Superior Spider-Man #12

[Prof. Warren]

The other explanation is that some people are incapable of accepting any criticism. They think Superior Spider-Man in both Slott and Gage's run is a flawless masterpiece from start to finish so any time people point out obvious plot holes, contrivances, dramatically hollow scenes and poor verisimilitude we get a laundry list of excuses.

Defending something against a criticism that may be flawed or incorrect isn't a claim that the work in question is a "flawless masterpiece from start to finish."

That would be an exaggeration on your part. Or maybe you're just attempting sarcasm.

-- The funeral is ridiculous for a guy who the mourners knew is still alive and is a fraud. Well it turns out that the MU doesn't operate on the same news length as we do. Apparently 18th and 19th Century speed of information flow is at operation here. Is this explanation given in the pages of the comic, no. Instead we must accept this as an article of faith from a few fans.

It's strongly suggested in the comic itself that the overall belief is that Elliot died at the hands of Ock and was innocent.

And the flow of information isn't the issue. It's the interpretation of that information.

-- Point out Anna Maria's statement about Peter's love life is ridiculous and OOC, we get Soviet-style whataboutism comparing it to Aunt May and so on. (Never mind that Aunt May, who was presented as prejudiced to Anna Maria in Slott's own run and who raised Peter is probably who you might want to blame for Peter's supposedly shallow romantic life).

Boy, so much butt hurt over the suggestion that Peter likes hot women. You'd think Anna accused Peter of murder.

And comparing Anna's defense of Ock to May's defense of Ock is simply a suggestion that Gage might have that history in the back of his head. He may not have.

But certainly, it was once a staple of the comic that May - also a romantic interest of Otto's at one time - would jump to Otto's defense.

-- Point out that Gage's run was a sales failure. It was apparently intended to earn the exact number of comics it did, and it ending at 12 issues was a plan all along even if it wasn't announced as a maxi-series.

Yes, it appears that was the plan.

The kind of defenses offered by Slott's fans is worthy of a Trump administration spokesman.

No one's really talking about Slott here. We're mostly talking about Gage's run and his last issue in particular.

FNSM by Tom Taylor didn't sell out Hickman's HoXPoX but it got an extension. So I don't think that's a good argument at all. For that matter Dennis Hallum's PS4 game time in sold well enough that it got extended series that wasn't planned out because it did better than people expected. And better than Gage's Superior.

Given that this series had a very specific goal, extending it wouldn't really be in the cards.

It's a different situation than Taylor's FNS, which would be a little easier to draw out.

And extending FNS is still not giving it that much longer of a life span. It did well enough to do a few more issues than planned.

Then why does she care about who Peter dates then? Again that makes zero sense.

There's no indication that Anna "cares." She's just making an observation.

Anna's character is the moral center in this series. For her to voice this, it comes from a place of privilege and as such causes dangers in legitimizing noxious and toxic ideas.

Hahaha! Yes, an off-hand comment from a supporting character in a comic definitely presents a danger in "legitimizing noxious and toxic ideas."

You can not agree with Anna's assessment of Peter's love life and still not find it so deeply troubling and offensive that you attempt to portray it as dangerous.

That's just silly.

[Celgress]

Yes and...?
Everything about this concept was stupid and overstayed it's welcome.

In your opinion, you don't speak for anyone but yourself none of us do. Just because you felt the concept had no value doesn't make your statement correct. For example, I didn't give a flipping f about Doc Ock until Superior when I learned he could be a pretty interesting, complex character. If the purpose was to make Ock relevant again to the Spidey Mythos the Superior concept was an unqualified success by any measure.

Also, Superior is what brought me back to Spider-Man comics after OMD. I was a lapsed fan who had become thoroughly disillusioned with Spider-Man until Superior caught my interest because it was so different than most of the BND reset crap we'd gotten up to that point.

[Celgress]

This issue has left me heartbroken. Not since Superman's death have I felt so empty after reading a comic book. While the story itself was well done what it wrought felt like a punch to my gut. Alas, poor Superior Spider-Man you deserved better than to be unceremoniously erased, my friend.

Farewell to the best modern other Spider-Man, bar none.

[Bloxer]

In your opinion, you don't speak for anyone but yourself none of us do. Just because you felt the concept had no value doesn't make your statement correct. For example, I didn't give a flipping f about Doc Ock until Superior when I learned he could be a pretty interesting, complex character. If the purpose was to make Ock relevant again to the Spidey Mythos the Superior concept was an unqualified success by any measure.

Also, Superior is what brought me back to Spider-Man comics after OMD. I was a lapsed fan who had become thoroughly disillusioned with Spider-Man until Superior caught my interest because it was so different than most of the BND reset crap we'd gotten up to that point.

You're failing to convince me of anything Ock was already relevant, he was already a top contender for Spider-Man's aarchnemesis, he's already one of Spider-Man's most famous well-known villains, he was already a character who shows up in almost every Spider-Man adaptation, so Ock was already an interesting character most people liked, superior did nothing but degrade him to nothing more than a Peter Parker wannabe with a bad costume, and the entire thing was nothing more than a publicity stunt the fact you fell for it doesn't give it value, it just reminds us why they keep doing things like this

[Celgress]

You're failing to convince me of anything Ock was already relevant...

I'm not trying to convince you (or anyone else) of anything. I'm only saying you should not make blanket statements. I honestly can't think of an interesting Otto story for more than twenty years before Superior (aside from the build-up to that event). He was wallowing in obscurity until Superior,

[Bloxer]

I'm not trying to convince you (or anyone else) of anything. I'm only saying you should not make blanket statements. I honestly can't think of an interesting Otto story for more than twenty years before Superior (aside from the build-up to that event). He was wallowing in obscurity until Superior,

Now you're just making stuff up.
If there's one Ock isn't it's obscure, and it sure as hell ain't because of this marketing stunt.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I suggest that it might have been part of Gage's thinking because, obviously, he's read all the same books. It may not have, which I said. That doesn't have to have been on Gage's mind at all for me to mention the similarities.

Well I said Hickman might not have had time to read Slott's stuff. I used qualifications to avoid making definite statements too. You still brought this up. So it's hypocritical on your part to use that as an argument.

And while Gage may not have intended for Anna to be "wrong" here, he also isn't making a be-all, end-all statement on Peter's nature.

If there's nothing to counter or qualify that, and there isn't, then it must be seen as a definite statement of writer's intent especially since the character is the moral voice of the stories leading up to that moment.

It's simply Anna's observation and, from her point of view, a correct one.

No it's not. From her point of view, Peter was a victim exploited by Otto who had his life wrecked by a conman who committed identity theft and who repaired his life to normalcy with considerable difficulty, and who also befriended her and helped her around and defended her against his Aunt who behaved obnoxiously to her.

She has absolutely no grounds to make such a statement. She has grounds to say mean things about Aunt May certainly, but not Peter.

Writers have characters express many points of view. It doesn't mean that they personally agree with each and every one of them.

This is going into Trumpian reasoning. Why don't you simply admit that yes Gage believes that, Anna is his mouthpiece, and that this is a valid argument and use...Why not make the actual case, instead of pretending and denying that he doesn't mean this. Because he obviously does. The public statements are there for everyone to hear and it's identical to what Anna says there. Make the actual case instead of using circular reasoning to pretend that it isn't there.

Comparing Taylor's run on FNS and Gage's run on SSM isn't exactly fair. If both were writing a book with Peter as the lead it would be more comparable to measure their respective sales.

How would the original Superior Spider-Man have sold if there was a 616 Spider-Man title on the stands? We don't have an answer for that when it was out originally but we have a comparative case now...where Superior Ock sold poorly against every Peter title on the market. So once that reality is here, we have people pretending this isn't so or it didn't happen.

Characters are allowed to make jerk-ish statements. You don't have to take everything they say as gospel.

There's nothing to suggest in that scene or moment that Anna was intended by Gage to be jerkish. If you believe this is so, work with the scene in question and make your case.

Weird how you constantly project sh*tty motives on to people where there's absolutely no evidence to suggest they would behave in such petty ways.

There are plenty of writers, writers of talent and so on, who have used comics to settle scores, voice grudges and throw stones at colleagues. It's as old as the hills. John Byrne's famous Fantastic Four #258, "Interlude" (which also happens to be a favorite comic of Slott's) was inspired by John Byrne's grudge against Chris Claremont over Doom's appearance in an Uncanny X-Men title.

In context, Anna Maria saying a statement can absolutely be read as an attack by Gage on characters which are in print in market and which are also doing better than his title.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Now you're just making stuff up.
If there's one Ock isn't it's obscure, and it sure as hell ain't because of this marketing stunt.

Great stories with Octopus in the 20 years before Superior Spider-Man came out in 2012-2013 include
-- Paul Jenkins Spectacular run where Otto fights Fusion and gruesomely crucifies him with oil and spikes.
-- Marvel Knights Spider-Man
-- JMS' run with Octopus fighting a corporate shark who tries to hijack his stuff and drives him into a rampage in LA.

If you consider AU then you have Brian Michael Bendis' Ultimate Clone Saga.

So Dr. Octopus was definitely not obscure.

And it's not much of an argument that Slott revived Otto as a villain if he spent a lot of the time in his run in a Spider-Man outfit, not using his mechanical arms, or looking like how Ditko did, or actually being a villain.

[Celgress]

Now you're just making stuff up.
If there's one Ock isn't it's obscure, and it sure as hell ain't because of this marketing stunt.

Nope, most people and critics agree Otto has not been this interesting in decades.

[Frontier]

And coming from a character who's a friend of Peter, it's nothing but a pure jerk move.

And even from a female perspective it also comes off like she's reducing MJ and Felicia to supermodels or sexy girls without depth.

[Celgress]

Great stories with Octopus in the 20 years before Superior Spider-Man came out in 2012-2013 include
-- Paul Jenkins Spectacular run where Otto fights Fusion and gruesomely crucifies him with oil and spikes.
-- Marvel Knights Spider-Man
-- JMS' run with Octopus fighting a corporate shark who tries to hijack his stuff and drives him into a rampage in LA.

If you consider AU then you have Brian Michael Bendis' Ultimate Clone Saga.

So Dr. Octopus was definitely not obscure.

And it's not much of an argument that Slott revived Otto as a villain if he spent a lot of the time in his run in a Spider-Man outfit, not using his mechanical arms, or looking like how Ditko did, or actually being a villain.

None of those were interesting stories, IMO. Other than his pre-Amazing #400 death Otto's character had been reduced to a cackling two-dimensional cardboard cut out until Superior.

Edit - If someone hates Superior that is their right what I can 't abide is those who demean the very concept and scoff how anyone could enjoy it. Let people have their opinions there is no need to be so demeaning, or dare I say superior.

[Inversed]

Yeah, no bother attempting to credit Taylor for his success which has been critically well-received especially for the Spider-Bite issues and FNSM#12 among others. Far moreso than Gage has been.

Except Superior has been just as critically well-received as FNSM, look back at several of the previous posts in this forum and you see people saying they like the book even better than Spencer's Amazing. (Also look back and you see alot of people dissing and being underwhelmed at Taylor's work).

Say whatever you want now, but to say that people have always been loving Taylor and that no one's been loving Gage's work is being in complete denial.

Well you see people like Slott and Gage appear to believe that a person's good looks are the most important things about it. If a woman is attractive there doesn't need to be depth or deep qualities. So stuff like actual stories which people read don't count.

In context it seems like a huge jerk move on the part of Gage because Black Cat has an ongoing (that's been quite successful, far moreso than his), and MJ got back together with Peter in Spencer's ASM which is one of the main selling points of his run, and has now gotten a miniseries.

It's a classic example of a low-selling title writer talking smack about his colleague's better selling stuff. Typical sour grapes.

Meanwhile in reality, I guarantee Nick Spencer or Jed MacKay are no where near as offended at this one-off line as you have been, nor Gage wrote this as some kind of "take that" at other's success. Just because you're mad doesn't mean everyone else is.

Great stories with Octopus in the 20 years before Superior Spider-Man came out in 2012-2013 include
-- Paul Jenkins Spectacular run where Otto fights Fusion and gruesomely crucifies him with oil and spikes.
-- Marvel Knights Spider-Man
-- JMS' run with Octopus fighting a corporate shark who tries to hijack his stuff and drives him into a rampage in LA.

If you consider AU then you have Brian Michael Bendis' Ultimate Clone Saga.

So Dr. Octopus was definitely not obscure.

And it's not much of an argument that Slott revived Otto as a villain if he spent a lot of the time in his run in a Spider-Man outfit, not using his mechanical arms, or looking like how Ditko did, or actually being a villain.

I would personally consider Last Legs, Origin Of The Species, Ends Of The Earth, and Dying Wish are better pre-Superior Otto centric stories than those (three of which written by Slott).

[Revolutionary_Jack]

And even from a female perspective it also comes off like she's reducing MJ and Felicia to supermodels or sexy girls without depth.

More than that, Anna Maria doesn't really know either of them. They hardly interacted. So it's kind of absurd and bizarre for her to say stuff like that. IF Anna Maria had said something mean about Aunt May it would have made sense because May did treat her badly.

And you know it would have made more sense to do that since Otto did date Aunt May before Anna Maria, so attacking Otto's ex makes sense. But here she's attacking Spider-Man who was kind to her and through Spider-Man attacking people she doesn't know but who obviously mean a great deal to him, and doing that behind his back in conversation with a terrorist who ruined Peter's life. In real life we call people of that kind jerks.

Edit - If someone hates Superior that is their right what I can 't abide is those who demean the very concept and scoff how anyone could enjoy it. Let people have their opinions there is no need to be so demeaning, or dare I say superior.

You are in contradiction. Attacking and demeaning Otto stories before Superior and then saying people who feel that way about those stories should not treat Superior the same way. You can't scoff at Jenkins, JMS, Millar and Bendis' take on Otto and then say people who like those shouldn't do the same with Superior.

So far I've not come against an actual defense of Superior Spider-Man. Anytime there's criticism what we get is that it sold well (back in 2013 and not now). As if the idea of a comic selling well and still being bad is a foreign concept. And then you have people making dubious arguments.
-- If someone says that Otto isn't redeemable, people say that's the point he's not supposed to be redeemable.
-- But if other fans then complain about character development being ruined and so on...and these same defenders don't correct their fellow fans by telling them "Otto was never a good guy, he was the same villainous guy before as he was now and so on".
-- When Rorschach became popular, Alan Moore and other Watchmen fans never stopped to remind Rorschach fans that their hero is not entirely an admirable guy and so on. We don't see that happen with Superior. It's like Otto is meant to be seen as both Redeemable and Non-Redeemable as a kind of all-you-can-have-and-eat dessert table.
-- Which basically means that there's a lack of real moral conviction there.

None of those were interesting stories, IMO. Other than his pre-Amazing #400 death Otto's character had been reduced to a cackling two-dimensional cardboard cut out until Superior.

As opposed to him being a two-dimensional cardboard cut-out anti-hero after Superior.

[Prof. Warren]

Whether Gage intended it or not, that's kind of how it does read in context.

Because Anna Maria doesn't know Black Cat and Mary Jane. Peter wasn't dating either when she knew him. So it makes no sense for her to specifically invoke those two characters. Gage who wrote the end of Superior Spider-Man and was a close collaborator of Slott's also knows this. So in context it reads like an attack on the current status-quo of Peter Parker by a guy who wrote the previous one.



I am not attacking Gage. I am attacking his work and pointing out that it looks bad if you see it in context.

No, it doesn't look bad at all. It is completely irrational and out of bounds to ascribe base, petty motivations to a writer who has zero public history of being anything other than a nice guy simply because they wrote a line of dialogue that rubbed you the wrong way.

[Junco]

I guess Anna Maria was the real Otto Octavius all along.