-
But hasn't trying to make him the same as he was 40 years ago also been the problem?
And considering how every hero seems to live in New York, him not interacting with them wouldn't make any sense.
-
The trend isn't really exclusive to Spider-Man, though. Legacy and 'team' characters have kinda been the "in" thing since the late 2000's. We also had a new (black) Captain America, a new Ms. Marvel, and several Young Avengers that all share a name with another "classic" hero. Over at DC, the Bat Family has been getting significant more exposure, as have Supergirl and Jon Kent, and all the new Flash's and Green Lanterns that now co-exist.
As for why Spider-Man has had so much success with it, I think it's for several reasons:
1. As Revolutionary_Jack said, a lot of Spider-Man content has become about tropes and novelty to make up for the lack-of-character.
2. Spider-Man is a bigger character than almost anyone but Superman and Batman, so naturally the other Spider-characters will get more exposure by association.
3. Spider-Man represents the working-class and the idea that a hero can be anyone under that mask, moreso than any other superhero. So naturally multiple Spider-People work better with that premise than they would anywhere else. To paraphrase a YouTuber, Peter Parker taught us that anyone can wear the mask, but Miles Morales proved it.
-
Exactly. Spider-Man isn't too precious to be above what these other heroes are experiencing, in terms of creating legacies. And as for Spider-Man being "tropey", that's basically because he was more well known than others, to the point where he's somewhat more cliche than a lot of other heroes. Marvel trying to branch out of that isn't a bad thing. Plus, him being working class doesn't reflect the actual diversity of the real working class.
-
[QUOTE=Mik;5597155]But hasn't trying to make him the same as he was 40 years ago also been the problem?[/QUOTE]
I mean, on paper Spider-Man has probably had the most evolution of any hero, really.
[QUOTE]And considering how every hero seems to live in New York, him not interacting with them wouldn't make any sense.[/QUOTE]
I've always been fine with occasional team-ups.
I remember growing up with the 90's cartoon where he'd every now and then team-up with an established Marvel character, but it wasn't all the time.
[QUOTE=Kaitou D. Kid;5597173]The trend isn't really exclusive to Spider-Man, though. Legacy and 'team' characters have kinda been the "in" thing since the late 2000's. We also had a new (black) Captain America, a new Ms. Marvel, and several Young Avengers that all share a name with another "classic" hero. Over at DC, the Bat Family has been getting significant more exposure, as have Supergirl and Jon Kent, and all the new Flash's and Green Lanterns that now co-exist.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the Spiders work anywhere near as well as the Batfamily in terms of execution.
Individually? Yeah. Together? Not so much.
[QUOTE]3. Spider-Man represents the working-class and the idea that a hero can be anyone under that mask, moreso than any other superhero. So naturally multiple Spider-People work better with that premise than they would anywhere else. To paraphrase a YouTuber, Peter Parker taught us that anyone can wear the mask, but Miles Morales proved it.[/QUOTE]
See, I get the notion in some respect but so much of what being Spider-Man is becomes defined by Peter Parker and his experience with that identity (even Miles in the comics said Spider-Man was defined by "his pain" or something to that effect) and how that reflects on other people with the powers or who wear the costume. So I don't think the notion that Spider-Man can be anyone works quite as well even if I get what they're saying with it.
And also being Spider-Man as an individual informs so much about Peter's character that I feel it's hard to implement characters that are derivative of that story unless they really don't interact with him much.
[QUOTE=Mik;5597198]Exactly. Spider-Man isn't too precious to be above what these other heroes are experiencing, in terms of creating legacies. And as for Spider-Man being "tropey", that's basically because he was more well known than others, to the point where he's somewhat more cliche than a lot of other heroes. Marvel trying to branch out of that isn't a bad thing. Plus, him being working class doesn't reflect the actual diversity of the real working class.[/QUOTE]
That doesn't mean the legacies work well with him as a character. On their own they work fine, but maybe not as far as the story of Peter Parker.
-
[QUOTE=Mik;5597198]And as for Spider-Man being "tropey", that's basically because he was more well known than others,...[/QUOTE]
That's not what I meant when I called Spider-Man being more like tropes than a character. That's a specific definition where I am quoting Claremont.
-
Spider-Man has evolved a lot but he's also regressed in some ways in the last 2 decades due to editorial mandates though.
And I think some of this might be subjective. Older fans may not like these changes, but younger or newer fans might be more open to them because they didn't read all of older Peter Parker or didn't identify with him as much. It may just be some fans of his don't like him working with others, but that doesn't mean it's bad or doesn't work. This is also true of other heroes too
[QUOTE=Revolutionary_Jack;5597245]That's not what I meant when I called Spider-Man being more like tropes than a character. That's a specific definition where I am quoting Claremont.[/QUOTE]
Ok, but you can't deny he's a lot more standard than other superheroes in many ways
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;5597240]
I don't think the Spiders work anywhere near as well as the Batfamily in terms of execution. [/QUOTE]
I agree. At least not the main Bat Family. I do think that, at least conceptually, it works a lot better than what Morrison tried doing with Batman Inc.
[QUOTE]Individually? Yeah. Together? Not so much.
See, I get the notion in some respect but so much of what being Spider-Man is becomes defined by Peter Parker and his experience with that identity (even Miles in the comics said Spider-Man was defined by "his pain" or something to that effect) and how that reflects on other people with the powers or who wear the costume. So I don't think the notion that Spider-Man can be anyone works quite as well even if I get what they're saying with it.
And also being Spider-Man as an individual informs so much about Peter's character that I feel it's hard to implement characters that are derivative of that story unless they really don't interact with him much.
That doesn't mean the legacies work well with him as a character. On their own they work fine, but maybe not as far as the story of Peter Parker.[/QUOTE]
I get what you're saying. Peter and his story is arguably too relatable for any new Spider-Hero to ever feel as original. There is an element of truth to this, although I don't think that means you can't have Miles Morales and Co. Miles is like a really good remix of a classic song; it doesn't ruin the original and I'm happy to have both and to be able to listen to both, depending on what mood I'm in.
I think what really hurts the other Spider-Heroes (Miguel notwithstanding) is that no writer has come up with a "mask" thing for them. You typically don't just put on a mask in Spider-Man, it typically means something, you know? The mask makes Peter sassier, makes Miguel quieter, and makes the Goblins sassier like Peter but in a sadistic way to parallel him. Miles and Co. don't really have anything like that, or the writers get lazy and just make them sound like Peter.
I would argue Spider-Man 2099 is an exception to what you're saying, though. It's not just because he has a "mask" thing but also because Peter David, very much like Lee and Ditko, had a very specific vision of what he wanted to do with him and distinguished him from Peter by turning him into his opposite. The other Spider-Heroes never had the foundation that Peter and Miguel got at their very beginning, which isn't to say that they can't get it in the future.
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;5597085]It's not that I don't understand the needs for the franchise to expand and add new characters/heroes, but very rarely do they seem to gel with Peter or the franchise' roots beyond their own, isolated, stories.[/QUOTE]
I agree.Bat fam works because Bruce works with them.
Spider-fam doesn't work because that reason exactly.
-
[QUOTE=Spiderfan001;5597340]I agree.Bat fam works because Bruce works with them.
Spider-fam doesn't work because that reason exactly.[/QUOTE]
The problem is that getting rid of them doesn't solve the problem. What would solve the problem would be to merge their books together and have them actually interact with each other and bond beyond just having a couple team-ups.
-
[QUOTE=Kaitou D. Kid;5597324]I agree. At least not the main Bat Family. I do think that, at least conceptually, it works a lot better than what Morrison tried doing with Batman Inc.
I get what you're saying. Peter and his story is arguably too relatable for any new Spider-Hero to ever feel as original. There is an element of truth to this, although I don't think that means you can't have Miles Morales and Co. Miles is like a really good remix of a classic song; it doesn't ruin the original and I'm happy to have both and to be able to listen to both, depending on what mood I'm in.
I think what really hurts the other Spider-Heroes (Miguel notwithstanding) is that no writer has come up with a "mask" thing for them. You typically don't just put on a mask in Spider-Man, it typically means something, you know? The mask makes Peter sassier, makes Miguel quieter, and makes the Goblins sassier like Peter but in a sadistic way to parallel him. Miles and Co. don't really have anything like that, or the writers get lazy and just make them sound like Peter.
I would argue Spider-Man 2099 is an exception to what you're saying, though. It's not just because he has a "mask" thing but also because Peter David, very much like Lee and Ditko, had a very specific vision of what he wanted to do with him and distinguished him from Peter by turning him into his opposite. The other Spider-Heroes never had the foundation that Peter and Miguel got at their very beginning, which isn't to say that they can't get it in the future.[/QUOTE]
Miles is paticular is way too similar to Pete.
Specially teen peter.
I wish they could differentiate him more.
That is why Miguel is the best legacy character imo and second best Spider-character.
Spider-man being the best.
-
[QUOTE=Mik;5597247]Spider-Man has evolved a lot but he's also regressed in some ways in the last 2 decades due to editorial mandates though.[/quote]
The result is that the Peter Parker you read in the comics no longer has that impression of unbroken chain, a baton passed from Ditko to JMS. You are reading essentially a set of stock characters.
Chris Claremont was talking about Cyclops and his approach to the X-Men in his historic run on the title. He said that in his run, he organically developed the characters and sought to age them up and replace them with a new class of mutants. He had the idea of Cyclops aging out of Student, becoming a father, someday becoming a Xavier figure and so on. Instead the X-Factor title wanted to reunite the Original 5 X-Men which led to Cyclops walking out of his wife and child to pal around with his resurrected ex and that, for Claremont, destroyed him as a heroic figure and moral authority. He said that Marvel essentially made Cyclops into a stock character who doesn't reflect the stories he experiences. Readers were asked to treat Cyclops as a heroic character as if he didn't just walk out of his wife and kid, they were asked to cheer him romancing Jean again, after he shacked up with a lookalike of her and got hitched to her...that's what Claremont was talking about.
In the case of OMD and BND, readers were told after a totally demoralizing story to somehow treat the return of Peter Parker to the Dennis O'Neil status-quo as somehow a 'brand new day' when in fact it was a totally humiliating regression for the character and it made reading Spider-Man since BND a largely humiliating experience.
[quote]And I think some of this might be subjective. Older fans may not like these changes, but younger or newer fans might be more open to them because they didn't read all of older Peter Parker or didn't identify with him as much.[/quote]
That assumption isn't necessarily true i.e. older fans being out of favor with new stories, and younger fans not liking older stories. That's also not how the breakdown and grudges in the Spider-Man fandom really work.
Ultimately, when we think of Spider-Man fandom...remember [B][I][U]the comics are not the main introduction[/U][/I][/B] [B][I][U]nor should comics readers and followers be considered a representative section[/U][/I][/B] of the fandom. Spider-Man's first introduction to people is toys, merchandise, then games, cartoons, movies. [B][I][U]The vast majority of the people exposed to Spider-Man through that will never read the comics, which is to say that the vast majority of Spider-Man fans don't read the comics[/U][/I][/B]. Among the parts of the audience that read or get interested in the comics, and specifically 616 Continuity, it will be those who are interested in the original stories and older runs and classic stories...and that would by necessity always give advantage to the older stories over more recent ones for new readers. How that works thanks to the shrinking of the comics' market is this...Dan Slott and Nick Spencer's run had their highest readership during their original publication but as time passes the readership of Dan Slott's run, and Nick Spencer's run for that matter will decline and will be far less revisited than older stories.
-
[QUOTE=PCN24454;5597345]The problem is that getting rid of them doesn't solve the problem. What would solve the problem would be to merge their books together and have them actually interact with each other and bond beyond just having a couple team-ups.[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
They should trim down though.
Have like 6 people max though.
Also we need more Spider-man and rests stories rather than all teaming up.
Set them up with Peter as the center of the Web and then have a couple of them interact among themselves.
Also way to many Spider-woman.Like silk,Madame web, Anya, gwen and Jessica is way too much.
Also maybe one of Peter's clones :Kaine or Ben should die in an ongoing with them.If they do his with clones or the Spider-women or Miles(in 5+ years if hype dies down) then give them a proper sendoff and not just for shock value like in Spider-geddon.
-
[QUOTE=Spiderfan001;5597347]Miles is paticular is way too similar to Pete.
Specially teen peter.
I wish they could differentiate him more.
That is why Miguel is the best legacy character imo and second best Spider-character.
Spider-man being the best.[/QUOTE]
Them being the same, honestly doesn't make Peter better. That just shows that despite Peter having three or four times the material that the other characters do, he doesn't have much to show for it.
-
[QUOTE=PCN24454;5597363]Them being the same, honestly doesn't make Peter better. That just shows that despite Peter having three or four times the material that the other characters do, he doesn't have much to show for it.[/QUOTE]
Well he did it first and most would say better.Also he was one of the first solo teen heroes and an original character.
Miles is part of a time where we have thousands of teen heroes and legacy characters.
Also while Peter built the Spider-man legacy miles is just riding it and not adding anything to it.
Also I have said this before but Peter in his first 11 years had so many iconic stories and moments and one of the best supporting casts and villain selections.
Miles has none of that in his first 11 years even though he has much more exposure.
-
[QUOTE=Revolutionary_Jack;5597354]The result is that the Peter Parker you read in the comics no longer has that impression of unbroken chain, a baton passed from Ditko to JMS. You are reading essentially a set of stock characters.
Chris Claremont was talking about Cyclops and his approach to the X-Men in his historic run on the title. He said that in his run, he organically developed the characters and sought to age them up and replace them with a new class of mutants. He had the idea of Cyclops aging out of Student, becoming a father, someday becoming a Xavier figure and so on. Instead the X-Factor title wanted to reunite the Original 5 X-Men which led to Cyclops walking out of his wife and child to pal around with his resurrected ex and that, for Claremont, destroyed him as a heroic figure and moral authority. He said that Marvel essentially made Cyclops into a stock character who doesn't reflect the stories he experiences. Readers were asked to treat Cyclops as a heroic character as if he didn't just walk out of his wife and kid, they were asked to cheer him romancing Jean again, after he shacked up with a lookalike of her and got hitched to her...that's what Claremont was talking about.
In the case of OMD and BND, readers were told after a totally demoralizing story to somehow treat the return of Peter Parker to the Dennis O'Neil status-quo as somehow a 'brand new day' when in fact it was a totally humiliating regression for the character and it made reading Spider-Man since BND a largely humiliating experience.[/QUOTE]
That's the problem though. Marvel is too infatuated with that particular image of Spider-Man
[QUOTE=Revolutionary_Jack;5597354]That assumption isn't necessarily true i.e. older fans being out of favor with new stories, and younger fans not liking older stories. That's also not how the breakdown and grudges in the Spider-Man fandom really work.
Ultimately, when we think of Spider-Man fandom...remember [B][I][U]the comics are not the main introduction[/U][/I][/B] [B][I][U]nor should comics readers and followers be considered a representative section[/U][/I][/B] of the fandom. Spider-Man's first introduction to people is toys, merchandise, then games, cartoons, movies. [B][I][U]The vast majority of the people exposed to Spider-Man through that will never read the comics, which is to say that the vast majority of Spider-Man fans don't read the comics[/U][/I][/B]. Among the parts of the audience that read or get interested in the comics, and specifically 616 Continuity, it will be those who are interested in the original stories and older runs and classic stories...and that would by necessity always give advantage to the older stories over more recent ones for new readers. How that works thanks to the shrinking of the comics' market is this...Dan Slott and Nick Spencer's run had their highest readership during their original publication but as time passes the readership of Dan Slott's run, and Nick Spencer's run for that matter will decline and will be far less revisited than older stories.[/QUOTE]
Ok, but you can't deny some older fans often balk at any changes to be more modern or inclusive, or just generally evolve the series. And I find some Spider-fans, for instance, tend to be 'isolationist,' if you may.
[QUOTE=Spiderfan001;5597384]Well he did it first and most would say better.Also he was one of the first solo teen heroes and an original character.
Miles is part of a time where we have thousands of teen heroes and legacy characters.
Also while Peter built the Spider-man legacy miles is just riding it and not adding anything to it.
Also I have said this before but Peter in his first 11 years had so many iconic stories and moments and one of the best supporting casts and villain selections.
Miles has none of that in his first 11 years even though he has much more exposure.[/QUOTE]
But that's a problem of Marvel not making enough effort for Miles. Peter didn't instantly become great. Marvel put effort into him. The same is true of many other heroes who have or haven't had much success.
