Amazing Spider-Man #1 preview

[Mercwmouth12]

The FF device is used by Peter after the Four refuse to help him and he doesn't know how to control it. Clearly he was on a mission that was costing him because he had no time for their refusal. Johnny even says it himself, Peter was 'screwing up his life' with his mission.

The being in light told Peter a trail of blood led him to Peter and MJ. Somehow that doesn't really translate to 'they went somewhere with him, lived happily, had kids, and came back, then MJ took the kids and walked", it's nice to think of Peter and MJ having kids, but you still have to follow that up with the fact Peter's now a deadbeat dad who's told to keep away by the mother. No amount of swerving from Wells can make that a good look for anybody.

Sad thing is that there's even a precedent for that, as Zdarsky had no problem having MJ pull a similar stunt in Life Story, and it took Peter a decade to realize what he was missing in life.

Sound theories but also we're coming up with these possibilities and we know no matter what it will be something dumb ahnf when this all said and done things will go back to normal as was before witj them together and life story it was each issue was in a different decade and if they did go with the absent father route it will be much faster. Here we can see Peter knows what he's missing in his life and even has a list of things he needs to do and repair his most important relationship is one of them

[TinkerSpider]

The most popular Marvel characters will always snap back to status quo. Always have and always will. This isn't my argument, it's a fact.

You're right.

But you're wrong about what Peter's status quo is.

Peter's status quo isn't his original situation, as you seem to keep arguing but then also leave out living with Aunt May and attending high school, as after all that was how he was initially introduced.

Peter's status quo is, "With Great Power There Must Also Come Great Responsibility."

Peter should always have a tension between doing the right thing and the cost of doing the right thing. In fact, that's Parker Luck - not that Peter is fated to always be a broke struggling bum, but that Peter can't win as Spider-Man AND as Peter Parker at the same time. THAT's his initial status quo: Peter Parker has big win in the wrestling match, he lets the burglar go because not his job (thus failing as a superhero) and Peter loses his uncle as a result. Peter dates Betty Brant (win) but she hates Spider-Man (loss). Peter meets Mary Jane (win), Mary Jane suggests they go to the Rhino rampage (oooh! Maybe Peter and Spider-Man can both win if they date MJ), Spidey defeats the Rhino (win for Spidey), but Aunt May is sick and Peter must break his next date with MJ which she is totally cool with (loss).

Nick Spencer spelled it out at the start of his run. Peter and Spider-Man each cost the other, but together they are greater than if Peter chose to be one or the other. So Peter will always walk a balancing act and inevitably fail as one or the other takes precedence. And sometimes that affects his living situation and sometimes that affects his personal relationships and sometimes that affects his job and sometimes that affects his ability to superhero. That's where the story tension comes in, not, "Oh look, Peter is having a good day but ho hum, he must be miserable at the end of it."

I sincerely believe the issue is that for ten years Amazing Spider-Man was written by an author who pretty much spat on "With Great Power, etc" in favor of making Peter an irresponsible manbaby, and now some believe that's the status quo for the character when it is the furthest thing from actuality.

[Sr. Bungle]

You're right.

But you're wrong about what Peter's status quo is.

Peter's status quo isn't his original situation, as you seem to keep arguing but then also leave out living with Aunt May and attending high school, as after all that was how he was initially introduced.

Peter's status quo is, "With Great Power There Must Also Come Great Responsibility."

Peter should always have a tension between doing the right thing and the cost of doing the right thing. In fact, that's Parker Luck - not that Peter is fated to always be a broke struggling bum, but that Peter can't win as Spider-Man AND as Peter Parker at the same time. THAT's his initial status quo: Peter Parker has big win in the wrestling match, he lets the burglar go because not his job (thus failing as a superhero) and Peter loses his uncle as a result. Peter dates Betty Brant (win) but she hates Spider-Man (loss). Peter meets Mary Jane (win), Mary Jane suggests they go to the Rhino rampage (oooh! Maybe Peter and Spider-Man can both win if they date MJ), Spidey defeats the Rhino (win for Spidey), but Aunt May is sick and Peter must break his next date with MJ which she is totally cool with (loss).

Nick Spencer spelled it out at the start of his run. Peter and Spider-Man each cost the other, but together they are greater than if Peter chose to be one or the other. So Peter will always walk a balancing act and inevitably fail as one or the other takes precedence. And sometimes that affects his living situation and sometimes that affects his personal relationships and sometimes that affects his job and sometimes that affects his ability to superhero. That's where the story tension comes in, not, "Oh look, Peter is having a good day but ho hum, he must be miserable at the end of it."

I sincerely believe the issue is that for ten years Amazing Spider-Man was written by an author who pretty much spat on "With Great Power, etc" in favor of making Peter an irresponsible manbaby, and now some believe that's the status quo for the character when it is the furthest thing from actuality.

Beautifuly said

[Refrax5]

You're right.

But you're wrong about what Peter's status quo is.

Peter's status quo isn't his original situation, as you seem to keep arguing but then also leave out living with Aunt May and attending high school, as after all that was how he was initially introduced.

Peter's status quo is, "With Great Power There Must Also Come Great Responsibility."

Peter should always have a tension between doing the right thing and the cost of doing the right thing. In fact, that's Parker Luck - not that Peter is fated to always be a broke struggling bum, but that Peter can't win as Spider-Man AND as Peter Parker at the same time. THAT's his initial status quo: Peter Parker has big win in the wrestling match, he lets the burglar go because not his job (thus failing as a superhero) and Peter loses his uncle as a result. Peter dates Betty Brant (win) but she hates Spider-Man (loss). Peter meets Mary Jane (win), Mary Jane suggests they go to the Rhino rampage (oooh! Maybe Peter and Spider-Man can both win if they date MJ), Spidey defeats the Rhino (win for Spidey), but Aunt May is sick and Peter must break his next date with MJ which she is totally cool with (loss).

Nick Spencer spelled it out at the start of his run. Peter and Spider-Man each cost the other, but together they are greater than if Peter chose to be one or the other. So Peter will always walk a balancing act and inevitably fail as one or the other takes precedence. And sometimes that affects his living situation and sometimes that affects his personal relationships and sometimes that affects his job and sometimes that affects his ability to superhero. That's where the story tension comes in, not, "Oh look, Peter is having a good day but ho hum, he must be miserable at the end of it."

I sincerely believe the issue is that for ten years Amazing Spider-Man was written by an author who pretty much spat on "With Great Power, etc" in favor of making Peter an irresponsible manbaby, and now some believe that's the status quo for the character when it is the furthest thing from actuality.

That is absolutely spot on.

[Lee]

You're right.

But you're wrong about what Peter's status quo is.

Peter's status quo isn't his original situation, as you seem to keep arguing but then also leave out living with Aunt May and attending high school, as after all that was how he was initially introduced.

Peter's status quo is, "With Great Power There Must Also Come Great Responsibility."

Marvel disagrees with you. They think there's more to the premise of Spider-Man than simply a catchphrase. Peter also has to be a young guy who struggles with the things young people do, often as a consequence of him choosing to be Spider-Man. He also lives in New York City. He's a science whizz. These are all parts of the default setting for Spider-Man. Always have been.

If your views on the character don't align with Marvel's, there's not really anything you can do about it. Spider-Man is never going to be the kind of comic series you want it to be, at least not in the long run. It will always be cyclical.

[TinkerSpider]

Marvel disagrees with you. They think there's more to the premise of Spider-Man than simply a catchphrase. Peter also has to be a young guy who struggles with the things young people do, often as a consequence of him choosing to be Spider-Man. He also lives in New York City. He's a science whizz. These are all parts of the default setting for Spider-Man. Always have been.

If your views on the character don't align with Marvel's, there's not really anything you can do about it. Spider-Man is never going to be the kind of comic series you want it to be, at least not in the long run. It will always be cyclical.

The first problem is calling it a catchphrase when it's a theme.

Just as FF is about family. That's the status quo and that's what it is about.

Just as Iron Man is about the tension between Tony's id and superego in Freudian terms - or put it another way, Tony's tendency toward meglomania and the rest of the world. That's the status quo and that's what it is about.

Living in New York City is a setting. Peter can live elsewhere. He did, in the Worldwide arc. The only reason why that arc didn't work is because Slott sucked at executing it. (And also because NYC is one of the few settings that allows for webslinging. I always doubted Ben would move to LA, because LA just doesn't have skyscrapers the way NYC does.)

Being a science whizz is part of Peter's intellect, but it's not his indelible profession. In fact, being a photographer and freelancing for the Daily Bugle has been Peter's professional status FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR longer than working as a scientist or doing much other than failing his science classes (a loss for Peter because he had to fight and ultimately win as Spider-Man. See how that works?). Interesting how you left "Daily Bugle photographer" out of what Peter "must" be, since you're so insistent he must remain stuck as he was when Lee first wrote him.

If your views on storytelling and characterization don't align with how characterization and storytelling actually work and how readers comprehend and consume fiction, well, there's not really anything you can do about it. *shrug*. I appreciate the use of the logical fallacy appeal to authority by invoking Marvel, but as Nick Spencer's run showed, Marvel has no problem with Peter written as a competent adult and having wins in his personal life (which were counteracted by losses as Spidey as Kindred sought their revenge).

[phonogram12]

Peter also has to be a young guy who struggles with the things young people do, often as a consequence of him choosing to be Spider-Man...These are all parts of the default setting for Spider-Man. Always have been.

Yeah, this has been baked into the DNA of Spider-Man since forever now. I recently bought the old '67 cartoon on DVD and so far I've only come across one episode that dealt with his personal life where it was an actual happy ending for him. Pretty much every other one was about him having to sacrifice that part of his life to save the city of whatever. Hell, it even seemed to be the main theme of No Way Home with both Tom and Andrew's version of the character. This is why I have to entirely agree on his progress being two steps forward one step back.

On a related note, this is also the reason that I think if he and MJ ever had children, she should pass away while they are still newborns. This would pretty much encompass this theme perfectly as an adult Peter.

[Lee]

Living in New York City is a setting. Peter can live elsewhere.

In theory, yes. In reality, no, I wouldn't count on it. Batman will always live in Gotham City. Superman will always live in Metropolis. The Simpsons will always live in Springfield. Peter Parker will always live in New York City. He might live elsewhere for a little while, for the sake of a storyline, then things will snap back to the standard and he'll be living in New York City again.

The current subplot with Norman Osborn being free of his sins and trying to make amends is also temporary. Norman will become the villainous Green Goblin again before long.

Spider-Man isn't the kind of comic series where Peter will move away from New York City permanently. It isn't the kind of comic series where Norman Osborn will become a good guy permanently. It isn't the kind of comic series where Peter will settle down and become a mature adult with a stable life permanently.

[Matt Rat]

On a related note, this is also the reason that I think if he and MJ ever had children, she should pass away while they are still newborns. This would pretty much encompass this theme perfectly as an adult Peter.

Already tackled in Earth X and in Abrams Spider-Man title.

This is why I have to entirely agree on his progress being two steps forward one step back.

Depending on what canon you read, it's always been several steps forward. Peter isn't Charlie Brown. Charlie Brown isn't even always Charlie Brown.


And try watching something better than the lolcow that is 60s Spider-Man. Like Amazing Friends or the 90s cartoon

616 Peter isn't young btw. Experiences such as his would age anyone, and there's not a lot of young 'everyday' people that go through what he has in the last decade.

[Vortex85]

616 Peter isn't young btw. Experiences such as his would age anyone, and there's not a lot of young 'everyday' people that go through what he has in the last decade.

Right? All his peers are having children, from Harry, to Betty, and now MJ. Hard to say Marvel are keeping the illusion of the characters youth up. Hell, how old is Normie now? LOL

[The_Sneezing_Stormtrooper]

Marvel disagrees with you. They think there's more to the premise of Spider-Man than simply a catchphrase. Peter also has to be a young guy who struggles with the things young people do, often as a consequence of him choosing to be Spider-Man. He also lives in New York City. He's a science whizz. These are all parts of the default setting for Spider-Man. Always have been.

If your views on the character don't align with Marvel's, there's not really anything you can do about it. Spider-Man is never going to be the kind of comic series you want it to be, at least not in the long run. It will always be cyclical.

Even if this were true (which it isn't) I'd argue that Marvel then fails to understand what young 20-somethings struggle with and relate to. Even while in that demographic I always found the Spider-Man of the older comics to be more relatable and well rounded as opposed to the caricature that we've often been stuck with in the last decade and a half. It's pretty clear that I'm not the only reader of that age group who feels that way.

Even if you felt that keeping the character young is important it shouldn't be a catch all excuse for lame characterization and lazy cyclical plotting.

[TinkerSpider]

Marvel disagrees with you. Peter also has to be a young guy who struggles with the things young people do, often as a consequence of him choosing to be Spider-Man. .

That's exactly what I said: Peter's life as Spider-Man costs him as Peter; Peter's life as Peter costs him as Spider-Man. And that's something people of any age can identify with.

I don't know why you seem to think people here are calling for Peter to be seventy-three years old. You're the only one who has put forward the idea Peter must progress iteratively.

However, even Slott canonically set Peter's age at 29 in ASM Vol. 4 #1. And that was several time jumps ago.

Spider-Man isn't the kind of comic series where Peter will move away from New York City permanently. It isn't the kind of comic series where Norman Osborn will become a good guy permanently. It isn't the kind of comic series where Peter will settle down and become a mature adult with a stable life permanently.

No one has said anything about permanence, either. That's another straw man.

What we are pointing out is that Peter is allowed to have wins in his personal life, as Nick Spencer's run showed. His life isn't a constant sad sack mess (and I'd point out with a parental figure who is nearly always 100% supportive and loves him unconditionally, Peter is way ahead of a lot of people).

Of course Peter is going to have obstacles and conflicts and messy problems and fights with his loved ones and villians who have personal beefs with him. Of course he's always going to (or at least always should) ultimately choose his responsibilty to the greater good over his wants as Peter. (That's another reason why OMD doesn't work well. If Peter and MJ sacrificed their love in order to serve a greater good to the world, that's one thing. But Peter was forced to make a choice between his aunt and his wife which is a choice that only affects Peter personally. It....just doesn't resonate. That's why NHW's version is so, so, so much better.)

No one is asking for all conflict to be taken away. We all understand we're reading fiction.

Yeah, this has been baked into the DNA of Spider-Man since forever now. I recently bought the old '67 cartoon on DVD and so far I've only come across one episode that dealt with his personal life where it was an actual happy ending for him. Pretty much every other one was about him having to sacrifice that part of his life to save the city of whatever. Hell, it even seemed to be the main theme of No Way Home with both Tom and Andrew's version of the character. This is why I have to entirely agree on his progress being two steps forward one step back.

The theme was "With Great Power There Must Also Come Great Responsibilty." Peter tried to have wins both as Spider-Man and as Peter Parker by asking Dr. Strange to cast the spell causing people to forget he was Spider-Man, but kept adding people he wanted to keep in the know in his Peter Parker life. This, of course, backfired because Parker Luck (both sides can't win at the same time). In the end, Peter chose his responsibility as Spider-Man even when it costs him as Peter.

[Malachi]

The most popular Marvel characters will always snap back to status quo. Always have and always will. This isn't my argument, it's a fact.

You are just reiterating Joe Quesadas arguments. First step is, even if you feel you are right, to feel shame you are in the same team as him.

The big problem with this is that by large your argument is built on the either reinforcement or shaping that Joe did. What he considered to be the iconic status quo that Spider-man had to return to was more or less what he said. Some might argue points or the general point what that is. But this status quo has by time become dominant because he said so.

If we go by the general conciousness idea then Spider-Man is in either high school or college. We are at least sure he is in an education enivorement. Our Peter isn’t.

They want Peter to date but who should he date? Gwen is dead. Felicia for some reason he hasn’t dated in a very long time. MJ is the iconic girl. The problem for marvel was that she became to iconic. Peter dating morphed into Spider-Man dates MJ. So they broke that up to try to redone what iconic is and was.

Does he work at the Daily Bugle. This was iconic. JJ and Spider-Man taking photos of himself was iconic. But then media and news changed. Printed press is not doing so well. Everyone has a cellphone with a camera. Peoples habits changed. So this part who was a big part changed due to the world changing.

If we ever get into any discussion trying to decide what iconic is and it’s role in shaping comics we need to remember that it can be very hard to understand what is iconic and how should it shape the ever changing future.

[phonogram12]

The theme was "With Great Power There Must Also Come Great Responsibilty." Peter tried to have wins both as Spider-Man and as Peter Parker by asking Dr. Strange to cast the spell causing people to forget he was Spider-Man, but kept adding people he wanted to keep in the know in his Peter Parker life. This, of course, backfired because Parker Luck (both sides can't win at the same time). In the end, Peter chose his responsibility as Spider-Man even when it costs him as Peter.

Exactly, which is why I highlighted and bolded that particular part of Lee's post. Being Spider-Man clearly involves sacrifice, which is why his personal life often suffers because of it.

Already tackled in Earth X and in Abrams Spider-Man title.

The premise of each respective title didn't interest me in the least so I can't comment.

Depending on what canon you read, it's always been several steps forward. Peter isn't Charlie Brown. Charlie Brown isn't even always Charlie Brown.

I agree about Charlie Brown. But it's always one step back whenever Spidey's made a few steps forward. Again, it's practically baked into his DNA.

And try watching something better than the lolcow that is 60s Spider-Man. Like Amazing Friends or the 90s cartoon

I honestly never understood the hype about the '90s cartoon. I watched it as it was airing back in the '90s and found it incredibly overrated. It always felt melodramatic and the dialogue was often atrocious. The only thing it got right with me is adapting a few storylines, but through the melodrama and terrible dialogue, I really couldn't appreciate them the same way as I did the original comics they were based on. My trifecta of Spider-Man cartoons are the original (Stan Lee and I believe Steve Ditko served as consultants on it and the legendary animator Ralph Bakshi even worked on the second season), Amazing Friends, and Spectacular (which I also own on bluray and is - for lack of a better word - spectacular).

616 Peter isn't young btw. Experiences such as his would age anyone, and there's not a lot of young 'everyday' people that go through what he has in the last decade.

I mean, at most he's in his late 20s. Not everyone has their entire lives together by their late 20s. Add in the sacrifices he has to make to be Spider-Man, I'd imagine it would make his life even tougher.

[Lukmendes]

They could easily do both though. Give us compelling stories and characters without doing a complete wipe and reset. Take the Parker Industries thing. You're telling me that a Spider-Man who is intelligent, has gadgets and is pretty well off is unrecognizable? If anything, the story that broke it up was totally out of character (A big tech company doesn't have offsite backups? What???).

It does have backups, only four or five for some reason, Otto destroyed the rest and was going after the last one.

The stupid thing is needing to destroy the entire fucking company so Otto doesn't get it, to the point everything it created can't function anymore, that is stupid lol.

Thing turned into a pinecone, then reverted back to normal,

Loool, pinecone Thing, never thought of that.

Sad thing is that there's even a precedent for that, as Zdarsky had no problem having MJ pull a similar stunt in Life Story, and it took Peter a decade to realize what he was missing in life.

Life Story Spidey became in the 80's issue, the 90's one didn't help it considering he decided to lie to Ben just so he can live in peace while Ben is the Spider-Man... Yeah, I couldn't really care about him much by that point.

You're right.

But you're wrong about what Peter's status quo is.

Peter's status quo isn't his original situation, as you seem to keep arguing but then also leave out living with Aunt May and attending high school, as after all that was how he was initially introduced.

Peter's status quo is, "With Great Power There Must Also Come Great Responsibility."

Peter should always have a tension between doing the right thing and the cost of doing the right thing. In fact, that's Parker Luck - not that Peter is fated to always be a broke struggling bum, but that Peter can't win as Spider-Man AND as Peter Parker at the same time. THAT's his initial status quo: Peter Parker has big win in the wrestling match, he lets the burglar go because not his job (thus failing as a superhero) and Peter loses his uncle as a result. Peter dates Betty Brant (win) but she hates Spider-Man (loss). Peter meets Mary Jane (win), Mary Jane suggests they go to the Rhino rampage (oooh! Maybe Peter and Spider-Man can both win if they date MJ), Spidey defeats the Rhino (win for Spidey), but Aunt May is sick and Peter must break his next date with MJ which she is totally cool with (loss).

Even then he still got situations where he managed to win as both in Ditko's run, Master Planner Trilogy being one but there were a few others where it looked like he won as Spidey, but lost as Peter, but turns out he won as Peter too.

So yeah, it's about balance, even if he generally wins in one and loses in the other, there can be situations he loses in both, or wins in both.