Amazing Spider-Man #31 Discussion/Review [SPOILER WARNING]

[Mister Mets]

Prior to ASM #600, Slott's first Doc Ock story, what was the last big Ock storyline? Maybe Countdown, the Jenkins/Ramos story in Spectacular Spider-Man where Ock kidnaps the Palestinian ambassador? He was an afterthought in Millar/Dodson's Marvel Knights Spider-Man, he turned up in a good JMS/JRJR arc but he wasn't even the main bad guy in it...prior to that, maybe the time he came back from the dead in 1997?

I think one problem with Ock is that he popped up in too many single-issue stories (The Marvel Team-Up Invincible appearance, "My Science Teacher is Spider-Man") and he was sometimes seen fighting Spider-Man in the background of another story, which diminished his importance.

He did have some mini-series when Spider-Man 2 came out, like Negative Exposure and Spider-Man/ Doctor Octopus: Year One.

[blackspidey2099]

Anyone can rip apart any book and make it sound like garbage. Every single story.

You could easily pick apart, say, The Death of Gwen Stacy and offer about twenty alternate ways in which Spidey could've and should've saved Gwen and say that you "proved" the story as is was stupid because you came up with several ways that it didn't have to go the way it did and that because other options were available, you've concluded that the story unnaturally forced Peter to make illogical choices in order to reach a desired outcome. That Gwen didn't have to die except for the fact that the writer "made" it happen and therefore it's bad writing.

You see how dumb that line of reasoning is? That's your critique of ASM 31 in a nutshell.

As for going through your exhaustive list of ways you would've written ASM 31 and pointing out why they wouldn't have worked - why would I bother to critique your fan fiction? The only person it means anything to is you. I care about the actual comic, not your alternate take on it.

Okay. If you didn't care about my "fan fiction", then why have you spent so much time whining about how it is just as logically inconsistent and downright stupid as the actual story? And if stories like The Death of Gwen Stacy are just as easy to pick apart, then why don't you point out a couple of major flaws in it, just to prove your point (since you obviously can't do the same to my "fan fiction")?

SCENE: One ordinary schoolday, a boy goes on a field trip with his class to view a scientific exhibit. However - little does he realize, that an experimental radioactive spider has escaped from it's containment ...

... and suddenly, it bites him on the hand!

LATER ...

On the way home on the bus, the boy begins to feel ill. As he arrives home, his Aunt May - concerned - asks Peter why he looks so pale.

Peter tells her not to worry: "I'm only tired from the trip Aunt May. I think I'll just lay down for a bit".

But later that evening - at around 9:30 - Aunt May worries that Peter never came downstairs to get his wheatcakes (".. its not like Peter! That boy loves his wheatcakes!..") and walks into Peter's dark and silent room ...

And she find him, lifeless .. a victim of radioactive blood poisioning from a freak accident at a science exhibition.

.
.
.
.
.
.

That would be pretty logically sound and consistent though. I mean .. ALL things considered ....

That is actually not logically sound or consistent, since such a small dose of radiation would cause barely any damage in comparison to the spider's venom, assuming the spider itself was poisonous enough to harm Peter. Radiation poisoning is not really a thing unless there is either a prolonged exposure or high dosage of radiation (or both). The likely result would have been Peter getting his hand stung, or maybe even needing to go to a hospital for the bite.

And the difference between the origin story is that it was SETTING the logic and characters that would be followed in future comics, while ASM 31 ignored previous logic (in some cases, established by Slott himself) like Peter's tech being EMP immune, or Peter being a super-genius, just so that Slott could achieve his desired outcome.

[WebLurker]

And the difference between the origin story is that it was SETTING the logic and characters that would be followed in future comics, while ASM 31 ignored previous logic (in some cases, established by Slott himself) like Peter's tech being EMP immune, or Peter being a super-genius, just so that Slott could achieve his desired outcome.

To play, devil's advocate, Brain Michael Bendis sometimes did the same in his Ultimate Spider-Man run, but he usually gets a pass for that. Why are we calling Slott out for similar things?

[Von]

That is actually not logically sound or consistent, since such a small dose of radiation would cause barely any damage in comparison to the spider's venom, assuming the spider itself was poisonous enough to harm Peter. Radiation poisoning is not really a thing unless there is either a prolonged exposure or high dosage of radiation (or both). The likely result would have been Peter getting his hand stung, or maybe even needing to go to a hospital for the bite.

Awesome! So what you're saying is:

- A kid dying from a radioactive spider bite is an extremely unlikely outcome

- A kid getting spider themed superpowers from a radioactive spider bit is a patently absurd outcome, a complete fantasy, one that flies in the face of all scientific and biological realities. And because of this - it is (in fact) one of the least likely and illogical outcomes we could reasonably expect from a radioactive spider bite, out of all concievable outcomes we could possibly imagine.

- Since both outcomes are extremely high on the list of 'Unlikely Outcomes From a Radioactive Spider Bite' - the obvious conclusion is that any story written that assumes either one of these outcomes as part of the foundational narrative - is by definition a story where the author is ignoring logic to achieve their desired outcome.

- Therefore - all stories based on a patently absurd and impossible premise are on shaky ground to begin with. The authors writing this character and his world have a WIDE LATITITUDE in introducing fantastic and outlandish characters and events panel after panel, issue after issue, year after year, decade after decade - and you essentially have to decide to personally pick and choose which outlandish character and event you want to accept as internally consistent and plausible, and which ones you don't want to accept

.. because the entire stream of outlandish characters and events has been one long continuous absurd and impossible train for the very first panel of the very first issue.

And the difference between the origin story is that it was SETTING the logic and characters that would be followed in future comics, while ASM 31 ignored previous logic (in some cases, established by Slott himself) like Peter's tech being EMP immune, or Peter being a super-genius, just so that Slott could achieve his desired outcome.

On the one hand I see your point. I'm not ignoring it.

I just see your point as hopelessly drowned out and overwhelmed by the fact that you are not noticing that this comic - and the entire genre of super powered people running around doing impossible things - is by definition almost nothing but illogical .

And they are all built almost entirely out of one patently absurd, illogical plot point after another that are invented out of thin air to achieve the desired outcomes of the writers.

And when I see posts like yours I find it amusing that you're choosing to ignore that - so much so, that you go into great detail to pick and chose parts the parts that are not 'lining up logically', to the degree that you are actually getting upset about it and debating with people about it lol.

If I felt compelled to examine every superhero comic for internal consistency to the degree that you are, I would just quit reading them. Anything other than that would be masochistic.

[theoneandonly]

Awesome! So what you're saying is:

- A kid dying from a radioactive spider bite is an extremely unlikely outcome

- A kid getting spider themed superpowers from a radioactive spider bit is a patently absurd outcome, a complete fantasy, one that flies in the face of all scientific and biological realities. And because of this - it is (in fact) one of the least likely and illogical outcomes we could reasonably expect from a radioactive spider bite, out of all concievable outcomes we could possibly imagine.

- Since both outcomes are extremely high on the list of 'Unlikely Outcomes From a Radioactive Spider Bite' - the obvious conclusion is that any story written that assumes either one of these outcomes as part of the foundational narrative - is by definition a story where the author is ignoring logic to achieve their desired outcome.

- Therefore - all stories based on a patently absurd and impossible premise are on shaky ground to begin with. The authors writing this character and his world have a WIDE LATITITUDE in introducing fantastic and outlandish characters and events panel after panel, issue after issue, year after year, decade after decade - and you essentially have to decide to personally pick and choose which outlandish character and event you want to accept as internally consistent and plausible, and which ones you don't want to accept

.. because the entire stream of outlandish characters and events has been one long continuous absurd and impossible train for the very first panel of the very first issue.



On the one hand I see your point. I'm not ignoring it.

I just see your point as hopelessly drowned out and overwhelmed by the fact that you are not noticing that this comic - and the entire genre of super powered people running around doing impossible things - is by definition almost nothing but illogical .

And they are all built almost entirely out of one patently absurd, illogical plot point after another that are invented out of thin air to achieve the desired outcomes of the writers.

And when I see posts like yours I find it amusing that you're choosing to ignore that - so much so, that you go into great detail to pick and chose parts the parts that are not 'lining up logically', to the degree that you are actually getting upset about it and debating with people about it lol.

If I felt compelled to examine every superhero comic for internal consistency to the degree that you are, I would just quit reading them. Anything other than that would be masochistic.

the logic of comic book stories in spiderverse is all over the place what with feminine versions,future versions alternate versions of the male hero running around, Spiders granting powers through mysticism or radiation or both no one can seem to decide, Regent taking out all heroes then being defeated by MJ, Peter and tony, Clones of gwen peter dying living dying again to the point that it seems peter was also supposed to die with Gwen Stacy. There is no inherent logic which writers follow but just work in whatever works for the story they are telling.Dan is following the same tradition that previous authors have.

[Von]

the logic of comic book stories in spiderverse is all over the place what with feminine versions,future versions alternate versions of the male hero running around, Spiders granting powers through mysticism or radiation or both no one can seem to decide, Regent taking out all heroes then being defeated by MJ, Peter and tony, Clones of gwen peter dying living dying again to the point that it seems peter was also supposed to die with Gwen Stacy. There is no inherent logic which writers follow but just work in whatever works for the story they are telling.Dan is following the same tradition that previous authors have.

Exactly. None of it has ever actually made much logical sense, ever lol.

The difference between readers like myself and readers like blackspidey though - is that one of the reasons I still like superhero comics in the first place is exactly because they are fantastic, illogical, and fully of outlandish and nonsensical characters, events and plot points.

My chosen career is demanding enough. Real life to a great degree is about being responsible, logical, staying on top of my game and overcoming an endless stream of new challenges and obstacles to overcome.

But when I open up one of my favorite comics I get off on the incredible diversity of talented artists and the explosion of colors on the page, I get swept up in the absurdity of the characters and the impossible situations they are constantly finding themselves in, and I can forget about all of that for a few minutes and 'recharge' my brain.

Yes, I do have some standards regarding internal consistency with previously established events and canon. I'm more likely to drop a book because the plot gets convoluted and confusing to the degree it completely stops making sense (time travel stories are prime for that) - and not because the writer is somewhat inconsistent with points they have already established previously. (granted, the two scenarios do have some overlap)

But my personal threshold where my 'consistency critic' gets triggered - and I start feeling like the writer is getting on my nerves with it - well that bar is way, wayyyy higher than blackspidey's lol. Its just a different set of expectations apparently.