Written by 
Dan Slott was given a golden opportunity to use The Amazing Spider-Man #1: Renew Your Vows to build bridges with Peter Parker fans. Instead, he opted for divorce. Fans who have waited years to see Peter and MJ back together finally got their wish, but unfortunately it was granted by the same guy who saw nothing wrong with turning the character into an afterthought in his own book.
Imagine you’re a fan of Peter Parker. You’ve patiently piled up a mountain of lackluster stories while waiting for another glimpse into the married life he once had. Finally, when Renew Your Vows hits, you open it up and the first thing you get is MJ nagging Peter not to fix his web shooters at the table. You turn to the second page to see a sullen Peter complain about changing diapers. Pensive and sad faces abound on the third page. The reader is told that Peter has “wedded bliss,” even though the evidence doesn’t back that up. Dan Slott then takes the action out of the apartment, and the next time MJ is seen she’s being held hostage by venom. No build up — he just escaped from Ryker’s Island penitentiary.
Question: Why should anyone care about an alternate universe MJ that they’ve “known” for all of three pages when those three pages have done nothing to show younger readers why the couple is so good together?
Answer: They shouldn’t.
A few pages are then allotted to MJ attempting to keep her daughter safe — as any sane mother would do in the same situation —and alternate universe Peter Parker ultimately ends up killing venom. “I did what I had to do,” is all he says before MJ can finish asking if Eddie Brock is dead.
Fans of Peter Parker are apparently supposed to have their minds blown that their hero — even an alternate universe version of the original — would ever be placed in a situation where he might have to kill a man. Correction: A psychopathic madman whose body has fused with an alien symbiote.
The only people this may be shocking to is Dan Slott of the infamous “No one dies” mantra, and those who think a man can be a hero and never — never, never, never — have to make such a difficult choice.
Newsflash: Cops are heroes and sometimes they have to kill. Soldiers are heroes and sometimes they have to kill. Spider-Man is a heroic character, and it makes sense that on a long enough timeline he may — despite his best efforts to avoid it — have to take a (likely super-powered) life to save others.
Only in the mind of Dan Slott would having to do what real heroes do every single day constitute the “death” of Spider-Man.
“That was the day The Avengers died. That every last hero died. Even Spider-Man. It just looked like him standing there. But that was just me. Peter Parker. A dad in a stupid red and blue suit,” the hero thinks while reflecting on his actions and The Avengers’ battle with Regent (aka: lame villain introduced for Secret Wars).
One word: Pathetic.
On the last page it gets worse. Peter says “It’s not a perfect world. But, I look after me and mine. And that’s good enough.”
Imagine a world where cops, firemen, soldiers, doctors and many other kind souls all had the “I look after me and mine” mentality of a married Peter Parker (written by Dan Slott). What would that world look like? It would look like a pretty scary place, which is why no one who fundamentally understands Peter Parker would put those words in his mouth.
If you own The Amazing Spider-Man #1: Renew Your Vows, then I suggest looking through the issue for all the times Peter really looks happy. Try and find a wide smile on his face. You’ll see four — all from pictures hanging on his apartment wall — and he’s not even smiling in his wedding picture. He has a look on his face that says, “Here. I’m married. You got the shot you wanted. Can we move on?” It’s a small detail, but one worth noticing.
Marvel gave fans what they were thirsting for, but its creative team made sure to spike the product with something bitter. Although it should come as no surprise at this point, it really is quite stunning how Marvel uses every opportunity to mend fences with Peter Parker fans to spit in their faces instead.
Exit question: Why does Mr. Slott have a sick fetish with killing Peter Parker, whether it’s outright killing the 616 version, killing off 616’s ghost/memory fragment/soul/whatever he was, killing off countless other versions in Spider-Verse, and now doing so symbolically in Renew Your Vows?
Exit question II: Why is Mr. Slott asking if Renew Your Vows brought back readers? For years Marvel has told us that the number of fans who stayed away from the book post OMD was marginal at best. When guys like me talked about a significant number of fans who were sitting on the sidelines, we were scoffed at. Yet now, suddenly, those numbers are enough to warrant a sales pitch to catch up on “Big Time” and “SSM”? Interesting.
Douglas Ernst Blog 
What an obnoxious thing. I couldn’t stand the New 52 Action Comics version of Superman, but Morrison liked it. If anyone wanted to read about socialist Superman, fine. At the very least the writer ought to write something he’s excited about. I don’t begrudge someone for liking a version of a character that I don’t, but I do begrudge a writer for writing something without being willing to commit to it and provide the people who want that version what they would enjoy.
Writing in such a grudging way shows disrespect for the readers. Just don’t bother with it if you’re going to do it in a way that shows your contempt for the character and anyone who would want to read about him.
I think there is some good art in this issue by Kubert, but that’s pretty much the only redeeming quality as far as I’m concerned. Younger fans have roughly a decade of experience with a horribly-written MJ. If they picked up this issue and saw the two of them together, then why would they care? I’m sorry, but a couple pages of diaper dialogue doesn’t cut it in terms of reestablishing the rapport between these two.
I didn’t even spend any time discussing Regent. My goodness, what a lame villain. Maybe Marvel will bring in “Alpha” to save the day. 😉
Even if somebody called him out at a con along with his editors for his shit, his lapdogs are going to eat it up and go to you, the loyal customer “you are just mean, you don’t get it, this is amazing and a great sendoff!” blegh!
I get it, they want to JSA the shit out of Peter and make him like Jay Garrick from the Pre-52 DC Comics days and have Miles Morales be his legacy charge and the main Spider-Man going forward, but this is sooooo ham-fisted in its way of “WAAAH! I DUN WANNA!!!!” *but it’s your paycheque and you only need to do one book.* “WAAAAAH! Fine. But I’m not gonna like it!”
This book confirmed one thing: Dan Slott hasn’t lived in the real world for 20 years if he can’t learn to compromise and just give the story people want to see.
What kind of Peter Parker would ever call his costume a ‘stupid red and blue suit’ — even if he was upset over how his fight with Venom ended? That’s like someone who gets upset over a particular U.S. president’s foreign policy and then calls the American flag a “stupid red, white and blue” piece of cloth while burning it.
The flag means something. It stands for something bigger than any one administration. Likewise, a properly-written Peter Parker would know after years of service that his suit was much more than a “stupid” piece of fabric.
That line in Peter Parker’s mouth is shameful. If he wants to walk away from the job for awhile to clear his head, fine. I get that. The words that were put in his mouth by Dan Slott, however, are just embarrassing.
Well, as I’m sure you’ve read my review at the Spider-Man Crawlspace, I kind of liked this issue, in part because I believed this is the best Dan Slott has actually depicted Peter and Mary Jane as a couple. Granted, given his past portrayals of them and his mediocre track-record on Spider-Man especially during the relaunch, that could be the result of having such low expectations that, when we see a Peter and MJ, force once, acting in character, I take what little celebration I can get. Plus, if anything, this comic does show, contrary to what Joe Quesada and Marvel have been saying for years, there is huge potential to be had with not only a married Spider-Man, but a Spider-Man who is a dad. Also, like you, I had zero problem with Peter feeling he had no other choice but to kill Venom in order to protect his family. As you said, Venom is a psychotic super-powered madman who literally threatens to suck his daughter’s brains, and as any parent can tell you, if their child was threatened or endangered by anyone in any way, they will make sure person who made the threat will wish they’ve never been born. So for me, it made all the sense in the world in the context of this issue for Spidey to do what he did.
That said, you make a very excellent point about how Peter deciding to quit as Spider-Man because he killed Venom, and how the line “I look after me and mine. And that’s good enough,” is something Spidey would never, ever normally say. Because as we know, Spidey puts the needs of others over himself, always. To be fair to Slott, however, being this is only part one, I think that’s very well the idea Slott is going for with this story: that Peter choosing to devote all his efforts towards being as a husband and father instead of finding a proper balance to be both a superhero who is also a husband and father will prove to be a disastrous mistake. After all, we’ve seen Peter give up being Spider-Man numerous times before, the famous being “Spider-Man: No More” and almost each and every time, it winds up biting him on the ass.
I also agree that the Regent is just a genetic, uninspired villain. And don’t even get me started on what he does to the Hulk. “You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry” indeed.
Mike, as always, you wrote a solid review. The thing I like about your reviews is that even when I disagree with you, I totally get where you’re coming from and it ends up being one of those “agree to disagree moments.” To me it all comes down to how much each element you’re talking about is weighted. For me, I read a comment about a “stupid red and blue suit” and it feels like such a betrayal of who the character is at his core that I don’t really care about two pages of banter that occurred between Peter and MJ.
Likewise, I can understand Peter walking away from the role. I get that. But it annoys me that he would say that killing Venom meant the “death” of Spider-Man. Even though we know he’ll be back, I don’t believe any writer should have put those words in Peter’s mouth to begin with. That’s what annoys me about Dan Slott’s writing. I honestly believe he’s just an impulsive guy who almost does a stream-of-consciousness form of writing and then he doesn’t edit himself afterward to really fine-tune the message. Because Marvel’s editors seem to be indifferent towards doing their job, the end result is something that is intellectually slipshod. When he’s called out on this, he essentially says, “It’s just a comic!”
Mr. Slott has used the “toys in the toy box” metaphor a few times over the years. I think stresses the whimsical nature of his job at the expense of the seriousness that should also be taken into account.
A friend of mine once said that if you mix a tablespoon of s**t into a tub of ice cream, then you’ll always taste the s**t. That’s essentially how I feel about this issue of Renew Your Vows.
Oy! In the first place, the match-up. I’m not a typical fan and just don’t care for inserting romance or married life ruts into every character’s life, and in this case, every main character. But the character-mangling here is even worse. Now Spider Man looks after his and his own and that’s fine with him? Uh, no. Just, no. That’s the day he stops being Spider Man.
The “I look after me and mine” line definitely evoked a cringe or two. I don’t believe, even as a parent, Peter would word it that way. There would be much more nuance to his feelings, even if he ultimately decided to walk away from his responsibilities as a hero.
As a parent I do not think I would feel that bad for killing a person that was going to cause harm to my family. I am not a violent person but there are times when we need to step up. When I was a teenager…many years ago my mother was in an altercation with a man that became violent to her, I stepped in and literally broke a door with him and took him down a flight of stairs. Looking back I was protecting my family and I still do not regret any of it. Walking away from a responsibility based on killing a person that was attacking your family seems rash. With that said it is only the beginning so who knows how it will play out. To be fair this is some of Slotts best work….which still does not say much.
Of course there’s also the fact that this was already done differently (and better). The MC2 version had Peter being Spider-Man until a fight with Green Goblin left him crippled (cribbed from Batman Beyond’s Bruce Wayne, maybe). He kept going long after his daughter was born and only quit when he was physically unable to be Spider-Man effectively anymore (assuming he couldn’t get a bionic leg for some reason).
Like you said, by this logic cops or firemen would just drop what they’re doing whenever their own families could possibly be at risk, rather than doing their jobs. That’s absurd. Besides, I’ve never understood what a “retired” superhero like Spider-Man would do anyway. Every other week there’s some sort of battle that threatens the whole city (or world). Is he really going to hang out at home for those? Just hope other people handle it? Wouldn’t saving his family require him to participate in superhero stuff at least in those instances? So how is it very different than before, other than that he’s in the suit less and doesn’t go after low- to mid-level villains unless they threaten himself or his family directly?
Boom. That is my point exactly, Eidolon. Thank you.
There’s a shot of Vulture taking a woman’s purse at the end of the issue. Peter is with Annie and he just ignores it. Let’s accept the fact that he’s going to not doing anything. Fine. If that was the case, then at least there should be some form of internal conflict. In Renew Your Vows, he acts like he honestly doesn’t give a rip. That would not happen. That is a betrayal of the character. Fans should look at that and close the book in disgust. But yet, some of them — including readers I respect — seem instead focused on the fact that Mary Jane is back and she’d treated with a modicum of respect. Yay. Congratulations. Dan Slott did his job adequately as it pertains to MJ. Too bad he did it while once again totally screwing up Peter.
So basically Renew Your Vows’s version of Pete giving up the webs is just a bullshit version of this from Spider-Man 2?
I forsee a lot of childish whining and griping on Slott’s Twitter feed tonight.
Then he’s gonna find out about your review here. *rim shot*
“Fans of Peter Parker are apparently supposed to have their minds blown that their hero — even an alternate universe version of the original — would ever be placed in a situation where he might have to kill a man. Correction: A psychopathic madman whose body has fused with an alien symbiote.”
Stuff like this is one of the reasons why I hated “Civil War.” The writers had Peter get on a soapbox to talk about super-villains’ rights as part of a misguided Guantanamo allegory, but I really didn’t see a problem with Stark and the rest locking up a bunch of super-villains in the Negative Zone given how many times said villains had escaped from regular prison and caused untold suffering to countless people. It’s like what several reviews I read said: “If Nitro had been kept in a prison like the Negative Zone one, the whole event never would’ve happened in the first place.”
So, yeah, I really don’t have a problem with Spider-Man ending up killing a villain who threatened his family, much less one who just broke out of prison and came after him directly.
“Newsflash: Cops are heroes and sometimes they have to kill. Soldiers are heroes and sometimes they have to kill.”
How dare you say such a thing without a trigger warning? I’m going to go to the nearest safe space and hope they have a DVD of Paddington Bear.
😉
“Only in the mind of Dan Slott would having to do what real heroes do every single day constitute the “death” of Spider-Man.”
Funny how “Spider-Man kills a villain to defend his family” is unacceptable by Slott (and apparently many a Marvel employee), but making a deal with Marvel’s resident Devil somehow is.
Personally, I always liked how Spider-Man actively avoided killing those who mean him or his loved ones harm, but not for the utterly simplistic reasons Slott purports. Killing a villain (particularly a supervillain) in self-defense doesn’t make a hero any less, but it’s dramatically more interesting to see a hero like Spider-Man try to find another way if possible. It offers a contrast with more jaded characters like Wolverine and makes the moments where Spidey considers killing someone (like the Green Goblin or the Sin-Eater) more suspenseful and engrossing.
“But, I look after me and mine. And that’s good enough.”
Wow, that’s a line that demonstrates Slott’s downright willful ignorance of Spider-Man. You’d think a guy who’s claimed to be a lifelong fan would’ve remembered the part about Spidey not acting to stop a certain burglar because it wasn’t his problem and how that inaction came back to bite him in the ass. I get that this is the first part of a multi-parter, but it’s so bizarre and idiotic to have Spider-Man (any Spider-Man) cop such an attitude. He knows better than anyone the dangers of putting his needs before anyone else’s.
“Although it should come as no surprise at this point, it really is quite stunning how Marvel uses every opportunity to mend fences with Peter Parker fans to spit in their faces instead.”
I’m sure Brevoort will be along any minute now to tell us to just take our medicine… and cough up some cash for the next issue.
I generally like the explanation for not killing that I think has been attributed to Batman at certain times, which is that a superhero is equipped to defeat villains without killing them where normal people aren’t. As far as I’ve seen Batman doesn’t look down on cops for shooting people when they need to, but he also can’t stand to use guns and tries very hard not to intentionally kill people himself. He’s a rich superhero so he can afford to put himself at additional risk to take them down without killing them. They’re normal people so he understands that they need to shoot bad guys sometimes.
Spider-Man is like that as well. He knows he’s putting himself at risk but he accepts it, and he doesn’t want to be the sort of man that kills someone. I assume he also wants to avoid being in a situation where he’s the one who makes someone else lose their Uncle Ben. It’s also the case that superheroes always have a means to stop the villain without killing him (if the writer says so).
In real life, if you’re in the Man of Steel situation, of course you should kill the guy. But whether a particular character’s world is like that is up to the writer to a large extent, and I think something important is lost when you write a light-hearted character like Spider-Man into situations where killing is required. For example I found that some of the recent storylines, like the one where the Lizard eats his own son alive while the boy says resignedly “I knew this was coming,” were way too dark to be enjoyable for a fun superhero character.
“Funny how “Spider-Man kills a villain to defend his family” is unacceptable by Slott (and apparently many a Marvel employee), but making a deal with Marvel’s resident Devil somehow is.”
Thank you. This highlights the absurdity of Marvel’s decision to have him make the deal with Mephisto to begin with, and the absurdity of having him (temporarily) walk away from his responsibilities after the death of Venom.
“Wow, that’s a line that demonstrates Slott’s downright willful ignorance of Spider-Man. You’d think a guy who’s claimed to be a lifelong fan would’ve remembered the part about Spidey not acting to stop a certain burglar because it wasn’t his problem and how that inaction came back to bite him in the ass. I get that this is the first part of a multi-parter, but it’s so bizarre and idiotic to have Spider-Man (any Spider-Man) cop such an attitude. He knows better than anyone the dangers of putting his needs before anyone else’s.”
Again, thank you. I’m not sure how Peter Parker fans can just gloss over this fact like it’s not a big deal. It’s off-putting and, as you say, “bizarre and idiotic” to have him speak in such a manner.
I will echo StillANerd in that I liked the issue a lot, Dan is capable of a good spell now and then, and he rarely gets to write MJ as well as he does here. It read very much like one of those ineffective What Ifs of the 1990s, and if this was entirely the only issue we got out of the tie-ins, I’d have been satisfied. I understand Peter trying to put family first now that all of the superheroes have been wiped out in this particular domain, I suspect if anyone was aware of the other domains on Battleworld this Peter would feel compelled to carry on in the costume, and indeed he will come around to defying the Regent in later issues.
I will adopt a “wait and see” approach to things. Also, Marvel announced Peter and Miles will be part of the All-New Marvel Universe line-up, AND that there will be all-new creative teams on most of the 60-odd books coming out. Does that mean Renew Your Vows is Slott’s swan song?
Does Dan Slott’s handling of MJ elevate the book to a good read when there are lines like “stupid red and blue suit,” or “I take care of me and mine”? I’d say the answer is “no.” As I said in another comment, there is no way Peter would react the way he did in those last panels with the Vulture flying off with a purse. He might not engage in the fight, but he wouldn’t merely walk away with a “Someone else can handle it” expression on his face. There would be internal strife. He would continue walking with Annie, but his mind would on the moral implications of walking away in that situation. I can’t get any enjoyment out of seeing Peter Parker behave that way.
Spider-Man Crawlspace predicted this would be a way for Dan to say F you to all of the fans about the marriage. Would you say that the view was accurate?
That I can’t answer until all of the issues are in the bag. I just respectfully disagree with Zariusii and Mike on this one. I suppose the writing had more flair to it than I’ve seen in a long time, but underneath the excitement of seeing MJ and Peter together again … or the thrill of seeing Peter fight for his family … there is a betrayal of the character that renders those other feelings moot.
I understand your viewpoint Doug, you’re cutting through the nostalgia and seeing “what does this do for us lately?”, if this were a done-in-one, I could see that, but we know there’s more to come the whole summer. This is not DC’s Convergence, which was all about optimistic done-in-ones. I think we have to let everything breath rather than fixate on the intakes of a deep breath.
I guess what it is I’m just glad to get a decent MJ, even if the cost is an indifferent Peter. There’s that monkeys paw in effect again it seems.
Keep fighting for the kind of Peter you’d want to see, I back you on your view even if I don’t 100% share it..for now. That COULD change depending on how everything else is executed. And you can say “I told you so” when it happens, and I’ll blush.
Do you want to know what the funny thing is, zariusii? I can have disagreements on issues with you, Mike, Natewinchester and anyone else who comes on these blogs and keep it civil. We can go back-and-forth and everyone is cool with one another. But yet, if were were to go on certain other comic websites and disagree with the direction a Dan Slott book was taking, then we’d be issued weird “warnings” about behavior, moderators would start deleting posts, and then the bannings would begin.
Meanwhile, Dan Slott wants to continue taking shots at me from afar after reading my posts. I’ll be writing on that shortly.
Update: Here it is. “Dan Slott stalks online critics he blocks on Twitter — while telling fans that said critics are ‘crazy’”
I’ll pass on “Renew Your Vows.” Largely because Slott is writing it, and also because it’s not the type of Peter/MJ story I want to see.
Ok, to be fair, I would like that. It would be a nice, humanizing moment that should be in a tale like this.
Huh, boy I miss Spider-girl. Too bad they didn’t get Tom to come write this instead of Dan.
No seriously, I’ve got some trades of it if you want to borrow/read them Doug, but I’d bet you dollars to donuts that a side by side comparison would prove just how superior that series was over this. Man, Dan could have at least ripped off that series if he didn’t feel up to doing this.
Yeah. In Tom’s universe, Peter remained Spider-Man for two years after Mayday was returned to him and MJ, all despite the fact Norman Osborn and everyone else was hanging over their heads and in major life-threatning ways. Eddie was at large, Norman was in his Lex Luthor phase, the original Hobgoblin had been re-established, and the Chamelion knew who Peter was and was unstable following a beating from MJ. So much was at stake and Peter perservered with MJ, who, in contrast to how she talks here, actually encouraged Peter to put on the webs at times when he felt like he should stay with her and his daughter. The “Mr and Mrs Spider-Man” strips, in a much shorter page count than one issue of this, really pull no punches in saying Peter would stick to his guns if he were a father and a hero, balancing the commitments as best he could
When you look at the picture of MJ saying it to Peter, the image doesn’t say, “Playful bickering between husband and wife.” It says, “Hey, I’m actually a little bit ticked off right now.”
That is not the first interaction I wanted to see between the two of them after this long of an absence.
I appreciate the offer, but my brother gave me Ready Player One to read, plus I have four books that I ordered last week that should be arriving any time soon. And I still need to keep working on my book, which is slowly coming along. Very slowly…but that’s what happens when you write once a week. I need to pick up the pace.
Slott cannot imagine a world in which people read his plot and react with opinions differing from his.
He thinks everyone will go “Gasp! Peter, no!” when Peter kills Venom, but I predict most will go, “Yay, and finally.” There might be one or two guys over at CS who are adamant that this was a murder, but it’s only 1-2 guys (and they aren’t even Slott fans). Most everybody else is either, “Regrettable but understandable” or “Darned tootin’!”
Peter lets the Vulture steal a purse? Slott thinks, “Look-look-look at that! Being married and having a child has made Peter callous and compromised!” I predict most people are saying, “Hey, he’s teaching his toddler how to cross the street safely. What’s he supposed to do, run off and leave her? Cops have guns.”
He lets the Avengers handle Fusion, er, Sylar, er, Regent? What’s irrational about that? They’re the Avengers! They’ve beaten bad guys 100 times worse than the regent. The only reason Regent mopped the floor with them is because Slott’s sermon behind the plot demands that the Avengers bite the dust.
Spider-Man went underground once Regent took over? What’s he supposed to do, let his brains get sucked out? (Actually, the phoniest thing about that bit is that Slott (implied) has Peter **the bio-chemist** doing absolutely nothing about Regent, not even secret science-related studying.)
Slott cannot extract himself from his own worldview prejudices, to see that everything **he** thinks will appall Spider-Man fans, and make them realize that marriage and family would make it impossible for him to function — putting aside for a moment the fact that these are totally fictional worlds, so writers can make anything they like happen as long as the internal logic holds together. But I can read his story, say “Good job” to him putting Venom down, “say “Naturally” to him choosing his family’s safety over helping the Avengers, and say, “Of course” to him disappearing as Spider-Man.
“Slott cannot imagine a world in which people read his plot and react with opinions differing from his.”
I think you are on the money with this one, Jack. There’s not much for me to add in terms of Slott, but I will address the “murder” as mentioned in the one CS review I read. No offense to the writer, but what is he thinking? It bothers me when someone equates killing a man in self defense with the cold-blooded murder of an innocent person. Why on earth would Peter mentally beat himself up over killing a super-powered monster who was hell-bend on murdering his wife and child? I read that review and just shook my head. I’m glad that Stillanerd’s review was on point regarding that issue.
Why would I want to read a comic book where I know a.) the hero will never die, and b.) there is zero chance that he will be put in a position where he may have to take a life to save a life? If the good guys and the bad guys always live, there is no tension. It’s generally pointless.
When a cop puts on his uniform every morning, he knows that there is always the chance that he may have to use his weapon — and possibly take a life. Why should it be any different for a superhero, who is going up against foes of equal strength? The “No one dies” mantra used by Dan Slott and others is complete nonsense that can only be taken seriously by hippie bongo drum circle participants. Spider-Man should always strive to protect life — all life — but he should also be prepared to take a life if that is the only viable option to safeguard humanity.
I think, in certain cases, some fans don’t know the legal definition of murder. There are also fans who are anti-death-penalty, so they interpret every killing as a “murder.” And there are nostalgists, who remember with fondness the old Westerns where the good guy just shot the guns out of his enemies’ hands. They are sick of all the Deadpools and Wolverines, so they really don’t want Spider-Man to turn into that (just like the folks who felt very upset when Superman killed Zod in MOS). Apart from this, it is easy to see just how contrived RYV already is showing itself to be. Thing is, I’m told this isn’t even the “real” 616 Peter Parker. Slott’s version, Bumbling Incompetent Spider-Man, made it onto Reed Richard’s inter-dimensional raft. So I don’t get why stuff from this mini-world — probably the child, saved by Peter through a worm-hole as MJ dies nobly and Manhattan burns down — should even make it over into the reconstituted, even-more-idiocized 616.
The weird thing is, I would be willing to be that a huge population of Tumbr kiddies would be all about some sort of tale where [insert well-known female Marvel character here] gets an abortion…while simultaneously throwing a fit if Spider-Man killed [insert well-known Marvel villain here]. Personally, I would gladly trade the death penalty in real life if we could bring back hard labor camps for serial killers, etc. Have them make giant cities inside the Rocky Mountains or something…
I get the fear of the slippery Spider-Man slope when it comes to killing. I don’t think those fears are unfounded (especially with today’s creators). However, I think if there was some sort of epic tale that happened once a decade, and it was done tastefully, then it could really add another level of complexity to the character.
In regards to Secret Wars, I bought the first issue and then I was like “Nope. Not happening.” I just want them to do whatever the heck they’re going to do and get it over with.
Nope, I’d rather just have serial killers done away with. Labor camps – you still have to feed them, and find something for them to do, which the rest of us actually need done. and please, not with the friggin’ abortion thing again. I’m so fed up with all the screaming “Baby killer!” activism. And animal rights activists as well.
Given that it’s my blog, I won’t shy away from mentioning abortion when I see fit. I have never screamed anything about abortion, but if someone believes that has ever happened then I urge them to bring it to my attention. I’d be interested in seeing that.
If you do a search for new Spiderman, new Wolverine or new Hulk, you will see that Marvel plans to introduce new versions of these characters, after the secret wars 2015 is over. Well, that means that Logan, Parker and Banner are probably out of the picture. Or Banner and Parker are focusing chiefly on scientific research. At least with DC, Clark Kent was still Superman, Bruce Wayne was still Batman, etc. And they did add some exciting things, like a Superman / Wonder Woman romance. I’ll wait until after the Secret Wars and preview the first issues of Spiderman and Hulk – to see if I like them. Perhaps in the Secret Wars shuffle, Dan Slott might also be replaced.
It will be interesting to see what Peter is like after Secret Wars and then compare that to Dan Slott’s last issue of ASM before this all happened. How long was Secret Wars in the works? How long does it take to put all those moving pieces in place? He had a really long time to plan his last issue of ASM before Secret Wars and we got “Ghost” bringing down Parker Industries and a bunch of people loitering around outside in shocked disbelief.
If Marvel goes in a completely different direction and just tells fans, “Yeah, forget about all that other stuff,” then that’s pretty embarrassing.
I read somewhere that SW was more than two years in the works. So DS had more than two years to get ASM ready, and they all still botched it up. Slott didn’t even get Peter and Felicia’s immediate continuity right, coordinated between ASM and Conway’s .1 “Spiral” special. Parker Industries blows up, The End. Not even a hey-what’s-that?, look up into the sky at a looming second Earth panel.