Rereading Zeb Wells and co's Amazing Spider-Man

[ImOctavius]

That's a weird thing to allow when Spencer went in the complete opposite direction with that relationship during his run. It makes it look like they don't respect their continuity.



(And even if you're looking at the movies, Maguire's Peter tells Norman that he had a father, his name was Ben Parker.)

Then he didn't read Spencer run or he didn't care. I can't decide which is worse.

[Jman27]

Then he didn't read Spencer run or he didn't care. I can't decide which is worse.

do upcoming writers read the previous run of the book fully of the run they are about to take over?

[ImOctavius]

do upcoming writers read the previous run of the book fully of the run they are about to take over?

The least thing they can do. Do not read the entire series from 1963, but at least read the previous run.

[ARkadelphia]

do upcoming writers read the previous run of the book fully of the run they are about to take over?

At bare minimum, the editors should

[Mister Mets]

Then he didn't read Spencer run or he didn't care. I can't decide which is worse.

I've looked into this a bit more. Are you talking about the scene in the current volume of Amazing Spider-Man #32 when Norman thinks Peter is spending too much time at work, and Peter says "The more I work with you, the more I recognize something familiar. The Norman Osborn I first met. The one who treated me like a son. I'm starting to think that might be the real you."

That has nothing to do with Spencer's run.

That's Peter's view of his best friend's dad who helped him get an apartment and who was nice to him when he wasn't the Green Goblin.

This is a case where the comics differ from most adaptations. In the Raimi Spider-Man films, Norman Osborn was always the Green Goblin. In the Lee/ Romita comics, Norman was usually a decent guy. That element of the character hasn't been touched on much since either the Night Gwen Stacy Died or his 90s resurrection, but it is canonical.

[exile001]

I've looked into this a bit more. Are you talking about the scene in the current volume of Amazing Spider-Man #32 when Norman thinks Peter is spending too much time at work, and Peter says "The more I work with you, the more I recognize something familiar. The Norman Osborn I first met. The one who treated me like a son. I'm starting to think that might be the real you."

That has nothing to do with Spencer's run.

That's Peter's view of his best friend's dad who helped him get an apartment and who was nice to him when he wasn't the Green Goblin.

This is a case where the comics differ from most adaptations. In the Raimi Spider-Man films, Norman Osborn was always the Green Goblin. In the Lee/ Romita comics, Norman was usually a decent guy. That element of the character hasn't been touched on much since either the Night Gwen Stacy Died or his 90s resurrection, but it is canonical.

This was their first meeting:

ASM39.jpg

Their relationship was always tainted by the shadow of the Goblin to one degree or another.

Peter's main reason for helping Norman is to ease Harry's situation, and afterwards Norman is occasionally referenced via Harry. We don't see much of them together, IIRC, outside of Goblin episodes. In fact, just being in the same room as Peter seems to start these off.

I think Wells, rightly or wrongly, is just dropping in something that worked in other mediums (from Spidey TAS onwards) and treating it as canon when, on paper, it never really was.

[Jman27]

This was their first meeting:

ASM39.jpg

Their relationship was always tainted by the shadow of the Goblin to one degree or another.

Peter's main reason for helping Norman is to ease Harry's situation, and afterwards Norman is occasionally referenced via Harry. We don't see much of them together, IIRC, outside of Goblin episodes. In fact, just being in the same room as Peter seems to start these off.

I think Wells, rightly or wrongly, is just dropping in something that worked in other mediums (from Spidey TAS onwards) and treating it as canon when, on paper, it never really was.

nope the main reason is to protect his secret identity

[Frontier]

nope the main reason is to protect his secret identity

It could be for more than one reason .

[Garlador]

It could be for more than one reason .

Both missions failed, spectacularly.

[Moxxi517]

I've looked into this a bit more. Are you talking about the scene in the current volume of Amazing Spider-Man #32 when Norman thinks Peter is spending too much time at work, and Peter says "The more I work with you, the more I recognize something familiar. The Norman Osborn I first met. The one who treated me like a son. I'm starting to think that might be the real you."

I think Wells, rightly or wrongly, is just dropping in something that worked in other mediums (from Spidey TAS onwards) and treating it as canon when, on paper, it never really was.

I think this is true, and i've seen this critique thrown around abunch. But I think not enough of the critique really focuses on #32 and how much of a mistake this is in context. What I mean by this is that, the remark isn't some sidebar that Peter is making, it's honestly a hugely important line of dialogue for the run as a whole which kind of ends up being nonsense. In retrospect, this line is essentially Peter's last words to Norman before he takes back the sins (it was kind of obvious that that'd be the case when #32 came out, but it's been confirmed now). As last words, it is a moment that should act as a capstone to Peter and Norman's relationship throughout the run up to that point. And the Peter, Norman relationship is arguably the singular most important character dynamic built up throughout the entire run. Having that moment be something that doesn't really connect with people is one thing, but having that moment solicit a "HUH?" reaction that leaves them questioning whether Zeb understands Peter and Norman's relationship at all is just such a big fail in my mind.

[CrimsonEchidna]

do upcoming writers read the previous run of the book fully of the run they are about to take over?

Sometimes they do but I think modern Marvel tends to operate on doing hard resets at the start of each run. Like Spencer's run is becoming more beloved but you also can't help but notice some of the first things he did was discard the story elements hanging from the Slott run he didn't want to integrate in his run (Peter's being an Editor in the Daily Bugle, OG Kraven being Alive, Felicia the Queenpin of Crime.)

I don't think it's malicious but it is a side-effect of the whole "each new #1 is a completely fresh starting point."

[Frontier]

Sometimes they do but I think modern Marvel tends to operate on doing hard resets at the start of each run. Like Spencer's run is becoming more beloved but you also can't help but notice some of the first things he did was discard the story elements hanging from the Slott run he didn't want to integrate in his run (Peter's being an Editor in the Daily Bugle, OG Kraven being Alive, Felicia the Queenpin of Crime.)

I don't think it's malicious but it is a side-effect of the whole "each new #1 is a completely fresh starting point."

I think it's a valid critique of the Spencer run that it was 90% cleaning up stuff from other runs or stories. Some handled better than others.

[U.N. Owen]

I'm happy Spencer got rid of that awful affair between Gwen and Norman. I don't understand if Norman had an affair with Mysterio, but I do understand that Sins Past got retconned.

[exile001]

I think it's a valid critique of the Spencer run that it was 90% cleaning up stuff from other runs or stories. Some handled better than others.

By the same token, I think it's valid to praise him for it. Personally, I thoroughly enjoyed the bulk of his run and a part of that was his restoring things I liked and retconning past mistakes.

I actually strongly support the idea that each new writer effectively has their own mini-continuity rather than having to be slave to decades of ultimately meaningless continuity. But Marvel and DC have been operating like that for a decade or so now, more or less.

[Garlador]

I actually strongly support the idea that each new writer effectively has their own mini-continuity rather than having to be slave to decades of ultimately meaningless continuity. But Marvel and DC have been operating like that for a decade or so now, more or less.

This is a very healthy way of looking at it. I’ve been seriously tempted to do a video or podcast about this approach to comic enjoyment, as it highlights the stark reality that different authors ultimately have different outlooks on a character, so some writers contradict or disagree with prior continuity to put “their” version forward. Sometimes that works great; sometimes it doesn’t. I discovered last week that J.M. DeMatteis effectively considers Peter still married in “his universe” and DeFalco viewed Spider-Girl as the inevitable continuation of his own stories. Those are at odds with “main” continuity, but that’s honestly just an arbitrary statement from corporate (and fans) to give more importance to one book over another. These aren’t historical records; they’re fantasy stories continually just made-up by storytellers hoping to entertain, and they all have their own approach to doing so.