Thread Drift: Dan Slott's Legacy

[KC]

I think everything he did before Amazing Spider-Man Volume 3. #1 will be fondly remembered, with Big Time, Spider-Island and Superior Spider-Man being his most fondly remembered storylines. I also think he is going to be remembered for the fact that he wrote Spider-Man for a very long time (which could be a good or bad thing).

[SilverWarriorWolf]

Frankly, just by looking at this list, he’ll be the guy half of fans declare to be the best writer ever and half the fans declare to be the worst writer ever.

In my opinion, his highs were amazing and his lows were abysmal. There really was no inbetween.

[Alan2099]

It all hinges on how Dan wraps up his run. Superior is always going to be his high point. When all is said and done, that is the story he will be remembered for.

I'd say Spider-verse, but it's definitely one of those two.

[Frontier]

I'd say Spider-verse, but it's definitely one of those two.

I think he'll be more remembered for the concept of Spider-Verse and how writers ran with that concept then he will be for the actual event/story itself.

[Alan2099]

I think he'll be more remembered for the concept of Spider-Verse and how writers ran with that concept then he will be for the actual event/story itself.

He brought the Japanese power ranger Spider-man into the Marvel Multiverse. How can you not love him for that?

[Kevinroc]

I didn't like Spider-Verse. I thought the villains were one-note bores, and they tried so hard to fit in "EVERY SPIDER-MAN EVER" that any semblance of a cohesive plot was drowned out by "remember this old What-If comic."

Slott will be remembered for Superior. That's his defining Spider-story.

[Frontier]

He brought the Japanese power ranger Spider-man into the Marvel Multiverse. How can you not love him for that?

And then Leopardon got take out as soon as he arrived .

[WebLurker]

He brought the Japanese power ranger Spider-man into the Marvel Multiverse. How can you not love him for that?

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the fact that that was even a thing.

(I guess I don't really see the point of a not-Spider-Man like that and I kinda think that unless you're a de facto Power Ranger, you've got no business owning a Megazord, but I'm weird like that.)

[Alan2099]

(I guess I don't really see the point of a not-Spider-Man like that and I kinda think that unless you're a de facto Power Ranger, you've got no business owning a Megazord, but I'm weird like that.)

That Spider-man actually pre-dates the Power Rangers. It'a literally the series that started the genre.

Now WHY it existed in the first place, that I can't tell you.

[boots]

It's called growing up.

a lot of skinny outsider nerd teens grown into skinny outsider nerd adults. and there’s nothing wrong with that

[boots]

That Spider-man actually pre-dates the Power Rangers. It'a literally the series that started the genre.

Now WHY it existed in the first place, that I can't tell you.

it’s a cultural thing. there’s a lot of pop psychology talk about why japan got into huge robots and godzilla monsters (mainly for the same reason they say the u.s developed superheroes; as a sort of cultural way to feel safer in a modern post world war life), but i like the idea that spider-man as a concept has these different interpretations

if japanese spider-man was literally peter with a japanese name, there wouldn’t be much point in his existence. that doesn’t mean i think peter should become an autobot or anything

[rrb]

I think everything he did before Amazing Spider-Man Volume 3. #1 will be fondly remembered, with Big Time, Spider-Island and Superior Spider-Man being his most fondly remembered storylines.

Big Time reinvigorated certain villains, Spider-Island was a mega story with a long-standing after effect, and Superior will be the most memorable.

[blackspidey2099]

I think Peter with SHIELD would just be the same kind of gimmicky status quo that Parker Industries was.

I don't think PI was gimmicky at all, but I do agree SHIELD would be.

And I enjoy him as a genius, but as just one element of his life and not shoved in our faces like it was in this run, where I feel it did at times overshadow those other important elements you mentioned.

I really don't need to see Peter put on the same pedestal as Reed, Tony, Hank, etc. I know he can be as a good as those guys, but I don't need to see it conveyed the way it was in Slott's run.

But to each their own.

For the most part, I don't feel like Slott's run focused on Peter's genius over any other aspect of Peter's character. Maybe it is just that you (and Spider-Man fans in general) are used to writers who tend to completely forget Peter's intelligence is even a thing? Because the majority of Peter's writers are like that.

I think a lot of people can actually relate to that though.

Sure, but that means he can't be an "everyman". People relate to Batman, Superman, and even Martian Manhunter too, but I don't think anyone makes the claims that those characters are "everymen". At the end of the day, any good story has protagonists who are relatable to the reader, no matter how far-fetched the situation. If Marvel can't make Peter relatable without halting his character growth and inconsistently forgetting half his character traits, maybe they should fire their existing writers and find some new ones...

Peter working with SHIELD is a similar problem to him getting PI, it just takes him out from street level stuff, his solo books need to keep him at that level since it's what defines him (Other books can have him doing stuff outside of street level though, it's basicaly the same situation as Batman).

Not that it's a bad thing, I did enjoy PI era after all, just that such changes can/will annoy fans who like him at street level.

I don't think street level is at all what defines Peter, or that status quos like PI took him out from doing any of that (ex. PI had that street level Cloak and Dagger story). I get that there are fans who just like to read street level stories, but there also are fans who like to see the protagonist actually grow up in a manner consistent with his abilities and character. I'm not sure why we can't have both - ex. a successful Peter who handles big threats, but also keeps looking out for the "little guy". That sounds much more like Peter than this 30 year old super-genius who also manages to be a complete loser because "reasons" (aka. bad writing).

Arguably the first two could've been there to make him relatable to other nerds, and the rest makes him into a "wish fulfillment", which is honestly what he always was, a nerd, super genius, kind of a loser and a pussy magnet? Yeah lol.

Fair enough. I completely agree that he was always a wish fulfillment character. The beauty of Lee's writing is that he acknowledged all of Peter's skills and still managed to make him relatable to the reader. It seems like very few other Spider-Man writers have been able to do that (with, unfortunately, most others just writing Peter like a fool to keep him relatable).

not a bad point. while i think frontier is right saying a lot of people can identify with the outsider, that’s not necessarily an every man. looking at your classic every man characters in tv and film, majority are probably not “nerds” or hyper intelligent

you might have a point that marvel migrated peter over to becoming an every man over time. which was probably why i preferred ben reilly as a kid, since he was the ultimate outsider

Thanks. And it isn't just Marvel ignoring Peter's hyper intelligence that is annoying (though it is the most annoying IMO). I also hate how they try to portray Peter as some sort of completely socially awkward loser who people laugh at, even though I can recall multiple times when supermodels are literally fighting over Peter because he's that much of a catch.

an easy way to explain peter’s inability to be professionally successful is his commitment to superheroics. it can be a case of missed opportunities

Not untrue; however, as someone else pointed out to me, other geniuses such as Hank Pym, Tony Stark, Amadeus Cho, etc. face just as many challenges in their lives, and yet still manage to be superheroes and also be professionally successful. So it isn't completely valid IMO, unless Marvel shunts off Peter to his own separate universe.

[Frontier]

For the most part, I don't feel like Slott's run focused on Peter's genius over any other aspect of Peter's character. Maybe it is just that you (and Spider-Man fans in general) are used to writers who tend to completely forget Peter's intelligence is even a thing? Because the majority of Peter's writers are like that.

That hasn't been my experience.

In what I have read previously I felt it was just conveyed and utilized in a way that was more well-rounded then it has been with Slott, where it came off kind of absurd or hamfisted at times.

Sure, but that means he can't be an "everyman". People relate to Batman, Superman, and even Martian Manhunter too, but I don't think anyone makes the claims that those characters are "everymen". At the end of the day, any good story has protagonists who are relatable to the reader, no matter how far-fetched the situation. If Marvel can't make Peter relatable without halting his character growth and inconsistently forgetting half his character traits, maybe they should fire their existing writers and find some new ones...

I can see that, but I also think compared to those characters Peter Parker from his inception was also more in-tuned with relate able situations and relationships in his civilian life, which emphasized an "everyman" feel to him as a character.

[Lukmendes]

I don't think PI was gimmicky at all, but I do agree SHIELD would be.
I don't think street level is at all what defines Peter, or that status quos like PI took him out from doing any of that (ex. PI had that street level Cloak and Dagger story). I get that there are fans who just like to read street level stories, but there also are fans who like to see the protagonist actually grow up in a manner consistent with his abilities and character. I'm not sure why we can't have both - ex. a successful Peter who handles big threats, but also keeps looking out for the "little guy". That sounds much more like Peter than this 30 year old super-genius who also manages to be a complete loser because "reasons" (aka. bad writing).

True, though I don't feel like PI was something fitting with Spidey's character that much, Horizon Labs seemed more fitting, but yeah, Spidey fighting big threats and still going back to fight the likes of Kingpin is fitting for him, again, they could just do it like DC does with Batman.

Hell, it's not like a successful Spidey would be immune to the infamous Parker luck, would just give him more challenges in fact lol.

Not untrue; however, as someone else pointed out to me, other geniuses such as Hank Pym, Tony Stark, Amadeus Cho, etc. face just as many challenges in their lives, and yet still manage to be superheroes and also be professionally successful. So it isn't completely valid IMO, unless Marvel shunts off Peter to his own separate universe.

I remember there was at least one occasion in the first volume of New Avengers where Cap said that Spidey works harder than anyone else, and when Cap was recruiting members for the New Avengers, Daredevil wondered how the hell Peter can do so much with so little time, so with Spidey it can be justified why he isn't as succesful as them, he works far harder than them.