-
[QUOTE=TinkerSpider;6043983]Funny how that “vitriol” (because for every fan who expresses displeasure, there is usually a fan who sings praises but funny how some only concentrate on the negative) usually coincides with Marvel doing its best to break the characters and their world: Clone Saga, OMD, BND, OMIT, incompetent manchild Peter, etc.
Maybe if Marvel wasn’t so determined to keep a character status that is the root cause for the “vitriol” they would see less justified fan displeasure.[/QUOTE]
All you have to do is point to Ben Reilly these days. You know what was not a popular status quo? Evil Ben Reilly. You know how the last Spider-Man arc ended? Evil Ben Reilly (again).
You can argue that a lot of fans take their frustrations into unacceptable behavior (this is true), but let's not ignore that Marvel often makes terrible decisions that have already proven unpopular.
-
[QUOTE=Kurolegacy;6043974]Honestly, I can’t see them bringing over Annie or Mayday to 616, between them reverting Anya and people constantly complaining about the number of characters with the same theme, they might find it too redundant to add another spider to 616.[/QUOTE]
Or they might be following up on what was teased at the end of Spencer's run. I doubt very much they reverted Anya because they were retiring the title of Spider-Girl.
The themes of Well's run appear to be partially about parenting for everyone involved in the supporting cast, so it makes sense for Annie or Mayday to get involved.
Honestly, Annie makes the most sense to carry over. She was the pattern weaver of the multiverse when last we checked in on her, and the strands will be coming apart for this event, so she's probably losing her current function. I don't think Slott will kill her either. Her parents? Maybe, but not her.
-
[QUOTE=Kevinroc;6043989]All you have to do is point to Ben Reilly these days. You know what was not a popular status quo? Evil Ben Reilly. You know how the last Spider-Man arc ended? Evil Ben Reilly (again).
You can argue that a lot of fans take their frustrations into unacceptable behavior (this is true), but let's not ignore that Marvel often makes terrible decisions that have already proven unpopular.[/QUOTE]
Especially when the decisions are wholly editorially mandated and are not organic to the story, yet they expect readers to just swallow it.
Peter Parker should never shirk his responsibility and actively give the Devil what he wants.
Ben Reilly threw a wholly irrational temper tantrum because he out of the blue trusted the massively untrustworthy Maxine and Peter wouldn’t put on a helmet that was the cause of Ben’s problems in the first place and decided, “Welp, I’m 3V!L now.”
If Marvel wants to change the characters’ statuses, fine. But don’t disrespect readers. And then don’t whine because readers don’t praise the stories en masse.
This isn’t condoning death threats or stalking creators on social media - it’s a comic book, c’mon - but Marvel expecting nothing but hallelujahs is disingenuous on their part.
-
[QUOTE=TinkerSpider;6043983]Funny how that “vitriol” (because for every fan who expresses displeasure, there is usually a fan who sings praises but funny how some only concentrate on the negative)...[/quote]
Someone saying "I like this comic" or "I don't like this comic" is normal and acceptable behaviour that doesn't require comment.
Someone writing nasty, personal and abusive things about people who made a comic they didn't like is not normal or acceptable behaviour. It's something to be admonished.
[QUOTE=TinkerSpider;6043983]...usually coincides with Marvel doing its best to break the characters and their world: Clone Saga, OMD, BND, OMIT, incompetent manchild Peter, etc.
Maybe if Marvel wasn’t so determined to keep a wholly editorially forced character status that is the root cause for the “vitriol” they would see less justified fan displeasure.[/QUOTE]
This is victim blaming. There's no excuse for nastiness, abuse or fan toxicity.
Someone making a lousy comic is no reason to be a jerk to them.
-
Cool, I'll have a Spider-man book to look forward to once Ben Reilly ends.
-
[QUOTE=Lee;6044052]Someone saying "I like this comic" or "I don't like this comic" is normal and acceptable behaviour that doesn't require comment.
Someone writing nasty, personal and abusive things about people who made a comic they didn't like is not normal or acceptable behaviour. It's something to be admonished.
This is victim blaming. There's no excuse for nastiness, abuse or fan toxicity.
Someone making a lousy comic is no reason to be a jerk to them.[/QUOTE]
Yes. I agree. But funny how you left out that I said “[B][I]This isn’t condoning death threats or stalking creators on social media — it’s a comic book, c’mon.”[/I][/B]
Maybe next time quote the entire post and don’t misrepresent it. There’s no excuse for that, either. So miss me with the wholly inappropriate use of “victim blaming.” I was clear I was speaking about criticism of the [B][I]stories[/I][/B]. Marvel isn’t a victim for putting out stories and receiving a negative reaction in return. That’s just called “audience response.”
-
[QUOTE=TinkerSpider;6044065]Yes. I agree. But funny how you left out that I said “[B][I]This isn’t condoning death threats or stalking creators on social media — it’s a comic book, c’mon.”[/I][/B]
Maybe next time quote the entire post and don’t misrepresent it. There’s no excuse for that, either.[/QUOTE]
I quoted the entire post.
-
I wonder if Slott will also write a Superior Spider-Man series next year since we'd be coming up on it's 10th anniversary?
-
[QUOTE=Lee;6044070]I quoted the entire post.[/QUOTE]
My bad - I made a follow up post prior to your post where I made it clearer I don’t condone that behavior. Apologies.
Moving on: I do like seeing spider-variants, so that should be fun. And at least it appears this story won’t be taking up issues of ASM, but will be a satellite.
-
[QUOTE=TinkerSpider;6044089]My bad - I made a follow up post prior to your post where I made it clearer I don’t condone that behavior. Apologies.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for your apology.
Just to add, since you updated your previous post:
[QUOTE=TinkerSpider;6044065]I was clear I was speaking about criticism of the [B][I]stories[/I][/B]. Marvel isn’t a victim for putting out stories and receiving a negative reaction in return. That’s just called “audience response.”[/QUOTE]
The post I quoted previously was your reply to Tendrin.
Tendrin said: "[B]I mean, we can blame editorial, but I think you don't need to look further than the vitriol directed at nearly every spider-writer for decades now.[/B]"
Tendin was addressing was vitriol directed at comic writers, not vitriol directed at comic stories or corporate entities.
-
[QUOTE=Lee;6044142]
The post I quoted previously was your reply to Tendrin.
Tendrin said: "[B]I mean, we can blame editorial, but I think you don't need to look further than the vitriol directed at nearly every spider-writer for decades now.[/B]"
Tendin was addressing was vitriol directed at comic writers, not vitriol directed at comic stories or corporate entities.[/QUOTE]
Except that one person’s “vitriol” supposedly personally aimed at the writer is another person’s warranted criticism of the story. For example, some might call the harsh criticism of the Kindred story “vitriol” but at least as far as I saw, it wasn’t directed at Spencer as a person.
Abusive behavior is egregious. However, story criticism is not abuse despite some people’s desire to conflate them.
-
There has been a lot of nastiness aimed directly at writers, editors and other comic pros on this message board and other parts of the Internet over the years. It's not hypothetical, and it's usually not ambiguous. Making digs about a writer's weight, for example (as I've seen on this forum more than once), is not story criticism.
-
[QUOTE=Lee;6044271]There has been a lot of nastiness aimed directly at writers, editors and other comic pros on this message board and other parts of the Internet over the years. It's not hypothetical, and it's usually not ambiguous. Making digs about a writer's weight, for example (as I've seen on this forum more than once), is not story criticism.[/QUOTE]
No one said it was. I'm against conflating the two, in case it isn't clear.
But there are those who do take story criticism as a personal attack. I'm happy to pull out examples if you require.
-
I hope whoever the villains end up being are better than the Inheritors.
(It's probably going to be the Inheritors again).
-