Controversial Spider-Man Opinions

[WebSlingWonder]

Okay a controversial comics opinion, not just a Spider-Man one.

I dislike Alex Ross as an artist. Dislike his cover-art, dislike his pencils, dislike Kingdom Come, Marvels and I hate that Norman Rockwell sunburst photorealism he trafficks in. I get why people like it, but to me that art style is highly superficial, sentimental, and schmaltzy in its sentiment and nostalgia.

It's comics art for people who don't like comics arts.

That literally means nothing, as for what you said. Ross is an incredible artist who paints, draws, and stylized superheroes to look realistic in their respective eras. The fact that Marvels looks as good as it does and doesn't change a single thing regarding the original designs says a lot about the work of Ross. And "superficial"? Get real. It's comic art, but a different type of comic art. They can't all be Ditkos and Frenz's.

[Lukmendes]

ps4 spider-man had weak combat mechanics, shallow enemy design, and subpar boss fights

Agreed.

Web swinging is fun (Even though it lacks web zipping upwards, which Spidey automatically uses in some situations, so it's there we just can't use it), but the combat is really basic, really safe, not taking any sort of risk to actually stand out, which is not surprising because the gameplay is more on the generic side.

Then there's the costume powers, which could be really fun, but most of them are wack, with a lot of cooldown, so you're basically using most of them only once per fight, which hey, it'd be fair enough if they lasted for longer...

shattered dimensions is the peak of these 3 things in a spider-game and is also the best one

The one thing I hated about SD was the upgrade system, takes so damn long to get everything... And it was annoying to do too lol.

It's not just that Harry has bad relationships with women, it's that he has consistently bad relationships with women. He's often unhappy and unsatisfied.

Which is no indication of being gay, because finding the right person can take forever, and he's a damaged individual to boot, making that even harder for him to be happy.

Specially if you keep in mind the situations with each of the women you listed, Gwen just rejected him, MJ broke up with him because of his drug problem, Hollister cheated on him, forgot what was the Liz situation.

Might be dollar store psychology, but it's not such a bad leap. And Iceman coming out was the best thing that ever happened to him, seems like. He's come into his own as a character since then.

It's a terrible leap and whether or not Iceman being gay worked is irrelevant, since the problem is the "logic" to make the conclusion, relationships are more complex than just "He can't make them work, that means he gay", which, I'm not saying that can't be the case, it can, just that Harry's bad relationships seem to be just bad luck and/or his own fuck ups.

-- Open World is not by default the only or the best way to do Spider-Man.

Yeah, open world is too ingrained in gaming overall, even more so with Spidey, something like level based games would still be fine, and probably would have better combat.

There's evidence to indicate that incels are deeply closeted homosexuals destroyed and ruined by macho identity-posturing and so on, so yeah.

That'd be a case by case basis, but most incels I've seen put too much importance in women and sex with women because of their own insecurity, though I can see a gat one doing that to repress homosexuality, but again, case by case.

Well, he was very inmature regarding Betty, to the point that he seemingly tried to propose to one-up Ned, but he was a dumb kid back then, so i kind of get it (and is not like Betty wasn't immature or unreasonable many times) and it was a good growing expirience for him.

Him trying to one up Ned seemed to be intentionally dumb action that Ditko made him do, since a few issues later we have Peter admitting that he moved on from Betty and hasn't even thought about her lately.

He could had treated Deb better in a couple of ocassions, but they never entered in a forman relationship (they were only in a couple of dates if i remember correctly) but to his credit he did try to make up for it as much as he could.

He was just terrible with Deb, even if they weren't dating, he was being a terrible friend with her lol.

There's one funny moment where he shows up at Deb's house very injured, she takes care of him, makes a big breakfast, and then he just leaves because he had a serious crush on another woman, I was really annoyed at Peter when that happened, but then it turned out that woman was a villain using something like pheromones to make Spidey her bitch, so it's the most justifiable case of all, although I'm not sure if he apologized for that, 'cause pheromones or not, I would certainly feel guilty if I were in his place, and Peter's guilty complex is way bigger than mine lol.

Interesting thing about Deb Whitman.

Roger Stern said in an interview (in the same fanzine with the JMS stuff I made a post about) that the secret of Deb Whitman was that she was visually the female version of Ditko's Peter Parker. Frank Miller who worked on Spec. at the time pointed this out and that blew the minds of everyone at the Spider-office.

So that subtext probably does explain the weird way Deb Whitman was treated in the story. Subconsciously it feels like Peter's dating his identical twin sister, and Peter rejecting Deb at least reflects a degree of confidence, disassociation, and independence on his side even if obviously he should have handled it better.

That's just weird, specially considering that Deb only kinda represents his appearance as a female (Guess it'd explain why she has a nice ass ), but her personality has nothing to do with Ditko's Peter, so the "disassociation" with his past only works in a superficial level.

Keep in mind “Opposites attract identical repel.” Peter’s two most successful relationships ( MJ and Felicia) are the exact opposite of him. As far as independence is concerned, Peter is more independent then most heroes. He is not thrown on some island like the mutants to isolate themselves from the human race nor does he hang out in Avengers Mansion away from the general population, nor does he abandon Peter Parker for 24/7 Spider-Man.

Ironically, his relationship with Felicia became a disaster exactly because they're too much opposites lol.

Even after she matured and got over the "I hate Peter Parker" thing, it didn't work because Felicia stayed a criminal and was just too vindictive.

MJ shows how the "Opposites attract" thing actually works, by being able to compromise in a healthy way, which just never happened with Felicia, Peter is a hero, she's a criminal, he's not willing to let her commit crimes, she's not willing to stop them, which is one of the problems, and if either compromised, they'd be miserable, it's just not healthy to do that.

Either way, wouldn't say Deb has too much in common with Peter either, a few times she's shown to be a klutz, she's not that intelligent since she tried to check out the material Peter was studying and failed, has way worse self confidence and just never, ever speaks her mind, and unfortunately that's kinda all there is to her as a character, because they didn't do much with her, and the relationship was boringly repetitive, gave me Gwen nostalgia, though not as bad, but still bad.

Spider-man Life Story is just a poorly constructed story from start to finish. Characters are introduced and never mentioned again. Plot threads are left dangling in the wind. The story's final act doesn't naturally follow the set-up of its first couple of issues. Otto's motivations made no sense. Peter was butchered. MJ was butchered.

Honestly, I find most chapters from Life Story to be, okay, but the first one, the way it managed well to develop Peter with his thoughts about the war, the scene with Norman blackmailing Peter to fight, and Peter trying to do the right thing, honestly, love that issue.

The rest take too much from each era and just awkwardly crams it into each issue, developing them less, so yeah, got worse over time, the first issue meanwhile has less wacky shit going on, so it develops more.

Also I hated Peter manipulating Ben in the 90's issue, lying to him that he's the real Peter Parker just so Peter himself can go live with his family peacefully? That's just disgusting and shitty of him.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

That literally means nothing, as for what you said. Ross is an incredible artist who paints, draws, and stylized superheroes to look realistic in their respective eras. The fact that Marvels looks as good as it does and doesn't change a single thing regarding the original designs says a lot about the work of Ross. And "superficial"? Get real. It's comic art, but a different type of comic art. They can't all be Ditkos and Frenz's.

My dude, it's a controversial opinion. That's why I put it here. It's how I feel about his art, I can't help it. I just reflexively dislike it and find it repulsive. I can't put my finger on why I dislike Alex Ross' artwork (and I mean I dislike everything and anything he has done), I just do. To me his stuff is not what comics' are about. I dislike his spec versions of the Spider-Man and Goblin suits designed and rejected for the first Raimi movie (which in turn inspired Ock's Superior suit, which is controversial by default), I dislike his covers and so on. I don't mind a certain photorealism in artwork, like for instance Salvador Larocca does that well as in To Have and to Hold which does have a photorealistic sheen but there's a way to do it and feel essentially right, and then there's Alex Ross.

I accept Ross is popular and in demand, and a lot of people with generally good taste, and whose opinions I value, like his stuff. But again, that's my controversial view on that.


------
Other controversial views.

-- Spider-Man became big largely for Steve Ditko's costume design and not for any of the deeper characterization that Stan Lee brought to Marvel.

[WebSlingWonder]

My dude, it's a controversial opinion. That's why I put it here. It's how I feel about his art, I can't help it. I just reflexively dislike it and find it repulsive. I can't put my finger on why I dislike Alex Ross' artwork (and I mean I dislike everything and anything he has done), I just do. To me his stuff is not what comics' are about. I dislike his spec versions of the Spider-Man and Goblin suits designed and rejected for the first Raimi movie (which in turn inspired Ock's Superior suit, which is controversial by default), I dislike his covers and so on. I don't mind a certain photorealism in artwork, like for instance Salvador Larocca does that well as in To Have and to Hold which does have a photorealistic sheen but there's a way to do it and feel essentially right, and then there's Alex Ross.

I accept Ross is popular and in demand, and a lot of people with generally good taste, and whose opinions I value, like his stuff. But again, that's my controversial view on that.


------
Other controversial views.

-- Spider-Man became big largely for Steve Ditko's costume design and not for any of the deeper characterization that Stan Lee brought to Marvel.

Yeah, I gotcha.

My controversial opinion: Spider-Man fans are the main ones to blame for destroying this franchise.

[Frontier]

I don't know if I said this earlier, but Drake Bell wasn't necessarily a terrible Spider-Man VA, he just got the worst material to work with for most of his tenure with the character.

[TheCape]

I don't know if I said this earlier, but Drake Bell wasn't necessarily a terrible Spider-Man VA, he just got the worst material to work with for most of his tenure with the character.

Yeah, maybe with a better direction he could have turn out better, hell the current cartoon isn't much better in spite of having Robbie Daymond as Peter (he has his moments, but most of the time he sounds bland at least in the first season).

[Lukmendes]

Yeah, I gotcha.

My controversial opinion: Spider-Man fans are the main ones to blame for destroying this franchise.

Spidey fans aren't the ones who made shit like Clone saga and OMD happen because of toxic nostalgia, so I wouldn't say they're the main problem.

I don't know if I said this earlier, but Drake Bell wasn't necessarily a terrible Spider-Man VA, he just got the worst material to work with for most of his tenure with the character.

He was Spidey in Avengers EMH cartoon, he was fine there.

[PCN24454]

I don't know if I said this earlier, but Drake Bell wasn't necessarily a terrible Spider-Man VA, he just got the worst material to work with for most of his tenure with the character.

He wasn't bad. It's just that the plot was annoying. I honestly don't know why people had a problem with his voice specifically.

[WebSlingWonder]

Spidey fans aren't the ones who made shit like Clone saga and OMD happen because of toxic nostalgia, so I wouldn't say they're the main problem.

No, but they continually lambast and bog down this franchise by continually being contradictory. In other words, they don't want anything to change or happen lest it mess with "precious Peter Parker." Should there be more than one Spider-Man? Fans scream "no" when it should be "yes". Should Peter be with MJ? Fans scream "yes" and harass creators. Should Peter be an "everyman"? Some scream "yes" and "no", and ultimately can't make up their dang minds about a 58-year franchise that has long moved on.

You know what my hot take is? Spider-Man fans are the worst superhero fans, even more than Batman fans, because they don't agree on a consistent version of the character and don't let the creators imagine new and incredible scenarios for him. You all do NOT deserve Spider-Man. Yeah, I said it.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

You know what my hot take is? Spider-Man fans are the worst superhero fans,

Spider-Man fans are responsible for:
-- Peter and Mary Jane getting married, which happened because fans asked for it and cheered for it at a convention when Lee and Jim Shooter were in attendance. Without fan response it would not have happened.
-- Spider-Girl becoming the first Marvel female superhero to reach 100 issues. It had a dedicate fanbase of committed readers who bought extra whenever sales reached cancellation point.

When have Batman fans done something remotely like this?

... even more than Batman fans, because they don't agree on a consistent version of the character

Batman exists in the DC Universe where there isn't a single consistent version of the character going all the way back to Bill Finger. In the case of Marvel, you have the 616 Continuity, which editors and others treat as the one true consistent version, and ultimately what is said and expressed about that will bring about an emotional response. It ultimately doesn't matter to Batman or DC fans which Earth is which and so on, it's all gonna be rebooted every five years or so.

...and don't let the creators imagine new and incredible scenarios for him.

Spider-Man fans do not sit on the Marvel Board of Directors with veto power over marketing and editorial on what stories can work or have hire-and-fire authority. The one time Spider-Man fans expressed a view, getting Peter-MJ married, Marvel editors decided to ignore and gaslight fans and so on.

You all do NOT deserve Spider-Man. Yeah, I said it.

Eastwood Deserve.jpg


PS: All seriousness, what in your opinion is the ideal picture of fandom that we should adhere to?

[Lukmendes]

No, but they continually lambast and bog down this franchise by continually being contradictory. In other words, they don't want anything to change or happen lest it mess with "precious Peter Parker." Should there be more than one Spider-Man? Fans scream "no" when it should be "yes". Should Peter be with MJ? Fans scream "yes" and harass creators. Should Peter be an "everyman"? Some scream "yes" and "no", and ultimately can't make up their dang minds about a 58-year franchise that has long moved on.

You know what my hot take is? Spider-Man fans are the worst superhero fans, even more than Batman fans, because they don't agree on a consistent version of the character and don't let the creators imagine new and incredible scenarios for him. You all do NOT deserve Spider-Man. Yeah, I said it.

Spider-Man fans are what kept MJ alive for so long to begin with, if it were up to Marvel she wouldn't have made it past the 90's because, again, toxic nostalgia.

Hell, I highly doubt she would even have come back to become relevant in the 80's to begin with if it were really up to higher ups.

As Jack pointed out, there's the whole Spider-Girl thing, she lasted pretty long for some alternate universe.

And yeah, fans aren't going to agree on a consistent version of the character, and expecting otherwise is silly, Spidey is 58 years old, we've seen him as a teenager, a college student, an adult trying to get by, a married man trying to make the relationship work, and more recent interpretations are giving emphasis to the teenager, and nostalgia is obviously going to influence what version the character the fans are going to prefer.

And also, Spidey fans not letting creators do different kinds of stories? When it's explicitly the higher ups who don't want to take too many risks, preventing the creators from going to those directions to begin with? Give me a break.

Seems you're just butthurt that the fanbase can't agree of what they want, which is natural and happens with any fanbase that is old enough, hell, even happens with those that aren't that old, it'd certainly be a lot more boring around here if we were all a hivemind constantly agreeing with each other, and Spidey's fanbase is certainly not the complete opposite of that with people aggressively disagreeing with each other and doing death threats, it's pretty tame really.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Spider-Man fans are a lot less divisive than other fans. Batman fans can't agree if Batman should be authoritarian and unstable like Miller's, or heroic and level-headed like O'Neil's. Superman fans can't agree if he should be a leftist crusader like in the Golden Age, or a Republican Dad like in the Cold War. Those are way bigger disagreements than anything I see among Spider-Man fans.

[TheCape]

Spider-Man fans are a lot less divisive than other fans. Batman fans can't agree if Batman should be authoritarian and unstable like Miller's, or heroic and level-headed like O'Neil's. Superman fans can't agree if he should be a leftist crusader like in the Golden Age, or a Republican Dad like in the Cold War. Those are way bigger disagreements than anything among Spider-Man fans.

When it comes to disagretments, no one beat Superman fans, they were my first forum here and that was among the first few things i learned. The disagreetment between Batman fans are a bit more recent thougth.

[WebSlingWonder]

I watched this board tear itself apart for years over the same few topics, namely OMD. And it was excruciating and exhausting. I left for a good amount of years and then, when I came back at the tail end of Slott's run it was fine. But then, with Spencer (seemingly) putting a lot of terrible Spidey stories to rest, you fans started picking up again and getting back to your old tricks. Now every time I turn around it's "Oh, I hate OMD" "Quesada is to blame for OMD" "JMS's run is overrated" "Silk is terrible" "Spider-Man should team up with She-Hulk" Enough is enough. I'm sick of it. And don't somebody say, "Well you don't have to be here. You could go somewhere else." Do you know how lonely it is to be a comic fan? How painful it is to like something other people dislike? "Comics are stupid" "Comics are dumb" "Comics are too complicated". I thought coming to these boards would help me make some friends, but it didn't. Instead, I'm just alone in my thoughts here as well as elsewhere.

I believe fandom in general is the worst thing to happen to a writer, and I say that as a writer. It scares me to think that creative work can leave the people who created it behind.

[Frontier]

Yeah, maybe with a better direction he could have turn out better, hell the current cartoon isn't much better in spite of having Robbie Daymond as Peter (he has his moments, but most of the time he sounds bland at least in the first season).

Marvel cartoons as of late have had difficulty bringing out their VA's A-game, even when they have all-star casts.

He was Spidey in Avengers EMH cartoon, he was fine there.

Yeah, I mean, that Spidey wasn't supposed to be Bell but it showed that with good direction and material he could actually deliver (as did a bit of later USM material), that just wasn't what he was given for most of his tenure.

He wasn't bad. It's just that the plot was annoying. I honestly don't know why people had a problem with his voice specifically.

I think it was a mix of the quality of the writing and the material he had as Peter that was negatively attributed to Bell rather than the writing/directing.