|
Post by Icctrombone on Mar 3, 2019 15:26:24 GMT -5
Yeah but I'm saying that Earth-Two type stories have been used in Spider-man comics published between the '60s and the '80s. I dunno... I do see Nowhere Man's point that some superheroes fit into specific genres (and don't fit into others) and Spider-man has been rooted in crime, romance, and Frankenstein-esque mad science. I was DEFINITELY annoyed by Venom, because evil-duplicate-from-outer-space seemed off genre for a regularly appearing element of the Spider-man mythos. It would have been fine as a one-off, but didn't we all acknowledge that Amazing Spider-Man #2 was a mistake and Spidey shouldn't be fighting space aliens on the regular? That still bothers me. (Conversely I'm fine with Spider-Gwen. Go figure.) The Venom space alien genre thing got introduced in the cosmic Secret Wars mini. That might be the first time his world intersected with cosmic elements.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2019 16:17:16 GMT -5
Yeah but I'm saying that Earth-Two type stories have been used in Spider-man comics published between the '60s and the '80s. I dunno... I do see Nowhere Man's point that some superheroes fit into specific genres (and don't fit into others) and Spider-man has been rooted in crime, romance, and Frankenstein-esque mad science. I was DEFINITELY annoyed by Venom, because evil-duplicate-from-outer-space seemed off genre for a regularly appearing element of the Spider-man mythos. It would have been fine as a one-off, but didn't we all acknowledge that Amazing Spider-Man #2 was a mistake and Spidey shouldn't be fighting space aliens on the regular? That still bothers me. (Conversely I'm fine with Spider-Gwen. Go figure.) The Venom space alien genre thing got introduced in the cosmic Secret Wars mini. That might be the first time his world intersected with cosmic elements. You meanMarvel Two-in-One Annual #2 where Spidey is fighting Thanos alongside the Avengers and frees AdamWarlock form the Soul Gem doesn't count as Spider-Man's world intersecting with cosmic elements? Or Amazing SPider-Man Annual 2 and the other numerous times Spidey teamed up with Doc Strange to face cosmic elements, or.... -M
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Mar 3, 2019 16:26:42 GMT -5
The Venom space alien genre thing got introduced in the cosmic Secret Wars mini. That might be the first time his world intersected with cosmic elements. You meanMarvel Two-in-One Annual #2 where Spidey is fighting Thanos alongside the Avengers and frees AdamWarlock form the Soul Gem doesn't count as Spider-Man's world intersecting with cosmic elements? Or Amazing SPider-Man Annual 2 and the other numerous times Spidey teamed up with Doc Strange to face cosmic elements, or.... I think he was talking about cosmic Venom stories, not cosmic Spidey stories. Secret Wars was cosmic, though the cosmic elements of it didn't really impinge upon him at the time; it was just Spidey's new costume.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Mar 3, 2019 16:31:26 GMT -5
Mrp was correct, I forgot the Warlock /Thanos conflict.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Mar 3, 2019 16:44:43 GMT -5
The Venom space alien genre thing got introduced in the cosmic Secret Wars mini. That might be the first time his world intersected with cosmic elements. You meanMarvel Two-in-One Annual #2 where Spidey is fighting Thanos alongside the Avengers and frees AdamWarlock form the Soul Gem doesn't count as Spider-Man's world intersecting with cosmic elements? Or Amazing SPider-Man Annual 2 and the other numerous times Spidey teamed up with Doc Strange to face cosmic elements, or.... -M Although it's worth noting that all of those (and mutliple other issues of Marvel-Team-Up starting with Thor in # 7 You guys know how much I love team-up books!) were all Spider-man as co-star, and very much framed as Spider-man operating as a fish out of water in someone else's milleu. The original Secret Wars series was basically the same thing. But grandfathering these crossover alien/"Alien" (the movie) elements into a commonly used part of the ongoing Spider-man solo title bothered me. I quite appreciated when Bendis and Ultimate Spider-Man "fixed" this by making Venom a product of mad science.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Mar 3, 2019 18:48:42 GMT -5
I realize that not everyone agrees with me, but I'm of the mind that the iconic characters (ONLY the iconic character, mind you) should remain relatively locked in place with the illusion of change. Yeah, yeah. Alan Moore (my favorite comics writer) would curse me if he read this, but these are immortal IP's that have been around for 60, 70, 80 years for a reason: the concept is rock solid. So were the concepts of Tarzan, Doc Savage, Phantom, The Shadow, Lone Ranger and others that predated the comic book heroes and did just what you suggest, and they have mostly faded into obscurity and irrelevance only appealing to people who were around in their heyday or shortly afterwards when they were still cultural touchstones. Compare that with Sherlock Holmes, who is of an age with those others, but who was constantly reinterpreted for new audiences, growing and changing until they had a resurgence after falling into obscurity and once again becoming cultural touchstones with shows like the BBC's Sherlock being a vibrant force in fandom and resonating with audiences despite it evolving the "rock solid" concept on the great detective into something more relevant to current audiences. Locking a property in place like you suggest, only locks it into a path to eventual obscurity and irrelevance once the original audience it appeals to ages out and dies off because it will not have the same appeal to newer audiences whose tastes have grown and changed with the times and with whom those "rock solid" elements will not resonate. Rock solid concepts that have continued to resonate (like say Arthur, Hercules, Robin Hood, etc.) have been around centuries, not decades, and continue to get reinterpreted for each new audience. If those "rock solid" concepts want to continue to be relevant and find new audiences, that is the path they will need to take. In their present form, they most certainly are NOT immortal IPs, they are products of the 20th century who will have to transcend their original incarnations to become immortal as the truly mythic properties have done. Myths are not static. Static characters are not immortal, they have an expiration date-the lifespan of the audience who discovered them when their core concept resonated with the audience. Some of those "rock solid" concepts you like do not resonate with current audiences but things like Into the Spider-Verse show that the characters can still resonate with current audiences as long as they are allowed to grow and evolve beyond those static elements. There are certain elements that are the core of the character-with Spider-Man it is the everyman and great responsibility coming with great power, not street level or other aspects you lament it losing. To be an everyman, the Spiderman concept has to continue to appeal to any and every one no matter who they are, and that is the driving force behind things like the Spider-verse. That is the immortal element of Spider-Man, not street level mostly because the street level of the 60s and 70s looks nothing like the street level of the 21st century. -M 1. As a fan of the 30's and 40's pulp era in general, I'm living proof (born in 1977) that those characters and that era appeals to more than just those that lived it. That said, I get your point. Most casual fans and pop culture enthusiast don't like period pieces...or do they? I see the western slowly creeping back into relevance on Netflix (Godless, etc.), Marco Polo, the various Norse series, and so on. I'm not saying that those series are setting the world on fire, but could it be that the talent and marketing effort put into the recent Tarzan, Phantom, Lone Ranger, Shadow, etc., wasn't up to par? 2. I love Sherlock Holmes, and like what I've seen of the recent BBC series, but for me he's always going to be a Victorian era character. Sure, you can take most elements of the Holmes/Watson dynamic and transplant it into the modern era with successful results--my favorite examples being House and The X-Files, but those were obviously not direct adaptations. Once again, I'm aware that I'm not in step with most viewers, but most people don't seem to have the slightest interest in anything older than a decade, historically speaking, so I'm not really too worried about that personally. That said, I'm not convinced that people won't watch period shows if it's presented in an interesting way. 3. By "lock in place" I'm talking about the basic dynamic created by Lee/Ditko/Romita etc. in the 60's, not the era, fashions, or even supporting cast. Hell, Ditko believed Parker should never be aged beyond 16. I wouldn't go that far, but a case could be made. I will say that with little doubt that I don't think any of the original creators would have made Parker a billionaire or introduced an alternate reality Aunt May with Spider-powers. 4. This is where you lose me, because I fail to see how modern audiences can relate to alternate versions of dead supporting characters and long-time comic reader in-jokes (Peter Porker?) any better than older audiences. Plus, if being an "every-man" is so important, how do you reconcile the dimensional stuff with that? Spider-Man is more than the basic philosophy laid down in his origin story, he was indeed the nexus of the "street level" Marvel Universe for at least the first 30 years of existence. This is important stuff. Street level crime didn't go away with the advent of the internet and the iphone, after all. Hell, the concepts created in the Spider-Man comics of the 60's and 70's almost directly lead to the Netflix Marvel series, particularly Daredevil and the Punisher.
|
|
|
Post by mrbrklyn on Mar 3, 2019 19:23:55 GMT -5
If they focused on selling books on the open market with stories worth reading, that might be a good start. They over think this business. It is all about getting product into the hands of readers at a price that won't make them too poor. It should also be remembered that Comics NEVER sold on their own, per se.... They always was a multimedia product.. cinema, newspapers, comics, radio, tv.
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Mar 3, 2019 19:28:03 GMT -5
I realize that not everyone agrees with me, but I'm of the mind that the iconic characters (ONLY the iconic character, mind you) should remain relatively locked in place with the illusion of change. Yeah, yeah. Alan Moore (my favorite comics writer) would curse me if he read this, but these are immortal IP's that have been around for 60, 70, 80 years for a reason: the concept is rock solid. True, I don't agree. As far as I'm concerned, "illusion of change" is shorthand for "illusion of good storytelling", and is one of (many) contributing factors to the current dire state of the Big Two. If iconic characters were allowed to grow up, grow old, start families, retire, die, and impart legacies, then perhaps we would've been spared Sue Dibny's rape and murder, Peter Parker's deal with the devil, and other trashy efforts in instilling life in static (stagnant) universes. That said, I'm not an "all-or-nothing" kind of guy. I think the Big Two should publish two lines of superhero comics — one which operates in comic book time with illusion of change (if even that), and another which operates in real time with actual change. That way we can all be happy.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2019 19:38:16 GMT -5
Wow, that last sentence. EXCELLENT IDEA!
How can we make this a reality?
I can imagine so many scenarios if, say, Bruce Banner was ageing in real time, etc. We can't compare chalk and cheese but due to real people ageing, we already see it in soap operas.
I WANT THIS IDEA!
It would work!
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Mar 3, 2019 21:18:22 GMT -5
Wow, that last sentence. EXCELLENT IDEA! How can we make this a reality? I can imagine so many scenarios if, say, Bruce Banner was ageing in real time, etc. We can't compare chalk and cheese but due to real people ageing, we already see it in soap operas. I WANT THIS IDEA! It would work! Welcome to Astro City.
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Mar 3, 2019 21:26:46 GMT -5
Wow, that last sentence. EXCELLENT IDEA! How can we make this a reality? I can imagine so many scenarios if, say, Bruce Banner was ageing in real time, etc. We can't compare chalk and cheese but due to real people ageing, we already see it in soap operas. I WANT THIS IDEA! It would work! Welcome to Astro City. Need to get around to checking that out one of these days.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2019 21:48:36 GMT -5
John Byrne also did it with his Superman & Batman: Generations trilogy, which spun out his epilogue from Batman & Captain America.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Mar 3, 2019 23:12:51 GMT -5
4. This is where you lose me, because I fail to see how modern audiences can relate to alternate versions of dead supporting characters and long-time comic reader in-jokes (Peter Porker?) any better than older audiences. Plus, if being an "every-man" is so important, how do you reconcile the dimensional stuff with that? Spider-Man is more than the basic philosophy laid down in his origin story, he was indeed the nexus of the "street level" Marvel Universe for at least the first 30 years of existence. This is important stuff. Street level crime didn't go away with the advent of the internet and the iphone, after all. Hell, the concepts created in the Spider-Man comics of the 60's and 70's almost directly lead to the Netflix Marvel series, particularly Daredevil and the Punisher. Old time audiences have some affection for Gwen Stacy, younger female-er audiences might relate to a younger-female-er Spider-man. The dimensional stuff is completely irrelevant to Spider-man except for one story, since Spider-Gwen lives in her own dimension. It's a little surprising to see such shock at concepts that have been part of superhero comics since well before Spider-Man, and have been around the whole time he has existed? Are you this annoyed with Mary Marvel? The Earth-Two Flash? Power Girl, who is an almost perfect analogue for Spider-Gwen? The What If? comics that I posted above? Spider-Man 2099? The early '00s Spider-Girl series? Spider-man in the sixties was the nexus of the "street level" Marvel universe but he was also the nexus of the "cosmic" Marvel Universe and the "Horror" Marvel universe because he headlined Marvel Team-Up and met everybody. ANYWAY the important point is that Venom is way dumber than Spider-Gwen in terms of genre-plasticity and everyone should just admit I'm right and tell me how smart I am.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Mar 4, 2019 17:50:02 GMT -5
4. This is where you lose me, because I fail to see how modern audiences can relate to alternate versions of dead supporting characters and long-time comic reader in-jokes (Peter Porker?) any better than older audiences. Plus, if being an "every-man" is so important, how do you reconcile the dimensional stuff with that? Spider-Man is more than the basic philosophy laid down in his origin story, he was indeed the nexus of the "street level" Marvel Universe for at least the first 30 years of existence. This is important stuff. Street level crime didn't go away with the advent of the internet and the iphone, after all. Hell, the concepts created in the Spider-Man comics of the 60's and 70's almost directly lead to the Netflix Marvel series, particularly Daredevil and the Punisher. Old time audiences have some affection for Gwen Stacy, younger female-er audiences might relate to a younger-female-er Spider-man. The dimensional stuff is completely irrelevant to Spider-man except for one story, since Spider-Gwen lives in her own dimension. It's a little surprising to see such shock at concepts that have been part of superhero comics since well before Spider-Man, and have been around the whole time he has existed? Are you this annoyed with Mary Marvel? The Earth-Two Flash? Power Girl, who is an almost perfect analogue for Spider-Gwen? The What If? comics that I posted above? Spider-Man 2099? The early '00s Spider-Girl series? Spider-man in the sixties was the nexus of the "street level" Marvel universe but he was also the nexus of the "cosmic" Marvel Universe and the "Horror" Marvel universe because he headlined Marvel Team-Up and met everybody. ANYWAY the important point is that Venom is way dumber than Spider-Gwen in terms of genre-plasticity and everyone should just admit I'm right and tell me how smart I am. I'm not shocked at the concept at all, I just feel that it's ill-suited for Spider-Man. The Flash (the Barry Allen version of course) was a dimensional/time-traveling hero form the start so that's always been part of his adventures. I'm also a big fan of What If? I'm a little surprised that some of you guys are mystified about my problems with the "Spiderverse" and Spider-Gwen in general. Spider-Man in Marvel Team-Up was allowed to branch out from his normal environment, sure, but that was the point. That being the case, at most he'd be in space or some alternate dimension for one or two issues. Many of his Marvel Team-Up adventures were tonally in line with Amazing, after all. I'm not a reader who feels that Spider-Man can't EVER have a space/magic adventure--I just don't think it should ever be a fixture. I disagree that he was ever a nexus for the horror or cosmic aspects of the Marvel Universe. Teaming up occasionally with a horror character or cosmic hero isn't the same thing as spawning virtually all the "street level" Marvel Universe in your main title. The FF are clearly the nexus of cosmic Marvel and I'd say Doctor Strange would be my top choice for horror, if indirectly.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Mar 4, 2019 20:16:32 GMT -5
Old time audiences have some affection for Gwen Stacy, younger female-er audiences might relate to a younger-female-er Spider-man. The dimensional stuff is completely irrelevant to Spider-man except for one story, since Spider-Gwen lives in her own dimension. It's a little surprising to see such shock at concepts that have been part of superhero comics since well before Spider-Man, and have been around the whole time he has existed? Are you this annoyed with Mary Marvel? The Earth-Two Flash? Power Girl, who is an almost perfect analogue for Spider-Gwen? The What If? comics that I posted above? Spider-Man 2099? The early '00s Spider-Girl series? Spider-man in the sixties was the nexus of the "street level" Marvel universe but he was also the nexus of the "cosmic" Marvel Universe and the "Horror" Marvel universe because he headlined Marvel Team-Up and met everybody. ANYWAY the important point is that Venom is way dumber than Spider-Gwen in terms of genre-plasticity and everyone should just admit I'm right and tell me how smart I am. I'm not shocked at the concept at all, I just feel that it's ill-suited for Spider-Man. The Flash (the Barry Allen version of course) was a dimensional/time-traveling hero form the start so that's always been part of his adventures. I'm also a big fan of What If? I'm a little surprised that some of you guys are mystified about my problems with the "Spiderverse" and Spider-Gwen in general. I guess I don't see Spider-Man as special. He's a superhero, he follows the same superhero genre tropes that have been in place for decades. He's also proved to be extremely flexible and fit in with damn near any type of stories. The idea of another universe where Spidey's supporting cast has his powers has been around for more than 40 years. At least to my view you seemed to see Spider-Gwen as an indictment of modern superhero storytelling (or modern Spider-Man storytelling, at least) when she's just doing the same thing superhero writers have always done. And, uh, while we're here. I basically agree that millionaire spider-man doesn't work with the character, but the execution of the premise was good enough that these were my favorite Spidey stories in a decade.
|
|