JJ Abrams and son cowriting Spider-Man mini-series; Sara Pichelli on art

[WebSlingWonder]

According to sources, Nick Lowe had been talking about a collaboration project between Marvel and Abram's for years. This mini materialzied from those talks. So no, this was not an opportunity they decided to give to Henry. It's the exact opposite. The miniseries was the outcome AFTER Abrams agreed to do something for Marvel.

Exactly. I think people are overlooking that fact.

[Vortex85]

Yes, here it is from the New York Times article:

HENRY I’m nervous, but I will do my best. Nick Lowe, the editor of this comic, reached out about 10 years ago. More recently we began to develop an idea: a new and different and exciting take on Spider-Man.

J. J. Nick had been pressing me to do a book with him. A year or so ago, I started talking about it with Henry and it sort of happened organically. And that has been the joy of this. Even though I’ve been talking to Nick for a long time, weirdly, this feels like it just sort of evolved from the conversations of Henry and I, having ideas that got us excited and Nick being open to the collaboration.

[boots]

So reading your post, I agree with most points. This is a far more nuanced issue that people are realizing than those on Twitter and earlier in this thread. It's kind of a double-edged sword, partly created by Marvel and partly created by off-the-wall fan expectations, and partly created by the standards in the entertainment industry. It's a perfect storm.

100% agreed. most issues aren't wholly negative or wholly positive. there's always context and nuance, no matter how much people try to remove that stuff.

No, you may not have a rich dad who can get you the job. But you have friends, contacts, connections that can do the same thing.

mmm, maybe? i don't have any friends that can get me a marvel comic writing gig, or if they can, the bastards aren't telling me.

for instance, i know of someone who basically bought themselves a role in a big film. they had the $, so they just "invested" and was given one of the main roles. that is not something that 90% of actors can or ever will be able to do. no matter how many friends they have.

A bit of a personal story: my father, and my family, came from barely having anything. He jokes about it now, but he put in the hard work, the determination, and the effort against all odds to go to school, get his degree, work as a youth pastor, then as a full pastor, and currently an executive pastor. He instructed all of us to keep going and build up a resilience that helps us up when we, inevitably, have nothing. As minorities ourselves, my family knows firsthand how privilege gets the job first. The good news? We still didn't stop. And to see where we are now is so much greater.

amazing story, and your father sounds like an impressive man. i'm not for a second saying resilience isn't key, or that determination isn't 100% necessary...but do we think that every person who didn't make it just wasn't "determined"? for every family out there with a similar story to yours who worked themselves to the bone and never gave up but still was unable to make exec pastor...were they just lazy? or do outside factors and forces greater than you can conquer also sometimes play into it?

i know people well into retirement age who are still trying to crack the entertainment industry. i have seen a lot of people give it their all and come away with nothing or worse, broken.

and sometimes the system is just not open to you. taking film for example, if you were an indian male actor in the 80s who wanted to play the romantic lead in hollywood, no matter your connections, talent or drive....there was almost no opportunity there for that to happen. that's changed somewhat of late, and we've seen an explosion of indian male talent in the west...but that was a change in the industry not a change in the attitude of the worker.

[Hugo Strange]

Yes, here it is from the New York Times article:

HENRY I’m nervous, but I will do my best. Nick Lowe, the editor of this comic, reached out about 10 years ago. More recently we began to develop an idea: a new and different and exciting take on Spider-Man.

J. J. Nick had been pressing me to do a book with him. A year or so ago, I started talking about it with Henry and it sort of happened organically. And that has been the joy of this. Even though I’ve been talking to Nick for a long time, weirdly, this feels like it just sort of evolved from the conversations of Henry and I, having ideas that got us excited and Nick being open to the collaboration.

About this "new and different take" I still have my doubts, but I'll wait to discuss this... but that remainds the Kindred storyline Spencer has been working during this same last year. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe not, only time will tell...

[Hugo Strange]

God, I hope it isn't a "look, I'm to busy to do what we had combined, so I'm going to get my inexperienced son to do it all and then I'll sign it. Good luck!"

[WebSlingWonder]

100% agreed. most issues aren't wholly negative or wholly positive. there's always context and nuance, no matter how much people try to remove that stuff.

mmm, maybe? i don't have any friends that can get me a marvel comic writing gig, or if they can, the bastards aren't telling me.

for instance, i know of someone who basically bought themselves a role in a big film. they had the $, so they just "invested" and was given one of the main roles. that is not something that 90% of actors can or ever will be able to do. no matter how many friends they have.

That's unfortunate on that person's part. That is a clear example of someone taking away a potential job.

amazing story, and your father sounds like an impressive man. i'm not for a second saying resilience isn't key, or that determination isn't 100% necessary...but do we think that every person who didn't make it just wasn't "determined"? for every family out there with a similar story to yours who worked themselves to the bone and never gave up but still was unable to make exec pastor...were they just lazy? or do outside factors and forces greater than you can conquer also sometimes play into it?

i know people well into retirement age who are still trying to crack the entertainment industry. i have seen a lot of people give it their all and come away with nothing or worse, broken.

and sometimes the system is just not open to you. taking film for example, if you were an indian male actor in the 80s who wanted to play the romantic lead in hollywood, no matter your connections, talent or drive....there was almost no opportunity there for that to happen. that's changed somewhat of late, and we've seen an explosion of indian male talent in the west...but that was a change in the industry not a change in the attitude of the worker.

Thank you for the kind words; life has not always been kind to us. As for the last part of your quote, I maintain that there needs to be a culture change in general for industries across the board when it comes to who has access and resources to this kind of work. This kind of stuff inspired a lot of political and economic talk back in the day, which I won't get into. I'm not a politician: I'm just a writer who can understand the frustrations and, in certain cases, the brokenness that comes with this sort of thing. I do think this conversation as a whole would be a lot different if it were just JJ himself instead of his son (which makes me wonder why he would put him through that), but that's a different story. For now, I think you and I both understand how these types of things work and/or need to change for the better.

[WebLurker]

I believe the main problem here is the nepotism. This guys worked hard to get where they are now, and Henry got that on a silver platter because he's his father son. Even Stan Lee had to work hard on Marvel, same goes for Romita Jr.

This is a very unfair situation for everyone who work with comics, because no matter how hard they work, people like Henry will have everything without doing anything to deserve it.

Why do we assume that Marvel would let him work on a project for them (albeit a project that solely exists for the benefit of this specific set of writers) if they didn't think he was qualified for the taks?

About this "new and different take" I still have my doubts, but I'll wait to discuss this... but that remainds the Kindred storyline Spencer has been working during this same last year. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe not, only time will tell...

Well, with a franchise running for multiple decades with multiple iterations, it's going to be pretty hard to find something totally new. Hopefully, they can pull off whatever it is well.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

As for whether it crushes someone's spirit of working in the industry, I think this is the difference between the greats and those who want to be great. There was a quote in the movie, Whiplash, where J. K. Simmons tells Miles Teller about Charlie Parker, and how his band director treated him like crap and ragged on him constantly.

I don't want this to come across as me underwriting you or anything. That is absolutely not my intent here. But this is a pernicious false idea that many smart people I know have fallen for, all coming from a very bad movie.

(https://www.newyorker.com/culture/ri...z-right-movies)

That entire Charlie Parker parable in Whiplash is false. It didn't happen the way the movie played it. There was a jam session where Parker in his early days was hamming up and so the band leader threw a cymbal to signal to Parker to "read the room". That's all it wasn't intended to rag on him or anything. Parker took that in good spirit and continued. What made Parker great was his practice, dedication, and commitment to craft and hard work.

Whiplash is a movie that justifies and enables abusive behavior by teachers and professionals, simply because a hyper-masculine jerk selling art, serviced by a showy performance, is something people can buy.

What I'm saying is that those who are working in the industry need to channel their frustrations into determination instead of depression and despair.

Giving vent on twitter might actually be a way of doing that you know. It's a coping mechanism.

Yes, it sucks that this one instance of nepotism is so blatant: but that does not make it the end of the world for Spider-Man and comic creators.

There's a raging debate on for several years in the latter half of this decade about creative people and companies being forgiven or enabled stuff all in the name of creativity. Usually at the expense of other people. Whether its abusive or bullying behavior, actual criminal behavior, and so on. If we now give this a fair pass then what would it say about us, that we learned nothing, we aren't willing to put lessons learned in practice?

[WebSlingWonder]

I don't want this to come across as me underwriting you or anything. That is absolutely not my intent here. But this is a pernicious false idea that many smart people I know have fallen for, all coming from a very bad movie.

(https://www.newyorker.com/culture/ri...z-right-movies)

That entire Charlie Parker parable in Whiplash is false. It didn't happen the way the movie played it. There was a jam session where Parker in his early days was hamming up and so the band leader threw a cymbal to signal to Parker to "read the room". That's all it wasn't intended to rag on him or anything. Parker took that in good spirit and continued. What made Parker great was his practice, dedication, and commitment to craft and hard work.

Whiplash is a movie that justifies and enables abusive behavior by teachers and professionals, simply because a hyper-masculine jerk selling art, serviced by a showy performance, is something people can buy.



Giving vent on twitter might actually be a way of doing that you know. It's a coping mechanism.



There's a raging debate on for several years in the latter half of this decade about creative people and companies being forgiven or enabled stuff all in the name of creativity. Usually at the expense of other people. Whether its abusive or bullying behavior, actual criminal behavior, and so on. If we now give this a fair pass then what would it say about us, that we learned nothing, we aren't willing to put lessons learned in practice?

Dude, really? Like I had stated my point and exited stage right man.

Alright, fine. To the Whiplash point, I can't speak to that.
To whether we're enabling harmful behavior in the industry...I mean, what can you and I, as consumers of this product and fans of this medium, rightfully do to combat those injustices? I'm well aware of how bad it gets for creators, and I don't agree with the BS they go through. But we, people like us, can't do anything about it. We can speak up and talk about it, but the sheer amount of voices and opinions drive out the point. Creators may have a bit more power in this regard (I remember hearing some chatter about a union a few years ago? What happened to that?). Either way, I think people are acknowledging these problems and are taking steps to fix them.

[Mister Mets]

I don't thinks it was a good business. If it was a good business, there wouldn't be so many people angry about that, many of them professionals in the field.

This doesn't necessarily follow. Pros can be upset at decisions that make business sense, especially if they think it's unfair.

Anger doesn't necessarily mean a move will be unprofitable. If people are pissed off and don't buy something, they're usually as valuable as the people who don't buy an item for any given reason (indifference, unfamiliarity with the creative team, etc.)

For example, there are plenty of comic fans not buying Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man.

I believe the main problem here is the nepotism. This guys worked hard to get where they are now, and Henry got that on a silver platter because he's his father son. Even Stan Lee had to work hard on Marvel, same goes for Romita Jr.

This is a very unfair situation for everyone who work with comics, because no matter how hard they work, people like Henry will have everything without doing anything to deserve it.

This seems to suggest that Marvel's supposed to make hiring decisions based on who deserves it the most. That's not their concenr.

That's the sad side of nepotism: it's the company saying to everyone that hard work is worth less than kinship.

Hard work doesn't have much intrinsic value.

You're going to have people who work hard and never get good enough.

What matters is the result of the hard work. If someone practiced for a long time, and got good, and does consistently impressive work, that is a worth a lot to a company.

You are there, working hard to the company, just waiting for the big chance to do the job of your dreams, and then you see the company is giving it to someone with no experience just because his father is a big shot in the company. This is depressing for everyone who works there.

That's probably the wrong way of looking at it for comics pros.

Something that can bring in new readers and make money would increase the chances of there being enough demand for new product that the struggling pro gets job opportunities.

i don't work for marvel, but as an ex producer, i can't wrap my head around this. marvel doesn't suddenly create more resources than they already possess. the finance for those extra 5 issues has to come from somewhere. they can't just whack 5 extra books on the production schedule on a whim.

it's possible that they have a special kitty on reserve for contingency/special projects not initially slated for 2019. but that's still contingency resources that could have been made available to another creator.

the only way this doesn't take the place of another potential book is if they sourced investment purely for this work.

but maybe someone who actually knows how this works for comics could expand on it all.

Marvel's expecting more money from this mini-series than from a five issue Spider-Man mini-series by Josh Layman and Sara Pichelli.

Costs are a potential factor. It's possible the Abrams are asking for money, although I doubt that anyone from Hollywood is writing comics for the money. It's a bit besides the point since then the argument would be that the kid is getting paid too much, rather than that the mini-series shouldn't be done at all.

According to sources, Nick Lowe had been talking about a collaboration project between Marvel and Abram's for years. This mini materialzied from those talks. So no, this was not an opportunity they decided to give to Henry. It's the exact opposite. The miniseries was the outcome AFTER Abrams agreed to do something for Marvel.

Yeah, this seemed to be the only way to get J.J. Abrams on-board.

I don't want this to come across as me underwriting you or anything. That is absolutely not my intent here. But this is a pernicious false idea that many smart people I know have fallen for, all coming from a very bad movie.

(https://www.newyorker.com/culture/ri...z-right-movies)

That entire Charlie Parker parable in Whiplash is false. It didn't happen the way the movie played it. There was a jam session where Parker in his early days was hamming up and so the band leader threw a cymbal to signal to Parker to "read the room". That's all it wasn't intended to rag on him or anything. Parker took that in good spirit and continued. What made Parker great was his practice, dedication, and commitment to craft and hard work.

Whiplash is a movie that justifies and enables abusive behavior by teachers and professionals, simply because a hyper-masculine jerk selling art, serviced by a showy performance, is something people can buy.



Giving vent on twitter might actually be a way of doing that you know. It's a coping mechanism.



There's a raging debate on for several years in the latter half of this decade about creative people and companies being forgiven or enabled stuff all in the name of creativity. Usually at the expense of other people. Whether its abusive or bullying behavior, actual criminal behavior, and so on. If we now give this a fair pass then what would it say about us, that we learned nothing, we aren't willing to put lessons learned in practice?

I don't think you can assume that people will agree with you on Whiplash being bad.

It got an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor, so the film industry liked it.
It's at 93 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, so critics liked. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/whiplash_2014
It has an 8.5 average on imdb, so filmgoers liked it. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2582802/

Some people didn't like it, but it is successful and acclaimed by pretty much every measure.

[boots]

For now, I think you and I both understand how these types of things work and/or need to change for the better.

absolutely. i'll just add that sometimes a change in the culture has to come through policy.

[boots]

Marvel's expecting more money from this mini-series than from a five issue Spider-Man mini-series by Josh Layman and Sara Pichelli.

Costs are a potential factor. It's possible the Abrams are asking for money, although I doubt that anyone from Hollywood is writing comics for the money. It's a bit besides the point since then the argument would be that the kid is getting paid too much, rather than that the mini-series shouldn't be done at all.

i don't really understand the relevance of this to what i was saying?

[Jekyll]

That entire Charlie Parker parable in Whiplash is false. It didn't happen the way the movie played it. There was a jam session where Parker in his early days was hamming up and so the band leader threw a cymbal to signal to Parker to "read the room". That's all it wasn't intended to rag on him or anything. Parker took that in good spirit and continued. What made Parker great was his practice, dedication, and commitment to craft and hard work.
Whiplash is a movie that justifies and enables abusive behavior by teachers and professionals, simply because a hyper-masculine jerk selling art, serviced by a showy performance, is something people can buy.

Thank you! As a current music educator, that film is a horrible representation of our field and there is nothing to be celebrated in that film.

To get back on topic: As I said earlier, I look forward to this series and I will be reading it. I think Marvel could have handled the announcement better and did not need the countdown mess, but time will tell how this series is.

[Mister Mets]

i don't really understand the relevance of this to what i was saying?

I think the standard questions about budget don't apply to something that appears to be a sure thing.

Regarding your experiences as a former producer, I'm wondering how easily something similar to this could have happened in your line of work. Did you work in Australian theater? If George Miller wanted to make a play, cowritten by one of his kids, would he be turned down?

[Hugo Strange]

This doesn't necessarily follow. Pros can be upset at decisions that make business sense, especially if they think it's unfair.

Anger doesn't necessarily mean a move will be unprofitable. If people are pissed off and don't buy something, they're usually as valuable as the people who don't buy an item for any given reason (indifference, unfamiliarity with the creative team, etc.)

For example, there are plenty of comic fans not buying Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man.

Yes, anger sells comics (Dan Slott proved that). Unfortunately it only works with the old public, because possible new readers don't have that twisted sense of loyalty that makes them buy any bad comic book thinking that the publisher will do something good if what is bad is already selling. Even a child is smart enough not to spend money on something they do not like.

About FNSM, how can I say that without being offensive?... FNSP isn't a good comic book. The dialogues are okay, but the plot is is predictable, weak and even plagiarized from other stories. That explains why people don't buy FNSP.

This seems to suggest that Marvel's supposed to make hiring decisions based on who deserves it the most. That's not their concenr.

That's exactly what I'm suggesting.

Hard work doesn't have much intrinsic value.

You're going to have people who work hard and never get good enough.

What matters is the result of the hard work. If someone practiced for a long time, and got good, and does consistently impressive work, that is a worth a lot to a company.

Unless your father is someone important in the company.

That's probably the wrong way of looking at it for comics pros.

Something that can bring in new readers and make money would increase the chances of there being enough demand for new product that the struggling pro gets job opportunities.

Here we have another problem: no matter you bring in new potential readers if you give them bad stuff. They probably won't give another chance, they'll learn with their mistake.

It's the same thing that happens with Marvel's re-releases: the issue 1 is the only one whar sells, so the following issues continue to fall in sales as if nothing had ever happened.

In the end you just lose a new audience... maybe forever.

Marvel's expecting more money from this mini-series than from a five issue Spider-Man mini-series by Josh Layman and Sara Pichelli.

Costs are a potential factor. It's possible the Abrams are asking for money, although I doubt that anyone from Hollywood is writing comics for the money. It's a bit besides the point since then the argument would be that the kid is getting paid too much, rather than that the mini-series shouldn't be done at all.

This's business. Everybody does it for the money. It's naïve to thing he's not getting a lot of money to sign his name on this comic books.