Have writers become lost on what Ben Reilly should be?

[Pav]

Are you claiming that you have no bias on the subject?

Trust me, I'm every bit as big of a Ben fan as you are, but I'm not willing to accept a character I don't recognize simply because his name happens to be Ben Reilly. I gave PAD a shot, even bought all the trades, but it's clear that Marvel is intent on making Ben something else, and I don't like what that is.

It has little to do with analysis. Each item on the list I posted is a fact, except for the final item, which is TBD.

I'm aware of my own biases; everyone has them. I'm not some objective robot.

The difference is that you look at the "facts" and come to conclusions that are colored by your biases: your distaste for what's been done to Ben directly influences your beliefs on how Marvel feels about Ben. On the other hand, my opinion on Ben's current status does't influence my belief regarding how the folks at Marvel feel about Ben Reilly: I feel pretty secure that some of the dudes over there must like him, or else they wouldn't use him -- and this has nothing to do with how I felt about Clone Conspiracy and his solo: I'm just trying to use logical business sense, as well as the small bit of knowledge I have about how Marvel works and how writers think.

The fact that you don't like what they're doing with Ben doesn't mean Marvel hates Ben: it just means you hate what they've chosen to do with him. I can very easily imagine an editor who was stoked to be able to give Ben a solo, and tried his best to develop a new status quo for a character who probably needs one. So, sure, you hate what they did; that doesn't mean they were out to ruin the character at all. I just think that idea is illogical.

I don't know what else to say about this. It seems pretty simple to me.

I think you might be blinded by your own biased optimism if you don't think there is a chance Ben will be used as canon fodder (continuing the trend established in the 90's).

Here's the funny thing: I'm not optimistic at all about Ben's immediate future. I'm just hopeful.

A person can be hopeful and pessimistic.

But also: we literally have no evidence that Ben is going to be used as fodder in Spidergeddon. That doesn't mean it won't happen, of course. But why would I worry about something for which there's no evidence?

-Pav, who is glad he's teaching debate this semester 'cause the skills are handy...

[Orbus]

it does a great job of summarising in less than a page.

but i don't know if less than a page was enough to hook in new readers?

Would a more in depth run down about Reilly's history hook in new readers? Remember most readers of the Clone Conspiracy will either have never read either 90s clone saga but know it by reputation of it being a very divisive story, read it but don't remember it well or read it and disliked it. I think there's just as much of a chance steeping the Clone Cone conspiracy in elements and references to the clone saga could push people away.

Other than Seward Trainer (who I'm surprised was not revived) most of Ben's supporting cast can't easily be used. Even by Marvel's sliding timescale Ben has been dead for a while, he can't simply walk in to the Daily Grind and say "hey guys I'm alive howabout a job". Sure, a gifted writer could revive Ben's supporting cast back in but it requires an in depth knowledge of Ben's history that most writers don't know and would be daunting to do research on. So that leaves the question is if Ben can't be what he was (or as the thread puts it what he's supposed to be) then taking him in a new direction is the answer.

Even the 90s cartoon was able to introduce Ben without a complex backstory. Same with Kaine in the newer cartoons.

It seems like your claim that Miles Morales is more relevant is simply due to "diversity" rather than the character himself.

The way Ben was used in the 90s animated should not be used as a template for anything. It was terrible and deliberately so hence why the characters themselves commented on how it all came off like a bad comic book story.

Well, let's recap:

So far Marvel has:

- Killed Ben
- Left him on the shelf for over 20 years, teasing his return more than once but not following through
- Finally brought him back as basically a completely different character, after killing him 27 more times
- Teased redeeming him, then killed him AGAIN at the last second and doubled-down on making him a supervillain
- Will likely kill him YET AGAIN in Spidergeddon

There is a pattern of behavior here.

They killed Ben off a time when they were sidelining people like War Machine and Thunderstrike. Marvel believed streamlining their brands made them more profitable. From a creative standpoint I can see why the character had to die. It had to be a definitive end that unequivocally said Ben is the clone and Peter is the real Spider-Man. If you're a fan of Ben (like me) that sucks but none of that seems personal.

Now things have changed and Marvel is more open to multiple Spider people running around and they brought Ben back. They didn't have to do that as they already had Kaine as the Scarlet Spider. Whether you agree with it or not they gave him a set up that has reliably worked for other characters. PAD didn't really follow through in a way that made the book a success but that too is not an indication that there's any great loathing of the character from Marvel.

As for Spider-Geddon the latest issue...

spoilers:

Shows Kaine is okay and on friendly enough terms with Ben who is still a heroic Scarlet Spider. Seemingly it ignores the ending of PAD's Scarlet Spider series. I suppose it may come in to play to play later on with Ben murderous impulses but honestly I think they are just acting like the the end of the Scarlet Spider series never happened...or Spided-Geddon takes place before it.

end of spoilers

Either way I think that's something Ben fans can be happy about and a sign that Marvel doesn't have anything against the character.

[Scarlet Spider-Man]

I'm aware of my own biases; everyone has them. I'm not some objective robot.

The difference is that you look at the "facts" and come to conclusions that are colored by your biases: your distaste for what's been done to Ben directly influences your beliefs on how Marvel feels about Ben. On the other hand, my opinion on Ben's current status does't influence my belief regarding how the folks at Marvel feel about Ben Reilly: I feel pretty secure that some of the dudes over there must like him, or else they wouldn't use him -- and this has nothing to do with how I felt about Clone Conspiracy and his solo: I'm just trying to use logical business sense, as well as the small bit of knowledge I have about how Marvel works and how writers think.

The fact that you don't like what they're doing with Ben doesn't mean Marvel hates Ben: it just means you hate what they've chosen to do with him. I can very easily imagine an editor who was stoked to be able to give Ben a solo, and tried his best to develop a new status quo for a character who probably needs one. So, sure, you hate what they did; that doesn't mean they were out to ruin the character at all. I just think that idea is illogical.

I don't know what else to say about this. It seems pretty simple to me.



Here's the funny thing: I'm not optimistic at all about Ben's immediate future. I'm just hopeful.

A person can be hopeful and pessimistic.

But also: we literally have no evidence that Ben is going to be used as fodder in Spidergeddon. That doesn't mean it won't happen, of course. But why would I worry about something for which there's no evidence?

-Pav, who is glad he's teaching debate this semester 'cause the skills are handy...

Marvel has had multiple opportunities to do right by Ben. They never do. So, yeah, the logical deduction from that is that they don't want to. Actions speak louder than words.

[Scarlet Spider-Man]

Would a more in depth run down about Reilly's history hook in new readers? Remember most readers of the Clone Conspiracy will either have never read either 90s clone saga but know it by reputation of it being a very divisive story, read it but don't remember it well or read it and disliked it. I think there's just as much of a chance steeping the Clone Cone conspiracy in elements and references to the clone saga could push people away.

Other than Seward Trainer (who I'm surprised was not revived) most of Ben's supporting cast can't easily be used. Even by Marvel's sliding timescale Ben has been dead for a while, he can't simply walk in to the Daily Grind and say "hey guys I'm alive howabout a job". Sure, a gifted writer could revive Ben's supporting cast back in but it requires an in depth knowledge of Ben's history that most writers don't know and would be daunting to do research on. So that leaves the question is if Ben can't be what he was (or as the thread puts it what he's supposed to be) then taking him in a new direction is the answer.



The way Ben was used in the 90s animated should not be used as a template for anything. It was terrible and deliberately so hence why the characters themselves commented on how it all came off like a bad comic book story.



They killed Ben off a time when they were sidelining people like War Machine and Thunderstrike. Marvel believed streamlining their brands made them more profitable. From a creative standpoint I can see why the character had to die. It had to be a definitive end that unequivocally said Ben is the clone and Peter is the real Spider-Man. If you're a fan of Ben (like me) that sucks but none of that seems personal.

Now things have changed and Marvel is more open to multiple Spider people running around and they brought Ben back. They didn't have to do that as they already had Kaine as the Scarlet Spider. Whether you agree with it or not they gave him a set up that has reliably worked for other characters. PAD didn't really follow through in a way that made the book a success but that too is not an indication that there's any great loathing of the character from Marvel.

As for Spider-Geddon the latest issue...

spoilers:

Shows Kaine is okay and on friendly enough terms with Ben who is still a heroic Scarlet Spider. Seemingly it ignores the ending of PAD's Scarlet Spider series. I suppose it may come in to play to play later on with Ben murderous impulses but honestly I think they are just acting like the the end of the Scarlet Spider series never happened...or Spided-Geddon takes place before it.

end of spoilers

Either way I think that's something Ben fans can be happy about and a sign that Marvel doesn't have anything against the character.

Marvel is making an animated movie that deals with introducing multiple new Spider-characters at once. If they can do that well, then introducing one clone is no sweat.

As far as Spidergeddon #2, spoilers:

it makes me think that PAD pulled a 180 at the last second for some reason, as it doesn't match up at all with Scarlet Spider's last issue. Or there was a major miscommunication somewhere in editorial. Or this takes place before the final arc in SS. Notice how Ben said "27-times dead," but he actually died a 28th time in SS #24-25? Of course, that means that Ben survives Spidergeddon, but is being set up as a supervillain again. We'll see, I guess.

end of spoilers

[HypnoHustler]

Marvel is making an animated movie that deals with introducing multiple new Spider-characters at once. If they can do that well, then introducing one clone is no sweat.

As far as Spidergeddon #2, spoilers:

it makes me think that PAD pulled a 180 at the last second for some reason, as it doesn't match up at all with Scarlet Spider's last issue. Or there was a major miscommunication somewhere in editorial. Or this takes place before the final arc in SS. Notice how Ben said "27-times dead," but he actually died a 28th time in SS #24-25? Of course, that means that Ben survives Spidergeddon, but is being set up as a supervillain again. We'll see, I guess.

end of spoilers

*sigh*... and now I'm buying Spider-geddon #2 just for that Ben and Kaine scene. A series I otherwise have no interest in. I'm such a sucker. Marvel is like an abusive spouse that I keep coming back to.

As for #25, let's just pretend the second half of that issue didn't happen. Ben still came back, but he was.... er.... fine.

[leokearon]

As far as Spidergeddon #2, spoilers:

it makes me think that PAD pulled a 180 at the last second for some reason, as it doesn't match up at all with Scarlet Spider's last issue. Or there was a major miscommunication somewhere in editorial. Or this takes place before the final arc in SS. Notice how Ben said "27-times dead," but he actually died a 28th time in SS #24-25? Of course, that means that Ben survives Spidergeddon, but is being set up as a supervillain again. We'll see, I guess.

end of spoilers

To be honest, it wouldn't' be the first time David's work was complete ignored by someone else

[HypnoHustler]

To be honest, it wouldn't' be the first time David's work was complete ignored by someone else

Usually I don't like that. I thought it was an insult when the death of Betty in the last issue of his Incred Hulk run was pretty much retconned in the same issue it happened with that stupid Joe Casey epilogue.

In this case he really dropped the ball though, and I'm willing to make a BIG exception. Unless the events of SS#25 get referenced, I'm going to pretend it never happened.

[leokearon]

Usually I don't like that. I thought it was an insult when the death of Betty in the last issue of his Incred Hulk run was pretty much retconned in the same issue it happened with that stupid Joe Casey epilogue.

In this case he really dropped the ball though, and I'm willing to make a BIG exception. Unless the events of SS#25 get referenced, I'm going to pretend it never happened.

I was referring to what happened with She-Hulk, and to be honest, Betty not being fully dead was teased by David, when Rick mentions Betty had a closed coffin funeral. (Also I remember David regretting doing the Lone and Level Sands)

[Obsidian Spider]

Here’s what I’m hoping for:

Ben is in Spider-Geddon. Spider-Geddon has a big cloning component to it. He joins in to get his hands back on cloning tech and uses some of his DNA from the first time he died (in the 90s at the hands of Norman Osborn). He’s able to bring back the Ben we all know and love and, with a final “Do better than me”, hands Ben 3.0 the hoodie off his back and goes out in a blaze of Inheritor-killing glory. “Oh, and dye it blonde again! Trust me!”

Ben 3.0 doesn’t need his own series (not going to happen anytime soon) but can be out there making a life for himself. Peter and Kaine will have all these mixed emotions because of what Ben 2.0 did, making for some interesting interactions.

Clone Ben Reilly Great Again!

[xpyred]

Here’s what I’m hoping for:

Ben is in Spider-Geddon. Spider-Geddon has a big cloning component to it. He joins in to get his hands back on cloning tech and uses some of his DNA from the first time he died (in the 90s at the hands of Norman Osborn). He’s able to bring back the Ben we all know and love and, with a final “Do better than me”, hands Ben 3.0 the hoodie off his back and goes out in a blaze of Inheritor-killing glory. “Oh, and dye it blonde again! Trust me!”

Ben 3.0 doesn’t need his own series (not going to happen anytime soon) but can be out there making a life for himself. Peter and Kaine will have all these mixed emotions because of what Ben 2.0 did, making for some interesting interactions.

Clone Ben Reilly Great Again!

That is too good an idea and makes too much sense. Therefore it will not happen. Sigh

[Pav]

Marvel has had multiple opportunities to do right by Ben. They never do. So, yeah, the logical deduction from that is that they don't want to. Actions speak louder than words.

You're right: obviously they gave him a solo to ruin his character. Marvel has a vendetta against Ben and Ben only, and in their brilliance, they've decided that - instead of just never using him again - the best course of action is to purposefully produce a comic they know is bad. That way, they can --- never use him again? Stop getting the thousands of fan letters demanding his return? It makes so much sense! How could I not see this logic before?!

Ooh, but maybe it's Disney. The House of Mouse thinks clones are immoral. X-23 better watch out, or Marvel will purposefully ruin her next!

-Pav, who only hopes his students can come up with such flawless logic in their next debates...

[Scarlet Spider-Man]

You're right: obviously they gave him a solo to ruin his character. Marvel has a vendetta against Ben and Ben only, and in their brilliance, they've decided that - instead of just never using him again - the best course of action is to purposefully produce a comic they know is bad. That way, they can --- never use him again? Stop getting the thousands of fan letters demanding his return? It makes so much sense! How could I not see this logic before?!

Ooh, but maybe it's Disney. The House of Mouse thinks clones are immoral. X-23 better watch out, or Marvel will purposefully ruin her next!

-Pav, who only hopes his students can come up with such flawless logic in their next debates...

Marvel likely already had a solo Ben Reilly book in the works once Slott decided to bring him back as a supervillain in Clone Conspiracy. Problem is, the reception to Ben's villainous persona was so negative that PAD probably decided to change gears and make it a redemption story instead (at least until the last issue, which doesn't fit into Spidergeddon at all so far).

Again, actions speak louder than words, and Marvel's actions toward Ben have been constantly negative.

[Mister Mets]

It really doesn't, though. You introduce Miles Warren in a film to set up Ben for another film. It doesn't have to be unnecessarily convoluted. Even the 90s cartoon was able to introduce Ben without a complex backstory. Same with Kaine in the newer cartoons.

It seems like your claim that Miles Morales is more relevant is simply due to "diversity" rather than the character himself.

I fully admit diversity is a big part of why Miles Morales is relevant. There is a bit more to it, as he's a reflection of the readership, an ordinary teenager who sees the original Spider-Man as a big deal.

Ben Reilly is a weird fit for film, because you've gotta set up other stuff first, and one of the advantages of the comics disappears when you have a new character who requires more screentime from the actor playing Peter Parker. A big part of his appeal was also the idea of someone initially similar to Peter Parker who had very different experiences. That would require a major time jump.

[Orbus]

Marvel likely already had a solo Ben Reilly book in the works once Slott decided to bring him back as a supervillain in Clone Conspiracy. Problem is, the reception to Ben's villainous persona was so negative that PAD probably decided to change gears and make it a redemption story instead (at least until the last issue, which doesn't fit into Spidergeddon at all so far).

Again, actions speak louder than words, and Marvel's actions toward Ben have been constantly negative.

I don't buy that.

Slott wanted to bring the character back in Spider-Island. Setting him up for what would be a heroic Scarlet Spider spin off but Marvel preferred Kaine because...well dark anti-hero Spider-Man on his own path to redemption is a unique hook that works.

When Slott was allowed to bring Ben back as a villain he had sympathetic motivations and seemed to be set up for a similar anti-hero on the path to redemption presumably for the same reason; that it's a differentiates him from Peter and is a good hook for a book.

What we got with PAD wasn't a redemption arc though, at least not a traditional one. The first six issues we never got the sense that Ben was even seeking redemption. He charged people for saving them, lied about being able to cure a sick little girl etc. Eventually due to his interaction with Death healing his wounds and curing his insanity it seemed the series shifted gears into an actual redemption story for Ben but a karmic one where he is literally punished and rewarded based on his actions, it often made it seem as if Ben was just doing good to fix his face rather than out of a true sense of heroism.

I've said it before but a more traditional redemption arc would have been better received. I think Peter David called it wrong but it's not a deliberate act of sabotage.

[Frontier]

Slott wanted to bring the character back in Spider-Island. Setting him up for what would be a heroic Scarlet Spider spin off but Marvel preferred Kaine because...well dark anti-hero Spider-Man on his own path to redemption is a unique hook that works.

Wasn't he supposed to be the Jackal in Spider-Island?

When Slott was allowed to bring Ben back as a villain he had sympathetic motivations and seemed to be set up for a similar anti-hero on the path to redemption presumably for the same reason; that it's a differentiates him from Peter and is a good hook for a book.

I don't think that was really how Slott left Ben. By the end of Clone Conspiracy he seemed to have gone really off the rails up until PAD started to write him, and even then he was teetering on and off for a while.