Spider-Man Amazing Spider-Man general series discussion (spoilers)

E said:
I don't think it's that. It has a rotating team of writers so it's not like it's Bendis writing 15 books a month, stretching himself thin and having it show in his work. But the writers could definitely be better.
Click to expand...

However, the main focus of the editors is getting the book out on time and not on quality.
E said:
Has anyone said how long they plan on doing it like this - having this be (basically) the only Spider-Man book and having it come out weekly?
Click to expand...

Nope, they haven't.

I'm pretty sure the plan is to do it for as long as it works. They plan the story arcs out a year in advance, so if and when they do decide to stop they'll know that far ahead of time. But as far as I can tell from reading the letters columns and interviews, this is the new status quo indefinitely.
 
captaincanuck65 said:
this is the new status quo indefinitely.
Click to expand...

Thank god for that... having multiple books sometimes meant having to be in multiple places at the same time (for Peter), and that was pretty annoying from a I-want-to-make-sense-out-of-my-comics point of view :roll:
 
I just read issue #611
It was kind of dumb. I don't really get Deadpool I guess (except for in Marvel vs DC when he's awesome!)

I also picked up issue #612, but I haven't read it yet.
It seems there's something going on with
the weaver and all the spider-themed characters
 
I know officially think Marcos Martin, Paolo Rivera and Paul Azaceta should be the only artists drawing Amazing Spider-Man :D

seriously though, are these awesome or what?

2z8n9xy.png


1zmgt4w.png
 
Last edited:
Chris Sim's review of #596 said:
Bullseye kills a rat by flicking a booger at him. Seriously, that happened. And not on Fanfiction.net or something, this is a comic that a writer was actually paid for. Bullseye picks his nose, pulls out a piece of snot that's got actual speed lines radiating from it, and then uses it to kill a rat for what I assume was meant to be comedic effect. It's not even gross-out funny, it's just stupid, and the only good thing about it is that it's a welcome break from the scene where Venom tries to tentacle-rape a hooker.
Click to expand...

Did that really happen? That's so bad. :lol:

I actually liked the latest issue. I am shocked. That pun actually wasn't intended.
 
Last edited:
http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=23853

Kiel Phegley: Since "Brand New Day" kicked off, there have been a few stated goals for the thrice-monthly "Amazing Spider-Man." First, it was to reestablish single Peter and inject some new life into the property. Lately, you guys have been exploring a "phase two" with the return of several classic villains through this new "Gauntlet" storyline. Is there a "phase three" for "Brand New Day" on the way, and what would that look like?

Well, I think it's pretty obvious that MJ is going to be back, so that's going to open a whole new can of worms with respect to relationships the characters will have or won't have. Should I even say the word "baby"? Should I use that word? I'll just put that out there: Baby. Mary Jane. Baby. Mary Jane with a… yes, baby. I'll stop there.
Click to expand...

*...*

OK. Now he is just trying to piss everyone off. God, that is disgusting.
 
captaincanuck65 said:
what if...


just thinking out loud here

what if it's baby May...

what if that was MJ's side deal with Mephisto, that she would get her baby back that "died"/was kidnapped in the clone saga?
Click to expand...

Interesting indeed, and I'd agree that it would be the only way this should be allowed to go down, but I don't care to see it happen.
 
After all the...'hoopla' that editorial gave about there not being a baby, and how Joe Q. hates it because it makes Peter "grow up too fast," it would never happen. An interesting idea indeed, but I can't see it happening.
 
Last edited:
Ice said:
After all the...'hoopla' that editorial gave about there not being a baby, and how Joe Q. hates it because it makes Peter "grow up too fast," it would never happen. An interesting idea indeed, but I can't see it happening.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I always found this policy odd. I mean, having a kid would make for a cool paralell between the Peter/Uncle Ben realationship.
 
Last edited:
Ice said:
After all the...'hoopla' that editorial gave about there not being a baby, and how Joe Q. hates it because it makes Peter "grow up too fast," it would never happen. An interesting idea indeed, but I can't see it happening.
Click to expand...

Grocer Man said:
Agreed.

I always found this policy odd. I mean, having a kid would make for a cool paralell between the Peter/Uncle Ben realationship.
Click to expand...

well, the creators have to walk a pretty tight line between moving the story forward/developing the characters and making sure they write themselves into a corner.

I think they're concerned that if Peter has a kid then that kid will have to eventually grow up and that will show the passing of time in Peter's life. You can show Peter Parker as a late 20s-early 30s guy for ages if there are no other milestones in his life to show the passage of time.

I kind of think though that they worry too much about continuity. The continuity doesn't make sense any more anyway, so just don't worry about it so much. (Don't throw it out altogether, but don't let time lines limit good story telling). Batman took on Dick Grayson as Robin when Dick was 12-13, and now he's probably 20-21. He also had a kid with Thalia Al Ghul who is now 10 years old. Time has clearly passed for Batman, but he's still in that nebulous 30 something age or maybe his early 40s at the oldest.
 
Plus, it's not like Marvel has never de-aged a character before if they wanted to, Magneto and Juggernaut come to mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top