Last edited by Jman27; 12-19-2023 at 06:12 PM.
"He's pure power and doesn't even know it. He's the best of us."-Matt Murdock
"I need a reason to take the mask off."-Peter Parker
"My heart half-breaks at how easy it is to lie to him. It breaks all the way when he believes me without question." Felicia Hardy
It was the most interesting Norman's been in ages. So of course it couldn't last. He was at his most interesting in Gold/Red Goblin. He was fine when he showed up in Slott's Spider-Man as well. Unfortunately the bulk of his time was in ASM under Well's pen so....yeah
And this point though, I think the best thing to do is kill him off. I think we've told all the possible stories that we can with Green Goblin. Scratch that. I really wouldn't mind Red Goblin vs Green Goblin. But even that would wear out it's welcome.
They got what they want from him now it's time to broom him.
Norman'll never be gone for good, and I think the idea that we've 'told all the possible stories' is a mistaken belief based largely on fan-jadedness, I think.
Yes, this is the most interesting Norman's been in years.
I think they're just getting him back where they want him, as someone who can have multiple directions and uses, and has a recognizable characterization to the kind of fan that hasn't been reading comics for 30 years.
Last edited by Tendrin; 12-18-2023 at 11:59 PM.
I would like to see Osborn stay good as long how much effort Marvel put in reverse of the Spidey marriage. Lex Luther in the current Superman comics is interesting, his past enemies are coming back to get him, and needs Superman's help. When Marvel try to make Osborn to Dr Doom level during Dark Reign didn't make sense to me than again real life is stranger than fiction.
Marvel's mascot for corporate greed should be Justin Hammer or Obadiah Stane, or else one of the directors of Roxxon.
It seems to me that Roxxon is a much more convincing portrayal of corporate greed than modern Norman Osborn could be, since its leaders are semi-anonymous interchangeable directors of an oil corporation. The evil of Roxxon is the evil of a corporate culture, whereas the evil of Norman Osborn is just the evil of the Osborn family drama. Oscorp has no well defined business model that I'm aware of; Oscorp doesn't really have anything interesting to say about the evils of corporate greed as such.
It says something sadly that the seventies could portray an oil corporation as a Big Bad, while in contemporary pop culture energy corporations are only evil if they're branching out into new apparently greener energy sources.
(Even the otherwise excellent spoilers:end of spoilers turns on a new green energy source being unstable.)
Glass Onion
Last edited by Daibhidh; 12-19-2023 at 05:21 AM.
Petrus Maria Johannaque sunt nubendi
On that note, interesting depictions of Tony Stark (eg MCU, Midnight Suns the computer game) strongly imply that his jerkish tendencies are enabled by the fact that being wealthy and the head of a big corporation gives him a lot of power to make decisions for other people who don't have the power to come back at him. Midnight Suns has him voiced by Josh Keaton; that's not the only way the game implies that if Tony hadn't been really wealthy he could have been Peter Parker (its depiction of Peter is in the Maguire/Holland/Bendis Ultimate mold as one of the nicest most purely heroic characters on the roster).
Petrus Maria Johannaque sunt nubendi
In the minority here but vastly preferred Norman being a dead guy. Everything that was done with him after his return could have been done with Roderick Kingsley. Harry could have survived and been the haunted on and off bad guy.
The Gold Goblin series was excellent. In the hands of a writer like Cantwell, Norman's hero turn was compelling, and the most interesting thing to happen to the character in years. There was potential there for other stories as well, like meeting his former compatriots from the Dark Avengers or Thunderbolts. It was certainly a change of pace from the usual 'how can I screw Peter over this time" story that seems to be a hallmark of Spidey these days.
I think it was a good idea. I like how Wells and Caldwell built on Spencer's development. It does bring back an obscure but classic characterization of Norman Osborn from the Lee/ Romita run, which is more complex than just being the Green Goblin all the time. I'd rather this stay the status quo, to develop the idea that Peter was right to spare Norman's life.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
It's not Baldur's Gate; but I do love the characters and the game play.
I'm not fully sold on their interpretation of Peter's character, but it does fit with their interpretation of Spider-man, and I am all for their interpretation of Spider-man.
(Basically, his heroic set piece is saving lives; he wins fights by improvising clever plans - they can't really simulate that last mechanically but Spider-man's mechanics are there to gesture in that direction.)
Petrus Maria Johannaque sunt nubendi
It's frustrating because Marvel has a habit of moving away from interesting new directions and characterizations to fall back on same old same old. And there are Green Goblin stories to tell but at this point they're some variation of "how to screw over Peter" that we've seen for years.
Heh heh. I was wondering when someone would point that out.