Slott announcing a return to Spider-Man?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I wonder if anyone said that about Chris Claremont and his 15 years on Uncanny X-Men. I'm sure not all of Claremont's X-Men stories during that period are gold standard.

With Claremont, the X-Men before him was a minor-league title. He elevated the X-Men, more than any other writer before and after him, into Marvel's uber-franchise and the center of the MU, and it's his stuff and ideas, the notion of Mutants as a metaphor for the oppressed that crossed into the movies, the Fox cartoon, Xmen Evolution and after that. Claremont on X-Men is comparable to Miller on Daredevil or Moore on Swamp Thing, Michelinie on Iron Man.

As far as ASM goes, the norm for a long time was shorter runs (Conway, Wein, Wolfman, Stern, Defalco) after Stan Lee. And in Lee's case, Lee-Ditko is the more consistent period than Lee-Romita. Then David Michelinie came along and had this huge extended run on Spider-Man. After him you have the great sadness that is the Clone Saga and Post-Clone Saga, and then JMS had another seven year run. So long runs on Spider-Man is the more recent and consistent trend. Slott is unusual because he wrote Spider-Man bi-monthly whereas Michelinie and JMS worked single-monthly. So in the same amount of time it took JMS to reach 70 issues, Slott got to do 140 issues...obviously higher workload, and hopefully for his sake, more pay, but it also means that Slott had an unfair advantage in logging more books on the pile than earlier writers did.

At the same time ASM is ASM, it's been a generally consistent and defining title for multiple geneations. Until the Clone Saga, Spider-Man never had a bad decade and bad period. Not everything before was good (just like not everything during the clone saga and Pre-JMS period was bad) but overall that was the norm. It's very difficult to argue that Slott transformed ASM the way Claremont did X-Men or Miller did Daredevil.

[Inversed]

Slott's done that, time and again. You don't have the career that he's had and the sustained success that he's had without consistently delivering the goods. And that "Silver Surfer thing he did" won him and Mike Allred an Eisner Award. He's done more than ok for himself, you know? Better than most people who want to make it as a writer will ever do.

Also, no matter what I feel may be downsides to Slott, I think he has done far more good than not. And even moreso, his and Allred's Silver Surfer is still a masterpiece and his crowning achievement to me by far, so he will always have that.

[Conn Seanery]

The topic isn't "defend your like/dislike of Dan Slott's ASM," so how about people drop the condescension and uncivil behavior. Everyone's permitted to have a theory/opinion regarding the thread topic and are welcome to share it. Anyone going out of their way to be confrontational and rude is risking getting drop-kicked off the forums.

[CrimsonEchidna]

With Slott saying that he got the itch to write the character again due to how much he loved Into the Spider-Verse, I imagine that it'll likely be a mini-series if it were to happen.

Him co-writing a Spider-Verse 3 is also likely.

[Frontier]

With Slott saying that he got the itch to write the character again due to how much he loved Into the Spider-Verse, I imagine that it'll likely be a mini-series if it were to happen.

Him co-writing a Spider-Verse 3 is also likely.

Yeah, I think if Slott is coming back for anything, it's probably a Spider-Verse story.

[KC]

I love Slott's Spider-Man but I'm not sure if him picking up another book is a good idea considering how terrible the scheduling for the two books he is currently writing is.

[Mister Mets]

With Slott saying that he got the itch to write the character again due to how much he loved Into the Spider-Verse, I imagine that it'll likely be a mini-series if it were to happen.

Him co-writing a Spider-Verse 3 is also likely.

With Mexican Spider-Man and Life Story Spider-Man.

Though it would probably be a good idea to wait a bit before that. Maybe have it come out at the same time as a Spider-Verse sequel film.

[Spiderfang]

He's seen that Ben Reilly has been fixed so he's coming back to the title to screw him up one last time.

[bob.schoonover]

One last run at Spider-verse, without the Inheritors, would be fun, whether it be Slott, Gage, both, or someone else. No Morlun, no multiversal collection of Electros. Maybe a multiversal Sinister Syndicate with the most dangerous versions of every villain? Anyway, I just want to see one last Silk/Spider-Woman team-up . . .

[Aura Blaize]

Anything's possible in comics. So why not?

As a rule when a writer finishes on ASM, that's it. You don't get call backs and do-overs. At best one or two fill-in issues here and there. Maybe a miniseries. But in general no writer who has had an extended run on Spider-Man has gotten a second run. Nearest is Tom Defalco when he was part of the team of writers working during the Clone Saga. But Gerry Conway for instance always chose to write for Spectacular and work there and in other side series and specials and avoided returning on the main title. That set the precedent after that. Even when Roger Stern finished his run and was offered (and declined) a return to Spider-Man in the '80s, it was for Spectacular Spider-Man and not the main series. So that's the precedent.

In the case of Slott, for a guy who has written Spider-Man for ten years I think you can say people got all the stories out of him that he ever had or ever will have. And that he should step aside and let other writers continue especially since this isn't Stan Lee or Steve Ditko. Nor is Slott like Claremont who took X-Men from fairly forgotten mid-tier comics title to center of the marvel universe. Spider-Man was always a banner title with several strong runs before and after Slott and Slott didn't define or redefine Spider-Man in any real distinct long-lasting way. Mostly just spinning the wheels. The sales on his run were good and strong but nothing in the all-time ballpark.

If Slott were to return on a second series title or a small miniseries here and there. That might be worth something. My feeling is that Slott works best when working in pre-established status-quos then creating one on his own. His best Spider-Man story is Spider-Man/Human Torch where he effortlessly situated his series in different status-quos across publication history, and of course his comics for Justice League Adventures and Batman Adventures where he worked on what was built for the DCAU cartoons (and where he collaborated with Ty Templeton for the first time).

This pretty much sums up my feelings. I wouldn't mind a mini series or a one shot, but definitely not a main title.

[Mister Mets]

Anything's possible in comics. So why not?

As a rule when a writer finishes on ASM, that's it. You don't get call backs and do-overs. At best one or two fill-in issues here and there. Maybe a miniseries. But in general no writer who has had an extended run on Spider-Man has gotten a second run. Nearest is Tom Defalco when he was part of the team of writers working during the Clone Saga. But Gerry Conway for instance always chose to write for Spectacular and work there and in other side series and specials and avoided returning on the main title. That set the precedent after that. Even when Roger Stern finished his run and was offered (and declined) a return to Spider-Man in the '80s, it was for Spectacular Spider-Man and not the main series. So that's the precedent.

In the case of Slott, for a guy who has written Spider-Man for ten years I think you can say people got all the stories out of him that he ever had or ever will have. And that he should step aside and let other writers continue especially since this isn't Stan Lee or Steve Ditko. Nor is Slott like Claremont who took X-Men from fairly forgotten mid-tier comics title to center of the marvel universe. Spider-Man was always a banner title with several strong runs before and after Slott and Slott didn't define or redefine Spider-Man in any real distinct long-lasting way. Mostly just spinning the wheels. The sales on his run were good and strong but nothing in the all-time ballpark.

If Slott were to return on a second series title or a small miniseries here and there. That might be worth something. My feeling is that Slott works best when working in pre-established status-quos then creating one on his own. His best Spider-Man story is Spider-Man/Human Torch where he effortlessly situated his series in different status-quos across publication history, and of course his comics for Justice League Adventures and Batman Adventures where he worked on what was built for the DCAU cartoons (and where he collaborated with Ty Templeton for the first time).

DeFalco was on the book for a while after Ben Reilly took over as Spider-Man, and then during the intermediate era between the Clone Saga and the Mackie/ Byrne relaunch. He wrote the book from 406-439.

It was a bit longer than his first run (252-283 with numerous fill-ins.)

I don't know if there should be a hard and fast rule against returns to ASM, although it wouldn't make sense for Slott, since Spencer's run is pretty good and still ongoing and Slott is not a prolific writer and just ended his run relatively recently. I can see him coming back if he's inspired by new developments or years of new ideas, but that would likely make more sense as a standalone.

I'd also love to see JMS back under the same circumstances, although in his case I think he was seeding stories he never got to pull off.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

DeFalco was on the book for a while after Ben Reilly took over as Spider-Man, and then during the intermediate era between the Clone Saga and the Mackie/ Byrne relaunch. He wrote the book from 406-439.

It was a bit longer than his first run (252-283 with numerous fill-ins.)

Thanks for that.

Chris Claremont said that his long run on X-Men while good for the title was also hard for Marvel because his presence and success was a disincentive to attracting hot new talents on what was now a prestige book. And yet any time he stepped down and interim writers took over there was resistance and opposition, at least until Grant Morrison's New X-Men and Whedon's run after that.

ASM is easily the most consistently maintained title in Marvel with great runs in multiple eras and only real major weak spot (the Clone Saga and the period after that) while BND runs a close second. Until Michelinie, the trend was short runs, after Michelinie you had a writing team and then you had a long run with JMS, followed by a wrting team and another long run with Slott. Michelinie was 1987-1994, JMS was 2001-2007, and while Slott wrote the title for ten years, his solo run was really 2011-2018. So also 7 years. In Slott's case because he wrote bi-monthly that meant 168 issues rather than 84 monthly issues. Going from 12 ish/yr to 24 ish/yr. So the two trends are short runs Pre-Michelinie, 7 year extended runs Post-Michelinie.

So if Spencer writes for three years he has 72 issues, 5 years he has 120. And Spencer might be tempted to stick long because well, he took over when ASM on original numbering was 802. Eventually it's going to get back to original numbering, and stack that up, and he's in touching distant of ASM#1000.

[Inversed]

So if Spencer writes for three years he has 72 issues, 5 years he has 120. And Spencer might be tempted to stick long because well, he took over when ASM on original numbering was 802. Eventually it's going to get back to original numbering, and stack that up, and he's in touching distant of ASM#1000.

Honestly I'm predicting we're gonna get a Tom King Batman situation with Spencer and Spider-Man, a 4 years and 100 issues run. I could see him sticking on for a bit longer after that, and we know Marvel's experience more than any others with relaunching even with the same creative team, but I think in this case they may decide to let the whole thing run its course and Spencer can tell his big large scale epic.

[NC_Yankee]

Thanks for that.

Chris Claremont said that his long run on X-Men while good for the title was also hard for Marvel because his presence and success was a disincentive to attracting hot new talents on what was now a prestige book. And yet any time he stepped down and interim writers took over there was resistance and opposition, at least until Grant Morrison's New X-Men and Whedon's run after that.

ASM is easily the most consistently maintained title in Marvel with great runs in multiple eras and only real major weak spot (the Clone Saga and the period after that) while BND runs a close second. Until Michelinie, the trend was short runs, after Michelinie you had a writing team and then you had a long run with JMS, followed by a wrting team and another long run with Slott. Michelinie was 1987-1994, JMS was 2001-2007, and while Slott wrote the title for ten years, his solo run was really 2011-2018. So also 7 years. In Slott's case because he wrote bi-monthly that meant 168 issues rather than 84 monthly issues. Going from 12 ish/yr to 24 ish/yr. So the two trends are short runs Pre-Michelinie, 7 year extended runs Post-Michelinie.

So if Spencer writes for three years he has 72 issues, 5 years he has 120. And Spencer might be tempted to stick long because well, he took over when ASM on original numbering was 802. Eventually it's going to get back to original numbering, and stack that up, and he's in touching distant of ASM#1000.

I will debate the point that the only bad runs were the clone saga and post BND ( although they are my most despised runs). I will cite the issues after 98 ( Goblin) up until 118 ( Hulk). 8 arrmed Spidy, Morbius, Gibbon, Gog, Hammerhead and maybe the worst Doc Ock.issues ever.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I will debate the point that the only bad runs were the clone saga and post BND ( although they are my most despised runs). I will cite the issues after 98 ( Goblin) up until 118 ( Hulk). 8 arrmed Spidy, Morbius, Gibbon, Gog, Hammerhead and maybe the worst Doc Ock.issues ever.

That's a low-point in two good runs, and not bad a run in and of itself. Tail end of Lee-Romita and early Conway (who had to continue where Lee left off, and only got to do what he wanted with 121-122). Not everything before the Clone Saga and BND was good, and not everything during the Clone Saga and BND is bad. You can have bad and weak moments and weak issues in strong runs. What we are talking here is generalizations. Saying the Clone Saga and the Post-Clone Saga is generally bad, which they are in my view (and also the general consensus, even those who defend the Clone Saga do it with an air of apology and so-bad-its-good mentality), doesn't mean that everything inside the Saga and so on is bad.

It's just that overall run, you have to make a judgment call. The Lee-Ditko is consistent from start-to-finish, maybe some weak issues (like the Spidey-Torch vs. Sandman one). The Lee-Romita is great but it's strength rests on two peaks (39-51, and around 83-84-98), while the middle is less consistent and more uneven, and the tail end is pretty weak. In Conway's Run, the opening 10 issues where he mostly tried to imitate Lee and spun threads on hat status-quo and plot points wasn't as good as when he got to break from that in 121-122 and set about doing his run. Dennis O'Neill who wrote Spider-man for some 20 issues between Wolfman and Stern is also considered to be among the weakest runs in Spider-Man, some argue weakest overall. I'd put Byrne below him. This is a guy with talent (as was Byrne), Batman's most decisive and influential writer/editor and he dropped the ball on Spider-Man but he still contributed some elements like Hydro Man, Madame Web, Calypso. His idea of Madame Web knowing Peter's secret was a genie that Stern put in the battle in his legendary Juggernaut two-parter.