The Short Term vs the Long Term and ASM

[Mister Mets]

I've said for a while that the constant reboots are a sign of laziness on the parts of writers. People don't want to have to actually know things about whom they're writing. About events that happened that might contradict what they have in mind for a story. If you are writing a title with 60 years worth of history, then maybe you should know a good chunk of that history if you're to even be considered for the title. Perhaps I'm biased in that I come from a history-focused background education wise and to me, there's never an excuse for not putting in the effort to actually make sure you're right in saying something.

Short-term stories are fine, but they're that; short-term. They're not meant for success. Part of why ASM Vol. 1 worked as well as it did was that it had depth to it; the stories were all part of the same long-time frame. Things would get referenced, no matter how far back. It's a type of story-telling that I fear is really dead in this era of things. As you OP said, Marvel as a company seems to only care about the now, rather than telling stories that will having last impact such as Kraven's Last Hunt. That book is still talked about and homaged to constantly. Can we really say anything from 2010 on will be the same way in the next fifty-years?

This run could have just as easily kicked off with Amazing Spider-Man #895. It continued the Tombstone and Norman Osborn stories from Nick Spencer's run, and was set in the aftermath of Beyond.

[Aura Blaize]

Can we really say anything from 2010 on will be the same way in the next fifty-years?

Superior comes to mind. It's already been referenced in other mediums. If they actually commit to it, Norman's face turn is also something that has a lasting effect.

And that's where one of the biggest problems comes in. Marvel will shake things up but before long, everything goes back to status quo. They did this TWICE with Superior. The first time was actually understandable. But then they actually circumvented status quo in a way that would make sense for VOL 2 and they STILL reverted. And Norman? Norman has been the most interesting he's been in decades. Will they commit to this? Probably not.

[Dan Slott]

I've said for a while that the constant reboots are a sign of laziness on the parts of writers.

It's not the writers who dictate a renumbering.

It's marketing/editorial who decides.

For example:

It's marketing/editorial that says something like, "After SECRET WARS every title will get a new #1."
Or, "With the start of this new writer/artist team, we should relaunch that book with a new #1."
Or, "This character is getting a big new Marvel movie in that month, we should have a new #1 on the racks at that time."

It's not the writer or artist or (sometimes even the) editor-of-the-title who decides that.

I won't say that I (as a writer) haven't factored renumbering into how I've pitched stories, but that's more about being a realist and someone working in the industry who knows how the sausage is made. There are cases where creators butt heads with the company and try to keep a run going without renumbering... but that's an uphill climb, you only get so much "coin" to spend on any one argument you may have-- and, as a creator, you probably want to save those "coins" for fights you have a better chance of winning.

[Dan Slott]

The long term plan is essentially to avoid long-term commitments so the character can be reset to basically what he was at the end of Roger Stern's run (unmarried grad school dropout.)

So many of the classic runs of Post Lee/Ditko/Romita Sr. eras of Spider-Man are this. And if the internet existed back then (not the far more flexible/easy going letter writers of yesterday-- I'm talking the instantaneously snarky/angry internet posters of today), I'm sure they'd be making the same comments they're making now, but leveled at those wonderful runs.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

So many of the classic runs of Post Lee/Ditko/Romita Sr. eras of Spider-Man are this. And if the internet existed back then (not the far more flexible/easy going letter writers of yesterday-- I'm talking the instantaneously snarky/angry internet posters of today), I'm sure they'd be making the same comments they're making now, but leveled at those wonderful runs.

With all due respect, this is just Brevoort's argument that post-OMD comics will be viewed more favorably in the future. You're just wording it in a different way (by implying that the older runs were just as hated back in their day).

My problem with that argument is no one ever answers the question "How long?". It's been almost 16 years. Millennials and Gen Z's aren't any crazier about OMD or the post-OMD status quo any more than older fans were. So at what point do these new fans that love the current comics come in?

[Dan Slott]

WYou're just wording it in a different way (by implying that the older runs were just as hated back in their day).

That's not what I'm saying.

I think those runs are phenomenal.

But *if* the hardcore posters of today existed back then-- along with a rapid response system like the internet-- those phenomenal runs would *also* be shredded for "lack of progression" and other message board talking points.

[clonegeek]

With all due respect, this is just Brevoort's argument that post-OMD comics will be viewed more favorably in the future. You're just wording it in a different way (by implying that the older runs were just as hated back in their day).

My problem with that argument is no one ever answers the question "How long?". It's been almost 16 years. Millennials and Gen Z's aren't any crazier about OMD or the post-OMD status quo any more than older fans were. So at what point do these new fans that love the current comics come in?

Hell for that matter, where are the writers who grew up with the post-OMD status quo?

[PCN24454]

I've said for a while that the constant reboots are a sign of laziness on the parts of writers. People don't want to have to actually know things about whom they're writing. About events that happened that might contradict what they have in mind for a story. If you are writing a title with 60 years worth of history, then maybe you should know a good chunk of that history if you're to even be considered for the title. Perhaps I'm biased in that I come from a history-focused background education wise and to me, there's never an excuse for not putting in the effort to actually make sure you're right in saying something.

Short-term stories are fine, but they're that; short-term. They're not meant for success. Part of why ASM Vol. 1 worked as well as it did was that it had depth to it; the stories were all part of the same long-time frame. Things would get referenced, no matter how far back. It's a type of story-telling that I fear is really dead in this era of things. As you OP said, Marvel as a company seems to only care about the now, rather than telling stories that will having last impact such as Kraven's Last Hunt. That book is still talked about and homaged to constantly. Can we really say anything from 2010 on will be the same way in the next fifty-years?

What lasting impact did Kraven’s Last Hunt have? It just killed off a C-Tier character and then Peter went about his life.

That’s kinda my problem with big events. They only give the illusion of progress than have progress itself.

[CaptainUniverse]

Hell for that matter, where are the writers who grew up with the post-OMD status quo?

They are being kept at arms length by a clique.

[clonegeek]

They are being kept at arms length by a clique.

Most new writers that blow up at the Big two are in their late 30s to early 40s

[CaptainUniverse]

Most new writers that blow up at the Big two are in their late 30s to early 40s

Oh wait, I misread that last post. I thought it said Pre-OMD. Nevermind.

[WebLurker]

The long term plan is essentially to avoid long-term commitments so the character can be reset to basically what he was at the end of Roger Stern's run (unmarried grad school dropout.)

Basically everything he's not, so far as the franchise as a whole is concerned.

[DT Winslow]

Thinking of relaunches makes me recall something I never considered.

20 years ago, I pitched to take over Legion of Super-Heroes. A shiny new number 1 wasn’t considered. At the time, it would have been issue 35, I think? I hand wrote the first draft of that script but I’m not sure if it was for sure 35 or 39. It was really a fun time.

I lost by the way. And there was indeed a new number 1!

[PCN24454]

Basically everything he's not, so far as the franchise as a whole is concerned.

What is the franchise as a whole?

[wleakr]

What lasting impact did Kraven’s Last Hunt have? It just killed off a C-Tier character and then Peter went about his life.

That’s kinda my problem with big events. They only give the illusion of progress than have progress itself.

Ddin't want to say it, but totally true. This story is always mentioned, and while it is a good story, at best it was just a filler story to give breaks to the current creative teams across the books at the time.

Once that story was complete, we returned to the regular creative teams and the arc was never mentioned again or had any follow up. It was like it never happenened.