Spider-Man Amazing Spider-Man: Brand New Day (#546-567) (Spoilers)

Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

ultimatedjf said:
Well, we did see him a couple'a years ago in Sensational Spider-Man ("Feral")




Didn't we see it in Spider-Man: Swing Shift?
Click to expand...


Didn't pick it up .

Didn't want to spend my free.

That said, it has been ages since last we've seen Dr.Bong.
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

The first arc was kinda enjoyable... but then I realised I didn't care enough to continue.
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

So...I just reread Brand New Day. And I really liked it.

And I feel so, so dirty for it.

But it was good! The narration was well done and the story came together in the end.

One thing I hated when I first read it was when Mr. Negative's goons were busting into the circus, and one of them said, "Curses, it's Spider-Man!" and another said "he's going to foil our evil plans!" At the time I thought it was one of the most retarded things I've ever read, but now I know it was a homage - I just can't remember to what. But I know I've read those two lines of dialog before.

And that makes it very funny.
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

Just read #552.

Cool idea having the guy stumble into Doc Connor's lab and (presumably) inject himself with some stuff. And the vomiting guts thing was pretty gross.

I did like how there was a crowd surrounding it and it was on the news and stuff. Seems like comics tend to gloss over public reaction to things like that, and it was nice to see it addressed.
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

Ugh. Blech. Pfooey. Mr. "I am your density"'s writing hasn't aged well.

I feel really patronized by this comic now. It's full of "wacky" humor that just doesn't work, and the dialogue is clunky as hell. "Woo-hoo! We're writing a comic book, see! We'll insert our writer and and editor's names in a newspaper! It'll be HIGHlarious!!!" For a 9 year-old perhaps.

And the whole Spidey-as-criminal thing just feels old. It's an interesting plot point with the tracers, but half the populace being suspicious of him...just because, doesn't feel substantiated at all. And Bennett not knowing anyone's name is the most annoying and grating and unfunny bit ever.

I feel like this title has de-evolved. Which i guess is what they were going for anyway. Anyone who has a problem with USM should read Gale's arc.
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

E said:
So...I just reread Brand New Day. And I really liked it.

And I feel so, so dirty for it.

But it was good! The narration was well done and the story came together in the end.

One thing I hated when I first read it was when Mr. Negative's goons were busting into the circus, and one of them said, "Curses, it's Spider-Man!" and another said "he's going to foil our evil plans!" At the time I thought it was one of the most retarded things I've ever read, but now I know it was a homage - I just can't remember to what. But I know I've read those two lines of dialog before.

And that makes it very funny.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, E, but thankfully I just skipped OMD, wikied the whole story and ultimately every new writer will make changes to the previous writer's conventions for the character, it's just such a blatant change it's rather perturbing. Other than that I'm enjoying BND, I just wish that Freak's origin wasn't as bad as it was. The rational for him injecting himself with animal serums just hurt my head.
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

Noticed this on the last page...

Bass said:
Oh, Christ. BACK TO THE FUTURE has a huge plot hole that prevents any of it working: if Einstein and Jennifer can be left in evil 1985 because as soon as Marty and Doc change 1955 evil 1985 will become good 1985, then how come normal 2015 doesn't become evil 2015 when Biff changes 1955?

Doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

It does, Marty and Doc just left too soon to see it. There's a ton of stuff like this they address on the DVD, it just got cut from the film because without a narrator most audiences would find it too confusing. You know when Old Biff gets back to 2015 and is acting pained? There's an extra ten or so seconds of that scene where he actually fades away, because he wouldn't be there in evil 2015, which is what everything is changing into.

Anyway, this is just me defending BTTF because I like it. In response to the logic of all this, one story having a plot hole doesn't excuse THIS story being full of them either.
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

Dancanread said:
Ugh. Blech. Pfooey. Mr. "I am your density"'s writing hasn't aged well.

I feel really patronized by this comic now. It's full of "wacky" humor that just doesn't work, and the dialogue is clunky as hell. "Woo-hoo! We're writing a comic book, see! We'll insert our writer and and editor's names in a newspaper! It'll be HIGHlarious!!!" For a 9 year-old perhaps.

...

I feel like this title has de-evolved. Which i guess is what they were going for anyway. Anyone who has a problem with USM should read Gale's arc.
Click to expand...

This is very a accurate explanation of why the 'fun comic' thing can feel just bad. It's a very hard balance to get right.

Planet-man said:
Noticed this on the last page...

It does, Marty and Doc just left too soon to see it. There's a ton of stuff like this they address on the DVD, it just got cut from the film because without a narrator most audiences would find it too confusing. You know when Old Biff gets back to 2015 and is acting pained? There's an extra ten or so seconds of that scene where he actually fades away, because he wouldn't be there in evil 2015, which is what everything is changing into.
Click to expand...

I know! But *obnoxious buzzer sound* You are wrong, sir! Time changes instantly - as soon as the timeline is changed, it all changes. The reason it doesn't, is because the dramatic reveal of evil 1985 wouldn't work if 2015 turned evil around them. Secondly, no one cares about the plot hole because it happened 20 minutes ago and you don't care.

Planet-man said:
Anyway, this is just me defending BTTF because I like it. In response to the logic of all this, one story having a plot hole doesn't excuse THIS story being full of them either.
Click to expand...

I *LOVE* BACK TO THE FUTURE! My point is that a big plot hole doesn't inherently destroy a story. It's dependent on the plot hole.

For example; HAMLET has a plot hole: As Hamlet is at sea with Rosencrantz and Guildernstern, the boat is attacked by pirates. Who kill everyone but Hamlet. Then Hamlet is returned to Denmark by them. ... Are they goodwill pirates? What pirates do that? Answer: You don't care. It's off-stage and barely mentioned. It's ****ing Hamlet.

TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY - in the original, only organic matter can travel through time. This is why Skynet had to send back an Arnie model Terminator than some kind of gigantic nuclear bomb. In T2, he sends back the T-1000 - which is completely inorganic. It has no organic parts at all. Big plot hole. You don't notice because when he shows up you a) forgot this rule and b) think he's a good guy, you think he's the Reese of the film. By the time you find out he's made of liquid metal you just forget the rule.

The whole "OMD plot hole" argument labours under holes in continuity that frankly, are completely irrelevant to enjoying the title for what it is. I was trying to make a point that plot holes can be invisible and can be ignored in some cases, and I think the continuity-retconning nonsense of OMD is one of those plot-holes I just think you have to ignore. Like Dawn showing up in BUFFY, it creates continuity plot-holes, but they're nitpicky and not germaine to the story proper.

At least, that's what I think. :)
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

Just got up to date on AMAZING SPIDER-MAN... it's gone too far in the 'let's have fun!' direction. The continuous narration, both from Spidey and from the 'comic' (I've never been reminded so many times by a comic that I'm READING a comic) to the nigh-ridiculous portrayal of Bennet.

It's just all trying far too hard. What makes it worse is Freak is a pretty **** villain, as is Mr Negative, and The Menace. While I'm very happy that they're trying to make new villains, it's painfully obvious why guys like Bendis just continually reuse other people's ideas that have worked - coming up with your own new villains seems almost impossible for some comics writers to do.

Though nothing bad in this comic is due to ONE MORE DAY. There's some fine elements there; I like the idea of the new Bugle owner not getting people's names right, and it would've been great if the only time he DID get someone's name right was on Peter's photo that he DIDN'T want credit for. I like how when JJJ sees the new Bugle he doesn't believe it's the Bugle. But I have a real problem with Bennet being a worse head for the DB than JJJ. It's just a bit silly. But as I say, what's wrong with the comic is NOT that Peter and Mary Jane are seperated.

Their marriage, whether it exists or not, is not part of the problem. Part of the problem is that the new direction they're pushing towards is just far too overemphasised.

That said, I enjoy this 'bad' version of Spidey much more than the previously 'bad' version of Spidey we've had for the last five years. So... it's a step up, I suppose...
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

Bass said:
I know! But *obnoxious buzzer sound* You are wrong, sir! Time changes instantly - as soon as the timeline is changed, it all changes. The reason it doesn't, is because the dramatic reveal of evil 1985 wouldn't work if 2015 turned evil around them. Secondly, no one cares about the plot hole because it happened 20 minutes ago and you don't care.
Click to expand...
*puts on nerd hat*

Actually according to BTTF temporal physics, time changes slowly up until the point of no return (as in chances to rectify the situation is lost) it moves slow. Remember in the first one Marty's siblings faded very slowly, in fact took a week until he started to fade away and wasn't set in stone until that one moment of truth, which hinges upon the interaction of agents out side of time being the only variables that can effect it. Now it can be argued that even though Doc said that they couldn't travel to the previous reality of the future could be that he didn't realize this, or he thought they current time is past the point of no return, or seeing how time is not effected by the paradox of interfering with the past going to the future would not stop what has already happened in the past.

For example; HAMLET has a plot hole: As Hamlet is at sea with Rosencrantz and Guildernstern, the boat is attacked by pirates. Who kill everyone but Hamlet. Then Hamlet is returned to Denmark by them. ... Are they goodwill pirates? What pirates do that? Answer: You don't care. It's off-stage and barely mentioned. It's ****ing Hamlet.
Click to expand...
Never read or saw Hamlet so assuming maybe it was a whole wash up to shore, a pay off, or he went all Tales-of-the-Black-Freighter on us
TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY - in the original, only organic matter can travel through time. This is why Skynet had to send back an Arnie model Terminator than some kind of gigantic nuclear bomb. In T2, he sends back the T-1000 - which is completely inorganic. It has no organic parts at all. Big plot hole. You don't notice because when he shows up you a) forgot this rule and b) think he's a good guy, you think he's the Reese of the film. By the time you find out he's made of liquid metal you just forget the rule.
Click to expand...
Well they did refer to him as "living metal" so maybe some technology was developed to make an organic metal
The whole "OMD plot hole" argument labours under holes in continuity that frankly, are completely irrelevant to enjoying the title for what it is. I was trying to make a point that plot holes can be invisible and can be ignored in some cases, and I think the continuity-retconning nonsense of OMD is one of those plot-holes I just think you have to ignore. Like Dawn showing up in BUFFY, it creates continuity plot-holes, but they're nitpicky and not germaine to the story proper.

At least, that's what I think. :)
Click to expand...

Now I agree the BND is enjoyable because it essentially going back to when Spidey was at his best and actually looking back and copying things (I dropped the book only a few episodes). But I'm just pissed because they could have brought back the feel and style of that spidey without the incredibly stupid OMD.

Joe Kalicki said:
I couldn't sleep last night and for some reason I was thinking of OMD.

If Spider-Man never got married in the first place, wouldn't it make OMD itself impossible? The entire story hinges on Spider-Man's marriage. If it erased that, then the events of OMD could never have happened in the first place. So if OMD erased itself, wouldn't it just go back to Peter and MJ being married again?
Click to expand...
Well Peter and MJ were married before Harry died, so you can assume that with the timeline changed the events after the marriage, like Harry's death, changed as well though not on a global level.
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

Random said:
*puts on nerd hat*

Actually according to BTTF temporal physics, time changes slowly up until the point of no return (as in chances to rectify the situation is lost) it moves slow. Remember in the first one Marty's siblings faded very slowly, in fact took a week until he started to fade away and wasn't set in stone until that one moment of truth, which hinges upon the interaction of agents out side of time being the only variables that can effect it. Now it can be argued that even though Doc said that they couldn't travel to the previous reality of the future could be that he didn't realize this, or he thought they current time is past the point of no return, or seeing how time is not effected by the paradox of interfering with the past going to the future would not stop what has already happened in the past.
Click to expand...

The major difference is that Marty was not in his current time when he began to fade. 1955 was not changing, 1985 was. From the POV of people in 1985, as soon as Marty disappeared, everything changed. From Marty's POV it's different. As such, old man Biff should see himself as starting to fade, but 2015 should change as soon as he steals the Delorian, thus destroying the film. :(

I like plot holes sometimes. :)

Also - this has to be the most inane discussion any of us have ever had ever ever. :p
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

How did we get to a back to the future discussion?
 
Last edited:
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

Bass said:
The major difference is that Marty was not in his current time when he began to fade. 1955 was not changing, 1985 was. From the POV of people in 1985, as soon as Marty disappeared, everything changed. From Marty's POV it's different. As such, old man Biff should see himself as starting to fade, but 2015 should change as soon as he steals the Delorian, thus destroying the film. :(
Click to expand...
If Biff never had intentions to return the Delorian it would have. You see when Biff returned to the future in the time machine at that point the future has not changed, there was still a chance that young Biff may not use the book or Marty getting it back(which he did so it's reasonable to assume that time would remain in flux for a little while). When Doc and Marty was in the alternate 1985 that point has already changed, so they would go forward to and alternate future. If the time machine was not brought back, I'm sure that the future would fade away into something else.

Also you could argue that Marty not fading away as soon as he returned could be the fact that he is a little over a week older from his POV from spending that time in another period, so from his perspective he wouldn't fade until another week for the time ripple to fade his past to his current age.
Venom Melendez said:
How did we get to a back to the future discussion?
Click to expand...
Discussing plot holes of OMD using other films as examples that plot holes don't always effect the story
Random said:
*puts on nerd hat*
Click to expand...
OH NOES TEH NERDZ HAT BEIN ON TWO LONG!!!
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

Random said:
If Biff never had intentions to return the Delorian it would have. You see when Biff returned to the future in the time machine at that point the future has not changed, there was still a chance that young Biff may not use the book or Marty getting it back(which he did so it's reasonable to assume that time would remain in flux for a little while). When Doc and Marty was in the alternate 1985 that point has already changed, so they would go forward to and alternate future. If the time machine was not brought back, I'm sure that the future would fade away into something else.
Click to expand...

lexluthorwrong1oi3.jpg


:p
 
Re: Amazing Spider-Man series discussion (spoilers)

E said:
One thing I hated when I first read it was when Mr. Negative's goons were busting into the circus, and one of them said, "Curses, it's Spider-Man!" and another said "he's going to foil our evil plans!" At the time I thought it was one of the most retarded things I've ever read, but now I know it was a homage - I just can't remember to what. But I know I've read those two lines of dialog before.
Click to expand...

Anyone know what that's from?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top