There is still much time before it can be said who truly will win but as of this moment my vote is on Spencer being the better writter , Slott started of well but once he hit his high note with SpOck but following it that's went it all soured, he kept bringing that up when he should have let it go, he made the Peter Parker aspect unlikable and arrogant before and after SW, and brought two events that were wasted potential (Spider-verse) or were not needed at all (Clone Saga II), and made decisions that were just not to the liking of the fans (Making Ben and Felicia villains and weak ones at that or Killing Flash Thomson). Slott should have bowed out after Superior. Spencer so far has fixed a lot of the messes he made and done well so far, he brought Peter and MJ back (fingers crossed to make this permanent again), brought back Felicia to Peter's Side, Has made some interesting strides with Jonah, Robbie, MJ. If he can continue this trend then i can easily see him being more well liked, heck if he can undo OMD he becomes a hero to all the fans...if he is allowed too of course.
Even if it had flaws, I really loved the build up to and the whole Superior Spider-man arc. That said, Spencer's writing on the title and his voice for Peter is more to my liking.
I'm a returning / infrequent reader of Amazing Spider-Man these days (much of my reading and enjoyment of Spider-Man was back in the 1970s to mid-1990s), and I'm just recently giving Spencer's ASM a chance.
(And, yes, I'm still pissed over what Spencer did to Cap/Steve and to Black Widow in Super-Duper Hush-Hush Secret Empire Strikes Back!)
So all I can really do is compare the TPB collections of Slott's "Big Time" with Spencer's "Back to Basics", and writing-wise, I'll easily take Slott over Spencer any day.
I found Spencer going overboard in his attempts at "lightness". Too many characters (besides Peter / Spider-Man) making jokes or saying really silly / dumb things. Too many villains acting like beginner morons rather than showing they have any real experience (even if they usually lost in the past).
And how come both runs started with Peter trying to find a new place to live? Both runs started with Peter in financial troubles after being disgraced because of what recently happened to him involving the Daily Bugle? Is there a formula of what writers are suppose to include at the starts of their runs or something?
Jury still out..I like Spencer's writing so far, (which is a great relief as I admit I had doubts) but just a bit too light hearted at times. Hoping the Kraven arc goes a little more serious..
I think the decider will be how Spencer handles the more serious stuff. So far it’s been very light and jokey. If this went on a few more issues longer, I’d start thinking it’s all being played abit too “safe”. But we will see.
I think we can all agree that Slott definitely DID NOT play it safe.
I think we can all agree that "Hunted" is going to go a long way in determining the first year of Spencer's run. Can't help but think that things will take a more serious, perhaps even darker, turn with that story and then the reveal of the Centipede Demon. I think Spencer even alluded to that last year before his run began; I recall him stating in an interview that things are going to be going down one path before a real change in tone---I think that's coming.
Hunted is going to be the Citizen Kane of epics about people in animal-themed costumes in New York, mark my words.
I don't blind date I make the direct market vibrate
I think the endgame will be the Centipede. That certainly is no laughing matter. Spencer is setting Peter up for a fall with regards to the "demon." Whoever they are, they're playing for keeps, and Kraven is too. I'm excited to see the other side drop.
Slott's first year's worth of stories as the solo writer of ASM are some of my favourite issues of Spider-Man ever. Spencer's first 12 issues were good, but in my opinion, Slott's first 12 issues were better.
“Somewhere, in our darkest night, we made up the story of a man who will never let us down.”
- Grant Morrison on Superman
This is so fascinating. I would've thought based on the response that it would be in Spencer's favor. It's crazy to know that it's split.
I think it's because Spencer has been taking it fairly slow early on, doing alot of character building and set up, while Slott's Big Time era is extremely fast paced with alot of big grand stories, so its harder to completely judge them fairly. I don't think he's reached the level of Big Time era Slott at the moment, but I would say right now he does seem to be at a higher quality than the post-Superior Slott era.
Big Time is maybe not the right comparison for Spencer.
Slott remember wrote the first issue of BND and he collaborated with a bunch of writers for the entire duration of BND before Big Time began.
So we should be comparing Slott's work on BND with Spencer's stuff.
Big Time wasn't exactly Slott's real debut. It was his debut as a solo writer but it's hardly like say Roger Stern going from Spectacular comic to Amazing comic. BND was still ASM. Big Time was also praised and liked at the time mostly for moving past BND and its very polarizing and dividing period, and the period from Big Time through Spider-Island to right before Dying Wish was about the last time Slott was non-controversial. Most would also consider that his most consistent period.
Spencer's run is certainly better than BND.
Spencer's work has handled serious stuff pretty well. Like Peter's angst and sense of guilt about his plagiarism, letting down Aunt May, him deciding to take a chance on Boomerang despite his suspicions, Mary Jane's big monologue at the Lookouts, then Aunt May's financial and health issues.
Whereas Slott's big statement about death was "It's so odd and weird that in comic books good characters don't come back from the dead huh"...which yeah is something we can all relate to in our real lives. Also Peter decides that his response to that is to play-act as a god and declare "No one dies".
One More Day technically speaking didn't play it safe. Nor did The Clone Saga. Doesn't mean that either of them are any good. Slott's work isn't as bad as that stuff, but it's not a special yardstick to measure quality.I think we can all agree that Slott definitely DID NOT play it safe.
Zack Snyder most definitely didn't play it safe in his movies. In fact he was way more bold and adventurous in his approach to Superman and Batman than even Alan Moore and Frank Miller were. But that didn't mean it was good.
Please not I never said Slott not playing it safe meant what he did was good. But it’s how it makes it difficult to compare. Spencer, while you note, has hit some serious things - hasn’t really put Spidey “through it” yet. It’s a slow, character building (and fixing problems from the previous run) start that I have no doubt will pay off.
I’m excited for Hunted. As a lot of said, I imagine that will be where Spencer takes it up a notch and we can start seeing how he handles the more meaningful stories.