Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 91 to 102 of 102
  1. #91
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    You might be overthinking the significance of an improvised comment in which he acknowledged an argument, but didn't endorse it.
    Yeah, I agree. I'm a Peter/MJ marriage shipper through and through, but I have to agree that it doesn't look like King was knocking the marriage at all. In fact, I think he was critiquing the viewpoint that some have that the marriage between Peter and MJ was "the end" and saying that he wasn't going to treat Batman the same way that the some among the Marvel editorial treated Spider-Man.
    Favorite Mythologies: Green Lantern, Batman (pre-Flashpoint), Spider-Man, The Fantastic Four, the Justice League/JLA (pre-Flashpoint)

    DC Pulls - Action Comics; Bug! Adventures of Forager; Deathstroke; Doom Patrol; Hal Jordan & the GLC; Mister Miracle; Superman

    Marvel Pulls - Captain America; The Mighty Thor

    Non-Big Two Pulls - Saga; Archie

  2. #92
    Astonishing Member theoneandonly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    2,655

    Default

    well marvel lately seem to imply that mephisto did not want only their marriage but his soul as well as evident in Spider man / Deadpool and he seems to have taken interest in Deadpool also after he saved Peter though he couldn't possibly corrupt Deadpool any more than he already is.
    The Self is the only existing reality

  3. #93
    Spider-Ninja
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Melbourne, VIC, Australia
    Posts
    150

    Default

    Quesada and King both are cut from the same cloth, both believe that a character getting married and finding happiness is an "ending" to that particular character. Especially when grief plays a big part in what forged that character to become the hero that they are today. Frankly, I think both are just childish and just didn't want to write a married character, or maybe they just don't have the ability to do so. So many writers will tell you that they pull from personal experiences in order to write their stories, which is why King's take on Nightwing becoming an agent of Spiral was so well done. King drew upon his experiences with the CIA in a post-9/11 world. Quesada just didn't like marriage, wanted to play with a single Spider-Man who could go off and flirt with all the females (Maybe Quesada isn't happy with his own life? Who knows). King on the other hand just doesn't seem to have the experiences to pull out to put into the character, so he bailed and is switching to something that he can relate to, thus be able to write better.

    I'll give this as an advantage to King, I don't see him getting involved at a later date with a sub-story that rubs it in our faces like Quesada likes to do.

  4. #94
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6,536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Taylor View Post
    Permanent status quo change or just temporary illusion of change I wonder?e
    Temporary. Doomsday Clock is set a year in advance of every title and they're together there (Lois is even working at the Daily Planet, which she quit at the start of Bendis' run)

  5. #95
    Astonishing Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    4,265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boots View Post
    how do you see that being relevant?

    i would say support for illusion of change or reboots or or permanent change would have little to do with how much they like the actual character
    The original question was why people who don't care for the reset button being mashed are into superhero comics. Can't speak for other people, but for me, the sole reason I pick them up is because I like the characters in question and could see that some people might put up with resetting if they otherwise were into the character. Mileage may vary.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  6. #96
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    916

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    The original question was why people who don't care for the reset button being mashed are into superhero comics. Can't speak for other people, but for me, the sole reason I pick them up is because I like the characters in question and could see that some people might put up with resetting if they otherwise were into the character. Mileage may vary.
    Sure, I agree that liking the characters and the medium is the answer to why people read the books. But what I was getting at, and could have been more clear about, is why people read mainstream superhero comics and then get UPSET over resets and everything coming back to sea level eventually. Don't we know that is part of the cost of admission, along with things like a willingness to suspend disbelief, an ability to apply "comic book logic", etc? It's not a secret and it's not a surprise when things get put back in their place. If we get upset at those things, aren't we touching an oven we know is hot and getting upset at getting burnt?

  7. #97

    Default

    Tom King should be fired for Batman #50. That is blatant false-advertising.

    Any writer that thinks that marriage is "the end of the story" is a bad writer.

  8. #98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeeguy91 View Post
    Yeah, I agree. I'm a Peter/MJ marriage shipper through and through, but I have to agree that it doesn't look like King was knocking the marriage at all. In fact, I think he was critiquing the viewpoint that some have that the marriage between Peter and MJ was "the end" and saying that he wasn't going to treat Batman the same way that the some among the Marvel editorial treated Spider-Man.
    He was also trying to promote the book, so he has no reason to alienate readers who feel a particular way on the spider-marriage.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  9. #99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlet Spider-Man View Post
    Tom King should be fired for Batman #50. That is blatant false-advertising.

    Any writer that thinks that marriage is "the end of the story" is a bad writer.
    The advertising wasn't his call, and any promotional decisions were also made by higher-ups.

    Plus it would be absurd for DC to fire the critically acclaimed writer of their biggest book. There's no indication that some other random writer, or even top-tier writer would get similar sales. Firing someone successful can also make any other names very wary about taking on the book. If Bendis thinks firing King was the wrong call, he'll be less likely to jump on the title, and he's probably the one guy DC has who would get similar numbers.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  10. #100
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    916

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    The advertising wasn't his call, and any promotional decisions were also made by higher-ups.

    Plus it would be absurd for DC to fire the critically acclaimed writer of their biggest book. There's no indication that some other random writer, or even top-tier writer would get similar effects. Firing someone successful can also make any other names very wary about taking on the book. If Bendis thinks firing King was the wrong call, he'll be less likely to jump on the title.
    Exactly.. Punishing King for DC's mistake would be unfair and I can't see how it wouldn't have a negative impact on DC's ability to retain and recruit talent. If someone like Donny Cates is thinking about signing with DC, seeing King be the fall guy here would have to give him pause.

  11. #101
    Astonishing Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    4,265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel22 View Post
    Sure, I agree that liking the characters and the medium is the answer to why people read the books. But what I was getting at, and could have been more clear about, is why people read mainstream superhero comics and then get UPSET over resets and everything coming back to sea level eventually. Don't we know that is part of the cost of admission, along with things like a willingness to suspend disbelief, an ability to apply "comic book logic", etc? It's not a secret and it's not a surprise when things get put back in their place. If we get upset at those things, aren't we touching an oven we know is hot and getting upset at getting burnt?
    Okay.

    I guess that some people hope that certain changes do stay? There are a few instances where a change stayed for good.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  12. #102
    Notorious M.O.S. Kuwagaton's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,055

    Default

    So Tom King actually did mention Spider-Man again in the Word Balloon podcast and mentioned something about Ditko: that he was set to return in 1999 but then declined when he saw that Byrne would be "infringing" on his turf. Is he the first to mention that?

Posting Permissions

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