Written by 
The Amazing Spider-Man 1.1 and 1.2 sounds like a great story in theory: A man is murdered by drug addicts but miraculously returns from the dead. Peter Parker investigates and finds himself falling down a rabbit hole of voodoo and witchcraft that eventually ends inside Communist Cuba. Unfortunately, writer Jose Molina has a tenuous grasp of the character, Dan Slott’s Peter Parker-Wayne-Stark status quo exacerbates the problem, and artist Simone Bianchi draws our hero like he took some hallucinogenic drugs and used Ace Ventura as his inspiration.
“Amazing Grace” is a story that could have been a really cool, dark reprieve from Dan Slott’s typical fare. Unfortunately, the roller coaster of quality goes downhill the moment Peter Parker blurts out “No Christmas crap until Thanksgiving.”
The ride takes a transgender swerve when the curvaceous Dr. Kevin Templeton starts swearing up a storm.
Perhaps the worst part about “Amazing Grace” at its half-way point is Molina’s repeated attempts to cast Peter Parker as a “doubter” of spiritual realities because he is a “man of science” (as if people who love science cannot believe in God or the spirit realm).
At one point in ASM 1.1 Peter says “the Beast” (i.e., Satan) does not exist, which is a slap in the face to fans given his history with Mephisto.
One would think a character who recently died and was resurrected would be a bit more open to the spiritual realm, but not to Molina. Instead, ASM 1.2 ends with “Uncle Ben” appearing before a shocked Peter. The deceased Parker says, “It’s Been a long time.”
Actually, it hasn’t — again, because Peter and his uncle talked when Dan Slott killed off the character in 2012.
One of the few bright spots in “Amazing Grace” is that Molina is not afraid to give Marvel’s liberal editors an education on communism. A professor at a Cuban university tells Peter “the embargo on free speech” under the Castros is something the U.S. cannot lift, and some locals say Cuban health care is only great for those with “money, connections, or a foreign passport.”
Molina has two issues left to bring this story back from the dead. Unfortunately, it’s a good bet that Bianchi’s artwork will keep ASM 1.3 – 1.4 buried.
Douglas Ernst Blog 
Awful story. A shame because the last two .Point series were really good. Peter’s actions are ridiculous, he’s fought tooth and nail with Kraven’s spirit in “Spirit of the Hunter”, in the same story, MJ told him that she witnessed a death of someone close to a friend of hers and revealed all she could see was an “old coat” with the person’s essence gone. Peter thanked God for MJ in one issue of JMS’s run, and then of course there’s Mephisto, so where the hell is any of this coming from?
Good question. It’s like the writer’s understanding of who Peter Parker is boils down to, “Oh, he’s a normal dude who tells jokes as he fights crime.”
Whereas Dan Slott knows a ton of Spider-Man history and willingly discards it when it suits his aims, Molina appears to be a guy who only has a cursory knowledge of the character. Pick your poison. I’ll actually go with Dan Slott if it’s only between those two because at least we’ll get something like “Renew Your Vows” on occasion.
I really just want to know what Bianchi was thinking. Why would anyone who loves Peter Parker want to buy a book where it looks like a hurried courtroom reporter scribbled him together? I didn’t even include the worst panel. There’s a scene in Cuba where Peter looks totally unrecognizable — not because he’s wearing some weird disguise, but because the art is just that careless.
Even just putting aside “One More Day,” Peter’s outright skepticism would be silly considering, y’know, his entire life and the world he lives in.
“The Beast” does not exist. How could anyone believe in such foolishness? Now excuse me while I go use the superpowers I got from being bit by an irradiated spider. I better hurry before I’m missed by my aunt, whose death was faked by that guy who survived being impaled in the chest by a big piece of metal. Oh, and remind me to call my good friends who got superpowers from being bombarded by cosmic rays in space. I’d call them right now, but they’ve gone to another dimension? Or was it another time? Maybe that who was frozen in a block of ice after World War 2 knows… or that rich guy with the highly advanced suit of armor. If not them, surely that big guy with the hammer. Uh, where was I? Oh, right, spiritual beliefs are just silly and should be doubted.” *twip, twip*
“…or that rich guy with the highly advanced suit of armor. If not them, surely that big guy with the hammer.”
I was thinking the same thing. So the guy who hangs out with Dr. Strange and Thor is a spiritual “doubter”? Hmmm. Okay. I think it’s safe to say that Peter Parker would be a firm believer in the spirit realm.
The whole thing reminds of an issue from ’99, where Spidey expressed disbelief in vampires despite not only having known Morbius and Blade for years but them appearing in that story.
So, you wouldn’t recommend this even to someone who was a big fan of the Iron Man clone Spider-Man? That’s a shame. Even if I actively dislike the “One More Day” Spider-Man and 99% of Slott’s work on it, for some people this version of Spider-Man is the one that is, or will be, “their” version, and will mean as much to them as my version does to me. Those readers certainly deserve the best-written “Iron Man clone Spider-Man” possible. (Regardless of the question if Spider-Man can be an Iron Man clone without compromising the definitive traits of the character, and the aggravation that I get that Marvel chose the worst way possible to introduce the current “Spider-Man” and removed the versions that mean anything to me without offering those version new ways to be continued, it’s better to have a well-written story set in a premise we don’t like then to have a bad story period.)
Can’t say I really like the art much either; the eyes look pretty dead, for one thing. I’m not a big fan of the sketch book-like art style in the first place, but I’ve seen better; Stuart Immonen’s work on “Ultimate Spider-Man” was pretty good (the characters were very expressive, action stuff was fun to look at, and it all looked like the original character designs had been simply filtered through the new asthetics rather than being completely remade).
As a point of curiosity, how exactly do these issues with the decimal numbers fit into the larger series? Are these continuing stuff that going on in Slott’s ongoing comics, or are these stand-alone stories that are happening in-between story arcs? If I was someone who wanted to get into the current iteration of “Spider-Man” comics, I’d be really confused about what to make of these issues and how to go about reading them. I mean, I’d be confused about how to break into Marvel period.
Out of curiosity, do any of Marvel/DC’s big reset buttons, reboots, backtracks, simplifications, retcons, “jumping-on points,” or whatever they do to try and make it easy for new readers to get into their comics, actually work? This maybe since the internet is really easy to create echo chambers in (I sometimes wonder if we have one here), but I’ve gotten the impression that those tricks don’t work that well and mostly tick off the regular readers the company has.
As an aside, I found this interesting article written in regards to the then-recent 2009 “Star Trek” reboot. While mostly interested in the “Trek” franchise, it did raise the interesting observation: in today’s pop culture, we usually favor serial storytelling with strong continuity, but conversely, seem to be eager for reboots. While both have their place, it’s an interesting thing to consider if that dual-mindset works, since a lot of the controversy over recent “Spider-Man” comics seems to be right at the heart of it; should the comics continue the story started back in the ’60s, or should it be changed to do different stuff?
The article: (http://www.kethinov.com/startrek_lostinnostalgia.php)
“Out of curiosity, do any of Marvel/DC’s big reset buttons, reboots, backtracks, simplifications, retcons, “jumping-on points,” or whatever they do to try and make it easy for new readers to get into their comics, actually work? This maybe since the internet is really easy to create echo chambers in (I sometimes wonder if we have one here), but I’ve gotten the impression that those tricks don’t work that well and mostly tick off the regular readers the company has.”
First off, I’d like to address the “echo chamber” comment. I need to make sure something is very clear. I wish I could show you all the hits that have come to my ASM reviews from Reddit or other websites. It’s fascinating. These guys will come here from Reddit and then complain about me having an “agenda” over there. They’ll say I’m taking Dan Slott “out of context” — over there. They never do it here.
I welcome a different point of view. I’m all for it. There is a big difference between an echo chamber (e.g., certain fan sites where you get banned if you disagree with the mod), and a place where critics stay away because they know they’ll be called out on straw man arguments, red herrings, personal attacks, etc.
One of my favorites is @blackspidey2099 over at ComicVine. All his does is rant about my “crappy” reviews, but he never really provides any substance to back up his claims. Just like Dan Slott, he talks tough — from a distance. Classic.
In terms of the endless reboots, they obviously work for short-term sales boosts. I’m not sure why Marvel can’t keep the original numbering and then below it do something like, “V3I5” for Volume 3, Issue 5, for example.
There is a way that Marvel can technically have their stupid reboots but also give long-time fans what want.
There HAVE been people of differing views who have commented here before. Lizard, Lightbringer, Vunderguy, X-Menxpert, DeLoftie, etc. Only problem is, rather than have a substantive debate, they chose to demonize Doug and some of the other commenters here, including me. Vunderguy’s been banned for a year (he called me a “sexist” for disagreeing with him on Wonder Woman), Lizard’s long gone (not sure if he’s been banned again; he once told me that he wished I’d never procreate), DeLoftie just disappeared after ranting and raving about “white privilege” over and over again and I chased Lightbringer away almost two years ago after I called him out on his poor behavior. Oh, and X-Menxpert used to comment, too, but he threw a temper tantrum and left because he couldn’t handle having his views challenged.
Related: I don’t post a lot of political stuff on Facebook now that I’m back on there, but my dad posted this hilarious Bernie Sanders cartoon that I couldn’t help but share. Some liberal girl I went to school with commented and called me a f****ing idiot for posting it and not supporting a whacko socialist like Sanders. I had to block her because she kept swearing at me; she seemed to think that swearing made her sound smarter. Point is, most modern-day leftists do not like opposing views and try to actively destroy those with whom they disagree.
On the subject of Spider-Man, I’ll give Molina props for educating Marvel’s liberal editors about the realities of communist Cuba, but like you I think it’s downright bizarre that someone like Peter who just died and was resurrected would be skeptical of an afterlife. Plus, he lives in the Marvel Universe where that sort of thing happens all the time. He’s dealt with the supernatural loads of times, so that doesn’t make a lick of sense.
There HAVE been people of differing views who have commented here before. Lizard, Lightbringer, Vunderguy, X-Menxpert, DeLoftie, etc.
That’s pretty amazing that you remembered DeLoftie! That’s why you’re awesome, Carl. 🙂
I’ll note that the only person on that list who has been placed in my hockey-like “penalty box” is Vunderguy, and I’ll let him out in June. I gave him countless chances to act like an adult, but for whatever reason he decided to waste them.
And I didn’t even describe some of the drive-by trolls or that lunatic who created a blog asking if Doug hated America.
And I didn’t even describe some of the drive-by trolls or that lunatic who created a blog asking if Doug hated America.
That guy even sent me Silence of the Lambs-like emails. When I blocked him and said everything he wrote would go to the spam box, he kept writing comments for another two or three days. They all went to my spam box, but he went at it anyway.
“There HAVE been people of differing views who have commented here before. Lizard, Lightbringer, Vunderguy, X-Menxpert, DeLoftie, etc.
That’s pretty amazing that you remembered DeLoftie! That’s why you’re awesome, Carl. 🙂
Who could forget the race-obsessed Irish troll? LOL.
“I’ll note that the only person on that list who has been placed in my hockey-like “penalty box” is Vunderguy, and I’ll let him out in June. I gave him countless chances to act like an adult, but for whatever reason he decided to waste them.”
I’ll never forget how he wanted to collaborate with me on writing, even though I don’t know him in real life, and then mocks and demonizes me for disagreeing with him. Then has the gall to tell me that I don’t have the right to criticize the state of the comic book industry. “You probably don’t have a script written or NUTHIN’.” I’m 21 chapters into my book, with five or six to go. What has Vunderguy done?
“That guy even sent me Silence of the Lambs-like emails. When I blocked him and said everything he wrote would go to the spam box, he kept writing comments for another two or three days. They all went to my spam box, but he went at it anyway.”
That guy was nuts. Hopefully he’s locked up now. There are enough lunatics polluting society now; we don’t need anymore.
Simone Bianchi is a man not a woman.
Mr. Anonymous, who is only 1.1 miles away from Marvel’s main offices, I stand corrected.
I apologize for the “boy named Sue”-type mistake. I will update the post to read, “Artist Simone Bianchi draws our hero like he took some hallucinogenic drugs and used Ace Ventura as his inspiration.”
Is that you, Dan Slott? Stay awhile. I know that you’ve recently had some issues over at Four Color Media Monitor, but you’re always welcome here.
I’m reading the last legs of the storyline in the ASM newspaper strip and there’s some very interesting things going on in it. Basically, Mary Jane has offered herself to Namor as his bride in exchange for him sparing the life of her husband. Assuming this is not revealed to be a bluff to lower his guard so Spidey or the military can sneek attack him…that is profoundly screwed up in the fact she is willing to lend herself to consensual adultery (because she’s still a married woman) out of Peter’s best interests. I’ll keep you posted on updates with this, but you might want to go over to Comic Kingdom and follow this particular development and possibly comment when it finishes.
My guess is that Spidey will save the day before Namor ever gets to lay an inappropriate hand on Mary Jane. 🙂
Well, the thing is he’s fought Namor twice now and been beaten very soundly. MJ already asked him to spare him once before, and in this second instance she’s had to offer herself as a Queen to save his life. I sure hope something happens because I don’t know how I feel about adultery being promoted in an all-ages comic strip
“I’m reading the last legs of the storyline in the ASM newspaper strip and there’s some very interesting things going on in it.”
I’d been following those comics online, but kind of dropped out after Spider-Man rescued the kid from the hospital (I generally appreciate the strip’s status quo and don’t want to see it canceled, but style of writing goes get to be a bit much for me sometimes). Given the nature of the comic, I’d gamble that Mary Jane isn’t going to have to go through with it all, although I’m pretty sure we’ll have to wait five months for the strip to tell the part of the story that leads up to that!
“First off, I’d like to address the “echo chamber” comment. I need to make sure something is very clear…”
I think we have a different idea of what “echo chamber” means. I never meant to suggest that people were thought-policed here. I should know. I had some dissenting views on the “Star Wars” prequels and have occasionally played devil’s advocate, and have been treated respectfully (and have tried to be respectful, in turn).
I guess what I was getting at is here, we’re all pretty much exclusively fans of the married, blue-collar Spider-Man — and/or other versions that take heavy inspiration from that iteration — and really dislike the current status quo, its author’s writing style, and his internet persona. Now, its good to have a place to discuss current “Spider-Man” events safely, and sometimes vent frustrations. However, in an environment like that (where everyone agrees), it’s really easy come to think that your sub-culture is the majority on the topic in question. I guess I’m just wondering if that sometimes happened here.
You poke around online, you find a lot people who very much like the post-“One More Day” comics and think Slott is one of the best “Spider-Man” writers in the character’s history, or at least a competent writer who doesn’t deserve being criticized for doing new stuff with the characters. I find it hard to believe that all of them are simply sucking up to the boss. So, I guess its worth examining, are we holding on to our views because there’s some objective validity to them, or are we simply refusing to accept new stuff because it’s new and not the old? (Not saying we have to convert and like the new version — I don’t and won’t. It’s all just stuff to think about.)
I’d like it if there were regular posters here who didn’t agree, like fans of the current “Spider-Man,” if they could post respectfully (emphasis on “respectfulness”). Conversations were everyone agrees aren’t as interesting as ones where different viewpoints are compared. If nothing else, I really can’t understand the appeal of the post-“One More Day” setting, so having someone who could explain way in a rational manner would help.
“In terms of the endless reboots, they obviously work for short-term sales boosts. I’m not sure why Marvel can’t keep the original numbering and then below it do something like, “V3I5” for Volume 3, Issue 5, for example.
“There is a way that Marvel can technically have their stupid reboots but also give long-time fans what want.”
I guess issue numbering, while the constant start-overs with from number one again are annoying, is not really something that bugs me. I guess I’m more curious if reboots to the story work as intended. I mean, how do new people usually pick up comics? I read certain Spider-Man stuff because I like the movies. Beyond that, I only look at comics if I’m in that section of the library and am bored.
Besides, most of these retcons and reboots are made to give new readers an entry point. However, if having a lot of backstory is confusing (allegedly), then the reboot is creating a situation where you’re saying: “Here, this’s a continuation of what came before, but ignore comics XYZ; they don’t count anymore. Oh, and when it says ‘this’ in ABC, it should read as ‘that.’ Oh, and there will be future revisions in the future, so when there’s new information, just forget about stuff that doesn’t match in the back issues. But, yeah, this is a continuation, so read the back issues if you want to know how we got here.”
That seems like the worse of two evils, since a simpler relationship to the back issues makes for easier reading. I, for one, don’t want to have to read something and be mentally editing it, or finding I like something that doesn’t “count” in the larger scope of the series.
I mean, I’m never reading that original Phoenix story in “X-Men,” since its been so retconned over the years that the original story is not an accurate representation of what happened. Also, unless the story was really really good, the only way I could stomach reading a pre-2007 616 “Spider-Man” book is if there was a way to read it where it wasn’t part of the “One More Day” world — such as it also happening in the “Spider-Girl” or “Renew Your Vows” universes.
“I guess what I was getting at is here, we’re all pretty much exclusively fans of the married, blue-collar Spider-Man — and/or other versions that take heavy inspiration from that iteration […] in an environment like that (where everyone agrees), it’s really easy come to think that your sub-culture is the majority on the topic in question. I guess I’m just wondering if that sometimes happened here.”
Good question. I don’t think anyone here feels as though there is a silent majority of Peter Parker fans who agree with them — but I do believe our numbers are much larger than Marvel would have you believe. I know from my WordPress stats and the search terms people use to read my posts that there are plenty of people who are unhappy with The Amazing Spider-Man and feel as though Dan Slott should move on to greener pastures. People do not always comment on my reviews, but they do well traffic-wise.
With that said, my initial reaction to the “echo chamber” comment was more so to clarify that people on this blog do not desire to be in an echo chamber and I do not take steps to make that happen. Compare this blog to Dan Slott’s Twitter, where he goes out of his way to find people who disagree with him and then blocks them from his feed. One person actually seeks to create an echo chamber, where the other invites all comers. As long as a person doesn’t use profanity or become an obvious troll, I welcome their feedback.
“You poke around online, you find a lot people who very much like the post-“One More Day” comics and think Slott is one of the best “Spider-Man” writers in the character’s history, or at least a competent writer who doesn’t deserve being criticized for doing new stuff with the characters. I find it hard to believe that all of them are simply sucking up to the boss. So, I guess its worth examining, are we holding on to our views because there’s some objective validity to them, or are we simply refusing to accept new stuff because it’s new and not the old?”
The mere fact that you are asking yourself these questions is an indication that you are on the objective side. Have you ever seen Dan Slott’s supporters engage in any form of introspection? Haha! I suppose it is a big world, and some of them may exist, but most of them share his lack of self-awareness. Like attracts like. 🙂
But seriously, I have said that Dan Slott is an “idea” man. He has some interesting ideas, but his execution of those ideas is often shoddy. He isn’t a “writer’s writer” like Bendis. I imagine Bendis would be a great short-story writer, whereas Slott is a guy who just churns out content like a machine.
Do you remember Spider-Verse and the Dan Slott’s Master Weaver becoming a literal Deus Ex Machina (God in the Machine) to get the story where it needed to be? That is a legitimate criticism that has nothing to do with him as a person and everything to do with his technical proficiency as a storyteller. Guys like me will call that out. So will Stillanerd, but he does it in a much more diplomatic way. Either way, the message is the same.
I’ve said it before, but Bendis is a guy who will do stuff I don’t like — but I still respect him because his writing is sound. From a writer’s perspective, I cannot really ding him. So I find myself saying, “Why would you do that? I really don’t like that you did that…but you logically got from Point A to Point B so I’ll just grumble for a while and then shut up.”
That is something you can’t really do with Dan Slott. If all you care about is Spider-Ham jokes being shoved into Spider-Verse, then you’ll love Dan Slott’s work. If Master “Deus ex Machina” Weaver bothers you, then you will not like Dan Slott’s product.
“Do you remember Spider-Verse and the Dan Slott’s Master Weaver becoming a literal Deus Ex Machina (God in the Machine) to get the story where it needed to be?”
I didn’t actually read “Spider-Verse,” except for that “It’s the Little Things” three-page story they reprinted in the “Renew Your Vows” trade paperback. I actually liked that. Not mind-blowing but a fun little tribute to some of the different takes on the “Spider-Man” mythos that somehow managed to capture the joy of the “Spider-Man “character.
I read all my comics in trades, so I heard a bit about “Spider-Verse” while it was coming out. The basic idea (having a bunch of different Spider-Mans trying to save the multiverse) didn’t sound bad in and of itself, but then I was hearing that there was a lot of death, Ultimate Peter Parker wasn’t involved but the “Superior” Spider-Man was, Silk was still around, and it was firmly rooted in the “One More Day” mindset. I decided that the cons outweighed the possible pros.
“But seriously, I have said that Dan Slott is an “idea” man. He has some interesting ideas, but his execution of those ideas is often shoddy.”
I did very much enjoy Slott’s “Renew Your Vows” comic to the point that I’d put it on my (admittedly short) list of favorite stories. If they ever did an ongoing series of that, Marvel’d have me as a regular customer. Because of that, I wonder if I’d like Slott’s work better if he was writing in the classic Spider-Man setting as opposed to the “One More Day” setting. RYV proved he could handle that version pretty well if he wanted to. Most of RYV’s weakness seemed to be in the pacing and structure of the villain’s story (whether a longer series or a rewrite would have fixed those problems is anyone’s guess).
My enjoyment of that story does raise the question for me of what, exactly, do I really dislike about Slott’s other stuff? The quality of writing, what he chooses to write, or the setting he’s writing in? I suspect the latter two are stronger points of contention for me. I tend to be very character-centric in serialized fiction. If I like the characters, I’ll be willing to sit through weaker stories (always to a point, of course). Stronger stories where I don’t care about or dislike the characters are a harder sell.
And, unfortunately, despite getting them right for RYV, Slott either can’t or won’t write the characters well in his regular series. Making matters worse, his story ideas, while good on paper, don’t really work for the Spider-Man world and have taken away the unique things that made him stand out from other superheroes.
I wonder if Slott and Brian Michael Bendis should’ve switched assignments. Since Slott is already writing knockoff “Iron Man” comics, he might as well do the real thing. Bendis has proven he gets Spider-Man, which is something really needed at a time when the character (in the traditional comics, at least), is being changed so much that I’m not sure if anyone really knows what “Spider-Man” means, anymore.
“I’ve said it before, but Bendis is a guy who will do stuff I don’t like — but I still respect him because his writing is sound.”
Agreed. I’m not a Miles Morales fan and find the character overrated (he’s not an interesting character in and of himself), but from what I’ve read of that series, Bendis put as much effort into making the “Ultimate” Miles comics as good as the previous ones he’d written with Peter. So, although I think the very premise of the Miles character is inherently flawed (Spider-Man and Peter Parker are so interconnected, he’s one of the few superheroes where the mantle cannot be passed on to anyone — not counting the premise of his daughter following in his footsteps), Bendis made it work as well as it could. It’s not as good as the Peter Parker stuff he wrote, but the fact that he’s clearly tried and created a character that’s been embraced by many people deserves praise, even if it’s not for me.
“Spider-Man” seems to provide an interesting contrast between Slott and Bendis. Both of them made very controversial changes to the character, but even people who don’t like Bendis creating a new Spider-Man seem to give that series respect. Whereas Slott’s changes seem to divide fans even further and I’ve yet to hear of anyone who dislikes his stuff saying that they respect it for what it is.
“Slott’s changes seem to divide fans even further and I’ve yet to hear of anyone who dislikes his stuff saying that they respect it for what it is.”
Do you remember when Marvel used anger to boost sales for SSM #9? And then they complain about negative feedback: “You’ll be angrier than you were after Spidey #700!”
My review for SSM #9 highlights how Dan Slott fundamentally misunderstands the character. That misunderstanding causes him to miss golden opportunities to write scenes that would be marveled at (no pun intended) by future generations.
“Do you remember when Marvel used anger to boost sales for SSM #9? And then they complain about negative feedback…”
Maybe what they want is people to be initially outraged (which would theoretically boost sales, as other readers would want to check it out and find out what was so controversial), but then read the stuff and decide that it was good or realized that it was a blessing in disguise? I’ve seen a few pro-“Superior…” comments that go something like: “I hated the idea of it, but then I read it and found I actually enjoyed it,” so it can happen.
But it’s a pretty big gamble, and it doesn’t always work. “One More Day” is still hated (even among people who think that the stuff that came after was worth it) and there’s still a pretty vocal subset of the fanbase that want it undone (or at least new material based on pre-OMD created on a regular basis).
But it’s a pretty big gamble, and it doesn’t always work.
Agreed, but my point was that an operation that was running smoothly would not need to resort to those sorts of tactics to sell comics. It’s sad that this is where Marvel is at these days.
If the Brain Trust had worked, they would have stuck with that, but it rapidly created continuity confusions, and the quality gaps between the various writers were big. Marvel tapped Slott to be the solo guy because he had other successes (Arkham Asylum), had done a good job with Spider-Man before (I’m With Stupid), and had experience as a humor-mag writer (Ren & Stimpy). Having him be the sole writer cleared all the clutter. But he ended up showing boredom with Peter Parker, and thinking up more and more outlandish scenarios — partly to maintain customer interest (because Slott can’t develop characters that people care for), and seemingly to keep his own self interested.
I think the best ASM writers liked the Peter Parker character. I think Stan Lee *likes* the Peter Parker character, and still does. I believe Slott does not like Peter Parker, and because he finds him boring, he has turned him into a buffoonish character, as a way to maintain his own interest.
I think the best ASM writers liked the Peter Parker character. I think Stan Lee *likes* the Peter Parker character, and still does. I believe Slott does not like Peter Parker, and because he finds him boring, he has turned him into a buffoonish character, as a way to maintain his own interest.
I’m not sure how there are still people out there who can still deny this to be true, given Dan Slott’s track record and countless public comments over the years.
He certainly enjoys the wise-cracking aspects of Spider-Man, but seems completely lost and confused when it comes to building relationships between Peter Parker and his supporting cast that readers actually care about. When it comes to creating meaningful bonds between characters, developing them, etc., he never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Dan seemed very focused for Renew Your Vows, but I almost feel like that kind of focus is the kind of thing that drains him. It seems like he could do that for self-contained tales, but would struggle to duplicate it for any sort of extended run. To do so would burn him out and require another writer pick up the baton, and he doesn’t want that. So we get globe-trotting Peter Parker-Wayne-Stark instead. He’s so busy jumping all over the map that he doesn’t really have time to cultivate meaningful relationships. What a coincidence.
He’s just awful at writing positive, appealing human relationships. To paraphrase a certain Bible passage, his stories are all noisy gongs and clashing cymbals because they have not love.
There’s a part of me that wants to check out Silver Surfer just because I haven’t really heard bad things about it. Then again, I don’t believe that many people are reading it.
I read 1.1 and I thought it wasn’t so bad. Prefer this than Slott’s. As for the argument that Peter doesn’t believe in superstitions despite making a deal with the devil and stuff, he doesn’t even remember that deal because of the deal’s rules. Although for someone who’s hanged out with Doctor Strange a lot shouldn’t be saying that this “beast” doesn’t exist. But I guess with Scientist there always has to be an explanation for everything so what do I know?
“For someone who’s hanged out with Doctor Strange a lot shouldn’t be saying that this ‘beast’ doesn’t exist.”
You’ll have to let me know your thoughts on Amazing Grace #1.3. You can probably guess my thoughts…
Obviously the Author of this comic doesn’t know a thing about Spider-man or comics. THis is why I hate when they put ant religious rhetoric in comics when the comics have gods and other cosmic Beings that could be gods. IN DC they have a dimension where Heaven in located the arch Angel Michael and other angels of the bible live there. In Marvel you Have the One Above All ( Who met Spider-man), The living Tribunal, the Beyonder, Celestials, Galactus, the infinity Gauntlet and numerous other Cosmic entities. But Spider-man doesn’t believe in God WTF! It Kills me when someone writes comics like when someone created a character called the One Above All who is the ultimate God of the Marvel Universe.
Matter of fact in the Infinity Gauntlet When Character named the Goddess tried to destroy the universe, she raptured up all of the Earth Super heroes that were religious or believed in god, and Spider-man was one of them. Peter Parker has always been a man of science but Infinity Crusade established that he was a Christian Protestant. Now all of a sudden he is an atheist because he is a scientist. When Peter Parker has personally met the One Above All.. WTF
I know this article is probably old but I am reading the comic now!
“I know this article is probably old but I am reading the comic now!”
Thanks for the comment, Rahsaan. We will forgive your tardiness — this time! 😉
On a serious note, I agree with you regarding Marvel’s strange way of dealing with the Christian faith these days. The only reason I can really come up with is that they are are secular leftists who, quite frankly, are uncomfortable delving into the faith. I would not want them to turn Peter into a preacher, but at the same time it’s somewhat offensive to turn him into The Amazing Spider-Atheist when history shows that was never the case.
Exactly