New Spider-Man satellite title by Slott and Bagley

[Batman Begins 2005]

Spencer's run was the true final chapter of the firsr BND era and is actually a great jumping off point for the franchise. Maybe Marvel got scared that it worked a little too well.

Good shout.

At least 50 years had him be the first to cross over with the Ultimate Universe, gave him a solo issue of AvX and gave him Ends of the Earth (I think). Spider-Man ate good for his 50th. So far 60th has been a bust that feels more like it’s there to kick him repeatedly rather than celebrate him.

I knew I was forgetting sonething. Cheers.

The 50th had The Amazing Spider-Man.
The 40th had Spider-Man.

The 60th was going to have Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse this year till it was out back a year. Real shame that. Maybe Spider-Man: No Way Home should have been saved for it.

[SpideyClone]

If you like Slott, you're still a fan of the character. I just want to understand what you see in him that I don't.

To be honest, I wouldn't say I enjoyed Slott's run based on his characterization of Peter, MJ etc. It was more like a roller coaster or watching a summer blockbuster movie, even if some of the story arcs went on a little long. And i thought he brought a lot to the table, Horizon, Max Modell, Anna Maria Marconi, Parker Industries, Spider-verse, etc.. And I thought Superior was unique in giving one of Spider-man's greatest foes a chance at heroism, even though we all knew it wouldn't last.

[Matt Rat]

To be honest, I wouldn't say I enjoyed Slott's run based on his characterization of Peter, MJ etc. It was more like a roller coaster or watching a summer blockbuster movie, even if some of the story arcs went on a little long. And i thought he brought a lot to the table, Horizon, Max Modell, Anna Maria Marconi, Parker Industries, Spider-verse, etc.. And I thought Superior was unique in giving one of Spider-man's greatest foes a chance at heroism, even though we all knew it wouldn't last.

That's a fair point. Thanks for replying (and not flipping out)

[Frontier]

So how long until Otto shows up and becomes the true main character of the book again ?

[Lee]

Slott fans never offer a decent explanation in regards to what they like so much about his run, and usually when they do, they'll inevitably blurt out some personal hot take about the character that a good number of long-term fans will disagree with.

I mean, I've seen it blow up on twitter, they seem Ok with themes of:

-Sexism
-Brainwashing
-Plagiarism
-Rape
-Downer Endings
-Misery Porn

And that to me is pretty telling.

It sounds like you're saying "If you like these Spider-Man comics then you're a bad person".

[FFJamie94]

I'm very okay with Slott returning to Spider-Man, I'm hoping we get Big Time Slott and not Post Superior Slott.
And with Bagley on art, it's a comic I'm intending to pick up.

Hopefully with Slott not running the show and instead doing the side story to someone else's work, he can do much better work. As it's a side title, it's not going to be the comic that effects Spider-Man history forever, instead it'll merely respond to the current events while telling its own story.
End of Spider-Verse it's going to be the big game changer, it's instead the conclusion of a trilogy which Slott has been working on since 2014.
And if it's not good, then it'll simply be forgotten and left in the past.
That's the thing about satellite books, unlike the main run, if they are good, then they are remembered fondly and if they are bad, then they simply cease to exist.

[rward777]

I'm very okay with Slott returning to Spider-Man, I'm hoping we get Big Time Slott and not Post Superior Slott.
And with Bagley on art, it's a comic I'm intending to pick up.

Hopefully with Slott not running the show and instead doing the side story to someone else's work, he can do much better work. As it's a side title, it's not going to be the comic that effects Spider-Man history forever, instead it'll merely respond to the current events while telling its own story.
End of Spider-Verse it's going to be the big game changer, it's instead the conclusion of a trilogy which Slott has been working on since 2014.
And if it's not good, then it'll simply be forgotten and left in the past.
That's the thing about satellite books, unlike the main run, if they are good, then they are remembered fondly and if they are bad, then they simply cease to exist.

Does that include Parker Industries?

[FFJamie94]

Does that include Parker Industries?

In the bad stuff?
Yeah, that's around the time I stopped reading Spider-Man for a while until Spencer, I was just tired of these really crappy plots.
That could have worked, but I don't see Peter as ever being a business man.
Honestly, he should just get a job at the Baxter Building working with Reed.

[Frontier]

I think people are well within their right to enjoy Slott's work but I personally just don't think he's good at writing Peter and his Spider-Man's competency and characterization is radically inconsistent.

Slott always seemed more concerned with crazy, out there, Silver Age ideas and building this into a franchise than properly developing and writing the titular character. Which is why so often Peter had to rely on or get upstaged by other characters, and the talk about other Spiders being in this book gives me those same vibes.

[SpideyClone]

I think people are well within their right to enjoy Slott's work but I personally just don't think he's good at writing Peter and his Spider-Man's competency and characterization is radically inconsistent.

Slott always seemed more concerned with crazy, out there, Silver Age ideas and building this into a franchise than properly developing and writing the titular character. Which is why so often Peter had to rely on or get upstaged by other characters, and the talk about other Spiders being in this book gives me those same vibes.

Since Wells is calling the shots on the main book and driving this iteration of Spidey thematically, I'm fine with Slott doing his thing on the ancillary book.

[Frontier]

Since Wells is calling the shots on the main book and driving this iteration of Spidey thematically, I'm fine with Slott doing his thing on the ancillary book.

Which is fair, I'm just not sure if Slott would be that great an alternative. Both he and Wells were even on the brain trust together.

[Mister Mets]

Rape by deception has been part of Western culture since at least Greek myth and Zeus kept shapeshifting to have sex with all sorts of unknowing women. Zeus's actions are not framed as morally correct for modern audiences nor should they be.

Otto's deception meant Anna Maria and Mary Jane could not make full, knowing and active consent to sexual activity. The only unsettling implication would be if sex without active, knowing consent is considered to be something a morally upstanding hero can and should engage in without consequently breaking their character.

Having sex or attempting to have sex while pretending to be a competely different person is an act of villainy (like it was for Zeus). And Otto is a villain - but Otto's actions were not framed as being problematic and villainous (with Peter even admiring that Otto had the will power Peter didn't have to resist Mary Jane which is just so...wrong and ick on so many levels, and Anna Maria admiring Otto for not using Peter's body to sleep with supermodels and black cats). That's a good part of why Superior is so problematic.

And we could also talk about how Otto violated Peter's and Mary Jane's privacy - or how Otto used Peter's body without his consent, which could also be construed as a form of rape - but the only reaction Peter had was "Otto was a jerk" which is another reason why Superior is so problematic. The issues aren't addressed and the villain goes unpunished with his major transgressions against another human being's agency waved off as "jerkiness."

There's a distinction between saying that something is morally correct, and categorizing something as rape, with the legal and moral weight of that description.

I don't think this is a thread that fans want to pull. If Superman has a romance with someone who doesn't know he's an alien, is that rape by deception? Was Peter Parker in danger of committing rape by deception when Gwen Stacy blamed Spider-Man for the death of her father?

It sounds like you're saying "If you like these Spider-Man comics then you're a bad person".

Yeah, that's going to rub people the wrong way.

It's one thing to say you don't like a comic; it's another to imply there's something wrong with the people who do.

Since Wells is calling the shots on the main book and driving this iteration of Spidey thematically, I'm fine with Slott doing his thing on the ancillary book.

This seems preferable to Slott's critics than having him on a flagship book. If you like his work, you've got a new monthly. If you don't, you can ignore it as you would most monthly titles.

[Mister Mets]

On Twitter, Dan Slott explained that he pitched this book to Marvel.

"Why would Marvel give this to YOU?"

This is a question I've heard from different corners of Spider-Fandom recently.

"Why did they give this to you and not another writer, one who hasn't written Spidey yet?"

&

"Why did they give you *that* AF #1000 story to write?"

And the answer is...

They didn't.

They didn't wake up one morning and go, "Let's give this to HIM."

I'm writing *that* Amazing Fantasy #1000 story cause that's the story *I* pitched. I went to the editor and pitched them *that* story. They liked it and said, "Write it up!"

With the all-new SPIDER-MAN book coming out in October, that came about in a similar way.

Marvel had no plans to do another monthly Spider-Man comic.

I asked Marvel's EIC if I could have a meeting to pitch a project. I pitched an approach for *how* to do an additional title.

Now, because of SPOILERS, I'm not going to tell you *what* that pitch was. You're gonna have to read the book.

(But it was a *damn* good pitch.)

After hearing it, the EIC said, "How can I say 'no' to that?"

And suddenly Marvel was doing a SPIDER-MAN book alongside ASM.

So in both cases, it wasn't a question of Marvel *giving* me something they were going to do.

These were cases of me *pitching* things to Marvel-- things they weren't panning on doing-- and Marvel *approving* them.

Hope that clears some things up.🤟

So this is a book that only exists because he wants to do it, not because Marvel was ready to offer a new monthly title to a promising young writer from Lumberjanes or something.

[Webhead]

There's a distinction between saying that something is morally correct, and categorizing something as rape, with the legal and moral weight of that description.

I don't think this is a thread that fans want to pull. If Superman has a romance with someone who doesn't know he's an alien, is that rape by deception? Was Peter Parker in danger of committing rape by deception when Gwen Stacy blamed Spider-Man for the death of her father?

We've gone over the Anna Maria thing, I understand not wanting to jump into complicated arguments, but the fact stands Otto faced no repercussions from his actions in that relationship nor was it depicted as even slightly messed up; quite the opposite in fact, since Slott implied Otto was less shallow than Peter because he didn't care about looks (he certainly cared about Peter's looks enough to use them though).

Those examples aren't accurate analogies since they don't involve identity theft, nor is the lie the characters are telling a way to advance their relationship.

Of course, going from that to "if a reader likes Slott they support rape" is ridiculous, and I for one would never make such a claim.

[Matt Rat]

On Twitter, Dan Slott explained that he pitched this book to Marvel.



So this is a book that only exists because he wants to do it, not because Marvel was ready to offer a new monthly title to a promising young writer from Lumberjanes or something.

He is really hyping that Peter/MJ story...