-
[QUOTE=Mister Mets;4712939]So, at this point he'll be known for restoring an earlier status quo rather than adding something new?[/QUOTE]
Dan Slott and others were also restoring an earlier status-quo rather than starting something new. So from that tack, virtually any run on Spider-Man can be dismissed.
And again it's only been a year since Spencer started after all.
-
[QUOTE=Mister Mets;4712939]So, at this point he'll be known for restoring an earlier status quo rather than adding something new?[/QUOTE]
Exactly. Spencer hasn't really put a new or unique spin on any stories he's told yet. He's just repeating old, familiar stories. That's exactly why I said his run has been pretty average and feels like he's playing it safe.
-
[QUOTE=Uncanny Mutie;4713056]Exactly. Spencer hasn't really put a new or unique spin on any stories he's told yet. He's just repeating old, familiar stories. That's exactly why I said his run has been pretty average and feels like he's playing it safe.[/QUOTE]
I disagree. Spencer has done what most writers could (and probably should) do: embrace the continuity of a character and use it to tell the Evolution of said character. In example, Black Cat, J. Jonah Jameson, Boomerang, and more.
-
[QUOTE=WebSlingWonder;4713159]I disagree. Spencer has done what most writers could (and probably should) do: embrace the continuity of a character and use it to tell the Evolution of said character. In example, Black Cat, J. Jonah Jameson, Boomerang, and more.[/QUOTE]
Spencer's run is far more character driven than plot driven, and the titles have not been that way since JMS left.
When writers do a character-driven take it's a little hard to tell that they have made changes or that they differ from the previously existing.
-
[QUOTE=Revolutionary_Jack;4712968]Dan Slott and others were also restoring an earlier status-quo rather than starting something new. So from that tack, virtually any run on Spider-Man can be dismissed.
And again it's only been a year since Spencer started after all.[/QUOTE]
Slott's legacy is probably more about alternate universes, Superior Spider-Man and Parker Industries.
My response was more to Fan of Mystery, although I think he may underrate the new aspects of Spencer's run (Boomerang as Peter's roommate, the supporting characters support group)
-
[QUOTE=WebSlingWonder;4713159]I disagree. Spencer has done what most writers could (and probably should) do: embrace the continuity of a character and use it to tell the Evolution of said character. In example, Black Cat, J. Jonah Jameson, Boomerang, and more.[/QUOTE]
This highlights the bigger problem, which is that when a new and interesting shift actually does happen, it happens to a character not named Spider-Man. At best, he's there to witness other characters move on to things I'd rather read about. Peter's only hail mary is the wedding ring. The book feels safe, familiar, and loosely plotted because it's the most boring character in the book playing a role in stories that are a big deal... for other characters, and then instead of exploring those ideas more, Peter takes the camera with him to do something completely different with the intention of getting back to other things later. This was a stated goal of the run, he said he wanted to write a wildly diverse slate of stories that would take us all over the place. All according to keikaku?
-
[QUOTE=Mister Mets;4712939]So, at this point he'll be known for restoring an earlier status quo rather than adding something new?[/QUOTE]
Don't get me wrong, I'm really liking Nick Spencer's run so far (something I am very happy to say about Spider-Man comics after so long), but it's kind of difficult to say at this point what exactly his overall legacy will be on the character since he hasn't even been on the title for two years yet. The three things I listed are just speculation at this point.
Speaking of which, your comment gives me the impression that restoring an earlier status quo instead of adding anything new is a negative thing. Dan Slott wrote [I]Amazing Spider-Man[/I] for about a decade and ended up dividing the fan-base heavily with many of his story decisions. With that in mind, I think Spencer restoring some of the earlier status quo (especially the aspects that never should have been tampered with in the first place like separating Peter and Mary Jane and bringing Kraven back to life) is something to be commended--especially since I and many other fans I've come across think he is doing a darn good job.
-
[QUOTE=Uncanny Mutie;4713056]Exactly. Spencer hasn't really put a new or unique spin on any stories he's told yet. He's just repeating old, familiar stories. That's exactly why I said his run has been pretty average and feels like he's playing it safe.[/QUOTE]
I will personally take that over the nonsense Dan Slott did with the franchise--namely during his final four years on the title.
-
[QUOTE=Fan of Mystery;4713266]I will personally take that over the nonsense Dan Slott did with the franchise--namely during his final four years on the title.[/QUOTE]
I feel like Spencer’s putting off the Kindred storyline too long. It’s the same problem Slott had with invoking storylines that he eventually abandons.
-
[QUOTE=PCN24454;4713371]I feel like Spencer’s putting off the Kindred storyline too long. It’s the same problem Slott had with invoking storylines that he eventually abandons.[/QUOTE]
That is one complaint I have about Spencer's run. He has done a fantastic job building up Kindred and I'm very interested to know who he is, but the reveal is taking a bit too long for my liking.
-
why are we talking about legacy when he barely has 2 years under his belt?
-
[QUOTE=Snoop Dogg;4713243]This highlights the bigger problem, which is that when a new and interesting shift actually does happen, it happens to a character not named Spider-Man. At best, he's there to witness other characters move on to things I'd rather read about. Peter's only hail mary is the wedding ring. The book feels safe, familiar, and loosely plotted because it's the most boring character in the book playing a role in stories that are a big deal... for other characters, and then instead of exploring those ideas more, Peter takes the camera with him to do something completely different with the intention of getting back to other things later. This was a stated goal of the run, he said he wanted to write a wildly diverse slate of stories that would take us all over the place. All according to keikaku?[/QUOTE]
At best I would say Peter helps initiate the character development and shifts while still remaining the central protagonist and hero, and he's still written to be in-character and saving the day (generally) on his own.
Much of that felt lacking in the preceding era in my opinion. If we want to complain about the supporting cast stealing the show, that would be the time, except then it came off kind of forced and just made Peter look bad/ineffectual.
-
[QUOTE=Fan of Mystery;4713255]Don't get me wrong, I'm really liking Nick Spencer's run so far (something I am very happy to say about Spider-Man comics after so long), but it's kind of difficult to say at this point what exactly his overall legacy will be on the character since he hasn't even been on the title for two years yet. The three things I listed are just speculation at this point.
Speaking of which, your comment gives me the impression that restoring an earlier status quo instead of adding anything new is a negative thing. Dan Slott wrote [I]Amazing Spider-Man[/I] for about a decade and ended up dividing the fan-base heavily with many of his story decisions. With that in mind, I think Spencer restoring some of the earlier status quo (especially the aspects that never should have been tampered with in the first place like separating Peter and Mary Jane and bringing Kraven back to life) is something to be commended--especially since I and many other fans I've come across think he is doing a darn good job.[/QUOTE]
Restoring an earlier status quo would be neutral. It doesn't require any particular skill. Telling good stories in a classic status quo would be more positive, and that's the next step. It's the main reason for the restoration.
-
[QUOTE=Mister Mets;4713654]Restoring an earlier status quo would be neutral. It doesn't require any particular skill. Telling good stories in a classic status quo would be more positive, and that's the next step. It's the main reason for the restoration.[/QUOTE]
I do think Spencer is telling some very good stories within the restored status quo.
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;4713646]At best I would say Peter helps initiate the character development and shifts while still remaining the central protagonist and hero, and he's still written to be in-character and saving the day (generally) on his own.
Much of that felt lacking in the preceding era in my opinion. If we want to complain about the supporting cast stealing the show, that would be the time, except then it came off kind of forced and just made Peter look bad/ineffectual.[/QUOTE]
You say that as though he’s not ineffectual now. Spencer could’ve removed him from the story and it wouldn’t have changed anything.