Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 187
  1. #76
    Mighty Member Inversed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    1,170

    Default

    To go off what some people said characters who would be considered foundational vs. integral, to me what I see it as certain characters may not be foundational or necessary, but the relationships and interactions are.

    It doesn't matter who the supporting cast is, or who the villain is, as long as Peter/Spider-Man has someone to bounce off of, relate to, and interact with. So for example, you don't need JJJ to be in a Spider-Man story, you could easily put any other character to fill that role, but you may be more likely to want to use him because you have a perfectly good character there that already exists, that also has a great history and is very popular and iconic.

    And I think that's the big difference, its not exactly who you use but how you use them, and when you have such an expansive castlist like Spider-Man, each with their own distinct personalities and character roles, they feel more necessary because you want to see more of them.
    Current Reading List: Spider-Gwen, Amazing Spider-Man, Avengers, Ms. Marvel, Spider-Man, Amazing Spider-Man: Renew Your Vows, Peter Parker: The Spectacular Spider-Man, Marvel Two-In-One, Tales Of Suspense, Champions, Despicable Deadpool

  2. #77
    Ultimate Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    13,850

    Default

    To be fair, I often see it levied at people who are not fond of superhero marriages that they're not forward thinking. This isn't necessarily true across the board. It just means they don't like a character moving forward in one particular way. There are many ways to move a character forward, marriage just being one. To not like one is not to not like any growth whatsoever.
    "They can be a great people Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you. My only son." - Jor-El

    "Now why don't we step up here and everybody get stepped up, and let's get some stepped up personal space up in this place." - Phillip Jacobs

  3. #78
    Astonishing Member TheCape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    3,009

    Default

    .......Nevermind.
    Last edited by TheCape; 06-12-2018 at 10:05 PM.

  4. #79
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    31,072

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inversed View Post
    One thing however I will defend and argue, is that romance & relationships are an important part of Spider-Man. In almost every other medium, and in almost all the other comic spinoffs, there's usually a subplot about Peter falling for someone, or someone falling for him, and the feelings are used as a good external motivation for him.

    That's my personal biggest disappointment with the past couple years of main Spider-Man is we have had barely any good relationship stuff, and I don't mean just with MJ, I mean with anyone. The best I can think of is the few flirtatious interactions with Black Cat, and a couple really good and nice moments when he was with Carlie. Can't really think of anything else, which is a shame because I think showing him with someone else in a relationship like that where they both really care for each other, even for just a little while, can create an extra sense of enjoyment and sweetness to the story.
    I agree that romance and relationships are very important to Spider-Man, but I think personally after seeing a relationship elevated and developed to the extent that Peter's relationship with Mary Jane was...to have it end as it did and for why it did is a specter that's probably always going to hang over the romance in the book moving forward.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    It seems unlikely that Marvel would waste time and energy splitting up the couple if they believed it to be sustainable.
    Well, I think the fact that the marriage lasted as long as it did proves that it was "sustainable," irregardless of people's issues with it or writers' self-confessed problems with writing it.
    Quote Originally Posted by bob/.schoonover View Post
    I'm prone to agreeing with you (especially about Robotnik vs Eggman), but I think GG is probably the one of those that is least clear (I think even if you believe these are all clear, if you'd consider GG to have the closest competition of those five) or at least most malleable. One can imagine Norman showing up in the MCU as an Avengers villain rather than in the SM movies (or not showing up at all), not appearing in Into the Spider-verse, and not appearing in any comics for a couple years (he probably needs to cool off a bit after GDS). I think, in that case, the public opinion might shift away from Norman (not sure where it'd shift - Toomes?, Otto?) who was big in the Raimi movies but mostly just a background presence in the Webb movies. Maybe?
    I would imagine that if Norman were used as an Avengers villain in the MCU that he would still inevitably be connected back to Spider-Man in a big way.

    The Goblin is in Into the Spider-Verse, even if it doesn't seem like there's much to that version beyond being a monster (though he does kill Spider-Man, so...).

  5. #80
    Mighty Member Inversed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    1,170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I agree that romance and relationships are very important to Spider-Man, but I think personally after seeing a relationship elevated and developed to the extent that Peter's relationship with Mary Jane was...to have it end as it did and for why it did is a specter that's probably always going to hang over the romance in the book moving forward.
    I do understand that, I honestly feel like if they resolved the Mephisto thing, but they still didn't get back together, it wouldn't sting as much and would probably be alot easier to move on, if they decided they wanted to do that.

    Cliffhanger plus no good alternatives equals alot of baggage that'll be stuck there without doing alot to work around it.
    Current Reading List: Spider-Gwen, Amazing Spider-Man, Avengers, Ms. Marvel, Spider-Man, Amazing Spider-Man: Renew Your Vows, Peter Parker: The Spectacular Spider-Man, Marvel Two-In-One, Tales Of Suspense, Champions, Despicable Deadpool

  6. #81
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,730

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inversed View Post
    To go off what some people said characters who would be considered foundational vs. integral, to me what I see it as certain characters may not be foundational or necessary, but the relationships and interactions are.

    It doesn't matter who the supporting cast is, or who the villain is, as long as Peter/Spider-Man has someone to bounce off of, relate to, and interact with. So for example, you don't need JJJ to be in a Spider-Man story, you could easily put any other character to fill that role, but you may be more likely to want to use him because you have a perfectly good character there that already exists, that also has a great history and is very popular and iconic.

    And I think that's the big difference, its not exactly who you use but how you use them, and when you have such an expansive castlist like Spider-Man, each with their own distinct personalities and character roles, they feel more necessary because you want to see more of them.
    The Amazing Spider-Man movies turned George Stacy into some form of J. Jonah Jameson, and that didn't work out exceedingly well.

  7. #82
    Astonishing Member Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,843

    Lightbulb



    I just stumbled upon this video about bad character development while looking through Youtube. Skip to 3:15 and watch until 3:55 for the bit that reminds me most of modern Spider-Man (Aunt May's death in #400, OMD, Felicia and Peter's relationship, exact) and made me LOL.
    Last edited by Celgress; 06-13-2018 at 08:59 PM.
    "You'll never learn to fly now 'til you're standing at the cliff."

  8. #83
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    31,072

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    The Amazing Spider-Man movies turned George Stacy into some form of J. Jonah Jameson, and that didn't work out exceedingly well.
    I don't know if they really did that. Even Ultimate Captain Stacy didn't seem to care for Spider-Man that much up until he died (although he wasn't around for that long anyways).

    But I think it actually worked fine in that movie, though that might just be because I like Denis Leary .

    Though it wasn't like in the Marvel's Spider-Man cartoon where they seemed to have to make Harry's hatred of Spider-Man increasingly more insufferable and illogical to compensate for Jameson not being around.

  9. #84
    Mighty Member whiteshark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    To be fair, I often see it levied at people who are not fond of superhero marriages that they're not forward thinking. This isn't necessarily true across the board. It just means they don't like a character moving forward in one particular way. There are many ways to move a character forward, marriage just being one. To not like one is not to not like any growth whatsoever.
    Wait what?
    So people that wanted to read forever stories with Peter Parker and Mary Jane are forward thinking and readers like me that liked that comic book stories do not remain the same forever in regards of Status Quo in the best Marvel tradition are not forward thinking?
    Does not make much sense to me,especially applying that logic to professional comic book writers and editors.

  10. #85
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,730

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I don't know if they really did that. Even Ultimate Captain Stacy didn't seem to care for Spider-Man that much up until he died (although he wasn't around for that long anyways).

    But I think it actually worked fine in that movie, though that might just be because I like Denis Leary .

    Though it wasn't like in the Marvel's Spider-Man cartoon where they seemed to have to make Harry's hatred of Spider-Man increasingly more insufferable and illogical to compensate for Jameson not being around.
    It's an authority figure who sets the public against Spider-Man. Jameson used the power of the press. Movie Stacy used the power of his office. The comparison might be a bit more apt than you might think.

  11. #86
    Astonishing Member boots's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    2,952

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Well, I think the fact that the marriage lasted as long as it did proves that it was "sustainable," irregardless of people's issues with it or writers' self-confessed problems with writing it.
    does irregardless mean despite or in support of their issues

    i kid. but “sustainable” has a different context when you’re talking indefinite continuity spanning decades with an ageing audience.

    what works for 10 years may not work for 20 and what works for 20 may not work for 50. it’s clear that the marriage CAN work (and no, just because a writer prefers not to write about it or finds it uninspiring does not make them a bad writer. shakespeare wasn’t shit because
    most of his stories were about the path to marriage rather than marriage itself)...but so can a lot of other status quos

    the challenge is picking the optimum one best suited to longevity and drama
    troo fan or death

  12. #87
    Astonishing Member David Walton's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,434

    Default

    I was so looking forward to Dennis Leary as Captain Stacy, and it would have been great...if he had actually, you know, been playing Captain Stacy. The quiet voice of wisdom. The guy who doesn't buy into the public's opinion of Spider-Man and recognizes things for what they really are. Who even gives Peter his blessing when he inadvertently caused his death.

    Instead, we got the JJJ substitute who made Peter swear never to go near Gwen again. You really couldn't get a further departure from the Stacy of the comics. Every attitude he held, every decision he made was the exact opposite of his 616 version.

    It's almost as bizarre as the MCU's Uncle Ben phobia.

  13. #88
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6,021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boots View Post
    what works for 10 years may not work for 20 and what works for 20 may not work for 50.
    Well, when left alone, the Spider-Marriage has worked for well over 30 so far so we'll see in another two decades if it can go that distance.

  14. #89
    Astonishing Member boots's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    2,952

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Miles To Go View Post
    Well, when left alone, the Spider-Marriage has worked for well over 30 so far so we'll see in another two decades if it can go that distance.
    i’m confused by the two decades hence remark...is the marriage coming back?

    regardless, i get that you love the marriage. i get that many militantly do

    but that doesn’t mean it worked

    and it doesn’t necessarily mean it didn’t

    was it something that worked but resulted in diminishing returns over time? was it something that got stronger and stronger every year? was it something that worked effectively for 30 years but had a use by date? was it something that worked but something else could work better?

    these are all interesting questions, if you really allow an exploration of them
    troo fan or death

  15. #90
    Mighty Member Inversed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    1,170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boots View Post
    i’m confused by the two decades hence remark...is the marriage coming back?

    regardless, i get that you love the marriage. i get that many militantly do

    but that doesn’t mean it worked

    and it doesn’t necessarily mean it didn’t

    was it something that worked but resulted in diminishing returns over time? was it something that got stronger and stronger every year? was it something that worked effectively for 30 years but had a use by date? was it something that worked but something else could work better?

    these are all interesting questions, if you really allow an exploration of them
    He means that because it has lasted 30 years thanks to things like the newspaper comic and Renew Your Vows, if they go on for another 20 years it will have lasted 50.

    And to be fair, I think the JMS era from 2002-2007 worked incredibly well, I've been going through that book as well as the satellites from that era recently and I personally wouldn't say there was a case of diminishing returns with that. Hell, one of the final stories, Matt Fraction's Sensational Spider-Man Annual in 2007, is one of my favourite Spider-Man issues now.

    Could it have gotten stale if it had continued on with no sense of direction? Absolutely, but I do think it ending during a time period when it was at probably its most consistent in terms of writing and approach contributed to the backlash.
    Current Reading List: Spider-Gwen, Amazing Spider-Man, Avengers, Ms. Marvel, Spider-Man, Amazing Spider-Man: Renew Your Vows, Peter Parker: The Spectacular Spider-Man, Marvel Two-In-One, Tales Of Suspense, Champions, Despicable Deadpool

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •