OMD/BND ruined the Black Cat so will she ever be redeemed as a character again ?

[Thor-Ul]

1. From interviews and other comments gathered Mary Jane was never pregnant in the new timeline.

2. Yes they still moved to Portland. Every story happened except they weren't married and MJ wasn't pregnant and any story related to pregnancy issues are now negated. As for why they moved to Portland. Plenty of no-prize worthy reasons. He found out he was a clone. He needed to get away from New York to rethink his life. Working at that company (which made the radioactive spider radioactive) will allow him to better understand his genetic structure and make sure he doesn't melt (remember Peter was under the impression he was a clone)

3. Deep down they both knew he would be Spidey again and Spider-Man would get in the way.

4. Probably I love you so much. Our love. You're my rock. Days of Our Lives theme music. Or maybe Jerry Maguire "YOU COMPLETE ME."

I thought than Peter retired from Spider-man during the clone saga because he was a married man and soon-to-be father. Which was then his motivation to retire of superheroics and give the Spider-Man title to Ben Reilly? I mean, because his girlfriend demanded it? That would made Peter such a pushover. Felicia is better without him.

[Vortex85]

1. From interviews and other comments gathered Mary Jane was never pregnant in the new timeline.

Do you know how much that affects and how many unknowns that creates in the timeline? Was MJ hospitalized during her pregnancy? Did Ben and Pete ever fight Caroline trainer together?

Did MJ not go to Seward Trainer to check the health of her fetus? If not, how would she be captured by Kaine since she was captured on the way home from checking on it and thats the only reason she was out? Did Peter team up with his clones to rescure her from Kaine?

Alison Mongrain wasn't hired by Osborn? Osborn didn't watch MJ give birth and distract Peter with Robot Master? What happened instead in the Revelations arc? What was MJ even doing?

So many changes and we don't know anything. It just ruins the narrative of comics and replaces it with a giant UNKNOWN.

[Vegeta]

Hawkeye vs Deadpool and the recently relaunched Amazing Spider-man title.

That can't be right, Hawkeye vs. Deadpool isn't even finished yet and the first issue came out long after the Superior Spider-Man issue where Spock caught Felicia robbing someone. I'm asking which comic it was before that Superior Spider-Man issue, the one Dan cited as the reason Felicia was evil again and robbing people.

[Darthfury78]

That can't be right, Hawkeye vs. Deadpool isn't even finished yet and the first issue came out long after the Superior Spider-Man issue where Spock caught Felicia robbing someone. I'm asking which comic it was before that Superior Spider-Man issue, the one Dan cited as the reason Felicia was evil again and robbing people.

Her return to being a thief happened around the time when she got back her Bad Luck powers from Dr. Tramma.

[Pav]

It's not settling for less. It's simply not going crazy every time you don't get your way with a story and falling back on attempting to assume others aren't capable of enjoying something because you don't. It's so pretentious as to be utterly laughable. Always tossing around "cerebral" and such nonsense.

Smart writing isn't a bad thing. Neither is a fun story. But when you start masturbating to your own opinion and everyone else is wrong? You may need to go back to basics.

I'm proud to take my comics seriously. The stories I read back in the day were triumphs, with characters going through the ringer and coming out of things with a better understanding of themselves and their world, they were ADULTS, and they taught me to be an adult.

"Creative" types pissing all of that away and those pleased being being fine with it so long as it gives them a fun-but-dumb book and the occasional belly laugh is frankly insulting to the characters and insulting to me, and future generations that are as like-minded as me.

I take my comics seriously. Grant Morrison's New X-Men run and the Clone Saga have been just as influential in my life as Hamlet and Henderson the Rain King. But I agree with hubbs: too many posters get overly upset when a writer chooses to do something that they don't like. You can complain about shoddy writing; you can complain about lack of continuity. In the end, you're complaining. And complaining. And complaining.

It gets so tiring to see the same posters complaining about the same thing day after day after day. Perhaps some of you might consider how your attitude on these forums affects the ability of your peers to enjoy the conversation.

-Pav, who values a positive mindset even when dealing with something negative...

[Punisher007]

Or you know, they can continue to give their opinions just like everyone else. This is a DISCUSSION forum, not a "lets blindly praise everything" forum. If they like something and think it's good, then they'll praise it. If they don't, then they'll point out why they don't, just like with anything else. It's that simple and if some people don't like it, well that's too bad. No one is forcing you to be here, you can always leave if it bothers you so much. People can complain all they damn well please, especially if it concerns shoddy treatment of their favorite characters.

[boots]

I take my comics seriously. Grant Morrison's New X-Men run and the Clone Saga have been just as influential in my life as Hamlet and Henderson the Rain King. But I agree with hubbs: too many posters get overly upset when a writer chooses to do something that they don't like. You can complain about shoddy writing; you can complain about lack of continuity. In the end, you're complaining. And complaining. And complaining.

It gets so tiring to see the same posters complaining about the same thing day after day after day. Perhaps some of you might consider how your attitude on these forums affects the ability of your peers to enjoy the conversation.

-Pav, who values a positive mindset even when dealing with something negative...

i have no problems with criticism, i just have two
criteria:

reasoned

informed

funny is a bonus.

[boots]

Or you know, they can continue to give their opinions just like everyone else. This is a DISCUSSION forum, not a "lets blindly praise everything" forum. If they like something and think it's good, then they'll praise it. If they don't, then they'll point out why they don't, just like with anything else. It's that simple and if some people don't like it, well that's too bad. No one is forcing you to be here, you can always leave if it bothers you so much. People can complain all they damn well please, especially if it concerns shoddy treatment of their favorite characters.

there's a difference between discussion and venting.

[cyberhubbs]

I'm proud to take my comics seriously. The stories I read back in the day were triumphs, with characters going through the ringer and coming out of things with a better understanding of themselves and their world, they were ADULTS, and they taught me to be an adult.

"Creative" types pissing all of that away and those pleased being being fine with it so long as it gives them a fun-but-dumb book and the occasional belly laugh is frankly insulting to the characters and insulting to me, and future generations that are as like-minded as me.

Yes, yes. Back in the day. We've all had our back in the days. We were all molded by the stories of our youth. But I don't get all superiority complex about it. It's not a war.

You don't have to like the stories. That isn't a concern. For the entirety of human existence someone has at some point in time read a story they ended up not liking. World didn't end. No need for all the drama.

Edit: Oh my god. I just realize you used the "I'm doing this for the children!" argument. Hah. Well-done.

[Rahul]

Nothing can be called permanent in mainstream, commercial comics.


The day fans realize this, the more happier they'll be.

[Cameron Samurai]

there's a difference between discussion and venting.

And there's a difference between positivity and being an echo-chamber

Nothing can be called permanent in mainstream, commercial comics.

Exactly. Because anything they change is almost always reversed and reestablished, because nostalgia sells as much as progress does.

You can complain about shoddy writing; you can complain about lack of continuity. In the end, you're complaining. And complaining. And complaining.

What does it matter to you? I won't intentionally lower my standards when my favorite hero is going down the pan.

It gets so tiring to see the same posters complaining about the same thing day after day after day.

Then ignore us and concentrate on what you enjoy. We won't be shutting up and won't be guilted into doing so

[boots]

And there's a difference between positivity and being a totalitarian boot-licking echo-chamber

no doubt. good thing this board doesn't have any of the latter, they sound scary.

and just to clarify your grammar there- are you saying the person is a totalitarianist who is also a sycophantic censor or a sycophant for totalitarianism censorship? two different things.

[Cameron Samurai]

Let me put this into perspective, I used to be exactly like you lot, pissing and moaning about people pissing and moaning because I felt offended what I enjoyed was being made out to be this incredibly lousy pastime and that I was an idiot for watching it (this was Doctor Who), then I actually developed critical faculties as I got older and listened to those criticisms, and now I wonder why I ever bothered defending those stories as much as I did. Don't get me wrong, I still ENJOY a lot of those stories, but I know they're objectively rubbish. A little honesty would do those attempting to make this place an echo-chamber wonders.

Be honest with yourselves. This is not a golden age we're living in. No shame in admitting it. I can understand it better if you enjoy it in an ironic way, but really, learn to accept people aren't going to settle for meteoric mediocrity if they interpret it as such, and more importantly, LISTEN to what they say rather than revolt against it. Everything educates at the end of the day, fresh perspectives are what discussion forums are all about.

If we're mentally taxing people out with perceived pessimism, tough chickens. This is the internet, develop something called a thicker skin and blooming well get on with it

[boots]

Let me put this into perspective,

let's both do that.

I used to be exactly like you lot, pissing and moaning about people pissing and moaning because I felt offended what I enjoyed...then I actually developed critical faculties

critical faculty failure 1: generalising the various posters on here as being of one mind. it's a blatant disregard for the variety of responses in this thread. you’re trying to create a unified group of people who apparently "piss and moan" about your pissing and moaning (does anybody else see the irony in this ). it's dangerous as you are creating a constitutive other (in the sociological sense not like kaine the other) out of certain members of this board who are not actually unified.

critical faculty failure 2: the belief you can empathise with this imaginary mind-think of the other because of your dark whovian past. i can't believe i just typed that.

critical faculty failure 3: by falsely creating this constitutive other, you miss the individual points that are made and instead respond to a generalised opposition that doesn't exist… which makes it hell difficult to discuss things with you mate.

speaking of which...

Be honest with yourselves. This is not a golden age we're living in. No shame in admitting it. I can understand it better if you enjoy it in an ironic way, but really, learn to accept people aren't going to settle for meteoric mediocrity if they interpret it as such, and more importantly, LISTEN to what they say rather than revolt against it.

perfect example. you're doing nobody (especially yourself) any favours with the golden age tangent- an epoch that not one person in this thread has ever suggested exists.

the attempt at condescension with 'irony must be the only way one can swallow such drek' might work on its patronising lonesome if you were actually addressing people’s points as they are, not as you imagine. none of what you’ve written applies to me and barely to anyone else. you're campaigning for a higher standard of story? pav is campaigning for a higher standard of posting. surely you can see the common ground there. i’ve stated my issues above with the approach some self styled critics take, though i’ve had some great talks with articulate and reasonable people who don’t like slott’s work. those guys stand out from the crowd.

just remembering my very first week on this board; a member lashed out at me because he believed i hadn't had children. he felt this devalued my opinion on spider man.

let that insanity sink in for a moment.

this grown man who apparently had (very unfortunate) children was angry at other men he’d never met and whose family status and history he knew nothing about, for not having birthed the imaginary children he felt it was their duty to before they were allowed to talk about a comic book.

i guess “boots” just doesn’t sound like a daddy.

If we're mentally taxing people out with perceived pessimism, tough chickens.

critical faculty failure 4: that your posts are mentally taxing. they're not.

[cyberhubbs]

let's both do that.



critical faculty failure 1: generalising the various posters on here as being of one mind. it's a blatant disregard for the variety of responses in this thread. you’re trying to create a unified group of people who apparently "piss and moan" about your pissing and moaning (does anybody else see the irony in this ). it's dangerous as you are creating a constitutive other (in the sociological sense not like kaine the other) out of certain members of this board who are not actually unified.

critical faculty failure 2: the belief you can empathise with this imaginary mind-think of the other because of your dark whovian past. i can't believe i just typed that.

critical faculty failure 3: by falsely creating this constitutive other, you miss the individual points that are made and instead respond to a generalised opposition that doesn't exist… which makes it hell difficult to discuss things with you mate.

speaking of which...



perfect example. you're doing nobody (especially yourself) any favours with the golden age tangent- an epoch that not one person in this thread has ever suggested exists.

the attempt at condescension with 'irony must be the only way one can swallow such drek' might work on its patronising lonesome if you were actually addressing people’s points as they are, not as you imagine. none of what you’ve written applies to me and barely to anyone else. you're campaigning for a higher standard of story? pav is campaigning for a higher standard of posting. surely you can see the common ground there. i’ve stated my issues above with the approach some self styled critics take, though i’ve had some great talks with articulate and reasonable people who don’t like slott’s work. those guys stand out from the crowd.

just remembering my very first week on this board; a member lashed out at me because he believed i hadn't had children. he felt this devalued my opinion on spider man.

let that insanity sink in for a moment.

this grown man who apparently had (very unfortunate) children was angry at other men he’d never met and whose family status and history he knew nothing about, for not having birthed the imaginary children he felt it was their duty to before they were allowed to talk about a comic book.

i guess “boots” just doesn’t sound like a daddy.




critical faculty failure 4: that your posts are mentally taxing. they're not.

A boot is still a type of shoe, but maybe they figured you had to be an old woman too.