ASM 3 (#897) Discussion

[Kurolegacy]

Did I miss something in regards to Paul being "violent"? Over in the previews thread, a few users stated that he was abusive. Did they seriously gather this from just one dialogue bubble "he deserved that"? MJ leaving her family because of an abusive dad does not equate to whatever that convo was. Plus, if we are going to take things out of context, then MJ's entire relationship with Peter should be in question because a)he fights crime by punching and kicking bad guys and B) he hit MJ once which was completely by accident but a lot of you want to send Peter to the chopping block for that as well.

Overall this volume sucks tremendously. I am so bored by whatever it is I am reading.

I’m guessing that they drawing that conclusion from the line that was said in his call with MJ about him having a temper.

[TinkerSpider]

Context. Earlier, in the same page, Peter is begging Tombstone not to kill civilians. That's what Peter's "Don't do this!" is about.

Sure. But he's also asking not to be killed, by telling Tombstone he's learned his lesson. I mean, Wells's or even Slott's Peter isn't so asininely stupid to think that Tombstone is going to stop his plan just because Tombstone taught Spider-Man a lesson. Tombstone told him there was going to be a gang war. That's always been his goal, and Peter knows that because he was told to his face.

And, if Peter had really learned his lesson, that would mean he would not interfere - which of course he would. So of course Tombstone doesn't heed him. Lonnie may be irrational but he's not dumb. He's certainly smarter than Peter is being currently depicted.

[Mercwmouth12]

Sure. But he's also asking not to be killed, by telling Tombstone he's learned his lesson. I mean, Wells's or even Slott's Peter isn't so asininely stupid to think that Tombstone is going to stop his plan just because Tombstone taught Spider-Man a lesson. Tombstone told him there was going to be a gang war. That's always been his goal, and Peter knows that because he was told to his face.

And, if Peter had really learned his lesson, that would mean he would not interfere - which of course he would. So of course Tombstone doesn't heed him. Lonnie may be irrational but he's not dumb. He's certainly smarter than Peter is being currently depicted.

What i'm intrigued about is what happens to Robbie. Does he just drop him off where the attack is, welcome him to the family or just have him watch so he can get the story of a lifetime?

[Refrax5]

Did I miss something in regards to Paul being "violent"? Over in the previews thread, a few users stated that he was abusive. Did they seriously gather this from just one dialogue bubble "he deserved that"? MJ leaving her family because of an abusive dad does not equate to whatever that convo was. Plus, if we are going to take things out of context, then MJ's entire relationship with Peter should be in question because a)he fights crime by punching and kicking bad guys and B) he hit MJ once which was completely by accident but a lot of you want to send Peter to the chopping block for that as well.

Overall this volume sucks tremendously. I am so bored by whatever it is I am reading.

People are overstating that. All we know is there was one time Paul apparently used force and it's brought up in a kind of light banter. That could mean virtually anything at this point.

[IamnotJudasTraveller]

Tombstone was explaining his clearly warped, villainous philosophy. I don't think it's surprising that the guy who thinks might makes right is vicious.

Peter got picked on as a kid, too, and he never became a mass murderer.

I think what Wells is doing here is setting up a contrast with Tombstone not accepting responsibility for his actions as opposed to Peter making responsibility his life's work.

Personally, my issue there is that Wells' handling of Tombstone up to this point was that while he's not a guy you root for - like how he killed all of Crime Master's men just to make a point - he's someone you actually want to keep up with overall. You're not going to stand by his philosophy but he seems to have an odd kind of sense to it all, like how he was trying to protect Janice by not exposing her to this and taking Randy's request in stride.

With that, the approach falls flat on its face because yeah, he's not really being the somewhat nuanced take anymore. He already wants to kill Robbie because things went south a little bit.

Unless the whole "break him in two" thing refers to him breaking the news to begin with because Robbie might be unaware. That could be potentially fun.

[Refrax5]

Tombstone was explaining his clearly warped, villainous philosophy. I don't think it's surprising that the guy who thinks might makes right is vicious.

Peter got picked on as a kid, too, and he never became a mass murderer.

I think what Wells is doing here is setting up a contrast with Tombstone not accepting responsibility for his actions as opposed to Peter making responsibility his life's work.

I might not have articulated myself very well there. What I mean is that it's weird that Wells spent so much time on Tombstone's perspective only to immediately make him so overtly evil two seconds later. It felt like a waste of pages. Like, why spend all this time giving him this illusion of nuance just to drop it in the same scene?

[Chris0013]

Why do they do those cliff hangers anymore? "oh no..Spidey is chained up and about to be shot by bad guys...there's no way he can get out of it this time..."

We all know he is going to get out somehow...

[jwatson]

I’m guessing that they drawing that conclusion from the line that was said in his call with MJ about him having a temper.

I don't know about people thinking he is abusive but it i know for me it didn't make sense that

1) MJ felt she would need to ask him if he was going to do something potentially hurtful to Peter.
2) Peter is spiderman so why would MJ even feel that he could do anything to Spiderman.

Seems like there is something there, i don't think that means he is abusive but he may be empowered himself.

[Sr. Bungle]

What a thrilling premise Screenshot_20220608-222020.jpg

[Sr. Bungle]

Also, Tombstone origin was as cliche as you can possibly get for a gangster.

[jwatson]

Personally, my issue there is that Wells' handling of Tombstone up to this point was that while he's not a guy you root for - like how he killed all of Crime Master's men just to make a point - he's someone you actually want to keep up with overall. You're not going to stand by his philosophy but he seems to have an odd kind of sense to it all, like how he was trying to protect Janice by not exposing her to this and taking Randy's request in stride.

With that, the approach falls flat on its face because yeah, he's not really being the somewhat nuanced take anymore. He already wants to kill Robbie because things went south a little bit.

Unless the whole "break him in two" thing refers to him breaking the news to begin with because Robbie might be unaware. That could be potentially fun.

I agree with the first part i don't agree with the second. I didn't find it in your face, i thought "tombstone probably already knows who spiderman is." and this is his way of teaching a lesson. What he is doing is wrong but some of what he is saying is right. Superheroes often have secret identities because they say they want to protect the people in their lives but what happens when your in a position like Pete was, not every villain is going to say "i don't care about masks" and not reveal you in front of all their henchmen which will then put them in real danger. Sure peter is a hero and with great power comes great responsibility but should he really be poking his nose in EVERY situation? The more situations he puts himself in the more he is running towards that moment similar to this one. I find it interesting and am wondering what his answer will be. This feels like just the prologue.

[jwatson]

What a thrilling premise Screenshot_20220608-222020.jpg

This makes me think of those people with 6 second attention spans and want like 6 second news and bullet points of things. It's issue 3 not 13. lol

[Sr. Bungle]

This makes me think of those people with 6 second attention spans and want like 6 second news and bullet points of things. It's issue 3 not 13. lol

What? It says #3

[jwatson]

What? It says #3

i meant the "watch peter get beaten brutally as we wait for answers."
it read as sarcastic to me but the sarcasm didn't feel warranted.

[Mercwmouth12]

i meant the "watch peter get beaten brutally as we wait for answers."
it read as sarcastic to me but the sarcasm didn't feel warranted.

Aipt review sums it up much better