Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202 
Member is Online
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 24, 2017 5:18:14 GMT -5
I haven't truly enjoyed Spider-Man comics in the way that I used to since the whole One More Day/Brand New Day clusterf**k, back in 2007. However, I continued to buy Amazing Spider-Man until early-to-mid 2016. The initially year or two of post-OMD stories were, for the most part, really lacklustre. Slott's run was a definite improvement, but a lingering bad taste from OMD and the impact (read "character regression") that it had on much of Spidey's supporting cast, really stuck in my craw. The Superior Spider-Man run was, without doubt, the highlight of Slott's run for me. It was something fresh and is the only part of his run that I would recommend without hesitation. However, when a super-villain living as Spider-Man is more exciting and interesting to read about than Peter Parker in the role, you know that there's a serious problem with the book. I finally dropped all of the Spidey books shortly after Superior Spider-Man ended, because by making Peter the playboy CEO of Parker Industries, I felt that Slott had taken the character much too far away from his roots and what it is that I enjoy about him. If I want to read about Tony Stark, I'll buy Iron Man comics, not Spider-Man ones. So yeah, Superior Spider-Man is well worth checking out, but the rest of Slott's run ranges from averagely entertaining to decidedly "yuck!". While I applaud Slott's decision to accentuate Peter's scientific abilities, I felt that the introduction of Parker Industries, with Peter as the millionaire, globe-trotting CEO was a step too far. I'm not arguing that it might be a "realistic" development, given Peter's genius level scientific abilities, but it unfortunately took the character so far away from his core that, for me, it was the final straw which made me drop Amazing Spider-Man after being a regular or semi-regular reader for 35 odd years. It essentially turned Peter Parker into Tony Stark and I have less than no interest in that. Yet Slott is building dramatic conflict by the fact that Peter isn't Tony Stark. Yes, he may be the head of his own global corporation but unlike Tony, Peter hasn't been raised nor trained to be an eventual CEO. He lacks experience and some essential knowledge in properly running such an enterprise. He's still playing by his own principles but by doing so, he's also undermining the public perception and financial foundations of a company that, in essence, he merely inherited. I'm not denying that Slott's handling of millionaire CEO Peter Parker doesn't have some redeeming qualities and I'm quite prepared to believe there have been some entertaining stories, but, for me, it's had the disastrous effect of taking Peter away from his core character concept: i.e. the hardluck hero and Everyman who is secretly Spider-Man. You can't be an Everyman or down on your luck if you're a globe-trotting millionaire business man. Don't get me wrong, I definitely enjoy character development over the course of a series. However, there are some fundamentals to a character's makeup that should never be violated, for fear of ruining said character, as Slott has done with Spider-Man. The annoying thing about Slott's run is that it was at it's best when Doc Ock was Spider-Man, as noted in my previous post. You know you've got a problem when the lead writer on Spider-Man writes a more compelling Doctor Octopus than he does a Peter Parker. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202
Member is Online
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 24, 2017 5:22:04 GMT -5
While I applaud Slott's decision to accentuate Peter's scientific abilities, I felt that the introduction of Parker Industries, with Peter as the millionaire, globe-trotting CEO was a step too far. I'm not arguing that it might be a "realistic" development, given Peter's genius level scientific abilities, but it unfortunately took the character so far away from his core that, for me, it was the final straw which made me drop Amazing Spider-Man after being a regular or semi-regular reader for 35 odd years. It essentially turned Peter Parker into Tony Stark and I have less than no interest in that. Yeah, I'm not loving that either. I mean specifically when he started working for Max Whatsisname at that place he used to work at doing science things. That was cool. Max Modell and it was Horizon Labs. Yeah, I agree, that was a cool idea and I had no problem with Peter working there. That made a whole lot of sense. |
|
|
|
Post by The Cheat on Jul 24, 2017 14:53:41 GMT -5
I'm really not a fan of Slott's run at all, but to be fair, the Parker Industries thing was clearly an editorial mandate to get him out the way so Miles could do all the classic Spider-Man stuff.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202
Member is Online
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 24, 2017 18:03:51 GMT -5
...but to be fair, the Parker Industries thing was clearly an editorial mandate to get him out the way so Miles could do all the classic Spider-Man stuff. That might be so (I wouldn't know), but that doesn't excuse what it's done to the original Spider-Man, Peter Parker's character, and it also doesn't mean that Slott had to go along with it. I think we can safely assume that Mr. Slott is perfectly happy with the direction of the book or he would've left. |
|
|
|
Post by String on Jul 25, 2017 12:10:11 GMT -5
Yet Slott is building dramatic conflict by the fact that Peter isn't Tony Stark. Yes, he may be the head of his own global corporation but unlike Tony, Peter hasn't been raised nor trained to be an eventual CEO. He lacks experience and some essential knowledge in properly running such an enterprise. He's still playing by his own principles but by doing so, he's also undermining the public perception and financial foundations of a company that, in essence, he merely inherited. I'm not denying that Slott's handling of millionaire CEO Peter Parker doesn't have some redeeming qualities and I'm quite prepared to believe there have been some entertaining stories, but, for me, it's had the disastrous effect of taking Peter away from his cute character concept: i.e. the hardluck hero and Everyman who is secretly Spider-Man. You can't be an Everyman or down on your luck if you're a globe-trotting millionaire business man. Don't get me wrong, I definitely enjoy character development over the course of a series. However, there are some fundamentals to a character's makeup that should never be violated, for fear of ruining said character, as Slott has done with Spider-Man. The annoying thing about Slott's run is that it was at it's best when Doc Ock was Spider-Man, as noted in my previous post. You know you've got a problem when the lead writer on Spider-Man writes a more compelling Doctor Octopus than he does a Peter Parker. Here's where we differ. I have no problem with the hard luck hero yet somehow over the years, this image has devolved into the perception that Peter is some kind of lovable loser, which is rubbish. Peter forever down on his luck? How is that inspiring? As much as you don't want to read of Peter as Tony, I have less than no interest in reading a Peter Parker such as that. I want Peter to succeed, to have the victories in life, both small and large, for however long they last for such is the ebb and flow of life and one imminently more relatable than someone who will never ever get ahead no matter what. As for core traits, the theme that Peter uses his powers to do the right thing, regardless of public or private cost, Slott's stories that I've read so far have more than exemplified this. Clone Conspiracy explores the moral costs of potential reversing every death Spider-Man has caused (whether through action or inaction) including the one death that started it all. Currently, as I stated, Peter continues to do what he feels is right and necessary despite the obvious political, financial, and social cost to his company. Plus, his limited experience as a CEO has helped bolster his own confidence levels of being a leader which he has demonstrated to his shocked superhero compatriots during this Secret Empire debacle. I would lend more credence to your opinion in this regard if indeed it was Peter himself that built up this global company. But he didn't. He merely inherited it and the former owner and originator, Otto Octavious, has come to collect what is rightfully his. (And if the company falls, what of the Uncle Ben Foundation, the humanitarian relief effort Peter did establish aided by Aunt May?) His company threatened on all sides, still struggling to do the right thing regardless of the cost, yeah...hard luck indeed. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202
Member is Online
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 25, 2017 13:12:53 GMT -5
I'm not denying that Slott's handling of millionaire CEO Peter Parker doesn't have some redeeming qualities and I'm quite prepared to believe there have been some entertaining stories, but, for me, it's had the disastrous effect of taking Peter away from his cute character concept: i.e. the hardluck hero and Everyman who is secretly Spider-Man. You can't be an Everyman or down on your luck if you're a globe-trotting millionaire business man. Don't get me wrong, I definitely enjoy character development over the course of a series. However, there are some fundamentals to a character's makeup that should never be violated, for fear of ruining said character, as Slott has done with Spider-Man. The annoying thing about Slott's run is that it was at it's best when Doc Ock was Spider-Man, as noted in my previous post. You know you've got a problem when the lead writer on Spider-Man writes a more compelling Doctor Octopus than he does a Peter Parker. Here's where we differ. I have no problem with the hard luck hero yet somehow over the years, this image has devolved into the perception that Peter is some kind of lovable loser, which is rubbish. Peter forever down on his luck? How is that inspiring? As much as you don't want to read of Peter as Tony, I have less than no interest in reading a Peter Parker such as that. I want Peter to succeed, to have the victories in life, both small and large, for however long they last for such is the ebb and flow of life and one imminently more relatable than someone who will never ever get ahead no matter what. As for core traits, the theme that Peter uses his powers to do the right thing, regardless of public or private cost, Slott's stories that I've read so far have more than exemplified this. Clone Conspiracy explores the moral costs of potential reversing every death Spider-Man has caused (whether through action or inaction) including the one death that started it all. Currently, as I stated, Peter continues to do what he feels is right and necessary despite the obvious political, financial, and social cost to his company. Plus, his limited experience as a CEO has helped bolster his own confidence levels of being a leader which he has demonstrated to his shocked superhero compatriots during this Secret Empire debacle. I would lend more credence to your opinion in this regard if indeed it was Peter himself that built up this global company. But he didn't. He merely inherited it and the former owner and originator, Otto Octavious, has come to collect what is rightfully his. (And if the company falls, what of the Uncle Ben Foundation, the humanitarian relief effort Peter did establish aided by Aunt May?) His company threatened on all sides, still struggling to do the right thing regardless of the cost, yeah...hard luck indeed. No, Peter certainly isn't a "lovable loser", but he is supposed to be a heroic "everyman", which is one of the basic archetypes of literature and drama. The everyman is supposed to be someone with whom the audience is easily able to identify, but who is placed in extraordinary situations. Peter's extraordinary situation is that he got bitten by a radioactive spider and became a superhero. Not that he's a fabulously wealthy, globe-trotting, corportae executive. Of course, as an everyman, the fortunes of his life will naturally ebb and flow, as they do with all of us. But even though he is given to bouts of self-pity (see the "Parker luck" that he so often complains about), he nonetheless manages to use his incredible powers to benefit other people -- usually with tremendous personal sacrifices needing to be made along the way. That's what makes him an everyman hero. But, in literary terms, Peter Parker's extraordinary circumstances -- his exception to being a real everyman, if you like -- is that he gained spider powers. Now, while we all like to see Peter on his uppers, for him to suddenly become the millionaire, playboy CEO of Parker Industries is, for me, a step too far. It violates the "literary terms" of his everyman status, by adding an additional layer of extraordinary circumstances to his life. That, in turn, prevents him from being a true everyman character. The fact that Peter inherited his position from Doc Ock's meddling is neither here nor there: it has essentially turned Peter into a lottery winner. Being a lottery winner is pretty much the polar opposite of being an everyman. Besides, being a wealthy corporate boss who masquerades as a superhero isn't what Spider-Man does...it's what Iron Man does.   |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse on Jul 25, 2017 15:27:25 GMT -5
Plus, his limited experience as a CEO has helped bolster his own confidence levels of being a leader which he has demonstrated to his shocked superhero compatriots during this Secret Empire debacle. I think Spider-Verse helped him in that regard as well. (Leading and coordinating multiple teams of alternate Spiders.) what of the Uncle Ben Foundation, the humanitarian relief effort Peter did establish aided by Aunt May?) I hope if anything sticks after this run it's the Uncle Ben Foundation. I love the idea of May working at a charitable foundation named after her husband and founded by her nephew. Something very heartfelt about that. |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse on Jul 25, 2017 15:29:14 GMT -5
Besides, being a wealthy corporate boss who masquerades as a superhero isn't what Spider-Man does...it's what Iron Man does. Batman did it first!  |
|
bor
Full Member
Posts: 238
|
Post by bor on Jul 28, 2017 4:19:34 GMT -5
I have for the most part been a big fan of Slotts run on both ASM and Superior. Big time era was entertaining with a few missteps here and there but overall I had not enjoyed the title as much since early JMS (Before JRJR left the title). Superio was a big higlight and although it had a somewhat disapointing ending, with the exception of one of my favorite Slott jokes, it was a good read. What came after it did feel like a step now some times. Spider-verse had some fun moments but in the end I just dont think this was one of Slott's better events. Since then everything has still been something I enjoyed and I can honestly say I havent hated any of the things he has done. However, I havent loved any of it either. I will say that its still a whole lot better then what is happening so far in the first two issues of Spectacular. Darn that book is bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jesse on Aug 24, 2017 17:04:32 GMT -5
For a Secret Empire tie-in Amazing Spider-Man #30-31 were excellent. Not only do we get the return of the classic costume after Doc Ock destroys Peter's current Spider Armor it looks like Parker Industries is no more. |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse on Oct 15, 2017 12:14:51 GMT -5
Amazing Spider-Man #789 starts the renumbering of the current "Legacy" era and gives us a new status quo for the character. I wouldn't say things are exactly back to basics post Secret Empire but the chapter "Fall of Parker Part 1 - Top to Bottom" leaves things feeling more classic Parker-esque as Peter deals with losing his company and the public basically hating him. I'm very curious as to how Peter will pick himself up and move forward. I'm also hoping the Uncle Ben Foundation stays around.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse on Dec 20, 2017 2:50:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by String on Dec 22, 2017 10:59:20 GMT -5
I've read that if this (supposed) last story arc is in four parts, then there's a good chance that Slott will end his run on #800. If so, that would be sweet.
'Fall of Parker' was a great arc, as Peter attempts to put his life back in some semblance of order. His new job is perfect and makes total sense. Also, I'm still loving the new 'Spockingbird' relationship. Their wit and banter together is terrific and funny.
|
|
