showcased in Untold Tales of Spider-Man. That was both set long before the Clone Saga, IIRC written before Norman’s return was decided upon and written by someone who definitely didn’t agree with his return.

Norman never despised Harry, but he was a shitty Dad. He was a shitty Dad in ASm #40. He didn’t just have no time for Harry, he neglected him specifically because he wanted to gain money and thereby gain power.

Even if you do argue that Norman didn’t despise Harry in the silver age but did post-clone saga, so long as that change was organically introduced that makes it fine. better than fine as that’s simply more dramatically enriching than him being a nice guy who happens to not have time for his son.

- “Also despite what post clone saga stories might have told you he only became a villain because an accident gave him brain damage.”

LOL nope.

a) As I just said, even if this was a retcon of the post-Clone Saga era (which it wasn’t) it made Norman a better character. A man being bad because he got brain damage is a cliche, lazy, over simplistic explanation for his villainy. It’s also arguably less realistic and actually makes the characetr a lesser villain as some surgery and thereby might be able to fix them. In fact you could argue they are in effect a victim of their brain damage and thereby not accountable for their actions. That’s so much less substantive than someone’s life experiences shaping them into a horrible human being. By this author’s wn logic Doc Ock’s origin (pre-Clone Saga I might add) makes him a LESSER villain because it established that he was actually evil because of his life before his accident. that was just the straw that broke the camel’s back, he didn’t just get a knock to the noggin and wound up evil

b) If Norman’s evilness stems from brain damage how come when he was a nice guy in the silver age neither he nor Harry suggested surgery or medication to help heal that damage? That would’ve meant he’d never have been evil again

c) ASm #40 makes it clear he was a piece of shit BEFORE his accident. He was neglecting his son, railroading his partner, stealing his inventions and power hungry before getting brain damage.

d) You could easily argue Norman was always brain damaged the doctors just mistakenly believed his injuries stemmed from the accident

e) Child Within and Spec Annual 1994 established Norman as a psychopath before he got his powers. Both were written before the Clone Saga. Post-Clone Saga stories like Revenge of the Green Goblin merely built upon this, they didn’t wholesale invent it

“Yes, that’s right with the exception of the animated Spider-Man series from 1994 the pre clone saga Norman Osborn was not some inhuman monster who became insane.”

LOL nope again.

First of all, 1994-cartoon Norman WAS fairly sympathetic before becoming the Goblin. In the show he got a loan from Kingpin and was forced to pay off the debt by targeting Spider-Man. Even if he didn’t initially realise Fisk was a criminal when he got the loan, by the time he did realise going to the police would’ve resulted in him losing his son and/or his life. He wouldn’t be the first man to get in deep with the mob after all.

When his inital effort to kill Spider-Man failed he was forced to give Kingpin his company and attempted to get out from this by assasinating Fisk. This backfired hard endangering his son, but Norman risked his life to save Harry.

His whole character until season 3 was basically defined by being a morally grey character. he loved his son, he was maybe egotistical and a ruthless businessman but the worst things he did were either on Kingpin’s orders or attempts to free himself of a very powerful and very dangerous controlling force in his life.

Not a nice man, but a far cry from an inhuman monster or an insane person, at least until he was exposed to the Goblin gas.

SECOND of all if you are an inhumane monster how exactly do you then ‘go insane’? Aren’t they functionally the same thing within the context of the dicussion?

It’s also not representative of canonical Norman. Canonical Norman was a psychopath because of his life experiences and possibly hereditary mental illnesses within the family. The Goblin formula by empowering him sent him on an ego trip.

The OP isn’t even using the commonly held misconceptions about Norman Osborn, he’s just using his own very specific ones. Most people mistakenly believe the Goblin formula drove Norman nuts when ASM #40 just claims the accident gave him brain damage. Over time creators decided the formula itself makes the user nuts.

“He was a tragic bussinessman who lost his wife and got brain damage after an explosion to his face“

a) Unless I am mistaken there was little word paid to Norman’s wife in the Silver Age. And what little we got never presented Norman as being affected by her passing. That was an invention of the 1990s and 2000s; and a very good one at that.

b) Yes how tragic a businessman he was to have neglected his son, sought power, rail roaded his partner and stolen his inventions. Obviously none of that is bad. he only became bad after an explosion gave him brain damage.

c) Even if he really was a tragic businessman blah blah blah, that is a LESS EFFECTIVE villain and a LESS complex character than the post-clone saga guy we got

“Becoming a villain after an explosion to the face by the way is also the villain origin for Dr. Octopus so yeah Norman Osborn was not a very original villain even before becoming the Gary Stu version of Lex Luthor.”

I’ve already addressed the idiotic criticism that Norman became a Luthor knock off.

The OP is disingenuous on several levels with his other point as well though.

For starters brain damage was never the sum totality of Norman’s origin as a character. Doc Ock was just a guy who was at best maybe a little odd looking due to his arms then had an accident and became evil. that was it.

Not only was Ott far from the first villain with such an origin, but to sit there and say Norman was unoriginal merely because he also took a boom to the face is moronic. Norman’s life before his accident made him incredibly different to Otto. It made him comparatively more layered and complex next to the likes of Otto or the other rogues because he wasn’t nice initially, he had this strained relationship with his son and above all else he had this internal denial over his failings as a father. THAT shit doesn’t count as part of his origin? ALL that matters is explosion+brain damage=evil?

That’s obviously moving the goal posts to win.

And it’s a self-defeating argument. Silver Age Norman is bad because he is unoriginal (even though functionally he actually was). Okay, in the 1990s and beyond he got a revised origin that was more original. But that’s bad because changed him from his Silver Age self.

Goal posts. They a movin!

Not to mention as I already said DOC OCK’s origin was also changed so his villainy didn’t just stem from a random accident that knocked his noggin.

So Doc Ock sucks too right?

Finally, I say this as someone who likes Norman AND Venom.

I would never call Venom a Gary Stu. I’ve never even SEEN anyone claim Venom was a Gary Stu. BOTH Norman and Venom get under appreciated.

Fuck i wrote like over 10 essays DEFENDING Venom.

You can pass my comments onto this idiot if you wish.

*Not necesarilly villains as you can have a villain protagonist, see Superior Spider-Man

#Venom #Norman Osborn #Green Goblin #Eddie Brock #Spider-Man #Doctor Octopus #otto octavius #Gwen Stacy #Clone Saga #Venom symbiote #symbiotes #Superior Spider-Man #Maximum Carnage #submission

29 notes · View notes

mrsspidermanmaryjanewatsonparker · 7 years ago

Text

It’s really obvious Joe Quesada was responsible for One More Day guys, not J. Michael Straczynski

Another reason why blaming Straczynski for One More Day is wrong?

The worst parts of it were the deal and the involvement of Mephisto.

And I strongly suspect that those elements were Quesada’s doing not Straczynski’s.

Not gonna lie some of this is based upon cultural prejudices so you’ve been warned.

Simply put the big notion that JMS would be responsible for Mephisto’s involvement is premeditated upon the idea that magic and mysticism was a major theme in his run on Spider-Man.

But here is the thing though.

Traditionally in the Western world AND in the Marvel universe there has usually been subtle lines of delineation between the kind of worldly mysticism and magic of other cultures, stereotypical ‘the wise old man from the East’, and the occult devil worshiping kind.

How many ‘wise man from the East who knows ancient magic’ have you (unfortunately) seen wherein their portrayed in a way that conveys wisdom, power and other positive attributes (not saying this means it’s not racist, but you see what I mean).

In contrast you have the people who help out Damien in the Omen movies, who’re decidedly agents of utter evil.

This applies to the Marvel Universe too. Not unsurprisingly given that these are American characters, written by American writers set usually in fictional American settings.

Consequently you have the kinds of magic and mystical sources Doctor Strange, the Norse Gods and other entities are associated with but in-universe guys like Mephisto, Ghost Rider and Damian Hellstorm are narratively coded differently.

Doctor Strange might fight forces of evil but they are usually Eldritch Abominations akin to something from Lovecraft. They’re broad forces of nature a lot of the time and even the ones who aren’t tend to be incredibly powerful magical jerks.

The Norse Gods are more grandiose and traditionally Epic, as are the members of the Greek pantheon.

Mephisto and characters associated with demons and Hell though are often portrayed as sadistic and encounters with them have horrible personal costs that usually play out as Aesop fables of some kind.

Why is recognizing this distinction important?

Because throughout his run Straczynski on Spider-Man expressed a clear preference for the former types than the latter. Even evil characters associated with mysticism weren’t strictly speaking demonic. His concept was to emphasise the spider aspect of Spider-Man. The animal and nature connection, hence Morlun, Shathra and the Other were magical but all connected in a ‘circle of life, law of the jungle’ kind of way.

Morlun and Shathra were evil but basically just wanted to eat Spider-Man. In the Other Peter died and was reborn as a spider in real life sheds its skin. Encounters with Doctor Strange similarly presented the forces of magic as relatively neutral, bigger than distinctions between good and evil but subject to abuse by individual people (huh, almost like it was riffing on ‘great power comes great responsibility’ or something)?

Same deal with Loki in JMS’ run. Loki wan’t presented as evil and the force he and Spidey teamed up against was just a force of trickery and chaos, not strictly evil but a threat to public safety all the same. Even Dormammu is more an 1960s fever dream conception of evil than strictly speaking clearly demonic within a Judea-Christian context.

What I am saying is for Straczynski to then turn around and make use of Mephisto actually seems to go against his preferences in dabbling with magic and mysticism. It’s too obvious for him, too black and white.

But then we have Quesada.

Quesada who famously was raised Catholic. And not just incidentally Catholic. Catholic to the point where he is majorly associated with the most famous Catholic superhero ever who also just so happens to dress as a devil. I am of course speaking about Matt Murdock, a.k.a. Daredevil.

Providing artwork along with the writing of fellow Catholic Kevin Smith, Quesada infamously produced the Guardian Devil storyline in the late 1990s and early 2000s and thereby helped save Marvel (and secure start him on the road to becoming EIC) by introducing the Marvel Knights line of comics.

So prolific was this story that the ramifications of it are still felt to this day in Daredevil and artwork from it is still used in promotional material for the character.

And WHAT does the Guardian Devil storyline happen to involve?

It involves Daredevil believing he’s encountering the anti-christ and the death of his long time love interest Karen Page, thereby making him single, something people at Marvel were evidently interested in since the story itself tries to have Daredevil call up his ex Black Widow for sex even before Karen has died.

....Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

Not convinced?

Okay.

How about the fact that Quesada once tried to justify One More Day by putting across a weird, weird story about his mother:

Let me digress for a bit, I promise there’s a point to this story.

I was raised by a very middle-class family. We went through some very rough financial times, but for the most part we were eventually okay. Both my mom and dad were old-school: To them, what was most important was that their kid had more in life and more opportunities than they had growing up. Many years ago, after my grandfather passed away, my father inherited the house owned by my grandfather. My dad was an amazing man, but he wasn’t great with money and he had a tendency to worry about things to extremes. My mom, having known him for so many years, knew this all too well. They had separated for some time and eventually reunited, so there was a lot of water under that bridge. Sometime after receiving the house, both he and my mom decided that they wanted to sell it, take the money and move to Florida, and buy a house there. My mom was especially pleased with this idea because owning a house was a proper inheritance to hand down to their son when the time came.

So, as planned, off they went to good ol’ Miami. My mom was thrilled, but only momentarily. They had some money in the bank, but my dad decided to rent a home instead of buying one. For three years, he rented, despite my mom and I encouraging him to stop wasting money on rent buy a proper home. My dad always panicked when it came to big money issues and I suspect that’s why he hesitated. But one day he finally gave in and decided to go house shopping.

After months and months of looking and finally finding a place, and then going through all of the time it took to close the deal, he did it — he signed on the dotted line. The very next day, my mother showed him a half dollar-sized bruise and lump over one of her breast. It was cancer and it was very advanced. We were both floored. How could she hide this from us? I asked my mom how long she knew she had the lump, and she said that she’d discovered it right around the time that my dad started to get the itch to buy a house. She had decided not to say anything because if my father had known that she had this medical issue, he would have begun worrying about medical bills and would have never bought the house.

I was furious at her; I understood why she did it, but the cancer eventually took her from us way to soon. In her world, she wanted to make sure that our family had a home and she put that above her health. After knowing my dad for all those years, she knew exactly how he would have reacted. The truth of the matter is that she was right — he would have stopped looking for a home, he would have worried himself sick about what was coming down the road. What she failed to see, however, was that no house, no inheritance, could ever make up the loss of her in my life.

So, to me, MJ was doing the same thing. Not only did she force the issue, but she did everything she could to make sure that Mephisto wouldn’t screw Peter in the deal. And then in the end, when Peter is at the crossroads, she gives him the okay and the confidence to join her in the pact when she simply says, “Be my hero.

Putting aside how a house isn’t the same thign as a fucking wife and relationship, that story sounds waaaaaaay too personal and waaaaaay too close to One More Day for him to just conveniently have it as an appropriate analogy to explain someone else’s story decisions.

And frankly a story like that would turn psychiatrists’ eyes into dollar signs.

It’s really fucked up and even more fucked up that he walked away thinking and feeling about it this way.

Basically it HEAVILY implies OMD was half about him working through his issues with his mother’s death as much as it was about him hating Spider-Man being married (and apparently wanting him to sleep with a woman called Carlie who was named after his daughter and no I’m not making that up).

Take all this context into account and it becomes really, really unlikely that the ideas to use Mephisto and erase the marriage via a deal with him was Straczynski’s doing.

#j. michael straczynski #Joe Quesada #Spider-Man #aunt may #may parker #peter parker #mjwatsonedit #mary jane watson #Mary Jane Watson Parker #MJ Watson

13 notes · View notes

nekropaci · 8 years ago

Text

long post ahead

Collecting together all the information about Victor’s backstory and there’s nothing good

beside that he won 5 gold medal of GPF continuously - but with what prices, I’ve always been wondering. He clearly lives for skating so that’s what made him happy to do that but the audience and his career where also important for him, but in the present, he had been really tired and unhappy, and we still has no idea about his family circumstances and he seemed to be completely alone before he went to coach Yuri, and he said himself that life and love is like a completely new thing for him and neglected them during his whole career. ... And so now in the present we sees that he still works hard but there are many hints that his career is dying.

I like how much Yurio knows about him and around this is the only moment when he speaks about him with respect then next moment he starts shouting again but whatever, he is the only one who spoke about him this much and until the 10th episode where Victor starts commentating no one reveals too much more

and this is the point where you realize that he gained no life and love from working hard and winning all the gold medals for 20 yyyyears, sounds really dark but if he would say that so seriously he would be dead already inside and not being so successful and cute, so to reduce that it means he just didn’t care about life and love so basically didn’t care about himself during his career and working-practicing his ass off ---- but to think that rather seriously he where really melancholic and lonely after all

I mean if you think about it he and Yuri has the opposite problems: Victor lacks life and love -so friends and family members around him and caring about himself

meanwhile Yuri has friends, family, cares about himself a lot and eating katsudon and drinks if he looses and has the onsen all the time but unlike Victor who winning so much he lacks the ability to win any gold medal

but together they saved each other

omd I hope he not literally means it I mean I really worries about his past at this point when he says “a brand new world I’d never known before”

in this whole episode he is so cute commentating all along and expressing how happy he is to met with Yuri and saying he finally lives and loves and he didn’t experienced these before

then next day is GPF and he reveals some thoughts about his career and we can actually see him how he is like outside of the shining

and below here you can notice the two frame is the same, very similar side view of him slowly fading over each other from smiling to being really sad

so that is what he shows on the outside but meanwhile he is being alone with Makkachin and looks like being so lost and unhappy

and someone who knows Japanese said here that the “but that also held me back” line where literally translated instead “but that was like a leash around my neck” --- and to interpret what he says is a bit difficult like: where surprising everyone being like chains for him ? and from what?

he looks so sad T-T

he says “I can ONLY find new strength on my own” I hope this is translated right tho - “that’s what I always thought” means he thought that being alone is the only way to find new strength and it’s sounds and looks like he always pushed everyone away from him

and it’s again the same side view showing him smiling and saying “now” so I guess he not thinks that way anymore and being happy about finding strength with Yuri / being inspired by Yuri

a kiss

and in the last episode he is completely confused and showing up true feelings without hiding them

and I love this because until this you can think he is absolutely insensitive and unable to cry but then Yuri says he decides to retire which shocks him so much he cries like a fountain - which is understandable cause to suddenly think loosing Yuri and that he will not skate anymore sounds pretty bad especially when he started to be finally happy and having someone beside him +if he cries now then he could cry before

-I hate this translation that talking about Yuri in third person, agh- -I think he says selfish at Yuri -who not being offended at all by that- because of a sudden reaction that feeling hurt and that Yuri not cares about him

Yuri is like “oh sorry I didn’t expected you to take this so sensitively” - it shows how Yuri where always seen Victor, as he never saw him showing tears, and thought that Victor is strong and insensitive enough to say such rough things to him so suddenly - which is pretty unfair - because Victor became very careful with him after seeing Yuri crying

tbh Yuri didn’t wanted to be rude, Yuri just not realizes how important he is and their relationship to Victor

but I love that both of them fights back and letting themselves raising their voice up it’s just shows how honest they became towards each other

here Victor says “chikara” means “strength, power” so it can mean “I thought you need strength from me more” basically he really wants to continue coaching Yuri

and he is almost shouting and cut -

I think Victor surely wanted to continue skating, it’s nothing like he ever wants to stop it, the case is, he wants to return with Yuri together, so for him to continue skating without Yuri became a pretty terrible thing and this scene just shows how much he is important for him now, and it’s not reveals anything about Victor’s background but a lot about their relationship and that he has a sensitive personality like this

so in next season he gonna continue to coach Yuri and return skating at the same time [which is gonna be hard as fuck] and living together in Russia and I hope we can learn a lot more about him TwT

#yuri on ice #and I wrote too much #really needs 2nd season #I mean I'm gonna cry #he didn't had LIFE

71 notes · View notes

wildlyfamousmusic · 5 years ago

Text

To WebweildingAvenger:

“Hey, so, for a while now you seem to have some disdain over some writers for some reason. Like Zdarsky. And for a while it’s shown. So, for a while you seem to be more critical on Zdarsky even for the most smallest reasons despite him: ”

I have disdain for Zdarsky because he did bad work and more than this is acclaimed and praised in spite of that.

My reasons are large AND small!

But shit like the Jameson issue or Theresa aren’t small issues by a long shot.

Not Really. Sure, Jameson wouldn’t be the one on your list of reveals before anyone likle Flash. But, it’s a start. As for Teresa, people liked her character since Family Business and thought she’d be interesting enough for the Lore. amd so far, people other than Zdarsky agreed.

“Giving Spidey his strength again ”

How the hell did he do that?????????????

For a while now, Spidey had shown to be incvompetent and a joke especially towards his peers when under the likes of Mark Waid, Dan Slott, Fred Van Lantem Bendism and a few others. Alot of times, people viewed him as a joke. The last straw was from Waid’s Avengers run and Slott’s continuing series. But, thankfully, Zdarsky showed Peter his strength back to everyone outsmarting them, outmaneuvering them, and outbesting them.

“Giving him his competence back ”

Again HOW? When he unmasked to Jameson but didn’t to Aunt May? When he needed so much goddam help throughout the series?

Read what I just wrote

Spencer is the one who gave Spider-Man his competence back!

Yes, since Zdarsky. And Nick is taking his time to fully give Peter the full recovery he needed since OMD and BND.

“Showing his best use of his strength and intellect ”

Again no he didn’t, what’s on the page and what you saw are totally different here.

No, he bested TChalla and Hawkeye, bested Tinkerer, bested the Six, had took down Norman, had took the rest of his past Six, had singlehandedly took down The Tinkerer and was hailed a hero, etc. etc. Stuff before Spencer.

“Face his foes ”

Er…when the Hell was Spider-Man NOT facing his foes. Even Slott had him do that?

But, they don’t end well. infact, the majority of the time, Peter had looked like a fool and around him from everyone made him look more like a fool. That is until Going Down Swinging which Slott did competently for his final work which is saying something.

“Overpowered his foes and other heroes ”

Again when the hell did this happen?

TChalla and Hawkeye, The Six, Norman, Tinkerer, the SWAT Team, etc. etc.

“Having some impactful moments with characters like The Tinkerer, Sandman, and his future self ”

Those weren’t impactful moments. Those were unnecessary retcons and poor retreads of better stories.

Not really. The stuff from Tinkerer was done interestingly as was Teresa. Stories have been known to have Retreads. But, Zdarsky put in Sandman for what might be in store for the future whether the likes of he, Cates, Spencer, or Duggan would want to tackle that story.

“Showing the use of his responsibilities/ Facing his struggles”

Again other people did this, did this before Zdarsky and did them better. And Peter was fundamentally irresponsible in unmasking to Jameson which is a huge part of Zdarsky’s run.

Yes, but, the likes of Slott, Waid, Bendis, and a few others had done them poorly. Zdarsky may have had him unmask infront of the oevwe didn’t want. But, it was a start. Plus, there’s also him nearly risking his life for everyone in the SWAT raid, Giving himself up for Aunt May, Saving his sister, teaching his younger self to improve top be a better person and a better hero, told Tinkerer to follow a better path after connecting with him, let Sandman live his final moments while the cops were chasing him even trying to give him one last look before he goes seeing how he viewed Flint as a better person than all the other foes he’s faced, etc. etc.

“Showing his views under Norman ”

In which he wrote Norman OOC, and it as was an AU version anyway.

No, Norman didn’t like that two of the Spiders who just showed up defeated him and unmasked him ruining his life like that humiliating him. With that plus the two Spiders, Norman needed answers, felt cheated, and wanted to ruin his life. Even the older version felt fear onto his eyes.

“All that kinda stuff. And for a while now, he was the first guy who brought Spidey to greatness.”

No. He absolutely wasn’t.

You personally like him and think he’s a great writer, therefore you projected greatness onto his work when it in truth wasn’t there.

No, there were there. Alot of people even myself Hated his first four to five issues of his run. Then it started to pick up better than we expected since issue 6.

The stuff you’ve listed off either didn’t happen or a re huge reaches or misinterpretations.

No, not Really.

Zdarsky for the Jameson and Therewsa thing alone can never ever be regarded as bringing Spider-Man to greatness. At all.

I’m mostly talking about writing and characterization. Teresa was a nice welcome though.

If he did, why the fuck did we even need Spencer’s reconstruction arcs in ASM?

Because those weren’t mostly Zdarsky’s plans before he left to do other stuff. Those were mostly Nick Spencer’s. And Zdarsky’s run came out before Sean Ryan took over as well as the arcs under Slott and before Spencer’s debut. He wanted to make things consistent for the two.

“Now before you say anything. Nick Spencer is great. He does some good stuff.”

Oh are you sure, because earlier you were claiming the fact that his Absolute Carnage tie-ins were the best of the last 5 issues is somehow proof he’s not all that good?

Because his Absolute Carnage I felt had this big oomph. Had this feel like it was needed all those times ago. Like I could feel his strength rising there and continued rising in his 2099 arc.

“But, even he has some problems. Like compared to his stuff from Zdarsky and Cates, his quality isn’t even that strong enough.”

Like I said in my prior post, you are smoking something weird if that’s your takeaway.

No, not really. I know what I’m talking about.

Like the guy who doesn’t know what the ramifications of Russia nuking part of America in the 1980s would be is stronger than Nick Spencer?

Yeah….okay.

Alright, Life Story has some issues. But, I could argue that part all day. No, I’m Talking about his PPSM run.

Having problems is irrelevant. What matters is how many and how big they are. Compared to Zdarsky they pale in comparison.

Not much in PPSM than in his Life Story at times.

“ Sure, he had brought back some things people love. But, compared to that, his quality in writing isn’t that strong. Like, he’s mostly holding back on things. Like, for example. His Hunted had a strong beginning and ending. But, it had a pretty weak middle that was holding back on alot of things.”

It’s very interesting you don’t specify what these ‘things’ are?

Like, there wasn’t much tension brought up when Spidey entered the games along with his foes. Like, there had been a few stuff. But, not enough that felt like a horror survival kind of experience. The stuff were slow and were interuptted. Sure, some moments with Black Ant, Taskmaster, were fine. But, nothing much in writing quality did anything felt horrifying. Like, the HU. chapters were fine being Gibbon being the best one. But, the stuff in quality ended up being good instead of great. The thing that felt more fillerish was The Vulture. In the middle, I don’t feel the strength there until we reached to Peter facing Curt Connors and Kraven. And the Vermin story was a bit bizarre like how he got this way. Sure, the one prior to it was terrifying especially towards the end. But, other than that, the middle wasn’t terrifying or full of stakes like how a horror survival story should be. And the deaths I felt bad. But, they don’t impact me hard as much as Gibbon’s. And besides Hunted, Some of these stuff like Jameson’s revisit and such don’t hit as hard as it should in terms of quality in the middle. The best being the thieves guild. But, the quality in this run needs to hit much harder. And so far, since Issue 29, things are starting to pick up and his 2099 arc see,s to be setting up some harder stuff.

See my prior post.

“Like, since his first 4-5 issues,he had been holding back for a while.”

How the Hell was his Synidcate story holding back?

Quality work. Not strong enough. It was good. But, not strong. It was Really enjoyable though.

How the Hell was issue #29?

One of the best and strongest

How were the AC issues?

The strongest so far.

And if they were hmmmmmmmm I wonder why that could be?

Could it be because he’s prepping MJ for a spin-off, doing a mandated tie-in with Venom and gearing up for a 2099 mega event maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe?????????????????

Yes, those are it. But, those issues weren’t what I’m talking about. It’s actually stuff with Foswell, Hunted, and such. His strength could grow in 2099.

“ The only story that had been his strongest was his Absolute Carnage Tie in.”

See my prior post.

“And then for his 2099 stuff it felt like it was picking up more.”

No it didn’t.

It was just slow, And besides, from what happened to 2099, we already know he wouldn’t meet with Peter immediately before the second part of this arc, It was shown he was stored in Alchemaxz after he CRASH LANDED to a plant unconscious even. So, how would he have the time to meet Peter there? And besides, the stuff with Foreigner, Chameleon, and Sable could result in something. And like the previews said, as Nick Spencer told us, the start of this arc gets to begin in Issue 33 where you see 2099 on the cover.

“ However, if his stuff continues to hold back especially what’s to come then That’s be a problem.”

WTF is this holding back crap?

Quality of work. Some impactful stuff. Some Strength. Something for what’s about to come. If there ever was an arc revolving around Norman and his gang, you would hope that Nick Spencer put some strength into this.

“And before you say anything. No, Zdarsky may have not brought alot of stuff back before Nick Spencer,”

He didn’t have to bring anything back, he just needed to do crappy stories with what he used, new or old.

Execution begged to differ.

“but, the thing is that A) His run came out Way before Going Down Swinging happened as well as the ending to Dan Slott’s Run”

What has that got to do with anything?!

You said Zdarsky didn’t do any of the stuff Nick Spencer did. Well, it’s shown that his run took place BEFORE Going Down Swinging and the beginning of Nick Spencer’s run which show the majority of the stuff compared to Zdarsky.

“and B) His Run took place Way before Nick Spencer started his run.”

Again what has that got to do with anything?!!!!!!

Read my post before this one.

“Nickhad plans. Chip had a schedule that prevented him from finishing his run before Sean Ryan took over.”

Sean Ryan took over BECAUSE Chip left, not the other way around. Chip could’ve stuck around and done Spider-Geddon tie-ins if he wanted but he didn’t!

Issue 310 was the perfect sendoff for him though. Sean Ryan just kinda filled in for the ending for this tie in event and did it fine.

“ And Really, outside of Life Story, his Spidey stuff continues to be great in the Daredevil and Two-In-One.”

Daredevil and M2in1 aren’t Spider-Man. And in them he’s writing Spidey in a limited capacity where it’s hard to screw up because he’s a guest character.

It’s how you handle the character. Really, guys like Slott, Waoid, Bendis, and a few others had their screw ups for his short appearance. The ones that had the best were Zdarsky, Hickman, and Charles Soule.

Also isn’t it ‘interesting’ that after months of arguing to the contrary suddenly Life Story actually wasn’t great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??????????????

Like O said, I know Life Storytn had some problems and I know you wouldn’t accept when I bring up Life Story. But, his PPSM run was a different story.

“So, while Nick Spencer had some good stuff. There’s no denying he has some problems when it comes to holding things back.”

There is 100% denying he has problems when it comes to holding back considering you’ve never said WHAT he’s holding back on!

Read my stuff,

“Because if he continues to hold back,he either needs a co-writer or needs to not hold back on things.”

What. Are. You. Talking. About??????????

“A d honestly, I don’t think you could pretend we didn’t have a great Spider-Man run until Nick Spencer took over when Really his stuff had been shown to hold back and not be up to par with other Spider-Man writers.”

*rolls eyes*

I don’t have to pretend things that are true.

And I’m not sitting here telling you he’s on Dematteis or Stern’s level. Hell HE probably wouldn’t even say that.

You’d probbly sound like he almost did if you think Chip’s work didn’t exist before.

But that’s not what you are really saying.

What you are really trying to say is Zdarsrky was great and greater than Spencer. Which isn’t true on either count.

Quality of work, yes. But, I’m saying is that you can’t ignore the stuff Zdarsky brought after all this time suffering from the hands of Waid, Bendis, Slott, and a few others. Some doing no service before he came along. What I’m also saying is that I like Nick Spencer. I love the things he brought for us. But, I want him to be a stronger writer on this run. Otherwise, if he keeps holding back to what’s to come, then the whole service would be for nothing. We like things back. But, we need better quality at the same time.

“What he needs is that strength. And compared to his work from Zdarsky and Donny Cates, Nick is not quite up there yet until otherwise.”

See my prior posts. Your abilities to critically analyse are shit.

Not really. I was hoping you’d get things and see where I’m coming from. Clearly you don’t. But, I hope you do.

#hellzyeahwebwieldingavenger #nick spencer #donny cates #chip zdarsky #spider-man #spider-man 2099 #hunted #jj jameson

0 notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 4 years ago

Link

I will respond to this. But in future I’m asking you and others not to send me things like this please.

“This month, Marvel Comics relaunched Amazing Spider-Man with a Nick Spencer as head writer, marking the end of Dan Slott's long run with the title and an end of the "Brand New Day" era of Spider-History.”

The problems start here. BND ended before Slott’s solo run began.

“ Spencer's run begins with a bit of a bang.

Well, about as much of a bang as you get from kissing the same person you've known for 50 years.”

This is a reductive and childish mentality towards romance and sex. It prioritizes the novelty and excitement of ‘new love’ (which is scientifically guaranteed to last like 2 years tops) over the deeper and ultimately more potent emotions attached to proper love, which in truth is kind of like friendship on steroids.

In this specific case it’s especially stupid as, putting aside fan reactions, the fact that Peter and Mj were back together after 10+ years was OBVIOUSLY going to be a shocking moment. A ‘bang’ if you will. This is like saying it wasn’t a moment of audience interest whenever Ross and Rachel seemingly got back together or when Monica and Chandler initially got together. They too had known one another for a long time, a roughly equivalent time for their character and Peter and MJ in-universe.

“This has come after Peter and Mary Jane have been apart for about a decade. This recent "surprise" get-back-to-gether is the same sort of "exciting development" that happens eventually after Marvel breaks a couple up, or kills someone in one of their books (See the Hulk, Jean Grey, Peter Parker during Superior Spider-Man, etc. etc. etc.) Peter and Mary Jane getting back together (apparently) is sort of a big deal.”

Yes. Because fans WANTED them to be back together.

Fans aren’t in this for the roller coaster of novelty. They don’t want Spidey or Superman to be with anyone OTHER than MJ or Lois. By the same token the majority do not want anyone other than Luthor or Joker to be Superman or Batman’s archenemies.

“See, in 2007 Marvel Comics made the bold decision to end the marriage between Spider-Man and his longtime wife, Mary Jane Watson.”

Watson Parker

It wasn’t bold it was asinine

How bold is it when it was the third such attempt to do that? “At the time, fans lost their shit.” And they are STILL angry about it. “You can't really blame them because the deed was done in the most asinine way. For some reason, divorce was out of the question. The alternative was somehow more awful. After Peter's Aunt May got shot in the bo-bo at the end of Civil War, Spider-Man literally made a deal with the devil to save her life.” WTF is a bo-bo? “What did this change exactly? Well, the events of Amazing Spider-Man Annual #21 didn't end in a marriage. So everything that happened after was still the same except Peter amd MJ were a common-law couple. Or something.” And MJ was never pregnant, and all the shit specifically related to their wedding rings, dress, photos, anniversary couldn’t have happened and given how to them marriage wasn’t a piece of paper then this would have massive ramifications for their relationship quite a part from the fact there would now be a massive sore spot in their relationship. “Anyway, like I said, a lot of longtime fans hated it.” No. MOST longtime fans hated it. And most SHORT time fans also hated it. And even many newer fans who jumped on-board after it hated it too. “You know, the audience they weren't trying to appeal to anymore.” Which was idiotic. You don’t try to gain a new audience by throwing away your old one. You try to retain the old audience and bring new people into the fold at the same time. Noticeably this happened in the 1990s. This failed to happen after OMD and it failed to happen with the Nu52 which was the OMD for the whole DC universe. The latter failed so badly they reverse rebooted many characters, Superman chief among them. Superman’s financial and critical reception increased when they brought back the OLD Superman who was married (and now a father to boot) and used him to replace the younger, single and hip Superman most people disliked. The OLD fans returned. Shockingly appealing to the old AND new fans is possible. “Still, they came up with a storyline that would be relatable to younger readers, and still be relevant to longtime readers as well”

It wasn’t a storyline it was an era

No. It absolutely wasn’t relatable or relevant to younger readers. I was 16-19 when BND was running. I was directly the demographic they were trying to appeal to. Let me tell you straight. Those stories were not relatable. At all. They weren’t relevant. At all. The PS4 game’s take? Now that shit was reltable but noticeably that version only takes plot concept from BND. The characterization of Peter is far more in line with his pre-OMD self and didn’t represent a regression of the character

Thousands of people became Spider-Man fans reading the marriage era Spidey comics. If it was so unrelatable how is that possible?

The stories were not relevant to the older audience at all because the whole purpose of BND was to basically ignore 90% of Spider-Man history between 1987-2007. And more importantly even the characteriation before then that they were trying to invoke was done incorrectly. The Spidey of BND was a systemically mischaracterizion of Spider-Man even if yu ignored OMD “The fiscal reasoning made sense, there were Spider-Man films that were out roping in a new generation kids who wouldn't relate to a married Spider-Man.”

There was a 5 season long TV show before those movies aimed directly at children. Kids got into Spidey through that and we didn’t care he was married. In fact he was married on the show

To 90s/2000s teens and tweens the struggles of Spidey in the 1994 cartoon and Raimi movies were not all that relatable. The male members of the cartoon audience were too young to be interested in romance and all the demographics were unlikely to relate to Peter’s financial struggles as they were too young to work. Even if they weren’t too young to work they wouldn’t have been the breadwinner of the household the way they might’ve been in the 1960s. By the 1990s and 2000s times had changed

Peter had become a MAN like halfway through the first Raimi movie and that wasn’t even the most popular or successful one. Spider-man 2, where Peter was distinctly an adult and grappling with adult problems, was

Kids have been unlikely to relate to Batman. In fact as times have changed it’s evident they infinitely prefer Batman to Robin, the character actually created specifically for them to relate to. Batman is at least as popular as Spider-Man, if not moreso

The MCU has made Iron Man and Black Panther (who kids could never truly relate to) and Captain America (whom few people regardless of age could ever relate to as he is almost a moral paragon) fan favourite characters. CLEARLY relatability is at best highly subjective and at worst not essential to making a character appealing

BND occurred after Spider-Man 3 where Peter wanted to marry Mary Jane. If anything the JMS era of Spidey where he was married to the main love interest from the movies and where Aunt May knew who he was would’ve been MORE synergetic with the movies of the time than what BND was “Also, times have changed. Fans freaked out that Spider-Man was no longer married and back to living at Aunt May's home? At the time Peter Parker was in his late 20s (Marvel Time).” No, at the time he was 30 years old. “If this is basically you in 2018, you had no reason to bitch about Brand New Day.” Get fucked. Fans had EVERY reason to bitch about BND back then AND now too. Putting aside how we got there (which would be reason enough) the stories themselves were objectively deplorable! “Looking back at the storyline 10 years after the fact,” It’s not a storyline. It was an era. “it's hard to understand what the big deal was.” It’s hard to understand mischaracterization, illogic, continuity contradictions, sexism, racism, juvenile writing, character deconstruction, borderline gaslighting of the fans, talking down to the audience, price gouging, inconsistent writing and art and just generally bad storytelling? “Because I secretly hate myself, I decided to read every Spider-Man comic published.” I somehow doubt that. Even if it’s true there is a massive difference between reading a story and understanding it. Dan Slott READ a lot of Spider-Man. He knew a lot of Spider-Facts. But he clearly never understood the character. He might KNOW MJ shut that door in ASM #122. But he absolutely doesn’t grasp it’s deeper meaning. “I started about a year ago, and I'm just hitting stories published in 2007. In retrospect, there are a lot of shitty Spider-Man stories. Some of them weren't as bad as they were made out to be (The Clone Saga, being one of them, surprisingly) One thing about the Peter/MJ marriage (which ran from 1987 to 2007) is you quickly realize their marriage was horrible.” Sure. If you are a bad literary analyst, sexist, crap at contextualization and apply a blunt criteria instead of nuance. If you don’t you get that there were ups and downs with the writing as would be expected of almost anything written across 20 years by multiple writers. “Especially for Mary Jane.” Oh cool, sexist it is then. “It wasn't good, it was a burden to telling good stories.” Kraven’s Last Hunt Sensational Spider-Man Annual 2007 Spider-Man Unlimited v3 #2 Story 2 Parallel Lives Anything by JMS involving MJ Revelations Spec #200 Spec #241-245 Sensational v2 #32 Marvel Knights: Spider-man #1-12 And many other stories I could name say otherwise genius. “This is because the writers involved at the time didn't seem to understand how a marriage works.”

JMS clearly did

DeMatteis clearly did

DeFalco clearly did

Sacasa clearly did

Peter David clearly did

Mark Millar clearly did

Even Bendis clearly did

Maybe it’s not how YOUR marriage works. But everyon’es marriage is a different “The marriage was, at best, an excuse for an instant damsel in distress situation,” Remember how the marriage was used as an instant damsel-in-distress situation in KLH? Remember how that was ALL it amounted to in the Eisner nominated Sensational Spider-Man Annual 2007? Remember how badly MJ was in need of rescuing in the Jonathan Caesar storyline? “or at worse a reason for Peter Parker to go on about how "lucky" he was to be married to a model/actress. Like Mary Jane was nothing more than a trophy to pride himself because he was such a fucking loser in high school.” Yes. Peter never argued with MJ. Peter never confided his concerns with MJ. MJ never alleviated his guilt. MJ never grew as a person from her horrible childhood issues through being married with Peter. MJ didn’t become more self-sacrificing due to Peter. Peter was never pushed to become more powerful by thoughts of his believed wife. They never helped one another through traumatic situations. “What I really want to stress here is, Peter and Mary Jane's marrage was awful.” Nah fam. YOUR analytical skills are awful. “Worst. Idea. Ever.” Nah fam. You writing this was the worst idea ever. Scratch that, me subjecting myself to this shit was the worst idea ever. “Can't take my word for it? Here are some reasons why: Mary Jane Had to Swat Away So Many Dicks” An attractive woman with a very public profile draws unwanted attention? How unrealistic! It’s terrible that such a thing would never happen in real life, real life being the baked into the core concept of Spider-Man. Why if it did it’d be a organic way to give MJ subplots and conflicts of her own to deal with that could impact upon Peter’s life by extension or something. “Almost from the start, Mary Jane had to fend off other men who were obsessed with her and didn't give a shit that she was married. That's not necessarily Peter's fault, but it really says a lot of the opinion towards female characters in comics at the time.” …how…? This happens in real life…A LOT! And what has ‘Peter’s fault’ got to do with this? It’s not even a statement that warrants a ‘necessarily’. What? If Peter was more ‘Alpha’ other men would know not to try it on with ‘his woman’ or something? Also, let’s properly contextualize things okay. Between 1987-2007 MJ was stalked by like 5 people. That’s once every 4 years if you average it out but 3/5 of them occurred in Michelinie’s run alone which is not the be all or end all of the marriage. Another one was for a single issue and the final one was actually obsessed with Peter and used MJ to get to him. I ain’t saying it didn’t get old but this guy is making it out to be something that was an annual event. “Sure, the idea of someone stalking an actress/model isn't outlandish, and a sad fact of the celebrity-driven reality we live in.” YOU DON’T SAY! And it doesn’t just apply to actresses or models btw. “However, the number of times this was used as a plot got a bit out of hand.” I agree. But 5 times across 20 years, when there was a 5 year gap between the third and fourth instances and a 5 year gap between the fourth and final instance (lasting for 1 issue and wasn’t even the main plot) is not reflective of anything. “That said because it's a Spider-Man comic book they couldn't just settle on a dumpy guy wearing sticky jogging pants. They had to kick it up a notch. With horrific implications for poor Mary Jane.” …yeeeeeeeeeeah? And? Stalkers are horrible. You want there to be tension and conflict so the threat of violence is absolutely justifiable. FFS, kraven the Hunter buried Spider-Man alive and Venom threatened to eat parts of him. And VENOM was Spidey’s stalker! “Jonathon Caesar An obsession so cliche, I'm surprised that nobody made a joke about his knife compensating for having a small dick.” Except circa 1989 it wasn’t cliché. At least not as far as a Spidey comic was concerned. If we are opening this up to ALL media then sure but then by that logic Gwen’s death and countless other stories would also be cliché wouldn’t they. “The first scum bag to enter Mary Jane's married life was Jonathon Caesar. He was a wealthy man with a lot of connections.” …Almost like Harvey Weinstein or something… “He helped Mary Jane get into the Bedford Towers condominium (which Caesar owned). His motivation? To kidnap a married woman and force her to live in a specially made trap room until she agreed to marry him. Spider-Man didn't even save the day! Mary Jane broke free on her own and the wall-crawler showed up in time to do the cleanup.” Holy shit. If anyone ever needed proof this doofus’s analytical skills weren’t there this is it. The Jonathan Caesar storyline was designed to be a subversion of the damsel-in-distress trope. The whole fucking POINT was that MJ saved herself instead of Spidey saving her! Jesus Christ how do you miss that. Not to mention how do you complain Caesar as a villain is cliché but then ALSO complain that the damsel-in-distress cliché wasn’t adhered to. “Caesar went to jail but he used his influence to ruin her modeling career and get her evicted from their home.” *coughWeinsteincough* “Not only that, but MJ's money got tied up in a lengthy legal battle, with no apparent end in sight. In fact the money mentioned here is never talked about again.” Er…yes it is. MJ ultimately settles in ASM #333 wiping out her savings. I’d have thought someone who read every Spider-Man comic book would have known that. “Caesar eventually got out of jail and continued to stalk Mary Jane.” Again, clearly hasn’t read every Spider-Man comic book and/or is a shitty analyst. Yes Caesar did this but he did this BEFORE MJ engaged him in a legal battle. “Her husband didn't do squat to stop it.” What was he supposed to do? Caesar was out legally and Peter couldn’t just kill or assault the guy. Threatening him would likely have helped Caesar’s legal case further, especially due to the public knowing about the association between Peter and Spidey. Touching Caesar would be like trying to get the Kingpin locked up. It’s extremely difficult for someone that rich and powerful. “He was too busy playing Spider-Man to help his own wife.” No. He was busy saving the lives of innocent people. He wasn’t doing this for fun, he is Spidey for the greater good. MJ knows that. MJ knew that she could ask Peter for help if she needed it and he’d come running. She made it clear she could handle it and like a good husband he respected her decision. It wasn’t like she was trying to reach him for help and he was distracted or actively ignored her. But you know, those disingenuous pieces of misinformation aren’t going to write themselves. Also the stories are a little ambiguous about this but there is a possible implication that MJ was keeping Peter somewhat in the dark about Caesar’s activities. “The only person who was interested in Mary Jane's safety was Officer Hal Goldman, who ended up shooting Caesar dead. Was Hal a super-cop detective that ate serial stalkers for lunch? Note really, see the thing about Hal.... Hal Goldman Let's follow up this sexist scene with the woman regretting her career choices. Very progressive.”

This bozo shouldn’t be lecturing people on what is and isn’t sexist

FFS OF COURSE someone in MJ’s position would be questioning her career choices. She’s just been stalked by 2 lunatics. But noticeably she doesn’t stop being an actress/model after this. The moment was a dash of comedy given the situation and nothing more. But you wouldn’t know that given how this guy is not bothering to use context or anything

How the Hell is MJ macing a stalker and then knocking him out sexist? “Hal Goldman wasn't actually a police officer. He was just a fat NYPD civilian desk clerk with a terrible bowl cut who had an unhealthy obsession with Mary Jane when she starred in a soap opera called "Secret Hospital". Although he was "investigating" Jonathan Ceasar's attempts to ruin Mary Jane's life again, he was also obsessed with protecting her from everyone who slighted her. He ran over an old woman who slapped MJ in the face, dropped a stage light on her director's head and tried to clobber Peter with a piece of concrete. However, this is an accurate depiction of how fan-boys react to things.” Remember how over 50% of fanboys threatened or actually inflicted violence upon people because of OMD? Neither do I. “When he guns down Caesar he professes his undying love to Mary Jane and admits to committing all the above crimes. Again, Peter is nowhere around,” Of course he’s nowhere around. Peter doesn’t constantly monitor MJ all day every day. You know…like a stalker. Fuck real life husbands don’t do this. Moreover if we bother to check the issue in question (ASM #339) some interesting details are presented to us. For starters MJ was only endangered due to trickery and bad luck. Caesar forced a co-star of MJ’s to handwrite a note and sign it asking for her to meet him at the set of Secret Hospital. Between the set being a relatively safe environment and the note checking out as legitimate due to the handwriting and signature, MJ had no reason to be suspicious. Peter absolutely intended to go with MJ but earlier that day had been doused with a chemical by the Sinister Six, the effects of which he was uncertain about. He got a call regarding the Six’s activities and the chemical so logically that would take priority over Mj merely meeting a co-star. MJ chose not to delay the meeting until Peter was available and go herself. Again neither she nor Peter had any reason to suspect foul play. So Peter’s absence was never due to neglect. It wasn’t even due to putting the duties of Spider-man before the needs of his wife. As far as either of them knew there was no danger. So again, distorting the facts. Classy. “so when she rejects him Officer Bowl Cut decides to do the old "if I can't have you, nobody will!" Routine. However, she sprayed him in the eyes with hairspray and clobbered him with a purse. You know just as you'd expect a strong female character to do.” Yes. That is exactly what I expect a female, or indeed any character, to do in that situation. Mary Jane had no real weapons. The story even specified that MJ tried to get a handgun but was still waiting on it. So she improvised and used whatever resources she had to hand. This is routine for Mary Jane both during and before the marriage. Using hairspray and a handbag, which are not obvious weapons but can nevertheless be repurposed for offence, was a perfectly legitimate technique for both the character and writer to employ. It’s almost like it makes her look smart, tough and resourceful for being able to think on her feet like that or something. Oh, and again. MJ is bad because she conforms to a cliché but is also bad because didn’t conform to the cliché of Spidey rescuing her which would’ve also been bad because the marriage is used to easily generate damsel-in-distress situations. This isn’t even a double standard it’s a TRIPLE standard. This jackoff has constructed his argument in such a way that Mary Jane/the marriage can NEVER win. “Jason Jerome This happened in 1990, consent hadn't been invented yet.”

Jason wasn’t a stalker strictly speaking

This storyline, bad as it was, was nevertheless handled very differently from the Jonathan Caesar arc because MJ at least was tempted to reciprocate feelings for Jason whilst she was repulsed by Caesar

YES. the concept of consent WASN’T very well taught back in the 1990s! What the hell is he point here? “Jason Jerome was an actor who thought he could seduce Mary Jane into having an affair with him. This came at a time when there were three monthly Spider-Man titles. This made for one busy wall-crawler. On top of fighting villains, he was also promoting a book and traveling the globe as a reporter. Needless to say, MJ was feeling more than a little neglected. This made Mary Jane susceptible to Jerome's advances. However, despite his best efforts, Mary Jane ended things before they had gone too far. To do so, she invited Jason to her apartment under the pretence of sex. Instead of getting balls deep, Jason Jerome found himself in a room plastered with photos of Peter and Mary Jane together, like inviting an obsessed man into your home without telling anyone is a smart idea.” Jason was not obsessed. He viewed MJ as a ‘conquest’ and from her POV was not dangerous like Caesar or Hal. Also IIRC this occurred after the incident with Hal, which meant MJ would likely have owned a handgun by this point. Even if she didn’t, she defeated Hal and Caesar and his guards when she was unprepared and improvising on the fly. Here she has had hours to prep and it’s literally in her home. If she suspected Jason to be dangerous (which he was not and had given her no reason to believe so) she was in a great position to handle him. “All the lamps and hairspray in the world cannot possibly stop this potentially becoming a bad situation.” A rich and powerful lunatic with a knife and armed guards outside got their ass beaten by MJ whilst she was improvising…on their home turf. A less rich, less powerful, unarmed man with no displays of mental instability or violence comes to MJ’s home turf on his own. So yes, if she was so inclined MJ could 100% rig up a trap with hairspray and a lamp or a fucking gun if she had one. “If this backfires, let's just hope he's into this sort of thing.” A necrophilia joke? How tasteful. “The Stalker "I said, I'm bored with sort of scenario. Can you try and change this up a bit?"”

Jason Jerome wasn’t stalking MJ

Yes the stalker was lame. Also this occurred around 9-10 years later

You know there is more to this relationship than the occasions when MJ was stalked FFS “The most unoriginal character created by Howard Mackie during his run.” His run when he was possibly dealing with serious health issues. Classy. “The Stalker follows a long tradition of Marvel characters whose names are obvious: The Prowler prowls,” Except he doesn’t do much prowling. He flits between retirement and active costumed work. And he’s not exactly a stalker of the night like Batman when he’s out of retirement. “the Watcher watches, and the Shocker finger blasts people.” Does this guy know what ‘shocking’ means? Blasting people isn’t shocking them. Electrocuting people = shocking people. Vibrating them doesn’t = shocking them. “So obviously, the Stalker was a stalker. Specifically, he stalked Mary Jane. The guy went to some insane lengths. He set off bombs and killed people. The whole time this was happening Peter was busy going out as Spider-Man.” YES. THAT’S HIS FUCKING JOB! Also, for the majority of the time Mj was being stalked she had kept Peter in the dark about the guy. Shortly after he finally did learn the truth he seemingly died. For sure he was kept away from her whilst she was being made a target, but

The 1970s Clone Saga

Spec Annual 1988

Smoke and Mirrors

Web #125

Maximum Clonage

Clone Conspiracy

“Each time he seems to forget the fact that a lunatic had cloned his dead girlfriend every time.”

Horseshit.

He KNEW the truth in every encounter following the first one. He didn’t fall for it on the third-sixth occasions but shockingly seeing your dead loved one (who died right in front of you) walking around alive is going to emotionally hurt you and dreadge up old wounds and old feelings.

Gerry Conway in Spec Annual 1988 directly addresses this by having Peter acknowledge that intellectually he knows Gwen to merely be a clone but emotionally he still feels towards her the same way as though she were the real Gwen.

It’s almost like Conway was a good writer not a HACK like the OP and so knows that in matters of the heart a realistic human being might let their sense of logic fly out the window.

If ONLY there had been a global sensation of a movie released months prior to ASM v5 #1 which demonstrated this aptly.

“Every time it made Peter confused and dug up old feelings. Which, naturally, made Mary Jane doubt the strength of their relationship.”

That literally happened twice. And she briefly doubted before thinking otherwise or been shown otherwise.

“With this many clones of the dead girlfriend, you'd figure he would have gotten used to it.”

Yes if he was an emotionless automaton. Or written by someone who knows jack about human emotions...like the OP…

“Instead of going to a shrink to process these feelings,”

Thus risking the anonymity that protects himself and his loved ones.

“Peter usually fell for the various manipulations that typically came from these convoluted cloning schemes and hit whoever was responsible.”

OBVIOUSLY he hit whoever was responsible. They were super villains, he was going to bring them to justice no matter what

Again, he fell for it the first time. But ONLY the first time. He was aware Gwen was a clone in every other encounter and never played along. Many of those instances weren’t even villains pulling a scheme but a situation Peter happened to mix himself up in. Spec Annual #8 had nothing to do with him as the High Evolutionary wanted to apprehend Gwen for his own purposes. Web #125 involved him discovering Gwen’s clone in the suburbs but no villain had planned on him doing that

“That Time Illegitimate Kids Showed Up

Gwen Stacy was always portrayed as a saintly woman cut down in the prime of her life.”

Except for all those times she absolutely wasn’t prior to her death; that’s not even counting AUs.

Saint Gwendolyn I, Holy Virgin Martyr Princess was a revisionist invention fabricated after her death to make her death more tragic in hindsight. It’s a pack of lies that doesn’t deserve to be paid attention to.

“That was until JMS wrote a Gwen Stacy story that was entirely fucked up.”

No. It was only partially fucked up because

Gwen was obviously not pregnant

MJ and Gwen didn’t care about Gwen’s kids

“In it, Peter learns that Gwen had an affair with Norman Osborn (the Green Goblin, AKA the guy who later murdered her) and got knocked up.”

They didn’t have an affair.

People seem to be misinformed on the definition of what the word ‘affair’ means. They use it as though it means ‘being unfaithful to your partner’. That is not the meaning of the term. An EXTRAMARITAL affair can mean that but a regular romantic/sexual affair doesn’t inherently mean there is any unfaithfulness occurring.

But it DOES have to be ongoing to some extent.

Gwen and Norman weren’t in any kind of on-going relationship. They had sex exactly once.

And during that time no unfaithfulness was occurring as Gwen was not with Peter at the time.

“Everyone apparently knew and kept it a secret.”

…er….no…I don’t know how you could even misread Sins Past to come to that conclusion.

The story is extremely explicit that Gwen and Norman kept their encounter and Gwen’s pregnancy a secret. MJ knew about it and told Peter years later. But there is nothing in the story even hinting that anyone else knew besides the three of them.

“During a point where Gwen and Peter were on the outs, she found out she was pregnant, left the country, and gave birth to the kids. These kids were then secreted away by Norman for years.

When Peter found about these kids (but not their origins) he assumed they were his kids, even though he later remembers that he and Gwen never had sex!!”

He never presumes they are his children. Again, great analytical skills there.

“What's worse, is after all was said and done, Peter later went to France to help out Gwen's daughter, who was her spitting image and the same biological age that Gwen was when Peter dated her (they aged fast, look it up) This was all an attempt to seduce Peter and he had to constantly remind himself that his feelings for her were wrong.”

It was absolutely not an attempt to seduce Peter. Sarah’s agenda only later evolved to entail that too but that wasn’t her original motive

In one of the all time best episodes of the Simpsons Homer was tempted by his co-worker Mindy. This occurred in spite of countless episodes demonstrating how much he loved Marge. Ultimately nothing more than a kiss was shared between them and he didn’t succumb to his temptations. In this scenario Peter is being confronted by someone who looks and to an extent acts identically to someone he loved and cruelly lost, someone who for a time he believed he might have a future with. This occurs not very long after he learns that his relationship with that person was at least partially a big lie as she was pregnant for most of their relationship and slept with his ultimate enemy. So he’s going to be incredibly emotionally vulnerable at this point. Sarah kissed him and he didn’t reciprocate at all. Peter if anything can be more forgiven his temptations than Homer was. And Homer was still forgivable as your actions are what ultimately matter. Peter not only acknowledged his feelings were wrong and coming from an emotionally confusing place but he never acted upon them either and reaffirmed his love for MJ when all was said and done. Much like Homer did to Marge after rejecting Mindy.

“Mary Jane had such a bad feeling about it, she travelled to France to check in on her hubby, and walked in on him while Gwen Jr. Was kissing Peter.”

Yeah. Because OOC writing exists dipshit. You don’t just take ANY given story as gospel FFS. What kind of pre-schooler level literary analysis is this?

“The fact that Peter was attracted to a 7 year old girl who only looked like she was in her early 20s because of a genetic disorder is super creepy.”

It is because see above about OOC writing. But by this logic the clones of Gwen were even younger. Sarah was mentally 7 but she looked just like an adult Gwen Stacy so obviously Peter’s emotions and attractions being confused is forgivable under the circumstances.

“So you can totally understand when Mary Jane was upset about that one.”

I’m genuinely shocked this clown was able to be so sympathetic towards MJ here.

“Somewhere, a divorce lawyer just got a huge erection.”

I’m sure he would have if only the story hadn’t ended by reaffirming Peter and MJ’s love for one another.

“It Wasn't Just the Dead Girlfriend, but her Extended Family

Before we get into more of the Stacy family, let's talk about the Watson family for a minute. Mary Jane came from a broken home. An alcoholic and abusive father led to her mother taking the kids and leaving. Although he mom died her sister had two kids and was abandoned by the father. Also, she has a cousin who has an eating disorder. In a lot of these cases, Peter Parker left his wife to deal with the family drama on her own.”

No.

Peter actively helped MJ when she asked him to in ASM #291-292.

He actively helped MJ’s friend who had a drug problem when MJ asked him to.

In the recent one shot Going Big Peter seeks out Kristy when she disappears…because MJ asked him to.

Peter respected MJ and her family and would’ve helped in any way he was able if MJ aske him to.

But between supporting their family, Aunt May and protecting the city because he’s a fucking super hero his time and abilities to help were limited. Oh and MJ didn’t ask him to.

She felt, not unjustifiably, that she could handle it. Often MJ wishes to leave Peter as unburdened as possible if she can handle a situation because his life is dangerous and stressful enough as is. But she knows he’s there to help if she needs it. And he would be there if she needed him.

It’ almost like they were MARRIED or something and divided up their duties appropriately or something.

This clown seems to treat ‘being Spider-Man’ as code for ‘have fun goofing off lulz’. It’s not. It’s a massive duty and higher purpose Peter takes incredibly seriously.

“Which is quite the slap in the face when he spent more time helping the Stacy family. Namely Gwen's cousins Paul and Jill and their dad.”

Because they were his friends, MJ’s friends and at times MJ asked him to help them. Peter didn’t even like spending time with them initially because they opened up old wounds for him. He had to put the work in to hang around them.

“When they appeared in Spider-Man stories in the late 90s, Mary Jane took a back seat to whatever problems the Stacy's were having.”

No she didn’t.

SOMETIMES the problems regarding the Stacy’s happened to be the A plot. Other times they happened to be the B plot. This happened more often than not in peter Parker: Spider-Man by Mackie. But there were FOUR Spider-titles at the time so that’s more than acceptable.

But Peter never helped the Stacy’s at the expense of Mary Jane, not unless there was a clear physical danger posed to their lives.

In Mackie/Byrne’s run MJ and Jill were endangered by the same incident and Peter prioritized saving MJ over Jill.

“You're still dealing with your miscarriage Mary Jane? Sorry, I got to talk Paul Stacy out of a hate group right now.”

Get fucked.

I’ve read PPSM #82-83 as well. In fact they were among my earliest ever comic books I re-read them several years ago.

This is yet another MASSIVE distortion of events.

Peter didn’t talk Paul out of a hate group (specifically the anti-mutant hate group the Friends of Humanity) at the expense of helping MJ deal with their miscarriage.

Peter and MJ were due to meet for a counselling session to talk about the miscarriage. However, Paul was being targeted by a mutant who literally told Peter she was going to murder him. Peter went to prevent that from happening but a bad bout of vertigo (brought on presumably by an encounter with Morbius the Living Vampire) caused Peter to cling to a wall, his life hanging in the balance.

That’s why he missed the therapy session that one time.

He wasn’t goofing off. He wasn’t lecturing Paul about why racism is bad m’kay. He was trying to save his life and then save his own life.

So a quintessential example of distorting the facts and removing things from context.

“Peter Shut Her Out of Every Existential Crisis”

No he didn’t. There were multiple times he questioned if he was doing the right thing, if he was making a difference, etc and talked to her about it

Even if he did shut her out that would be conflict which is what you fucking want in your dramatic story

WOW! Moments of intense mental/emotional strife involve people not acting in a healthy manner, including in regards to their romantic relationships?????? Who’d have THOUGHT!

“Not only were Mary Jane's problems put on a back burner, whenever Peter had a problem, he shut MJ out.”

MJ herself understood some of her problems had to be put on a back burner for the greater good that Spider-Man performed for the world at large.

And the times he shut her out amounted to…I don’t even know…maybe once just prior to the Clone Saga when he was grappling with intense grief and pain and was on the verge of a mental breakdown. Then just went ahead and had the mental breakdown.

“During their marriage, Peter had huge life-changing moments. The first was when his parents came back from the dead only to be revealed as impostors then his Aunt May suffered a life-threatening stroke.”

Yes. These were definitely the first life-changing moments that occurred after he married Mary Jane.

Being buried alive, encountering Venom, going back to school, his best friend turning to villainy and becoming a reserve Avenger certainly wouldn’t have been life changing at all.

“Spider-Man's answer? Give up on being Peter Parker and embracing the spider.”

I’ll take ‘What if grief and emotional trauma’ for 500 Alex!!!!!!!

Honest to Christ. The story makes everything clear as crystal. This is an entirely believable response to trauma, it’s just literalized because the person experiencing it lives a double life already and has super powers.

“The writers were probably going for dark and moody, but looking back at it, it was a lot of whining.”

He lived his whole life in the wake of losing his parents, then had those wounds reopened when he learned they were not dead, then gradually grew to love and trust them, was stabbed in the back by them, found out they were imposters and his parents had been dead after all, then saw them violently die right in front of him, then learned this was perpetuated by his best friend, then the woman who raised him had a stroke and fell into a coma.

That’s not WHINING, that’s an insane amount of grief and pain you fucking idiot.

No human being could cope with that amount of trauma and NOT express their pain in some form. This isn’t him complaining he missed a date or can’t get his studies done. This is his heart being ripped out and stomped on in front of him repeatedly!

“Also, he totally abandoned his wife. Which is a dick move. Hey Pete, she might be someone to support you through your recent loss.”

HE WAS HAVING A MENTAL BREAKDOWN YOU DUMBASS!

NO ONE thinks clearly or logically when they are in that kind of emotional/mental distress. He was grieving the loss of THREE parents for fuck’s sake!

“Somewhere, a grief councilor just got a huge erection.”

This shithead clearly doesn’t know the meaning of the word grief.

“Then came the Clone Saga where Peter was convinced he was actually a clone of the real Spider-Man. He was too wrapped up on the fact that his past was potentially a lie that he couldn't see the good things in his life. He was married. Had a child on the way. None of this registered with him because of all the clones around putting his past into question.”

Peter Parker’s belief system was that a clone is NOT a real human being, it is a creature that is less than human and that in being a clone you have no real identity or right to life, you are just a freak. MJ echoes these sentiments in ASM #400.

Ben Reilly, who had all of Peter’s memories became distraught upon learning he was a clone. That occurred circa 1975 when Peter was approximately 22 years old and hadn’t finished college yet. Ben literally grieved for himself and that the memories in his head were a pretense, a life that was not his. He contemplated killing Peter and taking his life. He became borderline suicidal and anti-social. This went on for years during which he pushed himself to the very edge self-destructively.

Putting aside how the original intent was for Ben to be the REAL Peter Parker, Ben’s behaviours display what a dark and dangerous place Peter could’ve gone to had he been in Ben’s position.

The intent of the Jackal and Norman Osborn in orchestrating the Clone Saga was to shatter Peter’s sense of identity. The Jackal wanted to do that in 1975 with a 22 year old Peter. Norman however knew the blow would hurt Peter much more when he had more to lose and so delayed it until 1995 when Peter would’ve been about 27 years old, had more of a career, longer and deeper connections to his loved ones, a wife and a baby on the way.

When he finally pulled the trigger Peter had also only recently recovered from a terrible mental breakdown, lost Aunt May, been falsely accused of murder, had his sense of identity further damaged by yet more clones of himself appearing and learned that he and MJ’s baby might have serious health problems if he was a clone.

In fact MJ’s first reaction upon learning Peter was a clone was to grip her tummy and express concern for her baby. And remember she directly told him a clone isn’t a real person.

When put in context this caused Peter to have a SECOND mental breakdown. Entirely UNDERSTANDABLY!

This wasn’t a case of appreciating all he had because from his point of view being a clone meant he’d LOST all that. That he COULDN’T have that because he was less than human and not the real person that life belonged to.

If BEN reacted that way when he believed he was a clone then logically OF COURSE Peter was going to take it much, much, much worse.

“It should also be pointed out that during this period, Mary Jane's life was at risk and she was being stalked, again. This time by a clone. However, Peter was once again nowhere to be seen.”

Oh my fucking…HE HAD BEEN ARRESTED!

He wasn’t around because he was literally incarcerated in prison. Breaking out risked exposing his identity and thus endangering MJ and the baby. He also didn’t KNOW she was being stalked. When he found out in ASM #401 he broke out of jail and sought to find her. Later when Ben offered to take his place in jail Peter went on the hunt for MJ’s stalker, his clone Kaine whom he ALSO suspected as the guy who framed him.

Gee, proactively seeking out the guy threatening your wife and who might’ve framed you?

What a shitty husband, it’s not like that’s an entirely practical consideration to take or anything.

“In Heindsight...”

Oh this outta be good

“I could go over every other moment where Peter treated his wife like crap,”

Except he rarely did and the examples you’ve brought up do not hold up to scrutiny in the slightest because you are a clown show of an analyst.

“but those are the huge ones.”

No they aren’t, see above.

“Looking back at the upset of 2007, it's clear that anyone who got mad didn't actually read any of the stories written while Peter and Mary Jane were married.”

That’s so very rich coming from this dipshit, see above.

“Even then, over the past decade there has been a plethora of great Spider-Man stories.”

That’s true.

Agent Venom by Rick Remender

Carnage Family Feud

Carnage USA

Half of Scarlet Spider by Chris Yost

Bits of Ben Reilly: Scarlet Spider by Peter David

AXIS Hobgoblin

AXIS Carnage

Carnage by Gerry Conway

Silk by Robbie Thompson

Superior Foes of Spider-Man

ASM: Renew Your Vows

The issue where Flash Thompson lost his legs

The story regarding the Rhino and his girlfriend

Spider-Man 2099 by Peter David

Notice how none of that stuff focuses upon 616 Peter Parker.

Because between 2008-2018 there were no good stories focussing upon 616 Peter Parker.

At best there were mediocre stories focussing upon the pathetic man-child that was Spider-Man in name only.

“In fact, I'd even argue that Dan Slott's run on Spider-Man has contained some of the best Spider-Man stories of the past two decades.”

And you’d just further confirm yourself to be a moron who doesn’t have the first warm shit of a clue about how to analyse stories if you did.

“I can't think or a stellar Spider-Man run past 198 until Slott's run.”

ASM by JMS+Romita Junior

Sensational by Sacasa

Spec by DeMatteis+Buscema

Spec by DeMatteis+Ross

Marvel Knights by Mark Millar

Bits of Peter Parker: Spider-Man by Paul Jenkins

Hypothetically though let’s say they weren’t stellar.

They would still be OBJECTIVELY better than Dan Slott. Like who’s mothers did Michelinie, DeFalco or any of the above guys murder for you to claim Slott was better than them.

None of those guys:

Had Peter become a paparazzi photographer

Had Aunt May claim she was disappointed in Peter for not supporting her the night Uncle Ben died

Had Doc Ock try to rape Mary Jane

Created a clear cut Mary Sue to upstage Spidey in his own book

Turned Spider-Man into Diet Iron Man

Killed off a Ditko-era character for no other reason beyond a shock death. Except Mark Millar but the character was extremely minor

“Next to JMS' run, Slott has been the best Spider-Man writer in decades.”

Again, notice how he CONVENIENTLY neglected to bring up stuff from the JMS run when MJ and the marriage was written the best.

His criteria for judging MJ literally JUST included:

ASM by Michelinie run from 1989-1994

ASM by DeMatteis in 1994

Conway’s Spec/Web runs from 1988-1989

Spec #226 by DeFalco in 1995

Mackie’s PPSM run from 1997

The Mackie/Byrne run from 1999-2001

That was it.

He stated the marriage lasted between 1987-2007 but his analysis halted at 2001. He’s leaving out 6 goddam years worth of material in addition to ALL the other material he conveniently ignored before then.

“Where to Go From Here?

That raises some interesting questions. Will Peter and Mary Jane tie the knot again? It seems like Marvel is marrying characters off again (Colossus and Kitty Pryde as well as Gambit and Rogue) so that's promising.

Another is the promising thing is that the alternate reality series Renew Your Vows has been doing very well.

The last point is the main reason why they nixed the marriage to begin with: Needing a Spider-Man younger readers can relate with.”

The main reason they nixed it was because Quesada was butthurt Gwen died in 1973 and that MJ got to marry him instead.

“For the past number of years they have been promoting the hell out of Miles Morales, the "Ultimate" Spider-Man. They have been grooming him to be the young Spidey that they want for younger fans.”

Maybe don’t use the term ‘grooming’ in the context of a teenage character there buddy.

“While that doesn't mean Peter and MJ are destined to get married again, hopefully they will allow Peter to at least grow up a little.”

I see.

Marriage = bad because it makes him unrelatable to the kids. But also this dipshit wants Peter to ‘grow up a little’…which is what he had done by marrying MJ in the first place.

“However, let me say this: Doing what's expected doesn't necessarily make for a good story, it's the unexpected.”

Why don’t you ask Star Wars and Game of Thrones fans what they think about that buddy?

“That's what made Slott's run on Spider-Man so great.”

That’s true. Nobody expected Slott would have Doc Ock masturbate in Peter’s body. Nobody expected him to drag out our suffering for as long as he did. Nobody expected he’d invoke such a juvenile idea as Norman Osborn becoming carnage.

“Let's hope Nick Spencer continues that tradition.’

Fuck the unexpected. Just give me competency.

#Spider-Man #mjwatsonedit #Mary Jane Watson #mj watson #Mary Jane Watson Parker #Peter Parker #ben Reilly #Brand New Day #Dan Slott #Clone Saga #submission

13 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 6 years ago

Text

ASM vol 5 #15/816 Thoughts

SPOILERS

Ain’t life funny?

Because I read this issue only an hour or so after issue #14 and most of my problems from issue #14 stand here.

Yet somehow, whether it was the issue or I dunno something else...I enjoyed this much more than last time.

So let me address the negatives first.

The Lizard stuff still stands as overly absurdist for a Spider-Man story. Granted it is alleviated by not having Peter and MJ there for dinner. It’s still dumb seeing a scene out every YA TV drama or whatever play out with Lizard people. Were they not Lizard people though it’d be perfectly decent character drama.

Bachalo’s art. Same complaints as last time except there were points in this issue where I truly couldn’t tell what the hell was happening. At points Black Ant was barely in shot and I couldn’t quite get the angle. The scene where Spider-Man, er...hits (?) Taskmaster is so poorly done I wasn’t sure if he was headbutting him or not and regardless I couldn’t tell what part of Taskmaster’s face I was looking at. Also the linework is often just like soft and I poorly done.

Its just so obvious this was a fill-in job to plug the gap and get the books out on time.

That’s really where my outright negatives end because this is a point that’s sort of bad but also sort of good.

I talked in my last issue post about how the books have recently been recycling art and how it doesn’t jive well when the art styles are so different.

This issue suffers from that a bit on the last page becuse Bachalo’s crappy art is juxtaposed with what is either a very realistic drawing of or an outright photo of New York city and it just looks stupid.

However it’s also used for a page that recycycles old art from the 1960s-1980s. And there it actually works.

I think that is because Bachalo’s art is relatively minimal on that page , the artwork in question is in greyscale and because (unlike with Ottley’s recycled art last issue) the art is so classical that it works it evokes the idea of a truly bygone age. It’s not that Bachalo’s style is clashing with this art it’s that no one draws comics like this anymore so it creates this idea of the past and present being ‘different countries’ as it were.

Other semi-negative. Peter claims he didn’t learn how to be a hero from Uncle Ben but Aunt May which is not strictly true. He learned it really from both of them but his selflessness was definitely more May.

The speech though was over all a wonderful affirmation of Aunt May’s importance to who Peter is, expressed in a way I never really considered before but rings so true!

Aunt May over all is used quite wonderfully here. I’m not going to say Spencer is a great Aunt May writer because he’s not yet hit the heights of JMS or DeMatteis. But he at least can write Aunt May competently and in a way that is devoid of the cliché doddering and overly worrisome old woman of yesteryear nor the ‘I’m so disappointed in you’ nail we’ve been hammering over and over since BND began.

Here Aunt May is not a hyper competent bad ass but is seen embodying her most defining personality trait: caring for others.

Spencer reinstating her role in FEAST is a wonderful direction as that role was one of the many good but bungled ideas of the post-OMD era. A perfect ongoing role for a character like Aunt May...even if it is probably being done just to synch up with the PS4 game. And if you don’t believe me consider that the page immediately after May announces she’s reforming FEAST they have an ad for Spider-Man: City at War #1. Which is...ugh...but still a good role for her and for Randy in fact.

We also have the return of the Ned Leeds clone. And yes I am saying clone because that is exactly what Clone Conspiracy established them as being; they’re not the original characters resurrected and even the issue itself affirms this.*

I do not know what the point of returning Ned Leeds to the cast could be. I think he should remain dead as now between this and Bennett Brant’s return both of the major deaths defining Betty Brant’s life have been semi-undone. What is the point?

At least Peter acted relatively in character regarding Ned’s return. My main interest in that plot point is the potential foreshadowing Ned hinted at. Apparently Betty needs protecting from something but what?

As for the main plot Spider-Man is very much in character in his prioritisation of Aunt May over Rhino, his desperation to save May and his violence towards Taskmaster. Black Ant gets some great lines in at TM’s expense about this too.

The Rhino thing is a mixed bag. I think Rhino and Spider-Man should be on opposing sides 99% of the time but also a Rhino who is more conciliatory towards Spider-Man was something that could have been explored further. At least his reversion to hating him was believable albeit somewhat unoriginal.

Kraven’s plan sounds very interesting even if I think Kraven should go back to being dead like in KLH.

And although I do not like Secret Empire and think Marvel should be ashamed to have done it, I do have to respect Spencer’s raw balls in daring to make major use of continuity from it in his upcoming Hunted event.

Over all an improvement other last issues problems.

*The issue also by the way claims Billy Connors is a teenager which is maybe the first time since the 1990s Billy has been acknowledged as being a teen. His age has always vacillated wildly.

#Amazing Spider-Man #Spider-Man #Peter Parker #Nick Spencer #chris bachalo #Rhino #the rhino #aleksei O'hirn #Paolo Rivera #Aunt May #May Parker #Ned Leeds #Clone Conspiracy #kraven the hunter #Sergei Kravinoff

12 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 6 years ago

Link

This post is full of misinformed, misinterpreted and out of context shit.

· There is NO hard canonical timeline for Peter’s ages for when he began acting as a hero. At best sources stating he was 15 upon getting his powers and ASm #400’s backup strip claiming that he was 16 the night he caught the burglar is how you can arrive at the conclusion he aged into being 16 by the time he began acting as a hero. But it’s vague as fuck and both 15 and 16 are retcons. Originally Peter was written to be a senior in the Ditko run. However it makes more sense if Peter was 15 both when he got his powers and when he began acting as a hero as Mysterio (debuting in ASM #13) claimed in ASM #24 that he’s hated Spider-Man for years implying at least 2 years elapsed between that issue and his debut

· Spider-Man circa the time this post was written was not 30 years old. He was actually older than that if you do the math properly. Do not be fooled by Learning to Crawl’s assertion he was merely 28 circa 2014 he was actually 30 years old circa OMD in 2007. So no he has egregiously more than 14 years worth of experience.

· The list of characters Peter’s been active longer than is highly flawed due to the inclusion of Captain America, the Guardians and Jessica Jones.

Whilst the essential sentiment is accurate it’s misleading because Jessica Jones first appearance was not when she canonically began to be active in the silver age (the 1960s). Captain America of course was active in WWII and then put on ice until the early days of the Marvel Age where the F4 debuted meaning he was most experienced by like decades ahead of Spider-Man. And the Guardians debut date listed is in reference to the ORIGINAL Guardians of the Galaxy. These Guardians were not Gamora, Star-Lord, Groot, etc. These were a group of heroes from the far future of an alternate marvel universe.

So great research there.

· The post states that 5 years real time = 1 year for the MU. Actually it’s 4 OR 5 and more commonly 4

· Yes Spider-Man was indeed widely disliked by most heroes but the OP idiotically claims it was because he was a jerk.

No. It was because Jameson slandered his name. Spider-Man’s jerkish behaviour was the result of three major factors.

Firstly it was the fact that many heroes outright disrespected him. for instance the Avengers not only insulted him verbally and antagonized him but they had the audacity to try and test his worthiness to join their team after only recently accepting former criminals Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch and Hawkeye onto their team. As a reminder the former two were affiliated with mutant terrorist Magneto and the latter with Communist spy Black Widow. None of them were ever tested, the Maximoffs just wrote a letter asking to join and that was it.

Secondly in the Silver and Bronze age ALL heroes in Marvel were jerks to one another. It was a conscious effort to differentiate themselves from DC. It isn’t something to be taken too seriously.

Thirdly Peter was well beyond most other heroes straining under immense pressures which would serve to make ANYONE uptight. These were pressures most other heroes simply never dealt with.

· The OP claims Peter picked fights to prove how tough and manly he was. This is not only ignorant of 1960s societal standards for the time but is also an overly comdemnatory reading of the character

See these for more on that

https://hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger.tumblr.com/post/163322233001/in-a-recent-exchange-i-had-with-somebody-they

https://hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger.tumblr.com/post/168252199132/fyeahspiderverse-ask-me-ask-me-ask#notes

This poster takes an oversimplified and highly pretentious sociological approach to the character that is ignorant of the character’s proper in context psychology or how many real life people would think, feel or act.

Noticably (and this is much later on in the post) she talks about the character revelling in violence when MOST superheroes are just like that and more poignantly the ‘revelling’ involved is a character harming objectively evil people the overwhelming majority of the time.

He gets brutal in the course of a brutal life dealing with brutal people doing horribly brutal things.

Does he lose his temper from time to time?

Yeah...but EVERY PERSON ON EARTH DOES THAT...and most people on Earth are not coping with the insane levels of personal stress being placed upon Spider-Man.

The OP I am willing to bet does not deal with anything CLOSE to the amount of horrible experiences and stresses Spider-Man himself does.

· The OP paints Peter is a disgustingly negative light. Listing how he is oudmouthed, proud, independent, stubborn, touchy, cocky, judgmental, and he has one hell of a temper that he typically can barely keep under control. He has a firm sense of justice, of what’s right and what’s wrong, and if he’s made up his mind, he will not budge.

This is BS because not only are there numerous instances of Peter having his mind changed but Peter being ‘touchy’ is usually owed a fuckton more to the situations he finds himself in and the stresses he’s coping with. FFS Peter for the first 18 years of his life has no friends and was bullied and ostracised. OF COURSE HE’D BE TOUCHY!

Similarly his’ barely controllable temper’ was a feature more during the silver and bronze age when writing standards for many superheroes was very different from what it’d later evolve into and the character was a lot younger too.

YES Peter has had moments where his temper breaks in later stories but they were situational.

But what’s gross about the OP is that she lists of all this stuff as part of Peter’s personality and then lists nothing else.

Nothing else.

Peter’s kindness?

Peter’s sense of loyalty?

Peter’s sense of you know...responsibility?

Peter’s sheer decency?

Peter’s ‘never say die’ attitude?

Peter’s sense of humour?

Peter’s fondness for learning?

Peter NOT being as judgemental as the OP is grossly pretending he is considering he never once held Flash Thompson once assaulting his girlfriend, Betty cheating on her husband or many other bad things his friends have done against them?

Which showcases an incredibly forgiving nature to the character.

· The OP claims Spider-Man REVELS in violence and loves fighting.

No Spider-Man loves blowing off steam with action which MOST superheroes do. It’s not a Peter thing it’s a genre convention thing and needs to be properly looked at WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE GENRE CONVENTIONS of the series and Marvel in general.

Does Spider-Man love beating up bad guys?

I think he certainly gets a certain thrill out of it, but he rarely seriously injures them unless the situation is serious or else he’s been pushed hard.

In the 1980s the violence Peter was witnessing in various street crimes actually served to seriously affect him and he wanted to quit.

Shit he’s wanted to quit COUNTLESS times and it’s his sense of responsibility that keeps him in the game.

That is NOT someone who just ‘loves’ fighting or ‘revels’ in violence.

· “He punches first and asks questions much, much later. ”

Again bullshit. Not only have there been instances where Spidey has asked questions first but this interpretation of Spider-Man is extremely flawed not only because it doesn’t properly contextualize genre conventions of the superhero genre (Daredevil and Batman are as ‘guilty’ of this as Spider-Man) but also because 99% of the crimes Spider-Man ‘punches first’ he catches red handed in the middle of the act.

He doesn’t need to ask questions if he sees someone in a ski mask with a gun holding up someone screaming in an alleyway.

He doesn’t need to ask questions when he sees what is obviously a bank robbery in progress.

He doesn’t need to ask questions first if the Rhino is rampaging in Times Square.

It’s OBVIOUS what is happening so his immediate intervention is neccesarry.

· The OP claims Spidey “goes out every night LOOKING for people to beat to a bloody pulp. It’s like his therapy, where he works out his many anger issues (I could write a whole essay on where those come from).”

First of all the OP couldn’t write a whole essay on where Spider-Man’s anger issues come from since she patently misunderstands Spider-Man.

Secondly beating up criminals isn’t Spider-Man’s ‘therepy’ it’s Spider-Man’s way of helping people by reducing the crime rate and protecting innocent civilians.

See ASm #50 where he retires briefly and crime rates spike.

See ASm #500 where he chooses to not prevent his younger self from becoming Spider-Man due to how many people wouldn’t be saved by him.

See EVERY SPIDER-MAN STORY EVER!

Spider-Man doesn’t go out every night looking to beat people to a bloody pulp.

I’m a Liberal and even I think that’s overliberalized bullshit.

If you actually pay attention Spider-Man rarely draws blood when going out on patrol let alone causes any serious physical trauma whatsoever.

More importantly going out on patrol looking for ‘people to beat up’ isn’t his fucking hobby. That’s him using his powers to help people by fighting crime...like the kind that got his Uncle Ben killed perhaps. Fucking idiot.

· “He is not afraid of the unsuperpowered criminals he hunts down because they literally CANNOT LAY A FINGER ON HIM AND HE KNOWS IT AND ALWAYS HAS.”

Yeah.

Remember all those times ‘unsuperpowered criminals’ like the Kingpin or the Enforcers or the Foreigner or Captain fucking America never hit him once?

· “The criminals are terrified of HIM. ”

Some are, some are not.

He isn’t Batman, it’s more they know they have little chance of avoiding capture if Spider-Man’s there. They aren’t actually afraid of him in the way the term ‘terrified’ implies.

They are afraid of him the way they are afraid of Superman. They know Superman isn’t going to hurt them much if at all but they know they’re in for jail if they cross him.

· “He is unstoppable when he’s angry.”

Is that why Daredevil was able to defeat him in the Death of Jean DeWolff when he was angry?

· OP uses Peter complaining how normal crooks are boring as an example of Spider-Man inherent personality and as an example to again paint him in a negative light.

This is BS because the issue is premeditated upon building up his pride before Doc Ock kicks his ass and humbles him.

He rarely if ever displays that kind of attitude towards regular criminals again.

This is also a TEENAGER displaying TEENAGE pride. There is nothing damning about that.

Oh but the character must’ve just inherently been that forever more obviously.

· OP uses Untold Tales #13 as an example of how ‘toxically violent’ Spider-Man is.

Again ignores context.

Spider-Man is a teenager who recently lost his Dad who’s school peer who was his own age violently died very recently and so he was grieving and lashing out.

I knew kids who were children of divorce who lashed out.

That was cause for understanding by my teachers and fellow students.

Peter was dealing with worse but he’s painted negatively and as though this is something inherent to him in this very extenuating circumstance. And he’s comdened by the OP for it. Gross.

Also the OP pretends Spider-Man almost killed the villain in question. He didn’t there is no indication of that. Spidey used too much force after he’d already won but he was never implied to be inflicting any really serious physical trauma.

· The most disgusting thing in the post so far, OP tries to pretend there is a problematic and inherent ‘pattern’ of Peter’s violence by citing how Peter almost killed Norman Osborn after Gwen died.

First of all there was no pattern because Peter didn’t almost kill the Untold Tales villain.

Second of all Peter was DELIBERATELY trying to muder the Green Goblin.

Third of all both instances involve Peter grieving.

Fourth of all the GG incident was when his almost fiancée had just been MURDERED before his eyes by the target of his anger.

Literally ANYONE would’ve felt the same way Peter did.

The OP treats people becoming violently angry against objectively evil people when they have or are very seriously threatening to do horrific things (like murdering innocent people, particularly those Spider-Man has an emotional investment in) as ‘problematic’.

It’s problematic in so far as we shouldn’t ALLOW people in society to go around doing that.

It isn’t problematic in so far as it speaks to inherent negative traits within those people who want to or actually do do those things.

Because let’s not lie to ourselves here.

If someone murdered someone you loved...you’d be angry. You’d want to hurt them. And if they were right in front of you shortly after they’d murdered your loved one and you could you’d inflict pain upon them.

Real talk every parent ever would agree if they’re child was hurt or god forbid abused or murdered they’d want to kill the person who did that.

And the OP disgustingly ignores how Peter DIDN’T kill the Goblin and acknowledged how he almost crossed a serious line having already gone too far.

· OP brings up ANOTHER instance where Spider-Man gets angry and violent to again unsubtley imply it’s so problematic.

Yes in this instance Spider-Man used force unnecessarily whilst angry.

He however inflicted no lasting damage and the person he used it on had just murdered an innocent man who had a family.

· “ASM #177, where, as you can see, he’s downright contemptuous of other people’s attempts to harm him”

Contemptuous was an interpretation of the OP, not something hardcore without a doubt the emotion Spider-Man was going with.

Frankly in the panels showcased i’d say Spidey was more surprised and mocking towards the guy who was again...a huge asshole.

He believed it was his friend Harry who was from Peter’s POV betraying his friendship, had tried to harma dn murder him, Aunt May, Flash and MJ in the past, had hospitalized MJ and at that PARTICULAR moment in the story was wasting Peter’s time as Aunt May’s life was hanging in the balance.

So yes Spider-Man mocked him and hit him.

Shockingly you are allowed to hit people sometimes FFS.

Oh and btw the issue number wasn’t even correct.

· OP uses ASM #189 to further support their case. This is one example where I WOULD agree that the panels legitimately support the agenda they are trying to push.

The problem is that the panels are also OOC.

Spider-Man had never to my recollection ever acted this was towards a doctor before and only particular situations had served to spur him to act this way.

This was part of the Marv Wolfman run where to be brutally honest there was more than a little OOC writing of many characters and an over all regressive approach to Spider-man in particular.

He’s MORE rash and MORE aggressive and MORE of a jerk than he’d been in a long ass time even under Stan Lee’s tenure.

And this made sense because Wolfman pretentiously regarded himself as a Ditko ‘purist’ who believed Spider-Man should never have left high school. And so he wrote Spider-Man in a regressive way to the point where often times, like in the referenced panel from ASM #189 he acted in ways that didn’t make sense for a 22 year old written for 1979 standards vs a teenager written for 1963 standards.

Further proof can be observed in how his writing for Mary jane in her rejection of Peter’s proposal played as though she never developed from the silver age onwards.

· “ASM #193 – this is VERY 616 Peter. He’s frustrated with his personal life, so he decides to take it out (violently) on a bad guy:”

Again...Wolfman’s run, but in this case he is not doing anything particularly wrong within the genre and societal conventions of the time.

Genre conventions dictated that in superhero comic book land hitting criminals is 100% okay because they are bad guys.

Therefore since Spider-Man does that anyway, venting his frustrations into something productive is also okay.

Societal conventions dictated that this was the late 1970s and early 1980s...in New York.

70s and 80s New York was ROUGH and had problems with street crime that got more violent into the 1980s, at least according to the media.

You know how in the Daredevil Netflix show they said because of the Battle of New York Hell’s Kitchen had gone downhill?

That was because they were trying to justify modern day Hell’s Kitchen resembling the kind of dark crime ridden place it was in the 70s and 80s at the height of Daredevil’s popularity.

NYC was ROUGH and that was attributed a lot to crime and so a crime fighter like Spider-Man getting rough would’ve been regarded as fine as would him doing it to vent anger.

The angrier he gets the more criminals he beats up meaning the more go to jail meaning the streets are safer. So all the better.

That was the logic of the time period.

Remember this was the decade that spawned DIRTY HARRY!

This was a decade where Vietnam wrapped up in abject failure and Watergate broke out. People were fucking angry and disillusioned.

And to add further context Marv Wolfman wrote Superman in the 1980s post-crisis era as getting rough with criminals too because Wolfman was a child of the era where both superheroes and crime/gangster stories involved that sort of mentality. His Superman was the Golden Age one who got rough a lot and it was seen as fine because criminals were bad and therefore deserved it.

Now bear all that shit in mind when reading ASM #189...where Spider-Man in hunting down a dangerous super villain who could endure blows from him and whom he’d need to find and stop anyway...whilst he’s coping with Aunt May being in a nursing home, his relationship with MJ whom he is in love with disintegrating, his relationship with Betty also disintegrating and having just taken a punch to the jaw from Ned Leeds his old rival.

YOU CANNOT REMOVE SHIT FROM THE CONTEXT OF THE TIMES THEY WERE CREATED IN!

· More of OP being a disgenuous jerk by pretending Spider-Man losing his temper in confronting the man who murdered Uncle Ben is problematic.

“…notice how a mask seems pretty unnecessary here, despite the fact that his opponent is armed. Peter doesn’t even hesitate. He is out for blood.”

A) The Burglar was not initially unarmed he lost his gun in the scuffle depicted in the panels from the OP

B) Real talk...who WOULDN’T lose their temper confronting the guy who MURDERED THEIR DAD to the point where they’d come close to seriously injuring them?

C) Peter believed Aunt May had recently DIED and that it was at least partially his fault

D) The OP conveniently neglects that the Burglar was threatening Spider-Man with a gun a panel before Peter attacked him and that Spider-Man doesn’t have his powers in this instance. In other words shortly after his mother figure’s death an unarmed and helpless Peter Parker was confronted by an armed known killer who killed his father figure in cold blood and was threatening his life. And he’s ‘problematic’ for assaulting him angrily and threatening to kill him. Can you spell ‘self’defence’?

OP is also disingenuous because she paints Spider-Man’s rage and scary demanor as the fault of the Burglar’s death when it was just the Burglar working himself up.

Spider-Man made it explicitly clear he was NOT going to kill or maim the Burglar but the Burglar was just too worked up and had a heart attack.

· OP brings up Spec v2 #10 where Spider-Man is beating the shit out of Doc Ock....but conveniently doesn’t include the panels prior to that incident where Doc Ock pointlessly murdered an innocent police officer violently and then threatened to murder someone everyday for a year...after he nearly deliberately instigated a war between Israel and Palestine! I am NOT making that up Doc Ock nearly set off a war between Israel and Palestine just to force Spider-Man into revealing his secret identity

FFS is Spider-man REALLY this violence revelling brute for punching the shit out of him for that!

Doc Ock took an innocent life, threatened to take more and was willing to risk MILLIONS of people dying in a war that could’ve lasted years because of his own stupid ego and obsession.

Like fuck dude WAR CRIMINALS have been executed for less than that but SPIDER-MAN is a violence addict because he punched Doc Ock a bit and humiliated him?

Look real talk Spidey making Doc Ock ‘ask him nicely’ was OOC (the OP doesn’t seem to realize such a thing could ever possibly happen) but even if it wasn’t it doesn’t prove the OP’s point because the CONTEXT OF THE SITUATION MATTERS.

· “ASM #522, where he loses his temper and throws Wolverine out of a window:”

Yes.

First thing in the morning after he’s been woken up abruptly by the worrying and mind boggling news that his wife has been sleeping with Tony Stark the guy who’s been insulting him on and off for awhile and who is now very directly insulting his pride and his beloved, long suffering wife (who’s lived through hell for him and has saved his life a million times too).

And he does the equivalent of punching the guy.

How ‘problematic’ and ‘toxic’ that must be.

Gimme a break.

Also remember Spider-Man doesn’t normally randomly punch people, even those who insult him despite the bullshit picture the OP is trying to paint.

· “ASM #539, the first issue in the “Back in Black” arc where Aunt May is shot on Kingpin’s orders, and Peter PUNCHES, INTIMIDATES, AND THREATENS HIS WAY THROUGH THE UNDERWORLD trying to figure out who was responsible. I would recommend reading this arc for a good look at Peter when he’s beyond furious”

OP disingenuously pretending that Peter when he is beyond furious is Spider-Man’s default setting as opposed to Spider-Man under extenuating and/or exceptional circumstances.

You know like when someone has shot his mother who is now dying and might pose a threat to yet more of his friends and family!

Like FUCK how are you so dense as to not properly contextualize shit.

· “Notice, again, the lack of a mask. Peter’s not even slightly frightened by the thought of diving into a room FULL of criminals armed with machine guns where he’s outnumbered by what looks like about 7 to 1.”

OP seemingly conveniently ignoring that in Back In Black (the story being referenced here) Spider-Man identity was public so it doesn’t matter that he didn’t have his mask

· “I find these panels more telling than Peter vs. Norman in #122 – in that one, Peter lost his temper momentarily but quickly snapped out of it and realized he didn’t have it in him to commit murder. Here, he’s completely cool. He genuinely plans to murder Kingpin. He’s thought about it. He wants to do it. He will do it without a moment’s hesitation if the need arises, if that’s what it takes to protect his family – that’s what 616 Peter does. He protects everyone around him. He takes the punishment they cannot.”

I find this part the most mind boggling of all because the OP’s statements here are not untrue but also make no sense in her characterization of Peter as toxic.

· “I could keep going with this all day, because this is who he is in the comics, but I’ll stop there. ”

Again no.

This is who Peter is at TIMES in the comics under certain circumstances and at particular points in his history. That isn’t what he is like at his regular default setting when horrible or seriously stressful or emotionally triggering things are not happening to him.

He ISN’T like this for instance in the Digger arc of JMS’ run.

He ISN’T like this in ASM #301

He ISN’T like this in ASM #41

He ISN’T like this in the Kid Who Collected Spider-Man

· “Does this angry, vengeful man who REVELS in violence really seem like he’s scared of, I don’t know, ANYONE? Don’t let the jokes fool you. Peter’s not someone you want to make angry. He is terrifying when he’s angry.”

Again OP speaks bullshit because

a) Peter doesn’t revel in violence. That’d inply real enjoyment. He at worst vents using it

b) Peter isn’t scared of anyone huh?

Sister let me introduce you to Spider-Man’s ex...and her new man.

Their shipper name...is Venom....

#Spider-Man #Venom #Eddie Brock #Green Goblin #Doctor Octopus #Peter Parker #MCu #marvel cinematic universe

44 notes · View notes