The current status of the Spider-Man rogues gallery

[boots]

hmm as someone who has recently started co writing, i honestly don’t think my contribution or artistic integrity is any less for that fact

[Revolutionary_Jack]

You seem to think that Dan Slott isn't aware that Otto is still a terrible person.

I am going by what's on page. And again regardless of how I feel about the quality of a story, it's always possible for a writer to be "of the devil's party and not know it". It happens to the very best authors, across all mediums. Take Steve Ditko Spider-Man co-creator, who had a Randian-tinged attitude to law and order, and yet he wrote, created, and developed so many cool rogues and villains. As a Randian, Ditko didn't believe in redemption and yet he also created a fantastic character like Frederick Foswell who does redeem himself in the course of the story going from journalist to gangster to journalist again.

That's Ditko, let alone Slott.

Does that mean he didn't act out of love towards her when he deleted himself? He obviously did. Both these thingse can be true.

We are in a Post-Me Too era, so the answer is no, both of those things can't be true. That part of the story would obviously have been entirely different had it come out today.

KLH belongs in the all time classics list but I think you're just using it in an effort to diminish SSM.

1) I am.

2) It's irrelevant if that is my motivation.

3) It's a valid argument to question the intents and ideas of a story whose ultimate point is that Peter is the true Superior Spider-Man when you spend nearly 30 issues without him and more or less diminish and denigrate Peter's actual supporting cast in the interim, and whose main drive for the actual duration of the story is essentially a parody of Peter's life.

4) It's also a valid argument to compare this to KLH where the moral message works as intended precisely because the final issues give Peter some strong, powerful, and defining character work and much time is spent showing Peter and his importance to the supporting cast.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

hmm as someone who has recently started co writing, i honestly don’t think my contribution or artistic integrity is any less for that fact

Difference between co-writing all the way through and writing most of the stuff and then having the finale done by a regular friend and partner.

[Agent Z]

I never said that, I merely said that the moral message in the story at hand is poorly executed, hollow and insincere. It's not saying anything. It doesn't mean anything.

So you didn’t say this?

The reason Dan Slott spent so many issues with Ock in Spider-Man is that he didn't actually believe in the moral idea he was putting out.

In the case of Superior Spider-Man we don't see Dr. Octopus publicly admit his crimes and attempt to reform and honor Spider-Man, which is what the story would require if it wants to be. What we see is a guy hijacking the life of a younger guy which he finds enviable, try and exploit that out of his own vanity, and use Peter's identity for false pretenses, personal profit, and glory-seeking. That's not a story of redemption, that's a story of identity theft sold as redemption because of Slott's Snyder-esque grasp of morality.

This is very much a clear declaration of what you view as SlottÂ’s morality if there ever was one.

[Tendrin]

I am going by what's on page. And again regardless of how I feel about the quality of a story, it's always possible for a writer to be "of the devil's party and not know it". It happens to the very best authors, across all mediums. Take Steve Ditko Spider-Man co-creator, who had a Randian-tinged attitude to law and order, and yet he wrote, created, and developed so many cool rogues and villains. As a Randian, Ditko didn't believe in redemption and yet he also created a fantastic character like Frederick Foswell who does redeem himself in the course of the story going from journalist to gangster to journalist again.

Well, you see, Ditko was co-writing.

That's Ditko, let alone Slott.

And Stan the Man. Let's not forget Stan the Man.

We are in a Post-Me Too era, so the answer is no, both of those things can't be true. That part of the story would obviously have been entirely different had it come out today.

I thought we were just going with what's written on the page? I mean, given that this was literally followed with Anna decrying him and calling him stalker, a middle aged creeper and more. That Otto /himself/ loved her doesn't make the relationship not toxic or bad. It clearly was, even if helped propel Otto into turning a corner at the end. Trying to invoke me too to bolster your argument is nice, though.

1) I am.

Using the shallowest arguments possible.

2) It's irrelevant if that is my motivation.

It's as relevant in that you plainly can't see past your own bias. I mean, you're the guy literally trying to argue that Slott only accidentally wrote a story that agreed with you.

3) It's a valid argument to question the intents and ideas of a story whose ultimate point is that Peter is the true Superior Spider-Man when you spend nearly 30 issues without him and more or less diminish and denigrate Peter's actual supporting cast in the interim, and whose main drive for the actual duration of the story is essentially a parody of Peter's life.

But I thought motivations were irrelevant?

4) It's also a valid argument to compare this to KLH where the moral message works as intended precisely because the final issues give Peter some strong, powerful, and defining character work and much time is spent showing Peter and his importance to the supporting cast.

Oh my goodness. Everything in SSM points out the moral correctness of Peter Parker.

Difference between co-writing all the way through and writing most of the stuff and then having the finale done by a regular friend and partner.

They were frequent collaborators through out the entire story. No Escape was co-written by Gage. The annuals were written by Gage. The new series is written by Gage. I'd say Gage has a better handle on these things than you do.

[boots]

Difference between co-writing all the way through and writing most of the stuff and then having the finale done by a regular friend and partner.

ok. what do you imagine that difference to be?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

ok. what do you imagine that difference to be?

Between Joel and Ethan Coen, Lennon/McCartney, Jagger/Richards on the one hand, and something like Justice League 2017 where Snyder's work is finished by Joss Whedon resulting in a jarring shift of style and attitude.

In the case of Superior, the final issues read jarringly different from Slott's stuff. And this was pointed out by others:
http://www.chasingamazingblog.com/20...that-happened/
The end of Superior was a letdown of great magnitude and one I suspect will have a profound impact on how I view and anticipate the next year or so of Spider-Man comics. Rather than getting excited or anxious when I read solicitations promising the return of “you know who” in ASM, or getting caught up in the hype of “every Spider-Man ever” in November’s Spider-Verse event, I’m resigned to being cautious and cynical.

What’s it going to take to get a Spider-Man story that has a perfectly executed beginning, middle AND end, that also manages to serve the fans and the front office? I could have sworn that Superior Spider-Man was going to be that story; it was a major risk for Marvel to introduce at the time, but along the way Slott and his creative team made the concept endearing to both new and old fans. Little did I know that the one big thing missing from Superior this whole time was a clear exit strategy.

[boots]

Between Joel and Ethan Coen, Lennon/McCartney

that can be the case

but it doesn’t account for the times when a solo writer doesn’t stick the landing or switches tone abruptly (dan abnett’s novels or boyle’s “sunshine”) or when co writing from conception to delivery is a mess (sooo many pop songs). and ignores movies like “wizard of oz” , “gone with the wind” where switching directors didn’t harm the end product. any show i’ve worked on will change directors for each block...and it’s a mixed bag. sometimes it’s seamless, other times jarring. even then that can’t always be laid at the feet of the new director.

i’m just not into cherry picking

whether or not “superior” worked as a cohesive story on the whole (i don’t even know if it was planned as such), i’m still not convinced that bringing in a mate at the end is automatically a bad thing

as for lennon/mccartney, everyone knows the true creative force was ringo

[theoneandonly]

if you go by the clone saga doctor octopus saved Peter from dying even when it was not to his advantage just because. you could say that ottos always on the greyish spectrum and it was not too improbable that he would reform and work within a reasonable limit as a ant hero. Well anyway do we call Peter trash for not doing his absolute best to ensure kaine paid for the crime? if the trial had not forced everybody's hands then Kaine would have been wandering free just like venom. then he threw his lot in with jackal and was ready to participate in mass murder but he got a pass for not being in his right mind. Otto similarly has gotten a pass from 'perfect' or 'thrash' Peter depending on how you view his more controversial actions when he saved aunt May from Osborn. So currently whatever Otto is up to is with the tacit approval of Peter who has always been ready to give chances or believe in redemption and doesn't hold it against them if they are genuinely trying to change. if someone faults him and Otto for that they may as well stop reading spider man and start reading fan fiction because the current status quo is not working for them.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

if you go by the clone saga...

Does anyone go by the clone saga?

you could say that ottos always on the greyish spectrum and it was not too improbable that he would reform and work within a reasonable limit as a ant hero.

If by "always" you ignore the first 30 years of his publ. history, sure. This is a guy who attacked nurses, doctors and patients and tried to destroy New York in The Owl/Octopus War.

Well anyway do we call Peter trash for not doing his absolute best to ensure kaine paid for the crime?

Don't see how that is equivalent. If and when Peter Parker hijacks another person's life, commits acts of terrorism and becomes a gangster, then I will call him trash.

[Mister Mets]

You say love. I say it's a dude in denial of the coercive nature of a relationship he started under false pretenses. Peter Parker acted out of love when after realizing he can't get his body back in Dying Wish, he forces his conscience on to Otto in a last-ditch attempt to stop him from abusing his loved ones. He acted selflessly there, far more than trash like Otto can ever fathom.



Kraven's Last Hunt is an obvious influence on Superior. Slott said numerous times that it's one of his favorite stories. Kraven himself says in that story he will prove himself Spider-Man's Superior. The gimmick of removing Peter out of all Spider-Man titles was done for the first time there where for over a month across all three Spider-Man titles you had no Peter and only Kraven. There it was a month, here it's a year.

Numerous people have pointed out KLH's influence and similarity to Superior so it's definitely an obvious point of comparison and reference.

And again between a sleek 6-issue story with a clear beginning-middle-end, all written by one guy, and a meandering 30+ issue series whose finale was co-written by another author, it's clear that the former is the more solid story and has a better structure.

There are two weak arguments here against Superior Spider-Man.

Some of what bothers you about Superior Spider-Man has little to do with quality. When you describe "a dude in denial of the coercive nature of a relationship he started under false pretenses" that seems to take it for granted a depth of characterization. If it were bad characterization or poorly conveyed, that would be a valid criticism of the story.

The comparison to KLH is also a stretch since that's seen as one of the best Spider-Man stories ever. Most other material will fall short in comparison, so that's hardly unique with Superior Spider-Man.

[Tendrin]

There are two weak arguments here against Superior Spider-Man.

Some of what bothers you about Superior Spider-Man has little to do with quality. When you describe "a dude in denial of the coercive nature of a relationship he started under false pretenses" that seems to take it for granted a depth of characterization. If it were bad characterization or poorly conveyed, that would be a valid criticism of the story.

The comparison to KLH is also a stretch since that's seen as one of the best Spider-Man stories ever. Most other material will fall short in comparison, so that's hardly unique with Superior Spider-Man.

Heck, it frequently makes 'all time greatest' lists beyond Spider-man but I'd argue that the two stories bare little in common beyond the surface. They're about, and say, different things about the title characters.

[Frontier]

You seem to think that Dan Slott isn't aware that Otto is still a terrible person. I say he never once forgot that, given that this was followed by Otto obsessively stalking Anna Maria and this being pointed out frequently. Slott never lost track of who Otto was. Does that mean he didn't act out of love towards her when he deleted himself? He obviously did. Both these thingse can be true.

I think this was just another fault of how inconsistent Slott's writing on things could be. Because at times he still seemed to be aware of how terrible Otto is and how bad the things he does are but at other times he also couldn't help himself from showing off just how awesome and "superior" Otto was.

It didn't help when compounded with his own issues when writing Peter. Anything involving Dock Ock seemed to have more energy and personal investment on Slott's part compared to anything with Peter.

[Snoop Dogg]

Otto in Superior did nice and cool things because he always thought he was in the right as an effective hero, therefore sometimes he was right and was the big hero and other times he was an ass. An anti-hero without self-awareness.

[Tendrin]

Otto in Superior did nice and cool things because he always thought he was in the right as an effective hero, therefore sometimes he was right and was the big hero and other times he was an ass. An anti-hero without self-awareness.

Otto's lack of self awareness is on full display in the latest SSM series too and is a frequent source of some of its funniest moments. I also liked this bit from No Escape:

SSMNoescape.jpg