Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but yes, that's what I was getting at.
I weren't being sarcastic.
I don't even read Batman regularly and I know he has been through TONS of changes.
I would say batman has developed, can you really say he hasn't changed since year one?
Batman's parents are killed. He trains. Becomes hard-nosed adventurer of the night.
70 years later - he's the same. His character changes in some tales like THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS but I don't know how Batman's character has developed or progressed in 70 years.
Also let's see I mentioned Flash, Superman is another example, Iron Man (defeating alcoholism has changed him) Cap (he became far less trusting of authority after his encounter with the secret empire and Civil war, not mention becoming a man out of time in the silver age), the Hulk (having to deal several different personalities, as many different tragic events). there several examples of heroes who have benefited from character development.
I agree - character development can be a great thing. I'm just saying it's not a mandatory requirement for a character.
I have seen both those movies and that's besides the point I'm making, the pointy is movie has far less time develop characters than a 40 year serial, plus you don't have to deal with the same characters every month over a 40 year period, which means movies are not the best examples for this debate.
Your point was that one doesn't have time to progress a character in a movie. I then explained that was incorrect. The idea that any superhero has progressed or developed more than Bogie in CASABLANCA is just plain wrong. Encountering adventures, swelling continuity, and hanging labels on the character, are not character development.
Some characters you mention have developed, but generally, the vast majority of superheroes not only develop barely, but do so at a phenomenally slow pace.
Punish er becoming an angel wasn't development, it was a bad plot twist coming out nowhere, there is a difference. Punisher is in his 50s, so his character is more set than Spidey, who was introduced as high school student.
It's as much character development as the marriage or the alcoholism. Just because it was told badly, doesn't mean it's not development.
Punisher goes from vehement loner hellbent on killing people with no regard for the repercussions of his actions, no thought of the future, to a man seeking redemption and hoping for a reward.
Big difference. Bad story.
But more importantly - not appropriate. Punisher doesn't WANT to develop. He doesn't want to go from the obssessive murderer that he is. You try it, and all of a sudden, Punisher loses his appeal.
This is my point - character development CAN be great. It CAN be bad. Not all characters want it in the same way, and not all characters want it at all. But some do.
I don't think Spidey, nor most superheroes, require it at all. Their stories hinge on the rather simple climax of, "superhero vs supervillain". That's the heart of their stories. And those stories are told in very small, serialised chapters. Character development simply isn't high on the list of things the comic needs to accomplish. That's not to say it shouldn't develop ever, but rather, it's just not a necessary requirement of the character.
None of the characters mentioned were introduced as teenagers, that is why character development works fort Spidey, he can't go from 15 to 25 and not have any character development, it makes him look like a pathetic man child. Characters who go from 15 to 25 over the course of their seres should get character development.
Again - not against him developing. Just against the idea that he MUST.
Bart Simpson is still 10 years old.
I don't think it does refresh the character, it makes him seem more stale, IMO. I can already read those stories from the 70s or Spidey as goofy kid in modern times in USM, why would I want read the same stories offered by those two venues, I already read those, I want read something different with spidey, with him at different stage in his life. I want Spidey who is a responsible adult, not a goofy kid or an idiot man child.
Fair enough.
You mentioned the Ultimate Universe, the difference has been USM is a goofy kid, while 616 spidey is a responsible adult. What's the difference now? They are both goofy kids, 616 Spidey just looks older.
They don't have to be different. The difference in the Ultimate universe was the setting. 2000s. 15 years old. No continuity. The difference, in terms of character, was the ultimate versions were meant to be more like the characters than their 616 counterparts who, due to continuity, had strayed to far from their center.
I don't particularly understand the desire to have a specific character be shoehorned into a different role. I'm sure there's a responsible adult superhero who's married and what not. I don't see why Spidey, who became famous for being a loser teenager, should fill that role. :?
Each to his own, I suppose.
Spidey is supposed to deal with real life problems and don't people in the real world have to deal with in laws?
Real life problem: If I don't trek across the desert to get water from the well, my family dies tomorrow.
That's a real life problem. In Africa. Real people in the real world have to worry about whether or not they get water today.
But Spidey shouldn't have to deal with THAT real life problem.
He's supposed to be a middle-class teenager/young adult who's perpetually unlucky.
Just as African poverty isn't appropriate, to a lesser extent, dealing with his wife's in-laws isn't really appropriate, neither is dealing with his child's problems at school, nor being molested by his crazy aunt.
There's a line where it's just inappropriate for the story to go to. Every one will decide it someplace else, and that's okay. But my point is - just as the African thing is an extreme of going too far, that must mean there are 'boundaries' (of some form). For me, dealing with in-laws is past that 'boundary' (it's not a specific line, but you get my meaning).
By the by you can read the whole article here:
http://spideykicksbutt.com/DeepThoughts/OneMoreDay.html
It explains pretty well, why OMD sucked.
Thanks.
No development, that's a bold statement, which I must resectfully disagree with. The problem I have with OMD is throws out the baby with the bath water. There were a lot of stories in the past 20 years where the marriage was important plot point.
Venom was introduced as villain who terrorized MJ and that was the reason Spidey ditched the black costume he was wearing at the time (a copy of the first black suit). How did Venom introduce himself to Spidey now, by overfeeding his gold fish? Also Spidey was able to escape the grave Kraven had buried Spidey in, by using his love of MJ to motivate him to escape. How did he escape now, motivated by his love of tacos. i won't even get into all the problems Harry's return creates. This whole thing just creates problems, it doesn't solve them.
... None of those requires him to be married. MJ and he could be dating, and it still works. The fact they're married doesn't affect the story at all.
Besides was there any good reason why something sensible like divorce wasn't an option? That would have been way better than the idiotic BS we got instead.
I believe, agree with it or not, the reasons were twofold:
1) Divorcing Spidey "aged" him. Joe Q maintains the idea that a divorced Spidey becomes too old for the audience to identify with. I think this is arbitrary nonsense. Joe Q said that Peter having kids would "age" him too much, but it's okay if his GIRLFRIEND (Gwen) has kids. Divorcing him is too much, but his best friend can be divorced MULTIPLE TIMES. It's total nonsense. Divorcing him only 'ages' him when it's brought up, and it won't be a topic they bring up all the time. But that's how he feels and he calls the shots.
2) Media backlash. Joe Q is worried about headlines expressing their distaste for MJ and Peter divorcing. I don't get why this is a problem. The media just had a huge attack on Spidey because they thought MJ did his laundry. And nothing bad happened to Marvel or its sales. I don't get why the media being potentially upset about the divorce would cause a problem. Wertham died years ago.
I think divorce was the most elegant, poignant solution to the character, and Joe Q took it off the table because of these two major reasons (in so far as I can tell). With that done, the only way out is to have SOMEONE show up and essentially magic it away. :|
