Spider-Men

[CrimsonEchidna]

I didn't dislike Miles meeting Ultimate Peter but that arc felt too much like Bendis couldn't help himself with the resurrections.

Yeah, I saw Peter's ressurection as the first sign of Bendis throwing food at the wall to see what would stick. Something that would pretty much continue to when he started writing Miles' 616 book. In hindsight, I really feel that another writer should've been the one to write Miles' Post-Secret Wars books. I know Bendis wanted to continue writing his baby, but he clearly hit that creative wall before Secret War even happened.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Yeah, I saw Peter's ressurection as the first sign of Bendis throwing food at the wall to see what would stick.

I *liked* Ultimate Peter's resurrection. And to be honest "throwing food at the wall" is more ULTIMATUM than Bendis.

Something that would pretty much continue to when he started writing Miles' 616 book. In hindsight, I really feel that another writer should've been the one to write Miles' Post-Secret Wars books. I know Bendis wanted to continue writing his baby, but he clearly hit that creative wall before Secret War even happened.

One of his best stuff is the Post-SW Infamous Iron Man series with Doom so I disagree. And I like the 616 Miles book he wrote for the most part.

[Inversed]

Spider-Men I had to thread too many stuff in a needle. It's got many big ideas that by themselves are worth doing in an extended story-arc all done side-by-side in a single story arc. Like Peter coming into an universe where he's dead and beloved as a great hero...that's a great 6-7 story arc right there. However it also becomes the first 616-Ultimate Marvel crossover which ideally needs a big scale (like Secret Wars 2015) to pull that off...so that brings in Fury and his fellow a--holes. It also becomes a story about Miles meeting "a" Peter for the first time. Not his Peter, and that becomes also a story about May, Gwen, and MJ meeting this Peter. So it's a mess.

I dunno, I would argue Spider-Men II is the much clearer example of threading too much at once, since its whole reason for existing is to answer a question that the book itself isn't even too sure of answering. Who 616 Miles is, what his connection to Spidey Miles is, how this all connects to Spidey Miles' past and the Ultimate Universe, as well as throwing in Peter & Miles' growing relationship + reaffirming Miles' place as Spider-Man in this world. Either they needed more time, or focusing on one or the other. The Generations: Spider-Man issue handled the latter much better overall.

One of his best stuff is the Post-SW Infamous Iron Man series with Doom so I disagree. And I like the 616 Miles book he wrote for the most part.

Bendis' problem has always been due to the fact he writes 5-6 series at once, it's always a crabshoot what you're going to get from him, considering how many plates he's spinning at once. Because Post-SW, you have absolute greats like the first arc of Invincible Iron Man, Infamous Iron Man, Jessica Jones, most of Miles 616, and Defenders, but then you have some disappointments like Guardians Of The Galaxy, the rest of Invincible Iron Man, the end of Miles 616, Spider-Men II, and Civil War II.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I dunno, I would argue Spider-Men II is the much clearer example of threading too much at once, since its whole reason for existing is to answer a question that the book itself isn't even too sure of answering. Who 616 Miles is, what his connection to Spidey Miles is, how this all connects to Spidey Miles' past and the Ultimate Universe, as well as throwing in Peter & Miles' growing relationship + reaffirming Miles' place as Spider-Man in this world. Either they needed more time, or focusing on one or the other. The Generations: Spider-Man issue handled the latter much better overall.

Well there the overall intent was to confirm and resolve once and for all that Ultimate Miles will always and forever be 616 going forward. That he's not going back to the Ultimate Universe. So once that intent is clear, the rest of the book falls into place. At least for me it does.

Bendis' problem has always been due to the fact he writes 5-6 series at once, it's always a crabshoot what you're going to get from him, considering how many plates he's spinning at once. Because Post-SW, you have absolute greats like the first arc of Invincible Iron Man, Infamous Iron Man, Jessica Jones, most of Miles 616, and Defenders, but then you have some disappointments like Guardians Of The Galaxy, the rest of Invincible Iron Man, the end of Miles 616, Spider-Men II, and Civil War II.

Yeah that's fair. I think the general uncontroversial opinion is that Bendis is better at stuff like Daredevil, USM and other projects which do a deep-dive on a single project and that him being given the keys to the whole universe was a mistake, starting from New Avengers onwards. Mistake in terms of writing and so on, not necessarily in terms of sales. Someone like Jonathan Hickman was able to do that better since his strengths play to that and his stuff sells big too.

My favorite stuff of Bendis is USM, Daredevil, Alias, The Pulse, Infamous Iron Man, and also the Ultimate Enemy Trilogy which made Ultimate Reed into a villain (albeit it took Hickman to transform Ult. Reed into The Maker).

[Frontier]

Well, it did confirm on page that the original Nick Fury is lame compared to the Samuel L. Jackson version.

At least he's not Marcus Johnson .

Although that line really only works because Ultimate Fury is a tool.

That's actually the weakest part of Spider-Men I, all the interactions with the extended Ultimate Universe. That was typical of the worst part of Ultimate Marvel where practically every story becomes about SHIELD and Ultimate Fury (for me blowing up SHIELD in Captain America: The Winter Soldier was super-cathartic because it was a f--k you to the Ultimate Marvel "all-powerful all-knowing" idea of the organization).

At least it was true to the universe.

That's why I like Spider-Men II...that was just a story of Miles and 616 Peter and for the first time established some kind of bond between them. And in fact, ITSV probably drew more from that then Spider-Men I at least in terms of dynamic.

if that had actually felt like the main focus and premise of the book, I might have enjoyed it more.

Spider-Men I had to thread too many stuff in a needle. It's got many big ideas that by themselves are worth doing in an extended story-arc all done side-by-side in a single story arc. Like Peter coming into an universe where he's dead and beloved as a great hero...that's a great 6-7 story arc right there. However it also becomes the first 616-Ultimate Marvel crossover which ideally needs a big scale (like Secret Wars 2015) to pull that off...so that brings in Fury and his fellow a--holes. It also becomes a story about Miles meeting "a" Peter for the first time. Not his Peter, and that becomes also a story about May, Gwen, and MJ meeting this Peter. So it's a mess.

Execution-wise it felt more focused on then Spider-Men II did in my opinion.

I *liked* Ultimate Peter's resurrection. And to be honest "throwing food at the wall" is more ULTIMATUM than Bendis.

"Because apparently the Spider-Bite makes us immortal!" I mean, I was happy to see Ultimate Pete get his happy ending, but it felt a bit much.

One of his best stuff is the Post-SW Infamous Iron Man series with Doom so I disagree. And I like the 616 Miles book he wrote for the most part.

I was never wowed by Bendis' voice for Doom across that entire run. Zdarsky wrote a better IIM Doom.

616 Miles's book was solid but there was just a lot of half-baked or underdeveloped stuff. Probably one of the biggest wastes of the Sinister Six in a Spider-Man arc.

[Snoop Dogg]

It was okay. Pichelli!

[your_name_here]

I really enjoyed it, and still do. It was just nice and fun, which is what Spider-Man should be (at times)...but held a balance of emotional weight with Aunt May/Peter and drama with the threat of Mysterio.

I thought Spider-Men II was awful, but I think ITSV used it very loosely as motivation for Kingpin.

[WebLurker]

That's actually the weakest part of Spider-Men I, all the interactions with the extended Ultimate Universe. That was typical of the worst part of Ultimate Marvel where practically every story becomes about SHIELD and Ultimate Fury (for me blowing up SHIELD in Captain America: The Winter Soldier was super-cathartic because it was a f--k you to the Ultimate Marvel "all-powerful all-knowing" idea of the organization).

That's why I like Spider-Men II...that was just a story of Miles and 616 Peter and for the first time established some kind of bond between them. And in fact, ITSV probably drew more from that then Spider-Men I at least in terms of dynamic.

Spider-Men I had to thread too many stuff in a needle. It's got many big ideas that by themselves are worth doing in an extended story-arc all done side-by-side in a single story arc. Like Peter coming into an universe where he's dead and beloved as a great hero...that's a great 6-7 story arc right there. However it also becomes the first 616-Ultimate Marvel crossover which ideally needs a big scale (like Secret Wars 2015) to pull that off...so that brings in Fury and his fellow a--holes. It also becomes a story about Miles meeting "a" Peter for the first time. Not his Peter, and that becomes also a story about May, Gwen, and MJ meeting this Peter. So it's a mess.

I will freely agree that Into the Spider-Verse did everything far better then the comics it was based on.

At least he's not Marcus Johnson .

Although that line really only works because Ultimate Fury is a tool.

Yeah, Ultimate Fury doesn't really have that many redeeming qualities, unlike the MCU version, which is basically what "Nick Fury" has become. Heck, I mean, the Marcus Johnson Nick Fury is basically written like Jackson these days, from what I've seen.

[Frontier]

Yeah, Ultimate Fury doesn't really have that many redeeming qualities, unlike the MCU version, which is basically what "Nick Fury" has become. Heck, I mean, the Marcus Johnson Nick Fury is basically written like Jackson these days, from what I've seen.

In the long-run I think MCU Fury is more like 616!Fury then the Ultimate version ended up being, at least by the end.

Johnson feels more like a kid pretending to be Jackson from all I've read of him.

[CrimsonEchidna]

In the long-run I think MCU Fury is more like 616!Fury then the Ultimate version ended up being, at least by the end.

I get teh feeling that Bendis and Mark Millar didn't see eye to eye on how exactly they wanted Ultimate Fury to be. I'd say MCU is closer to Bendis' interpretation he'd write in Ultimate Spider-Man since he was way more personable. Milar made damn near everyone an unlikable jackass in Ultimates lol

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Jackson's Fury is a nicer guy than Ultimate Fury...but he's also somehow a less impressive character because he's the not the protagonist of the universe. In Ultimate Marvel...Nick Fury was the protagonist of the entire line, the guy around whom everything centered or revolved around. Samuel Jackson's Fury could never take that role in the MCU, so the character they ran with, as seen in CAPTAIN MARVEL, is "an office jockey and nerd who pretends to be a much tougher and much smarter guy than he actually is and mostly just bluffs his way through."

So I am not sure if that's an improvement...if you want to see more Sam Jackson, probably not. If you want a nicer Fury, than yes.

[Alan2099]

Jackson's Fury is a nicer guy than Ultimate Fury...but he's also somehow a less impressive character because he's the not the protagonist of the universe. In Ultimate Marvel...Nick Fury was the protagonist of the entire line, the guy around whom everything centered or revolved around. Samuel Jackson's Fury could never take that role in the MCU, so the character they ran with, as seen in CAPTAIN MARVEL, is "an office jockey and nerd who pretends to be a much tougher and much smarter guy than he actually is and mostly just bluffs his way through."

So I am not sure if that's an improvement...if you want to see more Sam Jackson, probably not. If you want a nicer Fury, than yes.

Considering none of these movies are called Nick Fury, I'd rather he be a likable supporting cast member than the guy the entire universe revolves around.

(That's not to say I wouldn't watch a Nick Fury: Agent of SHIELD movie.)

[Frontier]

I get teh feeling that Bendis and Mark Millar didn't see eye to eye on how exactly they wanted Ultimate Fury to be. I'd say MCU is closer to Bendis' interpretation he'd write in Ultimate Spider-Man since he was way more personable. Milar made damn near everyone an unlikable jackass in Ultimates lol

I agree. Although it probably helped Bendis that his Fury was pretty much focused on Peter and Ultimate Peter was probably one of the few people Ultimate Fury actually cared about.

Jackson's Fury is a nicer guy than Ultimate Fury...but he's also somehow a less impressive character because he's the not the protagonist of the universe. In Ultimate Marvel...Nick Fury was the protagonist of the entire line, the guy around whom everything centered or revolved around. Samuel Jackson's Fury could never take that role in the MCU, so the character they ran with, as seen in CAPTAIN MARVEL, is "an office jockey and nerd who pretends to be a much tougher and much smarter guy than he actually is and mostly just bluffs his way through."

So I am not sure if that's an improvement...if you want to see more Sam Jackson, probably not. If you want a nicer Fury, than yes.

I don't think Ultimate Fury was all that great a protagonist, if he even really was that to begin with, so I don't mind. I think MCU Fury is much more then that description though.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Considering none of these movies are called Nick Fury, I'd rather he be a likable supporting cast member than the guy the entire universe revolves around.

I agree. I mean Ultimate Marvel had this thing where every story tended to become a SHIELD story. The X-Men...SHIELD. Spider-Man...SHIELD. The Ultimates...SHIELD. So somehow everything was about Fury.

It shows the pitfalls of having stuff be too interconnected in a shared universe. In Marvel, yes there's a shared universe on paper but the spirit is that every character has their own corner and are measured on how well they stand on their own. Do it too much and too often, and nothing feels separate, and everything becomes a SHIELD story, and so the story of Nick Fury.

This was the major weakness of Spider-Men I, rather than be a story about Spider-Man 616 and Miles Morales 1610, it also has to again be a SHIELD story and have Ultimate Nick Fury pop up.

The MCU for the most part have avoided that. The exception is Spider-Man, which is very much a case of it becoming a Tony Stark story rather than a Spider-Man story in the shared universe.

[Frontier]

SHIELD was only in a small quarter of the book.