Amazing Spider-Man #26 Review/SPOILERS

[Huntsman Spider]

My guess is that the board of PI removes Peter as CEO and installs Anna. That way PI is still in the background but story can move beyond it for a bit.

I would like that better. At least then the company would be in the hands of someone explicitly trusted by Peter and who's wise to his dual identity.

[The Negative Zone]

So, the whole Peter punching Asian criminals joke is "sjw conspiracy" made it to these forums? Man, I thought that craziness was only restricted to YouTube.

Anyway this was a great issue. It will be pretty awesome to see Spider-Man topple Osborn's rule. That's something I'll love.

I'm quite sad to hear the news Parker Industries will be ending in Marvel Legacy, so I'm guessing any actual romance between Spider-Man and Mockingbird will be only around for what... this arc? (If 26's issue is any indication, maybe not at all.) I'm disappointed, it feels like the PI era has a lot to wrap up and no time.

[Inversed]

My guess is that the board of PI removes Peter as CEO and installs Anna. That way PI is still in the background but story can move beyond it for a bit.

I'm all good with this, Anna's already been basically running the company herself. Let her be in charge and Peter can just use some of the resources for Spider-Man stuff.

[WebLurker]

So, the whole Peter punching Asian criminals joke is "sjw conspiracy" made it to these forums? Man, I thought that craziness was only restricted to YouTube.

Saw the page in question and some of the pushback. Personally, while I think those who were arguing against it were making a big deal over nothing, I don't think it was very funny in the first place; the comedic timing wasn't good and it rambled on too long, sucking the humor out of it. Say what will for or against Dan Slott as a Spider-Man writer, but I've never found humor and jokes to be his strong suite.

[Dan Slott]

Saw the page in question and some of the pushback. Personally, while I think those who were arguing against it were making a big deal over nothing, I don't think it was very funny in the first place; the comedic timing wasn't good and it rambled on too long, sucking the humor out of it. Say what will for or against Dan Slott as a Spider-Man writer, but I've never found humor and jokes to be his strong suite.

Quick reminder: How much of my work have you read again? A small handful/sampling (and nothing recent) right?

And why are you commenting in a review thread for a book you haven't read?

[WebLurker]

Quick reminder: How much of my work have you read again? A small handful/sampling (and nothing recent) right?

A pretty consistent point whenever I've read Spider-Man material you've written is that the humor falls flat. Humor can be extremely subjective. For some people the ASM's sense of humor may be great. It just hasn't worked very well for me personally (which is all subjective).

And why are you commenting in a review thread for a book you haven't read?

I find it interesting to read what other people think about stuff like this (one of the interesting things about creative projects is that you can show different people the same thing and get very different assessments of it). Also, I was commenting on a specific piece I had seen and read myself, no more, no less. (Even the comment that I'm not a fan of your writing when it comes to the humor and jokes is based off of first-hand experience.)

[Bor]

A pretty consistent point whenever I've read Spider-Man material you've written is that the humor falls flat. Humor can be extremely subjective. For some people the ASM's sense of humor may be great. It just hasn't worked very well for me personally (which is all subjective).



I find it interesting to read what other people think about stuff like this (one of the interesting things about creative projects is that you can show different people the same thing and get very different assessments of it). Also, I was commenting on a specific piece I had seen and read myself, no more, no less. (Even the comment that I'm not a fan of your writing when it comes to the humor and jokes is based off of first-hand experience.)

Have you read his Spider-man/Human torch mini? Because that is pretty darn close to being as objectively funny as it can be.

[WebLurker]

Have you read his Spider-man/Human torch mini? Because that is pretty darn close to being as objectively funny as it can be.

No, can't say I have. Is that in it's own trade or something?

[Bor]

No, can't say I have. Is that in it's own trade or something?

Yes. It is its own mini that came out before Slotts run. It follows the two characters friendship over different time periods. It also is a good example that Slott is able to write a good married Parker couple if given the chance.

Its worth checking out if you can. My favorite issue involves the spidey mobile and the red ghost with his super abes.

[Dan Slott]

A pretty consistent point whenever I've read Spider-Man material you've written is that the humor falls flat.

But, again, you've read a very small amount of my work. It's the "whenever" part that's weird to me.
Like if I saw 2 Clint Eastwood movies and then spent an enormous amount of time on threads about Clint Eastwood movies I hadn't seen. I don't get that.

I was commenting on a specific piece I had seen and read myself, no more, no less.

A page out of context that was part of a 40 page story you hadn't read. That would be like seeing a clip of a Clint Eastwood movie and then showing up on that same Clint Eastwood thread to discuss a tiny clip.

If there are so many hours in a day, wouldn't you rather spend them in threads discussing things that you'd actually read?

I'm just trying to get the appeal of this here.

[DieHard200904]

This is comics, not the real world, so I'll say this: fuck SHIELD, and Fury's pompous bollocks! Go for it Spidey!

You beat me to it, but pretty much this!

[WebLurker]

Yes. It is its own mini that came out before Slotts run. It follows the two characters friendship over different time periods. It also is a good example that Slott is able to write a good married Parker couple if given the chance.

I'll believe that, based on the RYV miniseries. All things considered, I think I'd like his writing more if it was in that era or some other series I liked, rather than on a series that I'm not onboard with, as far as the creative direction goes.

Its worth checking out if you can. My favorite issue involves the spidey mobile and the red ghost with his super abes.

Not sure if my library stocks it, but I'll have to put that on my to-read list, along with Kraven's Last Hunt and half-a-dozen other comics I've heard good things about.

But, again, you've read a very small amount of my work. It's the "whenever" part that's weird to me.

It's just of the stories you've written that I've read, it's been consistently a thing that I didn't care for. Now, maybe I've just had the misfortune of picking up the ones that suffered a bit there and aren't an accurate representation of the norm (as Bor recommended one that he thought was funny -- and one I've heard good things about even from your harshest critics), I don't know; it's just an offhand comment about my experiences, as limited as they may or may not be.

Like if I saw 2 Clint Eastwood movies and then spent an enormous amount of time on threads about Clint Eastwood movies I hadn't seen. I don't get that.

Don't think I comment on these ASM-only threads that much. I usually just lurk. Like I said, even if I'm not reading, I'm curious what other people think, what's going on, etc. (Besides, I'm a Spider-Man fan and have read/seen quite a few stuff with him in it.)

A page out of context that was part of a 40 page story you hadn't read. That would be like seeing a clip of a Clint Eastwood movie and then showing up on that same Clint Eastwood thread to discuss a tiny clip.

In this case, it was just an offhand comment on something I'd found by chance (I recall hearing the controversy elsewhere, which seemed a little over the top to me); I wasn't intending to get in a full-blown discussion.

If there are so many hours in a day, wouldn't you rather spend them in threads discussing things that you'd actually read?

I'm just trying to get the appeal of this here.

Like I said before, I like lurking and hearing what other people think of this stuff. Also, most of the Spider-Man material I read is out of print stuff in the first place, so not a lot of discussion going on (I came really late to the party); last couple times I've tried starting a thread, it goes nowhere (not very encouraging). I also do discuss stuff I've read elsewhere. This here just one small sliver of my forum use, not the bulk.

[PhantomStranger]

Commentator Douglas Ernst delivers a precise and efficient take down of Slott's entire storyline here:



I associate myself wholeheartedly with his remarks on this topic.

[Dan Slott]

Not going to watch that. Ever.

Douglas Ernst is a Right Wing blogger/"reporter" who works for a site that was heavy into Birther conspiracies, he has personally denied the existence of man made climate change, and has tried to sell a warped view that Otto Octavius is an anti-Semite and that I-- a liberal Jewish comic book writer-- would make an anti-Semite Spider-Man for a while.

If you're willing to go to that poisoned well for your "information" or "insight", you deserve what you get.

[Man-Thing]

Though I don't think it was the video's intent to highlight this, and rather posed it as a complaint, it did bring to my attention what I hadn't noticed on a casual read of the issue, in that Peter is basically doing the same thing Otto did. He's using his company as his own personal army and putting himself above the law, letting his drive to punish his enemy blind him to the harm he's doing. It's Goblin Nation all over again, except Peter's making the same mistakes. I wonder if he will, in turn, need to turn to Otto to save him, bringing us full circle back to issue 30 of Superior. Neato.