Is it just me or do a lot of people put Peter down to prop up Miles ?

[Mister Mets]

Realistically that works.

But realistically they’d have all died before the end of the Bronze age.

I mean given how these are super powers you could just say they have a degree of resiliency and healing real life people don’t Spider-Man himself 100% heals faster than normal people do.

I mean you’re not even counting the rough and tumbles civilians experience nor the sheer aging the stress of living as or within proximity of a super powered being would be.

Peter Parker should be grey and wrinkled and ravaged by years of pain, stress and late nights but he isn’t. Mary Jane looks unbelievably good for a woman who spent nights wracked by angst and concern over her husband’s well being, her family’s safety and whether tonight will be the night Norman Osborn or Venom decide to kill her in her sleep.

And those physical drawbacks are going to kick in even before all the psychological crap hits the fan.

I mean strictly speaking realistically how did Spider-Man ever make it passed his teen years given all the crap he had to deal with.

Breadwinning, school and dodging bullets alone would’ve done him in, let alone grieving and guilt over his Uncle, supporting his ailing mother and having a crazy ass girlfriend.






I was referring to legacies wherein the original guy is taken off the table and replaced long term by someone new. It isn’t the same when they have someone take up their mantle in another timeline/universe whilst the OG is still active and unaffected.

I don’t disagree that Miles’ rise to fame was poorly handled.

I really think they dreamed up Miles and then just made him happen ASAP whilst the iron surrounding Donald Glover was still hot and trendy.

Because Death of Spider-Man happened with really very little build up. The previous arc was nothing special really.

They should have in subplot pages introduced Miles and shown all the crap we saw prior to Spider-Man dying and shown Miles in the Death of Spider-Man story questioning about whether he should get involved.

Essentially instead of killing off Peter, then introducing Miles and his origin and having him replace Peter they should’ve introduced Miles and had part of his origin play out parallel to Peter’s death then led into the next part of Miles’ story where he becomes Spider-Man.

Legacies work best when the identity is a legend and a title. Cap is a symbol more than anything so legacying him works better than with other characters.

Wouldn't the explanation for your complaint (that Miles should have been introduced in the book before 'Death of Spider-Man') be Marvel and Bendis' official story that they made the decision to kill off Spider-Man long before determining who to replace him with?

It would also add new subplots to a well-regarded controversial story, taking away from the focus on Peter. And it could increase the sense of some readers that this new character is responsible for Peter's death.

[WebLurker]

Wouldn't the explanation for your complaint (that Miles should have been introduced in the book before 'Death of Spider-Man') be Marvel and Bendis' official story that they made the decision to kill off Spider-Man long before determining who to replace him with?

That still wouldn't change the argument that the transition was botched that much.

It would also add new subplots to a well-regarded controversial story, taking away from the focus on Peter.

Maybe.

And it could increase the sense of some readers that this new character is responsible for Peter's death.

I think that was unavoidable regardless of how the transition was handled.

[Timmyb52]

I get that but a line must be drawn somewhere no?

I mean realistically all of human history would be different though. Watchmen proved that. Captain America and Sub Mariner alone would rewrite the course of human history let alone Reed Richards and his inventions.

I mean fossil fuels and cancer would be done for that's for sure.

It's one of the reasons I hate Civil War 2006. All of a sudden things were being treated hyper realistically.

On a storytelling level it's too big of a presumption to say every superhero is a mentally ill timebomb waiting to go off. Yu might as well say Wanda and Franklin are subconciously rewriting reality every second that passes. Plus we live in the heads of most of these guys. the literary contract dictates we know all relevent info about them

I agree with you and that's why I said I wouldn't want the comics to do that. However, having my heroes too Over Powered and indestructible and who can never suffer problems or issues just makes it hard to connect with them.A nice mix of realism and fantasy makes for the best result IMHO.

[LASERlips]

What is "a lot" of people? I've seen both characters put down, but usually if both are discussed, it's Miles who gets bashed in favor of Peter. That's anecdotal, of course.

Miles has great potential, still, but he has suffered as a headlining character. His first book was awesome, if not a bit too decompressed. Then stupid events that he should never have been a part of. Then he did some pseudo-team stuff, which was fun. Then events again. Then 616. Bendis hasn't written a lot for Miles that has been memorable, outside of his initial run. But Miles is a good character, and he can be the Spider-Man of this generation (literally, since I think that Ms. Marvel is already this generation's Spider-Man, figuratively speaking), in the right hands. Miles has great capacity for growth as a character and a fantastic supporting cast (Marvel even ganked one of them for Homecoming). We just need to see him really blossom.

Peter, on the other hand, has had his potential squandered. He was growing as a character. Then it was all undone. Fans can demand change, sure, but sadly, the more recent changes came at the cost of his character.

I mean, this character, whose theme is one of responsibility, makes a deal with the actual devil in order to escape responsibility for his aunt being shot. In the process, he manages to escape responsibility for his wife as well. What a hero! Now he can date again! Yay? Like, is OMD what they really thought people wanted to read? Do they think the ends justify the means? Because that's villain talk, and we (should) know now that it didn't. Virtually none of the stories since then required Peter to be unmarried, or benefitted from it. Essentially, we got Peter as a man-child who can potentially sleep around so that real-life man-children can fantasize about him doing so. Period. And it wasn't worth it.

Peter Parker has long been the "everyman" hero. He used to be the everyman who could look forward to the next steps in his life. Now he's the everyman who is stuck, a single late-twenty-something trying to live the life of a single early-twenty-something. It's pathetic.


PS
I've dropped Amazing, so maybe this was explained. Last I knew, Peter "Stark" Parker was a personality shell built on Ock's memories of Peter's erased memories. Like, a copy of a copy. You know, this guy:
kErMKw52xqIsbJxhcKgOt4rzOfW.jpg

That would at least excuse some of this, but not the decade prior to Superior.

[SpideyCeo]

Pretty sure Peter being a legacy hero is established by future tie ins of the hero. Peter became a legend the second jms and slott made him the heart of new york heroics or something.

[BooCoo]

I think a lot of the problem is that Marvel has allowed Peter Parker to stagnate because of its rigid, intractable obsession with keeping him within certain narrow parameters that he should have since outgrown. "Miles as the fresher, cooler Spider-Man that Marvel can do more with than Peter" is a meme born of Marvel's own unwillingness to take chances with Peter's growth and characterization except on the most superficial of bases (you can't make him CEO of his own multibillion-dollar tech firm that gives him all sorts of shiny new toys, but then keep him in a permanent quasi-adolescent mindset) and should be examined from that vantage point. Miles Morales is a different character on certain levels than Peter Parker is, they come from worlds and upbringings that aren't all that similar, and while they might be united by common ideals and even common tragedies (at least in the Ultimate Universe from which Miles originally hails), there are fundamental differences in personality and character and even in their personal struggles that are worth exploring through continued and sustained interaction with each other, not simply writing off Peter to promote Miles. While the writers of these articles have every right to think what they will about the Spider-Men, to believe that Peter Parker has swung his course and is no longer as interesting as he used to be (if he ever was interesting in their eyes), they should also look more closely at how Marvel's own refusal to let Peter grow as a character and a hero, Marvel's own decisions to make Peter into an unchanging idol of "youth" doomed to permanent adolescence in line with how certain people in charge prefer to remember him, is behind a lot of why Peter has become so "uninteresting" and "bland."

I agree with nearly everything you say. I don't post on the forums much because they also have become stale about Peter recycling the same arguments. While some characters are inconsistent in charactarization, the opposite is true for Peter. He is so rigidly and unrealistically attached to the 'responsibility at all costs' template it cramps the character. No one is the same their whole life. They evolve, devolve, change, and react differently based on experiences. Not Peter. He's in a strange time warp of consistency. No matter what happens to him you can predict what he'll do because after all he's RESPONSIBLE. Rinse, repeat. If he isn't, IT ISN'T PETER. Really? Who does the right thing their whole life, never makes mistakes or never does something different or takes chances? Walking dead people, that's who. Look at the threads. For one of marvel's so called flagship characters, supporting threads are WEAK for Peter. I can go through Spiderman discussions in 10 minutes or less. But weird or obscure topics, or topics based on obsessing about ONE character get a bazillion replies (basically a fan thread for one person). Go figure.

[BooCoo]

Because laws of the internet fandom says you have to like one over the other and the correct one is always the older option

You just can't like both, you just CAN'T!!

[/sarcasm]

LOL, unless it involves the oversensitive Wally West fans. The Flash rule don't apply in their world.

[Spidercide]

Okay. For those of us, like me, who started out with Ultimate, though, it was the original who got replaced long term. So, people will have different perspectives, but I can see what you mean.



Thing is, I don't think he's an awful character (bland maybe) and most of the stories Bedis wrote with him were competent at worse. Heck, the origin story did a good good job, if nothing else, easing us Peter fans into the new way of things (with Spider-Woman kind of being our surrogate) and all that. But, yeah, the nuts and bolts to make Miles a Spider-Man were clunky and the hectic pace to get him off the ground didn't help. (Ironically, the Ultimate Peter origin story, despite being a retelling of the story we all know, was able to breathe a lot more and took more time setting up the new series.)



Maybe. I will say, though, that if Spider-Man had to be killed, the death story was a good sendoff.



Yeah, I agree that doing that would've worked better (it might've made for some more interesting stories than the pseudo-Amazing Friends stuff that kind of dragged down the post-Ultimatum stories.

In actuality, though, I think that rather than creating Miles, Ultimate Jessica Drew should've become the new Spider-Man; her origin story was already established, she was a more engaging character (IMHO), was already underused, and had built-in story hooks (her trying to make her own identity for one).



Okay, I can see that.

But USM wasn’t the original version. Similarly New 52 Superman isn’t the OG Superman.

I think he’s overrated and has notable problems that should be fixed. But he’s hardly like Silk before Thompson rescued her.

I would say there are incompetent Miles stories.

Miles’ origin as a Spider-Man is intrinsically flawed because the thing that is supposed to teach him about responsibility (when he doesn’t go help Peter) isn’t clear cut. For all he or we know going to fight the Goblin could’ve gotten him killed not saved Peter. In Peter’s origin had he intervened it is guaranteed the burglar couldn’t have killed Uncle Ben.

Wouldn't the explanation for your complaint (that Miles should have been introduced in the book before 'Death of Spider-Man') be Marvel and Bendis' official story that they made the decision to kill off Spider-Man long before determining who to replace him with?

It would also add new subplots to a well-regarded controversial story, taking away from the focus on Peter. And it could increase the sense of some readers that this new character is responsible for Peter's death.

I don't really believe that story and I also think readers who felt that way would feel that way regardless so why not at least make the transition organic

I agree with you and that's why I said I wouldn't want the comics to do that. However, having my heroes too Over Powered and indestructible and who can never suffer problems or issues just makes it hard to connect with them.A nice mix of realism and fantasy makes for the best result IMHO.

Sure that's what marvel was all about, but when it comes to stuff like PTSD that's a huge long term commitment and a heavy topic for a series which is after all intended to be fun at the end of the day. It's like whenever comics use rape in a story. You just shouldn't unless you are prepared to commit to it and handle it realistically because it's too big of an issue to treat lightly.

What is "a lot" of people? I've seen both characters put down, but usually if both are discussed, it's Miles who gets bashed in favor of Peter. That's anecdotal, of course.

Miles has great potential, still, but he has suffered as a headlining character. His first book was awesome, if not a bit too decompressed. Then stupid events that he should never have been a part of. Then he did some pseudo-team stuff, which was fun. Then events again. Then 616. Bendis hasn't written a lot for Miles that has been memorable, outside of his initial run. But Miles is a good character, and he can be the Spider-Man of this generation (literally, since I think that Ms. Marvel is already this generation's Spider-Man, figuratively speaking), in the right hands. Miles has great capacity for growth as a character and a fantastic supporting cast (Marvel even ganked one of them for Homecoming). We just need to see him really blossom.

Peter, on the other hand, has had his potential squandered. He was growing as a character. Then it was all undone. Fans can demand change, sure, but sadly, the more recent changes came at the cost of his character.

I mean, this character, whose theme is one of responsibility, makes a deal with the actual devil in order to escape responsibility for his aunt being shot. In the process, he manages to escape responsibility for his wife as well. What a hero! Now he can date again! Yay? Like, is OMD what they really thought people wanted to read? Do they think the ends justify the means? Because that's villain talk, and we (should) know now that it didn't. Virtually none of the stories since then required Peter to be unmarried, or benefitted from it. Essentially, we got Peter as a man-child who can potentially sleep around so that real-life man-children can fantasize about him doing so. Period. And it wasn't worth it.

Peter Parker has long been the "everyman" hero. He used to be the everyman who could look forward to the next steps in his life. Now he's the everyman who is stuck, a single late-twenty-something trying to live the life of a single early-twenty-something. It's pathetic.


PS
I've dropped Amazing, so maybe this was explained. Last I knew, Peter "Stark" Parker was a personality shell built on Ock's memories of Peter's erased memories. Like, a copy of a copy. You know, this guy:
kErMKw52xqIsbJxhcKgOt4rzOfW.jpg

That would at least excuse some of this, but not the decade prior to Superior.

Then you’ve not been to tumblr. Dude there were CBR articles and legitimate news sites when the casting was announced mad as **** that Peter was in the MCU instead of Miles with proclamations about how he’s better.

Miles first book was way too decompressed because Bendis is bad when it comes to decompression.

Miles is a creatively flawed character. He needs some necessary tweaks to fix the problems with him, among which some have been the result of mismanagement.

At this point I don’t think any generation can have a Spider-Man beyond Peter. Peter as Spider-Man is an institution. Miles is basically just what Kaine and Miguel were to Spider-Man.

Unless you mean this generation of new characters and being the teenage everyperson. But I think Jaimie Reyes and Kamala are that the way Richard Rider was for the 1970s generation.

I’m not saying Miles doesn’t have potential but I take umbridge with articles like the ones I linked to basically putting over as being better than Peter.

Peter’s potential is currently being fucked but that’s no reason to dismiss him as a character. He can be fixed and can be written out of the ditch he’s in, it’s happened before. I mean the Avengers sucked basically throughout the 90s until Busieck fixed them.

Plus Peter’s over all history is what he should be based upon, he doesn’t ride or die by what’s happening now and in the context of that history he has so much to offer and most of it is good. Like if you could up the overall respectable-great years of Peter Parker Spider-Man vs the legit bad ones there are still more of the former than the latter.

Dude...c’mon...

You know better than to count **** like One More Day because you know all too well that it was nuclear levels of out of character.

When analyzing the character we should discount what is OOC precisely due to the name of the term. OUT of character.

I agree though that few of the stories post-OMD have justified the direction or required him to be unmarried and the few which have have sucked **** like that evil Black Cat arc in ASM #606-607.

I agree with nearly everything you say. I don't post on the forums much because they also have become stale about Peter recycling the same arguments. While some characters are inconsistent in charactarization, the opposite is true for Peter. He is so rigidly and unrealistically attached to the 'responsibility at all costs' template it cramps the character. No one is the same their whole life. They evolve, devolve, change, and react differently based on experiences. Not Peter. He's in a strange time warp of consistency. No matter what happens to him you can predict what he'll do because after all he's RESPONSIBLE. Rinse, repeat. If he isn't, IT ISN'T PETER. Really? Who does the right thing their whole life, never makes mistakes or never does something different or takes chances? Walking dead people, that's who. Look at the threads. For one of marvel's so called flagship characters, supporting threads are WEAK for Peter. I can go through Spiderman discussions in 10 minutes or less. But weird or obscure topics, or topics based on obsessing about ONE character get a bazillion replies (basically a fan thread for one person). Go figure.

Peter did evolve. 1963 Peter Parker isn’t the same as 1973 1983 or 1993 Peter Parker.

Plus he’s made plenty of mistakes and morall missteps in his time. have you seen the history of the character.

[Mister Mets]

That still wouldn't change the argument that the transition was botched that much.



Maybe.



I think that was unavoidable regardless of how the transition was handled.

I don't even know if botched is the right word if the early issues were written without Miles Morales in mind. It's hard to fault someone for botching something they weren't planning at the time.

[Smoov-E]

LOL, unless it involves the oversensitive Wally West fans. The Flash rule don't apply in their world.

Barry fans are far more sensitive than Wally fans

[WebLurker]

Miles has great potential, still, but he has suffered as a headlining character.

Maybe.

His first book was awesome, if not a bit too decompressed.

The first one was kinda weak, IMHO. The second one was when it went from okay to good.

Then stupid events that he should never have been a part of. Then he did some pseudo-team stuff, which was fun. Then events again. Then 616. Bendis hasn't written a lot for Miles that has been memorable, outside of his initial run.

Yeah, the events really botched things.

But Miles is a good character, and he can be the Spider-Man of this generation (literally, since I think that Ms. Marvel is already this generation's Spider-Man, figuratively speaking), in the right hands. Miles has great capacity for growth as a character and a fantastic supporting cast (Marvel even ganked one of them for Homecoming). We just need to see him really blossom.

Is Miles a good character? I guess (whenever I read his stuff, I'm always most interested in the supporting characters, but there's no reason to hate him). Could he become a better one? Sure.

However, I think that Peter will be this generation's Spider-Man, like he's been every generation's Spider-Man. First of all, much like Batman, Peter is too associated with the mantle for a change to truly stick (IMHO). We could in theory get a Barry Allen/Wally West situation, esp. if Miles continues to get exposure in new media (like the upcoming animated movie), but I don't think that's going to happen. The mythos just isn't a legacy situation.

Secondly, the MCU is making new Peter Parker Spider-Man movies. The MCU, the X-Men films, etc., those are this generation's versions of Marvel. That's what most people were introduced through, that's what most people mainly consume, that's what (arguably) will most define the characters going forward (as Nick Fury can attest to).

Peter, on the other hand, has had his potential squandered. He was growing as a character. Then it was all undone. Fans can demand change, sure, but sadly, the more recent changes came at the cost of his character.

I mean, this character, whose theme is one of responsibility, makes a deal with the actual devil in order to escape responsibility for his aunt being shot. In the process, he manages to escape responsibility for his wife as well. What a hero! Now he can date again! Yay? Like, is OMD what they really thought people wanted to read? Do they think the ends justify the means? Because that's villain talk, and we (should) know now that it didn't. Virtually none of the stories since then required Peter to be unmarried, or benefitted from it. Essentially, we got Peter as a man-child who can potentially sleep around so that real-life man-children can fantasize about him doing so. Period. And it wasn't worth it.

Peter Parker has long been the "everyman" hero. He used to be the everyman who could look forward to the next steps in his life. Now he's the everyman who is stuck, a single late-twenty-something trying to live the life of a single early-twenty-something. It's pathetic.

Well, the ASM comics aren't the only comics, much less stories told about the character. The comics are the smallest pieces of the franchises as of right now. Same's true for other stuff. Heck, I'm an X-Men fan and I've never cracked open more than a few of their comics in my life, nor do I want to, but I do like the movies.

But USM wasn’t the original version. Similarly New 52 Superman isn’t the OG Superman.

For some of us, he was. It's what we encountered first that tends to be the "real" thing.

I think he’s overrated and has notable problems that should be fixed. But he’s hardly like Silk before Thompson rescued her.

Agreed (although I haven't read Silk, so I'm just basing that on how I've heard people describe it).

I would say there are incompetent Miles stories.

Which ones?

Miles’ origin as a Spider-Man is intrinsically flawed because the thing that is supposed to teach him about responsibility (when he doesn’t go help Peter) isn’t clear cut. For all he or we know going to fight the Goblin could’ve gotten him killed not saved Peter. In Peter’s origin had he intervened it is guaranteed the burglar couldn’t have killed Uncle Ben.

Interesting way to look at it.

Then you’ve not been to tumblr. Dude there were CBR articles and legitimate news sites when the casting was announced mad as **** that Peter was in the MCU instead of Miles with proclamations about how he’s better.

I do recall around the time that casting for the MCU Spider-Man was going on, you could find think pieces and random chatter that the movie had to be a Miles movie (or have a black Peter). The lack of diversity in the leads of the MCU movies had to be addressed. Peter being in every other Spider-Man movie had exhausted the story-telling options or made the character boring so a new unused character was needed. Or just personal preference between characters (I can relate to that; when DC makes a Green Lantern movie, I very much want Jessica Cruz to be in it, despite her not being the original, given that I'm not really interested in the original).

I also noticed that those stopped appearing around the time that Civil War showed the new Spider-Man in question.

[Spidercide]

Maybe.



The first one was kinda weak, IMHO. The second one was when it went from okay to good.



Yeah, the events really botched things.



Is Miles a good character? I guess (whenever I read his stuff, I'm always most interested in the supporting characters, but there's no reason to hate him). Could he become a better one? Sure.

However, I think that Peter will be this generation's Spider-Man, like he's been every generation's Spider-Man. First of all, much like Batman, Peter is too associated with the mantle for a change to truly stick (IMHO). We could in theory get a Barry Allen/Wally West situation, esp. if Miles continues to get exposure in new media (like the upcoming animated movie), but I don't think that's going to happen. The mythos just isn't a legacy situation.

Secondly, the MCU is making new Peter Parker Spider-Man movies. The MCU, the X-Men films, etc., those are this generation's versions of Marvel. That's what most people were introduced through, that's what most people mainly consume, that's what (arguably) will most define the characters going forward (as Nick Fury can attest to).



Well, the ASM comics aren't the only comics, much less stories told about the character. The comics are the smallest pieces of the franchises as of right now. Same's true for other stuff. Heck, I'm an X-Men fan and I've never cracked open more than a few of their comics in my life, nor do I want to, but I do like the movies.



For some of us, he was. It's what we encountered first that tends to be the "real" thing.



Agreed (although I haven't read Silk, so I'm just basing that on how I've heard people describe it).



Which ones?



Interesting way to look at it.



I do recall around the time that casting for the MCU Spider-Man was going on, you could find think pieces and random chatter that the movie had to be a Miles movie (or have a black Peter). The lack of diversity in the leads of the MCU movies had to be addressed. Peter being in every other Spider-Man movie had exhausted the story-telling options or made the character boring so a new unused character was needed. Or just personal preference between characters (I can relate to that; when DC makes a Green Lantern movie, I very much want Jessica Cruz to be in it, despite her not being the original, given that I'm not really interested in the original).

I also noticed that those stopped appearing around the time that Civil War showed the new Spider-Man in question.

The real thing is the real thing. If you prefer USM and it's your fav version that's cool. But I mean I don't regard 1994 cartoon Spider-Man as the real deal.

The story where he beats Blackheart. The resurrection of Peter Parker. His girlfriend being involved with SHIELD. His Dad having SHIELD affiliations. Killing off and then resurrecting his mother. the Spider-Gwen crossover.

And the thing is I'm not even against Peter Parker being played by an actor who is not white.

But what I found despicable was that when the casting was made many people spewed venom over it, many people angrily posted other potential casts and all of them were either too old, unsuitable (Greyworm from Game of Thrones was in a genuine article, who the **** thinks he could do the character?) and most of them were black actors, rarely if ever actors of any other racial/ethnic group.

It's so insane that yesterday I as a white guy saying there is nothing wrong with casting Peter with a black actor was told by a black person that I was being racist in saying that.

The notion that Peter is used up as a characetr for the movies is so fucking idiotic it's not even funny.

I can come up with like 3 brand new movie plots right now based on the Ditko run alone

1) Spider-Man fights a gang war in a crime noir movie
2) A character piece movie about Peter and Aunt May's relationship based on the MP Trilogy
3) Jameson makes the Scorpion and the movie is about unethical journalism in regards to celebrities

[WebLurker]

The real thing is the real thing. If you prefer USM and it's your fav version that's cool. But I mean I don't regard 1994 cartoon Spider-Man as the real deal.

It's just emotional attachment stuff, not logic.

The story where he beats Blackheart. The resurrection of Peter Parker. His girlfriend being involved with SHIELD. His Dad having SHIELD affiliations. Killing off and then resurrecting his mother. the Spider-Gwen crossover.

Katie Bishop was actually with HYDRA, not SHIELD (although I didn't think they did as much with that idea as they could've). I haven't read any of the 616 Miles stuff, so I can't comment on that. I actually really liked the Peter Parker resurrection story, but that's me.

And the thing is I'm not even against Peter Parker being played by an actor who is not white.

Yeah. I myself would prefer a white Peter -- mostly on the grounds that that's what the character looks like in the comics and I tend to prefer when major characters look something like they do in the stuff I read (comics are a very visual medium). But, at the end of the day, give the best actor the job. Likeness or accuracy to the source material is not the be all end all for making a good movie character. Doc Ock in Spider-Man 2 was very different from the comics, but he's considered one of the best comic book movie villains. The Big Hero 6 movie made a more diverse lineup than the source material, but the reason people like the movie is because the characters were enjoyable. Heck, the new Spider-Man movie is reimagining Liz Allen as a black character, but the casting decision will stand and fall on whether she gives a good performance, not that she looks or doesn't look like a specific drawing. (Based on the trailers, I'm hopeful she'll do good.)

Besides, movie's are an adaptation, so you can change stuff like the ethnicities, esp. if it fits the story being told. For example, Logan reimagined Laura/X-23, a white character in her previous stories, as a biracial half white/half Latina character because of they story they told and I've never heard any complaints about that (in fact, she seems to have become a breakout character and a lot of viewers would like to see the actress reprise the character in new movies).

So, I guess while I'm inclined to prefer the likenesses be kept closer to the source material, at the end of the day, what works best for the movie is what needs to happen, regardless of how "faithful" that makes the adaptation.

But what I found despicable was that when the casting was made many people spewed venom over it, many people angrily posted other potential casts and all of them were either too old, unsuitable (Greyworm from Game of Thrones was in a genuine article, who the **** thinks he could do the character?) and most of them were black actors, rarely if ever actors of any other racial/ethnic group.

I think most fan castings are rarely viable ideas and only useful as thought exercises, so I don't see the need to get so worked up about it.

It's so insane that yesterday I as a white guy saying there is nothing wrong with casting Peter with a black actor was told by a black person that I was being racist in saying that.

I don't understand that either (but then, I'm white, too).

The notion that Peter is used up as a characetr for the movies is so fucking idiotic it's not even funny.

I can come up with like 3 brand new movie plots right now based on the Ditko run alone

1) Spider-Man fights a gang war in a crime noir movie
2) A character piece movie about Peter and Aunt May's relationship based on the MP Trilogy
3) Jameson makes the Scorpion and the movie is about unethical journalism in regards to celebrities

I can understand someone preferring a Miles movie on the grounds that they're tired of Peter movies or prefer the Miles character. Agreed though that there is plenty of material for more Peter stories. I really like the idea of a gangland story, since some of my favorite Ultimate comics stories involved the Kingpin.

[Miles To Go]

The real thing is the real thing. If you prefer USM and it's your fav version that's cool. But I mean I don't regard 1994 cartoon Spider-Man as the real deal.

What makes him any less of a real deal? I've always thought, besides Spider-Girl's Peter Parker, Barnes' Spider-Man had the most complete story out of any of them, and that's including the cliffhanger he was left on.

Hell, both he and even newspaper Mary Jane have met fricking Stan Lee ahead of their core continuity versions.

[Spidercide]

What makes him any less of a real deal? I've always thought, besides Spider-Girl's Peter Parker, Barnes' Spider-Man had the most complete story out of any of them, and that's including the cliffhanger he was left on.

Hell, both he and even newspaper Mary Jane have met fricking Stan Lee ahead of their core continuity versions.

What makes them the real deal is being the original version created by Spider-Man's original creators and existing in the pages of the original and main marvel universe and specifically the ASM title that defined the character...oh and being the one version 100% not derivitive of any other one.

That's not actually true 616 Spidey encountered Stan Lee before any other version