What was the worst year of the Spider-Man Comics?

[oldschool]

1994 until now

every year has been bad

Then why do you still read it? Not being snarky, just genuinely curious why you would continue to read a book you consider bad for 20 straight years.

[exile001]

1994 until now

every year has been bad

What, every year since 1993 has been worse than anything before?

What was the change? How is, say, 2004 worse than the year Parker's parents were revealed as robots for example?

Not taking a swipe, I'm honestly trying to engage here, and find out what you dislike so much from the oddly specific date onwards.

For the record, the same with PeterAvenger, I'm actually trying to find conversation on these 'worst years', but I had a lot to say in reply.

[Ozymandias]

Then why do you still read it? Not being snarky, just genuinely curious why you would continue to read a book you consider bad for 20 straight years.

Love for the character, and lots of hope and patience, I guess ;-)

[exile001]

Love for the character, and lots of hope and patience, I guess ;-)

Ha ha, you may have a point. I had a two year run on Robin I disliked, but kept hoping for better. Luckily, a team change freshened up my enthusiasm. 20 years, though. Phew, that's a lot of patience.

[PeterAvenger]

I'm going to have a go at answering your points without being aggressive or taking offense (different tastes and all that).

And I appreciate that.

You do realise the ultimate villain of SSM IS Doctor Octopus, right? That's the point? Also, the book is narrated BY Ock, from his perspective, so obviously, he's going to believe he is superior. He even still has his animosity towards Peter for all the years they were enemies. He is a biased narrator.

Ock didn't just become 'good', and change into Peter. Ock understood Peter, understood his own life better, so decided to try to be better. He saw being a 'hero' as a challenge, so undertook that challenge as Doctor Octopus would do.

Honestly, I didn't get that impression from this book at all. Given that he's the title character, and he actually tries (keyword: TRIES) to be good overall, it just comes off as a poor, uninspiring anti-hero story.

The rushed ending to SSM I can agree with, it really didn't feel like this HUGE moment that peter was back. But we now know we're getting that resolution in Spider-Verse, when Peter comes face to face with SpOck.

Also, Peter is back. It's that simple.

Is it? In SSM #9, Otto says that Ghost Peter is just a conscience formed from Peter's memories. Whether Otto is really the right source of info or not on the subject, what he says could at least be possible. It's certainly a better explanation than Peter's mind going back into his own body and under Otto's mind.

I think you're being too thin skinned here, particularly towards Slott whose job it is to sell the comics he writes. He was trying to sell the fact that Peter was gone. And, to be fair, this is the guy who received death/rape threats towards himself and those he loves. Over a comic book. I think that'd add some snark to me.

If you didn't know Peter would be back eventually, then you're much less cynical than me. Slott and Wacker often said this was a ride and Peter would be back eventually.

Ok, I know that Slott just writes the book and tries to sell it, but he didn't HAVE to go to the lengths he did. I mean, murdering a superhero and letting the villain taunt the reader, JUST to sell a comic? And what he was saying in forums and interviews really didn't help.

Speaking of what he was saying, when did Slott and Wacker ever say that Peter would be back eventually? In multiple interviews and Q&A's, they always said that Otto was the new Spider-Man and that Peter wasn't coming back. And yes, I knew that in the end, Peter would be back, but all anyone has told me since the book started was to just read it and "enjoy the ride". And given how the book plays out, it seemed like a harsh PAINFUL ride to me.

I don't think anyone was glad at what happened to peter, we just took it as an exciting part of the story. It was horrific.

As to it haunting you, I don't know what to say. There are parts of Spider-Man's past that I detest, but I just put it out of my mind and get on with it. It doesn't bug me reading, say, Spider-verse, knowing that in an annual it was revealed that peter's parents were spies (my single most hated part of SM canon).

I mean, maybe give Spider-Verse a miss (even though I'm sure we will see Peter give SpOck a massive beating) and come back after when every SSM plot point will probably have been resolved.

If people weren't glad that it happened, why did the book sell so well? Why was it critically acclaimed?

And let me elaborate on specifically WHY this book haunts me (admittedly, probably a poor choice of words). I've lost people to cancer before. I even lost a grandparent around Christmas a few years ago. And when ASM #700 came out only a couple of years after that, right around the same time of year, I got furious. With so many people buying the book and liking it, it was like hearing that cancer was somehow a GOOD thing. One person in the book even yells out "Good riddance!" on Peter's deathbed. I was just.....livid. And given everything that happens AFTER the issue, with Otto continually ruining Peter's reputation, there was NO way I could bring myself to "enjoy the ride".

Because it's a comic, dude. It IS NOT REAL! It's not like SSM fans sit about laughing at the actual news.

It's based on the ludicrous premises of a dude with radioactive Spider-powers (and let's just add, sticky skin, heightened jumping, super-strength, harder skin, and spider-sense aren't even things spiders have!), mind-swapping (or "mind-swapping" depending on your take), and a complete lack of 'real world' logic (example: he wasn't arrested immediately for shooting Massacre).

If you think enjoying fiction based on the merits that it is so utterly unbelievable that it's just ridiculous could make you a worse person, then I think you need to stop taking a moral stance on fun.

I know it's not real. It's just hard to understand why so many people like this book after everything Otto does in it.

[MASTER-OF-SUPRISE]

My infinite hate for Sins Past makes me want to say 2004, and keep in mind that Queen Storyline was also that year, but that was also the year of the Spider-Man 2 movie, JRJR's last bit with JMS, and some good Jenkins comics, so probably not.

My next thought was 2007, becuase OMD was that bad and damaging for the franchise, but again, the Back in Black stuff that happened that year was actually kind of worthwhile. So probably not that just because of one comic.

My THIRD thought was 2014, because not only did Superior land with the predictable thud, we're back to Slott butchering Peter's character, adding more crap onto MJ's character, and freshly ruining Felicia's character, on top of an unnecessary and dumb retcon of the origin story. But 2014 isn't over yet so that's not really fair, plus this year featured the return of PAD on a Spider-Man comic. Spider-Man 2099, but still. So for now, no. wait until Spider-Verse also under delivers on its ending.

So my vote is 2013, because that was the year without a Spider-Man, really. Ultimate has been dead since 2011 and 616 Peter was dead and yet somehow managed to get killed again. The adaptation of the TV show had a 'real' Spider-Man in it, but if you've seen that show you know why I put that in quotes. It features one of the worst Spider-Man issues in years and doesn't have any thing to counter balance it.

Oh yeah, and 1999. Er...Mackie is boring. Shrug. Just doesn't get the blood boiling.

In summary....

1. 2013
2. 1999
3. 2007
4. 2004
5. 2014
6. 1995



Yes, it's a phrase that DOES only work when you share a majority opinion.

...
...
...

In all seriousness I thought of this as well but couldn't convey it properly at the end of my day right before bed. Though I think Superior is not as popular in general as you may think it is....but it's certainly more popular than it deserves.



Superior not being a Spider-Man book is only the tip of it's problems, it's still bad because it falls apart if you think about it at all. There are plot contrivances everywhere, characters lug around the idiot ball like it's their wallet, and the central character's motivation isn't even internally consistent, as he regularly jumps between foiling supervillains and then just committing outright acts of villainy. He never confronts his actions or feels conflicted about his past or even shows much concern that he's doing the right thing, he just does the superhero thing for no discernible reason.

QFT.

But all the negatives of Ock are supposed to prove WHY Peter is better. Ock doesn't show having great power gives great responsibility because he doesn't care. Ock understands why this had such an effect on Peter, but his uncle didn't say it in those circumstances.

It's like if a good friend of mine were relating the story to me. I'd understand his pain, and by association of it happening to someone close it would change me in some way, but it still wouldn't be my pain.

It's not in a religious text, it's not meant to have some important moral message to the reader.

Also, Ock doesn't get away with anything. He fails and fails and ultimately gives up everything to have Peter fix things. SSM only gives the illusion of success, and obviously does it damn well.

If that's what they meant to do I don't think they conveyed that message very well. The story tries too make Ock leaving seem tragic but without an actual reason for it too be tragic. I don't think Otto regretted hurting most of the people he hurt as Doc Ock. Even after Superior the book seems too be saying Peter should adapt Otto's ideas with that police radio scene.

[Webhead]

1964 onwards. The only true Spider-Man lasted until the end of 1963. Then they ruined what made him interesting. Single digit issues.

[SpiderNerd]

Hmmm...I really don't think there's a single definitive "worst" year of Spidey. Some top contenders...

1. 2006: The beginning of Civil War. That storyline contained the worst writing for Peter Parker in history. He was not in-character for a second during that.

2. 2013: Superior Spider-Man was an idea that really had no place being in the main book, and it especially had no reason to replace it. The overall mediocre to poor execution of the entire series hampered it a lot. While I admit it had some good moments, there was a lot of badness in there. On top of that, there weren't really a lot of great secondary books. I never enjoyed the Venom series, and Scarlet Spider wasn't my cup of tea. The only title I really enjoyed was Superior Foes.

3. 2007: The rest of Civil War, Back in Black, and OMD. I hated all of that. Though, I will admit that the Spidey-Kingpin fight in ASM 542 was one of the most badass scenes in spider-history.

4. 2000: Out of the two and a half years of the Mackie/Byrne reboot, this was the worst. ASM V2 #13 is terrible on near-insurmountable levels, and nearly every issue after that suffers due to it.

5. 1995: The Peter Parker we've been reading for the past 20 years wasn't the real one? I don't think so.

If I had to pick one, it'd probably be 2006, but I would probably immediately second-guess that answer. All five of those years did not do justice to the character, and I wouldn't mind forgetting them.

[Pat Thomas]

I loved Amazing Fantasy 15. I've been hoping that the series would pick up that spark, but it never has. Guess I'll keep hoping. 1963-2014 have been terrible.

[Pav]

And let me elaborate on specifically WHY this book haunts me (admittedly, probably a poor choice of words). I've lost people to cancer before. I even lost a grandparent around Christmas a few years ago. And when ASM #700 came out only a couple of years after that, right around the same time of year, I got furious. With so many people buying the book and liking it, it was like hearing that cancer was somehow a GOOD thing. One person in the book even yells out "Good riddance!" on Peter's deathbed. I was just.....livid. And given everything that happens AFTER the issue, with Otto continually ruining Peter's reputation, there was NO way I could bring myself to "enjoy the ride".

I feel for you - dealing with the loss of a loved one seems so impossibly hard sometimes. You realize though, I'm sure, that the comic shouldn't be judged based on the kinds of memories you recall when reading it. That not a fair way to analyze the text, and it's not a fair way to judge the people who bought and liked it: nobody bought the book because they like cancer. Your pathos gets in the way of your logos. (Don't worry: it's a big club you're in.)

I know it's not real. It's just hard to understand why so many people like this book after everything Otto does in it.

Perhaps much for the same reasons people like...

Seinfeld
It's Always Sunny in Philidelphia
Hannibal
Dexter
Pretty Little Liars
Wolverine
Punisher
Severus Snape
Sherlock Holmes
Breaking Bad

And on and on and on.

-Pav, who will remind everyone that anti heroes have been around for a long time...

[JTait]

It's interesting seeing 1995 as such a popular choice for the worst year of Spider-Man's history. While I can't disagree that the quality of a lot of the storytelling in that period was quite poor, it was the year that I started reading comics, and ultimately became hooked on them.

Personally I would probably go for 2000. While 1999 was pretty bad, the run up to the Final Chapter was quite good and there was at least the promise that some of Mackie's reboot era subplots would come to something. While MJ's stalker, for example, was poorly executed I was genuinely intrigued about his identity. The same goes for Steward Ward. By the second year of the reboot it became clear that Mackie did not have a clue where any of his subplots were heading. Peter's descent into depression and homelessness became a chore to read too.

[MECHANO]

JMS+Deodato Jr= steaming pile....

[exile001]

EDIT: @PeterAvenger (thought I'd used a quote).

Cool, thanks for the well thought out replies (been AFK for a few days, or would have replied sooner).

I can definitely get where you're coming from with the death/SSM era now, and I'm sorry to hear that time has such pain for you.

I enjoyed SSM, but a part of that was seeing the bad-guy (SpOck) fail (even when he thought he won) and I think a lot of others felt the same, but I also know there are several people on this board who also see it as SpOck triumphing over and over, and didn't enjoy it for the same reason.

On Pete's return, I am just taking it on face value. The story, the writer and editor have both said it's the real Peter, I doubt they'll go over it again.

It's a bit like the end of the second clone saga for me. Ben dies and dissolves proving Peter is the real, original Peter. But it actually doesn't. It just proves that Ben was a clone. It proves nothing about the remaining Peter, as 'switching the results' has already been used a few times, there were hundreds of clones by the end of Maximum Clonage: Omega, and the real Peter could be dead or in a cell somewhere or anything. Unless we see Peter die and not dissolve, we don't know. And even then, some clones (like Kaine) don't dissolve.

So I just take it as agreed that Peter is the real Peter unless a future issue tells me otherwise.

I hope, once Verse is over, you can get past SSM and re-find your love for Spidey.

[exile001]

If that's what they meant to do I don't think they conveyed that message very well. The story tries too make Ock leaving seem tragic but without an actual reason for it too be tragic. I don't think Otto regretted hurting most of the people he hurt as Doc Ock. Even after Superior the book seems too be saying Peter should adapt Otto's ideas with that police radio scene.

This is completely true, and part of why I disliked ASM 1-6 so much. I'd be fine if Peter learned from SSM and decided to 'grow up', to live up to the tremendous potential he has, or even point out why he feels, after everything he went through, everything SpOck did to "improve" Spider-man was wrong.

But it didn't. It was just "well, I'm back. And now I have a company. Cool."

I don't think Otto felt regret, as he honestly didn't see anything wrong, morally, with what he was doing. I always took it that he saw the 'thought download' Peter forced on him at the end of ASM 700, but he was still a fundamentally broken human being. It didn't "fix" him, just gave him a new goal.

He saw the error of his ways, as dispassionately as he saw an experiment gone wrong. He course corrected to the new version of the experiment, but didn't regret any of the mistakes that lead to that point as it was all a learning experience.

I know we're not going to agree, but even now, months later, I still enjoy chatting about it and other people's perspectives on the whole thing.

[PeterAvenger]

Cool, thanks for the well thought out replies (been AFK for a few days, or would have replied sooner).

I can definitely get where you're coming from with the death/SSM era now, and I'm sorry to hear that time has such pain for you.

I enjoyed SSM, but a part of that was seeing the bad-guy (SpOck) fail (even when he thought he won) and I think a lot of others felt the same, but I also know there are several people on this board who also see it as SpOck triumphing over and over, and didn't enjoy it for the same reason.

On Pete's return, I am just taking it on face value. The story, the writer and editor have both said it's the real Peter, I doubt they'll go over it again.

It's a bit like the end of the second clone saga for me. Ben dies and dissolves proving Peter is the real, original Peter. But it actually doesn't. It just proves that Ben was a clone. It proves nothing about the remaining Peter, as 'switching the results' has already been used a few times, there were hundreds of clones by the end of Maximum Clonage: Omega, and the real Peter could be dead or in a cell somewhere or anything. Unless we see Peter die and not dissolve, we don't know. And even then, some clones (like Kaine) don't dissolve.

So I just take it as agreed that Peter is the real Peter unless a future issue tells me otherwise.

I hope, once Verse is over, you can get past SSM and re-find your love for Spidey.

Of course I love Spider-Man. I always have (it's partly why I hate SSM, lol).

And I get what you're saying about comparing the Clone Saga to SSM. I haven't read all of the Clone Saga, but I don't think Spider-Man got mixed up with any other clone, except for maybe Ben Reilly or Kaine. But with SSM, mind identity seems a little too ambiguous. It just feels like it's easier for a "clone" to take over, especially when you think about how Peter somehow gets back into his own body after dying in Otto's. And I HATE how Slott and Wacker just told everyone "Yup, that's Spidey, everything's fine". That's not proper storytelling.

I'm sure I'll move on completely from this story sooner or later, but it does mean a lot for someone to listen and understand why I have issues with the comic. And I'm glad to hear that people don't like SSM for the wrong reasons.