Controversial Spider-Man Opinions

[yojimbo]

But Peter has rarely been incompetent, he was just trying to balance his personal life with superheroics and that's why his science acumen got pushed to the side. At least the public application did, because he used mad science skills to take down various supercriminals.

The classic superhero model has all but been erased, but there's a solid concept behind the secret identity, the guy who seems like he's a flake because his life has been compartmentalized and no one sees every side of it. That's very true to life. There are days where your professional life suffers because you're trying to keep everything together at home, and vice versa.

That's why I like Peter as a grad assistant or a teacher. It's one of those jobs that people pay lip service to, but they're often thinking, "If Peter had really applied himself, he could be doing real science." At the same time, what could be more important than teaching a new generation of kids to love science?

Most of us would like to believe that we're special, that we've accomplished things that people won't always see the same way we do. No one really cheers you on for making it through the day when you've got a migraine, after all--but sometimes those feel like the most monumental victories of all.

Peter has always had a lot to be proud of, but even more so because he's not looking for credit. He just does the right thing even though it costs him a lot and makes him appear flaky.

I don't think having Nick Fury and other heroes recognize Peter's greatness has served the Spider-Man mythos well. And looking at Spider-Man these days, it's gone well past Charlie Brown kicking the football, as he's suddenly become Tom Brady.

I really loved this post. Thanks a lot for this. I agree to everything you said.

The reason why Peter Parker has been my favourite character is precisely because of what you're saying. Peter was always trying to balance everything and live a normal life. That's what made him a hero. Not his powers, nor his intellect. Spider-Man is the hero that everyone can be.

Frankly I have no use for a Spider-Man managing a company or being a successful scientist, not because it can't be a good story, but because it moves the character too far from his roots and makes Peter just one of the others heroes, without paying attention to the reason why it became so successful as a character. And seriously, the new ASM idea is the classic status-quo of Iron Man. I never find that idea interesting (and for Iron Man it made sense) and I don't see why I should be interested now.

I think that Slott is too big a fan to write the character good. All his ideas basically revolve around making Peter look cool and a winner, when that's exactly the opposite of why he is great.

[Spidercide]

I really loved this post. Thanks a lot for this. I agree to everything you said.

The reason why Peter Parker has been my favourite character is precisely because of what you're saying. Peter was always trying to balance everything and live a normal life. That's what made him a hero. Not his powers, nor his intellect. Spider-Man is the hero that everyone can be.

Frankly I have no use for a Spider-Man managing a company or being a successful scientist, not because it can't be a good story, but because it moves the character too far from his roots and makes Peter just one of the others heroes, without paying attention to the reason why it became so successful as a character. And seriously, the new ASM idea is the classic status-quo of Iron Man. I never find that idea interesting (and for Iron Man it made sense) and I don't see why I should be interested now.

I think that Slott is too big a fan to write the character good. All his ideas basically revolve around making Peter look cool and a winner, when that's exactly the opposite of why he is great.

I think it works for Iron Man or Batman but that's what makes them who THEY are. it isn't what makes Spider-Man who he is.

And really how creative are you genuinely being when you can only find something new to mine from the character by turning them into another notable character? It's like the flipside to giving the identity to a new person because you've hit a wall with the old guy.

[Frontier]

I think I said it earlier in this thread, but I really do think Peter's intelligences hurts Spider-Man in the long run and it would be better if Spider-Man was always average intelligences.

The only real reason you'd want Peter to be intelligent is because of him making the webshooters.

It also plays a part in how he's able to always outthink his enemies or come up with ways to beat them on the fly or with preparation. It's probably partially why he was able to be so successful in spite of his age when he first started out.

[Frontier]

I know Im gonna get a ton of hate for this, but I liked the organic webs. In the movies, anyway. Changing it around in the comics felt weird and unnatural. Would be fine (with me) if they went that route for fresh versions though.

Anyway, what should I be reading if I want to get Parker?

Well, what have you read with the character? I think that's a good place to start .

[Aruran.]

It also plays a part in how he's able to always outthink his enemies or come up with ways to beat them on the fly or with preparation. It's probably partially why he was able to be so successful in spite of his age when he first started out.

Yeah but quick wit =/= intelligence.
And especially when Peter is younger and learning the ropes, it seems more interesting when he faces a bad guy and screws up while stopping them at the same time.
(IE causing collateral damage)

[cyberhubbs]

I think it works for Iron Man or Batman but that's what makes them who THEY are. it isn't what makes Spider-Man who he is.

And really how creative are you genuinely being when you can only find something new to mine from the character by turning them into another notable character? It's like the flipside to giving the identity to a new person because you've hit a wall with the old guy.

Just because Peter owns a tech company it doesn't mean he's suddenly Tony Stark. The similarities are superficial.

In any case, putting characters in new situations is the whole point of long-term fiction. Fortunes are lost and won, however brief. Batman and Stark have been brought low before, no reason why Peter can't be taken high for a little bit.

[mi27ke85]

• The first movie was awesome.
• One More Day was necessary to get Peter Parker back to his roots. I viewed it as the equivalent of ripping of a Band-Aid. Horribbly written and a totally nonsensical deus ex machina. If you wanted to get Peter Parker back to his roots though, I don't know any other way to get rid of MJ except some kind of prolonged divorce story.
• Speaking of, I don't think Mary Jane is a very interesting character.
• Venom is probably my favorite Spider-Man rogue. Can't help it, it's what I grew up with.
• I liked 'Back in Black.' I know it was a a gimmick for the third movie but it's cool to see Spidey not pulling punches. He doesn't get angry often and it's interesting to see the other characters' reactions when he decides to get medieval.
• I don't mind some of the admittedly horrible characters from post-Brand New Day. Freak, Screwball, Menace, etc. I personally think Mr. Negative is kind of weak, also. Still, I like that they made a point in Brand New Day to introduce a lot of new characters, even though a lot of them didn't stick.

[Speed Force League Unlimited]

• I don't mind some of the admittedly horrible characters from post-Brand New Day. Freak, Speedball, Menace, etc. I personally think Mr. Negative is kind of weak, also. Still, I like that they made a point in Brand New Day to introduce a lot of new characters, even though a lot of them didn't stick.

I think you meant Screwball.
Speedball was introduced in Amazing Spider-Man annual 22.

[Frontier]

Yeah but quick wit =/= intelligence.
And especially when Peter is younger and learning the ropes, it seems more interesting when he faces a bad guy and screws up while stopping them at the same time.
(IE causing collateral damage)

Just because he's smart doesn't mean he can't screw up (though on the other hand that doesn't mean he screws up all the time), and he certainly wasn't perfect when he was starting out as I recall. His smarts were still invaluable in how he was able to come up with ways to beat his villains in the end.

[Agent Z]

Just because he's smart doesn't mean he can't screw up (though on the other hand that doesn't mean he screws up all the time), and he certainly wasn't perfect when he was starting out as I recall. His smarts were still invaluable in how he was able to come up with ways to beat his villains in the end.

And the bolded is certainly true for characters who are supposedly smarter than Peter. Hell, that's how the Fantastic Four started.

[Keeper of the Crows]

Just because Peter owns a tech company it doesn't mean he's suddenly Tony Stark. The similarities are superficial.

In any case, putting characters in new situations is the whole point of long-term fiction. Fortunes are lost and won, however brief. Batman and Stark have been brought low before, no reason why Peter can't be taken high for a little bit.

I think this is a good point. I loved Superior Spider-Man, for example, and that was a dramatically different status-quo for Peter Parker and Otto Octavius. In fact, I think the willingness to shake things up is Slott's greatest strength. I think it's fascinating to see Peter in unique situations after 50 years of stories, especially if he reacts to those situations in a way that's true to his character.

[cyberhubbs]

I think this is a good point. I loved Superior Spider-Man, for example, and that was a dramatically different status-quo for Peter Parker and Otto Octavius. In fact, I think the willingness to shake things up is Slott's greatest strength. I think it's fascinating to see Peter in unique situations after 50 years of stories, especially if he reacts to those situations in a way that's true to his character.

Yeah, and this situation is pretty much in character. Peter may not have built Parker Industries without Otto's ambition, but he is willing to step up into the role to help folks. It's an interesting way to get around Peter's "flakiness", 'cause Otto, even when he's not as evil, is still very much about his ego.

[mi27ke85]

Yep! Thanks for the correction.

[mi27ke85]

I think you meant Screwball.
Speedball was introduced in Amazing Spider-Man annual 22.

Yeah, I meant Screwball. Changed it. Thanks for the correction.

[yojimbo]

Just because Peter owns a tech company it doesn't mean he's suddenly Tony Stark. The similarities are superficial.

In any case, putting characters in new situations is the whole point of long-term fiction. Fortunes are lost and won, however brief. Batman and Stark have been brought low before, no reason why Peter can't be taken high for a little bit.

Peter owns a tech company (while he graduated in biology, but never mind that, Doc Ock can take a PhD in no time) and Spider-Man is his bodyguard. It's the Silver Age status quo of Iron Man, no matter how it will eventually diverge. Slott basically took the basic concept of another character and put Spider-Man there, I agree with Spidercide that it's hardly a creative idea.

I have no problem with new situations, however the idea of Peter suddenly a millionaire and with a global reach is for me a step too far for the character. Tony Stark lost his companies more than once, but he has never reach the point when all his belongings are on the street because he didn't pay rent (like it happened to Peter). For Peter already having a stable job (like he had at Horizon) is a big step forward.