Clone Saga - most cringeworthy moments?

[AlexCampy89]

Don't know exactly how we came to talk about Charlemagne and Wolverine vs Spider-Man 1, but I'd say that Charlie didn't commit suicide.
It was involuntary manslaughter.

Peter killed her, although it was justified by his shaken and upset behavior after Wolverine fight. And it made perfectly sense, considering how the fight went and how close to death Spider-Man came.


Also, a lot of people forgot how that was a Wolverine annual and mainly a Wolverine story featuring Spider-Man in a supporting role. Despite all, it is a wonderful story that pushes forward both Wolverine and Spider-Man lores.


Peter punching Charlemagne made sense and was not offensive because she wanted to die. Had Wolverine killed her, her death would have been way more painful, despite Wolverine promising that it wouldn't hurt (heck, with adamantium claws). Charlie death was a bittersweet ending for Spider-Man but definitely the best case scenario for both Wolverine and Charlie.

Peter beating Ben and then a pregnant woman, without consequences, is an offense to the reader foremost, and to the lore secondarily.

[JTait]

Spidercide, for me, summed up the excesses and the absurdities of the Clone Saga in one, garishly costumed package. The funny thing is that the concept of an evil clone of Peter Parker is a fairly solid one, and it was set up relatively well. Unfortunately, as with a lot of the Clone Saga it was dealt with appallingly and everything about the character, from his uninspired costume to his lame dialogue between a microcosm of everything I hated about the storyline.

[Spiderfang]

The whole Judas Traveller thing, the various "villain of the day" appearances that had nothing to do with the overall plot of the Clone Saga, Jackal trying to be Joker 2.0.

[Desmark]

Don't know exactly how we came to talk about Charlemagne and Wolverine vs Spider-Man 1, but I'd say that Charlie didn't commit suicide.
It was involuntary manslaughter.

Peter killed her, although it was justified by his shaken and upset behavior after Wolverine fight. And it made perfectly sense, considering how the fight went and how close to death Spider-Man came.


Also, a lot of people forgot how that was a Wolverine annual and mainly a Wolverine story featuring Spider-Man in a supporting role. Despite all, it is a wonderful story that pushes forward both Wolverine and Spider-Man lores.


Peter punching Charlemagne made sense and was not offensive because she wanted to die. Had Wolverine killed her, her death would have been way more painful, despite Wolverine promising that it wouldn't hurt (heck, with adamantium claws). Charlie death was a bittersweet ending for Spider-Man but definitely the best case scenario for both Wolverine and Charlie.

Peter beating Ben and then a pregnant woman, without consequences, is an offense to the reader foremost, and to the lore secondarily.

As both the incidents involve violence against women carried out by Peter involuntarily it was natural that the Charlie incident would be brought up while talking about Peter hitting mj inadvertently.

[AlexCampy89]

As both the incidents involve violence against women carried out by Peter involuntarily it was natural that the Charlie incident would be brought up while talking about Peter hitting mj inadvertently.

But he didn't hit MJ inadvertently, that's my point.

When he killed Charlie, he was shaken by the previous fight against Wolverine. He punched Charlie because he thought that Wolverine was about to sneak at him and sucker punch him.


When Peter was fighting with Ben, there was no other person in the room, except for a pregnant MJ. He hit her because she tried to save Ben from Peter. Then Peter realized how he fucked up and ran away.
Two totally different situations.

Proof of this is that he punched Charlie with all his strength, and killed her. But he pulled the punch to a Pregnant MJ, and both her and her child survived.

[Pav]

But he didn't hit MJ inadvertently, that's my point.

When he killed Charlie, he was shaken by the previous fight against Wolverine. He punched Charlie because he thought that Wolverine was about to sneak at him and sucker punch him.


When Peter was fighting with Ben, there was no other person in the room, except for a pregnant MJ. He hit her because she tried to save Ben from Peter. Then Peter realized how he fucked up and ran away.
Two totally different situations.

Proof of this is that he punched Charlie with all his strength, and killed her. But he pulled the punch to a Pregnant MJ, and both her and her child survived.

When Peter hit MJ, he was shaken by the realization that he was a clone; he hit MJ because he thought Ben was behind him and in that moment he hated Ben.

Seward Trainer was also on the room, I believe.

-Pav, who's just saying...

[Huntsman Spider]

When Peter hit MJ, he was shaken by the realization that he was a clone; he hit MJ because he thought Ben was behind him and in that moment he hated Ben.

Seward Trainer was also on the room, I believe.

-Pav, who's just saying...

He might've thought it was Trainer behind him, since he had Ben in a near-literal death grip at the time, and since Trainer was the one who made that revelation (which turned out to be a lie, anyway), Peter wasn't all that concerned with not killing him. That said, it was still an immensely messed-up moment.

[boots]

He might've thought it was Trainer behind him, since he had Ben in a near-literal death grip at the time, and since Trainer was the one who made that revelation (which turned out to be a lie, anyway), Peter wasn't all that concerned with not killing him. That said, it was still an immensely messed-up moment.

peter pissing off out a window instead of staying to make sure everyone was ok and taking responsibility was the kicker there. yeah, it shows how low he's sunk...but c'mon...

and out of universe- did we really need more examples of violence against women to make a point?

[Huntsman Spider]

peter pissing off out a window instead of staying to make sure everyone was ok and taking responsibility was the kicker there. yeah, it shows how low he's sunk...but c'mon...

and out of universe- did we really need more examples of violence against women to make a point?

Exactly. He was right to be ashamed of himself in that moment, but like you said, he should've stayed to try to make things right, instead of running off and later joining up with the Jackal in a fit of what I could only call temporary insanity.

[boots]

Exactly. He was right to be ashamed of himself in that moment, but like you said, he should've stayed to try to make things right, instead of running off and later joining up with the Jackal in a fit of what I could only call temporary insanity.

yeah...trying to be fair to the writers...i suppose that's what they were going for. peter has lost the plot.

but it could have been handled in so many other, more interesting and less offensive, ways

[Huntsman Spider]

yeah...trying to be fair to the writers...i suppose that's what they were going for. peter has lost the plot.

but it could have been handled in so many other, more interesting and less offensive, ways

Yeah, I'd agree with that last part. Instead of Peter smacking MJ away from him, she could've been calling out to him to stop, with Seward holding her back from going directly into Peter's line of fire (as it were), and when Peter heard her voice and turned to look at her, seeing the horror and fear on her face and in her eyes, then looking at himself and what he was doing to Ben, it would be a slightly better excuse for him to run off in shame and self-loathing.

[HypnoHustler]

Yeah, I'd agree with that last part. Instead of Peter smacking MJ away from him, she could've been calling out to him to stop, with Seward holding her back from going directly into Peter's line of fire (as it were), and when Peter heard her voice and turned to look at her, seeing the horror and fear on her face and in her eyes, then looking at himself and what he was doing to Ben, it would be a slightly better excuse for him to run off in shame and self-loathing.

That’d be MUCH better. Even I, a huge fan of Ben and Kaine and an ardent defender of the clone saga, can admit that was an awful, awful moment. Was that DeFalco’s choice or editorial edict or what? It’s inexplicable why someone thought that smack was a good idea.

[Somecrazyaussie]

I have to agree with the majority and say Spidercide. Kaine was already positioned as the "villainous" clone in the titles. So, in a way, Spidercide was redundant. The more clones that showed up, the shittier the whole thing became (looking at you Maximum Clonage).

Also, what the hell is the deal with Judas Traveller and his various associates? I know they were explained away as being pawns of Norman in his quest for revenge, but in hindsight their entire narrative seems totally out of place with everything else going on.

[exile001]

The Clone Saga... is why I started reading Spider-man. There, I admitted it. I LOVED it.

There is a lot of good comics in that era (the Clone/Ben sagas), but man was there some bad. Off the top of my head, my biggest issues were these;

Dan Jurgens was a bad fit for Spider-man. His Superman is legendary, but his Spider-man never really hit for me. The tone and voice was off, even compared to the other Spider-books at the time. The burglar's daughter, a thread that ran primarily in his book, was a particularly bad idea.

Bill Sienkiewicz inks. For a legendary figure in the industry whose original work is beloved (and excellent), everything he inked looked like an incomprehensible mess. Seriously, it is painful to look at.

And lastly, too much change all at once. It was a common error during this time (and for years after), and was repeatedly rejected by fans.

If you're making a major change to your title, and telling us the guy we were reading the last 20 odd years was the clone and this other dude is the REAL Spider-man is a pretty goddamn HUGE change, then you need to keep as much of the ancillary things (supporting cast, villains, locations) familiar while the audience adjusts to the big change. It keeps the focus squarely on the new thing you are trying to sell, yet keeps the audience feeling they're still reading the same book they've been buying for years.

But no! They kill off May, they kill off Doctor Octopus and overhaul other villains (to be replaced by a newer, edgier, cyber-ier versions), the Bugle gone, MJ gone, classic costume gone. Had they been more gradual with these changes it could have worked (or at least worked better), but a wholesale scorching the Earth of everything we'd been reading for decades just turned off long terms fans and didn't bring in any new ones.

Also, because I think it's essential to mention; Fuck Judas Traveller and Scrier.

[Huntsman Spider]

That’d be MUCH better. Even I, a huge fan of Ben and Kaine and an ardent defender of the clone saga, can admit that was an awful, awful moment. Was that DeFalco’s choice or editorial edict or what? It’s inexplicable why someone thought that smack was a good idea.

Probably to discredit Peter as the "real" Spider-Man so Ben would be more acceptable to fans. Backfired horribly, of course.

The Clone Saga... is why I started reading Spider-man. There, I admitted it. I LOVED it.

There is a lot of good comics in that era (the Clone/Ben sagas), but man was there some bad. Off the top of my head, my biggest issues were these;

Dan Jurgens was a bad fit for Spider-man. His Superman is legendary, but his Spider-man never really hit for me. The tone and voice was off, even compared to the other Spider-books at the time. The burglar's daughter, a thread that ran primarily in his book, was a particularly bad idea.

Bill Sienkiewicz inks. For a legendary figure in the industry whose original work is beloved (and excellent), everything he inked looked like an incomprehensible mess. Seriously, it is painful to look at.

And lastly, too much change all at once. It was a common error during this time (and for years after), and was repeatedly rejected by fans.

If you're making a major change to your title, and telling us the guy we were reading the last 20 odd years was the clone and this other dude is the REAL Spider-man is a pretty goddamn HUGE change, then you need to keep as much of the ancillary things (supporting cast, villains, locations) familiar while the audience adjusts to the big change. It keeps the focus squarely on the new thing you are trying to sell, yet keeps the audience feeling they're still reading the same book they've been buying for years.

But no! They kill off May, they kill off Doctor Octopus and overhaul other villains (to be replaced by a newer, edgier, cyber-ier versions), the Bugle gone, MJ gone, classic costume gone. Had they been more gradual with these changes it could have worked (or at least worked better), but a wholesale scorching the Earth of everything we'd been reading for decades just turned off long terms fans and didn't bring in any new ones.

Also, because I think it's essential to mention; Fuck Judas Traveller and Scrier.

Generally agree with this, though I will cop to liking the virtual-reality stuff, even if it was completely nonsensical. Given that VR tech in real life is getting closer and closer to mainstream, it wouldn't be so bad to try again with Carolyn Trainer/Lady Octopus.